Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz..
That's called malicious interference and can and should get you fined and shut down. Further, it is not WISP spectrum and never was. I have never understood the WISP sense of entitlement with unlicensed (free) spectrum, especially given that it is a population that is largely politically conservative. On Mar 2, 2015 12:16 PM, Tim Reichhart t...@nwohiobb.com wrote: That means can we point our 5ghz backhaul stuff at there towers and make there signal about worthless? If so that would teach cell phone companies not to mess with WISP’s spectrum. *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Peter Kranz *Sent:* Monday, March 02, 2015 12:03 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. If systems like this end up rolling out on cell sites across the nation we are going to see some tough times getting clear channels. I’ve seen several proposals now for tower based systems that use very large swaths of 5Ghz as alternative LTE data paths to cell phones with multi-channel BW designed to suck up every free piece of 5Ghz spectrum found. http://www.engadget.com/2015/03/02/t-mobile-alcatel-wifi-and-4g-fight/ *Peter Kranz*Founder/CEO - Unwired Ltd www.UnwiredLtd.com http://www.unwiredltd.com/ Desk: 510-868-1614 x100 Mobile: 510-207- pkr...@unwiredltd.com
Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz..
Then Patrick Mobile carriers really have no rights to be start using unlicensed spectrum they pay the big bucks for license spectrum so what gives them rights to enter the unlicensed spectrum? So they can trash the whole or some of the 5ghz spectrum so we wisp cant have anything? Just like I seen an screenshot of alvarion breeze in 5ghz that everybody said that you couldn’t see in ubnt gear when doing airview. Tim From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 7:31 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. That's called malicious interference and can and should get you fined and shut down. Further, it is not WISP spectrum and never was. I have never understood the WISP sense of entitlement with unlicensed (free) spectrum, especially given that it is a population that is largely politically conservative. On Mar 2, 2015 12:16 PM, Tim Reichhart t...@nwohiobb.com wrote: That means can we point our 5ghz backhaul stuff at there towers and make there signal about worthless? If so that would teach cell phone companies not to mess with WISP’s spectrum. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Peter Kranz Sent: Monday, March 02, 2015 12:03 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. If systems like this end up rolling out on cell sites across the nation we are going to see some tough times getting clear channels. I’ve seen several proposals now for tower based systems that use very large swaths of 5Ghz as alternative LTE data paths to cell phones with multi-channel BW designed to suck up every free piece of 5Ghz spectrum found. http://www.engadget.com/2015/03/02/t-mobile-alcatel-wifi-and-4g-fight/ Peter Kranz Founder/CEO - Unwired Ltd www.UnwiredLtd.com http://www.unwiredltd.com/ Desk: 510-868-1614 x100 tel:510-868-1614%20x100 Mobile: 510-207- pkr...@unwiredltd.com
Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz..
Tim, none of us have to like it but the right they have to use unlicensed spectrum is exactly the same as that which permits you to do so. On Mar 3, 2015 7:52 AM, Tim Reichhart t...@nwohiobb.com wrote: Then Patrick Mobile carriers really have no rights to be start using unlicensed spectrum they pay the big bucks for license spectrum so what gives them rights to enter the unlicensed spectrum? So they can trash the whole or some of the 5ghz spectrum so we wisp cant have anything? Just like I seen an screenshot of alvarion breeze in 5ghz that everybody said that you couldn’t see in ubnt gear when doing airview. Tim *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Patrick Leary *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 7:31 AM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. That's called malicious interference and can and should get you fined and shut down. Further, it is not WISP spectrum and never was. I have never understood the WISP sense of entitlement with unlicensed (free) spectrum, especially given that it is a population that is largely politically conservative. On Mar 2, 2015 12:16 PM, Tim Reichhart t...@nwohiobb.com wrote: That means can we point our 5ghz backhaul stuff at there towers and make there signal about worthless? If so that would teach cell phone companies not to mess with WISP’s spectrum. *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Peter Kranz *Sent:* Monday, March 02, 2015 12:03 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. If systems like this end up rolling out on cell sites across the nation we are going to see some tough times getting clear channels. I’ve seen several proposals now for tower based systems that use very large swaths of 5Ghz as alternative LTE data paths to cell phones with multi-channel BW designed to suck up every free piece of 5Ghz spectrum found. http://www.engadget.com/2015/03/02/t-mobile-alcatel-wifi-and-4g-fight/ *Peter Kranz*Founder/CEO - Unwired Ltd www.UnwiredLtd.com http://www.unwiredltd.com/ Desk: 510-868-1614 x100 Mobile: 510-207- pkr...@unwiredltd.com
Re: [AFMUG] HP buys Aruba
My message makes it official. :) Travis On 3/3/2015 8:03 AM, Josh Luthman wrote: We talked about it yesterday :) Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 9:58 AM, Travis Johnson t...@ida.net mailto:t...@ida.net wrote: http://www.firstpost.com/business/biggest-deal-since-autonomy-hp-buy-wi-fi-gear-maker-aruba-networks-2-7-bn-2132659.html Travis
Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz
Im trying to avoid expensive licensed links. My customer base is too small for now. If I have to spend money on licensed links for such a small area it wouldn't be much more to just run my own fiber. Thank you, Brett A Mansfield On Mar 3, 2015, at 8:42 AM, Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com wrote: The range severely drops when you're getting more beamwidth and sacrificing forward gain. Have you looked at 28 GHz from CTI? I think that sounds like an ideal solution for you. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Brett A Mansfield br...@silverlakeinternet.com wrote: Anyone know if there is any 60GHz PTMP solution out there yet? All of my towers cover less than half a mile so short range 60GHz would be ideal for me. I am competing with fiber and would like to offer similar speeds. Thank you, Brett A Mansfield Silver Lake Internet
Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz
LOL, so true. Regards, Chuck On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Chuck McCown ch...@wbmfg.com wrote: You never regret running fiber. *From:* Brett A Mansfield br...@silverlakeinternet.com *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:45 AM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz Im trying to avoid expensive licensed links. My customer base is too small for now. If I have to spend money on licensed links for such a small area it wouldn't be much more to just run my own fiber. Thank you, Brett A Mansfield On Mar 3, 2015, at 8:42 AM, Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com wrote: The range severely drops when you're getting more beamwidth and sacrificing forward gain. Have you looked at 28 GHz from CTI? I think that sounds like an ideal solution for you. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Brett A Mansfield br...@silverlakeinternet.com wrote: Anyone know if there is any 60GHz PTMP solution out there yet? All of my towers cover less than half a mile so short range 60GHz would be ideal for me. I am competing with fiber and would like to offer similar speeds. Thank you, Brett A Mansfield Silver Lake Internet
Re: [AFMUG] Samsung smart TVs
I’ve got 100 senior citizens using Roku. It’s the easiest one but only after you set the channel up on your computer. That’s what hangs up most of them. Rory From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 8:29 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Samsung smart TVs Really? I thought Roku was the worst interface. My parents inability to use it concurred with that. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:27 AM, Jeremy jeremysmi...@gmail.commailto:jeremysmi...@gmail.com wrote: I haven't seen this, and have never had an issue with our Samsung SmartTV. However, we mostly use the Roku, as the interface is much better. On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:20 PM, Caleb Knauer cknauer.li...@gmail.commailto:cknauer.li...@gmail.com wrote: I've seen literally hundreds of Roku's in use in my adventures lately and they work well. Plus the remote is easy to use which is a huge plus for our user base. On Monday, March 2, 2015, Ken Hohhof af...@kwisp.commailto:af...@kwisp.com wrote: Interesting approach. I have been wondering if the Rokus are more reliable than the hodgepodge of devices that customers buy for another reason and then use to stream video. Sounds like you give them a big thumbs up. It's another device that customers can't pronounce though. I've had customers tell me they have a Rock-You or a Ruko. -Original Message- From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Monday, March 02, 2015 1:58 PM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Samsung smart TVs This is one reason we give all new customers (and contract renewals) a free roku (basic model, 720p). It is one of the best streaming devices on the market. This gives our customers a superior impression of us as an ISP. We get a lot of happy comments about our service after they switch from another provider and install the roku. -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.comhttp://www.spitwspots.com On 03/02/2015 10:53 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote: Do these things have problems with the apps for Netflix, Pandora, etc. that are causing the rest of you support calls? Or just me? Calls like Netflix app stopped working 3 weeks ago, or I can watch Netflix but Pandora complains about network problems. My impression is buggy apps or updates that break stuff. But of course everyone tells the customer it's their Internet. I have seen Samsung TVs not play nice with some WiFi routers, but that should affect everything, not just one app. I hate to tell customers to call Samsung or Netflix/Pandora/etc. because I know they will just point the finger back at the ISP.
Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz
The range severely drops when you're getting more beamwidth and sacrificing forward gain. Have you looked at 28 GHz from CTI? I think that sounds like an ideal solution for you. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Brett A Mansfield br...@silverlakeinternet.com wrote: Anyone know if there is any 60GHz PTMP solution out there yet? All of my towers cover less than half a mile so short range 60GHz would be ideal for me. I am competing with fiber and would like to offer similar speeds. Thank you, Brett A Mansfield Silver Lake Internet
[AFMUG] HP buys Aruba
http://www.firstpost.com/business/biggest-deal-since-autonomy-hp-buy-wi-fi-gear-maker-aruba-networks-2-7-bn-2132659.html Travis
[AFMUG] 60GHz
Anyone know if there is any 60GHz PTMP solution out there yet? All of my towers cover less than half a mile so short range 60GHz would be ideal for me. I am competing with fiber and would like to offer similar speeds. Thank you, Brett A Mansfield Silver Lake Internet
Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz
You never regret running fiber. From: Brett A Mansfield Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:45 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz Im trying to avoid expensive licensed links. My customer base is too small for now. If I have to spend money on licensed links for such a small area it wouldn't be much more to just run my own fiber. Thank you, Brett A Mansfield On Mar 3, 2015, at 8:42 AM, Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com wrote: The range severely drops when you're getting more beamwidth and sacrificing forward gain. Have you looked at 28 GHz from CTI? I think that sounds like an ideal solution for you. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Brett A Mansfield br...@silverlakeinternet.com wrote: Anyone know if there is any 60GHz PTMP solution out there yet? All of my towers cover less than half a mile so short range 60GHz would be ideal for me. I am competing with fiber and would like to offer similar speeds. Thank you, Brett A Mansfield Silver Lake Internet
Re: [AFMUG] HP buys Aruba
We talked about it yesterday :) Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 9:58 AM, Travis Johnson t...@ida.net wrote: http://www.firstpost.com/business/biggest-deal-since- autonomy-hp-buy-wi-fi-gear-maker-aruba-networks-2-7-bn-2132659.html Travis
Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz..
Exactly, We just have to be more creative on how we deploy and own our sites. Property, Property and Property is going to allow wisps to mitigate certain areas that cause pain from the bigger monsters. Antenna tech has come along way in the last five years and that will be our saving grace. I like the use of a 180 deg 5G multi sector antenna that will give me 19 to 25db gain to hear our subscribers. HP dualpole dishes with excellent F/B ratio You have to think like the big monster does both technically and politically. On 03/03/2015 07:20 AM, Patrick Leary wrote: Frankly, it's worse Caleb. The rural broadband allocation of 3.65 GHz is most definitively NOT WISP spectrum, but rather is spectrum WISPs can use for a specific use. That in itself is rare, as the FCC pretends it prefers flexible use rules that allow the market to decide best use. In this specific case, the FCC determined the public interest was best served by setting this spectrum aside for the specific purpose of rural broadband. True (and I know it to be true because I was there), their expectation was that WISPs would be the ones to deploy most likely, but absolutely nothing prevents, say, Verizon from rolling out a national 3.65 deployment should it want to do so. On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 12:37 AM, Caleb Knauer cknauer.li...@gmail.com mailto:cknauer.li...@gmail.com wrote: If I may put on my jerk hat for a second, what makes you think 5Ghz is WISP spectrum? It's not, just like 900/2.4Ghz isn't. You can't own unlicensed frequency, and as long as the gear is following P15 rules then there's pretty much nothing that you can do. 900Mhz died that way, and who knows what the future holds for 5Ghz. The only block you could consider WISP spectrum is 3.65, and with so many using the band that don't play by the rules with regards to registration etc I think maybe the feds are going to have a hard time allocating more this way. Also, go ahead and point your stuff at big red/blue, and while you may be within your legal rights it won't be a fun fight. Actually if they are just one way 5Ghz for downstream then it won't do anything to them anyway. Or maybe I'm just tired and cranky. On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:16 AM, Tim Reichhart t...@nwohiobb.com mailto:t...@nwohiobb.com wrote: That means can we point our 5ghz backhaul stuff at there towers and make there signal about worthless? If so that would teach cell phone companies not to mess with WISP’s spectrum. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Peter Kranz Sent: Monday, March 02, 2015 12:03 PM To: af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com Subject: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. If systems like this end up rolling out on cell sites across the nation we are going to see some tough times getting clear channels. I’ve seen several proposals now for tower based systems that use very large swaths of 5Ghz as alternative LTE data paths to cell phones with multi-channel BW designed to suck up every free piece of 5Ghz spectrum found. http://www.engadget.com/2015/03/02/t-mobile-alcatel-wifi-and-4g-fight/ Peter Kranz Founder/CEO - Unwired Ltd www.UnwiredLtd.com http://www.UnwiredLtd.com Desk: 510-868-1614 x100 tel:510-868-1614%20x100 Mobile: 510-207- tel:510-207- pkr...@unwiredltd.com mailto:pkr...@unwiredltd.com -- Patrick Leary Director BD, North America, Telrad 727.501.3735 patrickleary.af...@gmail.com mailto:patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG] patrick.le...@telrad.com mailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com [this is my corporate address]
Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz..
We love 5.15-5.25 though. So far our customer testing is showing performance very close to our 3.65 due to the low noise floor, and I know you've been reading about how the 3.65 is doing. Patrick Telrad On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:03 AM, David dmilho...@wletc.com wrote: Agreed but now there could be less room for additional development of other wireless devices. Also, if they would stay on on side of the band would be nice like 5.1 Still plenty of room for us. On 03/03/2015 06:31 AM, Patrick Leary wrote: That's called malicious interference and can and should get you fined and shut down. Further, it is not WISP spectrum and never was. I have never understood the WISP sense of entitlement with unlicensed (free) spectrum, especially given that it is a population that is largely politically conservative. On Mar 2, 2015 12:16 PM, Tim Reichhart t...@nwohiobb.com wrote: That means can we point our 5ghz backhaul stuff at there towers and make there signal about worthless? If so that would teach cell phone companies not to mess with WISP’s spectrum. *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Peter Kranz *Sent:* Monday, March 02, 2015 12:03 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. If systems like this end up rolling out on cell sites across the nation we are going to see some tough times getting clear channels. I’ve seen several proposals now for tower based systems that use very large swaths of 5Ghz as alternative LTE data paths to cell phones with multi-channel BW designed to suck up every free piece of 5Ghz spectrum found. http://www.engadget.com/2015/03/02/t-mobile-alcatel-wifi-and-4g-fight/ *Peter Kranz *Founder/CEO - Unwired Ltd www.UnwiredLtd.com http://www.unwiredltd.com/ Desk: 510-868-1614 x100 Mobile: 510-207- pkr...@unwiredltd.com -- Patrick Leary Director BD, North America, Telrad 727.501.3735 patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG] patrick.le...@telrad.com patrick.le...@telrad.com [this is my corporate address]
Re: [AFMUG] Samsung smart TVs
I haven't seen this, and have never had an issue with our Samsung SmartTV. However, we mostly use the Roku, as the interface is much better. On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:20 PM, Caleb Knauer cknauer.li...@gmail.com wrote: I've seen literally hundreds of Roku's in use in my adventures lately and they work well. Plus the remote is easy to use which is a huge plus for our user base. On Monday, March 2, 2015, Ken Hohhof af...@kwisp.com wrote: Interesting approach. I have been wondering if the Rokus are more reliable than the hodgepodge of devices that customers buy for another reason and then use to stream video. Sounds like you give them a big thumbs up. It's another device that customers can't pronounce though. I've had customers tell me they have a Rock-You or a Ruko. -Original Message- From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Monday, March 02, 2015 1:58 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Samsung smart TVs This is one reason we give all new customers (and contract renewals) a free roku (basic model, 720p). It is one of the best streaming devices on the market. This gives our customers a superior impression of us as an ISP. We get a lot of happy comments about our service after they switch from another provider and install the roku. -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com On 03/02/2015 10:53 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote: Do these things have problems with the apps for Netflix, Pandora, etc. that are causing the rest of you support calls? Or just me? Calls like Netflix app stopped working 3 weeks ago, or I can watch Netflix but Pandora complains about network problems. My impression is buggy apps or updates that break stuff. But of course everyone tells the customer it's their Internet. I have seen Samsung TVs not play nice with some WiFi routers, but that should affect everything, not just one app. I hate to tell customers to call Samsung or Netflix/Pandora/etc. because I know they will just point the finger back at the ISP.
Re: [AFMUG] Samsung smart TVs
Really? I thought Roku was the worst interface. My parents inability to use it concurred with that. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:27 AM, Jeremy jeremysmi...@gmail.com wrote: I haven't seen this, and have never had an issue with our Samsung SmartTV. However, we mostly use the Roku, as the interface is much better. On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:20 PM, Caleb Knauer cknauer.li...@gmail.com wrote: I've seen literally hundreds of Roku's in use in my adventures lately and they work well. Plus the remote is easy to use which is a huge plus for our user base. On Monday, March 2, 2015, Ken Hohhof af...@kwisp.com wrote: Interesting approach. I have been wondering if the Rokus are more reliable than the hodgepodge of devices that customers buy for another reason and then use to stream video. Sounds like you give them a big thumbs up. It's another device that customers can't pronounce though. I've had customers tell me they have a Rock-You or a Ruko. -Original Message- From: Josh Reynolds Sent: Monday, March 02, 2015 1:58 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Samsung smart TVs This is one reason we give all new customers (and contract renewals) a free roku (basic model, 720p). It is one of the best streaming devices on the market. This gives our customers a superior impression of us as an ISP. We get a lot of happy comments about our service after they switch from another provider and install the roku. -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com On 03/02/2015 10:53 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote: Do these things have problems with the apps for Netflix, Pandora, etc. that are causing the rest of you support calls? Or just me? Calls like Netflix app stopped working 3 weeks ago, or I can watch Netflix but Pandora complains about network problems. My impression is buggy apps or updates that break stuff. But of course everyone tells the customer it's their Internet. I have seen Samsung TVs not play nice with some WiFi routers, but that should affect everything, not just one app. I hate to tell customers to call Samsung or Netflix/Pandora/etc. because I know they will just point the finger back at the ISP.
Re: [AFMUG] ::: More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz..
Interesting. It does say small cell deployments though. https://www.qualcomm.com/invention/technologies/lte/unlicensed https://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2015/02/26/qualcomm-extends-lte-unlicensed-spectrum-enhance-mobile-experiences-and If systems like this end up rolling out on cell sites across the nation we are going to see some tough times getting clear channels. I’ve seen several proposals now for tower based systems that use very large swaths of 5Ghz as alternative LTE data paths to cell phones with multi-channel BW designed to suck up every free piece of 5Ghz spectrum found. http://www.engadget.com/2015/03/02/t-mobile-alcatel-wifi-and-4g-fight/
Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz
I remember a few years ago Doug Clark was going on about a 24 GHz PTMP system. Seems like he may have actually purchased on. Then there was the ultraviolet light system that required reflection from airborne dust particles. From: Josh Luthman Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:42 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz The range severely drops when you're getting more beamwidth and sacrificing forward gain. Have you looked at 28 GHz from CTI? I think that sounds like an ideal solution for you. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Brett A Mansfield br...@silverlakeinternet.com wrote: Anyone know if there is any 60GHz PTMP solution out there yet? All of my towers cover less than half a mile so short range 60GHz would be ideal for me. I am competing with fiber and would like to offer similar speeds. Thank you, Brett A Mansfield Silver Lake Internet
Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz
It can be done on the cheap. Rent a trencher. Get the duct. Put the fiber in the duct before laying it in the trench if possible. Lots of slack on both ends. At least 100 feet. Use something the unicam machine for ends rather than fusion splicing or hire someone to do the splicing. Total cost of materials can be around $1/foot plus the cost of trenching. How far do you have to go? From: Brett A Mansfield Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:10 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz Seems like running fiber might be the best way. I was just hoping there was a good wireless solution that would be cheaper. Fiber ROI is pretty high and when paying out of my own pocket without financing it's a huge chunk out of savings. I'll just have to find a way to convince the Mrs that it will be worth it in the long run. Thank you, Brett A Mansfield On Mar 3, 2015, at 8:51 AM, Chuck Hogg ch...@shelbybb.com wrote: LOL, so true. Regards, Chuck On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Chuck McCown ch...@wbmfg.com wrote: You never regret running fiber. From: Brett A Mansfield Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:45 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz Im trying to avoid expensive licensed links. My customer base is too small for now. If I have to spend money on licensed links for such a small area it wouldn't be much more to just run my own fiber. Thank you, Brett A Mansfield On Mar 3, 2015, at 8:42 AM, Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com wrote: The range severely drops when you're getting more beamwidth and sacrificing forward gain. Have you looked at 28 GHz from CTI? I think that sounds like an ideal solution for you. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Brett A Mansfield br...@silverlakeinternet.com wrote: Anyone know if there is any 60GHz PTMP solution out there yet? All of my towers cover less than half a mile so short range 60GHz would be ideal for me. I am competing with fiber and would like to offer similar speeds. Thank you, Brett A Mansfield Silver Lake Internet
Re: [AFMUG] HP buys Aruba
Who’s gonna buy ubnt? Gino A. Villarini President Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. www.aeronetpr.com @aeronetpr From: Travis Johnson t...@ida.netmailto:t...@ida.net Reply-To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Date: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 at 11:17 AM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] HP buys Aruba My message makes it official. :) Travis On 3/3/2015 8:03 AM, Josh Luthman wrote: We talked about it yesterday :) Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 9:58 AM, Travis Johnson t...@ida.netmailto:t...@ida.net wrote: http://www.firstpost.com/business/biggest-deal-since-autonomy-hp-buy-wi-fi-gear-maker-aruba-networks-2-7-bn-2132659.html Travis
Re: [AFMUG] Best price for att full gig?
We use ATT MetroE to get Cogent back to us from Louisville. The MetroE product is priced through FISPA. Essentially, the net is a little less than $4/mb. I assume you are hitting a data center there. Are you getting hit with any cross connect fees etc? Finding data centers are raising prices lately.
Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz
Doesn't Elva or whatever they are called sell a 38 Ghz ptmp system Jaime Solorza On Mar 3, 2015 8:46 AM, Chuck McCown ch...@wbmfg.com wrote: I remember a few years ago Doug Clark was going on about a 24 GHz PTMP system. Seems like he may have actually purchased on. Then there was the ultraviolet light system that required reflection from airborne dust particles. *From:* Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:42 AM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz The range severely drops when you're getting more beamwidth and sacrificing forward gain. Have you looked at 28 GHz from CTI? I think that sounds like an ideal solution for you. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Brett A Mansfield br...@silverlakeinternet.com wrote: Anyone know if there is any 60GHz PTMP solution out there yet? All of my towers cover less than half a mile so short range 60GHz would be ideal for me. I am competing with fiber and would like to offer similar speeds. Thank you, Brett A Mansfield Silver Lake Internet
Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz..
So we help the Cellular industry by offloading data to WiFi. We help the Cellular Industry by supporting Cellular repeaters that allow customers to use their cell phones in homes and businesses where tower coverage is spotty. Then we get our nuts kicked once they complete their build out and we are no longer needed. Nice ... Steve B. _ From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Gino Villarini Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:59 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. It is what it is. one of the risk of being in this industry and use unlicensed Gino A. Villarini President Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. www.aeronetpr.com @aeronetpr From: Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.net Reply-To: af@afmug.com af@afmug.com Date: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 at 9:21 AM To: af@afmug.com af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. Agreed. They get very defensive when they have no right to be. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions https://twitter.com/ICSIL _ From: Patrick Leary patrickleary.af...@gmail.com To: af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 6:31:28 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. That's called malicious interference and can and should get you fined and shut down. Further, it is not WISP spectrum and never was. I have never understood the WISP sense of entitlement with unlicensed (free) spectrum, especially given that it is a population that is largely politically conservative. On Mar 2, 2015 12:16 PM, Tim Reichhart t...@nwohiobb.com wrote: That means can we point our 5ghz backhaul stuff at there towers and make there signal about worthless? If so that would teach cell phone companies not to mess with WISP's spectrum. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Peter Kranz Sent: Monday, March 02, 2015 12:03 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. If systems like this end up rolling out on cell sites across the nation we are going to see some tough times getting clear channels. I've seen several proposals now for tower based systems that use very large swaths of 5Ghz as alternative LTE data paths to cell phones with multi-channel BW designed to suck up every free piece of 5Ghz spectrum found. http://www.engadget.com/2015/03/02/t-mobile-alcatel-wifi-and-4g-fight/ Peter Kranz Founder/CEO - Unwired Ltd www.UnwiredLtd.com http://www.unwiredltd.com/ Desk: 510-868-1614 x100 tel:510-868-1614%20x100 Mobile: 510-207- pkr...@unwiredltd.com
Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz
Its PTMP, so if I run fiber it would be to the home. In the neighborhood I'm in it's about 400 homes right now. They are on phase 2 of 9. The next 2 phases are high density housing and then the rest are homes to total about 2400 homes. Laying fiber will be easy and cheap for the remaining phases. It will be more difficult in the ones already built. It will be around 80k -150k linear ft. Anyone ever work with Coax? It's cheap and I can splice it easily. Is this cost similar to fiber? Thank you, Brett A Mansfield On Mar 3, 2015, at 9:22 AM, Chuck McCown ch...@wbmfg.com wrote: It can be done on the cheap. Rent a trencher. Get the duct. Put the fiber in the duct before laying it in the trench if possible. Lots of slack on both ends. At least 100 feet. Use something the unicam machine for ends rather than fusion splicing or hire someone to do the splicing. Total cost of materials can be around $1/foot plus the cost of trenching. How far do you have to go? From: Brett A Mansfield Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:10 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz Seems like running fiber might be the best way. I was just hoping there was a good wireless solution that would be cheaper. Fiber ROI is pretty high and when paying out of my own pocket without financing it's a huge chunk out of savings. I'll just have to find a way to convince the Mrs that it will be worth it in the long run. Thank you, Brett A Mansfield On Mar 3, 2015, at 8:51 AM, Chuck Hogg ch...@shelbybb.com wrote: LOL, so true. Regards, Chuck On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Chuck McCown ch...@wbmfg.com wrote: You never regret running fiber. From: Brett A Mansfield Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:45 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz Im trying to avoid expensive licensed links. My customer base is too small for now. If I have to spend money on licensed links for such a small area it wouldn't be much more to just run my own fiber. Thank you, Brett A Mansfield On Mar 3, 2015, at 8:42 AM, Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com wrote: The range severely drops when you're getting more beamwidth and sacrificing forward gain. Have you looked at 28 GHz from CTI? I think that sounds like an ideal solution for you. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Brett A Mansfield br...@silverlakeinternet.com wrote: Anyone know if there is any 60GHz PTMP solution out there yet? All of my towers cover less than half a mile so short range 60GHz would be ideal for me. I am competing with fiber and would like to offer similar speeds. Thank you, Brett A Mansfield Silver Lake Internet
Re: [AFMUG] ::: More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz..
Even in a small cell deployment, it's going add a whole bunch of noise in an increasingly overused band. At a minimum this will require WISPs to modify our minimum signal level standards. It will be interesting to see who has more difficulty. They are trying to talk to handsets and are used to operating in sub -100dB ranges. When they realize they need to get -70 against the background they might give up as there is no way the handset will ever be able to put out enough power. -Original Message- From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 7:27 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ::: More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. Interesting. It does say small cell deployments though. https://www.qualcomm.com/invention/technologies/lte/unlicensed https://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2015/02/26/qualcomm-extends-lte-unlicensed-spectrum-enhance-mobile-experiences-and If systems like this end up rolling out on cell sites across the nation we are going to see some tough times getting clear channels. I’ve seen several proposals now for tower based systems that use very large swaths of 5Ghz as alternative LTE data paths to cell phones with multi-channel BW designed to suck up every free piece of 5Ghz spectrum found. http://www.engadget.com/2015/03/02/t-mobile-alcatel-wifi-and-4g-fight/
Re: [AFMUG] ::: More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz..
its meaning interference On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Patrick Leary patrickleary.af...@gmail.com wrote: LTE has interference mitigation techniques most WISPs are not familiar with. Many are used to gear that performs poorly in its presence. One customer at our training recently explained to others how even as the noise got worse, the link chugged right along, staying consistent. It does much better than WiMAX. Remember, LTE is designed to handle people traveling at 80 mph talking on devices where the interference environment is completely dynamic. On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Jerry Richardson je...@richardson.bz wrote: Even in a small cell deployment, it's going add a whole bunch of noise in an increasingly overused band. At a minimum this will require WISPs to modify our minimum signal level standards. It will be interesting to see who has more difficulty. They are trying to talk to handsets and are used to operating in sub -100dB ranges. When they realize they need to get -70 against the background they might give up as there is no way the handset will ever be able to put out enough power. -Original Message- From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 7:27 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ::: More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. Interesting. It does say small cell deployments though. https://www.qualcomm.com/invention/technologies/lte/unlicensed https://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2015/02/26/qualcomm-extends-lte-unlicensed-spectrum-enhance-mobile-experiences-and If systems like this end up rolling out on cell sites across the nation we are going to see some tough times getting clear channels. I’ve seen several proposals now for tower based systems that use very large swaths of 5Ghz as alternative LTE data paths to cell phones with multi-channel BW designed to suck up every free piece of 5Ghz spectrum found. http://www.engadget.com/2015/03/02/t-mobile-alcatel-wifi-and-4g-fight/ -- Patrick Leary Director BD, North America, Telrad 727.501.3735 patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG] patrick.le...@telrad.com patrick.le...@telrad.com [this is my corporate address] -- Patrick Leary Director BD, North America, Telrad 727.501.3735 patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG] patrick.le...@telrad.com patrick.le...@telrad.com [this is my corporate address]
Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz..
Yes, I love my 3.65 deployment thus far and not looking back. Steadily moving with more tower growth and more deployments. We have 4 sites scheduled this year to go on and 1 is completed working 2 this next quarter. We are doing a full 3.65 on each site and adding 5Ghz 450 where it makes sense. On 03/03/2015 09:23 AM, Patrick Leary wrote: We love 5.15-5.25 though. So far our customer testing is showing performance very close to our 3.65 due to the low noise floor, and I know you've been reading about how the 3.65 is doing. Patrick Telrad On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:03 AM, David dmilho...@wletc.com mailto:dmilho...@wletc.com wrote: Agreed but now there could be less room for additional development of other wireless devices. Also, if they would stay on on side of the band would be nice like 5.1 Still plenty of room for us. On 03/03/2015 06:31 AM, Patrick Leary wrote: That's called malicious interference and can and should get you fined and shut down. Further, it is not WISP spectrum and never was. I have never understood the WISP sense of entitlement with unlicensed (free) spectrum, especially given that it is a population that is largely politically conservative. On Mar 2, 2015 12:16 PM, Tim Reichhart t...@nwohiobb.com mailto:t...@nwohiobb.com wrote: That means can we point our 5ghz backhaul stuff at there towers and make there signal about worthless? If so that would teach cell phone companies not to mess with WISP’s spectrum. *From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Peter Kranz *Sent:* Monday, March 02, 2015 12:03 PM *To:* af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com *Subject:* [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. If systems like this end up rolling out on cell sites across the nation we are going to see some tough times getting clear channels. I’ve seen several proposals now for tower based systems that use very large swaths of 5Ghz as alternative LTE data paths to cell phones with multi-channel BW designed to suck up every free piece of 5Ghz spectrum found. http://www.engadget.com/2015/03/02/t-mobile-alcatel-wifi-and-4g-fight/ *Peter Kranz *Founder/CEO - Unwired Ltd www.UnwiredLtd.com http://www.unwiredltd.com/ Desk: 510-868-1614 x100 tel:510-868-1614%20x100 Mobile: 510-207- tel:510-207- pkr...@unwiredltd.com mailto:pkr...@unwiredltd.com -- Patrick Leary Director BD, North America, Telrad 727.501.3735 patrickleary.af...@gmail.com mailto:patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG] patrick.le...@telrad.com mailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com [this is my corporate address]
Re: [AFMUG] ::: More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz..
LTE has interference mitigation techniques most WISPs are not familiar with. Many are used to gear that performs poorly in its presence. One customer at our training recently explained to others how even as the noise got worse, the link chugged right along, staying consistent. It does much better than WiMAX. Remember, LTE is designed to handle people traveling at 80 mph talking on devices where the interference environment is completely dynamic. On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Jerry Richardson je...@richardson.bz wrote: Even in a small cell deployment, it's going add a whole bunch of noise in an increasingly overused band. At a minimum this will require WISPs to modify our minimum signal level standards. It will be interesting to see who has more difficulty. They are trying to talk to handsets and are used to operating in sub -100dB ranges. When they realize they need to get -70 against the background they might give up as there is no way the handset will ever be able to put out enough power. -Original Message- From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 7:27 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ::: More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. Interesting. It does say small cell deployments though. https://www.qualcomm.com/invention/technologies/lte/unlicensed https://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2015/02/26/qualcomm-extends-lte-unlicensed-spectrum-enhance-mobile-experiences-and If systems like this end up rolling out on cell sites across the nation we are going to see some tough times getting clear channels. I’ve seen several proposals now for tower based systems that use very large swaths of 5Ghz as alternative LTE data paths to cell phones with multi-channel BW designed to suck up every free piece of 5Ghz spectrum found. http://www.engadget.com/2015/03/02/t-mobile-alcatel-wifi-and-4g-fight/ -- Patrick Leary Director BD, North America, Telrad 727.501.3735 patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG] patrick.le...@telrad.com patrick.le...@telrad.com [this is my corporate address]
Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz..
Frankly, it's worse Caleb. The rural broadband allocation of 3.65 GHz is most definitively NOT WISP spectrum, but rather is spectrum WISPs can use for a specific use. That in itself is rare, as the FCC pretends it prefers flexible use rules that allow the market to decide best use. In this specific case, the FCC determined the public interest was best served by setting this spectrum aside for the specific purpose of rural broadband. True (and I know it to be true because I was there), their expectation was that WISPs would be the ones to deploy most likely, but absolutely nothing prevents, say, Verizon from rolling out a national 3.65 deployment should it want to do so. On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 12:37 AM, Caleb Knauer cknauer.li...@gmail.com wrote: If I may put on my jerk hat for a second, what makes you think 5Ghz is WISP spectrum? It's not, just like 900/2.4Ghz isn't. You can't own unlicensed frequency, and as long as the gear is following P15 rules then there's pretty much nothing that you can do. 900Mhz died that way, and who knows what the future holds for 5Ghz. The only block you could consider WISP spectrum is 3.65, and with so many using the band that don't play by the rules with regards to registration etc I think maybe the feds are going to have a hard time allocating more this way. Also, go ahead and point your stuff at big red/blue, and while you may be within your legal rights it won't be a fun fight. Actually if they are just one way 5Ghz for downstream then it won't do anything to them anyway. Or maybe I'm just tired and cranky. On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:16 AM, Tim Reichhart t...@nwohiobb.com wrote: That means can we point our 5ghz backhaul stuff at there towers and make there signal about worthless? If so that would teach cell phone companies not to mess with WISP’s spectrum. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Peter Kranz Sent: Monday, March 02, 2015 12:03 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. If systems like this end up rolling out on cell sites across the nation we are going to see some tough times getting clear channels. I’ve seen several proposals now for tower based systems that use very large swaths of 5Ghz as alternative LTE data paths to cell phones with multi-channel BW designed to suck up every free piece of 5Ghz spectrum found. http://www.engadget.com/2015/03/02/t-mobile-alcatel-wifi-and-4g-fight/ Peter Kranz Founder/CEO - Unwired Ltd www.UnwiredLtd.com Desk: 510-868-1614 x100 Mobile: 510-207- pkr...@unwiredltd.com -- Patrick Leary Director BD, North America, Telrad 727.501.3735 patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG] patrick.le...@telrad.com patrick.le...@telrad.com [this is my corporate address]
Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz..
Agreed. They get very defensive when they have no right to be. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Patrick Leary patrickleary.af...@gmail.com To: af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 6:31:28 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. That's called malicious interference and can and should get you fined and shut down. Further, it is not WISP spectrum and never was. I have never understood the WISP sense of entitlement with unlicensed (free) spectrum, especially given that it is a population that is largely politically conservative. On Mar 2, 2015 12:16 PM, Tim Reichhart t...@nwohiobb.com wrote: That means can we point our 5ghz backhaul stuff at there towers and make there signal about worthless? If so that would teach cell phone companies not to mess with WISP’s spectrum. From: Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Peter Kranz Sent: Monday, March 02, 2015 12:03 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. If systems like this end up rolling out on cell sites across the nation we are going to see some tough times getting clear channels. I’ve seen several proposals now for tower based systems that use very large swaths of 5Ghz as alternative LTE data paths to cell phones with multi-channel BW designed to suck up every free piece of 5Ghz spectrum found. http://www.engadget.com/2015/03/02/t-mobile-alcatel-wifi-and-4g-fight/ Peter Kranz Founder/CEO - Unwired Ltd www.UnwiredLtd.com Desk: 510-868-1614 x100 Mobile: 510-207- pkr...@unwiredltd.com
Re: [AFMUG] HP buys Aruba
Huawei. On Mar 3, 2015 9:52 AM, Gino Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com wrote: Who’s gonna buy ubnt? Gino A. Villarini President Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. www.aeronetpr.com @aeronetpr From: Travis Johnson t...@ida.net Reply-To: af@afmug.com af@afmug.com Date: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 at 11:17 AM To: af@afmug.com af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] HP buys Aruba My message makes it official. :) Travis On 3/3/2015 8:03 AM, Josh Luthman wrote: We talked about it yesterday :) Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 9:58 AM, Travis Johnson t...@ida.net wrote: http://www.firstpost.com/business/biggest-deal-since-autonomy-hp-buy-wi-fi-gear-maker-aruba-networks-2-7-bn-2132659.html Travis
Re: [AFMUG] ::: More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz..
LTE has magic awesome sauce, but then they have been playing in their own ultra-quiet licensed bands listening down below -100 against a background of -150+. Noise for them is -140… We can cope with narrower/beam forming sectors, higher gain at the CPE, etc. GPS sync will be a must for channel re-use (Ubi – are you listening?) No doubt if they go through with it that this is going to be a pain in the ass for everyone. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:51 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ::: More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. its meaning interference On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Patrick Leary patrickleary.af...@gmail.com mailto:patrickleary.af...@gmail.com wrote: LTE has interference mitigation techniques most WISPs are not familiar with. Many are used to gear that performs poorly in its presence. One customer at our training recently explained to others how even as the noise got worse, the link chugged right along, staying consistent. It does much better than WiMAX. Remember, LTE is designed to handle people traveling at 80 mph talking on devices where the interference environment is completely dynamic. On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Jerry Richardson je...@richardson.bz mailto:je...@richardson.bz wrote: Even in a small cell deployment, it's going add a whole bunch of noise in an increasingly overused band. At a minimum this will require WISPs to modify our minimum signal level standards. It will be interesting to see who has more difficulty. They are trying to talk to handsets and are used to operating in sub -100dB ranges. When they realize they need to get -70 against the background they might give up as there is no way the handset will ever be able to put out enough power. -Original Message- From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 7:27 AM To: af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ::: More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. Interesting. It does say small cell deployments though. https://www.qualcomm.com/invention/technologies/lte/unlicensed https://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2015/02/26/qualcomm-extends-lte-unlicensed-spectrum-enhance-mobile-experiences-and If systems like this end up rolling out on cell sites across the nation we are going to see some tough times getting clear channels. I’ve seen several proposals now for tower based systems that use very large swaths of 5Ghz as alternative LTE data paths to cell phones with multi-channel BW designed to suck up every free piece of 5Ghz spectrum found. http://www.engadget.com/2015/03/02/t-mobile-alcatel-wifi-and-4g-fight/ -- Patrick Leary Director BD, North America, Telrad 727.501.3735 tel:727.501.3735 patrickleary.af...@gmail.com mailto:patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG] patrick.le...@telrad.com mailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com [this is my corporate address] -- Patrick Leary Director BD, North America, Telrad 727.501.3735 patrickleary.af...@gmail.com mailto:patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG] patrick.le...@telrad.com mailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com [this is my corporate address]
Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz..
I think the point some are missing is the lesson learned from 900Mhz and smart meters. While 900Mhz is unlicensed spectrum, a single operator has managed to take it over in California to the point where no other user has any chance of using the spectrum for commercial purposes. By this I mean that PGE’s deployment of smart meters on every power meter in the area, and on top of power poles, and other high sites, has raised the noise floor on this band to unusable levels for high speed communications. So by means of overwhelming numbers, PGE managed to take over 900Mhz for its own users, stranding the investment of ISPs in this spectrum in affected markets. I don’t think the commissions initial concept of unlicensed spectrum was that a single operator would do this, I think they expected operators by this to use licensed spectrum. I’d like to see a limit on how many systems a particular entity can deploy in an unlicensed band. It could be some high number, like 1 million units. Peter Kranz Founder/CEO - Unwired Ltd http://www.unwiredltd.com/ www.UnwiredLtd.com Desk: 510-868-1614 x100 Mobile: 510-207- mailto:pkr...@unwiredltd.com pkr...@unwiredltd.com
Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz..
Yep, lived it. The discussions PGE ended with “Our lawyers say we are in compliance, take it up with them”. OK then…. We managed to keep some links up, but ultimately it relegated 900 to very low density neighborhoods and links that needed to be -65 or better at both ends. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Peter Kranz Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:02 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. I think the point some are missing is the lesson learned from 900Mhz and smart meters. While 900Mhz is unlicensed spectrum, a single operator has managed to take it over in California to the point where no other user has any chance of using the spectrum for commercial purposes. By this I mean that PGE’s deployment of smart meters on every power meter in the area, and on top of power poles, and other high sites, has raised the noise floor on this band to unusable levels for high speed communications. So by means of overwhelming numbers, PGE managed to take over 900Mhz for its own users, stranding the investment of ISPs in this spectrum in affected markets. I don’t think the commissions initial concept of unlicensed spectrum was that a single operator would do this, I think they expected operators by this to use licensed spectrum. I’d like to see a limit on how many systems a particular entity can deploy in an unlicensed band. It could be some high number, like 1 million units. Peter Kranz Founder/CEO - Unwired Ltd http://www.unwiredltd.com/ www.UnwiredLtd.com Desk: 510-868-1614 x100 Mobile: 510-207- mailto:pkr...@unwiredltd.com pkr...@unwiredltd.com
Re: [AFMUG] ::: More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz..
Shit. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:03 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ::: More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. The handset isn't putting out any power in 5 GHz. 5 GHz is downlink only. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions https://twitter.com/ICSIL _ From: Jerry Richardson je...@richardson.bz mailto:je...@richardson.bz To: af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 10:45:27 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ::: More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. Even in a small cell deployment, it's going add a whole bunch of noise in an increasingly overused band. At a minimum this will require WISPs to modify our minimum signal level standards. It will be interesting to see who has more difficulty. They are trying to talk to handsets and are used to operating in sub -100dB ranges. When they realize they need to get -70 against the background they might give up as there is no way the handset will ever be able to put out enough power. -Original Message- From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 7:27 AM To: af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ::: More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. Interesting. It does say small cell deployments though. https://www.qualcomm.com/invention/technologies/lte/unlicensed https://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2015/02/26/qualcomm-extends-lte-unlicensed-spectrum-enhance-mobile-experiences-and If systems like this end up rolling out on cell sites across the nation we are going to see some tough times getting clear channels. I’ve seen several proposals now for tower based systems that use very large swaths of 5Ghz as alternative LTE data paths to cell phones with multi-channel BW designed to suck up every free piece of 5Ghz spectrum found. http://www.engadget.com/2015/03/02/t-mobile-alcatel-wifi-and-4g-fight/
Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz..
Here in the border we have to deal with interference on licensed and unlicensed bands from another country! Even our Public Safety system was interfered with and had to be dealt with. Like Gino says, Its part of doing business in these bands! Jaime Solorza Wireless Systems Architect 915-861-1390 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Jerry Richardson je...@richardson.bz wrote: Yep, lived it. The discussions PGE ended with “Our lawyers say we are in compliance, take it up with them”. OK then…. We managed to keep some links up, but ultimately it relegated 900 to very low density neighborhoods and links that needed to be -65 or better at both ends. *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Peter Kranz *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:02 AM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. I think the point some are missing is the lesson learned from 900Mhz and smart meters. While 900Mhz is unlicensed spectrum, a single operator has managed to take it over in California to the point where no other user has any chance of using the spectrum for commercial purposes. By this I mean that PGE’s deployment of smart meters on every power meter in the area, and on top of power poles, and other high sites, has raised the noise floor on this band to unusable levels for high speed communications. So by means of overwhelming numbers, PGE managed to take over 900Mhz for its own users, stranding the investment of ISPs in this spectrum in affected markets. I don’t think the commissions initial concept of unlicensed spectrum was that a single operator would do this, I think they expected operators by this to use licensed spectrum. I’d like to see a limit on how many systems a particular entity can deploy in an unlicensed band. It could be some high number, like 1 million units. *Peter Kranz*Founder/CEO - Unwired Ltd www.UnwiredLtd.com http://www.unwiredltd.com/ Desk: 510-868-1614 x100 Mobile: 510-207- pkr...@unwiredltd.com
Re: [AFMUG] HP buys Aruba
HP
bp
part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com
On 3/3/2015 8:52 AM, Gino Villarini wrote:
Who�s gonna buy ubnt?
Gino A. Villarini
President
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
www.aeronetpr.com
@aeronetpr
From: Travis Johnson t...@ida.net mailto:t...@ida.net
Reply-To: af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com af@afmug.com
mailto:af@afmug.com
Date: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 at 11:17 AM
To: af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com af@afmug.com
mailto:af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] HP buys Aruba
My message makes it official. :)
Travis
On 3/3/2015 8:03 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
We talked about it yesterday :)
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Mar 3, 2015 9:58 AM, Travis Johnson t...@ida.net
mailto:t...@ida.net wrote:
http://www.firstpost.com/business/biggest-deal-since-autonomy-hp-buy-wi-fi-gear-maker-aruba-networks-2-7-bn-2132659.html
Travis
Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz
If you bury anything, bury fiber. Do not bury anything else new. No. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Brett A Mansfield br...@silverlakeinternet.com To: af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 10:47:41 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz Its PTMP, so if I run fiber it would be to the home. In the neighborhood I'm in it's about 400 homes right now. They are on phase 2 of 9. The next 2 phases are high density housing and then the rest are homes to total about 2400 homes. Laying fiber will be easy and cheap for the remaining phases. It will be more difficult in the ones already built. It will be around 80k -150k linear ft. Anyone ever work with Coax? It's cheap and I can splice it easily. Is this cost similar to fiber? Thank you, Brett A Mansfield On Mar 3, 2015, at 9:22 AM, Chuck McCown ch...@wbmfg.com wrote: It can be done on the cheap. Rent a trencher. Get the duct. Put the fiber in the duct before laying it in the trench if possible. Lots of slack on both ends. At least 100 feet. Use something the unicam machine for ends rather than fusion splicing or hire someone to do the splicing. Total cost of materials can be around $1/foot plus the cost of trenching. How far do you have to go? From: Brett A Mansfield Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:10 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz Seems like running fiber might be the best way. I was just hoping there was a good wireless solution that would be cheaper. Fiber ROI is pretty high and when paying out of my own pocket without financing it's a huge chunk out of savings. I'll just have to find a way to convince the Mrs that it will be worth it in the long run. Thank you, Brett A Mansfield On Mar 3, 2015, at 8:51 AM, Chuck Hogg ch...@shelbybb.com wrote: blockquote LOL, so true. Regards, Chuck On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Chuck McCown ch...@wbmfg.com wrote: blockquote You never regret running fiber. From: Brett A Mansfield Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:45 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 60GHz Im trying to avoid expensive licensed links. My customer base is too small for now. If I have to spend money on licensed links for such a small area it wouldn't be much more to just run my own fiber. Thank you, Brett A Mansfield On Mar 3, 2015, at 8:42 AM, Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com wrote: blockquote The range severely drops when you're getting more beamwidth and sacrificing forward gain. Have you looked at 28 GHz from CTI? I think that sounds like an ideal solution for you. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Brett A Mansfield br...@silverlakeinternet.com wrote: blockquote Anyone know if there is any 60GHz PTMP solution out there yet? All of my towers cover less than half a mile so short range 60GHz would be ideal for me. I am competing with fiber and would like to offer similar speeds. Thank you, Brett A Mansfield Silver Lake Internet /blockquote /blockquote /blockquote /blockquote
Re: [AFMUG] HP buys Aruba
Aeronet!!! Jaime Solorza Wireless Systems Architect 915-861-1390 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 9:59 AM, cjwstudios cjwstud...@gmail.com wrote: Huawei. On Mar 3, 2015 9:52 AM, Gino Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com wrote: Who’s gonna buy ubnt? Gino A. Villarini President Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. www.aeronetpr.com @aeronetpr From: Travis Johnson t...@ida.net Reply-To: af@afmug.com af@afmug.com Date: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 at 11:17 AM To: af@afmug.com af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] HP buys Aruba My message makes it official. :) Travis On 3/3/2015 8:03 AM, Josh Luthman wrote: We talked about it yesterday :) Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 9:58 AM, Travis Johnson t...@ida.net wrote: http://www.firstpost.com/business/biggest-deal-since-autonomy-hp-buy-wi-fi-gear-maker-aruba-networks-2-7-bn-2132659.html Travis
Re: [AFMUG] ::: More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz..
The handset isn't putting out any power in 5 GHz. 5 GHz is downlink only. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Jerry Richardson je...@richardson.bz To: af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 10:45:27 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ::: More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. Even in a small cell deployment, it's going add a whole bunch of noise in an increasingly overused band. At a minimum this will require WISPs to modify our minimum signal level standards. It will be interesting to see who has more difficulty. They are trying to talk to handsets and are used to operating in sub -100dB ranges. When they realize they need to get -70 against the background they might give up as there is no way the handset will ever be able to put out enough power. -Original Message- From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 7:27 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ::: More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. Interesting. It does say small cell deployments though. https://www.qualcomm.com/invention/technologies/lte/unlicensed https://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2015/02/26/qualcomm-extends-lte-unlicensed-spectrum-enhance-mobile-experiences-and If systems like this end up rolling out on cell sites across the nation we are going to see some tough times getting clear channels. I’ve seen several proposals now for tower based systems that use very large swaths of 5Ghz as alternative LTE data paths to cell phones with multi-channel BW designed to suck up every free piece of 5Ghz spectrum found. http://www.engadget.com/2015/03/02/t-mobile-alcatel-wifi-and-4g-fight/
Re: [AFMUG] ::: More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz..
I sit on both sides of the fenceWISP and SCADA...many SCADA operators are switching to unlicensed bands to use IP and pass higher data rates that serial radios can't carry. With everything going IP it makes sense. Surveillance cameras and other devices require Ethernet so many are using the unlicensed bands as well as 3.65GHz. Houston has a ton of GE-MDS 3.65GHz links for grid SCADA. Look what happened to 902-928MHz in many part of the country. These bands are going to be used because it makes business sense for certain applications. Like taxes...can't avoid them Jaime Solorza Wireless Systems Architect 915-861-1390 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:03 AM, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.net wrote: The handset isn't putting out any power in 5 GHz. 5 GHz is downlink only. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions https://twitter.com/ICSIL -- *From: *Jerry Richardson je...@richardson.bz *To: *af@afmug.com *Sent: *Tuesday, March 3, 2015 10:45:27 AM *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] ::: More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. Even in a small cell deployment, it's going add a whole bunch of noise in an increasingly overused band. At a minimum this will require WISPs to modify our minimum signal level standards. It will be interesting to see who has more difficulty. They are trying to talk to handsets and are used to operating in sub -100dB ranges. When they realize they need to get -70 against the background they might give up as there is no way the handset will ever be able to put out enough power. -Original Message- From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 7:27 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ::: More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. Interesting. It does say small cell deployments though. https://www.qualcomm.com/invention/technologies/lte/unlicensed https://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2015/02/26/qualcomm-extends-lte-unlicensed-spectrum-enhance-mobile-experiences-and If systems like this end up rolling out on cell sites across the nation we are going to see some tough times getting clear channels. I’ve seen several proposals now for tower based systems that use very large swaths of 5Ghz as alternative LTE data paths to cell phones with multi-channel BW designed to suck up every free piece of 5Ghz spectrum found. http://www.engadget.com/2015/03/02/t-mobile-alcatel-wifi-and-4g-fight/
Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz..
We have been installing shields ala' silence of the lambs where necessary.
Image result for silence of the lambs
bp
part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com
On 3/3/2015 9:05 AM, Jerry Richardson wrote:
Yep, lived it.
The discussions PGE ended with “Our lawyers say we are in compliance,
take it up with them”.
OK then….
We managed to keep some links up, but ultimately it relegated 900 to
very low density neighborhoods and links that needed to be -65 or
better at both ends.
*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Peter Kranz
*Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:02 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz..
I think the point some are missing is the lesson learned from 900Mhz
and smart meters.
While 900Mhz is unlicensed spectrum, a single operator has managed to
take it over in California to the point where no other user has any
chance of using the spectrum for commercial purposes.
By this I mean that PGE’s deployment of smart meters on every power
meter in the area, and on top of power poles, and other high sites,
has raised the noise floor on this band to unusable levels for high
speed communications.
So by means of overwhelming numbers, PGE managed to take over 900Mhz
for its own users, stranding the investment of ISPs in this spectrum
in affected markets. I don’t think the commissions initial concept of
unlicensed spectrum was that a single operator would do this, I think
they expected operators by this to use licensed spectrum.
I’d like to see a limit on how many systems a particular entity can
deploy in an unlicensed band. It could be some high number, like 1
million units.
*Peter Kranz
*Founder/CEO - Unwired Ltd
www.UnwiredLtd.com http://www.unwiredltd.com/
Desk: 510-868-1614 x100
Mobile: 510-207-
pkr...@unwiredltd.com mailto:pkr...@unwiredltd.com
Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz..
I refuse to use any CMS system of any kind because they're easily exploited. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: David dmilho...@wletc.com To: af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 11:17:27 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. Interesting, We use drupal for this site so its possible not sure how it happened because its sits on a Lamp stack server. Thanks Dave On 03/03/2015 10:46 AM, Patrick Leary wrote: FYI David Inline image 1 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 11:16 AM, David dmilho...@wletc.com wrote: blockquote Yes, I love my 3.65 deployment thus far and not looking back. Steadily moving with more tower growth and more deployments. We have 4 sites scheduled this year to go on and 1 is completed working 2 this next quarter. We are doing a full 3.65 on each site and adding 5Ghz 450 where it makes sense. On 03/03/2015 09:23 AM, Patrick Leary wrote: blockquote We love 5.15-5.25 though. So far our customer testing is showing performance very close to our 3.65 due to the low noise floor, and I know you've been reading about how the 3.65 is doing. Patrick Telrad On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:03 AM, David dmilho...@wletc.com wrote: blockquote Agreed but now there could be less room for additional development of other wireless devices. Also, if they would stay on on side of the band would be nice like 5.1 Still plenty of room for us. On 03/03/2015 06:31 AM, Patrick Leary wrote: blockquote That's called malicious interference and can and should get you fined and shut down. Further, it is not WISP spectrum and never was. I have never understood the WISP sense of entitlement with unlicensed (free) spectrum, especially given that it is a population that is largely politically conservative. On Mar 2, 2015 12:16 PM, Tim Reichhart t...@nwohiobb.com wrote: blockquote That means can we point our 5ghz backhaul stuff at there towers and make there signal about worthless? If so that would teach cell phone companies not to mess with WISP’s spectrum. From: Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Peter Kranz Sent: Monday, March 02, 2015 12:03 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. If systems like this end up rolling out on cell sites across the nation we are going to see some tough times getting clear channels. I’ve seen several proposals now for tower based systems that use very large swaths of 5Ghz as alternative LTE data paths to cell phones with multi-channel BW designed to suck up every free piece of 5Ghz spectrum found. http://www.engadget.com/2015/03/02/t-mobile-alcatel-wifi-and-4g-fight/ Peter Kranz Founder/CEO - Unwired Ltd www.UnwiredLtd.com Desk: 510-868-1614 x100 Mobile: 510-207- pkr...@unwiredltd.com /blockquote /blockquote -- Patrick Leary Director BD, North America, Telrad 727.501.3735 patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG] p atrick.le...@telrad.com [this is my corporate address] /blockquote /blockquote -- Patrick Leary Director BD, North America, Telrad 727.501.3735 patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG] p atrick.le...@telrad.com [this is my corporate address] /blockquote
Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz..
It is. All we can do is plan the best we can and react when no-one else does. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jaime Solorza Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:23 AM To: Animal Farm Subject: Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. Here in the border we have to deal with interference on licensed and unlicensed bands from another country! Even our Public Safety system was interfered with and had to be dealt with. Like Gino says, Its part of doing business in these bands! Jaime Solorza Wireless Systems Architect 915-861-1390 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Jerry Richardson je...@richardson.bz mailto:je...@richardson.bz wrote: Yep, lived it. The discussions PGE ended with “Our lawyers say we are in compliance, take it up with them”. OK then…. We managed to keep some links up, but ultimately it relegated 900 to very low density neighborhoods and links that needed to be -65 or better at both ends. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Peter Kranz Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:02 AM To: af@afmug.com mailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. I think the point some are missing is the lesson learned from 900Mhz and smart meters. While 900Mhz is unlicensed spectrum, a single operator has managed to take it over in California to the point where no other user has any chance of using the spectrum for commercial purposes. By this I mean that PGE’s deployment of smart meters on every power meter in the area, and on top of power poles, and other high sites, has raised the noise floor on this band to unusable levels for high speed communications. So by means of overwhelming numbers, PGE managed to take over 900Mhz for its own users, stranding the investment of ISPs in this spectrum in affected markets. I don’t think the commissions initial concept of unlicensed spectrum was that a single operator would do this, I think they expected operators by this to use licensed spectrum. I’d like to see a limit on how many systems a particular entity can deploy in an unlicensed band. It could be some high number, like 1 million units. Peter Kranz Founder/CEO - Unwired Ltd http://www.unwiredltd.com/ www.UnwiredLtd.com Desk: 510-868-1614 x100 tel:510-868-1614%20x100 Mobile: 510-207- tel:510-207- mailto:pkr...@unwiredltd.com pkr...@unwiredltd.com
Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz..
Use Chrome? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 1:15 PM, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com wrote: I did a full scan today with my Kaspersky. Seems I'm okay, but I don't know s**t about that stuff. *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *David *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 12:48 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. Patrick, This maybe something you may need to look at on your system. http://blog.vilmatech.com/remove-heurtrojan-script-generic-redirected-flash-player-page / From what I read this is a trojan on the client not server. thanks Dave On 03/03/2015 10:46 AM, Patrick Leary wrote: FYI David [image: Inline image 1] On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 11:16 AM, David dmilho...@wletc.com wrote: Yes, I love my 3.65 deployment thus far and not looking back. Steadily moving with more tower growth and more deployments. We have 4 sites scheduled this year to go on and 1 is completed working 2 this next quarter. We are doing a full 3.65 on each site and adding 5Ghz 450 where it makes sense. On 03/03/2015 09:23 AM, Patrick Leary wrote: We love 5.15-5.25 though. So far our customer testing is showing performance very close to our 3.65 due to the low noise floor, and I know you've been reading about how the 3.65 is doing. Patrick Telrad On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:03 AM, David dmilho...@wletc.com wrote: Agreed but now there could be less room for additional development of other wireless devices. Also, if they would stay on on side of the band would be nice like 5.1 Still plenty of room for us. On 03/03/2015 06:31 AM, Patrick Leary wrote: That's called malicious interference and can and should get you fined and shut down. Further, it is not WISP spectrum and never was. I have never understood the WISP sense of entitlement with unlicensed (free) spectrum, especially given that it is a population that is largely politically conservative. On Mar 2, 2015 12:16 PM, Tim Reichhart t...@nwohiobb.com wrote: That means can we point our 5ghz backhaul stuff at there towers and make there signal about worthless? If so that would teach cell phone companies not to mess with WISP’s spectrum. *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Peter Kranz *Sent:* Monday, March 02, 2015 12:03 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. If systems like this end up rolling out on cell sites across the nation we are going to see some tough times getting clear channels. I’ve seen several proposals now for tower based systems that use very large swaths of 5Ghz as alternative LTE data paths to cell phones with multi-channel BW designed to suck up every free piece of 5Ghz spectrum found. http://www.engadget.com/2015/03/02/t-mobile-alcatel-wifi-and-4g-fight/ *Peter Kranz *Founder/CEO - Unwired Ltd www.UnwiredLtd.com http://www.unwiredltd.com/ Desk: 510-868-1614 x100 Mobile: 510-207- pkr...@unwiredltd.com -- Patrick Leary Director BD, North America, Telrad 727.501.3735 patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG] patrick.le...@telrad.com patrick.le...@telrad.com [this is my corporate address] -- Patrick Leary Director BD, North America, Telrad 727.501.3735 patrickleary.af...@gmail.com [this address is only for AFMUG] patrick.le...@telrad.com patrick.le...@telrad.com [this is my corporate address] This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses. This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses.
Re: [AFMUG] Samsung smart TVs
On 3/3/15 12:03, Josh Luthman wrote: But has the interface changed? Yeah, it's been like 7 years. ~Seth
Re: [AFMUG] Samsung smart TVs
I don't know what it looked like before, but if you google/image roku interface you'll see what it looks like. -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com On 03/03/2015 11:03 AM, Josh Luthman wrote: But has the interface changed? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 3:02 PM, Seth Mattinen se...@rollernet.us mailto:se...@rollernet.us wrote: On 3/3/15 11:45, Josh Luthman wrote: It was an original Roku, I think. You add the channels and such from the website but on the tv you go left/right through them and then specify the channel and then which content inside of it. The original was 2008, they're on their third generation now. ~Seth
Re: [AFMUG] Samsung smart TVs
Nowhere close to that now. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 3:29 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Samsung smart TVs This is what I remember: http://www5.pcmag.com/media/images/266683-roku-2-xs-interface-menu.jpg Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 3:24 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com mailto:j...@spitwspots.com wrote: I don't know what it looked like before, but if you google/image roku interface you'll see what it looks like. -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com http://www.spitwspots.com On 03/03/2015 11:03 AM, Josh Luthman wrote: But has the interface changed? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 tel:937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 tel:937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 3:02 PM, Seth Mattinen se...@rollernet.us mailto:se...@rollernet.us wrote: On 3/3/15 11:45, Josh Luthman wrote: It was an original Roku, I think. You add the channels and such from the website but on the tv you go left/right through them and then specify the channel and then which content inside of it. The original was 2008, they're on their third generation now. ~Seth
Re: [AFMUG] HP buys Aruba
Gino, I followed your investing lead... you proclaimed $ 100 UBNT stock by end of 2014. Can I file my claim for stock under performance directly with you ? LOL Paul :) From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Gino Villarini Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 12:37 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] HP buys Aruba I have! In 30 stocks.. Lol! Gino A. Villarini President Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. www.aeronetpr.comhttp://www.aeronetpr.com @aeronetpr From: Jaime Solorza losguyswirel...@gmail.commailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com Reply-To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Date: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 at 1:01 PM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] HP buys Aruba Aeronet!!! Jaime Solorza Wireless Systems Architect 915-861-1390 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 9:59 AM, cjwstudios cjwstud...@gmail.commailto:cjwstud...@gmail.com wrote: Huawei. On Mar 3, 2015 9:52 AM, Gino Villarini g...@aeronetpr.commailto:g...@aeronetpr.com wrote: Who's gonna buy ubnt? Gino A. Villarini President Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. www.aeronetpr.comhttp://www.aeronetpr.com @aeronetpr From: Travis Johnson t...@ida.netmailto:t...@ida.net Reply-To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Date: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 at 11:17 AM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] HP buys Aruba My message makes it official. :) Travis On 3/3/2015 8:03 AM, Josh Luthman wrote: We talked about it yesterday :) Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340tel:937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343tel:937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 9:58 AM, Travis Johnson t...@ida.netmailto:t...@ida.net wrote: http://www.firstpost.com/business/biggest-deal-since-autonomy-hp-buy-wi-fi-gear-maker-aruba-networks-2-7-bn-2132659.html Travis
Re: [AFMUG] Samsung smart TVs
There are two products that we recommend without any hesitation, Roku and Ooma. Never have a problem with either. Rory From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 1:29 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Samsung smart TVs This is what I remember: http://www5.pcmag.com/media/images/266683-roku-2-xs-interface-menu.jpg Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 3:24 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.commailto:j...@spitwspots.com wrote: I don't know what it looked like before, but if you google/image roku interface you'll see what it looks like. -- Josh Reynolds CIO, SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.comhttp://www.spitwspots.com On 03/03/2015 11:03 AM, Josh Luthman wrote: But has the interface changed? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340tel:937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343tel:937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 3:02 PM, Seth Mattinen se...@rollernet.usmailto:se...@rollernet.us wrote: On 3/3/15 11:45, Josh Luthman wrote: It was an original Roku, I think. You add the channels and such from the website but on the tv you go left/right through them and then specify the channel and then which content inside of it. The original was 2008, they're on their third generation now. ~Seth
[AFMUG] BIND 9.4.2 SRV records
we are trying to get these srv record working for office 365 Adding through the web interface doesnt seem to get the format correct Editing the record file doesnt seem to do it either is there something Im missing, like is there somewhere I need to enable srv records, we have never put one in before. The current iteration is as follows: _sip._tls.domainname.com. 3600 IN SRV 1 100 443 sipdir.online.lync.com. _sipfederationtls._tcp.domainname.com. 3600 IN SRV 1 100 5061 sipfed.online.lync.com. This is what the host says needs to be present [image: Inline image 1] -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
[AFMUG] Ubiquiti radios with different xm/xw firmware
I know that was some discussion on this and some people said that mixing firmware was a problem, even with 5.5.10. I hadn't seen the problem until about a week ago. Had PowerBridge talking to a Powerbeam talking to a PowerBridge which then link to a another PTP using NS5's and an AP on that end. It seemed to work great for several months. A week ago, the AP at the end started pushing through 10-20 pings and then dropping 3 pings. After finding nothing, we pull the PowerBridge and replaced it with a PowerBeam. Problem solved. On the other hand, we have a boatload of NS5M's, some with XW firmware connected to XM Rockets. No problems so far. Rory
Re: [AFMUG] Cisco Router VLAN
encapsulation dot1q VLAN_ID native? Unless I'm confused what you're asking for... On 3/4/2015 1:28 AM, Jason McKemie wrote: If I have an incoming VLAN tag that I want to strip on a Cisco router, how would I do so? I've got a sub interface configured on the physical interface where the VLAN enters the router, the correct VLAN number, and an IP address on the same network as the device at the other end of the cable configured on the sub interface. Still unable to ping anything. Is there a command I'm missing here? I had a Mikrotik router in the same location that I currently have the Cisco and didn't have any issues.
[AFMUG] Cisco Router VLAN
If I have an incoming VLAN tag that I want to strip on a Cisco router, how would I do so? I've got a sub interface configured on the physical interface where the VLAN enters the router, the correct VLAN number, and an IP address on the same network as the device at the other end of the cable configured on the sub interface. Still unable to ping anything. Is there a command I'm missing here? I had a Mikrotik router in the same location that I currently have the Cisco and didn't have any issues.
Re: [AFMUG] New feedback
computer viruses. This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses. This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses. This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://afmug.com/pipermail/af/attachments/20150303/f33e4d9b/attachment.html -- Subject: Digest Footer ___ Af mailing list Af@afmug.com http://afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af -- End of Af Digest, Vol 7, Issue 160 **
Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz..
I raised this with the CPUC. Same approach that although the part15 rules allow them to do this, should they because of their position. Monopoly etc.. especially when licensed is available to them for this purpose. The CPUC were not interested. Just quoted part15. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Peter Kranz Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:02 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. I think the point some are missing is the lesson learned from 900Mhz and smart meters. While 900Mhz is unlicensed spectrum, a single operator has managed to take it over in California to the point where no other user has any chance of using the spectrum for commercial purposes. By this I mean that PGE’s deployment of smart meters on every power meter in the area, and on top of power poles, and other high sites, has raised the noise floor on this band to unusable levels for high speed communications. So by means of overwhelming numbers, PGE managed to take over 900Mhz for its own users, stranding the investment of ISPs in this spectrum in affected markets. I don’t think the commissions initial concept of unlicensed spectrum was that a single operator would do this, I think they expected operators by this to use licensed spectrum. I’d like to see a limit on how many systems a particular entity can deploy in an unlicensed band. It could be some high number, like 1 million units. Peter Kranz Founder/CEO - Unwired Ltd http://www.unwiredltd.com/ www.UnwiredLtd.com Desk: 510-868-1614 x100 Mobile: 510-207- mailto:pkr...@unwiredltd.com pkr...@unwiredltd.com
Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz..
Yeah, stop being cry babies and man up! Gino A. Villarini @gvillarini On Mar 3, 2015, at 1:24 PM, Jaime Solorza losguyswirel...@gmail.commailto:losguyswirel...@gmail.com wrote: Here in the border we have to deal with interference on licensed and unlicensed bands from another country! Even our Public Safety system was interfered with and had to be dealt with. Like Gino says, Its part of doing business in these bands! Jaime Solorza Wireless Systems Architect 915-861-1390 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Jerry Richardson je...@richardson.bzmailto:je...@richardson.bz wrote: Yep, lived it. The discussions PGE ended with “Our lawyers say we are in compliance, take it up with them”. OK then…. We managed to keep some links up, but ultimately it relegated 900 to very low density neighborhoods and links that needed to be -65 or better at both ends. From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.commailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Peter Kranz Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:02 AM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. I think the point some are missing is the lesson learned from 900Mhz and smart meters. While 900Mhz is unlicensed spectrum, a single operator has managed to take it over in California to the point where no other user has any chance of using the spectrum for commercial purposes. By this I mean that PGE’s deployment of smart meters on every power meter in the area, and on top of power poles, and other high sites, has raised the noise floor on this band to unusable levels for high speed communications. So by means of overwhelming numbers, PGE managed to take over 900Mhz for its own users, stranding the investment of ISPs in this spectrum in affected markets. I don’t think the commissions initial concept of unlicensed spectrum was that a single operator would do this, I think they expected operators by this to use licensed spectrum. I’d like to see a limit on how many systems a particular entity can deploy in an unlicensed band. It could be some high number, like 1 million units. Peter Kranz Founder/CEO - Unwired Ltd www.UnwiredLtd.comhttp://www.unwiredltd.com/ Desk: 510-868-1614 x100tel:510-868-1614%20x100 Mobile: 510-207-tel:510-207- pkr...@unwiredltd.commailto:pkr...@unwiredltd.com
Re: [AFMUG] New feedback
Sort of off topic, but what would be the smallest AP we could get? I'm thinking about using this system on a few of my towers to make sure we never leave without a new customer, but I serve a very rural area. I have some towers with 15 clients. Is an omni + GPS sync or narrow channel out of the question? - Original Message - From: Patrick Leary To: tel...@wispa.org ; af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 4:42 PM Subject: [AFMUG] New feedback This is an interesting bit of commentary from one of our new customers. If he wishes to identify himself, he will Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 From: Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 2:31 AM To: Patrick Leary; Nick Dewar Subject: Interesting Statistic Patrick / Nick - Our Director of Operations, which you both met in St Louis, sent out an interesting email to our staff this evening. In February with only 20 working days we completed 40 installs with one technician... This is only icing on the cake, especially since we are onboarding two more techs... I ran some additional numbers and found that out of the Telrad installations that we scheduled, 100 % were successful both of these months. This is a game changer, and it proves that we can eliminate the need to waste further time with the dreaded site surveys. Our success is not without the help of Telrad's Compact solution. Truly amazing and inspiring, excited for our aggressive expansion this spring/summer/fall. I cannot wait to have hundreds of these damn things in the air. Excited and thankful to be a part of the LTE Beta, and am thankful for the Holy Grail email that introduced us to the product This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses.
[AFMUG] New feedback
This is an interesting bit of commentary from one of our new customers. If he wishes to identify himself, he will Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image003.png@01D055D9.2BA82B50]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 2:31 AM To: Patrick Leary; Nick Dewar Subject: Interesting Statistic Patrick / Nick - Our Director of Operations, which you both met in St Louis, sent out an interesting email to our staff this evening. In February with only 20 working days we completed 40 installs with one technician... This is only icing on the cake, especially since we are onboarding two more techs... I ran some additional numbers and found that out of the Telrad installations that we scheduled, 100 % were successful both of these months. This is a game changer, and it proves that we can eliminate the need to waste further time with the dreaded site surveys. Our success is not without the help of Telrad's Compact solution. Truly amazing and inspiring, excited for our aggressive expansion this spring/summer/fall. I cannot wait to have hundreds of these damn things in the air. Excited and thankful to be a part of the LTE Beta, and am thankful for the Holy Grail email that introduced us to the product This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses.
Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz..
I have yet to see a good FHSS radio get knocked off the air be it serial or Ethernet. I can only speak about GE MDS, Freewave, MaXstream MicroHard and CalAMP. Canopy 900MHz is still working in many areas of town even near refinery and water companies MAS farm. TxDOT using MDS and Encom for ITSall in the 902-928MHz band with EPEC deploying Itron and Neptune smart meters.. It does take work but so far ..knock on wood Jaime Solorza Wireless Systems Architect 915-861-1390 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 4:29 PM, Gino Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com wrote: Yeah, stop being cry babies and man up! Gino A. Villarini @gvillarini On Mar 3, 2015, at 1:24 PM, Jaime Solorza losguyswirel...@gmail.com wrote: Here in the border we have to deal with interference on licensed and unlicensed bands from another country! Even our Public Safety system was interfered with and had to be dealt with. Like Gino says, Its part of doing business in these bands! Jaime Solorza Wireless Systems Architect 915-861-1390 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Jerry Richardson je...@richardson.bz wrote: Yep, lived it. The discussions PGE ended with “Our lawyers say we are in compliance, take it up with them”. OK then…. We managed to keep some links up, but ultimately it relegated 900 to very low density neighborhoods and links that needed to be -65 or better at both ends. *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Peter Kranz *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:02 AM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz.. I think the point some are missing is the lesson learned from 900Mhz and smart meters. While 900Mhz is unlicensed spectrum, a single operator has managed to take it over in California to the point where no other user has any chance of using the spectrum for commercial purposes. By this I mean that PGE’s deployment of smart meters on every power meter in the area, and on top of power poles, and other high sites, has raised the noise floor on this band to unusable levels for high speed communications. So by means of overwhelming numbers, PGE managed to take over 900Mhz for its own users, stranding the investment of ISPs in this spectrum in affected markets. I don’t think the commissions initial concept of unlicensed spectrum was that a single operator would do this, I think they expected operators by this to use licensed spectrum. I’d like to see a limit on how many systems a particular entity can deploy in an unlicensed band. It could be some high number, like 1 million units. *Peter Kranz *Founder/CEO - Unwired Ltd www.UnwiredLtd.com http://www.unwiredltd.com/ Desk: 510-868-1614 x100 Mobile: 510-207- pkr...@unwiredltd.com
Re: [AFMUG] New feedback
The 15 number comes from rural area. I have some towers that can only hit a few homes. Of those few, some still have OTA TV and rotary phones. They have no need nor want for Internet. Don't get hung up on that. I'm looking at probably 4 of these strategically placed in my network to cover any blind spots I might have over my coverage area. I'm not following, capping? Aside from that, this email came off more than a bit condesending. - Original Message - From: Patrick Leary To: af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 7:41 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan of capping Glen. It is a gimmick. The hardware is what it is, and this hardware is expensive. 30dBm per port. 4 tx/4rx. Power is expensive. The highest quality DSPs on the market. not consumer grade stuff with the sensitivity of your in home Wi-Fi router. We build our own phy from the ground up too, our own ATPC algorithms too. On the software, we do that though -- enabling modularity and scale as you need to. I think I need to do a dedicated webinar to this community to walk you guys (or those inclined) through it (any takers?). I do not think we can be a solution that makes sense where you only have 15 clients. That's the blunt truth. Unless you are doing 50 Mbps customers, I am not your micropop (but I can do that in some modest scale). That said, I wonder where that 15 number comes from? Can you please explain on what architecture that is based? Range? Height? Etc. If it is based on a micropop and even then on what just that pop can see, I'd say that's likely a model invented out of necessity due to the poor performance of the system you are using. I had a guy on a call today. He zoomed me in on Google Earth to his NLOS area. Farmland with wind breaks and shade trees for the homes. He is at 400' and can't connect squat behind those breaks. In my world, that's LOS all the way, even at 150 ft. It is total garbage that so many systems to can't deal with that and you've all been fed that that is normal. It is not. It is just gear with terrible specs where the only RD is at the software level, and even that is scant. You do not have NLOS problems. You have equipment problems. How such a product ever was allowed to go to market as a solution for rural broadband is, to me, cynical and reflective of playing a market to skim opportunistic dollars from a market segment that sometimes seems to embrace abuse. Sort of like the poor 700 MHz owners who got sucked in to buying 20 year old Marconi WipLL repackaged as a 700 MHz solution because all there was to buy. Then vendors do that crap and THEN, THEN tell you there's no backward compatibility when they come out with something new? WISPs. Sometimes you guys drive me nuts. You are like cheerleaders that love to date the quarterbacks who abuse you. That is like selling a car that falls apart once you leave residential streets. None of you should ever have accepted these golf carts to run your fleets. Sometimes, cheap is just cheap. Boy, I'm gonna hear it from my vendor peers, but this ain't a game or just a job for me. I damn sure hope it ain't that for you either. Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Glen Waldrop Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:08 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Sort of off topic, but what would be the smallest AP we could get? I'm thinking about using this system on a few of my towers to make sure we never leave without a new customer, but I serve a very rural area. I have some towers with 15 clients. Is an omni + GPS sync or narrow channel out of the question? - Original Message - From: Patrick Leary To: tel...@wispa.org ; af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 4:42 PM Subject: [AFMUG] New feedback This is an interesting bit of commentary from one of our new customers. If he wishes to identify himself, he will Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 From: Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 2:31 AM To: Patrick Leary; Nick Dewar Subject: Interesting Statistic Patrick / Nick - Our Director of Operations, which you both met in St Louis, sent out an interesting email to our staff this evening. In February with only 20 working days we completed 40 installs with one technician... This is only icing on the cake, especially since we are onboarding two more techs... I ran some additional numbers and found that out of the Telrad installations that we scheduled, 100 % were successful both of these months. This is a game changer, and it proves that we can eliminate the need to waste further time with the dreaded site
Re: [AFMUG] New feedback
Patrick's not here to make friends. He does have a point, though. If a product is revolutionary, you can't look at it the same way everything else. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Glen Waldrop gwl...@cngwireless.net To: af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 9:19:22 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback The 15 number comes from rural area. I have some towers that can only hit a few homes. Of those few, some still have OTA TV and rotary phones. They have no need nor want for Internet. Don't get hung up on that. I'm looking at probably 4 of these strategically placed in my network to cover any blind spots I might have over my coverage area. I'm not following, capping? Aside from that, this email came off more than a bit condesending. - Original Message - From: Patrick Leary To: af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 7:41 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan of capping Glen. It is a gimmick. The hardware is what it is, and this hardware is expensive. 30dBm per port. 4 tx/4rx. Power is expensive. The highest quality DSPs on the market. not consumer grade stuff with the sensitivity of your in home Wi-Fi router. We build our own phy from the ground up too, our own ATPC algorithms too. On the software, we do that though -- enabling modularity and scale as you need to. I think I need to do a dedicated webinar to this community to walk you guys (or those inclined) through it (any takers?). I do not think we can be a solution that makes sense where you only have 15 clients. That's the blunt truth. Unless you are doing 50 Mbps customers, I am not your micropop (but I can do that in some modest scale). That said, I wonder where that 15 number comes from? Can you please explain on what architecture that is based? Range? Height? Etc. If it is based on a micropop and even then on what just that pop can see, I'd say that's likely a model invented out of necessity due to the poor performance of the system you are using. I had a guy on a call today. He zoomed me in on Google Earth to his NLOS area. Farmland with wind breaks and shade trees for the homes. He is at 400' and can't connect squat behind those breaks. In my world, that's LOS all the way, even at 150 ft. It is total garbage that so many systems to can't deal with that and you've all been fed that that is normal. It is not. It is just gear with terrible specs where the only RD is at the software level, and even that is scant. You do not have NLOS problems. You have equipment problems. How such a product ever was allowed to go to market as a solution for rural broadband is, to me, cynical and reflective of playing a market to skim opportunistic dollars from a market segment that sometimes seems to embrace abuse. Sort of like the poor 700 MHz owners who got sucked in to buying 20 year old Marconi WipLL repackaged as a 700 MHz solution because all there was to buy. Then vendors do that crap and THEN, THEN tell you there's no backward compatibility when they come out with something new? WISPs. Sometimes you guys drive me nuts. You are like cheerleaders that love to date the quarterbacks who abuse you. That is like selling a car that falls apart once you leave residential streets. None of you should ever have accepted these golf carts to run your fleets. Sometimes, cheap is just cheap. Boy, I'm gonna hear it from my vendor peers, but this ain't a game or just a job for me. I damn sure hope it ain't that for you either. Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Glen Waldrop Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:08 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Sort of off topic, but what would be the smallest AP we could get? I'm thinking about using this system on a few of my towers to make sure we never leave without a new customer, but I serve a very rural area. I have some towers with 15 clients. Is an omni + GPS sync or narrow channel out of the question? blockquote - Original Message - From: Patrick Leary To: tel...@wispa.org ; af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 4:42 PM Subject: [AFMUG] New feedback This is an interesting bit of commentary from one of our new customers. If he wishes to identify himself, he will Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 From: Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 2:31 AM To: Patrick Leary; Nick Dewar Subject: Interesting Statistic Patrick / Nick – Our Director of Operations, which you both met in St Louis, sent out an interesting email to our staff this evening. In February with only 20 working days we completed 40 installs with one technician ... This is only icing on the cake, especially since we are onboarding two more techs. .. I ran some additional numbers
Re: [AFMUG] BIND 9.4.2 SRV records
I figured it out, its the stupid office365 portal. everytime i would run a check it had different errors and solutions, like suggesting i remove the NS records because it thought they were MX records (no clue on why) at one point it saw one SRV record, but not the other, which was odd because the both had the exact same syntax It at one point had two CNAMEs that dont even exist and never have for autodiscover responses its almost like the issue is some caching on their side thats very screwed up I finally just ran the check over and over until it said everything was good and left it alone. really irritates me cause I tried playing hooky from work today and ended up spending six hours I could have been playing minecraft with the kids trying to figure this out, at one point even contemplating just rebuilding the DNS servers On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 9:22 PM, Steve Utick sut...@gmail.com wrote: Not sure on the GUI, as I've never used it. We do have this set up for a couple of customers though, and the following is what's in the zone file for them: _sip._tls IN SRV 100 1 443 sipdir.online.lync.com. _sipfederationtls._tcp IN SRV 100 1 5061 sipfed.online.lync.com. On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 3:40 PM, That One Guy thatoneguyst...@gmail.com wrote: we are trying to get these srv record working for office 365 Adding through the web interface doesnt seem to get the format correct Editing the record file doesnt seem to do it either is there something Im missing, like is there somewhere I need to enable srv records, we have never put one in before. The current iteration is as follows: _sip._tls.domainname.com. 3600 IN SRV 1 100 443 sipdir.online.lync.com. _sipfederationtls._tcp.domainname.com. 3600 IN SRV 1 100 5061 sipfed.online.lync.com. This is what the host says needs to be present [image: Inline image 1] -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
Re: [AFMUG] BIND 9.4.2 SRV records
That gawd awful office365 portal gave me heartburn too.
I really hate the way they have taken something that should be really
simple and hosed up up beyond belief.
bp
part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com
On 3/3/2015 7:37 PM, That One Guy wrote:
I figured it out, its the stupid office365 portal.
everytime i would run a check it had different errors and solutions,
like suggesting i remove the NS records because it thought they were
MX records (no clue on why)
at one point it saw one SRV record, but not the other, which was odd
because the both had the exact same syntax
It at one point had two CNAMEs that dont even exist and never have for
autodiscover responses
its almost like the issue is some caching on their side thats very
screwed up
I finally just ran the check over and over until it said everything
was good and left it alone. really irritates me cause I tried playing
hooky from work today and ended up spending six hours I could have
been playing minecraft with the kids trying to figure this out, at one
point even contemplating just rebuilding the DNS servers
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 9:22 PM, Steve Utick sut...@gmail.com
mailto:sut...@gmail.com wrote:
Not sure on the GUI, as I've never used it. We do have this set up
for a couple of customers though, and the following is what's in
the zone file for them:
_sip._tls IN SRV 100 1 443
sipdir.online.lync.com http://sipdir.online.lync.com.
_sipfederationtls._tcp IN SRV 100 1 5061
sipfed.online.lync.com http://sipfed.online.lync.com.
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 3:40 PM, That One Guy
thatoneguyst...@gmail.com mailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com wrote:
we are trying to get these srv record working for office 365
Adding through the web interface doesnt seem to get the format
correct
Editing the record file doesnt seem to do it either
is there something Im missing, like is there somewhere I need
to enable srv records, we have never put one in before.
The current iteration is as follows:
_sip._tls.domainname.com http://tls.domainname.com. 3600 IN
SRV 1 100 443 sipdir.online.lync.com
http://sipdir.online.lync.com.
_sipfederationtls._tcp.domainname.com
http://tcp.domainname.com. 3600 IN SRV 1 100 5061
sipfed.online.lync.com http://sipfed.online.lync.com.
This is what the host says needs to be present
Inline image 1
--
If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see
your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part
of the team.
--
If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your
team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
Re: [AFMUG] About $12k
so the minimum for a full 360 degree pop and still have near spec performance would realistically start at 36k aside from site incidentals to support the product? On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 9:21 PM, Glen Waldrop gwl...@cngwireless.net wrote: That's what I needed to know. - Original Message - *From:* Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com *To:* af@afmug.com *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:16 PM *Subject:* [AFMUG] About $12k One BTS, included embedded EPC with MAC level authentication (cheapest option) supporting up to 50 clients. Antenna could be swapped for any other. NOTE: this exclude any NMS pieces, but you could just connect over Telnet or direct connect. This would be the BAREST of bones, but there it is. That's still LTE and about 100 Mbps with killer NLOS. Includes: 735270 CMP.XT-BS-3.4-3.7 1 715773 LTE COMPACT SW License 1 700258 BMAX-4M-GPS 1 300736 ANT 3.3-3.8GHz,18 dBi, 65deg, 4ports (RF cables NOT included) 1 715620 BreezeWay-1010-50 (per Compact HW license) 1 715621 BreezeWay-1010-iHSS-50 (50 subs. license) 1 SLA 1 Year SLA 1 *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Patrick Leary *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:08 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] New feedback No, could be much less. Give me a minute... *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:05 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Probably 20k to start. Quality over quantity. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 8:56 PM, John Woodfield john.woodfi...@jwcn.biz wrote: Patrick, I haven't had time to read through all this emails. Can you summarize what the lowest cost get up and running on a tower is so I can consider this further along with cost per sub? Thanks, John Woodfield, President Delmarva WiFi Inc. 410-870-WiFi -Original Message- From: Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 8:41pm To: af@afmug.com af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan of capping Glen. It is a gimmick. The hardware is what it is, and this hardware is expensive. 30dBm per port. 4 tx/4rx. Power is expensive. The highest quality DSPs on the market. not consumer grade stuff with the sensitivity of your in home Wi-Fi router. We build our own phy from the ground up too, our own ATPC algorithms too. On the software, we do that though -- enabling modularity and scale as you need to. I think I need to do a dedicated webinar to this community to walk you guys (or those inclined) through it (any takers?). I do not think we can be a solution that makes sense where you only have 15 clients. That's the blunt truth. Unless you are doing 50 Mbps customers, I am not your micropop (but I can do that in some modest scale). That said, I wonder where that 15 number comes from? Can you please explain on what architecture that is based? Range? Height? Etc. If it is based on a micropop and even then on what just that pop can see, I'd say that's likely a model invented out of necessity due to the poor performance of the system you are using. I had a guy on a call today. He zoomed me in on Google Earth to his NLOS area. Farmland with wind breaks and shade trees for the homes. He is at 400' and can't connect squat behind those breaks. In my world, that's LOS all the way, even at 150 ft. It is total garbage that so many systems to can't deal with that and you've all been fed that that is normal. It is not. It is just gear with terrible specs where the only RD is at the software level, and even that is scant. You do not have NLOS problems. You have equipment problems. How such a product ever was allowed to go to market as a solution for rural broadband is, to me, cynical and reflective of playing a market to skim opportunistic dollars from a market segment that sometimes seems to embrace abuse. Sort of like the poor 700 MHz owners who got sucked in to buying 20 year old Marconi WipLL repackaged as a 700 MHz solution because all there was to buy. Then vendors do that crap and THEN, THEN tell you there's no backward compatibility when they come out with something new? WISPs. Sometimes you guys drive me nuts. You are like cheerleaders that love to date the quarterbacks who abuse you. That is like selling a car that falls apart once you leave residential streets. None of you should ever have accepted these golf carts to run your fleets. Sometimes, cheap is just cheap. Boy, I'm gonna hear it from my vendor peers, but this ain't a game or just a job for me. I damn sure hope it ain't that
Re: [AFMUG] New feedback
Well, I'd say most of my friends are WISPs or in this business at this point. One day I'll fire up an RV and do a 50 state tour, only staying on the property of my WISP friends. I'd love it. I have LOTS of long time friends in this space, but they tend to be as blunt as I am. Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image001.png@01D0560C.9516CC80]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 10:37 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Patrick's not here to make friends. He does have a point, though. If a product is revolutionary, you can't look at it the same way everything else. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com [Image removed by sender.]https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL[Image removed by sender.]https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb[Image removed by sender.]https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions[Image removed by sender.]https://twitter.com/ICSIL From: Glen Waldrop gwl...@cngwireless.net To: af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 9:19:22 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback The 15 number comes from rural area. I have some towers that can only hit a few homes. Of those few, some still have OTA TV and rotary phones. They have no need nor want for Internet. Don't get hung up on that. I'm looking at probably 4 of these strategically placed in my network to cover any blind spots I might have over my coverage area. I'm not following, capping? Aside from that, this email came off more than a bit condesending. - Original Message - From: Patrick Learymailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 7:41 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan of capping Glen. It is a gimmick. The hardware is what it is, and this hardware is expensive. 30dBm per port. 4 tx/4rx. Power is expensive. The highest quality DSPs on the market. not consumer grade stuff with the sensitivity of your in home Wi-Fi router. We build our own phy from the ground up too, our own ATPC algorithms too. On the software, we do that though -- enabling modularity and scale as you need to. I think I need to do a dedicated webinar to this community to walk you guys (or those inclined) through it (any takers?). I do not think we can be a solution that makes sense where you only have 15 clients. That's the blunt truth. Unless you are doing 50 Mbps customers, I am not your micropop (but I can do that in some modest scale). That said, I wonder where that 15 number comes from? Can you please explain on what architecture that is based? Range? Height? Etc. If it is based on a micropop and even then on what just that pop can see, I'd say that's likely a model invented out of necessity due to the poor performance of the system you are using. I had a guy on a call today. He zoomed me in on Google Earth to his NLOS area. Farmland with wind breaks and shade trees for the homes. He is at 400' and can't connect squat behind those breaks. In my world, that's LOS all the way, even at 150 ft. It is total garbage that so many systems to can't deal with that and you've all been fed that that is normal. It is not. It is just gear with terrible specs where the only RD is at the software level, and even that is scant. You do not have NLOS problems. You have equipment problems. How such a product ever was allowed to go to market as a solution for rural broadband is, to me, cynical and reflective of playing a market to skim opportunistic dollars from a market segment that sometimes seems to embrace abuse. Sort of like the poor 700 MHz owners who got sucked in to buying 20 year old Marconi WipLL repackaged as a 700 MHz solution because all there was to buy. Then vendors do that crap and THEN, THEN tell you there's no backward compatibility when they come out with something new? WISPs. Sometimes you guys drive me nuts. You are like cheerleaders that love to date the quarterbacks who abuse you. That is like selling a car that falls apart once you leave residential streets. None of you should ever have accepted these golf carts to run your fleets. Sometimes, cheap is just cheap. Boy, I'm gonna hear it from my vendor peers, but this ain't a game or just a job for me. I damn sure hope it ain't that for you either. Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D0560C.9516CC80]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Glen Waldrop Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:08 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Sort of off topic, but what would be the smallest AP we could get? I'm thinking about using this system on a few of my towers to make sure we never leave without a new customer, but I serve a very rural area. I have some towers with 15 clients. Is an omni + GPS sync
Re: [AFMUG] New feedback
Tree density is seriously mixed. Some places it is ridiculous, 100+ year growth, old forests. Nearly half of my coverage area is over farmland (beef, catfish) so those places are usually an easy shot. The truly irritating thing about wireless in this area is cedar trees. There won't be one tree in the yard, but there will almost always be a line of cedar across the road or something, somewhere near a fence line. Anyone that has the phobia that RF is killing us just needs to plant cedar. I've got a few places that if your system could serve you'd get a shining recommendation from me. Nothing short of going over cedar seems to work. 900MHz seems to get a half mile or less if cedar is involved. I can get over a mile away with the test AP on the ground and a yagi in my truck through hardwood and pine, but cedar just stops it cold. Mike Hammet may have a point though. I may not be your target audience. I might not get a return on my investment, but it would be irresponsible of me to not evaluate another tool to find out. - Original Message - From: Patrick Leary To: af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 10:48 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback I suspect you could pull off omnis then. How's the tree density? Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Glen Waldrop Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 10:19 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback The 15 number comes from rural area. I have some towers that can only hit a few homes. Of those few, some still have OTA TV and rotary phones. They have no need nor want for Internet. Don't get hung up on that. I'm looking at probably 4 of these strategically placed in my network to cover any blind spots I might have over my coverage area. I'm not following, capping? Aside from that, this email came off more than a bit condesending. - Original Message - From: Patrick Leary To: af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 7:41 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan of capping Glen. It is a gimmick. The hardware is what it is, and this hardware is expensive. 30dBm per port. 4 tx/4rx. Power is expensive. The highest quality DSPs on the market. not consumer grade stuff with the sensitivity of your in home Wi-Fi router. We build our own phy from the ground up too, our own ATPC algorithms too. On the software, we do that though -- enabling modularity and scale as you need to. I think I need to do a dedicated webinar to this community to walk you guys (or those inclined) through it (any takers?). I do not think we can be a solution that makes sense where you only have 15 clients. That's the blunt truth. Unless you are doing 50 Mbps customers, I am not your micropop (but I can do that in some modest scale). That said, I wonder where that 15 number comes from? Can you please explain on what architecture that is based? Range? Height? Etc. If it is based on a micropop and even then on what just that pop can see, I'd say that's likely a model invented out of necessity due to the poor performance of the system you are using. I had a guy on a call today. He zoomed me in on Google Earth to his NLOS area. Farmland with wind breaks and shade trees for the homes. He is at 400' and can't connect squat behind those breaks. In my world, that's LOS all the way, even at 150 ft. It is total garbage that so many systems to can't deal with that and you've all been fed that that is normal. It is not. It is just gear with terrible specs where the only RD is at the software level, and even that is scant. You do not have NLOS problems. You have equipment problems. How such a product ever was allowed to go to market as a solution for rural broadband is, to me, cynical and reflective of playing a market to skim opportunistic dollars from a market segment that sometimes seems to embrace abuse. Sort of like the poor 700 MHz owners who got sucked in to buying 20 year old Marconi WipLL repackaged as a 700 MHz solution because all there was to buy. Then vendors do that crap and THEN, THEN tell you there's no backward compatibility when they come out with something new? WISPs. Sometimes you guys drive me nuts. You are like cheerleaders that love to date the quarterbacks who abuse you. That is like selling a car that falls apart once you leave residential streets. None of you should ever have accepted these golf carts to run your fleets. Sometimes, cheap is just cheap. Boy, I'm gonna hear it from my vendor peers, but this ain't a game or just a job for me. I damn sure hope it ain't that for you either. Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 From: Af
Re: [AFMUG] New feedback
Population density is very low in some rural areas. New construction has been pretty much nada, with the housing bust and wind farms, no new subdivisions, no farmettes. The only houses are where farmhouses or 1 room schoolhouses used to stand. Then factor in you just can’t achieve 100% market share. No matter how good your service and price, some of the available subscribers will instead go with WISP competitors, DSL, satellite, mobile hotspot, or “I don’t need one of those newfangled computer thingies”. So sometimes you’re doing good to get 15 subs. Of course if you can double your range, you may quadruple the available market. Someone on the list posted a few days back about not going through granite. I assume even LTE can’t do that however. From: Patrick Leary Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 7:41 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan of capping Glen. It is a gimmick. The hardware is what it is, and this hardware is expensive. 30dBm per port. 4 tx/4rx. Power is expensive. The highest quality DSPs on the market. not consumer grade stuff with the sensitivity of your in home Wi-Fi router. We build our own phy from the ground up too, our own ATPC algorithms too. On the software, we do that though -- enabling modularity and scale as you need to. I think I need to do a dedicated webinar to this community to walk you guys (or those inclined) through it (any takers?). I do not think we can be a solution that makes sense where you only have 15 clients. That's the blunt truth. Unless you are doing 50 Mbps customers, I am not your micropop (but I can do that in some modest scale). That said, I wonder where that 15 number comes from? Can you please explain on what architecture that is based? Range? Height? Etc. If it is based on a micropop and even then on what just that pop can see, I'd say that's likely a model invented out of necessity due to the poor performance of the system you are using. I had a guy on a call today. He zoomed me in on Google Earth to his NLOS area. Farmland with wind breaks and shade trees for the homes. He is at 400' and can't connect squat behind those breaks. In my world, that's LOS all the way, even at 150 ft. It is total garbage that so many systems to can't deal with that and you've all been fed that that is normal. It is not. It is just gear with terrible specs where the only RD is at the software level, and even that is scant. You do not have NLOS problems. You have equipment problems. How such a product ever was allowed to go to market as a solution for rural broadband is, to me, cynical and reflective of playing a market to skim opportunistic dollars from a market segment that sometimes seems to embrace abuse. Sort of like the poor 700 MHz owners who got sucked in to buying 20 year old Marconi WipLL repackaged as a 700 MHz solution because all there was to buy. Then vendors do that crap and THEN, THEN tell you there's no backward compatibility when they come out with something new? WISPs. Sometimes you guys drive me nuts. You are like cheerleaders that love to date the quarterbacks who abuse you. That is like selling a car that falls apart once you leave residential streets. None of you should ever have accepted these golf carts to run your fleets. Sometimes, cheap is just cheap. Boy, I'm gonna hear it from my vendor peers, but this ain't a game or just a job for me. I damn sure hope it ain't that for you either. Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Glen Waldrop Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:08 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Sort of off topic, but what would be the smallest AP we could get? I'm thinking about using this system on a few of my towers to make sure we never leave without a new customer, but I serve a very rural area. I have some towers with 15 clients. Is an omni + GPS sync or narrow channel out of the question? - Original Message - From: Patrick Leary To: tel...@wispa.org ; af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 4:42 PM Subject: [AFMUG] New feedback This is an interesting bit of commentary from one of our new customers. If he wishes to identify himself, he will Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 From: Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 2:31 AM To: Patrick Leary; Nick Dewar Subject: Interesting Statistic Patrick / Nick – Our Director of Operations, which you both met in St Louis, sent out an interesting email to our staff this evening. In February with only 20 working days we completed 40 installs with one technician... This is only icing on the cake, especially since we are onboarding two more techs... I ran some additional numbers and found that out of the “Telrad” installations
Re: [AFMUG] About $12k
Is the 50 user limit just a guideline or a software limitation? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com wrote: One BTS, included embedded EPC with MAC level authentication (cheapest option) supporting up to 50 clients. Antenna could be swapped for any other. NOTE: this exclude any NMS pieces, but you could just connect over Telnet or direct connect. This would be the BAREST of bones, but there it is. That's still LTE and about 100 Mbps with killer NLOS. Includes: 735270 CMP.XT-BS-3.4-3.7 1 715773 LTE COMPACT SW License 1 700258 BMAX-4M-GPS 1 300736 ANT 3.3-3.8GHz,18 dBi, 65deg, 4ports (RF cables NOT included) 1 715620 BreezeWay-1010-50 (per Compact HW license) 1 715621 BreezeWay-1010-iHSS-50 (50 subs. license) 1 SLA 1 Year SLA 1 *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af-boun...@afmug.com');] *On Behalf Of *Patrick Leary *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:08 PM *To:* af@afmug.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com'); *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] New feedback No, could be much less. Give me a minute... *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af-boun...@afmug.com');] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:05 PM *To:* af@afmug.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com'); *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Probably 20k to start. Quality over quantity. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 8:56 PM, John Woodfield john.woodfi...@jwcn.biz javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','john.woodfi...@jwcn.biz'); wrote: Patrick, I haven't had time to read through all this emails. Can you summarize what the lowest cost get up and running on a tower is so I can consider this further along with cost per sub? Thanks, John Woodfield, President Delmarva WiFi Inc. 410-870-WiFi -Original Message- From: Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','patrick.le...@telrad.com'); Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 8:41pm To: af@afmug.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com'); af@afmug.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com'); Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan of capping Glen. It is a gimmick. The hardware is what it is, and this hardware is expensive. 30dBm per port. 4 tx/4rx. Power is expensive. The highest quality DSPs on the market. not consumer grade stuff with the sensitivity of your in home Wi-Fi router. We build our own phy from the ground up too, our own ATPC algorithms too. On the software, we do that though -- enabling modularity and scale as you need to. I think I need to do a dedicated webinar to this community to walk you guys (or those inclined) through it (any takers?). I do not think we can be a solution that makes sense where you only have 15 clients. That's the blunt truth. Unless you are doing 50 Mbps customers, I am not your micropop (but I can do that in some modest scale). That said, I wonder where that 15 number comes from? Can you please explain on what architecture that is based? Range? Height? Etc. If it is based on a micropop and even then on what just that pop can see, I'd say that's likely a model invented out of necessity due to the poor performance of the system you are using. I had a guy on a call today. He zoomed me in on Google Earth to his NLOS area. Farmland with wind breaks and shade trees for the homes. He is at 400' and can't connect squat behind those breaks. In my world, that's LOS all the way, even at 150 ft. It is total garbage that so many systems to can't deal with that and you've all been fed that that is normal. It is not. It is just gear with terrible specs where the only RD is at the software level, and even that is scant. You do not have NLOS problems. You have equipment problems. How such a product ever was allowed to go to market as a solution for rural broadband is, to me, cynical and reflective of playing a market to skim opportunistic dollars from a market segment that sometimes seems to embrace abuse. Sort of like the poor 700 MHz owners who got sucked in to buying 20 year old Marconi WipLL repackaged as a 700 MHz solution because all there was to buy. Then vendors do that crap and THEN, THEN tell you there's no backward compatibility when they come out with something new? WISPs. Sometimes you guys drive me nuts. You are like cheerleaders that love to date the quarterbacks who abuse you. That is like selling a car that falls apart once you leave residential streets. None of you should ever have accepted these golf carts to run your fleets. Sometimes, cheap is just cheap. Boy, I'm gonna hear it from my vendor peers,
Re: [AFMUG] About $12k
Never mind, I see that now. How much is the 50 user license? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Jason McKemie j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com wrote: Is the 50 user limit just a guideline or a software limitation? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','patrick.le...@telrad.com'); wrote: One BTS, included embedded EPC with MAC level authentication (cheapest option) supporting up to 50 clients. Antenna could be swapped for any other. NOTE: this exclude any NMS pieces, but you could just connect over Telnet or direct connect. This would be the BAREST of bones, but there it is. That's still LTE and about 100 Mbps with killer NLOS. Includes: 735270 CMP.XT-BS-3.4-3.7 1 715773 LTE COMPACT SW License 1 700258 BMAX-4M-GPS 1 300736 ANT 3.3-3.8GHz,18 dBi, 65deg, 4ports (RF cables NOT included) 1 715620 BreezeWay-1010-50 (per Compact HW license) 1 715621 BreezeWay-1010-iHSS-50 (50 subs. license) 1 SLA 1 Year SLA 1 *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Patrick Leary *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:08 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] New feedback No, could be much less. Give me a minute... *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:05 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Probably 20k to start. Quality over quantity. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 8:56 PM, John Woodfield john.woodfi...@jwcn.biz wrote: Patrick, I haven't had time to read through all this emails. Can you summarize what the lowest cost get up and running on a tower is so I can consider this further along with cost per sub? Thanks, John Woodfield, President Delmarva WiFi Inc. 410-870-WiFi -Original Message- From: Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 8:41pm To: af@afmug.com af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan of capping Glen. It is a gimmick. The hardware is what it is, and this hardware is expensive. 30dBm per port. 4 tx/4rx. Power is expensive. The highest quality DSPs on the market. not consumer grade stuff with the sensitivity of your in home Wi-Fi router. We build our own phy from the ground up too, our own ATPC algorithms too. On the software, we do that though -- enabling modularity and scale as you need to. I think I need to do a dedicated webinar to this community to walk you guys (or those inclined) through it (any takers?). I do not think we can be a solution that makes sense where you only have 15 clients. That's the blunt truth. Unless you are doing 50 Mbps customers, I am not your micropop (but I can do that in some modest scale). That said, I wonder where that 15 number comes from? Can you please explain on what architecture that is based? Range? Height? Etc. If it is based on a micropop and even then on what just that pop can see, I'd say that's likely a model invented out of necessity due to the poor performance of the system you are using. I had a guy on a call today. He zoomed me in on Google Earth to his NLOS area. Farmland with wind breaks and shade trees for the homes. He is at 400' and can't connect squat behind those breaks. In my world, that's LOS all the way, even at 150 ft. It is total garbage that so many systems to can't deal with that and you've all been fed that that is normal. It is not. It is just gear with terrible specs where the only RD is at the software level, and even that is scant. You do not have NLOS problems. You have equipment problems. How such a product ever was allowed to go to market as a solution for rural broadband is, to me, cynical and reflective of playing a market to skim opportunistic dollars from a market segment that sometimes seems to embrace abuse. Sort of like the poor 700 MHz owners who got sucked in to buying 20 year old Marconi WipLL repackaged as a 700 MHz solution because all there was to buy. Then vendors do that crap and THEN, THEN tell you there's no backward compatibility when they come out with something new? WISPs. Sometimes you guys drive me nuts. You are like cheerleaders that love to date the quarterbacks who abuse you. That is like selling a car that falls apart once you leave residential streets. None of you should ever have accepted these golf carts to run your fleets. Sometimes, cheap is just cheap. Boy, I'm gonna hear it from my vendor peers, but this ain't a game or just a job for me. I damn sure hope it ain't that for you either. *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af
Re: [AFMUG] New feedback
Patrick, I think I asked 2 or 3 times, and maybe it's my fault and I missed your reply, but what are the costs besides the radio and the antenna? Remember guys this isn't a pmp450 or rocket m5, there is a bunch of software and hardware on the backend that must be in place before a customer can connect, right Patrick ? If I had even a vague idea of what that part would cost, I might consider a trial tower with 3 sectors... On Mar 3, 2015 6:14 PM, David Milholen dmilho...@wletc.com wrote: Patrick, Please send me a product brochure and a few specs with a price list off list. Thanks Dave On 3/3/2015 8:08 PM, Patrick Leary wrote: No, could be much less. Give me a minute... *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:05 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Probably 20k to start. Quality over quantity. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 8:56 PM, John Woodfield john.woodfi...@jwcn.biz wrote: Patrick, I haven't had time to read through all this emails. Can you summarize what the lowest cost get up and running on a tower is so I can consider this further along with cost per sub? Thanks, John Woodfield, President Delmarva WiFi Inc. 410-870-WiFi -Original Message- From: Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 8:41pm To: af@afmug.com af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan of capping Glen. It is a gimmick. The hardware is what it is, and this hardware is expensive. 30dBm per port. 4 tx/4rx. Power is expensive. The highest quality DSPs on the market. not consumer grade stuff with the sensitivity of your in home Wi-Fi router. We build our own phy from the ground up too, our own ATPC algorithms too. On the software, we do that though -- enabling modularity and scale as you need to. I think I need to do a dedicated webinar to this community to walk you guys (or those inclined) through it (any takers?). I do not think we can be a solution that makes sense where you only have 15 clients. That's the blunt truth. Unless you are doing 50 Mbps customers, I am not your micropop (but I can do that in some modest scale). That said, I wonder where that 15 number comes from? Can you please explain on what architecture that is based? Range? Height? Etc. If it is based on a micropop and even then on what just that pop can see, I'd say that's likely a model invented out of necessity due to the poor performance of the system you are using. I had a guy on a call today. He zoomed me in on Google Earth to his NLOS area. Farmland with wind breaks and shade trees for the homes. He is at 400' and can't connect squat behind those breaks. In my world, that's LOS all the way, even at 150 ft. It is total garbage that so many systems to can't deal with that and you've all been fed that that is normal. It is not. It is just gear with terrible specs where the only RD is at the software level, and even that is scant. You do not have NLOS problems. You have equipment problems. How such a product ever was allowed to go to market as a solution for rural broadband is, to me, cynical and reflective of playing a market to skim opportunistic dollars from a market segment that sometimes seems to embrace abuse. Sort of like the poor 700 MHz owners who got sucked in to buying 20 year old Marconi WipLL repackaged as a 700 MHz solution because all there was to buy. Then vendors do that crap and THEN, THEN tell you there's no backward compatibility when they come out with something new? WISPs. Sometimes you guys drive me nuts. You are like cheerleaders that love to date the quarterbacks who abuse you. That is like selling a car that falls apart once you leave residential streets. None of you should ever have accepted these golf carts to run your fleets. Sometimes, cheap is just cheap. Boy, I'm gonna hear it from my vendor peers, but this ain't a game or just a job for me. I damn sure hope it ain't that for you either. *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Glen Waldrop *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:08 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Sort of off topic, but what would be the smallest AP we could get? I'm thinking about using this system on a few of my towers to make sure we never leave without a new customer, but I serve a very rural area. I have some towers with 15 clients. Is an omni + GPS sync or narrow channel out of the question? - Original Message - *From:* Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com *To:* tel...@wispa.org ; af@afmug.com *Sent:* Tuesday, March
[AFMUG] Telrad LTE Webinar -- The Full Monty for the AFMUG
When: Thursday, March 05, 2015 2:00 PM-3:30 PM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US Canada). Where: via link below AND call in number Note: The GMT offset above does not reflect daylight saving time adjustments. *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* ...If you dareHell, if I dare. I have room for 100. No holds barred, but I warn you I'm an armed veteran and expert marksman. Given time we'll even run through the LTE interference thing. 1. Please join my meeting. https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/471332645 2. Use your microphone and speakers (VoIP) - a headset is recommended. Or, call in using your telephone. Dial +1 (408) 650-3123 Access Code: 471-332-645 Audio PIN: Shown after joining the meeting Meeting ID: 471-332-645 GoToMeeting® Online Meetings Made Easy® Not at your computer? Click the link to join this meeting from your iPhone®, iPad®, Android® or Windows Phone® device via the GoToMeeting app. This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses.
Re: [AFMUG] New feedback
Maybe. My time is tight. I think we last spoke when you were at Alvarion and we had acquired the old Friend.ly network... John Woodfield, President Delmarva WiFi Inc. 410-870-WiFi -Original Message-From: "Patrick Leary" patrick.le...@telrad.comSent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 9:08pmTo: "af@afmug.com" af@afmug.comSubject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Have not heard Delmarva in a while. I grew up in No VA. The run out east toward OC was a rite of passage...and my first ticket. Damned tricky MD state troopers; they used to run 18 wheelers. If I do this in a webinar, would that work? Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of John WoodfieldSent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:56 PMTo: af@afmug.comSubject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Patrick, I haven't had time to read through all this emails. Can you summarize what the lowest cost get up and running on a tower is so I can consider this further along with cost per sub? Thanks, John Woodfield, President Delmarva WiFi Inc. 410-870-WiFi -Original Message- From: "Patrick Leary" patrick.le...@telrad.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 8:41pm To: "af@afmug.com" af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan of capping Glen. It is a gimmick. The hardware is what it is, and this hardware is expensive. 30dBm per port. 4 tx/4rx. Power is expensive. The highest quality DSPs on the market. not consumer grade stuff with the sensitivity of your in home Wi-Fi router. We build our own phy from the ground up too, our own ATPC algorithms too. On the software, we do that though -- enabling modularity and scale as you need to. I think I need to do a dedicated webinar to this community to walk you guys (or those inclined) through it (any takers?). I do not think we can be a solution that makes sense where you only have 15 clients. That's the blunt truth. Unless you are doing 50 Mbps customers, I am not your micropop (but I can do that in some modest scale). That said, I wonder where that 15 number comes from? Can you please explain on what architecture that is based? Range? Height? Etc. If it is based on a micropop and even then on what just that pop can see, I'd say that's likely a model invented out of necessity due to the poor performance of the system you are using. I had a guy on a call today. He zoomed me in on Google Earth to his "NLOS" area. Farmland with wind breaks and shade trees for the homes. He is at 400' and can't connect squat behind those breaks. In my world, that's LOS all the way, even at 150 ft. It is total garbage that so many systems to can't deal with that and you've all been fed that that is "normal." It is not. It is just gear with terrible specs where the only RD is at the software level, and even that is scant. You do not have NLOS problems. You have equipment problems. How such a product ever was allowed to go to market as a "solution" for rural broadband is, to me, cynical and reflective of playing a market to skim opportunistic dollars from a market segment that sometimes seems to embrace abuse. Sort of like the poor 700 MHz owners who got sucked in to buying 20 year old Marconi WipLL repackaged as a 700 MHz "solution" because all there was to buy. Then vendors do that crap and THEN, THEN tell you there's no backward compatibility when they come out with something new? WISPs. Sometimes you guys drive me nuts. You are like cheerleaders that love to date the quarterbacks who abuse you. That is like selling a car that falls apart once you leave residential streets. None of you should ever have accepted these golf carts to run your fleets. Sometimes, cheap is just cheap. Boy, I'm gonna hear it from my vendor peers, but this ain't a game or just a job for me. I damn sure hope it ain't that for you either. Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Glen WaldropSent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:08 PMTo: af@afmug.comSubject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Sort of off topic, but what would be the smallest AP we could get? I'm thinking about using this system on a few of my towers to make sure we never leave without a new customer, but I serve a very rural area. I have some towers with 15 clients. Is an omni + GPS sync or narrow channel out of the question? - Original Message - From: Patrick Leary To: tel...@wispa.org ; af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 4:42 PM Subject: [AFMUG] New feedback This is an interesting bit of commentary from one of our new customers. If he wishes to identify himself, he will Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 From: Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 2:31 AMTo: Patrick Leary; Nick DewarSubject: Interesting Statistic "Patrick / Nick – Our Director of Operations, which you both met in St Louis, sent out an interesting email to our staff this evening. In February with only 20
Re: [AFMUG] About $12k
We use those 65 degrees even in a 3 sector arrangement. We have all the hard data from the field that shows you gain nothing from using 90s or 120s over the 65s, and in fact you lose isolation and power density. Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image001.png@01D0560B.E1919D70]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jason McKemie Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 10:08 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] About $12k Is there a 90 degree sector or are you using 65 degree sectors in a 4 BTS cluster? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.commailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com wrote: Only 2 models, the 3.65 (actually 3.4-3.7) COMPACT 1000 or the 2.x (2.3 and 2.5) COMPACT 3000. I included the 3.65 version. The 2.5 is all the same, save for the BTS price, which is about $5k higher (but 40 dBm per port and 43 pounds of brute power, compared to the 18 pound COMPACT 1000) Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D0560B.E1919D70]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.comjavascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af-boun...@afmug.com');] On Behalf Of Jason McKemie Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:36 PM To: af@afmug.comjavascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com'); Subject: Re: [AFMUG] About $12k Which base station are you quoting, and what are the basic differences between the models? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.comjavascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','patrick.le...@telrad.com'); wrote: Think of all the EPC options (and there are 3 forms) as shells: 1 is an shell embedded as a piece of software inside EACH BTS...a total one box solution (we can do that since we are a SDR). 1 is a shell that's a small (1/2U) appliance supporting up to 10k subs and 2 gigs. These are stackable and with our NPV option is infinitely stackable. Into each shell option you plug in ONLY the functionality you need: Connecting to an external Radius? Buy that module. Don't need to? Don't get it. If not above, then doing MAC level authentication instead? Buy the iHSSS module. PCRF module. Doing service flows and dedicated bearers? Get that. Don't, then don't. Need Layer 2, get that. Don't? Dont. These modules are in price relative to the version of EPC (baby, momma or papa bear size). Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D0560B.E1919D70]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jason McKemie Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:23 PM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] About $12k Never mind, I see that now. How much is the 50 user license? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Jason McKemie j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.commailto:j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com wrote: Is the 50 user limit just a guideline or a software limitation? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.comjavascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','patrick.le...@telrad.com'); wrote: One BTS, included embedded EPC with MAC level authentication (cheapest option) supporting up to 50 clients. Antenna could be swapped for any other. NOTE: this exclude any NMS pieces, but you could just connect over Telnet or direct connect. This would be the BAREST of bones, but there it is. That's still LTE and about 100 Mbps with killer NLOS. Includes: 735270 CMP.XT-BS-3.4-3.7 1 715773 LTE COMPACT SW License 1 700258 BMAX-4M-GPS 1 300736 ANT 3.3-3.8GHz,18 dBi, 65deg, 4ports (RF cables NOT included) 1 715620 BreezeWay-1010-50 (per Compact HW license) 1 715621 BreezeWay-1010-iHSS-50 (50 subs. license) 1 SLA 1 Year SLA 1 Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D0560B.E1919D70]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:08 PM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback No, could be much less. Give me a minute... Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D0560B.E1919D70]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:05 PM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Probably 20k to start. Quality over quantity. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 8:56 PM, John Woodfield john.woodfi...@jwcn.bizmailto:john.woodfi...@jwcn.biz wrote: Patrick, I haven't had time to read through all this emails. Can you summarize what the lowest cost get up and running on a tower is so I can consider this further along with cost per sub? Thanks, John Woodfield, President Delmarva WiFi Inc. 410-870-WiFi -Original Message- From: Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.commailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 8:41pm To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a
Re: [AFMUG] New feedback
I'll call you tomorrow John. Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image001.png@01D0560C.1758B470]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of John Woodfield Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 10:14 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Maybe. My time is tight. I think we last spoke when you were at Alvarion and we had acquired the old Friend.ly network... John Woodfield, President Delmarva WiFi Inc. 410-870-WiFi -Original Message- From: Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.commailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 9:08pm To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Have not heard Delmarva in a while. I grew up in No VA. The run out east toward OC was a rite of passage...and my first ticket. Damned tricky MD state troopers; they used to run 18 wheelers. If I do this in a webinar, would that work? Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D0560C.1758B470]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of John Woodfield Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:56 PM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Patrick, I haven't had time to read through all this emails. Can you summarize what the lowest cost get up and running on a tower is so I can consider this further along with cost per sub? Thanks, John Woodfield, President Delmarva WiFi Inc. 410-870-WiFi -Original Message- From: Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.commailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 8:41pm To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan of capping Glen. It is a gimmick. The hardware is what it is, and this hardware is expensive. 30dBm per port. 4 tx/4rx. Power is expensive. The highest quality DSPs on the market. not consumer grade stuff with the sensitivity of your in home Wi-Fi router. We build our own phy from the ground up too, our own ATPC algorithms too. On the software, we do that though -- enabling modularity and scale as you need to. I think I need to do a dedicated webinar to this community to walk you guys (or those inclined) through it (any takers?). I do not think we can be a solution that makes sense where you only have 15 clients. That's the blunt truth. Unless you are doing 50 Mbps customers, I am not your micropop (but I can do that in some modest scale). That said, I wonder where that 15 number comes from? Can you please explain on what architecture that is based? Range? Height? Etc. If it is based on a micropop and even then on what just that pop can see, I'd say that's likely a model invented out of necessity due to the poor performance of the system you are using. I had a guy on a call today. He zoomed me in on Google Earth to his NLOS area. Farmland with wind breaks and shade trees for the homes. He is at 400' and can't connect squat behind those breaks. In my world, that's LOS all the way, even at 150 ft. It is total garbage that so many systems to can't deal with that and you've all been fed that that is normal. It is not. It is just gear with terrible specs where the only RD is at the software level, and even that is scant. You do not have NLOS problems. You have equipment problems. How such a product ever was allowed to go to market as a solution for rural broadband is, to me, cynical and reflective of playing a market to skim opportunistic dollars from a market segment that sometimes seems to embrace abuse. Sort of like the poor 700 MHz owners who got sucked in to buying 20 year old Marconi WipLL repackaged as a 700 MHz solution because all there was to buy. Then vendors do that crap and THEN, THEN tell you there's no backward compatibility when they come out with something new? WISPs. Sometimes you guys drive me nuts. You are like cheerleaders that love to date the quarterbacks who abuse you. That is like selling a car that falls apart once you leave residential streets. None of you should ever have accepted these golf carts to run your fleets. Sometimes, cheap is just cheap. Boy, I'm gonna hear it from my vendor peers, but this ain't a game or just a job for me. I damn sure hope it ain't that for you either. Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D0560C.1758B470]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Glen Waldrop Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:08 PM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Sort of off topic, but what would be the smallest AP we could get? I'm thinking about using this system on a few of my towers to make sure we never leave without a new customer, but I serve a very rural area. I have some towers with 15 clients. Is an omni + GPS sync or narrow channel out of the question? - Original Message - From: Patrick
Re: [AFMUG] About $12k
Re-use of 1 is possible. Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image001.png@01D0560D.185BD720]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jason McKemie Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 11:20 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] About $12k Is there frequency re-use with a 3 BTS setup? If there is re-use, what's the penalty? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.netmailto:af...@ics-il.net wrote: 3x 65s for 360* coverage. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com [Image removed by sender.]https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL[Image removed by sender.]https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb[Image removed by sender.]https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions[Image removed by sender.]https://twitter.com/ICSIL From: Jason McKemie j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.comjavascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com'); To: af@afmug.comjavascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com'); Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 9:07:51 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] About $12k Is there a 90 degree sector or are you using 65 degree sectors in a 4 BTS cluster? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.comjavascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','patrick.le...@telrad.com'); wrote: Only 2 models, the 3.65 (actually 3.4-3.7) COMPACT 1000 or the 2.x (2.3 and 2.5) COMPACT 3000. I included the 3.65 version. The 2.5 is all the same, save for the BTS price, which is about $5k higher (but 40 dBm per port and 43 pounds of brute power, compared to the 18 pound COMPACT 1000) Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D0560D.185BD720]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jason McKemie Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:36 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] About $12k Which base station are you quoting, and what are the basic differences between the models? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com wrote: Think of all the EPC options (and there are 3 forms) as shells: 1 is an shell embedded as a piece of software inside EACH BTS...a total one box solution (we can do that since we are a SDR). 1 is a shell that's a small (1/2U) appliance supporting up to 10k subs and 2 gigs. These are stackable and with our NPV option is infinitely stackable. Into each shell option you plug in ONLY the functionality you need: Connecting to an external Radius? Buy that module. Don't need to? Don't get it. If not above, then doing MAC level authentication instead? Buy the iHSSS module. PCRF module. Doing service flows and dedicated bearers? Get that. Don't, then don't. Need Layer 2, get that. Don't? Dont. These modules are in price relative to the version of EPC (baby, momma or papa bear size). Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D0560D.185BD720]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jason McKemie Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:23 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] About $12k Never mind, I see that now. How much is the 50 user license? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Jason McKemie j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com wrote: Is the 50 user limit just a guideline or a software limitation? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com wrote: One BTS, included embedded EPC with MAC level authentication (cheapest option) supporting up to 50 clients. Antenna could be swapped for any other. NOTE: this exclude any NMS pieces, but you could just connect over Telnet or direct connect. This would be the BAREST of bones, but there it is. That's still LTE and about 100 Mbps with killer NLOS. Includes: 735270 CMP.XT-BS-3.4-3.7 1 715773 LTE COMPACT SW License 1 700258 BMAX-4M-GPS 1 300736 ANT 3.3-3.8GHz,18 dBi, 65deg, 4ports (RF cables NOT included) 1 715620 BreezeWay-1010-50 (per Compact HW license) 1 715621 BreezeWay-1010-iHSS-50 (50 subs. license) 1 SLA 1 Year SLA 1 Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D0560D.185BD720]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:08 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback No, could be much less. Give me a minute... Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D0560D.185BD720]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:05 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Probably 20k to start. Quality over quantity. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 8:56 PM, John Woodfield john.woodfi...@jwcn.biz wrote: Patrick, I haven't had time to read through all this emails. Can you summarize what the lowest cost get up and running on a tower is so I can consider this further along with cost per sub? Thanks,
Re: [AFMUG] About $12k
Not that I understand. I doubt we'll see much of that though in 3.65. I expect the norm to be re-use of 2. Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image001.png@01D0560E.BB213170]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jason McKemie Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 11:57 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] About $12k Is there a throughput penalty for that re-use? On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:54 PM, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.commailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com wrote: Re-use of 1 is possible. Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735tel:727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D0560E.BB213170]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.commailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jason McKemie Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 11:20 PM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] About $12k Is there frequency re-use with a 3 BTS setup? If there is re-use, what's the penalty? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.netmailto:af...@ics-il.net wrote: 3x 65s for 360* coverage. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com [Image removed by sender.]https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL[Image removed by sender.]https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb[Image removed by sender.]https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions[Image removed by sender.]https://twitter.com/ICSIL From: Jason McKemie j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.commailto:j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 9:07:51 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] About $12k Is there a 90 degree sector or are you using 65 degree sectors in a 4 BTS cluster? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.commailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com wrote: Only 2 models, the 3.65 (actually 3.4-3.7) COMPACT 1000 or the 2.x (2.3 and 2.5) COMPACT 3000. I included the 3.65 version. The 2.5 is all the same, save for the BTS price, which is about $5k higher (but 40 dBm per port and 43 pounds of brute power, compared to the 18 pound COMPACT 1000) Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735tel:727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D0560E.BB213170]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.commailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jason McKemie Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:36 PM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] About $12k Which base station are you quoting, and what are the basic differences between the models? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.commailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com wrote: Think of all the EPC options (and there are 3 forms) as shells: 1 is an shell embedded as a piece of software inside EACH BTS...a total one box solution (we can do that since we are a SDR). 1 is a shell that's a small (1/2U) appliance supporting up to 10k subs and 2 gigs. These are stackable and with our NPV option is infinitely stackable. Into each shell option you plug in ONLY the functionality you need: Connecting to an external Radius? Buy that module. Don't need to? Don't get it. If not above, then doing MAC level authentication instead? Buy the iHSSS module. PCRF module. Doing service flows and dedicated bearers? Get that. Don't, then don't. Need Layer 2, get that. Don't? Dont. These modules are in price relative to the version of EPC (baby, momma or papa bear size). Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735tel:727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D0560E.BB213170]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.commailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jason McKemie Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:23 PM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] About $12k Never mind, I see that now. How much is the 50 user license? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Jason McKemie j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.commailto:j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com wrote: Is the 50 user limit just a guideline or a software limitation? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.commailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com wrote: One BTS, included embedded EPC with MAC level authentication (cheapest option) supporting up to 50 clients. Antenna could be swapped for any other. NOTE: this exclude any NMS pieces, but you could just connect over Telnet or direct connect. This would be the BAREST of bones, but there it is. That's still LTE and about 100 Mbps with killer NLOS. Includes: 735270 CMP.XT-BS-3.4-3.7 1 715773 LTE COMPACT SW License 1 700258 BMAX-4M-GPS 1 300736 ANT 3.3-3.8GHz,18 dBi, 65deg, 4ports (RF cables NOT included) 1 715620 BreezeWay-1010-50 (per Compact HW license) 1 715621 BreezeWay-1010-iHSS-50 (50 subs. license) 1 SLA 1 Year SLA 1 Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735tel:727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D0560E.BB213170]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.commailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015
Re: [AFMUG] About $12k
Yes, that is correct. And right now I cannot them in stock. Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image001.png@01D055F7.8F916D20]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:19 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] About $12k That's one antenna and no CPEs! Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 9:16 PM, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.commailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com wrote: One BTS, included embedded EPC with MAC level authentication (cheapest option) supporting up to 50 clients. Antenna could be swapped for any other. NOTE: this exclude any NMS pieces, but you could just connect over Telnet or direct connect. This would be the BAREST of bones, but there it is. That's still LTE and about 100 Mbps with killer NLOS. Includes: 735270 CMP.XT-BS-3.4-3.7 1 715773 LTE COMPACT SW License 1 700258 BMAX-4M-GPS 1 300736 ANT 3.3-3.8GHz,18 dBi, 65deg, 4ports (RF cables NOT included) 1 715620 BreezeWay-1010-50 (per Compact HW license) 1 715621 BreezeWay-1010-iHSS-50 (50 subs. license) 1 SLA 1 Year SLA 1 Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735tel:727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D055F7.8F916D20]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.commailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:08 PM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback No, could be much less. Give me a minute... Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735tel:727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D055F7.8F916D20]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:05 PM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Probably 20k to start. Quality over quantity. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340tel:937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343tel:937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 8:56 PM, John Woodfield john.woodfi...@jwcn.bizmailto:john.woodfi...@jwcn.biz wrote: Patrick, I haven't had time to read through all this emails. Can you summarize what the lowest cost get up and running on a tower is so I can consider this further along with cost per sub? Thanks, John Woodfield, President Delmarva WiFi Inc. 410-870-WiFi -Original Message- From: Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.commailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 8:41pm To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan of capping Glen. It is a gimmick. The hardware is what it is, and this hardware is expensive. 30dBm per port. 4 tx/4rx. Power is expensive. The highest quality DSPs on the market. not consumer grade stuff with the sensitivity of your in home Wi-Fi router. We build our own phy from the ground up too, our own ATPC algorithms too. On the software, we do that though -- enabling modularity and scale as you need to. I think I need to do a dedicated webinar to this community to walk you guys (or those inclined) through it (any takers?). I do not think we can be a solution that makes sense where you only have 15 clients. That's the blunt truth. Unless you are doing 50 Mbps customers, I am not your micropop (but I can do that in some modest scale). That said, I wonder where that 15 number comes from? Can you please explain on what architecture that is based? Range? Height? Etc. If it is based on a micropop and even then on what just that pop can see, I'd say that's likely a model invented out of necessity due to the poor performance of the system you are using. I had a guy on a call today. He zoomed me in on Google Earth to his NLOS area. Farmland with wind breaks and shade trees for the homes. He is at 400' and can't connect squat behind those breaks. In my world, that's LOS all the way, even at 150 ft. It is total garbage that so many systems to can't deal with that and you've all been fed that that is normal. It is not. It is just gear with terrible specs where the only RD is at the software level, and even that is scant. You do not have NLOS problems. You have equipment problems. How such a product ever was allowed to go to market as a solution for rural broadband is, to me, cynical and reflective of playing a market to skim opportunistic dollars from a market segment that sometimes seems to embrace abuse. Sort of like the poor 700 MHz owners who got sucked in to buying 20 year old Marconi WipLL repackaged as a 700 MHz solution because all there was to buy. Then vendors do that crap and THEN, THEN tell you there's no backward compatibility when they come out with something new? WISPs. Sometimes you guys drive me nuts. You are like cheerleaders that love to date the quarterbacks who abuse you. That is like selling a car that falls apart once you leave
Re: [AFMUG] About $12k
Which base station are you quoting, and what are the basic differences between the models? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com wrote: Think of all the EPC options (and there are 3 forms) as shells: 1 is an shell embedded as a piece of software inside EACH BTS...a total one box solution (we can do that since we are a SDR). 1 is a shell that's a small (1/2U) appliance supporting up to 10k subs and 2 gigs. These are stackable and with our NPV option is infinitely stackable. Into each shell option you plug in ONLY the functionality you need: Connecting to an external Radius? Buy that module. Don't need to? Don't get it. If not above, then doing MAC level authentication instead? Buy the iHSSS module. PCRF module. Doing service flows and dedicated bearers? Get that. Don't, then don't. Need Layer 2, get that. Don't? Dont. These modules are in price relative to the version of EPC (baby, momma or papa bear size). *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af-boun...@afmug.com');] *On Behalf Of *Jason McKemie *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:23 PM *To:* af@afmug.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com'); *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] About $12k Never mind, I see that now. How much is the 50 user license? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Jason McKemie j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com'); wrote: Is the 50 user limit just a guideline or a software limitation? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com wrote: One BTS, included embedded EPC with MAC level authentication (cheapest option) supporting up to 50 clients. Antenna could be swapped for any other. NOTE: this exclude any NMS pieces, but you could just connect over Telnet or direct connect. This would be the BAREST of bones, but there it is. That's still LTE and about 100 Mbps with killer NLOS. Includes: 735270 CMP.XT-BS-3.4-3.7 1 715773 LTE COMPACT SW License 1 700258 BMAX-4M-GPS 1 300736 ANT 3.3-3.8GHz,18 dBi, 65deg, 4ports (RF cables NOT included) 1 715620 BreezeWay-1010-50 (per Compact HW license) 1 715621 BreezeWay-1010-iHSS-50 (50 subs. license) 1 SLA 1 Year SLA 1 *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af-boun...@afmug.com');] *On Behalf Of *Patrick Leary *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:08 PM *To:* af@afmug.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com'); *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] New feedback No, could be much less. Give me a minute... *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af-boun...@afmug.com');] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:05 PM *To:* af@afmug.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com'); *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Probably 20k to start. Quality over quantity. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 8:56 PM, John Woodfield john.woodfi...@jwcn.biz javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','john.woodfi...@jwcn.biz'); wrote: Patrick, I haven't had time to read through all this emails. Can you summarize what the lowest cost get up and running on a tower is so I can consider this further along with cost per sub? Thanks, John Woodfield, President Delmarva WiFi Inc. 410-870-WiFi -Original Message- From: Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','patrick.le...@telrad.com'); Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 8:41pm To: af@afmug.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com'); af@afmug.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com'); Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan of capping Glen. It is a gimmick. The hardware is what it is, and this hardware is expensive. 30dBm per port. 4 tx/4rx. Power is expensive. The highest quality DSPs on the market. not consumer grade stuff with the sensitivity of your in home Wi-Fi router. We build our own phy from the ground up too, our own ATPC algorithms too. On the software, we do that though -- enabling modularity and scale as you need to. I think I need to do a dedicated webinar to this community to walk you guys (or those inclined) through it (any takers?). I do not think we can be a solution that makes sense where you only have 15 clients. That's the blunt truth. Unless you are doing 50 Mbps customers, I am not your micropop (but I can do that in some modest scale). That said, I wonder where that 15 number comes from? Can you please explain on what architecture that is based? Range? Height? Etc. If it is based on a micropop and even then on what just that pop can see,
Re: [AFMUG] About $12k
3x 65s for 360* coverage. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Jason McKemie j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com To: af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 9:07:51 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] About $12k Is there a 90 degree sector or are you using 65 degree sectors in a 4 BTS cluster? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com wrote: Only 2 models, the 3.65 (actually 3.4-3.7) COMPACT 1000 or the 2.x (2.3 and 2.5) COMPACT 3000. I included the 3.65 version. The 2.5 is all the same, save for the BTS price, which is about $5k higher (but 40 dBm per port and 43 pounds of brute power, compared to the 18 pound COMPACT 1000) Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 From: Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Jason McKemie Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:36 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] About $12k Which base station are you quoting, and what are the basic differences between the models? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com wrote: Think of all the EPC options (and there are 3 forms) as shells: 1 is an shell embedded as a piece of software inside EACH BTS...a total one box solution (we can do that since we are a SDR). 1 is a shell that's a small (1/2U) appliance supporting up to 10k subs and 2 gigs. These are stackable and with our NPV option is infinitely stackable. Into each shell option you plug in ONLY the functionality you need: Connecting to an external Radius? Buy that module. Don't need to? Don't get it. If not above, then doing MAC level authentication instead? Buy the iHSSS module. PCRF module. Doing service flows and dedicated bearers? Get that. Don't, then don't. Need Layer 2, get that. Don't? Dont. These modules are in price relative to the version of EPC (baby, momma or papa bear size). Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 From: Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Jason McKemie Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:23 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] About $12k Never mind, I see that now. How much is the 50 user license? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Jason McKemie j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com wrote: Is the 50 user limit just a guideline or a software limitation? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com wrote: One BTS, included embedded EPC with MAC level authentication (cheapest option) supporting up to 50 clients. Antenna could be swapped for any other. NOTE: this exclude any NMS pieces, but you could just connect over Telnet or direct connect. This would be the BAREST of bones, but there it is. That's still LTE and about 100 Mbps with killer NLOS. Includes: 735270 CMP.XT-BS-3.4-3.7 1 715773 LTE COMPACT SW License 1 700258 BMAX-4M-GPS 1 300736 ANT 3.3-3.8GHz,18 dBi, 65deg, 4ports (RF cables NOT included) 1 715620 BreezeWay-1010-50 (per Compact HW license) 1 715621 BreezeWay-1010-iHSS-50 (50 subs. license) 1 SLA 1 Year SLA 1 Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:08 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback No, could be much less. Give me a minute... Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:05 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Probably 20k to start. Quality over quantity. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 8:56 PM, John Woodfield john.woodfi...@jwcn.biz wrote: Patrick, I haven't had time to read through all this emails. Can you summarize what the lowest cost get up and running on a tower is so I can consider this further along with cost per sub? Thanks, John Woodfield, President Delmarva WiFi Inc. 410-870-WiFi -Original Message- From: Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 8:41pm To: af@afmug.com af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan of capping Glen. It is a gimmick. The hardware is what it is, and this hardware is expensive. 30dBm per port. 4 tx/4rx. Power is expensive. The highest quality DSPs on the market. not consumer grade stuff with the sensitivity of your in home Wi-Fi router. We build our own phy from the ground up too, our own ATPC algorithms too. On the software, we do that though -- enabling modularity and scale as you need to. I think I need to do a dedicated webinar to this community to walk you guys (or those inclined) through it (any takers?). I do not
Re: [AFMUG] About $12k
That's what I needed to know. - Original Message - From: Patrick Leary To: af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:16 PM Subject: [AFMUG] About $12k One BTS, included embedded EPC with MAC level authentication (cheapest option) supporting up to 50 clients. Antenna could be swapped for any other. NOTE: this exclude any NMS pieces, but you could just connect over Telnet or direct connect. This would be the BAREST of bones, but there it is. That's still LTE and about 100 Mbps with killer NLOS. Includes: 735270 CMP.XT-BS-3.4-3.7 1 715773 LTE COMPACT SW License 1 700258 BMAX-4M-GPS 1 300736 ANT 3.3-3.8GHz,18 dBi, 65deg, 4ports (RF cables NOT included) 1 715620 BreezeWay-1010-50 (per Compact HW license) 1 715621 BreezeWay-1010-iHSS-50 (50 subs. license) 1 SLA 1 Year SLA 1 Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:08 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback No, could be much less. Give me a minute... Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:05 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Probably 20k to start. Quality over quantity. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 8:56 PM, John Woodfield john.woodfi...@jwcn.biz wrote: Patrick, I haven't had time to read through all this emails. Can you summarize what the lowest cost get up and running on a tower is so I can consider this further along with cost per sub? Thanks, John Woodfield, President Delmarva WiFi Inc. 410-870-WiFi -Original Message- From: Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 8:41pm To: af@afmug.com af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan of capping Glen. It is a gimmick. The hardware is what it is, and this hardware is expensive. 30dBm per port. 4 tx/4rx. Power is expensive. The highest quality DSPs on the market. not consumer grade stuff with the sensitivity of your in home Wi-Fi router. We build our own phy from the ground up too, our own ATPC algorithms too. On the software, we do that though -- enabling modularity and scale as you need to. I think I need to do a dedicated webinar to this community to walk you guys (or those inclined) through it (any takers?). I do not think we can be a solution that makes sense where you only have 15 clients. That's the blunt truth. Unless you are doing 50 Mbps customers, I am not your micropop (but I can do that in some modest scale). That said, I wonder where that 15 number comes from? Can you please explain on what architecture that is based? Range? Height? Etc. If it is based on a micropop and even then on what just that pop can see, I'd say that's likely a model invented out of necessity due to the poor performance of the system you are using. I had a guy on a call today. He zoomed me in on Google Earth to his NLOS area. Farmland with wind breaks and shade trees for the homes. He is at 400' and can't connect squat behind those breaks. In my world, that's LOS all the way, even at 150 ft. It is total garbage that so many systems to can't deal with that and you've all been fed that that is normal. It is not. It is just gear with terrible specs where the only RD is at the software level, and even that is scant. You do not have NLOS problems. You have equipment problems. How such a product ever was allowed to go to market as a solution for rural broadband is, to me, cynical and reflective of playing a market to skim opportunistic dollars from a market segment that sometimes seems to embrace abuse. Sort of like the poor 700 MHz owners who got sucked in to buying 20 year old Marconi WipLL repackaged as a 700 MHz solution because all there was to buy. Then vendors do that crap and THEN, THEN tell you there's no backward compatibility when they come out with something new? WISPs. Sometimes you guys drive me nuts. You are like cheerleaders that love to date the quarterbacks who abuse you. That is like selling a car that falls apart once you leave residential streets. None of you should ever have accepted these golf carts to run your fleets. Sometimes, cheap is just cheap. Boy, I'm gonna hear it from my vendor peers, but this ain't a game or just a job for me. I damn sure hope it
Re: [AFMUG] BIND 9.4.2 SRV records
Not sure on the GUI, as I've never used it. We do have this set up for a couple of customers though, and the following is what's in the zone file for them: _sip._tls IN SRV 100 1 443 sipdir.online.lync.com. _sipfederationtls._tcp IN SRV 100 1 5061 sipfed.online.lync.com. On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 3:40 PM, That One Guy thatoneguyst...@gmail.com wrote: we are trying to get these srv record working for office 365 Adding through the web interface doesnt seem to get the format correct Editing the record file doesnt seem to do it either is there something Im missing, like is there somewhere I need to enable srv records, we have never put one in before. The current iteration is as follows: _sip._tls.domainname.com. 3600 IN SRV 1 100 443 sipdir.online.lync.com. _sipfederationtls._tcp.domainname.com. 3600 IN SRV 1 100 5061 sipfed.online.lync.com. This is what the host says needs to be present [image: Inline image 1] -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
Re: [AFMUG] New feedback
If being the operative term. Until I personally test it, or I hear from other regulars on this list that are using it, it's pie in the sky to me. I'm not closed off to the idea, just skeptical for obvious reasons. On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.net wrote: Patrick's not here to make friends. He does have a point, though. If a product is revolutionary, you can't look at it the same way everything else. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions https://twitter.com/ICSIL -- *From: *Glen Waldrop gwl...@cngwireless.net javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','gwl...@cngwireless.net'); *To: *af@afmug.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com'); *Sent: *Tuesday, March 3, 2015 9:19:22 PM *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] New feedback The 15 number comes from rural area. I have some towers that can only hit a few homes. Of those few, some still have OTA TV and rotary phones. They have no need nor want for Internet. Don't get hung up on that. I'm looking at probably 4 of these strategically placed in my network to cover any blind spots I might have over my coverage area. I'm not following, capping? Aside from that, this email came off more than a bit condesending. - Original Message - *From:* Patrick Leary javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','patrick.le...@telrad.com'); *To:* af@afmug.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com'); *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 7:41 PM *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan of capping Glen. It is a gimmick. The hardware is what it is, and this hardware is expensive. 30dBm per port. 4 tx/4rx. Power is expensive. The highest quality DSPs on the market. not consumer grade stuff with the sensitivity of your in home Wi-Fi router. We build our own phy from the ground up too, our own ATPC algorithms too. On the software, we do that though -- enabling modularity and scale as you need to. I think I need to do a dedicated webinar to this community to walk you guys (or those inclined) through it (any takers?). I do not think we can be a solution that makes sense where you only have 15 clients. That's the blunt truth. Unless you are doing 50 Mbps customers, I am not your micropop (but I can do that in some modest scale). That said, I wonder where that 15 number comes from? Can you please explain on what architecture that is based? Range? Height? Etc. If it is based on a micropop and even then on what just that pop can see, I'd say that's likely a model invented out of necessity due to the poor performance of the system you are using. I had a guy on a call today. He zoomed me in on Google Earth to his NLOS area. Farmland with wind breaks and shade trees for the homes. He is at 400' and can't connect squat behind those breaks. In my world, that's LOS all the way, even at 150 ft. It is total garbage that so many systems to can't deal with that and you've all been fed that that is normal. It is not. It is just gear with terrible specs where the only RD is at the software level, and even that is scant. You do not have NLOS problems. You have equipment problems. How such a product ever was allowed to go to market as a solution for rural broadband is, to me, cynical and reflective of playing a market to skim opportunistic dollars from a market segment that sometimes seems to embrace abuse. Sort of like the poor 700 MHz owners who got sucked in to buying 20 year old Marconi WipLL repackaged as a 700 MHz solution because all there was to buy. Then vendors do that crap and THEN, THEN tell you there's no backward compatibility when they come out with something new? WISPs. Sometimes you guys drive me nuts. You are like cheerleaders that love to date the quarterbacks who abuse you. That is like selling a car that falls apart once you leave residential streets. None of you should ever have accepted these golf carts to run your fleets. Sometimes, cheap is just cheap. Boy, I'm gonna hear it from my vendor peers, but this ain't a game or just a job for me. I damn sure hope it ain't that for you either. *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af-boun...@afmug.com');] *On Behalf Of *Glen Waldrop *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:08 PM *To:* af@afmug.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com'); *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Sort of off topic, but what would be the smallest AP we could get? I'm thinking about using this system on a few of my towers to make sure we never leave without a new customer, but I serve a very rural area. I have some towers with 15 clients. Is an omni + GPS sync or narrow channel out of the question?
Re: [AFMUG] About $12k
The sauce better be really really good with all of those licenses. Seems like u have a license for just about everything ? :) On Mar 3, 2015 8:20 PM, Jason McKemie j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com wrote: Is there frequency re-use with a 3 BTS setup? If there is re-use, what's the penalty? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.net wrote: 3x 65s for 360* coverage. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions https://twitter.com/ICSIL -- *From: *Jason McKemie j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com *To: *af@afmug.com *Sent: *Tuesday, March 3, 2015 9:07:51 PM *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] About $12k Is there a 90 degree sector or are you using 65 degree sectors in a 4 BTS cluster? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com wrote: Only 2 models, the 3.65 (actually 3.4-3.7) COMPACT 1000 or the 2.x (2.3 and 2.5) COMPACT 3000. I included the 3.65 version. The 2.5 is all the same, save for the BTS price, which is about $5k higher (but 40 dBm per port and 43 pounds of brute power, compared to the 18 pound COMPACT 1000) *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Jason McKemie *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:36 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] About $12k Which base station are you quoting, and what are the basic differences between the models? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com wrote: Think of all the EPC options (and there are 3 forms) as shells: 1 is an shell embedded as a piece of software inside EACH BTS...a total one box solution (we can do that since we are a SDR). 1 is a shell that's a small (1/2U) appliance supporting up to 10k subs and 2 gigs. These are stackable and with our NPV option is infinitely stackable. Into each shell option you plug in ONLY the functionality you need: Connecting to an external Radius? Buy that module. Don't need to? Don't get it. If not above, then doing MAC level authentication instead? Buy the iHSSS module. PCRF module. Doing service flows and dedicated bearers? Get that. Don't, then don't. Need Layer 2, get that. Don't? Dont. These modules are in price relative to the version of EPC (baby, momma or papa bear size). *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Jason McKemie *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:23 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] About $12k Never mind, I see that now. How much is the 50 user license? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Jason McKemie j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com wrote: Is the 50 user limit just a guideline or a software limitation? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com wrote: One BTS, included embedded EPC with MAC level authentication (cheapest option) supporting up to 50 clients. Antenna could be swapped for any other. NOTE: this exclude any NMS pieces, but you could just connect over Telnet or direct connect. This would be the BAREST of bones, but there it is. That's still LTE and about 100 Mbps with killer NLOS. Includes: 735270 CMP.XT-BS-3.4-3.7 1 715773 LTE COMPACT SW License 1 700258 BMAX-4M-GPS 1 300736 ANT 3.3-3.8GHz,18 dBi, 65deg, 4ports (RF cables NOT included) 1 715620 BreezeWay-1010-50 (per Compact HW license) 1 715621 BreezeWay-1010-iHSS-50 (50 subs. license) 1 SLA 1 Year SLA 1 *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Patrick Leary *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:08 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] New feedback No, could be much less. Give me a minute... *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:05 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Probably 20k to start. Quality over quantity. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 8:56 PM, John Woodfield john.woodfi...@jwcn.biz wrote: Patrick, I haven't had time to read through all this emails. Can you summarize what the lowest cost get up and running on a tower is so I can consider this further along with cost per sub? Thanks, John Woodfield, President Delmarva WiFi Inc. 410-870-WiFi -Original Message- From: Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 8:41pm To: af@afmug.com af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan
Re: [AFMUG] New feedback
The people here don't get out much. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Jason McKemie j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com To: af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 10:25:50 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback If being the operative term. Until I personally test it, or I hear from other regulars on this list that are using it, it's pie in the sky to me. I'm not closed off to the idea, just skeptical for obvious reasons. On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Mike Hammett af...@ics-il.net wrote: Patrick's not here to make friends. He does have a point, though. If a product is revolutionary, you can't look at it the same way everything else. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com From: Glen Waldrop gwl...@cngwireless.net To: af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 9:19:22 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback The 15 number comes from rural area. I have some towers that can only hit a few homes. Of those few, some still have OTA TV and rotary phones. They have no need nor want for Internet. Don't get hung up on that. I'm looking at probably 4 of these strategically placed in my network to cover any blind spots I might have over my coverage area. I'm not following, capping? Aside from that, this email came off more than a bit condesending. blockquote - Original Message - From: Patrick Leary To: af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 7:41 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan of capping Glen. It is a gimmick. The hardware is what it is, and this hardware is expensive. 30dBm per port. 4 tx/4rx. Power is expensive. The highest quality DSPs on the market. not consumer grade stuff with the sensitivity of your in home Wi-Fi router. We build our own phy from the ground up too, our own ATPC algorithms too. On the software, we do that though -- enabling modularity and scale as you need to. I think I need to do a dedicated webinar to this community to walk you guys (or those inclined) through it (any takers?). I do not think we can be a solution that makes sense where you only have 15 clients. That's the blunt truth. Unless you are doing 50 Mbps customers, I am not your micropop (but I can do that in some modest scale). That said, I wonder where that 15 number comes from? Can you please explain on what architecture that is based? Range? Height? Etc. If it is based on a micropop and even then on what just that pop can see, I'd say that's likely a model invented out of necessity due to the poor performance of the system you are using. I had a guy on a call today. He zoomed me in on Google Earth to his NLOS area. Farmland with wind breaks and shade trees for the homes. He is at 400' and can't connect squat behind those breaks. In my world, that's LOS all the way, even at 150 ft. It is total garbage that so many systems to can't deal with that and you've all been fed that that is normal. It is not. It is just gear with terrible specs where the only RD is at the software level, and even that is scant. You do not have NLOS problems. You have equipment problems. How such a product ever was allowed to go to market as a solution for rural broadband is, to me, cynical and reflective of playing a market to skim opportunistic dollars from a market segment that sometimes seems to embrace abuse. Sort of like the poor 700 MHz owners who got sucked in to buying 20 year old Marconi WipLL repackaged as a 700 MHz solution because all there was to buy. Then vendors do that crap and THEN, THEN tell you there's no backward compatibility when they come out with something new? WISPs. Sometimes you guys drive me nuts. You are like cheerleaders that love to date the quarterbacks who abuse you. That is like selling a car that falls apart once you leave residential streets. None of you should ever have accepted these golf carts to run your fleets. Sometimes, cheap is just cheap. Boy, I'm gonna hear it from my vendor peers, but this ain't a game or just a job for me. I damn sure hope it ain't that for you either. Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 From: Af [mailto: af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Glen Waldrop Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:08 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Sort of off topic, but what would be the smallest AP we could get? I'm thinking about using this system on a few of my towers to make sure we never leave without a new customer, but I serve a very rural area. I have some towers with 15 clients. Is an omni + GPS sync or narrow channel out of the question? blockquote - Original Message - From: Patrick Leary To: tel...@wispa.org ; af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 4:42 PM Subject: [AFMUG] New feedback This is an interesting bit of commentary from one of our new
Re: [AFMUG] About $12k
tomorrow I'll post a 3 BTS arrangement. Do remember, I am not talking about any sort of scale but onesy twosy. Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image001.png@01D0560C.C5AA4110]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of That One Guy Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 11:05 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] About $12k so the minimum for a full 360 degree pop and still have near spec performance would realistically start at 36k aside from site incidentals to support the product? On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 9:21 PM, Glen Waldrop gwl...@cngwireless.netmailto:gwl...@cngwireless.net wrote: That's what I needed to know. - Original Message - From: Patrick Learymailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:16 PM Subject: [AFMUG] About $12k One BTS, included embedded EPC with MAC level authentication (cheapest option) supporting up to 50 clients. Antenna could be swapped for any other. NOTE: this exclude any NMS pieces, but you could just connect over Telnet or direct connect. This would be the BAREST of bones, but there it is. That's still LTE and about 100 Mbps with killer NLOS. Includes: 735270 CMP.XT-BS-3.4-3.7 1 715773 LTE COMPACT SW License 1 700258 BMAX-4M-GPS 1 300736 ANT 3.3-3.8GHz,18 dBi, 65deg, 4ports (RF cables NOT included) 1 715620 BreezeWay-1010-50 (per Compact HW license) 1 715621 BreezeWay-1010-iHSS-50 (50 subs. license) 1 SLA 1 Year SLA 1 Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735tel:727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D0560C.C5AA4110]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.commailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:08 PM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback No, could be much less. Give me a minute... Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735tel:727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D0560C.C5AA4110]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:05 PM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Probably 20k to start. Quality over quantity. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340tel:937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343tel:937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 8:56 PM, John Woodfield john.woodfi...@jwcn.bizmailto:john.woodfi...@jwcn.biz wrote: Patrick, I haven't had time to read through all this emails. Can you summarize what the lowest cost get up and running on a tower is so I can consider this further along with cost per sub? Thanks, John Woodfield, President Delmarva WiFi Inc. 410-870-WiFi -Original Message- From: Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.commailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 8:41pm To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan of capping Glen. It is a gimmick. The hardware is what it is, and this hardware is expensive. 30dBm per port. 4 tx/4rx. Power is expensive. The highest quality DSPs on the market. not consumer grade stuff with the sensitivity of your in home Wi-Fi router. We build our own phy from the ground up too, our own ATPC algorithms too. On the software, we do that though -- enabling modularity and scale as you need to. I think I need to do a dedicated webinar to this community to walk you guys (or those inclined) through it (any takers?). I do not think we can be a solution that makes sense where you only have 15 clients. That's the blunt truth. Unless you are doing 50 Mbps customers, I am not your micropop (but I can do that in some modest scale). That said, I wonder where that 15 number comes from? Can you please explain on what architecture that is based? Range? Height? Etc. If it is based on a micropop and even then on what just that pop can see, I'd say that's likely a model invented out of necessity due to the poor performance of the system you are using. I had a guy on a call today. He zoomed me in on Google Earth to his NLOS area. Farmland with wind breaks and shade trees for the homes. He is at 400' and can't connect squat behind those breaks. In my world, that's LOS all the way, even at 150 ft. It is total garbage that so many systems to can't deal with that and you've all been fed that that is normal. It is not. It is just gear with terrible specs where the only RD is at the software level, and even that is scant. You do not have NLOS problems. You have equipment problems. How such a product ever was allowed to go to market as a solution for rural broadband is, to me, cynical and reflective of playing a market to skim opportunistic dollars from a market segment that sometimes seems to embrace abuse. Sort of like the poor 700 MHz owners who got sucked in to buying 20 year old Marconi WipLL repackaged as a 700 MHz solution because all there was to
Re: [AFMUG] New feedback
Probably 20k to start. Quality over quantity. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 8:56 PM, John Woodfield john.woodfi...@jwcn.biz wrote: Patrick, I haven't had time to read through all this emails. Can you summarize what the lowest cost get up and running on a tower is so I can consider this further along with cost per sub? Thanks, John Woodfield, President Delmarva WiFi Inc. 410-870-WiFi -Original Message- From: Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 8:41pm To: af@afmug.com af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan of capping Glen. It is a gimmick. The hardware is what it is, and this hardware is expensive. 30dBm per port. 4 tx/4rx. Power is expensive. The highest quality DSPs on the market. not consumer grade stuff with the sensitivity of your in home Wi-Fi router. We build our own phy from the ground up too, our own ATPC algorithms too. On the software, we do that though -- enabling modularity and scale as you need to. I think I need to do a dedicated webinar to this community to walk you guys (or those inclined) through it (any takers?). I do not think we can be a solution that makes sense where you only have 15 clients. That's the blunt truth. Unless you are doing 50 Mbps customers, I am not your micropop (but I can do that in some modest scale). That said, I wonder where that 15 number comes from? Can you please explain on what architecture that is based? Range? Height? Etc. If it is based on a micropop and even then on what just that pop can see, I'd say that's likely a model invented out of necessity due to the poor performance of the system you are using. I had a guy on a call today. He zoomed me in on Google Earth to his NLOS area. Farmland with wind breaks and shade trees for the homes. He is at 400' and can't connect squat behind those breaks. In my world, that's LOS all the way, even at 150 ft. It is total garbage that so many systems to can't deal with that and you've all been fed that that is normal. It is not. It is just gear with terrible specs where the only RD is at the software level, and even that is scant. You do not have NLOS problems. You have equipment problems. How such a product ever was allowed to go to market as a solution for rural broadband is, to me, cynical and reflective of playing a market to skim opportunistic dollars from a market segment that sometimes seems to embrace abuse. Sort of like the poor 700 MHz owners who got sucked in to buying 20 year old Marconi WipLL repackaged as a 700 MHz solution because all there was to buy. Then vendors do that crap and THEN, THEN tell you there's no backward compatibility when they come out with something new? WISPs. Sometimes you guys drive me nuts. You are like cheerleaders that love to date the quarterbacks who abuse you. That is like selling a car that falls apart once you leave residential streets. None of you should ever have accepted these golf carts to run your fleets. Sometimes, cheap is just cheap. Boy, I'm gonna hear it from my vendor peers, but this ain't a game or just a job for me. I damn sure hope it ain't that for you either. *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Glen Waldrop *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:08 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Sort of off topic, but what would be the smallest AP we could get? I'm thinking about using this system on a few of my towers to make sure we never leave without a new customer, but I serve a very rural area. I have some towers with 15 clients. Is an omni + GPS sync or narrow channel out of the question? - Original Message - *From:* Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com *To:* tel...@wispa.org ; af@afmug.com *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 4:42 PM *Subject:* [AFMUG] New feedback This is an interesting bit of commentary from one of our new customers. If he wishes to identify himself, he will *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 2:31 AM *To:* Patrick Leary; Nick Dewar *Subject:* Interesting Statistic Patrick / Nick – Our Director of Operations, which you both met in St Louis, sent out an interesting email to our staff this evening. In February with only 20 working days we completed 40 installs with one technician... This is only icing on the cake, especially since we are onboarding two more techs... I ran some additional numbers and found that out of the “Telrad” installations that we scheduled, 100 % were successful both of these months. This is a game changer, and it proves that we can eliminate the need to waste further time with the dreaded site surveys. Our success is not
Re: [AFMUG] About $12k
No user limit, just the EPC limit in that form (embedded EPC). I can license those in 50 to 500 user increments. For a centralized EPC, we have 2 gig versions with 1000 user licenses (and a switch w/12 gigE ports and 2 SFPs), and those are hot stackable. Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image001.png@01D055F8.739B1CA0]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jason McKemie Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:21 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] About $12k Is the 50 user limit just a guideline or a software limitation? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.commailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com wrote: One BTS, included embedded EPC with MAC level authentication (cheapest option) supporting up to 50 clients. Antenna could be swapped for any other. NOTE: this exclude any NMS pieces, but you could just connect over Telnet or direct connect. This would be the BAREST of bones, but there it is. That's still LTE and about 100 Mbps with killer NLOS. Includes: 735270 CMP.XT-BS-3.4-3.7 1 715773 LTE COMPACT SW License 1 700258 BMAX-4M-GPS 1 300736 ANT 3.3-3.8GHz,18 dBi, 65deg, 4ports (RF cables NOT included) 1 715620 BreezeWay-1010-50 (per Compact HW license) 1 715621 BreezeWay-1010-iHSS-50 (50 subs. license) 1 SLA 1 Year SLA 1 Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D055F8.739B1CA0]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.comjavascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af-boun...@afmug.com');] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:08 PM To: af@afmug.comjavascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com'); Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback No, could be much less. Give me a minute... Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D055F8.739B1CA0]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.comjavascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af-boun...@afmug.com');] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:05 PM To: af@afmug.comjavascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com'); Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Probably 20k to start. Quality over quantity. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 8:56 PM, John Woodfield john.woodfi...@jwcn.bizjavascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','john.woodfi...@jwcn.biz'); wrote: Patrick, I haven't had time to read through all this emails. Can you summarize what the lowest cost get up and running on a tower is so I can consider this further along with cost per sub? Thanks, John Woodfield, President Delmarva WiFi Inc. 410-870-WiFi -Original Message- From: Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.comjavascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','patrick.le...@telrad.com'); Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 8:41pm To: af@afmug.comjavascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com'); af@afmug.comjavascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af@afmug.com'); Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan of capping Glen. It is a gimmick. The hardware is what it is, and this hardware is expensive. 30dBm per port. 4 tx/4rx. Power is expensive. The highest quality DSPs on the market. not consumer grade stuff with the sensitivity of your in home Wi-Fi router. We build our own phy from the ground up too, our own ATPC algorithms too. On the software, we do that though -- enabling modularity and scale as you need to. I think I need to do a dedicated webinar to this community to walk you guys (or those inclined) through it (any takers?). I do not think we can be a solution that makes sense where you only have 15 clients. That's the blunt truth. Unless you are doing 50 Mbps customers, I am not your micropop (but I can do that in some modest scale). That said, I wonder where that 15 number comes from? Can you please explain on what architecture that is based? Range? Height? Etc. If it is based on a micropop and even then on what just that pop can see, I'd say that's likely a model invented out of necessity due to the poor performance of the system you are using. I had a guy on a call today. He zoomed me in on Google Earth to his NLOS area. Farmland with wind breaks and shade trees for the homes. He is at 400' and can't connect squat behind those breaks. In my world, that's LOS all the way, even at 150 ft. It is total garbage that so many systems to can't deal with that and you've all been fed that that is normal. It is not. It is just gear with terrible specs where the only RD is at the software level, and even that is scant. You do not have NLOS problems. You have equipment problems. How such a product ever was allowed to go to market as a solution for rural broadband is, to me, cynical and reflective of playing a market to skim opportunistic dollars from a market segment that sometimes seems to embrace abuse. Sort of like the poor 700 MHz owners who got sucked in to buying 20 year old Marconi WipLL repackaged as a 700 MHz solution because all there was to buy.
Re: [AFMUG] About $12k
Cannot keep them in stock? Which one? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 9:20 PM, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com wrote: Yes, that is correct. And right now I cannot them in stock. *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:19 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] About $12k That's one antenna and no CPEs! Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 9:16 PM, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com wrote: One BTS, included embedded EPC with MAC level authentication (cheapest option) supporting up to 50 clients. Antenna could be swapped for any other. NOTE: this exclude any NMS pieces, but you could just connect over Telnet or direct connect. This would be the BAREST of bones, but there it is. That's still LTE and about 100 Mbps with killer NLOS. Includes: 735270 CMP.XT-BS-3.4-3.7 1 715773 LTE COMPACT SW License 1 700258 BMAX-4M-GPS 1 300736 ANT 3.3-3.8GHz,18 dBi, 65deg, 4ports (RF cables NOT included) 1 715620 BreezeWay-1010-50 (per Compact HW license) 1 715621 BreezeWay-1010-iHSS-50 (50 subs. license) 1 SLA 1 Year SLA 1 *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Patrick Leary *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:08 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] New feedback No, could be much less. Give me a minute... *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:05 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Probably 20k to start. Quality over quantity. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 8:56 PM, John Woodfield john.woodfi...@jwcn.biz wrote: Patrick, I haven't had time to read through all this emails. Can you summarize what the lowest cost get up and running on a tower is so I can consider this further along with cost per sub? Thanks, John Woodfield, President Delmarva WiFi Inc. 410-870-WiFi -Original Message- From: Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 8:41pm To: af@afmug.com af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan of capping Glen. It is a gimmick. The hardware is what it is, and this hardware is expensive. 30dBm per port. 4 tx/4rx. Power is expensive. The highest quality DSPs on the market. not consumer grade stuff with the sensitivity of your in home Wi-Fi router. We build our own phy from the ground up too, our own ATPC algorithms too. On the software, we do that though -- enabling modularity and scale as you need to. I think I need to do a dedicated webinar to this community to walk you guys (or those inclined) through it (any takers?). I do not think we can be a solution that makes sense where you only have 15 clients. That's the blunt truth. Unless you are doing 50 Mbps customers, I am not your micropop (but I can do that in some modest scale). That said, I wonder where that 15 number comes from? Can you please explain on what architecture that is based? Range? Height? Etc. If it is based on a micropop and even then on what just that pop can see, I'd say that's likely a model invented out of necessity due to the poor performance of the system you are using. I had a guy on a call today. He zoomed me in on Google Earth to his NLOS area. Farmland with wind breaks and shade trees for the homes. He is at 400' and can't connect squat behind those breaks. In my world, that's LOS all the way, even at 150 ft. It is total garbage that so many systems to can't deal with that and you've all been fed that that is normal. It is not. It is just gear with terrible specs where the only RD is at the software level, and even that is scant. You do not have NLOS problems. You have equipment problems. How such a product ever was allowed to go to market as a solution for rural broadband is, to me, cynical and reflective of playing a market to skim opportunistic dollars from a market segment that sometimes seems to embrace abuse. Sort of like the poor 700 MHz owners who got sucked in to buying 20 year old Marconi WipLL repackaged as a 700 MHz solution because all there was to buy. Then vendors do that crap and THEN, THEN tell you there's no backward compatibility when they come out with something new? WISPs. Sometimes you guys drive me nuts. You are like cheerleaders that love to date the quarterbacks who abuse you. That is like selling a car that falls apart
Re: [AFMUG] New feedback
I certainly know that area well. I lived in GA for 10 years and did lots of work in my fiber days around Tuscaloosa (and pretty much everywhere else in the south). Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image001.png@01D05612.0EF483D0]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Glen Waldrop Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 12:23 AM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Close, south of Tuscaloosa, west of Montgomery. Same basic geography though, hills, cows, fish and trees. Might be a redneck spread out amongst the trees. Might be one of them... - Original Message - From: CBB - Jay Fullermailto:par...@cyberbroadband.net To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 11:19 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback He's (glen) between ttown and Montgomery patrick Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone - Reply message - From: Glen Waldrop gwl...@cngwireless.netmailto:gwl...@cngwireless.net To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: [AFMUG] New feedback Date: Tue, Mar 3, 2015 11:10 PM Tree density is seriously mixed. Some places it is ridiculous, 100+ year growth, old forests. Nearly half of my coverage area is over farmland (beef, catfish) so those places are usually an easy shot. The truly irritating thing about wireless in this area is cedar trees. There won't be one tree in the yard, but there will almost always be a line of cedar across the road or something, somewhere near a fence line. Anyone that has the phobia that RF is killing us just needs to plant cedar. I've got a few places that if your system could serve you'd get a shining recommendation from me. Nothing short of going over cedar seems to work. 900MHz seems to get a half mile or less if cedar is involved. I can get over a mile away with the test AP on the ground and a yagi in my truck through hardwood and pine, but cedar just stops it cold. Mike Hammet may have a point though. I may not be your target audience. I might not get a return on my investment, but it would be irresponsible of me to not evaluate another tool to find out. - Original Message - From: Patrick Learymailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 10:48 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback I suspect you could pull off omnis then. How's the tree density? Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:EFF4838098994042AC9A2ADB3F7C6030@ziggy7]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Glen Waldrop Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 10:19 PM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback The 15 number comes from rural area. I have some towers that can only hit a few homes. Of those few, some still have OTA TV and rotary phones. They have no need nor want for Internet. Don't get hung up on that. I'm looking at probably 4 of these strategically placed in my network to cover any blind spots I might have over my coverage area. I'm not following, capping? Aside from that, this email came off more than a bit condesending. - Original Message - From: Patrick Learymailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 7:41 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan of capping Glen. It is a gimmick. The hardware is what it is, and this hardware is expensive. 30dBm per port. 4 tx/4rx. Power is expensive. The highest quality DSPs on the market. not consumer grade stuff with the sensitivity of your in home Wi-Fi router. We build our own phy from the ground up too, our own ATPC algorithms too. On the software, we do that though -- enabling modularity and scale as you need to. I think I need to do a dedicated webinar to this community to walk you guys (or those inclined) through it (any takers?). I do not think we can be a solution that makes sense where you only have 15 clients. That's the blunt truth. Unless you are doing 50 Mbps customers, I am not your micropop (but I can do that in some modest scale). That said, I wonder where that 15 number comes from? Can you please explain on what architecture that is based? Range? Height? Etc. If it is based on a micropop and even then on what just that pop can see, I'd say that's likely a model invented out of necessity due to the poor performance of the system you are using. I had a guy on a call today. He zoomed me in on Google Earth to his NLOS area. Farmland with wind breaks and shade trees for the homes. He is at 400' and can't connect squat behind those breaks. In my world, that's LOS all the way, even at 150 ft. It is total garbage that so many systems to can't deal with that and you've all been fed that that is normal. It is not. It is just gear with terrible specs where the only RD is at the software level, and even that is scant. You do not have NLOS problems. You have equipment problems. How such a product
Re: [AFMUG] New feedback
1+ Jaime Solorza On Mar 3, 2015 7:08 PM, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com wrote: Have not heard Delmarva in a while. I grew up in No VA. The run out east toward OC was a rite of passage...and my first ticket. Damned tricky MD state troopers; they used to run 18 wheelers. If I do this in a webinar, would that work? *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *John Woodfield *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:56 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Patrick, I haven't had time to read through all this emails. Can you summarize what the lowest cost get up and running on a tower is so I can consider this further along with cost per sub? Thanks, John Woodfield, President Delmarva WiFi Inc. 410-870-WiFi -Original Message- From: Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 8:41pm To: af@afmug.com af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan of capping Glen. It is a gimmick. The hardware is what it is, and this hardware is expensive. 30dBm per port. 4 tx/4rx. Power is expensive. The highest quality DSPs on the market. not consumer grade stuff with the sensitivity of your in home Wi-Fi router. We build our own phy from the ground up too, our own ATPC algorithms too. On the software, we do that though -- enabling modularity and scale as you need to. I think I need to do a dedicated webinar to this community to walk you guys (or those inclined) through it (any takers?). I do not think we can be a solution that makes sense where you only have 15 clients. That's the blunt truth. Unless you are doing 50 Mbps customers, I am not your micropop (but I can do that in some modest scale). That said, I wonder where that 15 number comes from? Can you please explain on what architecture that is based? Range? Height? Etc. If it is based on a micropop and even then on what just that pop can see, I'd say that's likely a model invented out of necessity due to the poor performance of the system you are using. I had a guy on a call today. He zoomed me in on Google Earth to his NLOS area. Farmland with wind breaks and shade trees for the homes. He is at 400' and can't connect squat behind those breaks. In my world, that's LOS all the way, even at 150 ft. It is total garbage that so many systems to can't deal with that and you've all been fed that that is normal. It is not. It is just gear with terrible specs where the only RD is at the software level, and even that is scant. You do not have NLOS problems. You have equipment problems. How such a product ever was allowed to go to market as a solution for rural broadband is, to me, cynical and reflective of playing a market to skim opportunistic dollars from a market segment that sometimes seems to embrace abuse. Sort of like the poor 700 MHz owners who got sucked in to buying 20 year old Marconi WipLL repackaged as a 700 MHz solution because all there was to buy. Then vendors do that crap and THEN, THEN tell you there's no backward compatibility when they come out with something new? WISPs. Sometimes you guys drive me nuts. You are like cheerleaders that love to date the quarterbacks who abuse you. That is like selling a car that falls apart once you leave residential streets. None of you should ever have accepted these golf carts to run your fleets. Sometimes, cheap is just cheap. Boy, I'm gonna hear it from my vendor peers, but this ain't a game or just a job for me. I damn sure hope it ain't that for you either. *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Glen Waldrop *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:08 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Sort of off topic, but what would be the smallest AP we could get? I'm thinking about using this system on a few of my towers to make sure we never leave without a new customer, but I serve a very rural area. I have some towers with 15 clients. Is an omni + GPS sync or narrow channel out of the question? - Original Message - *From:* *Patrick Leary* patrick.le...@telrad.com *To:* *tel...@wispa.org* tel...@wispa.org ; *af@afmug.com* af@afmug.com *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 4:42 PM *Subject:* [AFMUG] New feedback This is an interesting bit of commentary from one of our new customers. If he wishes to identify himself, he will *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 2:31 AM *To:* Patrick Leary; Nick Dewar *Subject:* Interesting Statistic Patrick / Nick – Our Director of Operations, which you both met in St Louis, sent out an interesting email to our staff this evening. In February with only 20 working days
Re: [AFMUG] About $12k
That's one antenna and no CPEs! Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 9:16 PM, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com wrote: One BTS, included embedded EPC with MAC level authentication (cheapest option) supporting up to 50 clients. Antenna could be swapped for any other. NOTE: this exclude any NMS pieces, but you could just connect over Telnet or direct connect. This would be the BAREST of bones, but there it is. That's still LTE and about 100 Mbps with killer NLOS. Includes: 735270 CMP.XT-BS-3.4-3.7 1 715773 LTE COMPACT SW License 1 700258 BMAX-4M-GPS 1 300736 ANT 3.3-3.8GHz,18 dBi, 65deg, 4ports (RF cables NOT included) 1 715620 BreezeWay-1010-50 (per Compact HW license) 1 715621 BreezeWay-1010-iHSS-50 (50 subs. license) 1 SLA 1 Year SLA 1 *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Patrick Leary *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:08 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] New feedback No, could be much less. Give me a minute... *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:05 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Probably 20k to start. Quality over quantity. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 8:56 PM, John Woodfield john.woodfi...@jwcn.biz wrote: Patrick, I haven't had time to read through all this emails. Can you summarize what the lowest cost get up and running on a tower is so I can consider this further along with cost per sub? Thanks, John Woodfield, President Delmarva WiFi Inc. 410-870-WiFi -Original Message- From: Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 8:41pm To: af@afmug.com af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan of capping Glen. It is a gimmick. The hardware is what it is, and this hardware is expensive. 30dBm per port. 4 tx/4rx. Power is expensive. The highest quality DSPs on the market. not consumer grade stuff with the sensitivity of your in home Wi-Fi router. We build our own phy from the ground up too, our own ATPC algorithms too. On the software, we do that though -- enabling modularity and scale as you need to. I think I need to do a dedicated webinar to this community to walk you guys (or those inclined) through it (any takers?). I do not think we can be a solution that makes sense where you only have 15 clients. That's the blunt truth. Unless you are doing 50 Mbps customers, I am not your micropop (but I can do that in some modest scale). That said, I wonder where that 15 number comes from? Can you please explain on what architecture that is based? Range? Height? Etc. If it is based on a micropop and even then on what just that pop can see, I'd say that's likely a model invented out of necessity due to the poor performance of the system you are using. I had a guy on a call today. He zoomed me in on Google Earth to his NLOS area. Farmland with wind breaks and shade trees for the homes. He is at 400' and can't connect squat behind those breaks. In my world, that's LOS all the way, even at 150 ft. It is total garbage that so many systems to can't deal with that and you've all been fed that that is normal. It is not. It is just gear with terrible specs where the only RD is at the software level, and even that is scant. You do not have NLOS problems. You have equipment problems. How such a product ever was allowed to go to market as a solution for rural broadband is, to me, cynical and reflective of playing a market to skim opportunistic dollars from a market segment that sometimes seems to embrace abuse. Sort of like the poor 700 MHz owners who got sucked in to buying 20 year old Marconi WipLL repackaged as a 700 MHz solution because all there was to buy. Then vendors do that crap and THEN, THEN tell you there's no backward compatibility when they come out with something new? WISPs. Sometimes you guys drive me nuts. You are like cheerleaders that love to date the quarterbacks who abuse you. That is like selling a car that falls apart once you leave residential streets. None of you should ever have accepted these golf carts to run your fleets. Sometimes, cheap is just cheap. Boy, I'm gonna hear it from my vendor peers, but this ain't a game or just a job for me. I damn sure hope it ain't that for you either. *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Glen Waldrop *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:08 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] New
Re: [AFMUG] About $12k
Think of all the EPC options (and there are 3 forms) as shells: 1 is an shell embedded as a piece of software inside EACH BTS...a total one box solution (we can do that since we are a SDR). 1 is a shell that's a small (1/2U) appliance supporting up to 10k subs and 2 gigs. These are stackable and with our NPV option is infinitely stackable. Into each shell option you plug in ONLY the functionality you need: Connecting to an external Radius? Buy that module. Don't need to? Don't get it. If not above, then doing MAC level authentication instead? Buy the iHSSS module. PCRF module. Doing service flows and dedicated bearers? Get that. Don't, then don't. Need Layer 2, get that. Don't? Dont. These modules are in price relative to the version of EPC (baby, momma or papa bear size). Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image001.png@01D055F9.6A02CB10]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jason McKemie Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:23 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] About $12k Never mind, I see that now. How much is the 50 user license? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Jason McKemie j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.commailto:j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com wrote: Is the 50 user limit just a guideline or a software limitation? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.comjavascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','patrick.le...@telrad.com'); wrote: One BTS, included embedded EPC with MAC level authentication (cheapest option) supporting up to 50 clients. Antenna could be swapped for any other. NOTE: this exclude any NMS pieces, but you could just connect over Telnet or direct connect. This would be the BAREST of bones, but there it is. That's still LTE and about 100 Mbps with killer NLOS. Includes: 735270 CMP.XT-BS-3.4-3.7 1 715773 LTE COMPACT SW License 1 700258 BMAX-4M-GPS 1 300736 ANT 3.3-3.8GHz,18 dBi, 65deg, 4ports (RF cables NOT included) 1 715620 BreezeWay-1010-50 (per Compact HW license) 1 715621 BreezeWay-1010-iHSS-50 (50 subs. license) 1 SLA 1 Year SLA 1 Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D055F9.6A02CB10]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:08 PM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback No, could be much less. Give me a minute... Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D055F9.6A02CB10]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:05 PM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Probably 20k to start. Quality over quantity. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 8:56 PM, John Woodfield john.woodfi...@jwcn.bizmailto:john.woodfi...@jwcn.biz wrote: Patrick, I haven't had time to read through all this emails. Can you summarize what the lowest cost get up and running on a tower is so I can consider this further along with cost per sub? Thanks, John Woodfield, President Delmarva WiFi Inc. 410-870-WiFi -Original Message- From: Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.commailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 8:41pm To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan of capping Glen. It is a gimmick. The hardware is what it is, and this hardware is expensive. 30dBm per port. 4 tx/4rx. Power is expensive. The highest quality DSPs on the market. not consumer grade stuff with the sensitivity of your in home Wi-Fi router. We build our own phy from the ground up too, our own ATPC algorithms too. On the software, we do that though -- enabling modularity and scale as you need to. I think I need to do a dedicated webinar to this community to walk you guys (or those inclined) through it (any takers?). I do not think we can be a solution that makes sense where you only have 15 clients. That's the blunt truth. Unless you are doing 50 Mbps customers, I am not your micropop (but I can do that in some modest scale). That said, I wonder where that 15 number comes from? Can you please explain on what architecture that is based? Range? Height? Etc. If it is based on a micropop and even then on what just that pop can see, I'd say that's likely a model invented out of necessity due to the poor performance of the system you are using. I had a guy on a call today. He zoomed me in on Google Earth to his NLOS area. Farmland with wind breaks and shade trees for the homes. He is at 400' and can't connect squat behind those breaks. In my world, that's LOS all the way, even at 150 ft. It is total garbage that so many systems to can't deal with that and you've all been fed that that is normal. It is not. It is just gear with terrible specs where the only RD is at the software
Re: [AFMUG] Telrad LTE Webinar -- The Full Monty for the AFMUG
Damn. I will be on tower if radio is bad or on drive back to El Paso on Thursday afternoon . Next time Jaime Solorza On Mar 3, 2015 7:25 PM, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com wrote: When: Thursday, March 05, 2015 2:00 PM-3:30 PM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US Canada). Where: via link below AND call in number Note: The GMT offset above does not reflect daylight saving time adjustments. *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* ...If you dareHell, if I dare. I have room for 100. No holds barred, but I warn you I'm an armed veteran and expert marksman. Given time we'll even run through the LTE interference thing. 1. Please join my meeting. *https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/471332645* https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/471332645 2. Use your microphone and speakers (VoIP) - a headset is recommended. Or, call in using your telephone. Dial +1 (408) 650-3123 Access Code: 471-332-645 Audio PIN: Shown after joining the meeting Meeting ID: 471-332-645 GoToMeeting® Online Meetings Made Easy® Not at your computer? Click the link to join this meeting from your iPhone®, iPad®, Android® or Windows Phone® device via the GoToMeeting app. This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses.
Re: [AFMUG] About $12k
is this msrp pricing with potential of vendor discounts or is it a hard set price? On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:04 PM, That One Guy thatoneguyst...@gmail.com wrote: so the minimum for a full 360 degree pop and still have near spec performance would realistically start at 36k aside from site incidentals to support the product? On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 9:21 PM, Glen Waldrop gwl...@cngwireless.net wrote: That's what I needed to know. - Original Message - *From:* Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com *To:* af@afmug.com *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:16 PM *Subject:* [AFMUG] About $12k One BTS, included embedded EPC with MAC level authentication (cheapest option) supporting up to 50 clients. Antenna could be swapped for any other. NOTE: this exclude any NMS pieces, but you could just connect over Telnet or direct connect. This would be the BAREST of bones, but there it is. That's still LTE and about 100 Mbps with killer NLOS. Includes: 735270 CMP.XT-BS-3.4-3.7 1 715773 LTE COMPACT SW License 1 700258 BMAX-4M-GPS 1 300736 ANT 3.3-3.8GHz,18 dBi, 65deg, 4ports (RF cables NOT included) 1 715620 BreezeWay-1010-50 (per Compact HW license) 1 715621 BreezeWay-1010-iHSS-50 (50 subs. license) 1 SLA 1 Year SLA 1 *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Patrick Leary *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:08 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] New feedback No, could be much less. Give me a minute... *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:05 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Probably 20k to start. Quality over quantity. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 8:56 PM, John Woodfield john.woodfi...@jwcn.biz wrote: Patrick, I haven't had time to read through all this emails. Can you summarize what the lowest cost get up and running on a tower is so I can consider this further along with cost per sub? Thanks, John Woodfield, President Delmarva WiFi Inc. 410-870-WiFi -Original Message- From: Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 8:41pm To: af@afmug.com af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan of capping Glen. It is a gimmick. The hardware is what it is, and this hardware is expensive. 30dBm per port. 4 tx/4rx. Power is expensive. The highest quality DSPs on the market. not consumer grade stuff with the sensitivity of your in home Wi-Fi router. We build our own phy from the ground up too, our own ATPC algorithms too. On the software, we do that though -- enabling modularity and scale as you need to. I think I need to do a dedicated webinar to this community to walk you guys (or those inclined) through it (any takers?). I do not think we can be a solution that makes sense where you only have 15 clients. That's the blunt truth. Unless you are doing 50 Mbps customers, I am not your micropop (but I can do that in some modest scale). That said, I wonder where that 15 number comes from? Can you please explain on what architecture that is based? Range? Height? Etc. If it is based on a micropop and even then on what just that pop can see, I'd say that's likely a model invented out of necessity due to the poor performance of the system you are using. I had a guy on a call today. He zoomed me in on Google Earth to his NLOS area. Farmland with wind breaks and shade trees for the homes. He is at 400' and can't connect squat behind those breaks. In my world, that's LOS all the way, even at 150 ft. It is total garbage that so many systems to can't deal with that and you've all been fed that that is normal. It is not. It is just gear with terrible specs where the only RD is at the software level, and even that is scant. You do not have NLOS problems. You have equipment problems. How such a product ever was allowed to go to market as a solution for rural broadband is, to me, cynical and reflective of playing a market to skim opportunistic dollars from a market segment that sometimes seems to embrace abuse. Sort of like the poor 700 MHz owners who got sucked in to buying 20 year old Marconi WipLL repackaged as a 700 MHz solution because all there was to buy. Then vendors do that crap and THEN, THEN tell you there's no backward compatibility when they come out with something new? WISPs. Sometimes you guys drive me nuts. You are like cheerleaders that love to date the quarterbacks who abuse you. That is like selling a car that falls apart once you leave residential streets. None of you should ever have accepted these golf carts to run
Re: [AFMUG] New feedback
I suspect you could pull off omnis then. How's the tree density? Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image001.png@01D0560C.3C21D1B0]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Glen Waldrop Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 10:19 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback The 15 number comes from rural area. I have some towers that can only hit a few homes. Of those few, some still have OTA TV and rotary phones. They have no need nor want for Internet. Don't get hung up on that. I'm looking at probably 4 of these strategically placed in my network to cover any blind spots I might have over my coverage area. I'm not following, capping? Aside from that, this email came off more than a bit condesending. - Original Message - From: Patrick Learymailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 7:41 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan of capping Glen. It is a gimmick. The hardware is what it is, and this hardware is expensive. 30dBm per port. 4 tx/4rx. Power is expensive. The highest quality DSPs on the market. not consumer grade stuff with the sensitivity of your in home Wi-Fi router. We build our own phy from the ground up too, our own ATPC algorithms too. On the software, we do that though -- enabling modularity and scale as you need to. I think I need to do a dedicated webinar to this community to walk you guys (or those inclined) through it (any takers?). I do not think we can be a solution that makes sense where you only have 15 clients. That's the blunt truth. Unless you are doing 50 Mbps customers, I am not your micropop (but I can do that in some modest scale). That said, I wonder where that 15 number comes from? Can you please explain on what architecture that is based? Range? Height? Etc. If it is based on a micropop and even then on what just that pop can see, I'd say that's likely a model invented out of necessity due to the poor performance of the system you are using. I had a guy on a call today. He zoomed me in on Google Earth to his NLOS area. Farmland with wind breaks and shade trees for the homes. He is at 400' and can't connect squat behind those breaks. In my world, that's LOS all the way, even at 150 ft. It is total garbage that so many systems to can't deal with that and you've all been fed that that is normal. It is not. It is just gear with terrible specs where the only RD is at the software level, and even that is scant. You do not have NLOS problems. You have equipment problems. How such a product ever was allowed to go to market as a solution for rural broadband is, to me, cynical and reflective of playing a market to skim opportunistic dollars from a market segment that sometimes seems to embrace abuse. Sort of like the poor 700 MHz owners who got sucked in to buying 20 year old Marconi WipLL repackaged as a 700 MHz solution because all there was to buy. Then vendors do that crap and THEN, THEN tell you there's no backward compatibility when they come out with something new? WISPs. Sometimes you guys drive me nuts. You are like cheerleaders that love to date the quarterbacks who abuse you. That is like selling a car that falls apart once you leave residential streets. None of you should ever have accepted these golf carts to run your fleets. Sometimes, cheap is just cheap. Boy, I'm gonna hear it from my vendor peers, but this ain't a game or just a job for me. I damn sure hope it ain't that for you either. Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D0560C.3C21D1B0]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Glen Waldrop Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:08 PM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Sort of off topic, but what would be the smallest AP we could get? I'm thinking about using this system on a few of my towers to make sure we never leave without a new customer, but I serve a very rural area. I have some towers with 15 clients. Is an omni + GPS sync or narrow channel out of the question? - Original Message - From: Patrick Learymailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com To: tel...@wispa.orgmailto:tel...@wispa.org ; af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 4:42 PM Subject: [AFMUG] New feedback This is an interesting bit of commentary from one of our new customers. If he wishes to identify himself, he will Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D0560C.3C21D1B0]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 2:31 AM To: Patrick Leary; Nick Dewar Subject: Interesting Statistic Patrick / Nick - Our Director of Operations, which you both met in St Louis, sent out an interesting email to our staff this evening. In February with only 20 working days we completed 40 installs with one technician... This is only icing on the cake, especially since we are
Re: [AFMUG] New feedback
No, could be much less. Give me a minute... Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image001.png@01D055F5.E1039040]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:05 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Probably 20k to start. Quality over quantity. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 8:56 PM, John Woodfield john.woodfi...@jwcn.bizmailto:john.woodfi...@jwcn.biz wrote: Patrick, I haven't had time to read through all this emails. Can you summarize what the lowest cost get up and running on a tower is so I can consider this further along with cost per sub? Thanks, John Woodfield, President Delmarva WiFi Inc. 410-870-WiFi -Original Message- From: Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.commailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 8:41pm To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan of capping Glen. It is a gimmick. The hardware is what it is, and this hardware is expensive. 30dBm per port. 4 tx/4rx. Power is expensive. The highest quality DSPs on the market. not consumer grade stuff with the sensitivity of your in home Wi-Fi router. We build our own phy from the ground up too, our own ATPC algorithms too. On the software, we do that though -- enabling modularity and scale as you need to. I think I need to do a dedicated webinar to this community to walk you guys (or those inclined) through it (any takers?). I do not think we can be a solution that makes sense where you only have 15 clients. That's the blunt truth. Unless you are doing 50 Mbps customers, I am not your micropop (but I can do that in some modest scale). That said, I wonder where that 15 number comes from? Can you please explain on what architecture that is based? Range? Height? Etc. If it is based on a micropop and even then on what just that pop can see, I'd say that's likely a model invented out of necessity due to the poor performance of the system you are using. I had a guy on a call today. He zoomed me in on Google Earth to his NLOS area. Farmland with wind breaks and shade trees for the homes. He is at 400' and can't connect squat behind those breaks. In my world, that's LOS all the way, even at 150 ft. It is total garbage that so many systems to can't deal with that and you've all been fed that that is normal. It is not. It is just gear with terrible specs where the only RD is at the software level, and even that is scant. You do not have NLOS problems. You have equipment problems. How such a product ever was allowed to go to market as a solution for rural broadband is, to me, cynical and reflective of playing a market to skim opportunistic dollars from a market segment that sometimes seems to embrace abuse. Sort of like the poor 700 MHz owners who got sucked in to buying 20 year old Marconi WipLL repackaged as a 700 MHz solution because all there was to buy. Then vendors do that crap and THEN, THEN tell you there's no backward compatibility when they come out with something new? WISPs. Sometimes you guys drive me nuts. You are like cheerleaders that love to date the quarterbacks who abuse you. That is like selling a car that falls apart once you leave residential streets. None of you should ever have accepted these golf carts to run your fleets. Sometimes, cheap is just cheap. Boy, I'm gonna hear it from my vendor peers, but this ain't a game or just a job for me. I damn sure hope it ain't that for you either. Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735tel:727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D055F5.E1039040]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.commailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Glen Waldrop Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:08 PM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Sort of off topic, but what would be the smallest AP we could get? I'm thinking about using this system on a few of my towers to make sure we never leave without a new customer, but I serve a very rural area. I have some towers with 15 clients. Is an omni + GPS sync or narrow channel out of the question? - Original Message - From: Patrick Learymailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com To: tel...@wispa.orgmailto:tel...@wispa.org ; af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 4:42 PM Subject: [AFMUG] New feedback This is an interesting bit of commentary from one of our new customers. If he wishes to identify himself, he will Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735tel:727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D055F5.E1039040]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 2:31 AM To: Patrick Leary; Nick Dewar Subject: Interesting Statistic Patrick / Nick – Our Director of Operations, which you both met in St Louis, sent out an interesting email to our
Re: [AFMUG] New feedback
That's a tough nut. You need the power, but not the capacity, and it is the power that cost the money. Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image001.png@01D055F4.F443A740]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of That One Guy Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:56 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback sometimes, in a rural area there are only 15 people who want internet in an area beyond dialup. I dont know what it is they are still even able to do on dialup, but there is still alot of it around here, i dont even know where they get modems these days, but the rural rural market, not rural to and urban area, just sometimes doesnt have a population that wants anything On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 7:41 PM, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.commailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com wrote: Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan of capping Glen. It is a gimmick. The hardware is what it is, and this hardware is expensive. 30dBm per port. 4 tx/4rx. Power is expensive. The highest quality DSPs on the market. not consumer grade stuff with the sensitivity of your in home Wi-Fi router. We build our own phy from the ground up too, our own ATPC algorithms too. On the software, we do that though -- enabling modularity and scale as you need to. I think I need to do a dedicated webinar to this community to walk you guys (or those inclined) through it (any takers?). I do not think we can be a solution that makes sense where you only have 15 clients. That's the blunt truth. Unless you are doing 50 Mbps customers, I am not your micropop (but I can do that in some modest scale). That said, I wonder where that 15 number comes from? Can you please explain on what architecture that is based? Range? Height? Etc. If it is based on a micropop and even then on what just that pop can see, I'd say that's likely a model invented out of necessity due to the poor performance of the system you are using. I had a guy on a call today. He zoomed me in on Google Earth to his NLOS area. Farmland with wind breaks and shade trees for the homes. He is at 400' and can't connect squat behind those breaks. In my world, that's LOS all the way, even at 150 ft. It is total garbage that so many systems to can't deal with that and you've all been fed that that is normal. It is not. It is just gear with terrible specs where the only RD is at the software level, and even that is scant. You do not have NLOS problems. You have equipment problems. How such a product ever was allowed to go to market as a solution for rural broadband is, to me, cynical and reflective of playing a market to skim opportunistic dollars from a market segment that sometimes seems to embrace abuse. Sort of like the poor 700 MHz owners who got sucked in to buying 20 year old Marconi WipLL repackaged as a 700 MHz solution because all there was to buy. Then vendors do that crap and THEN, THEN tell you there's no backward compatibility when they come out with something new? WISPs. Sometimes you guys drive me nuts. You are like cheerleaders that love to date the quarterbacks who abuse you. That is like selling a car that falls apart once you leave residential streets. None of you should ever have accepted these golf carts to run your fleets. Sometimes, cheap is just cheap. Boy, I'm gonna hear it from my vendor peers, but this ain't a game or just a job for me. I damn sure hope it ain't that for you either. Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735tel:727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D055F4.F443A740]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.commailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Glen Waldrop Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 8:08 PM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Sort of off topic, but what would be the smallest AP we could get? I'm thinking about using this system on a few of my towers to make sure we never leave without a new customer, but I serve a very rural area. I have some towers with 15 clients. Is an omni + GPS sync or narrow channel out of the question? - Original Message - From: Patrick Learymailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com To: tel...@wispa.orgmailto:tel...@wispa.org ; af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 4:42 PM Subject: [AFMUG] New feedback This is an interesting bit of commentary from one of our new customers. If he wishes to identify himself, he will Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735tel:727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D055F4.F443A740]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 2:31 AM To: Patrick Leary; Nick Dewar Subject: Interesting Statistic Patrick / Nick – Our Director of Operations, which you both met in St Louis, sent out an interesting email to our staff this evening. In February with only 20 working days we completed 40 installs with one technician... This is only icing on the cake, especially since we are onboarding two more techs... I ran some additional
Re: [AFMUG] About $12k
What is epc? I thought one radio was like 6500 or something ? Where does the other 5500 come from? Antenna and poe? On Mar 3, 2015 6:26 PM, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com wrote: No user limit, just the EPC limit in that form (embedded EPC). I can license those in 50 to 500 user increments. For a centralized EPC, we have 2 gig versions with 1000 user licenses (and a switch w/12 gigE ports and 2 SFPs), and those are hot stackable. *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Jason McKemie *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:21 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] About $12k Is the 50 user limit just a guideline or a software limitation? On Tuesday, March 3, 2015, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com wrote: One BTS, included embedded EPC with MAC level authentication (cheapest option) supporting up to 50 clients. Antenna could be swapped for any other. NOTE: this exclude any NMS pieces, but you could just connect over Telnet or direct connect. This would be the BAREST of bones, but there it is. That's still LTE and about 100 Mbps with killer NLOS. Includes: 735270 CMP.XT-BS-3.4-3.7 1 715773 LTE COMPACT SW License 1 700258 BMAX-4M-GPS 1 300736 ANT 3.3-3.8GHz,18 dBi, 65deg, 4ports (RF cables NOT included) 1 715620 BreezeWay-1010-50 (per Compact HW license) 1 715621 BreezeWay-1010-iHSS-50 (50 subs. license) 1 SLA 1 Year SLA 1 *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Patrick Leary *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:08 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] New feedback No, could be much less. Give me a minute... *Patrick Leary* *M* 727.501.3735 http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:05 PM *To:* af@afmug.com *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Probably 20k to start. Quality over quantity. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 8:56 PM, John Woodfield john.woodfi...@jwcn.biz wrote: Patrick, I haven't had time to read through all this emails. Can you summarize what the lowest cost get up and running on a tower is so I can consider this further along with cost per sub? Thanks, John Woodfield, President Delmarva WiFi Inc. 410-870-WiFi -Original Message- From: Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 8:41pm To: af@afmug.com af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan of capping Glen. It is a gimmick. The hardware is what it is, and this hardware is expensive. 30dBm per port. 4 tx/4rx. Power is expensive. The highest quality DSPs on the market. not consumer grade stuff with the sensitivity of your in home Wi-Fi router. We build our own phy from the ground up too, our own ATPC algorithms too. On the software, we do that though -- enabling modularity and scale as you need to. I think I need to do a dedicated webinar to this community to walk you guys (or those inclined) through it (any takers?). I do not think we can be a solution that makes sense where you only have 15 clients. That's the blunt truth. Unless you are doing 50 Mbps customers, I am not your micropop (but I can do that in some modest scale). That said, I wonder where that 15 number comes from? Can you please explain on what architecture that is based? Range? Height? Etc. If it is based on a micropop and even then on what just that pop can see, I'd say that's likely a model invented out of necessity due to the poor performance of the system you are using. I had a guy on a call today. He zoomed me in on Google Earth to his NLOS area. Farmland with wind breaks and shade trees for the homes. He is at 400' and can't connect squat behind those breaks. In my world, that's LOS all the way, even at 150 ft. It is total garbage that so many systems to can't deal with that and you've all been fed that that is normal. It is not. It is just gear with terrible specs where the only RD is at the software level, and even that is scant. You do not have NLOS problems. You have equipment problems. How such a product ever was allowed to go to market as a solution for rural broadband is, to me, cynical and reflective of playing a market to skim opportunistic dollars from a market segment that sometimes seems to embrace abuse. Sort of like the poor 700 MHz owners who got sucked in to buying 20 year old Marconi WipLL repackaged as a 700 MHz solution because all there was to buy. Then vendors do that crap and THEN, THEN tell you there's no backward compatibility when they come out with something new? WISPs. Sometimes you guys drive me nuts. You are like cheerleaders that
Re: [AFMUG] About $12k
Right now our ramp is so sudden and massive it is taking time to adjust. An exponential increase, literally. We buy components in 90 day cycles. 2 of those cycles back I was quiet as a mouse. I waited until we were closer to LTE. No one, least of me, cares much about WiMAX. Too much to overcome with the crappy WiMAX solutions we'd have had to sell against. Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image001.png@01D055FA.12EF9320]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:26 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] About $12k Cannot keep them in stock? Which one? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 9:20 PM, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.commailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com wrote: Yes, that is correct. And right now I cannot them in stock. Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735tel:727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D055FA.12EF9320]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.commailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:19 PM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] About $12k That's one antenna and no CPEs! Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340tel:937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343tel:937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 9:16 PM, Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.commailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com wrote: One BTS, included embedded EPC with MAC level authentication (cheapest option) supporting up to 50 clients. Antenna could be swapped for any other. NOTE: this exclude any NMS pieces, but you could just connect over Telnet or direct connect. This would be the BAREST of bones, but there it is. That's still LTE and about 100 Mbps with killer NLOS. Includes: 735270 CMP.XT-BS-3.4-3.7 1 715773 LTE COMPACT SW License 1 700258 BMAX-4M-GPS 1 300736 ANT 3.3-3.8GHz,18 dBi, 65deg, 4ports (RF cables NOT included) 1 715620 BreezeWay-1010-50 (per Compact HW license) 1 715621 BreezeWay-1010-iHSS-50 (50 subs. license) 1 SLA 1 Year SLA 1 Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735tel:727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D055FA.12EF9320]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.commailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:08 PM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback No, could be much less. Give me a minute... Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735tel:727.501.3735 [cid:image002.png@01D055FA.12EF9320]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:05 PM To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Probably 20k to start. Quality over quantity. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340tel:937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343tel:937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 3, 2015 8:56 PM, John Woodfield john.woodfi...@jwcn.bizmailto:john.woodfi...@jwcn.biz wrote: Patrick, I haven't had time to read through all this emails. Can you summarize what the lowest cost get up and running on a tower is so I can consider this further along with cost per sub? Thanks, John Woodfield, President Delmarva WiFi Inc. 410-870-WiFi -Original Message- From: Patrick Leary patrick.le...@telrad.commailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 8:41pm To: af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com af@afmug.commailto:af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New feedback Alvarion did that. I admit, I'm not a fan of capping Glen. It is a gimmick. The hardware is what it is, and this hardware is expensive. 30dBm per port. 4 tx/4rx. Power is expensive. The highest quality DSPs on the market. not consumer grade stuff with the sensitivity of your in home Wi-Fi router. We build our own phy from the ground up too, our own ATPC algorithms too. On the software, we do that though -- enabling modularity and scale as you need to. I think I need to do a dedicated webinar to this community to walk you guys (or those inclined) through it (any takers?). I do not think we can be a solution that makes sense where you only have 15 clients. That's the blunt truth. Unless you are doing 50 Mbps customers, I am not your micropop (but I can do that in some modest scale). That said, I wonder where that 15 number comes from? Can you please explain on what architecture that is based? Range? Height? Etc. If it is based on a micropop and even then on what just that pop can see, I'd say that's likely a model invented out of necessity due to the poor performance of the system you are using. I had a guy on a call today. He zoomed me in on Google Earth to his NLOS area. Farmland with wind breaks and shade trees for the homes. He is at 400' and can't connect squat behind those breaks. In my world, that's LOS all the way, even at 150 ft. It is total garbage that so many systems to
