Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
Ok Jack, I have to admit, I have not read your book, but if it reads like this discussion, I have no desire too, unless you 1. either state that your book is for the advanced wireless subjects, or 2. Thoroughly describe your acronyms. FYI, I do understand most of the poster's acronyms, but for the average WISP operator, I doubt they do. I have a BS in Electrical Engineering and a BS in Management of Information Sciences, not to be tooting my own horn. No, I do not work for Alvarion or Motorola, nor do I have a desire too. Maybe I was in the wrong with my post about the poster's acronyms and my direct criticism with the use of acronyms. I also believe your post was in direct comment to me about my understanding and involvement of WISP activities. I publicly admit, I am not a member of WISPA at the moment, and as long as as an acting officer or supreme WISPA being is degrading me, I will not become a member. Scottie Arnett President Info-Ed, Inc. Broadband Internet Service Provider -- Original Message -- From: Jack Unger jun...@ask-wi.com Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2009 22:39:38 -0700 !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN html head meta content=text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1 http-equiv=Content-Type title/title /head body bgcolor=#ff text=#00 Yep it's too bad that many wireless ISPs have no interest in learning about wireless. br br Scottie Arnett wrote: blockquote cite=mid:200910040029.aa21037...@mail.info-ed.com type=cite pre wrap=I am reading your response and can not decipher all your algorithms? Point that out and I will have a much more understanding of what you are scientifically trying to say. Most WISPS have absolutely no scientific background! John -- Original Message -- From: Lawrence E. Bakst a class=moz-txt-link-rfc2396E href=mailto:m...@iridescent.org;m...@iridescent.org/a Reply-To: WISPA General List a class=moz-txt-link-rfc2396E href=mailto:wireless@wispa.org;wireless@wispa.org/a Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 00:15:45 -0400 /pre blockquote type=cite pre wrap=I think you guys know most of this already, but here is my take FWIW. I'm not a WISP, but I spent 5 years leading the design and development of an 802.11[agb] security system. We did our own polling solution based on 802.11e HCCA to solve the RTS/hidden node problem. All things being equal (which they often aren't) 802.11b will give you a higher S/N and C/I than 802.11g, because in almost all cases and especially at higher speeds. 802.11g has to lower the PA power because of the PAPR of OFDM and meeting the 802.11g EVM spec. It is true that 2.4 GHz can be very polluted. We found the noise floor to be really awful. You would be surprised by the number of entities that know they are way over the FCC max power in 2.4 GHz, but I digress. We once measured over 300 PHY errors a second on an unused 2.4 GHz channel. The number went down to 150 PHY errors a second inside an FCC chamber, if you can believe that. Having said all that we didn't use 802.11b at all because it's data rates are too low for video. Also while we supported 2.4 GHz, we mostly deployed at 5.8 GHz ISM because of the increased power available there and the pollution was much less, but that maybe different now. For 802.11[ag] mutlipoint, the sweet spot speed wise is 18-36 Mbps. It's very hard to keep a multipoint system at 48 or 54 Mbps because you need a great deal of link margin and with all cards you loose power as the speed increases to maintain PAPR/EVM. For point to point with direction antenna relief you can often maintain 48 or 54. Antennae make a big difference, as others have noted horizontal polarization is usually best and make the beam as narrow as you can afford because it raises the effective gain. However, if you are in an area where everyone else is horizontal it can make sense to try vertical. With some of the antennae we used that was as simple as rotating the antenna 90 deg at both ends. Watch out for crappy antennae, cheap cable, bad connectors, and so on. That can often cost you a few dB. In the product I designed I spent more time then I care to admit trying to make a very tough loss budget that I set out as a goal. There is no substitute for link margin, you can never really have enough. I can confirm that our sweeps with a spectrum analyzer show lots of opportunity to use 5 and 10 MHz channels, as others have also noted. For WISPs it would be nice if chip vendors designed the radios so that you could set the channel bandwidth from 5-40 MHz in 1 MHz increments. It can be done but probably won't be, although maybe the Microsoft WhiteFI stuff force the chip vendors to do it. In WiMax and LTE they are already doing some things close to this. Still 5, 10, and 20 isn't bad and probably hits the sweet spot or 80/20 rule. One of the down sides of fitting a 5 or 10 MHz channel in a
Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
Lawrence post wasn't too technical at all Stuff wisps operators or at least the RF guy of a wisp should know Gino A. Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2009 1:40 AM To: sarn...@info-ed.com; WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-) Yep it's too bad that many wireless ISPs have no interest in learning about wireless. Scottie Arnett wrote: I am reading your response and can not decipher all your algorithms? Point that out and I will have a much more understanding of what you are scientifically trying to say. Most WISPS have absolutely no scientific background! John -- Original Message -- From: Lawrence E. Bakst m...@iridescent.org mailto:m...@iridescent.org Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org mailto:wireless@wispa.org Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 00:15:45 -0400 I think you guys know most of this already, but here is my take FWIW. I'm not a WISP, but I spent 5 years leading the design and development of an 802.11[agb] security system. We did our own polling solution based on 802.11e HCCA to solve the RTS/hidden node problem. All things being equal (which they often aren't) 802.11b will give you a higher S/N and C/I than 802.11g, because in almost all cases and especially at higher speeds. 802.11g has to lower the PA power because of the PAPR of OFDM and meeting the 802.11g EVM spec. It is true that 2.4 GHz can be very polluted. We found the noise floor to be really awful. You would be surprised by the number of entities that know they are way over the FCC max power in 2.4 GHz, but I digress. We once measured over 300 PHY errors a second on an unused 2.4 GHz channel. The number went down to 150 PHY errors a second inside an FCC chamber, if you can believe that. Having said all that we didn't use 802.11b at all because it's data rates are too low for video. Also while we supported 2.4 GHz, we mostly deployed at 5.8 GHz ISM because of the increased power available there and the pollution was much less, but that maybe different now. For 802.11[ag] mutlipoint, the sweet spot speed wise is 18-36 Mbps. It's very hard to keep a multipoint system at 48 or 54 Mbps because you need a great deal of link margin and with all cards you loose power as the speed increases to maintain PAPR/EVM. For point to point with direction antenna relief you can often maintain 48 or 54. Antennae make a big difference, as others have noted horizontal polarization is usually best and make the beam as narrow as you can afford because it raises the effective gain. However, if you are in an area where everyone else is horizontal it can make sense to try vertical. With some of the antennae we used that was as simple as rotating the antenna 90 deg at both ends. Watch out for crappy antennae, cheap cable, bad connectors, and so on. That can often cost you a few dB. In the product I designed I spent more time then I care to admit trying to make a very tough loss budget that I set out as a goal. There is no substitute for link margin, you can never really have enough. I can confirm that our sweeps with a spectrum analyzer show lots of opportunity to use 5 and 10 MHz channels, as others have also noted. For WISPs it would be nice if chip vendors designed the radios so that you could set the channel bandwidth from 5-40 MHz in 1 MHz increments. It can be done but probably won't be, although maybe the Microsoft WhiteFI stuff force the chip vendors to do it. In WiMax and LTE they are already doing some things close to this. Still 5, 10, and 20 isn't bad and probably hits the sweet spot or 80/20 rule. One of the down sides of fitting a 5 or 10 MHz channel in a sweet spot is that it can change at any time. Best, leb At 9:58 AM -0500 10/1/09, Jason Hensley wrote: In 2.4 land, if you have a lot of noise, which protocol is better - B or G? Is it better to run an AP as locked into one mode or is it OK to do a mix? Max I want off of 2.4 customers is 3meg so not that worried about the extra speed that G will provide, but, I would like to know which is more stable? I've always thought that B was more stable overall but just provided less bandwidth. I've gotten some info that may counter that. What's the real-world experience with folks in a high-noise environment, combined with a higher useage AP?
Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
At 11:15 PM 10/3/2009, Lawrence wrote: ... All things being equal (which they often aren't) 802.11b will give you a higher S/N and C/I than 802.11g, because in almost all cases and especially at higher speeds. 802.11g has to lower the PA power because of the PAPR of OFDM and meeting the 802.11g EVM spec. Given, and considering OFDM modulation vice CCK, there are a couple things to note. With G, and the faster data rates, client transactions are over faster and tend to give the AP back sooner, especially if the operator elects to transmit the PLCP header with a short (56 bit) preamble. This is true for at least 90% of the traffic on my network which is very bursty activity. Get 'em out of the way faster! Additionally, OFDM survives in a multi-path environment much better. In my environment, water towers, barns, machine sheds, silos all seem to reflect the signal around. Having said all that we didn't use 802.11b at all because it's data rates are too low for video. There are some links which, because of a lower signal to noise, where B just works much better. But, while they are on are using the resources of the sector much longer than their G counterparts. Also while we supported 2.4 GHz, we mostly deployed at 5.8 GHz ISM because of the increased power available there and the pollution was much less, but that maybe different now. In my environment neither is saturated. 2.4 works better because of the variability in terrain. Signals arriving over corn fields also work better than signals arriving over bean fields. :-) There is no substitute for link margin, you can never really have enough. I like to do installs this time of year. Foliage is at maximum growth for the year. Crops are mature and waving in the breeze. The leaves are drying but still on the trees. Rain water collects in those trees. If it works now, and I have sufficient fade margin, it will only get better this winter as the leaves drop. Tne of the down sides of fitting a 5 or 10 MHz channel in a sweet spot is that it can change at any time. This is true of any public frequency, but the effects on a half or quarter channel are less pronounced, and the fractional channels give an immediate boost in the SI over a 20 MHz channel size. I think there is room for ANY lively discussions on this list; administrative, technical or otherwise. Long live wireless and free enterprise! Mike WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
Title: Thank You, Here is my opinion for what it is worth: The post Lawrence put up was worth thousands of dollars that a WISP would have to spend in both time and equipment to figure out the lessons he's already learned. He posted his knowledge to the group for FREE as additional input to the original question. For that we should all be thankful. If a person does not understand a particular topic or all of the information contained in the message they can, one delete the message and move on, two ask some follow up questions in a polite manor in hopes that they can gain further understanding of the topic. My father in law has a rule in his house and I try to stick to it in life. The rule is (especially at his bar), if we don't have something nice to say about a person, we won't say anything at all. It keeps the negativity down. Everyone likes to hang out at his place (nice positive environment). It's not that we always have to be in agreement with everyone, but we just don't need to be doing things with a negative attitude. There are plenty of ways to have the discussion in a more constructive fashion. Thank You, Brian Webster Scottie Arnett wrote: Ok Jack, I have to admit, I have not read your book, but if it reads like this discussion, I have no desire too, unless you 1. either state that your book is for the advanced wireless subjects, or 2. Thoroughly describe your acronyms. FYI, I do understand most of the poster's acronyms, but for the average WISP operator, I doubt they do. I have a BS in Electrical Engineering and a BS in Management of Information Sciences, not to be tooting my own horn. No, I do not work for Alvarion or Motorola, nor do I have a desire too. Maybe I was in the wrong with my post about the poster's acronyms and my direct criticism with the use of acronyms. I also believe your post was in direct comment to me about my understanding and involvement of WISP activities. I publicly admit, I am not a member of WISPA at the moment, and as long as as an acting officer or "supreme WISPA being" is degrading me, I will not become a member. Scottie Arnett President Info-Ed, Inc. Broadband Internet Service Provider -- Original Message -- From: Jack Unger jun...@ask-wi.com Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2009 22:39:38 -0700 !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" html head meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type" title/title /head body bgcolor="#ff" text="#00" Yep it's too bad that many wireless ISPs have no interest in learning about wireless. br br Scottie Arnett wrote: blockquote cite="" class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:mid:200910040029.aa21037...@mail.info-ed.com">"mid:200910040029.aa21037...@mail.info-ed.com" type="cite" pre wrap=""I am reading your response and can not decipher all your algorithms? Point that out and I will have a much more understanding of what you are scientifically trying to say. Most WISPS have absolutely no scientific background! John -- Original Message -- From: "Lawrence E. Bakst" a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="" class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:m...@iridescent.org">"mailto:m...@iridescent.org"m...@iridescent.org/a Reply-To: WISPA General List a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="" class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:wireless@wispa.org">"mailto:wireless@wispa.org"wireless@wispa.org/a Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 00:15:45 -0400 /pre blockquote type="cite" pre wrap=""I think you guys know most of this already, but here is my take FWIW. I'm not a WISP, but I spent 5 years leading the design and development of an 802.11[agb] security system. We did our own polling solution based on 802.11e HCCA to solve the RTS/hidden node problem. All things being equal (which they often aren't) 802.11b will give you a higher S/N and C/I than 802.11g, because in almost all cases and especially at higher speeds. 802.11g has to lower the PA power because of the PAPR of OFDM and meeting the 802.11g EVM spec. It is true that 2.4 GHz can be very polluted. We found the noise floor to be really awful. You would be surprised by the number of "entities" that know they are way over the FCC max power in 2.4 GHz, but I digress. We once measured over 300 PHY errors a second on an "unused" 2.4 GHz channel. The number went down to 150 PHY errors a second inside an FCC chamber, if you can believe that. Having said all that we didn't use 802.11b at all because it's data rates are too low for video. Also while we supported 2.4 GHz, we mostly deployed at 5.8 GHz ISM because of the increased power available there and the pollution was much less, but that maybe different now. For 802.11[ag] mutlipoint, the sweet spot speed wise is 18-36 Mbps. It's very hard to keep a multipoint system at 48 or 54 Mbps because you need a great deal of link margin and with all cards you loose power as the speed
Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
(below is from http://en.allexperts.com/e/i/ie/ieee_802.11e.htm) HCCA: The HCCA works a lot like the PCF: the interval between two beacon frames is divided into two periods, the CFP and the CP. During the CFP, the Hybrid Coordinator (HC) controls the access to the medium. During the CP, all stations function in EDCA. The main difference with the PCF is that Traffic Classes (TC) are defined. Also, the HC can coordinate the traffic in any fashion it chooses (not just round-robin). Moreover, the stations give info about the lengths of their queues for each Traffic Class (TC). The HC can use this info to give priority to one station over another. Another difference is that stations are given a TXOP: they may send multiple packets in a row, for a given time period selected by the HC. During the CP, the HC allows stations to send data by sending CF-Poll frames. --- PCF: The original 802.11 MAC defines another coordination function called the Point Coordination Function (PCF): this is available only in infrastructure mode, where stations are connected to the network through an Access Point (AP). This mode is optional, and only very few APs or Wi-Fi adapters actually implement it. APs send beacon frames at regular intervals (usually every 0.1 second). Between these beacon frames, PCF defines two periods: the Contention Free Period (CFP) and the Contention Period (CP). In CP, the DCF is simply used. In CFP, the AP sends Contention Free-Poll (CF-Poll) packets to each station, one at a time, to give them the right to send a packet. The AP is the coordinator. This allows for a better management of the QoS. Unfortunately, the PCF has limited support and a number of limitations (for example, it does not define classes of traffic). HCCA is generally considered the most advanced (and complex) coordination function. With the HCCA, QoS can be configured with great precision. QoS-enabled stations have the ability to request specific transmission parameters (data rate, jitter, etc.) which should allow advanced applications like VoIP and video streaming to work more effectively on a Wi-Fi network. HCCA support is not mandatory for 802.11e APs. In fact, few (if any) APs currently available are enabled for HCCA. The Wi-Fi Alliance has a forthcoming certification (WMM Scheduled Access) that will allow network integrators to easily distinguish APs that allow HCCA. --- (below is just from my limited knowlege) PA: Power Amplifier --- (below is from http://www.wirelessdictionary.com/wireless_dictionary_UMTS_LTE_PAPR_Definition.html ) PAPR: Peak to Average Power Ratio; Peak to average power ratio is a comparison of the peak power detected over a period of sample time to the average power level that occurs over the same time period. SC-FDMA has a lower PAPR as compared to other radio channel structures such as OFDMA. --- (below is from http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1069514 and http://www.gigascale.org/pubs/1333.html ) EVM: In digital radio applications, error-vector-magnitude (EVM) is the primary specification which quantifies the performance of digital modulation implemented in silicon. In production testing of wireless systems, measurement of EVM (a critical spec that is directly related to bit error rate) incurs significant test time due to the large numbers of symbols that need to be transmitted for reasons of accuracy. In our approach, EVM is modeled as a function of the system static non-idealities (IQ mismatch, gain, IIP3 parameters) and dynamic non-idealities (system noise, VCO phase noise). Using a selected subset of the OFDM tones, the static parameters are calculated first. These are then used to facilitate noise estimation using a back-end constellation compensation and noise amplification procedure. --- NOW! with that out of the way, let's all put our guns, arrows, cannons, swords, phallic members and the great and powerful REPLY-ALL keys (http://www.kirikiri.com/that/reply.gif) away and THANK the non- member/non-usual poster for his time and information! Lawrence, thanks so much for this posting. A little homework on my/our part using http://lmgtfy.com/?q=802.11+specs really clued me in on some things I have to take into account when doing installs and growing my customer base. And the rest of you! It is Sunday morning, you should all still be in your underwear drinking coffee taking a day off! :) Just think of me at 4000 feet building a repeater shed as the snow starts to fall and have a great day! ryan On Oct 4, 2009, at
[WISPA] OT: Speaking of G, anyone need a 60' Rohn 25G?
Pardon the for sale type post, it's my first offense! I have a brand new 60' Rohn 25G kit I never wound up using. Complete with guy brackets, bolts, and a 1000' spool of Rohn supplied guy wire. Has tilt over base and top piece too. Anyone need this before the spiders in my shop carry it off? Sacramento CA area. Rk WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] OT: Speaking of G, anyone need a 60' Rohn 25G?
As long as there are not multiple posts about passing on info for a sale, I dont see the harm. With that said, I have a wonderful Cisco 7204VXR with a 4 port T1 card and redundant power supplies I need to get to a good home. This unit just does its job and works with no compliants! Make an offer offlist. On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 10:48 AM, Rick Kunze rku...@colusanet.com wrote: Pardon the for sale type post, it's my first offense! I have a brand new 60' Rohn 25G kit I never wound up using. Complete with guy brackets, bolts, and a 1000' spool of Rohn supplied guy wire. Has tilt over base and top piece too. Anyone need this before the spiders in my shop carry it off? Sacramento CA area. Rk WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] OT: Speaking of G, anyone need a 60' Rohn 25G?
FYI, "for sale" posts are not appropriate for this list. RickG wrote: As long as there are not multiple posts about passing on info for a sale, I dont see the harm. With that said, I have a wonderful Cisco 7204VXR with a 4 port T1 card and redundant power supplies I need to get to a good home. This unit just does its job and works with no compliants! Make an offer offlist. On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 10:48 AM, Rick Kunze rku...@colusanet.com wrote: Pardon the for sale type post, it's my first offense! I have a brand new 60' Rohn 25G kit I never wound up using. Complete with guy brackets, bolts, and a 1000' spool of Rohn supplied guy wire. Has tilt over base and top piece too. Anyone need this before the spiders in my shop carry it off? Sacramento CA area. Rk WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Author - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs" Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993 www.ask-wi.com 818-227-4220 jun...@ask-wi.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
Google has been a great solution to my ignorance. It's like downlading from the Matrix :-) From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Brian Webster Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2009 7:29 AM To: sarn...@info-ed.com; WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-) Here is my opinion for what it is worth: The post Lawrence put up was worth thousands of dollars that a WISP would have to spend in both time and equipment to figure out the lessons he's already learned. He posted his knowledge to the group for FREE as additional input to the original question. For that we should all be thankful. If a person does not understand a particular topic or all of the information contained in the message they can, one delete the message and move on, two ask some follow up questions in a polite manor in hopes that they can gain further understanding of the topic. My father in law has a rule in his house and I try to stick to it in life. The rule is (especially at his bar), if we don't have something nice to say about a person, we won't say anything at all. It keeps the negativity down. Everyone likes to hang out at his place (nice positive environment). It's not that we always have to be in agreement with everyone, but we just don't need to be doing things with a negative attitude. There are plenty of ways to have the discussion in a more constructive fashion. Thank You, Brian Webster Scottie Arnett wrote: Ok Jack, I have to admit, I have not read your book, but if it reads like this discussion, I have no desire too, unless you 1. either state that your book is for the advanced wireless subjects, or 2. Thoroughly describe your acronyms. FYI, I do understand most of the poster's acronyms, but for the average WISP operator, I doubt they do. I have a BS in Electrical Engineering and a BS in Management of Information Sciences, not to be tooting my own horn. No, I do not work for Alvarion or Motorola, nor do I have a desire too. Maybe I was in the wrong with my post about the poster's acronyms and my direct criticism with the use of acronyms. I also believe your post was in direct comment to me about my understanding and involvement of WISP activities. I publicly admit, I am not a member of WISPA at the moment, and as long as as an acting officer or supreme WISPA being is degrading me, I will not become a member. Scottie Arnett President Info-Ed, Inc. Broadband Internet Service Provider -- Original Message -- From: Jack Unger jun...@ask-wi.commailto:jun...@ask-wi.com Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2009 22:39:38 -0700 !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN html head meta content=text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1 http-equiv=Content-Type title/title /head body bgcolor=#ff text=#00 Yep it's too bad that many wireless ISPs have no interest in learning about wireless. br br Scottie Arnett wrote: blockquote cite=mid:200910040029.aa21037...@mail.info-ed.commailto:mid:200910040029.aa21037...@mail.info-ed.com type=cite pre wrap=I am reading your response and can not decipher all your algorithms? Point that out and I will have a much more understanding of what you are scientifically trying to say. Most WISPS have absolutely no scientific background! John -- Original Message -- From: Lawrence E. Bakst a class=moz-txt-link-rfc2396E href=mailto:m...@iridescent.org;mailto:m...@iridescent.orgm...@iridescent.orgmailto:m...@iridescent.org/a Reply-To: WISPA General List a class=moz-txt-link-rfc2396E href=mailto:wireless@wispa.org;mailto:wireless@wispa.orgwireless@wispa.orgmailto:wireless@wispa.org/a Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 00:15:45 -0400 /pre blockquote type=cite pre wrap=I think you guys know most of this already, but here is my take FWIW. I'm not a WISP, but I spent 5 years leading the design and development of an 802.11[agb] security system. We did our own polling solution based on 802.11e HCCA to solve the RTS/hidden node problem. All things being equal (which they often aren't) 802.11b will give you a higher S/N and C/I than 802.11g, because in almost all cases and especially at higher speeds. 802.11g has to lower the PA power because of the PAPR of OFDM and meeting the 802.11g EVM spec. It is true that 2.4 GHz can be very polluted. We found the noise floor to be really awful. You would be surprised by the number of entities that know they are way over the FCC max power in 2.4 GHz, but I digress. We once measured over 300 PHY errors a second on an unused 2.4 GHz channel. The number went down to 150 PHY errors a second inside an FCC chamber, if you can believe that. Having said all that we didn't use 802.11b at all because it's data rates are too low for video. Also while we supported 2.4 GHz, we mostly deployed at 5.8 GHz ISM because of the increased power available there and the
Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
On Sun, 2009-10-04 at 02:31 -0500, Scottie Arnett wrote: Ok Jack, I have to admit, I have not read your book, but if it reads like this discussion, I have no desire too, unless you 1. either state that your book is for the advanced wireless subjects, or 2. Thoroughly describe your acronyms. I have read Jack's book and I must say that it is very well written and is very easy to understand. It is, however, VERY technical. There is a lot of math, but that is out of necessity. Personally, I highly recommend the book. http://www.ask-wi.com/book.html for those that don't know about it. -- * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* * http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering * * http://www.wispa.org/ * Wired or Wireless Networks * * http://blog.butchevans.com/ * ImageStream, Mikrotik and MORE! * WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] OT: Speaking of G, anyone need a 60' Rohn 25G?
Which list would they be appropriate on? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com From: Jack Unger Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2009 11:45 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] OT: Speaking of G, anyone need a 60' Rohn 25G? FYI, for sale posts are not appropriate for this list. RickG wrote: As long as there are not multiple posts about passing on info for a sale, I dont see the harm. With that said, I have a wonderful Cisco 7204VXR with a 4 port T1 card and redundant power supplies I need to get to a good home. This unit just does its job and works with no compliants! Make an offer offlist. On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 10:48 AM, Rick Kunze rku...@colusanet.com wrote: Pardon the for sale type post, it's my first offense! I have a brand new 60' Rohn 25G kit I never wound up using. Complete with guy brackets, bolts, and a 1000' spool of Rohn supplied guy wire. Has tilt over base and top piece too. Anyone need this before the spiders in my shop carry it off? Sacramento CA area. Rk WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Author - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993 www.ask-wi.com 818-227-4220 jun...@ask-wi.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
Scottie, I read the whole thread and I don't see any remarks by Jack Unger that should be taken personally. He made a very fair and honest observation. I only wish I knew more about wireless. I have read Jack's book and recommend it as well, but I think I should read it a few more times and pick up some other scientific journals to also enhance my knowledge of the subject. I also didn't see anything wrong with your post in reply to Lawrence. Acronyms are used often in present times and I often have to look up the acronym to see what the author is referring to. Usually in a few keystrokes I can find the answer, which is a credit to the Internet industry. This is a forum of intelligent people and it often challenges our diligence to enhance our intelligence even more. I do not believe Jack's post was a direct comment towards Scottie Arnett. I have known Jack for many years and am always very impressed with the amount of dedication and time he devotes to our industry. I can only hope that you will someday advance beyond trying to read extra content into other's posts and understand that most people don't know who Scottie Arnett is or what contributions you have made to the industry. I'm sure you have great respect for your accomplishments in your local marketplace and I applaud you for that. However, WISPA is bigger than any one small marketplace. WISPA is the sum of lots of small marketplaces and operators who realize the strength of cooperating and collaborating with others who have similar interests and challenges. Respectfully, Rick Harnish -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Scottie Arnett Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2009 3:32 AM To: wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-) Ok Jack, I have to admit, I have not read your book, but if it reads like this discussion, I have no desire too, unless you 1. either state that your book is for the advanced wireless subjects, or 2. Thoroughly describe your acronyms. FYI, I do understand most of the poster's acronyms, but for the average WISP operator, I doubt they do. I have a BS in Electrical Engineering and a BS in Management of Information Sciences, not to be tooting my own horn. No, I do not work for Alvarion or Motorola, nor do I have a desire too. Maybe I was in the wrong with my post about the poster's acronyms and my direct criticism with the use of acronyms. I also believe your post was in direct comment to me about my understanding and involvement of WISP activities. I publicly admit, I am not a member of WISPA at the moment, and as long as as an acting officer or supreme WISPA being is degrading me, I will not become a member. Scottie Arnett President Info-Ed, Inc. Broadband Internet Service Provider -- Original Message -- From: Jack Unger jun...@ask-wi.com Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2009 22:39:38 -0700 !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN html head meta content=text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1 http-equiv=Content-Type title/title /head body bgcolor=#ff text=#00 Yep it's too bad that many wireless ISPs have no interest in learning about wireless. br br Scottie Arnett wrote: blockquote cite=mid:200910040029.aa21037...@mail.info-ed.com type=cite pre wrap=I am reading your response and can not decipher all your algorithms? Point that out and I will have a much more understanding of what you are scientifically trying to say. Most WISPS have absolutely no scientific background! John -- Original Message -- From: Lawrence E. Bakst a class=moz-txt-link-rfc2396E href=mailto:m...@iridescent.org;m...@iridescent.org/a Reply-To: WISPA General List a class=moz-txt-link-rfc2396E href=mailto:wireless@wispa.org;wireless@wispa.org/a Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 00:15:45 -0400 /pre blockquote type=cite pre wrap=I think you guys know most of this already, but here is my take FWIW. I'm not a WISP, but I spent 5 years leading the design and development of an 802.11[agb] security system. We did our own polling solution based on 802.11e HCCA to solve the RTS/hidden node problem. All things being equal (which they often aren't) 802.11b will give you a higher S/N and C/I than 802.11g, because in almost all cases and especially at higher speeds. 802.11g has to lower the PA power because of the PAPR of OFDM and meeting the 802.11g EVM spec. It is true that 2.4 GHz can be very polluted. We found the noise floor to be really awful. You would be surprised by the number of entities that know they are way over the FCC max power in 2.4 GHz, but I digress. We once measured over 300 PHY errors a second on an unused 2.4 GHz channel. The number went down to 150 PHY errors a second inside an FCC chamber, if you can believe that. Having said all that we didn't use 802.11b at all because it's data rates are too low for video. Also while we supported 2.4 GHz, we
Re: [WISPA] OT: Speaking of G, anyone need a 60' Rohn 25G?
So non-vendors can only list items for sale on the Canopy list on Fridays? If so, that needs changing. That never posed an issue on P-15 lists. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Jack Unger jun...@ask-wi.com Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2009 2:46 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] OT: Speaking of G, anyone need a 60' Rohn 25G? The Motorola Canopy list allows ads on Fridays. Please double-check with Chuck over there. Also, the WISPA Members list allows 4 ads per year from Vendor Members. Mike Hammett wrote: Which list would they be appropriate on? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com From: Jack Unger Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2009 11:45 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] OT: Speaking of G, anyone need a 60' Rohn 25G? FYI, for sale posts are not appropriate for this list. RickG wrote: As long as there are not multiple posts about passing on info for a sale, I dont see the harm. With that said, I have a wonderful Cisco 7204VXR with a 4 port T1 card and redundant power supplies I need to get to a good home. This unit just does its job and works with no compliants! Make an offer offlist. On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 10:48 AM, Rick Kunze rku...@colusanet.com wrote: Pardon the for sale type post, it's my first offense! I have a brand new 60' Rohn 25G kit I never wound up using. Complete with guy brackets, bolts, and a 1000' spool of Rohn supplied guy wire. Has tilt over base and top piece too. Anyone need this before the spiders in my shop carry it off? Sacramento CA area. Rk WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Author - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993 www.ask-wi.com 818-227-4220 jun...@ask-wi.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
I have been on this list since 2001. I have seen many toot their own horns whenever they can and I have seen others that dont. I have also seen many get their feathers ruffled way too easy. Either way, there are some that can talk the talk, some that walk the walk, some that talk the walk, and some that walk the talk. As they say, just because you can do something doesnt mean you should. Most of the talkers have left the list with their undies in a bind. I suggest that before sending out an email, try to rein your ego in a bit and the list will be better for it. After all isnt this list to help others, or get help, not to be self-serving? This is not pointed at any one person, just my two cents on the subject. With that said, its been my experience in visiting many WISP's around the country that they are some of the sharpest people around. In my mind, WISP's are a perfect example of good 'ol business ingenuity and entrepreneurship if there ever was one. My hat is off to all of you! -RickG On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 2:01 PM, Rick Harnish rharn...@wispa.org wrote: Scottie, I read the whole thread and I don't see any remarks by Jack Unger that should be taken personally. He made a very fair and honest observation. I only wish I knew more about wireless. I have read Jack's book and recommend it as well, but I think I should read it a few more times and pick up some other scientific journals to also enhance my knowledge of the subject. I also didn't see anything wrong with your post in reply to Lawrence. Acronyms are used often in present times and I often have to look up the acronym to see what the author is referring to. Usually in a few keystrokes I can find the answer, which is a credit to the Internet industry. This is a forum of intelligent people and it often challenges our diligence to enhance our intelligence even more. I do not believe Jack's post was a direct comment towards Scottie Arnett. I have known Jack for many years and am always very impressed with the amount of dedication and time he devotes to our industry. I can only hope that you will someday advance beyond trying to read extra content into other's posts and understand that most people don't know who Scottie Arnett is or what contributions you have made to the industry. I'm sure you have great respect for your accomplishments in your local marketplace and I applaud you for that. However, WISPA is bigger than any one small marketplace. WISPA is the sum of lots of small marketplaces and operators who realize the strength of cooperating and collaborating with others who have similar interests and challenges. Respectfully, Rick Harnish -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Scottie Arnett Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2009 3:32 AM To: wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-) Ok Jack, I have to admit, I have not read your book, but if it reads like this discussion, I have no desire too, unless you 1. either state that your book is for the advanced wireless subjects, or 2. Thoroughly describe your acronyms. FYI, I do understand most of the poster's acronyms, but for the average WISP operator, I doubt they do. I have a BS in Electrical Engineering and a BS in Management of Information Sciences, not to be tooting my own horn. No, I do not work for Alvarion or Motorola, nor do I have a desire too. Maybe I was in the wrong with my post about the poster's acronyms and my direct criticism with the use of acronyms. I also believe your post was in direct comment to me about my understanding and involvement of WISP activities. I publicly admit, I am not a member of WISPA at the moment, and as long as as an acting officer or supreme WISPA being is degrading me, I will not become a member. Scottie Arnett President Info-Ed, Inc. Broadband Internet Service Provider -- Original Message -- From: Jack Unger jun...@ask-wi.com Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2009 22:39:38 -0700 !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN html head meta content=text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1 http-equiv=Content-Type title/title /head body bgcolor=#ff text=#00 Yep it's too bad that many wireless ISPs have no interest in learning about wireless. br br Scottie Arnett wrote: blockquote cite=mid:200910040029.aa21037...@mail.info-ed.com type=cite pre wrap=I am reading your response and can not decipher all your algorithms? Point that out and I will have a much more understanding of what you are scientifically trying to say. Most WISPS have absolutely no scientific background! John -- Original Message -- From: Lawrence E. Bakst a class=moz-txt-link-rfc2396E href=mailto:m...@iridescent.org;m...@iridescent.org/a Reply-To: WISPA General List a class=moz-txt-link-rfc2396E href=mailto:wireless@wispa.org;wireless@wispa.org/a Date: Sun, 4
Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
My apologies to the list, it was supposed to have been off-list. My apologies to Jack and Lawrence too. I took Jack's post the wrong way and responded in an unprofessional manner. Tends to show one's IQ level at 3:00 AM after a few too many late night drinks after a rough week. Cheers, Scott -- Original Message -- From: RickG rgunder...@gmail.com Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 21:25:03 -0400 I have been on this list since 2001. I have seen many toot their own horns whenever they can and I have seen others that dont. I have also seen many get their feathers ruffled way too easy. Either way, there are some that can talk the talk, some that walk the walk, some that talk the walk, and some that walk the talk. As they say, just because you can do something doesnt mean you should. Most of the talkers have left the list with their undies in a bind. I suggest that before sending out an email, try to rein your ego in a bit and the list will be better for it. After all isnt this list to help others, or get help, not to be self-serving? This is not pointed at any one person, just my two cents on the subject. With that said, its been my experience in visiting many WISP's around the country that they are some of the sharpest people around. In my mind, WISP's are a perfect example of good 'ol business ingenuity and entrepreneurship if there ever was one. My hat is off to all of you! -RickG On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 2:01 PM, Rick Harnish rharn...@wispa.org wrote: Scottie, I read the whole thread and I don't see any remarks by Jack Unger that should be taken personally. He made a very fair and honest observation. I only wish I knew more about wireless. I have read Jack's book and recommend it as well, but I think I should read it a few more times and pick up some other scientific journals to also enhance my knowledge of the subject. I also didn't see anything wrong with your post in reply to Lawrence. Acronyms are used often in present times and I often have to look up the acronym to see what the author is referring to. Usually in a few keystrokes I can find the answer, which is a credit to the Internet industry. This is a forum of intelligent people and it often challenges our diligence to enhance our intelligence even more. I do not believe Jack's post was a direct comment towards Scottie Arnett. I have known Jack for many years and am always very impressed with the amount of dedication and time he devotes to our industry. I can only hope that you will someday advance beyond trying to read extra content into other's posts and understand that most people don't know who Scottie Arnett is or what contributions you have made to the industry. I'm sure you have great respect for your accomplishments in your local marketplace and I applaud you for that. However, WISPA is bigger than any one small marketplace. WISPA is the sum of lots of small marketplaces and operators who realize the strength of cooperating and collaborating with others who have similar interests and challenges. Respectfully, Rick Harnish -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Scottie Arnett Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2009 3:32 AM To: wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-) Ok Jack, I have to admit, I have not read your book, but if it reads like this discussion, I have no desire too, unless you 1. either state that your book is for the advanced wireless subjects, or 2. Thoroughly describe your acronyms. FYI, I do understand most of the poster's acronyms, but for the average WISP operator, I doubt they do. I have a BS in Electrical Engineering and a BS in Management of Information Sciences, not to be tooting my own horn. No, I do not work for Alvarion or Motorola, nor do I have a desire too. Maybe I was in the wrong with my post about the poster's acronyms and my direct criticism with the use of acronyms. I also believe your post was in direct comment to me about my understanding and involvement of WISP activities. I publicly admit, I am not a member of WISPA at the moment, and as long as as an acting officer or supreme WISPA being is degrading me, I will not become a member. Scottie Arnett President Info-Ed, Inc. Broadband Internet Service Provider -- Original Message -- From: Jack Unger jun...@ask-wi.com Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2009 22:39:38 -0700 !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN html head meta content=text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1 http-equiv=Content-Type title/title /head body bgcolor=#ff text=#00 Yep it's too bad that many wireless ISPs have no interest in learning about wireless. br br Scottie Arnett wrote: blockquote cite=mid:200910040029.aa21037...@mail.info-ed.com type=cite pre wrap=I am reading your response and can not decipher all
[WISPA] XBOX 360
I have a couple XBOX 360 players saying they are having lag issues. It seems a low bandwidth consumer. How are you guys optimizing for them? I'd like to try and make them happier. Is there a down side? I know Marlon asked last winter but a good answer never appeared on the list. Thanks WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] XBOX 360
I at least 15% of my customers use 360 and none have problems... and two of them (myself included) are highly intolerant of network issues. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Mike m...@aweiowa.com Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2009 9:41 PM To: sarn...@info-ed.com; WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] XBOX 360 I have a couple XBOX 360 players saying they are having lag issues. It seems a low bandwidth consumer. How are you guys optimizing for them? I'd like to try and make them happier. Is there a down side? I know Marlon asked last winter but a good answer never appeared on the list. Thanks WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] XBOX 360
What kind of network topology do you have between your head end and their Xbox? Two or more layers of NAT, from what I read, bother the Xbox. What kind of bandwidth does he get after a speed test? Xbox uses a lot more then I expect. I remember at a LAN party the 1.5 meg T1 was full by 3-4 Xboxes. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth. --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 10:53 PM, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.netwrote: I at least 15% of my customers use 360 and none have problems... and two of them (myself included) are highly intolerant of network issues. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Mike m...@aweiowa.com Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2009 9:41 PM To: sarn...@info-ed.com; WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] XBOX 360 I have a couple XBOX 360 players saying they are having lag issues. It seems a low bandwidth consumer. How are you guys optimizing for them? I'd like to try and make them happier. Is there a down side? I know Marlon asked last winter but a good answer never appeared on the list. Thanks WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] XBOX 360
As my father told me, a poor workman blames his tools. . . . J o n a t h a n -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2009 9:41 PM To: sarn...@info-ed.com; WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] XBOX 360 I have a couple XBOX 360 players saying they are having lag issues. It seems a low bandwidth consumer. How are you guys optimizing for them? I'd like to try and make them happier. Is there a down side? I know Marlon asked last winter but a good answer never appeared on the list. Thanks -- -- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -- -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
