Re: [WISPA] Foreign Antennas
- Original Message - From: "Kurt Fankhauser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2006 1:58 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] Foreign Antennas > Its also illegal for you to drive on a suspended license. At least I > don't drink and drive, especially when there is a U-Haul trailer behind > the vehicle. Yes, it is. I'm glad I don't do that kinda stuff... One has enough trouble staying out of trouble without inviting it... > > > Kurt Fankhauser > WAVELINC > 114 S. Walnut St. > Bucyrus, OH 44820 > 419-562-6405 > www.wavelinc.com > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Mark Koskenmaki > Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 5:20 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Foreign Antennas > > It's also illegal for you to consume alcohol. > > Any list readers care to bet whether he has always followed that law or > not? > > > North East Oregon Fastnet, LLC 509-593-4061 > personal correspondence to: mark at neofast dot net > sales inquiries to: purchasing at neofast dot net > Fast Internet, NO WIRES! > > > - > - Original Message - > From: "Kurt Fankhauser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'WISPA General List'" > Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 5:56 PM > Subject: RE: [WISPA] Foreign Antennas > > > > Antenna has to be certified as long as the radio, and then together > they > > both have to be certified. You could have a certified radio and > antenna > > but if they aren't certified to be used together then its illegal. > > > > Kurt Fankhauser > > WAVELINC > > 114 S. Walnut St. > > Bucyrus, OH 44820 > > 419-562-6405 > > www.wavelinc.com > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On > > Behalf Of Jason Wallace > > Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 1:31 PM > > To: WISPA General List > > Subject: [WISPA] Foreign Antennas > > > > Gang, > > > > I have found several 802.11b antennas produced outside the US that > > I'd like to use. They are not FCC certified, however. Do the > antennas > > need to be fcc certified or just the radios? This is assuming that > all > > the gain/ERP rules are met. > > > > Jason Wallace > > -- > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > > > > -- > > No virus found in this incoming message. > > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > > Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.23/243 - Release Date: > > 1/27/2006 > > > > > > -- > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > -- > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.23/243 - Release Date: > 1/27/2006 > > > -- > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Foreign Antennas
Its also illegal for you to drive on a suspended license. At least I don't drink and drive, especially when there is a U-Haul trailer behind the vehicle. Kurt Fankhauser WAVELINC 114 S. Walnut St. Bucyrus, OH 44820 419-562-6405 www.wavelinc.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Koskenmaki Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 5:20 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Foreign Antennas It's also illegal for you to consume alcohol. Any list readers care to bet whether he has always followed that law or not? North East Oregon Fastnet, LLC 509-593-4061 personal correspondence to: mark at neofast dot net sales inquiries to: purchasing at neofast dot net Fast Internet, NO WIRES! - - Original Message - From: "Kurt Fankhauser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 5:56 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] Foreign Antennas > Antenna has to be certified as long as the radio, and then together they > both have to be certified. You could have a certified radio and antenna > but if they aren't certified to be used together then its illegal. > > Kurt Fankhauser > WAVELINC > 114 S. Walnut St. > Bucyrus, OH 44820 > 419-562-6405 > www.wavelinc.com > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Jason Wallace > Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 1:31 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: [WISPA] Foreign Antennas > > Gang, > > I have found several 802.11b antennas produced outside the US that > I'd like to use. They are not FCC certified, however. Do the antennas > need to be fcc certified or just the radios? This is assuming that all > the gain/ERP rules are met. > > Jason Wallace > -- > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.23/243 - Release Date: > 1/27/2006 > > > -- > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.23/243 - Release Date: 1/27/2006 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Re: 900Mhz Grid vs Yagi
ever notice yagis killing folliage? -- Bob Repeater Kim 2611 s Highway 101 Cardiff CA 92007 206 984 0880 http://evdo-coverage.com/cellular-repeater.html On 1/27/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yagi's performance like crap w/ snow and ice on them though > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf > > Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 > > Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 10:42 AM > > To: WISPA General List > > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 900Mhz Grid vs Yagi > > > > A bit old here But check out: > > > http://www.odessaoffice.com/wireless/antenna/how_to_pick_the_right_antenna.htm > > There are radiation pattern examples there. As a general rule I'd have to > > say that yagi's are quite a bit better than grids. > > > > laters, > > Marlon > > (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales > > (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services > > 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! > > 64.146.146.12 (net meeting) > > www.odessaoffice.com/wireless > > www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Tom DeReggi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "WISPA General List" > > Sent: Monday, November 14, 2005 5:09 PM > > Subject: [WISPA] 900Mhz Grid vs Yagi > > > > > > > > > > PacWireless makes a 900Mhz 18 dbi Parabolic grid antenna. > > > M2 makes a 900Mhz 17.5 dbi Yagi antenna. > > > > > > We had found that 900 was very particular to placement, even a few > inches > > > in one direction or the other can make big differences in link quality. > > > Has anyone used both antenna types for a specific link, to compare the > > > properties of each of the designs. The thought is whether the wider > > > surface area of the parabolic antenna would make it better to survive > > > signal obstruction from swaying trees in forests. The prabolic is a > > > monster at 3 ft dia, s othe Yagi would clearly be a better choice for a > > > roof top chimney install based on cosmetics. But wondering from a > > > performance perspective the comparison. > > > > > > Tom DeReggi > > > RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc > > > IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband > > > > > > -- > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > > > > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > > > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > -- > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > > -- > > Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. > > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > > Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.19/231 - Release Date: > 01/16/2006 > > > > -- > Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.19/231 - Release Date: 01/16/2006 > > > -- > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > -- Robert Q Kim, Wireless Internet Advisor http://evdo-coverage.com/cell-repeater.html http://hsdpa-coverage.com 2611 S. Pacific Coast Highway 101 Suite 102 Cardiff by the Sea, CA 92007 206 984 0880 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3 ft Dual Pol antennas
I could get 3 Horizontal pol 900 antennas back to back on a tower. Great Front to back ratio on them, with sharp cut offs on edges. Atleast by 900Mhz standards. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Matt Liotta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 5:08 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3 ft Dual Pol antennas Tom DeReggi wrote: There may be many on this list including myself, that may not totally understand all the factors to consider in an antenna. With Dual Pol 900 Tilteks, I learned the value, and have no hesitance to pay the price. What was the value? -Matt -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Foreign Antennas
It's also illegal for you to consume alcohol. Any list readers care to bet whether he has always followed that law or not? North East Oregon Fastnet, LLC 509-593-4061 personal correspondence to: mark at neofast dot net sales inquiries to: purchasing at neofast dot net Fast Internet, NO WIRES! - - Original Message - From: "Kurt Fankhauser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 5:56 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] Foreign Antennas > Antenna has to be certified as long as the radio, and then together they > both have to be certified. You could have a certified radio and antenna > but if they aren't certified to be used together then its illegal. > > Kurt Fankhauser > WAVELINC > 114 S. Walnut St. > Bucyrus, OH 44820 > 419-562-6405 > www.wavelinc.com > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Jason Wallace > Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 1:31 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: [WISPA] Foreign Antennas > > Gang, > > I have found several 802.11b antennas produced outside the US that > I'd like to use. They are not FCC certified, however. Do the antennas > need to be fcc certified or just the radios? This is assuming that all > the gain/ERP rules are met. > > Jason Wallace > -- > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.23/243 - Release Date: > 1/27/2006 > > > -- > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Foreign Antennas
Antenna has to be certified as long as the radio, and then together they both have to be certified. You could have a certified radio and antenna but if they aren't certified to be used together then its illegal. Kurt Fankhauser WAVELINC 114 S. Walnut St. Bucyrus, OH 44820 419-562-6405 www.wavelinc.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jason Wallace Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 1:31 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Foreign Antennas Gang, I have found several 802.11b antennas produced outside the US that I'd like to use. They are not FCC certified, however. Do the antennas need to be fcc certified or just the radios? This is assuming that all the gain/ERP rules are met. Jason Wallace -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.23/243 - Release Date: 1/27/2006 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] EtherAnt - Outdoor Ethernet Splice
I have spent hours on the phone telling everyone from technicians to the CEO of Terabeam to please get rid of those connectors. IMHO, they are cheap and get very brittle when cold. I did the same thing as Mark. I bought a bag of connectors a few years back and started making them ourselves. That lasted about two months and we bagged that idea and found a better solution with a removable backplate that we could remove and run the ethernet directly into the integrated circuit board. I figured Terabeam must have bought several hundred thousand of those ends and wanted to use them up before they made any changes. Now they don't hardly have a usable product to sell, so I guess that inventory will last much longer than they expected. BTW, I probably still have about 50 of those ends if anyone needs some. Rick Harnish President OnlyInternet Broadband & Wireless, Inc. 260-827-2482 Office 260-307-4000 Cell 260-918-4340 VoIP www.oibw.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Nash Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 2:00 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] EtherAnt - Outdoor Ethernet Splice Yeah...talk about CREATING revenue for yourself...YOU decided to use that connector, and now YOU are going to charge me through the YANG to use them. It's like the mafia offering us 'protection'. But you know...I wouldn't go so far as to add the transvestite option...I have my limits and you'll just have to trust me as to why or where or with whom & whatnot. ;) Maybe a living snake... Mark Nash Network Engineer UnwiredOnline.Net 350 Holly Street Junction City, OR 97448 541-998- 541-998-5599 fax http://www.uwol.net - Original Message - From: "Mac Dearman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 10:55 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] EtherAnt - Outdoor Ethernet Splice > You are a fine guy Mark! Thanks a million. > > I agree that YDI ought to have been be shot down, stripped and dragged > through town naked behind a 4 wheeler with a New Orleans transvestite > dancing on the back for the prices that they have charged for that > fitting.Really just for using that fitting :-) > > Mac Dearman > Maximum Access, LLC. > Authorized Barracuda Reseller > MikroTik RouterOS Certified > www.inetsouth.com > www.mac-tel.us > Rayville, La. > 318.728.8600 > 318.303.4227 > 318.303.4229 > > > > > > Mark Nash wrote: > > > For those of you who are needing to transition away from Terabeam > > products with the round, 6-conductor outdoor connector to a standard > > RJ45, I have found my plan to do it. I'm going to make pigtails that > > will connect to that connector. > > > > If you don't know, the connector is made by SwitchCraft, their EN3 > > Mini Weathertight Series. Since the beginning of the EtherAnt product > > line, YDI/Terabeam has been charging extreme amounts for these cables > > ($50 for 25-foot cable, $100 for 75-foot...go figure on that one-it's > > just some extra outdoor cat5 cable so where's the cost? I told Mr. > > Young 4 years ago that it was unethical to charge that much for the > > longer lengths.) So we bought about 5 cables in the beginning then > > found the connector and have been making them ourselves ever since, > > saving about $40 per 25-foot cable. > > > > Problem is that while they DO make a crimp connector, it's not meant > > for conductors as small as a cat5 conductor. So we solder them onto > > the cable on the spool...either in the truck at the install or at the > > shop. > > > > Well I've digressed...the point is that there is an in-line > > weathertight RECEPTACLE to this plug. So I'm going to make pigtails > > with them and use them when I swap out the EtherAnt products. They > > also make a bulkhead "Panel Mount" receptable. > > > > Even though they are 'weathertight', we still tape them. > > > > I get the plugs from the vendor I use the most, StreakWave > > http://www.streakwave.com. > > > > You can get them at Digi-Key http://www.digikey.com. > > > > Here are the SwitchCraft part numbers that I use: > > > > Plug: EN3C6M > > In-line Receptable: EN3L6F > > Panel Mount Receptacle: EN3P6F > > > > I've attached a pin-out image for cat5 cable into the PLUG for making > > the CPE cable. RECEPTACLE would obviously mirror this. This pin-out > > is standard amongst all YDI/Terabeam/Now Proxim products that use this > > plug. > > > > These two products together will make the 'Outdoor Ethernet Splice > > possible as well, but soldering on a ladder is no fun. I'm trying > > another product for that (discussed on this list a week ago or so). > > > > Mark Nash > > Network Engineer > > UnwiredOnline.Net > > 325 Holly Street > > Junction City, OR 97448 > > http://www.uwol.net > > 541-998- > > 541-998-5599 fax > > > > > > > -- > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http
Re: [WISPA] 3 ft Dual Pol antennas
Tom DeReggi wrote: There may be many on this list including myself, that may not totally understand all the factors to consider in an antenna. With Dual Pol 900 Tilteks, I learned the value, and have no hesitance to pay the price. What was the value? -Matt -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] 3 ft Dual Pol antennas
Well that's true, It's also dependant on the technology that you are using, the antenna is only one part. Dustin -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 4:11 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3 ft Dual Pol antennas Dustin, >It's disturbing that you take offense when someone makes a profit for >building a better product You have misunderstood. No offense was taken. My point was that just because it has a higher price tag does not make it a better antenna. Many people assume a name brand means better, which rarely is the case, it just means they spend more money on marketing. Also, I just questioned, what value should be given to a product of a higher price. If I pay twice the price, do I get twice the benefit from the product? In andrews case, a better mount does not add value for me, as the competitor mount is already good enough. Travis, Posted an interesting point about the Drum design antenna, that added a much ,arger value for him, getting rid of truck rolls to the top of the mountain every time it snows daily. I'd pay an extra $300 for that benefit any day of the week. I don't mind paying more for value. I just expect to understand clearly what that value is, and I need that value to be proven. There may be many on this list including myself, that may not totally understand all the factors to consider in an antenna. With Dual Pol 900 Tilteks, I learned the value, and have no hesitance to pay the price. We've discussed many reasons, why one antenna could be better than another, however, not all the antennas we have discussed as a overly priced antenna possessesthose higher quality traits. I've considered using Andrews, because the extra, 2 db gain, but I wanted to know that was infact the case. Manufacturers often do exadurate their spec sheets. You never know. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "dustin jurman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 1:02 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] 3 ft Dual Pol antennas > So if I read this correctly, I guess you drive a VW bug. (I hope that got > a > big laugh after your rant) > > I think the point was made in an earlier email that quality and > performance > go hand in hand but don't take my word on it, This is an excellent project > for Charles to do in the next WINOG that I plan to attend. > > While pure gain is a small part of the equation, how clean the frequency > is > received is another, What about Front to back ratio's? I have two Spectra > radio's collocated on the same tower on the same freq at the same height > on > some 3 foot dishes. (Ok they are 20 feet apart! But horizontal not > vertical). But Spectra/Moto300's are super sensitive so they hear a lot > more than the standard 802.11a radio. > > You really can see dish quality with the Orthogon/moto radio's because > they > give you so much information on how the signal is received over a generic > RSSI or DBM level. Charles are you listening? A lot of value can be > taken > from this rant. > > Lastly since you are really broaching a few different subjects, if you > want > to talk about value of your services and time we should start another > thread. It's disturbing that you take offense when someone makes a profit > for building a better product. At a time when ISP's should be going > wireless > or deploying their own network why do you want to compete with the LEC? > > Tom, I'll buy you a beer at ISPCON - I love productive threads. > > Dustin Jurman > President > Rapid Systems Corporation > 1211 N. Westshore Blvd > Tampa, FL 33607 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Tom DeReggi > Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 7:13 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3 ft Dual Pol antennas > > Dustin, > > Your point is well taken, and I agree not all complete packages are > created > equal. > > However, 2 points > > 1) I never had a Pac Wireless dish move on me yet. So there is nothing > wrong > with being cheaper and cheesier, if its good enough for the job. > > 2) Product is cheap to manufacturer in quantity. man hours (labor)on the > other hand isn't, expecially mine. No matter how much volume I do, my > labor > doesn;t get cheaper, I'd argue that my labor rate goes up the more work I > have, because its in finite supply, unlike product that has an infinite > supply. > > My point is, my job is to put money in my pocket, or pass the savings on > to > my subscribers, not to put money in the pocket of a manufacturer that over > engineers. Its like the restaurants that attract people by givingthem > these > huge platefulls of food, that rarely can ever be eaten in full, and half > of > goes in the trash can. I'd rather save a dollar, than pay for waste. > >
[WISPA] Foreign Antennas
Gang, I have found several 802.11b antennas produced outside the US that I'd like to use. They are not FCC certified, however. Do the antennas need to be fcc certified or just the radios? This is assuming that all the gain/ERP rules are met. Jason Wallace -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Multiple Radios on Single antenna
Moto300/Orthogons can do dual payload so you need both polarities to achieve 300 megs. DSJ -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 3:52 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Multiple Radios on Single antenna > What are the advantages of using > both polarities for the same signal in a good LOS environment? There isn't. But having one on standby means, that when someone deploys on that channel/pol, in seconds you can switch polarities, to get past it. Broadcasting on DualPols, does have benefits in NLOS environments. However, the antenna design is more critical for transmitting on both at the same time. Often the Dual Pol antenna is used to create Circular polarity, such as the higher end Proxim Dual Pol gear. Or Orthogon that may compare signals to self correct them. Tom DeReggi > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi > Sent: 17 January 2006 18:08 > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Multiple Radios on Single antenna > > I'm not saying there isn;t a benefit now and then sharing a Dual pol > antenna > > between two freqs, otherwise nobody would make them. BUt > > We have found most tower agreements also, have restrictions in the > agreement > > that disallow using multiple radios our spectrum ranges on the > antennas without paying for that as a second antenna, even though > taking up only one antenna position. > > We found that its just as easy to sneak/put up a second antenna, > without managers knowledge as it is to put up a dual freq antenna > without them knowing. So normally you gotta pay regardless, if you do > it honestly. It becomes an issue of wether you are honest about what you put up, versus > sneaking up extra options without paying. Wether its spectrum or > antennas > is irrelevant. Most tower owners don't audit their sides regularly > because its jsut to expensive and even if they do, the auditors often > are over worked, and don't always check thouroughly what they are > required to supposed to check. Most colocators also aren't short on > antenna space, so they are really charging you based on the value you > are receiving being there, not really the actually antenna space. > Although special cases do apply such as with windload requirement of > over weighted towers or towers like clock tower that have a limited > number of window openings for the antennas. > > I also find saving money isn't that much of a savings because the > antenna makers then also charge more for the dual pol antennas to > counter most of your planned savings. > > However, saving on time, clearly is an option, with only one antenna > to carry and bolt up. However you may run into issues, where the > alignment of the antennas may need to be varied to get optimal signal > based on wether you > > are aligning for 5.8 or 2.4. So because we like to engineer for > OPTIMAL signal, apposed to compromised mostly best signal, we prefer > to use seperate > > antennas. > > As a disclaimer: We pay for all our colocated antennas at our cell > sites, and we do that because we honor our tower relationships, and > have negotiated > > good terms, and do not want to abuse the trust they have in us, so we > maintain good relations. I mention sneaking up antennas only because, > every > > once in a while, we may have sneaked up an antenna to do the inital > testing (which often requires it left there for a few days), so that > we can avoid the lengthly antenna request process and timely paper > work until after we are certain that the link is doable and tested. > We justify sneaking the antenna up, because not only are we saving us > time, we also are saving the management a lot of time, preventing the > need to do paperwork unnecessarilly, if we are unsuccessful in pulling > off the link we > engineered. I do not advise attempting to pull one over on Management > companies. If the Management company does not care what spectrum gets > used, and charging just for the antenna space, the more power to you > for being smarter. > > Tom DeReggi > RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc > IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband > > > - Original Message - > From: "Chadd Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2006 10:30 AM > Subject: RE: [WISPA] Multiple Radios on Single antenna > > >> Who sells dual band antennas? That could save some money on tower >> space and simplify some installations. >> >> Thanks, >> Chadd >> >> -Original Message- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Behalf Of Tom DeReggi >> Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2006 9:19 AM >> To: WISPA General List >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Multiple Radios on Single antenna >> >> >> . However, I am aware of many successfuly using 2.4 and 5.8 from the >> same antenna. >> >> >> -- >> No vir
Re: [WISPA] 3 ft Dual Pol antennas
Dustin, It's disturbing that you take offense when someone makes a profit for building a better product You have misunderstood. No offense was taken. My point was that just because it has a higher price tag does not make it a better antenna. Many people assume a name brand means better, which rarely is the case, it just means they spend more money on marketing. Also, I just questioned, what value should be given to a product of a higher price. If I pay twice the price, do I get twice the benefit from the product? In andrews case, a better mount does not add value for me, as the competitor mount is already good enough. Travis, Posted an interesting point about the Drum design antenna, that added a much ,arger value for him, getting rid of truck rolls to the top of the mountain every time it snows daily. I'd pay an extra $300 for that benefit any day of the week. I don't mind paying more for value. I just expect to understand clearly what that value is, and I need that value to be proven. There may be many on this list including myself, that may not totally understand all the factors to consider in an antenna. With Dual Pol 900 Tilteks, I learned the value, and have no hesitance to pay the price. We've discussed many reasons, why one antenna could be better than another, however, not all the antennas we have discussed as a overly priced antenna possessesthose higher quality traits. I've considered using Andrews, because the extra, 2 db gain, but I wanted to know that was infact the case. Manufacturers often do exadurate their spec sheets. You never know. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "dustin jurman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 1:02 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] 3 ft Dual Pol antennas So if I read this correctly, I guess you drive a VW bug. (I hope that got a big laugh after your rant) I think the point was made in an earlier email that quality and performance go hand in hand but don't take my word on it, This is an excellent project for Charles to do in the next WINOG that I plan to attend. While pure gain is a small part of the equation, how clean the frequency is received is another, What about Front to back ratio's? I have two Spectra radio's collocated on the same tower on the same freq at the same height on some 3 foot dishes. (Ok they are 20 feet apart! But horizontal not vertical). But Spectra/Moto300's are super sensitive so they hear a lot more than the standard 802.11a radio. You really can see dish quality with the Orthogon/moto radio's because they give you so much information on how the signal is received over a generic RSSI or DBM level. Charles are you listening? A lot of value can be taken from this rant. Lastly since you are really broaching a few different subjects, if you want to talk about value of your services and time we should start another thread. It's disturbing that you take offense when someone makes a profit for building a better product. At a time when ISP's should be going wireless or deploying their own network why do you want to compete with the LEC? Tom, I'll buy you a beer at ISPCON - I love productive threads. Dustin Jurman President Rapid Systems Corporation 1211 N. Westshore Blvd Tampa, FL 33607 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 7:13 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3 ft Dual Pol antennas Dustin, Your point is well taken, and I agree not all complete packages are created equal. However, 2 points 1) I never had a Pac Wireless dish move on me yet. So there is nothing wrong with being cheaper and cheesier, if its good enough for the job. 2) Product is cheap to manufacturer in quantity. man hours (labor)on the other hand isn't, expecially mine. No matter how much volume I do, my labor doesn;t get cheaper, I'd argue that my labor rate goes up the more work I have, because its in finite supply, unlike product that has an infinite supply. My point is, my job is to put money in my pocket, or pass the savings on to my subscribers, not to put money in the pocket of a manufacturer that over engineers. Its like the restaurants that attract people by givingthem these huge platefulls of food, that rarely can ever be eaten in full, and half of goes in the trash can. I'd rather save a dollar, than pay for waste. We need cost effective alternatives for product. The most cost effective vendors will sell more product. Its the nature of the world we live in. There's no room for fat, in todays competitive world. However, with that said, I am one to pay for quality, when there is in fact additional value delivered worth paying for, apposed to the fabrocation that quality is added based on name brand recognition. For example, my experience wi
Re: [WISPA] Multiple Radios on Single antenna
What are the advantages of using both polarities for the same signal in a good LOS environment? There isn't. But having one on standby means, that when someone deploys on that channel/pol, in seconds you can switch polarities, to get past it. Broadcasting on DualPols, does have benefits in NLOS environments. However, the antenna design is more critical for transmitting on both at the same time. Often the Dual Pol antenna is used to create Circular polarity, such as the higher end Proxim Dual Pol gear. Or Orthogon that may compare signals to self correct them. Tom DeReggi -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: 17 January 2006 18:08 To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Multiple Radios on Single antenna I'm not saying there isn;t a benefit now and then sharing a Dual pol antenna between two freqs, otherwise nobody would make them. BUt We have found most tower agreements also, have restrictions in the agreement that disallow using multiple radios our spectrum ranges on the antennas without paying for that as a second antenna, even though taking up only one antenna position. We found that its just as easy to sneak/put up a second antenna, without managers knowledge as it is to put up a dual freq antenna without them knowing. So normally you gotta pay regardless, if you do it honestly. It becomes an issue of wether you are honest about what you put up, versus sneaking up extra options without paying. Wether its spectrum or antennas is irrelevant. Most tower owners don't audit their sides regularly because its jsut to expensive and even if they do, the auditors often are over worked, and don't always check thouroughly what they are required to supposed to check. Most colocators also aren't short on antenna space, so they are really charging you based on the value you are receiving being there, not really the actually antenna space. Although special cases do apply such as with windload requirement of over weighted towers or towers like clock tower that have a limited number of window openings for the antennas. I also find saving money isn't that much of a savings because the antenna makers then also charge more for the dual pol antennas to counter most of your planned savings. However, saving on time, clearly is an option, with only one antenna to carry and bolt up. However you may run into issues, where the alignment of the antennas may need to be varied to get optimal signal based on wether you are aligning for 5.8 or 2.4. So because we like to engineer for OPTIMAL signal, apposed to compromised mostly best signal, we prefer to use seperate antennas. As a disclaimer: We pay for all our colocated antennas at our cell sites, and we do that because we honor our tower relationships, and have negotiated good terms, and do not want to abuse the trust they have in us, so we maintain good relations. I mention sneaking up antennas only because, every once in a while, we may have sneaked up an antenna to do the inital testing (which often requires it left there for a few days), so that we can avoid the lengthly antenna request process and timely paper work until after we are certain that the link is doable and tested. We justify sneaking the antenna up, because not only are we saving us time, we also are saving the management a lot of time, preventing the need to do paperwork unnecessarilly, if we are unsuccessful in pulling off the link we engineered. I do not advise attempting to pull one over on Management companies. If the Management company does not care what spectrum gets used, and charging just for the antenna space, the more power to you for being smarter. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Chadd Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2006 10:30 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] Multiple Radios on Single antenna Who sells dual band antennas? That could save some money on tower space and simplify some installations. Thanks, Chadd -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2006 9:19 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Multiple Radios on Single antenna . However, I am aware of many successfuly using 2.4 and 5.8 from the same antenna. -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.19/231 - Release Date: 1/16/2006 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Ch
Re: [WISPA] EtherAnt - Outdoor Ethernet Splice
Yeah...talk about CREATING revenue for yourself...YOU decided to use that connector, and now YOU are going to charge me through the YANG to use them. It's like the mafia offering us 'protection'. But you know...I wouldn't go so far as to add the transvestite option...I have my limits and you'll just have to trust me as to why or where or with whom & whatnot. ;) Maybe a living snake... Mark Nash Network Engineer UnwiredOnline.Net 350 Holly Street Junction City, OR 97448 541-998- 541-998-5599 fax http://www.uwol.net - Original Message - From: "Mac Dearman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 10:55 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] EtherAnt - Outdoor Ethernet Splice > You are a fine guy Mark! Thanks a million. > > I agree that YDI ought to have been be shot down, stripped and dragged > through town naked behind a 4 wheeler with a New Orleans transvestite > dancing on the back for the prices that they have charged for that > fitting.Really just for using that fitting :-) > > Mac Dearman > Maximum Access, LLC. > Authorized Barracuda Reseller > MikroTik RouterOS Certified > www.inetsouth.com > www.mac-tel.us > Rayville, La. > 318.728.8600 > 318.303.4227 > 318.303.4229 > > > > > > Mark Nash wrote: > > > For those of you who are needing to transition away from Terabeam > > products with the round, 6-conductor outdoor connector to a standard > > RJ45, I have found my plan to do it. I'm going to make pigtails that > > will connect to that connector. > > > > If you don't know, the connector is made by SwitchCraft, their EN3 > > Mini Weathertight Series. Since the beginning of the EtherAnt product > > line, YDI/Terabeam has been charging extreme amounts for these cables > > ($50 for 25-foot cable, $100 for 75-foot...go figure on that one-it's > > just some extra outdoor cat5 cable so where's the cost? I told Mr. > > Young 4 years ago that it was unethical to charge that much for the > > longer lengths.) So we bought about 5 cables in the beginning then > > found the connector and have been making them ourselves ever since, > > saving about $40 per 25-foot cable. > > > > Problem is that while they DO make a crimp connector, it's not meant > > for conductors as small as a cat5 conductor. So we solder them onto > > the cable on the spool...either in the truck at the install or at the > > shop. > > > > Well I've digressed...the point is that there is an in-line > > weathertight RECEPTACLE to this plug. So I'm going to make pigtails > > with them and use them when I swap out the EtherAnt products. They > > also make a bulkhead "Panel Mount" receptable. > > > > Even though they are 'weathertight', we still tape them. > > > > I get the plugs from the vendor I use the most, StreakWave > > http://www.streakwave.com. > > > > You can get them at Digi-Key http://www.digikey.com. > > > > Here are the SwitchCraft part numbers that I use: > > > > Plug: EN3C6M > > In-line Receptable: EN3L6F > > Panel Mount Receptacle: EN3P6F > > > > I've attached a pin-out image for cat5 cable into the PLUG for making > > the CPE cable. RECEPTACLE would obviously mirror this. This pin-out > > is standard amongst all YDI/Terabeam/Now Proxim products that use this > > plug. > > > > These two products together will make the 'Outdoor Ethernet Splice > > possible as well, but soldering on a ladder is no fun. I'm trying > > another product for that (discussed on this list a week ago or so). > > > > Mark Nash > > Network Engineer > > UnwiredOnline.Net > > 325 Holly Street > > Junction City, OR 97448 > > http://www.uwol.net > > 541-998- > > 541-998-5599 fax > > > > > > > -- > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] EtherAnt - Outdoor Ethernet Splice
You are a fine guy Mark! Thanks a million. I agree that YDI ought to have been be shot down, stripped and dragged through town naked behind a 4 wheeler with a New Orleans transvestite dancing on the back for the prices that they have charged for that fitting.Really just for using that fitting :-) Mac Dearman Maximum Access, LLC. Authorized Barracuda Reseller MikroTik RouterOS Certified www.inetsouth.com www.mac-tel.us Rayville, La. 318.728.8600 318.303.4227 318.303.4229 Mark Nash wrote: For those of you who are needing to transition away from Terabeam products with the round, 6-conductor outdoor connector to a standard RJ45, I have found my plan to do it. I'm going to make pigtails that will connect to that connector. If you don't know, the connector is made by SwitchCraft, their EN3 Mini Weathertight Series. Since the beginning of the EtherAnt product line, YDI/Terabeam has been charging extreme amounts for these cables ($50 for 25-foot cable, $100 for 75-foot...go figure on that one-it's just some extra outdoor cat5 cable so where's the cost? I told Mr. Young 4 years ago that it was unethical to charge that much for the longer lengths.) So we bought about 5 cables in the beginning then found the connector and have been making them ourselves ever since, saving about $40 per 25-foot cable. Problem is that while they DO make a crimp connector, it's not meant for conductors as small as a cat5 conductor. So we solder them onto the cable on the spool...either in the truck at the install or at the shop. Well I've digressed...the point is that there is an in-line weathertight RECEPTACLE to this plug. So I'm going to make pigtails with them and use them when I swap out the EtherAnt products. They also make a bulkhead "Panel Mount" receptable. Even though they are 'weathertight', we still tape them. I get the plugs from the vendor I use the most, StreakWave http://www.streakwave.com. You can get them at Digi-Key http://www.digikey.com. Here are the SwitchCraft part numbers that I use: Plug: EN3C6M In-line Receptable: EN3L6F Panel Mount Receptacle: EN3P6F I've attached a pin-out image for cat5 cable into the PLUG for making the CPE cable. RECEPTACLE would obviously mirror this. This pin-out is standard amongst all YDI/Terabeam/Now Proxim products that use this plug. These two products together will make the 'Outdoor Ethernet Splice possible as well, but soldering on a ladder is no fun. I'm trying another product for that (discussed on this list a week ago or so). Mark Nash Network Engineer UnwiredOnline.Net 325 Holly Street Junction City, OR 97448 http://www.uwol.net 541-998- 541-998-5599 fax -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] EtherAnt - Outdoor Ethernet Splice
For those of you who are needing to transition away from Terabeam products with the round, 6-conductor outdoor connector to a standard RJ45, I have found my plan to do it. I'm going to make pigtails that will connect to that connector. If you don't know, the connector is made by SwitchCraft, their EN3 Mini Weathertight Series. Since the beginning of the EtherAnt product line, YDI/Terabeam has been charging extreme amounts for these cables ($50 for 25-foot cable, $100 for 75-foot...go figure on that one-it's just some extra outdoor cat5 cable so where's the cost? I told Mr. Young 4 years ago that it was unethical to charge that much for the longer lengths.) So we bought about 5 cables in the beginning then found the connector and have been making them ourselves ever since, saving about $40 per 25-foot cable. Problem is that while they DO make a crimp connector, it's not meant for conductors as small as a cat5 conductor. So we solder them onto the cable on the spool...either in the truck at the install or at the shop. Well I've digressed...the point is that there is an in-line weathertight RECEPTACLE to this plug. So I'm going to make pigtails with them and use them when I swap out the EtherAnt products. They also make a bulkhead "Panel Mount" receptable. Even though they are 'weathertight', we still tape them. I get the plugs from the vendor I use the most, StreakWave http://www.streakwave.com. You can get them at Digi-Key http://www.digikey.com. Here are the SwitchCraft part numbers that I use: Plug: EN3C6M In-line Receptable: EN3L6F Panel Mount Receptacle: EN3P6F I've attached a pin-out image for cat5 cable into the PLUG for making the CPE cable. RECEPTACLE would obviously mirror this. This pin-out is standard amongst all YDI/Terabeam/Now Proxim products that use this plug. These two products together will make the 'Outdoor Ethernet Splice possible as well, but soldering on a ladder is no fun. I'm trying another product for that (discussed on this list a week ago or so). Mark Nash Network Engineer UnwiredOnline.Net 325 Holly Street Junction City, OR 97448 http://www.uwol.net 541-998- 541-998-5599 fax <> -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] 3 ft Dual Pol antennas
So if I read this correctly, I guess you drive a VW bug. (I hope that got a big laugh after your rant) I think the point was made in an earlier email that quality and performance go hand in hand but don't take my word on it, This is an excellent project for Charles to do in the next WINOG that I plan to attend. While pure gain is a small part of the equation, how clean the frequency is received is another, What about Front to back ratio's? I have two Spectra radio's collocated on the same tower on the same freq at the same height on some 3 foot dishes. (Ok they are 20 feet apart! But horizontal not vertical). But Spectra/Moto300's are super sensitive so they hear a lot more than the standard 802.11a radio. You really can see dish quality with the Orthogon/moto radio's because they give you so much information on how the signal is received over a generic RSSI or DBM level. Charles are you listening? A lot of value can be taken from this rant. Lastly since you are really broaching a few different subjects, if you want to talk about value of your services and time we should start another thread. It's disturbing that you take offense when someone makes a profit for building a better product. At a time when ISP's should be going wireless or deploying their own network why do you want to compete with the LEC? Tom, I'll buy you a beer at ISPCON - I love productive threads. Dustin Jurman President Rapid Systems Corporation 1211 N. Westshore Blvd Tampa, FL 33607 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 7:13 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3 ft Dual Pol antennas Dustin, Your point is well taken, and I agree not all complete packages are created equal. However, 2 points 1) I never had a Pac Wireless dish move on me yet. So there is nothing wrong with being cheaper and cheesier, if its good enough for the job. 2) Product is cheap to manufacturer in quantity. man hours (labor)on the other hand isn't, expecially mine. No matter how much volume I do, my labor doesn;t get cheaper, I'd argue that my labor rate goes up the more work I have, because its in finite supply, unlike product that has an infinite supply. My point is, my job is to put money in my pocket, or pass the savings on to my subscribers, not to put money in the pocket of a manufacturer that over engineers. Its like the restaurants that attract people by givingthem these huge platefulls of food, that rarely can ever be eaten in full, and half of goes in the trash can. I'd rather save a dollar, than pay for waste. We need cost effective alternatives for product. The most cost effective vendors will sell more product. Its the nature of the world we live in. There's no room for fat, in todays competitive world. However, with that said, I am one to pay for quality, when there is in fact additional value delivered worth paying for, apposed to the fabrocation that quality is added based on name brand recognition. For example, my experience with Radiowaves has been nothing but the best from a customer service point of view, and may be worth paying more for, for some people. However for me, their antennas have shown to under perform, and not worth the higher cost on service alone. I'll be buying a few Andrew's 3 ft dishes soon, but its not because of quality, its because I found a distributor that will give me a good price, compared to the alternatives. On a side note, Andrews does spec, about 2 db higher in gain that competitors on the 3 ft Dual Pol antenna. Dustin, Have you confirmed wether the Andrews 3 ft dishes really deliver the 2 db extra gain (34 db)? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Matt Liotta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2006 2:27 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3 ft Dual Pol antennas > When you compare the Andrew and Gabriel mounts there is no doubt the > Andrew mount is more substantial, but it also appears to be over > engineered for a relatively small dish. We prefer the Gabriel mounts over > the Andrew since they are lighter and easier to work with, but not too > light like Pacwireless. The Andrew and Gabriel mounts also have superior > fine adjustment capabilities compared to Pacwireless. > > -Matt > > dustin jurman wrote: > >>Tom, >> >>You cannot forget that there are big differences in quality, it's not just >>the dish but the mount as well. As we utilize almost everything that you >>list here with the exception of PAC Wireless there is a huge difference in >>quality between Andrew and Gabriel quick fires. While the Gabriel might >>be >>the best value, it has the Chester cheese doodle mount when compared to >>that >>of an Andrew. >>Dustin Jurman >>President >>Rapid Systems Corporation >>1211 N. Westshore Blvd >>Tampa, FL 33607 >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>813-232-48
Re: [WISPA] M5580 feedback and Dish mounting help
Now on a serious note, the real problem I forecast with this is on 5.3 ghz and OFDM where you cant use a dish Currently Trango is not shipping or has not released a 5.3Ghz version of their Atlas Fox. Maybe thats why? They realize there is not enough power to pull it off based on antenna size? That was a disappointment to me, I was hoping they would have added 5.2G - 5.8Ghz antennas standard to the Atlas Fox so it would have been a Dual Freq Radio. Unfortuneately its not :-( However, Who says you can't use a dish on 5.3Ghz? Its allowed. Thats the beauty of the ability to lower radio power. Wether Trango makes a version with an optimized int antenna is another story. It would be interesting to see how much gain we got out of the Trango Dish, it uses the same mount bracket as the 5.8G. The higher gain seperate radio still can be used with the DSS dish, it just does not get max signal from it, as the beamwidth does not extend the full width of the dish. Any one try it yet? On a side note, If comparing Trango to Canopy... This same problem applies to Canopy. The reason Trango lowered the Antenna gain, is that it needs a wider beam width in order to get the full reflected signal from the dish Its an identical design limit of the Canopy, where they try to share one radio with or without dish, and not cables. Trango originally tried to have two seperate models for optimal options for buyers, but they are attempting to combine them, to reduce number of types of radios to manufacture and stock for mutual benefit. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc - Original Message - From: "G.Villarini" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2006 8:20 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] M5580 feedback and Dish mounting help Jejeje the 60x60 cpe trango antenna! Canopy anyone? Now on a serious note, the real problem I forecast with this is on 5.3 ghz and OFDM where you cant use a dish Gino A. Villarini, Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.aeronetpr.com 787.273.4143 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 3:15 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] M5580 feedback and Dish mounting help The Trango M5580 is a great product and been working well from a stability perspective and price point, and glqd to have it as an option. However, there are several challenges to deal with. There are two negatives that creates a third. 1) 8 db int antenna, so 7 db less than Fox5800. 2) No longer supports RF Threshhold command. The range drops down to two miles, giving you a -74 signal, more easilly able to survive the noise using DSSS. However when upgraded to OFDM, I'm concerned about the low gain of the radio being able to survive the noise with adequate singal to noise threshold. I'm guessing the range will be more like 1 mile to have high enough signal to support the high modulations. Unless of course the dish install is used. This is where we make a savings. Using a inexpensive M5580 w/ dish apposed to Fox-D. The foxes without the dish was convenient because we could mount lower, on the side of the wall or under eves. Now we are in most cases goingto be required to mount on the roof or on the side of the house at the peak. I hate drilling down into the roof, for water proof liability reasons, but its likely that may have to start happening. What we are finding is that most of the houses we are targeting, we are finding that the peaks are taller than our 30 ft ladders can reach, and often taller than our 40 foot ladders can reach. We are also finding our underserved area, are larger homes with very steep peaked roofs, causing safety issues. We often will carry a 20 ft section of ladder with hooks, and lift it onto the peak as our method to climb. But when the edge of the roof is up 30 feeet, its scary pulling the ladder up, to lift onto the roof. Clearly a two man job, that takes care. What we are finding that we are doing instead, is we are finding a way up to the peak of the roof, and then we straddle the peak so we can safely manuver to the side edge where we mount a Pole (with M-mount and contilever mount), and have DSS dish extend over the roof line. Its can be difficult hangling down over the edge to mount the bottom cross bar to stablize the pole. So my question is, how are people optimizing this process? I know some one makes a pre-made kit in steel, for this type of mount, without needing to cut 2x4s. Whats the best place to find these mounts, and what thickness do they need to be to adequately support the Fox Dishes? I need to make the determination if we can cost effectively still mount to the side of the house easilly for these installations, or if we have to lower ourselves to Cable TV standard, and screw through the roof :-( And at what point we are better off staying with Fox5800 SUs, apposed to the timely and
Re: [WISPA] USF tax changes?
- Original Message - From: "Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 7:37 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] USF tax changes? > I had a call the other day from someone at the Congressional Budget Office. > It *looks* like there is a move afoot to expand USF to broadband. > > I believe this would only be a good thing for the market. > > Out here the telco gets $109 per month per phone line. And they require a > phone line for DSL service. > > So $15 per phone line. > $30 per dsl. > $109 per line in usf funds. > > Nearly $160 per month per sub. And I get $35. Oh joy! > > Now if I could get $109 too! At nearly 300 subs today Man could I put > in a nice network! And afford to go where others aren't going yet. > > And the value of a wisp would REALLY shoot through the roof. But Marlon... If you "raise" us to "thier" level, you're going to see your services taxed at state and federal level, you're going to SWAMPED with paperwork, and you won't be able to do sqat without 25 forms in triplicate. And that includes, going to the bathroom. You're going to end up subjecting us to the same regulatory climate that "they" live in. And that will be the end of the WISP business, where only the monopoly-type telcos with the huge capitalization and lotsa lawyers on staff will be able to do "wireless". Would I like to get 150 / mo per sub, and have to bill only 41 bucks to do it? Darn right. Heck, if I got 109 / mo for each sub, I'd bill $1/ mo and sign people like there was no tomorrow... Given the choice of being regulated and getting the money and not being regulated and doing without it... I choose without. I don't think the alternative is viable. > > I'm not a big fan of government meddling but one of two things has to happen > here. Either they drop usf (most rural telcos would fold so this is > unlikely) or expand it to include us and cable and sat. Like it or not, > government funding was used for electrification, phones, roads etc. If the > competition is going to get subsidized, we should to. I say drop it, and re-write the laws governing VOIP and POTS service, so that "anyone" can do it, just like "anyone" can be a WISP. It's going to mean that "gauranteed" phone service would be a thing of the past... And I don't see any reason it should be "gauranteed". Just like it shouldn't be "gauranteed" your cell will work or your satellite dish will work, or your pager will work, or there's a theater in town. For that matter, anyone that remote can now get satellite phones... Heck, it isn't even guaranteed there'll be a decent place to eat lunch in town... ( especially not Odessa, hehehehe ). North East Oregon Fastnet, LLC 509-593-4061 personal correspondence to: mark at neofast dot net sales inquiries to: purchasing at neofast dot net Fast Internet, NO WIRES! - > > WISPA needs to support this move. In a big way. > Marlon > (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales > (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services > 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! > 64.146.146.12 (net meeting) > www.odessaoffice.com/wireless > www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam > > > > - Original Message - > From: "Blair Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 6:08 PM > Subject: [WISPA] USF tax changes? > > > > Does WISPA have a stand on this? > > > > http://techrepublic.com.com/2100-1035-5959140.html?tag=nl.e550 > > > > As one who has built my network without any public money, I have no > > interest in collecting special taxes. I have more than enough paperwork > > now... > > > > I also don't want my competitors to get government money to build their > > networks. But locally, I have found out that they are getting government > > grants to expand into my area. Having seen their install rates, monthly > > fees and tower provisioning costs, they would not be making any money if > > they did not have the government footing the bill. > > > > -- > > > > Blair Davis > > West Michigan Wireless ISP > > 269-686-8648 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > -- > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: Re[2]: [WISPA] USF tax changes?
The question is, who will qualify to get the funds, if Broadband added to USF? It doesn't help if the ILECs, or Super large companies with tons of backend financing are the one that end up being the only ones able to qualify to get the funds. Do you think the Telcos and Large CLECs would just sit there and let us collect the money? I'm just sinical that we'll start paying but not receiving. The other side is that FIBER, any way you look at it, has a better value propositions than Wireless, and if upfront money is available and long term financing, it has been proven fiber can be isntalled for the same amount as wireless to a rural town. So getting USF for rural, could mean getting more competition in the rural markets that we now have as our best non-competitive markets. However, it would be great, if we were inked into the plan to be able to receive for USF. I'd justify VOIP getting taxed, if it meant I got to receive funds from it to build my wireless networks. Not that I live in rural america :-( What I'd like to see is for USF to cover deployment to underserved, not just rural. Thats an areas where Wireless provider can produce the MOST value. Filling in the holes. Fiber is cheaper to deploy in Rural and Urban, when considering 90% of the homes in the area are going to get the service. But the few people that just aren't convenient to hit get left behind, and are forgotten about. Nobody should be left behind. An example I can point to is here locally with Fios. One of my customers just switched to FIOS when it came available, because he had a crappy wireless link with me, because he had to shoot through a forest of PINE TREES. I actually recommended that he change. FIOS could serve him because his house was right on the street by the wire. However, 1 mile down the road, I have 5 prospects, that are to far away from the road, and Version said they couldn't and wouldn't serve them. Thats 5 homes, that I can serve with my Wireless, even though FIOS was in town. These 5 homes were jsutas needy as anyone in rural america. The day the Underserved are treated equal, is the day I will be satisfied. If you have a problem, you should not be discriminated against because of where you live, even if its a weathy county. My support for USF will only come, if it gets reformed to meet its name "UNIVERSAL" service fund, not just "RURAL ILEC" service fund. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Barry at Mutual Data" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 11:09 AM Subject: Re[2]: [WISPA] USF tax changes? Hello Marlon, At 100 bucks a month for USF, I could drop fiber into each customer and scrap my wireless altogether. And that would be a kick ass network! Barry Friday, January 27, 2006, 10:37:09 AM, you wrote: MKS592> I had a call the other day from someone at the MKS592> Congressional Budget Office. MKS592> It *looks* like there is a move afoot to expand USF to broadband. MKS592> I believe this would only be a good thing for the market. MKS592> Out here the telco gets $109 per month per phone line. And they require a MKS592> phone line for DSL service. MKS592> So $15 per phone line. MKS592> $30 per dsl. MKS592> $109 per line in usf funds. MKS592> Nearly $160 per month per sub. And I get $35. Oh joy! MKS592> Now if I could get $109 too! At nearly 300 subs MKS592> today Man could I put MKS592> in a nice network! And afford to go where others aren't going yet. MKS592> And the value of a wisp would REALLY shoot through the roof. MKS592> I'm not a big fan of government meddling but one of two things has to happen MKS592> here. Either they drop usf (most rural telcos would fold so this is MKS592> unlikely) or expand it to include us and cable and sat. Like it or not, MKS592> government funding was used for electrification, MKS592> phones, roads etc. If the MKS592> competition is going to get subsidized, we should to. MKS592> WISPA needs to support this move. In a big way. MKS592> Marlon MKS592> (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales MKS592> (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services MKS592> 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! MKS592> 64.146.146.12 (net meeting) MKS592> www.odessaoffice.com/wireless MKS592> www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam MKS592> - Original Message - MKS592> From: "Blair Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> MKS592> To: "WISPA General List" MKS592> Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 6:08 PM MKS592> Subject: [WISPA] USF tax changes? Does WISPA have a stand on this? http://techrepublic.com.com/2100-1035-5959140.html?tag=nl.e550 As one who has built my network without any public money, I have no interest in collecting special taxes. I have more than enough paperwork now... I also don't want my competitors to get government mone
Re[2]: [WISPA] USF tax changes?
Hello Marlon, At 100 bucks a month for USF, I could drop fiber into each customer and scrap my wireless altogether. And that would be a kick ass network! Barry Friday, January 27, 2006, 10:37:09 AM, you wrote: MKS592> I had a call the other day from someone at the MKS592> Congressional Budget Office. MKS592> It *looks* like there is a move afoot to expand USF to broadband. MKS592> I believe this would only be a good thing for the market. MKS592> Out here the telco gets $109 per month per phone line. And they require a MKS592> phone line for DSL service. MKS592> So $15 per phone line. MKS592> $30 per dsl. MKS592> $109 per line in usf funds. MKS592> Nearly $160 per month per sub. And I get $35. Oh joy! MKS592> Now if I could get $109 too! At nearly 300 subs MKS592> today Man could I put MKS592> in a nice network! And afford to go where others aren't going yet. MKS592> And the value of a wisp would REALLY shoot through the roof. MKS592> I'm not a big fan of government meddling but one of two things has to happen MKS592> here. Either they drop usf (most rural telcos would fold so this is MKS592> unlikely) or expand it to include us and cable and sat. Like it or not, MKS592> government funding was used for electrification, MKS592> phones, roads etc. If the MKS592> competition is going to get subsidized, we should to. MKS592> WISPA needs to support this move. In a big way. MKS592> Marlon MKS592> (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales MKS592> (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services MKS592> 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! MKS592> 64.146.146.12 (net meeting) MKS592> www.odessaoffice.com/wireless MKS592> www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam MKS592> - Original Message - MKS592> From: "Blair Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> MKS592> To: "WISPA General List" MKS592> Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 6:08 PM MKS592> Subject: [WISPA] USF tax changes? >> Does WISPA have a stand on this? >> >> http://techrepublic.com.com/2100-1035-5959140.html?tag=nl.e550 >> >> As one who has built my network without any public money, I have no >> interest in collecting special taxes. I have more than enough paperwork >> now... >> >> I also don't want my competitors to get government money to build their >> networks. But locally, I have found out that they are getting government >> grants to expand into my area. Having seen their install rates, monthly >> fees and tower provisioning costs, they would not be making any money if >> they did not have the government footing the bill. >> >> -- >> >> Blair Davis >> West Michigan Wireless ISP >> 269-686-8648 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Best regards, Barrymailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] 900Mhz Grid vs Yagi
Yagi's performance like crap w/ snow and ice on them though > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 > Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 10:42 AM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 900Mhz Grid vs Yagi > > A bit old here But check out: > http://www.odessaoffice.com/wireless/antenna/how_to_pick_the_right_antenna.htm > There are radiation pattern examples there. As a general rule I'd have to > say that yagi's are quite a bit better than grids. > > laters, > Marlon > (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales > (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services > 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! > 64.146.146.12 (net meeting) > www.odessaoffice.com/wireless > www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam > > > > - Original Message - > From: "Tom DeReggi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Monday, November 14, 2005 5:09 PM > Subject: [WISPA] 900Mhz Grid vs Yagi > > > > > > PacWireless makes a 900Mhz 18 dbi Parabolic grid antenna. > > M2 makes a 900Mhz 17.5 dbi Yagi antenna. > > > > We had found that 900 was very particular to placement, even a few inches > > in one direction or the other can make big differences in link quality. > > Has anyone used both antenna types for a specific link, to compare the > > properties of each of the designs. The thought is whether the wider > > surface area of the parabolic antenna would make it better to survive > > signal obstruction from swaying trees in forests. The prabolic is a > > monster at 3 ft dia, s othe Yagi would clearly be a better choice for a > > roof top chimney install based on cosmetics. But wondering from a > > performance perspective the comparison. > > > > Tom DeReggi > > RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc > > IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband > > > > -- > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > -- > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > -- > Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.19/231 - Release Date: 01/16/2006 > -- Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.19/231 - Release Date: 01/16/2006 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 900Mhz Grid vs Yagi
A bit old here But check out: http://www.odessaoffice.com/wireless/antenna/how_to_pick_the_right_antenna.htm There are radiation pattern examples there. As a general rule I'd have to say that yagi's are quite a bit better than grids. laters, Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! 64.146.146.12 (net meeting) www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: "Tom DeReggi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Monday, November 14, 2005 5:09 PM Subject: [WISPA] 900Mhz Grid vs Yagi PacWireless makes a 900Mhz 18 dbi Parabolic grid antenna. M2 makes a 900Mhz 17.5 dbi Yagi antenna. We had found that 900 was very particular to placement, even a few inches in one direction or the other can make big differences in link quality. Has anyone used both antenna types for a specific link, to compare the properties of each of the designs. The thought is whether the wider surface area of the parabolic antenna would make it better to survive signal obstruction from swaying trees in forests. The prabolic is a monster at 3 ft dia, s othe Yagi would clearly be a better choice for a roof top chimney install based on cosmetics. But wondering from a performance perspective the comparison. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 900b mhz omni
agreed. Hi gain omni antennas of any freq. are in all but a very few deployments very bad news. Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! 64.146.146.12 (net meeting) www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: "Barry at Mutual Data" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 8:46 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 900b mhz omni Hello ccooper, Why go higher then 9db? The pattern will shrink to paper thin figuratively speaking. We have wy better luck with 9db or less at 900mhz. Barry Wednesday, January 25, 2006, 10:04:54 PM, you wrote: cic> Anybody know where i can find an H-pol 900 mhz omni w/ higer gain than 9Db? cic> thanks, cic> chris -- Best regards, Barrymailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] USF tax changes?
I had a call the other day from someone at the Congressional Budget Office. It *looks* like there is a move afoot to expand USF to broadband. I believe this would only be a good thing for the market. Out here the telco gets $109 per month per phone line. And they require a phone line for DSL service. So $15 per phone line. $30 per dsl. $109 per line in usf funds. Nearly $160 per month per sub. And I get $35. Oh joy! Now if I could get $109 too! At nearly 300 subs today Man could I put in a nice network! And afford to go where others aren't going yet. And the value of a wisp would REALLY shoot through the roof. I'm not a big fan of government meddling but one of two things has to happen here. Either they drop usf (most rural telcos would fold so this is unlikely) or expand it to include us and cable and sat. Like it or not, government funding was used for electrification, phones, roads etc. If the competition is going to get subsidized, we should to. WISPA needs to support this move. In a big way. Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! 64.146.146.12 (net meeting) www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: "Blair Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 6:08 PM Subject: [WISPA] USF tax changes? Does WISPA have a stand on this? http://techrepublic.com.com/2100-1035-5959140.html?tag=nl.e550 As one who has built my network without any public money, I have no interest in collecting special taxes. I have more than enough paperwork now... I also don't want my competitors to get government money to build their networks. But locally, I have found out that they are getting government grants to expand into my area. Having seen their install rates, monthly fees and tower provisioning costs, they would not be making any money if they did not have the government footing the bill. -- Blair Davis West Michigan Wireless ISP 269-686-8648 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3 ft Dual Pol antennas
Tom DeReggi wrote: Have you confirmed wether the Andrews 3 ft dishes really deliver the 2 db extra gain (34 db)? We have. -Matt -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
