RE: [WISPA] NextLink in Phoenix
what hardware ? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter R. Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 6:52 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] NextLink in Phoenix XO Communications today launched broadband wireless services in Phoenix, bringing its NextLink wireless footprint to 10 major cities. XO will initially deploy in downtown Phoenix but plans its base station sites to cover the entire Phoenix metropolitan area including Paradise Valley, Scottsdale and Tempe. XO has Local Multipoint Distribution System licenses in 75 markets-all left over from when the former NextLink tried to build a nationwide first generation broadband wireless access system for businesses. Like all of the initial BWA systems, the NextLink network never got off the ground, and when the company changed its name to XO it shelved the licenses, only to revive them again last year as an alternative to fiber and copper access in its markets. XO has now launched wireless service in Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, Houston, Los Angeles, Miami, San Diego, Tampa and Washington, D.C. (They don't know where service is available, but it's launched :) Peter -- 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] Mikrotik 900MHz feedback
Is anyone using the MTIKs w/ the 900MHz cards? We use Mikrotiks for routing frequently; however, we have never used them as an actual access point. How do these work as 900MHz APs/SUs and is it more cost effective than a canned solution such as Trango or Tranzeo 900 gear? Thanks. _ Don Annas 336.510.3800 x111 336.510.3801 fax HYPERLINK mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] HYPERLINK http://www.triadtelecom.com/www.TriadTelecom.com _ -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.14/727 - Release Date: 3/19/2007 11:49 AM attachment: att179fd.jpg -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Working With Others
Ok, I knew the day would come...I got a phone call the other day that I knocked out 350 Automatic Meter Readers because they are within the same frequency range I am using. They are 917.50 MHz, and I am using Motorola Canopy centered on 920. Now, here are my issues. I have two other ones located nearby that are using 906, so I don't want to walk over myself. SCADA is in the middle band, so I need the upper channel...but there is paging that bleeds down to 924 MHz. I am as high up as I can be. Oh, I am horizontal and they are vertical. Now, they are almost unwilling to change the frequency they are running on, (right now)...It seems like they are willing to look at it, but basically their comments are things like We haven't had anyone that wasn't willing to work with us and It has been working for 10 years type thing... He did say the only company that wasn't willing to work with them was a major hospital and they eventually upgraded their phone system and it is no longer a problem. To me this sounds like THEY are the unwilling ones to change. I was here first mentality...not how can we work together. Why would a meter reading company that reads 1/2 million meters use UL frequency? Has anyone run into this? -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] My bad--apologies to the List!
Folks, I'm sorry about my most recent-incomplete-post. My wife's PC crashed while I was drafting the post and I must have hit Send instead of Save when I closed mine down. It was late-what can I say? Mea culpa! To finish the thought processes, The Two 'S' Rule refers to the essential components for successful implementations: Specifications and Supervision. What I want done has to be thoroughly and clearly specified and communicated to employees or contractors; later, the responsibility to follow through and ensure that I receive what I'm paying for is solely mine. As an old boss used to say, What gets measured, gets done. If I don't check what's being done, I can't know what's being done, and the inevitable hit to my bottom line is nobody's fault but mine. Achieving success concerning your other point, Tom, is an even more difficult challenge. I've raised hackles for many years by pointing out that the two least trained and least motivated groups of employees in most technology-based service companies are the Installer and the Customer Service Representative. For some reason, 'managers' seem to have great difficulty justifying the investment in the training and remuneration factors which motivate the two sets of employees with, by far, the most day-in-day-out customer 'face time'. And I cannot expect field personnel to make good judgments if they don't understand what they're doing, and why, and if all they see and hear out of me conveys the business priority of speed over quality. Yes, it's a difficult balance to achieve. But, as my Dad used to say, It's your business; manage it or lose it. In the face of high customer acquisition costs, such 'logic' is mystifying. Excepting emergencies and flukes, there is simply no excuse for sending under-trained, poorly motivated or poorly equipped folks into the field IF the goal is to grow a stable customer base. Customers have plenty of service provider options these days and the playing field is becoming more crowded every day. To put the concept into movie terms, if you botch it, they will leave! One last thing about courtesy wraps. The overall thickness of the weatherproofing wall is relatively constant, regardless if it's on LMR-400, LDF-7 or EW-20 (although it looks much larger on smaller cables). A layer of tape, one of mastic and four tape wraps should come out to be about the same 'depth' in any case, and the courtesy layer adds maybe 1/32nd of an inch to the ~3/8 finished total. Y'all have a great day! Ted Hatfield -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik 900MHz feedback
The biggest difference with MT 900mhz vs. Trango is the Trango radios have filters already built into the units. In noisy environments, the Trango will perform much better unless you install filters on the MT units. Travis Microserv Don Annas wrote: Is anyone using the MTIKs w/ the 900MHz cards? We use Mikrotiks for routing frequently; however, we have never used them as an actual access point. How do these work as 900MHz APs/SUs and is it more cost effective than a canned solution such as Trango or Tranzeo 900 gear? Thanks. _ Don Annas 336.510.3800 x111 336.510.3801 fax HYPERLINK mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] HYPERLINK http://www.triadtelecom.com/www.TriadTelecom.com _ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Working With Others
Yes... we have the same exact meter systems in two or three of our cities. We have to use channel 1 or 4 on Trango (906mhz, 924mhz) and horizontal polarity to stay out of their way. They were very easy to deal with, and actually purchased a horizontal omni for us to fix one of the cities. Travis Microserv Eric Rogers wrote: Ok, I knew the day would come...I got a phone call the other day that I knocked out 350 Automatic Meter Readers because they are within the same frequency range I am using. They are 917.50 MHz, and I am using Motorola Canopy centered on 920. Now, here are my issues. I have two other ones located nearby that are using 906, so I don't want to walk over myself. SCADA is in the middle band, so I need the upper channel...but there is paging that bleeds down to 924 MHz. I am as high up as I can be. Oh, I am horizontal and they are vertical. Now, they are almost unwilling to change the frequency they are running on, (right now)...It seems like they are willing to look at it, but basically their comments are things like We haven't had anyone that wasn't willing to work with us and It has been working for 10 years type thing... He did say the only company that wasn't willing to work with them was a major hospital and they eventually upgraded their phone system and it is no longer a problem. To me this sounds like THEY are the unwilling ones to change. I was here first mentality...not how can we work together. Why would a meter reading company that reads 1/2 million meters use UL frequency? Has anyone run into this? -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] NextLink in Phoenix
Hughes Network Systems is a strategic Nextlink partner, providing its LMDS AIReach AB9400 system in both point-to-point and point-to-multipoint modes to support Nextlink's high-speed Internet access and Ethernet services. Peter R. wrote: XO Communications today launched broadband wireless services in Phoenix, bringing its NextLink wireless footprint to 10 major cities. XO will initially deploy in downtown Phoenix but plans its base station sites to cover the entire Phoenix metropolitan area including Paradise Valley, Scottsdale and Tempe. XO has Local Multipoint Distribution System licenses in 75 markets—all left over from when the former NextLink tried to build a nationwide first generation broadband wireless access system for businesses. Like all of the initial BWA systems, the NextLink network never got off the ground, and when the company changed its name to XO it shelved the licenses, only to revive them again last year as an alternative to fiber and copper access in its markets. XO has now launched wireless service in Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, Houston, Los Angeles, Miami, San Diego, Tampa and Washington, D.C. (They don't know where service is available, but it's launched :) Peter -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Mikrotik 900MHz feedback
Probably not legal- so not really very cost effective :) Marty ___ Marty Dougherty CEO Roadstar Internet Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] 703-554-6620 www.roadstarinternet.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Annas Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 7:22 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: [WISPA] Mikrotik 900MHz feedback Is anyone using the MTIKs w/ the 900MHz cards? We use Mikrotiks for routing frequently; however, we have never used them as an actual access point. How do these work as 900MHz APs/SUs and is it more cost effective than a canned solution such as Trango or Tranzeo 900 gear? Thanks. _ Don Annas 336.510.3800 x111 336.510.3801 fax HYPERLINK mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] HYPERLINK http://www.triadtelecom.com/www.TriadTelecom.com _ -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.14/727 - Release Date: 3/19/2007 11:49 AM -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] NextLink in Phoenix
Nothing new. XO has had an active Wireless Broadband division for the last few years. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Peter R. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 5:51 PM Subject: [WISPA] NextLink in Phoenix XO Communications today launched broadband wireless services in Phoenix, bringing its NextLink wireless footprint to 10 major cities. XO will initially deploy in downtown Phoenix but plans its base station sites to cover the entire Phoenix metropolitan area including Paradise Valley, Scottsdale and Tempe. XO has Local Multipoint Distribution System licenses in 75 markets—all left over from when the former NextLink tried to build a nationwide first generation broadband wireless access system for businesses. Like all of the initial BWA systems, the NextLink network never got off the ground, and when the company changed its name to XO it shelved the licenses, only to revive them again last year as an alternative to fiber and copper access in its markets. XO has now launched wireless service in Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, Houston, Los Angeles, Miami, San Diego, Tampa and Washington, D.C. (They don't know where service is available, but it's launched :) Peter -- 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] ELN Acton Wi-Fi Phone
http://www.engadget.com/2007/03/20/earthlink-unveils-wifi-phone-beta-in-anaheim-ca/ Earthlink's finally ready to publicly discuss the WiFi phone beta they've been running in Anaheim California -- well, kind of. They didn't exactly have much to say about the service because it's in beta, but we know that officially exists, and that should be enough, right? We'd love a closer look at the Accton phone they're using for this thing, but we know the type, and something tells us it's not exactly going to have an ancillary HSDPA for 3G SIP or anything. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] My bad--apologies to the List!
Ed, All good advice, thanks. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Edward J. Hatfield III [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 8:02 AM Subject: [WISPA] My bad--apologies to the List! Folks, I'm sorry about my most recent-incomplete-post. My wife's PC crashed while I was drafting the post and I must have hit Send instead of Save when I closed mine down. It was late-what can I say? Mea culpa! To finish the thought processes, The Two 'S' Rule refers to the essential components for successful implementations: Specifications and Supervision. What I want done has to be thoroughly and clearly specified and communicated to employees or contractors; later, the responsibility to follow through and ensure that I receive what I'm paying for is solely mine. As an old boss used to say, What gets measured, gets done. If I don't check what's being done, I can't know what's being done, and the inevitable hit to my bottom line is nobody's fault but mine. Achieving success concerning your other point, Tom, is an even more difficult challenge. I've raised hackles for many years by pointing out that the two least trained and least motivated groups of employees in most technology-based service companies are the Installer and the Customer Service Representative. For some reason, 'managers' seem to have great difficulty justifying the investment in the training and remuneration factors which motivate the two sets of employees with, by far, the most day-in-day-out customer 'face time'. And I cannot expect field personnel to make good judgments if they don't understand what they're doing, and why, and if all they see and hear out of me conveys the business priority of speed over quality. Yes, it's a difficult balance to achieve. But, as my Dad used to say, It's your business; manage it or lose it. In the face of high customer acquisition costs, such 'logic' is mystifying. Excepting emergencies and flukes, there is simply no excuse for sending under-trained, poorly motivated or poorly equipped folks into the field IF the goal is to grow a stable customer base. Customers have plenty of service provider options these days and the playing field is becoming more crowded every day. To put the concept into movie terms, if you botch it, they will leave! One last thing about courtesy wraps. The overall thickness of the weatherproofing wall is relatively constant, regardless if it's on LMR-400, LDF-7 or EW-20 (although it looks much larger on smaller cables). A layer of tape, one of mastic and four tape wraps should come out to be about the same 'depth' in any case, and the courtesy layer adds maybe 1/32nd of an inch to the ~3/8 finished total. Y'all have a great day! Ted Hatfield -- 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] NextLink in Phoenix
Matt, Agreed. They are in a number of our buildings. Everything done to top Telco standards. The Hughes AirReach gear aint cheap either. They definately are throwing money at it. But at the end of the day, can they walk away with the customer AND still make a profit? Teligent/Winstar proved the LMDS model ineffective 7 years ago. What has changed? I'm not sure the cost has? The other thing to add is, if the model is the right one for todays market, its not an opportunity unique to XO, Teligent licenses (38Ghz) are obtainable by anyone on lease for like $50 a month. (I think Nextlink/XO was somewhere between 26Ghz-29Ghz?) Its a tough call, on what's best today. Is the higher demand for broadband, and property owners' fees brought back down to reality, allowing it to work today? Truthfully Dragonwave class gear gets pretty clsoe to cost of the LMDS stuff. LMDS does well at 3-4 miles, a sweet spot in Urban america, apposed to limiting short range MMW type gear, which is now still twice the cost? And LMDS still allows cost saving with PtMP. I think the big differentiator is whether T1s (channelized) are the thing of the past, and whether Ethernet will be the dominator. I'm betting on Ethernet, but the licensed gear still needs to come down in cost, based on the PTP limitation. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 9:33 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] NextLink in Phoenix Tom DeReggi wrote: Nothing new. XO has had an active Wireless Broadband division for the last few years. They certainly spend a lot of money at least; not much revenue to show for it. -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] Working With Others
This is a good one Eric. FIRST and FOREMOST, they were there first, you need to find a way to change things.. FCC wise they have no leg to stand on. But as good citizens and a good American, you need to do the honorable thing and design your new system around any existing ones. I think you could move up if you used some band pass filters on your system. You might also want to ask them how old their meter reading systems are. Maybe they need to upgrade. Better yet, ask them if they are willing to work with you. You could help them upgrade to a system that they don't have to fiddle with. How about an ethernet capable meter base that they can read from. They just pay you for the hook up and a small monthly fee, you take care of the network. AND you can service the local house with internet! Anyway, I always work around existing operators in my area when I light up a new tower. In fact our tower agreements clearly state that we'll not cause interference to ANYONE in the area. But once we are there we also have the same protection. And I've set a good precedent for any operators in my areas. laters, Marlon (509) 982-2181 (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Eric Rogers [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 5:39 AM Subject: [WISPA] Working With Others Ok, I knew the day would come...I got a phone call the other day that I knocked out 350 Automatic Meter Readers because they are within the same frequency range I am using. They are 917.50 MHz, and I am using Motorola Canopy centered on 920. Now, here are my issues. I have two other ones located nearby that are using 906, so I don't want to walk over myself. SCADA is in the middle band, so I need the upper channel...but there is paging that bleeds down to 924 MHz. I am as high up as I can be. Oh, I am horizontal and they are vertical. Now, they are almost unwilling to change the frequency they are running on, (right now)...It seems like they are willing to look at it, but basically their comments are things like We haven't had anyone that wasn't willing to work with us and It has been working for 10 years type thing... He did say the only company that wasn't willing to work with them was a major hospital and they eventually upgraded their phone system and it is no longer a problem. To me this sounds like THEY are the unwilling ones to change. I was here first mentality...not how can we work together. Why would a meter reading company that reads 1/2 million meters use UL frequency? Has anyone run into this? -- 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] WISP blocked access to Washington Post website - Dumb or Responsible?
I spend time each day keeping up not just on technical news but on world news. Last Saturday or Sunday, I noticed that I could no longer access the website of the Washington Post. Whatever your political view of the Washington Post, it is still considered as one of the top two national newspapers. Finally last night, I emailed [EMAIL PROTECTED] and I reported that I could not reach the WP website. Here's the reply I received: Mr. Unger, We have temporarily blocked the IP for washingtonpost.com due to a problem traced back to that IP. We are working to resolve this issue and will be unblocking the IP within the next 48 hours. -- Here's my reply to the WISP (which incidentally is California's largest WISP for business and is now owned by a large national ISP. Dear Mr. Xxxx, Thank you for letting me know. I first noticed this problem several days ago. I look forward to having my access to the Washington Post website restored. Thank you, jack I'd appreciate a few knowledge WISP opinions on this issue. 1. Why will it apparently take a total of 5 days to resolve this issue? 2. Was my WISP really not aware of the problem and are they just now starting to look into it? 3. Was/is someone really spamming from the WP IP? Is there a very real and legitimate reason why the WP website would need to be blocked this long? 4. Could this be just another story in the emerging saga of the Net Neutrality debate? Should I be worried about hearing It's our network and we can block anyone we want to block? Again, I'd appreciate a few thoughtful, knowledgable WISP opinions. Thank you in advance, jack -- Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. FCC License # PG-12-25133 Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993 Author of the WISP Handbook - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs True Vendor-Neutral Wireless Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220 www.ask-wi.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] WISP blocked access to Washington Post website - Dumb orResponsible?
We block ip addys that put us under attack or are caught at port sniffing. Other than that, I don't block access to things (though I'm VERY ready to block xboxfreezone.com and other such scams :-). It's your job to make sure that your computer is in good shape, firewall etc., wise not mine. Marlon (509) 982-2181 (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 9:32 AM Subject: [WISPA] WISP blocked access to Washington Post website - Dumb orResponsible? I spend time each day keeping up not just on technical news but on world news. Last Saturday or Sunday, I noticed that I could no longer access the website of the Washington Post. Whatever your political view of the Washington Post, it is still considered as one of the top two national newspapers. Finally last night, I emailed [EMAIL PROTECTED] and I reported that I could not reach the WP website. Here's the reply I received: Mr. Unger, We have temporarily blocked the IP for washingtonpost.com due to a problem traced back to that IP. We are working to resolve this issue and will be unblocking the IP within the next 48 hours. -- Here's my reply to the WISP (which incidentally is California's largest WISP for business and is now owned by a large national ISP. Dear Mr. Xxxx, Thank you for letting me know. I first noticed this problem several days ago. I look forward to having my access to the Washington Post website restored. Thank you, jack I'd appreciate a few knowledge WISP opinions on this issue. 1. Why will it apparently take a total of 5 days to resolve this issue? 2. Was my WISP really not aware of the problem and are they just now starting to look into it? 3. Was/is someone really spamming from the WP IP? Is there a very real and legitimate reason why the WP website would need to be blocked this long? 4. Could this be just another story in the emerging saga of the Net Neutrality debate? Should I be worried about hearing It's our network and we can block anyone we want to block? Again, I'd appreciate a few thoughtful, knowledgable WISP opinions. Thank you in advance, jack -- Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. FCC License # PG-12-25133 Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993 Author of the WISP Handbook - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs True Vendor-Neutral Wireless Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220 www.ask-wi.com -- 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] Working With Others
Thanks Marlon, I also agree that since I am the newbie in the area, I need to be willing to be flexible. But, what options do I have when my channels are 8MHz wide and they are in the upper end of my channel 2 and channel 3 is unusable by paging? I can move my center channel 1 MHz at a time, so it does give me some flexibility in that regard. First, I did do some brief spectrum analysis over several days from my radios BEFORE I deployed and I didn't see anyone in that range. The reasons I didn't are because I am horizontal and they are vertical and they are only pushing 1/4 watt. Their base station is only 25ft on a pole with the 1 or 2 db omnis pointing down and the meters have no external antennas and I am 180' almost 30 ft elevation higher. Based on all I have learned using 900 MHz, I know it has major multi-pathing problems if both ends are below the tree-line. Needless to say, I think there are additional things they need to take into account along with channel (RF) coordination. I am willing to give them space on my tower to get them up off the ground. I think it is going to come down to...I am the new guy and I need to move. He did mention he has some sort of DSSS meters that are newer that he may consider upgrading to. I really want to co-exist, and I do feel like I am the bully. I have considered a notch or band-pass filter for the paging to allow me to go up further in the RF. I am worried that I will need to do this at the CPE as well. If I change my other two locations from the lower band to the upper band, they are closer to the paging tower so the upper band is out of the question. If I use 915 (channel 2 for Motorola) then I may take down the East end of my town doing the same thing. I would love to somehow interface their AMR to my internet connection and provide the feed to the customer and the meter. Thanks, Eric -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 12:17 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Working With Others This is a good one Eric. FIRST and FOREMOST, they were there first, you need to find a way to change things.. FCC wise they have no leg to stand on. But as good citizens and a good American, you need to do the honorable thing and design your new system around any existing ones. I think you could move up if you used some band pass filters on your system. You might also want to ask them how old their meter reading systems are. Maybe they need to upgrade. Better yet, ask them if they are willing to work with you. You could help them upgrade to a system that they don't have to fiddle with. How about an ethernet capable meter base that they can read from. They just pay you for the hook up and a small monthly fee, you take care of the network. AND you can service the local house with internet! Anyway, I always work around existing operators in my area when I light up a new tower. In fact our tower agreements clearly state that we'll not cause interference to ANYONE in the area. But once we are there we also have the same protection. And I've set a good precedent for any operators in my areas. laters, Marlon (509) 982-2181 (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Eric Rogers [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 5:39 AM Subject: [WISPA] Working With Others Ok, I knew the day would come...I got a phone call the other day that I knocked out 350 Automatic Meter Readers because they are within the same frequency range I am using. They are 917.50 MHz, and I am using Motorola Canopy centered on 920. Now, here are my issues. I have two other ones located nearby that are using 906, so I don't want to walk over myself. SCADA is in the middle band, so I need the upper channel...but there is paging that bleeds down to 924 MHz. I am as high up as I can be. Oh, I am horizontal and they are vertical. Now, they are almost unwilling to change the frequency they are running on, (right now)...It seems like they are willing to look at it, but basically their comments are things like We haven't had anyone that wasn't willing to work with us and It has been working for 10 years type thing... He did say the only company that wasn't willing to work with them was a major hospital and they eventually upgraded their phone system and it is no longer a problem. To me this sounds like THEY are the unwilling ones to change. I was here first mentality...not how can we work together. Why would a meter reading company that reads 1/2 million meters use UL frequency? Has anyone run into this? -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
[WISPA] P2P Apps Going Legit?
I had a customer tell me yesterday that he uses his Gnutella program to do unlimited downloads from a paid site. I've used the Mikrotik routers (p2p queue set to 64k) to block this and other programs, so it's not working now for the customer. I want to allow for paid downloads, but not P2P filesharing. Have you come across this? Can it be dealt with? Mark Nash Network Engineer UnwiredOnline.Net 350 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] P2P Apps Going Legit?
The paid P2P is only for support on the software, it does not make it legit. go to the site and read what it says. No royalties are paid to anyone. You have a Good Day now, Carl A Jeptha http://www.airnet.ca Office Phone: 905 349-2084 Office Hours: 9:00am - 5:00pm skype cajeptha Mark Nash wrote: I had a customer tell me yesterday that he uses his Gnutella program to do unlimited downloads from a paid site. I've used the Mikrotik routers (p2p queue set to 64k) to block this and other programs, so it's not working now for the customer. I want to allow for paid downloads, but not P2P filesharing. Have you come across this? Can it be dealt with? Mark Nash Network Engineer UnwiredOnline.Net 350 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] Lawmakers threaten FBI over spy powers
Lawmakers threaten FBI over spy powers By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS, Associated Press Writer http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070320/ap_on_go_co/national_security_letters Republicans and Democrats sternly warned the FBI on Tuesday that it could lose its broad power to collect telephone, e-mail and financial records to hunt terrorists after revelations of widespread abuses of the authority detailed in a recent internal investigation. Their threats came as the Justice Department's chief watchdog, Glenn A. Fine, told the House Judiciary Committee that the FBI engaged in widespread and serious misuse of its authority in illegally collecting the information from Americans and foreigners through so-called national security letters. If the FBI doesn't move swiftly to correct the mistakes and problems revealed last week in Fine's 130-page report, you probably won't have NSL authority, said Rep. Dan Lungren (news, bio, voting record), R-Calif., a supporter of the power, referring to the data requests by their initials. From the attorney general on down, you should be ashamed of yourself, said Rep. Darrell Issa (news, bio, voting record), R-Calif. We stretched to try to give you the tools necessary to make America safe, and it is very, very clear that you've abused that trust. If Congress revokes some of the expansive law enforcement powers it granted in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks, Issa said, America may be less safe, but the Constitution will be more secure, and it will be because of your failure to deal with this in a serious fashion. The FBI's failure to establish sufficient controls or oversight for collecting the information constituted serious and unacceptable failures, Fine told the committee. Democrats called Fine's findings an example of how the Justice Department has used broad counterterrorism authorities to trample on privacy rights. This was a serious breach of trust, said Rep. John Conyers (news, bio, voting record), D-Mich., the Judiciary chairman. The department had converted this tool into a handy shortcut to illegally gather vast amounts of private information while at the same time significantly underreporting its activities to Congress. Rep. Jerrold Nadler (news, bio, voting record), D-N.Y., said Congress should revise the USA Patriot Act, which substantially loosened controls over the letters. We do not trust government always to be run by angels, especially not this administration, Nadler said. It is not enough to mandate that the FBI fix internal management problems and recordkeeping, because the statute itself authorizes the unchecked collection of information on innocent Americans. Some Republicans, however, said the FBI's expanded spying powers were vital to tracking terrorists. The problem is enforcement of the law, not the law itself, said Rep. Lamar Smith (news, bio, voting record) of Texas, the panel's senior GOP member. We need to be vigilant to make sure these problems are fixed. Fine said he did not believe the problems were intentional, although he acknowledged he could not rule that out. We believe the misuses and the problems we found generally were the product of mistakes, carelessness, confusion, sloppiness lack of training, lack of adequate guidance and lack of adequate oversight, Fine said. It really was unacceptable and inexcusable what happened here, he added under questioning. Valerie Caproni, the FBI's general counsel, said she took responsibility for the abuses and believed they could be fixed in a matter of months. We're going to have to work to get the trust of this committee back, and we know that's what we have to do, and we're going to do it, she said. In a review of headquarters files and a sampling of just four of the FBI's 56 field offices, Fine found 48 violations of law or presidential directives during between 2003 and 2005, including failure to get proper authorization, making improper requests and unauthorized collection of telephone or Internet e-mail records. He estimated that a significant number of ... violations throughout the FBI have not been identified or reported. The bureau has launched an audit of all 56 field offices to determine the full extent of the problem. The Senate Judiciary Committee is to hear Wednesday from Fine and FBI Director Robert Mueller on the same topic. In 1986, Congress first authorized FBI agents to obtain electronic records without approval from a judge using national security letters. The letters can be used to acquire e-mails, telephone, travel records and financial information, like credit and bank transactions. In 2001, the Patriot Act eliminated any requirement that the records belong to someone under suspicion. Now an innocent person's records can be obtained if FBI field agents consider them merely relevant to an ongoing terrorism or spying investigation. Fine's review, authorized by Congress over Bush administration
Re: [WISPA] P2P Apps Going Legit?
I've seen sites like Limewire that charge for using the program (with limewire facelift) to do unlimited downloads - Still Ilegal. Also I ran across a customer who did his homework signed up for the third most popular DVD download site, but it was still a Paid P2P scam!! On 3/20/07, Mark Nash [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I had a customer tell me yesterday that he uses his Gnutella program to do unlimited downloads from a paid site. I've used the Mikrotik routers (p2p queue set to 64k) to block this and other programs, so it's not working now for the customer. I want to allow for paid downloads, but not P2P filesharing. Have you come across this? Can it be dealt with? Mark Nash Network Engineer UnwiredOnline.Net 350 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] P2P Apps Going Legit?
Mark Nash wrote: I had a customer tell me yesterday that he uses his Gnutella program to do unlimited downloads from a paid site. I've used the Mikrotik routers (p2p queue set to 64k) to block this and other programs, so it's not working now for the customer. I want to allow for paid downloads, but not P2P filesharing. The most likely scenario here is the one that's already been mentioned a couple times - that your customer, basically, was conned. At this time, I don't know of any (legal) services that operate that way. At this time being the key phrase. Over time, this WILL become an issue. Bram Cohen (the author of the popular BitTorrent software) has made deals with a number of media centers, such that bittorrent.com is now has a non-trivial amount of legal content that users download using P2P software. And there are the classic examples like Linux ISOs and archive.org. There were rumors that Apple might integrate some kind of P2P software into their iTV (now AppleTV) product, to speed the download of purchased programming. I don't think anything came of that, but still. Like it or not, a lot of our customers want to use P2P software, and we're basically out of time for the old everything you do is illegal speech, because that's provably not true any longer. (Yes, it's still 95% true, but that's a quibble.) Generally, I tell users that I really don't care what they're downloading, only how they're downloading it. A brief speech on how RF, as a shared medium, works, and most customers are at least somewhat understanding. (Note: not necessarily happy, just understanding.) As a tangent to this, has anyone deployed a sizeable wireless network that uses, say, Mikrotik's M3P or something similar for the end-users? If so, does it actually make P2P usable for end-users without making everyone's connections feel sluggish? David Smith MVN.net -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] P2P Apps Going Legit?
The only cure for P2P is bandwidth caps. We have operated this way since our inception 5 years ago. We all sale bandwidth for a living - - the more I sale the more money I make. I tell every client what their share is for the month (listed in our TOS AUP) and I charge for any amount over that. I do shape all P2P, but that is for self preservation! Mac -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David E. Smith Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 2:05 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] P2P Apps Going Legit? Mark Nash wrote: I had a customer tell me yesterday that he uses his Gnutella program to do unlimited downloads from a paid site. I've used the Mikrotik routers (p2p queue set to 64k) to block this and other programs, so it's not working now for the customer. I want to allow for paid downloads, but not P2P filesharing. The most likely scenario here is the one that's already been mentioned a couple times - that your customer, basically, was conned. At this time, I don't know of any (legal) services that operate that way. At this time being the key phrase. Over time, this WILL become an issue. Bram Cohen (the author of the popular BitTorrent software) has made deals with a number of media centers, such that bittorrent.com is now has a non-trivial amount of legal content that users download using P2P software. And there are the classic examples like Linux ISOs and archive.org. There were rumors that Apple might integrate some kind of P2P software into their iTV (now AppleTV) product, to speed the download of purchased programming. I don't think anything came of that, but still. Like it or not, a lot of our customers want to use P2P software, and we're basically out of time for the old everything you do is illegal speech, because that's provably not true any longer. (Yes, it's still 95% true, but that's a quibble.) Generally, I tell users that I really don't care what they're downloading, only how they're downloading it. A brief speech on how RF, as a shared medium, works, and most customers are at least somewhat understanding. (Note: not necessarily happy, just understanding.) As a tangent to this, has anyone deployed a sizeable wireless network that uses, say, Mikrotik's M3P or something similar for the end-users? If so, does it actually make P2P usable for end-users without making everyone's connections feel sluggish? David Smith MVN.net -- 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] P2P Apps Going Legit?
Or - shape EVERYTHING. You don't want limits? You can easily set a burst limit, not like a typical one, but using long averages and multiple shapes. Like for instance: 10M burst, for 10 seconds, then 5M burst for 30 seconds, after that you take it down to 1-2Mbps for say 30 more seconds. But you don't tell the customer this... On a MT router, I noticed shaping on conventional shared cable broadband - you can literally watch the shape on a big download. - Original Message - From: David E. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 2:05 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] P2P Apps Going Legit? Mark Nash wrote: I had a customer tell me yesterday that he uses his Gnutella program to do unlimited downloads from a paid site. I've used the Mikrotik routers (p2p queue set to 64k) to block this and other programs, so it's not working now for the customer. I want to allow for paid downloads, but not P2P filesharing. The most likely scenario here is the one that's already been mentioned a couple times - that your customer, basically, was conned. At this time, I don't know of any (legal) services that operate that way. At this time being the key phrase. Over time, this WILL become an issue. Bram Cohen (the author of the popular BitTorrent software) has made deals with a number of media centers, such that bittorrent.com is now has a non-trivial amount of legal content that users download using P2P software. And there are the classic examples like Linux ISOs and archive.org. There were rumors that Apple might integrate some kind of P2P software into their iTV (now AppleTV) product, to speed the download of purchased programming. I don't think anything came of that, but still. Like it or not, a lot of our customers want to use P2P software, and we're basically out of time for the old everything you do is illegal speech, because that's provably not true any longer. (Yes, it's still 95% true, but that's a quibble.) Generally, I tell users that I really don't care what they're downloading, only how they're downloading it. A brief speech on how RF, as a shared medium, works, and most customers are at least somewhat understanding. (Note: not necessarily happy, just understanding.) As a tangent to this, has anyone deployed a sizeable wireless network that uses, say, Mikrotik's M3P or something similar for the end-users? If so, does it actually make P2P usable for end-users without making everyone's connections feel sluggish? David Smith MVN.net -- 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: 7.1.413 / Virus Database: 268.18.15/728 - Release Date: 3/20/2007 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Fw: [WISP] cost per customer and new toys
I didn't see much talk on this so I thought I'd see what everyone else has to say. Marlon (509) 982-2181 (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Scott Piehn [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 7:42 AM Subject: Re: [WISP] cost per customer and new toys $7.04 to $9.58/ sub Includes Bandwidth, and tower rent Scott Piehn - Original Message - From: Rick Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 7:49 AM Subject: RE: [WISP] cost per customer and new toys so $45/month is killing you ? :) Same here... -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 8:24 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WISP] cost per customer and new toys I don't have very many customers to spread this over, but... No circuits $12.5/sub for bandwidth $166/sub for AP $16/sub for Office Don't have or have the ability to track other expenses. We also have VoIP service that I didn't include there. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 12:19 AM Subject: [WISP] cost per customer and new toys OK, this aughta be fun What is your COST per customer? We went thought some accounting stuff the other day and tried to figure a few things out. Cost of data circuits: $2 to $3 per sub Cost for bandwidth: $1 to $2 per sub Cost for aps: $1 to $20 per sub Office rent: $1ish per sub Labor: $3 to $5 per sub Gas: $1.5 to $2 per sub Insurance: $.75 per sub Customer acquisition costs (advertising, selling at a loss etc.) $50 to $100 per sub (mostly one time in my case) I'm sure I've left a lot out. Right now we've run about a 15% profit margin for the last three years. That'll go higher with more customers as we'll not need bigger data pipes etc. for at least 3x more customers than today. We'll have to upgrade some of our backhauls and ap's but we're in good shape for servers and all of that. I also roll my servers out every 3 to 4 years. Always lots of memory and high end processors. I've not done raid in quite a while though. What to offer next. We're working on off site backups. But we need new servers with LOTs of space. Not sure I can justify thousands for a good machine with several hundred gigs of storage just for a few $30 per month backup accounts. I have a server with a couple of 80 gig drives in it, I tried to backup my email, pics and music and filled the drive and crashed the box :-). I'm also a bit worried about not having the server backed up. No matter how much we tell people NOT to use our box as their ONLY copy of critical photos, docs etc. they will. I'd also like to find a program that'll run on our web server and authenticate against our radius server. I want my customers to be able to have something similar to myspace but though me instead of them. No luck finding a package for that yet though. laters, marlon *** WISPCON 2007 - Feb 21-23, 2007 - New Orleans http://www.wispcon.info/us/wispcon-ix/center.htm *** Register your services in our FREE WISP Locator http://www.part-15.org/maps/WISPSearch.asp *** The PART-15.ORG WISP Discussion List To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe wisp yournickname To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type unsubscribe wisp) Archives: http://archives.part-15.org *** WISPCON 2007 - Feb 21-23, 2007 - New Orleans http://www.wispcon.info/us/wispcon-ix/center.htm *** Register your services in our FREE WISP Locator http://www.part-15.org/maps/WISPSearch.asp *** The PART-15.ORG WISP Discussion List To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe wisp yournickname To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type unsubscribe wisp) Archives: http://archives.part-15.org *** WISPCON 2007 - Feb 21-23, 2007 - New Orleans http://www.wispcon.info/us/wispcon-ix/center.htm *** Register your services in our FREE WISP Locator http://www.part-15.org/maps/WISPSearch.asp *** The PART-15.ORG WISP Discussion List To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe wisp yournickname To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type unsubscribe wisp) Archives:
Re: [WISPA] P2P Apps Going Legit?
Ares Ultra costs the customer around $50 from what I hear. It ENCRYPTS the P2P traffic, and the Mikrotik will NOT recognize it as P2P traffic, so it will take EVERY AVAILABLE PACKET that your AP can push out. The way I have dealt with this is to disable the client (at the radio level) and when they call, I tell them that we cannot support P2P applications. If they demand that they have to do it, and refuse to quit, then I uninstall them, and suggest that they get their broadband elsewhere. I haven't found a more effective way to make it work. pd Mark Nash wrote: I had a customer tell me yesterday that he uses his Gnutella program to do unlimited downloads from a paid site. I've used the Mikrotik routers (p2p queue set to 64k) to block this and other programs, so it's not working now for the customer. I want to allow for paid downloads, but not P2P filesharing. Have you come across this? Can it be dealt with? Mark Nash Network Engineer UnwiredOnline.Net 350 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] P2P Apps Going Legit?
Ares Ultra costs the customer around $50 from what I hear. It ENCRYPTS the P2P traffic, and the Mikrotik will NOT recognize it as P2P traffic, so it will take EVERY AVAILABLE PACKET that your AP can push out. The way I have dealt with this is to disable the client (at the radio level) and when they call, I tell them that we cannot support P2P applications. If they demand that they have to do it, and refuse to quit, then I uninstall them, and suggest that they get their broadband elsewhere. I haven't found a more effective way to make it work. pd Mark Nash wrote: I had a customer tell me yesterday that he uses his Gnutella program to do unlimited downloads from a paid site. I've used the Mikrotik routers (p2p queue set to 64k) to block this and other programs, so it's not working now for the customer. I want to allow for paid downloads, but not P2P filesharing. Have you come across this? Can it be dealt with? Mark Nash Network Engineer UnwiredOnline.Net 350 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] P2P Apps Going Legit?
Check out the High Speed Wireless program here. Pay special attention to the transfer limits. http://www.odessaoffice.com/services.html We turn things like that into profit centers. If they won't pay, then they fire themselves. OR they learn to control their usage. If they stay and don't control usage, fine with me. I love my $35 accounts that actually pay $50 to $60 per month. grin marlon - Original Message - From: Pete Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 7:29 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] P2P Apps Going Legit? Ares Ultra costs the customer around $50 from what I hear. It ENCRYPTS the P2P traffic, and the Mikrotik will NOT recognize it as P2P traffic, so it will take EVERY AVAILABLE PACKET that your AP can push out. The way I have dealt with this is to disable the client (at the radio level) and when they call, I tell them that we cannot support P2P applications. If they demand that they have to do it, and refuse to quit, then I uninstall them, and suggest that they get their broadband elsewhere. I haven't found a more effective way to make it work. pd Mark Nash wrote: I had a customer tell me yesterday that he uses his Gnutella program to do unlimited downloads from a paid site. I've used the Mikrotik routers (p2p queue set to 64k) to block this and other programs, so it's not working now for the customer. I want to allow for paid downloads, but not P2P filesharing. Have you come across this? Can it be dealt with? Mark Nash Network Engineer UnwiredOnline.Net 350 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/
