[WISPA] Light Duty self-support
Who is your first call for an economical self support tower for a customer to clear trees? We typically build guyed Rohn 25 towers but this customer doesn't want guy wires. Needs to be 100ft and enough wind load to hold a small repeater site, maybe 10 sqft. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Light Duty self-support
Rohn does a self supporter right around 100 feet. Customer did it himself a while back. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 27, 2014 9:32 AM, Chris Fabien ch...@lakenetmi.com wrote: Who is your first call for an economical self support tower for a customer to clear trees? We typically build guyed Rohn 25 towers but this customer doesn't want guy wires. Needs to be 100ft and enough wind load to hold a small repeater site, maybe 10 sqft. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Light Duty self-support
We have a few Tycon towers like that. They are great if you have a bucket truck. I feel like I'm climbing on tinfoil once I get near the top. Pretty sketchy... On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:35 AM, Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.comwrote: Rohn does a self supporter right around 100 feet. Customer did it himself a while back. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 27, 2014 9:32 AM, Chris Fabien ch...@lakenetmi.com wrote: Who is your first call for an economical self support tower for a customer to clear trees? We typically build guyed Rohn 25 towers but this customer doesn't want guy wires. Needs to be 100ft and enough wind load to hold a small repeater site, maybe 10 sqft. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Light Duty self-support
Chris,check out Universal,they build them here in Michigan. We have a few of them. Great solution and price! http://www.universaltowers.com/products.html On Thursday, March 27, 2014 10:49 AM, Jeremy jeremysmi...@gmail.com wrote: We have a few Tycon towers like that. They are great if you have a bucket truck. I feel like I'm climbing on tinfoil once I get near the top. Pretty sketchy... On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:35 AM, Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com wrote: Rohn does a self supporter right around 100 feet. Customer did it himself a while back. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 27, 2014 9:32 AM, Chris Fabien ch...@lakenetmi.com wrote: Who is your first call for an economical self support tower for a customer to clear trees? We typically build guyed Rohn 25 towers but this customer doesn't want guy wires. Needs to be 100ft and enough wind load to hold a small repeater site, maybe 10 sqft. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Light Duty self-support
ANWireless. Great towers, great support. On 3/27/2014 10:32 AM, Chris Fabien wrote: Who is your first call for an economical self support tower for a customer to clear trees? We typically build guyed Rohn 25 towers but this customer doesn't want guy wires. Needs to be 100ft and enough wind load to hold a small repeater site, maybe 10 sqft. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com http://www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4354 / Virus Database: 3722/7253 - Release Date: 03/26/14 -- Scott Reed Owner NewWays Networking, LLC Wireless Networking Network Design, Installation and Administration Mikrotik Advanced Certified www.nwwnet.net (765) 855-1060 (765) 439-4253 Toll-free (855) 231-6239 ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
[WISPA] Number's that can't port to VOIP
We have a customer on fringe of a rural Century Tel area and both of our voip providers came back saying they were unable to port the number for us. Are there remote areas where you still can't port a number? Is there a way to find out if anyone can port this number? Like a master list or database I can search? ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Number's that can't port to VOIP
Typically, you can check to the local calling guide and if the rate center with the numbers is local to a rate center your providers are in, you should be good to go. YMMV. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Chris Fabien ch...@lakenetmi.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2014 2:01:38 PM Subject: [WISPA] Number's that can't port to VOIP We have a customer on fringe of a rural Century Tel area and both of our voip providers came back saying they were unable to port the number for us. Are there remote areas where you still can't port a number? Is there a way to find out if anyone can port this number? Like a master list or database I can search? ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Number's that can't port to VOIP
This is the adjacent rate center to one of our main service areas, it is a local call. Different telco though. On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.netwrote: Typically, you can check to the local calling guide and if the rate center with the numbers is local to a rate center your providers are in, you should be good to go. YMMV. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- *From: *Chris Fabien ch...@lakenetmi.com *To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Thursday, March 27, 2014 2:01:38 PM *Subject: *[WISPA] Number's that can't port to VOIP We have a customer on fringe of a rural Century Tel area and both of our voip providers came back saying they were unable to port the number for us. Are there remote areas where you still can't port a number? Is there a way to find out if anyone can port this number? Like a master list or database I can search? ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
[WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had...
Today we had a company come to us pushing wimax. Admittedly I've never used wimax, nor do I know a lot about it. From what I can see looking at Google images of the technology and how it's deployed, it looks no different than the PtP and PtMP that we all use with 900 MHz, or 2.4 and 5.x GHz. Is the only advantage to wimax the presumably clearer and less-used frequencies upon which they operate? I had (evidently mistakenly) thought that perhaps wimax was a code word for some sort of mesh, and that's how it achieved NLOS service. However in looking at the network layouts on Google, it doesn't look like that at all. Rather, it looks like that add another AP to get around the obstruction(s), and simply backhaul it to an intermediary AP/tower to get it back to the PoP. Thanks Sam ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had...
Different frequencies (2.5 in the US, 2.3 in Asia, 3.3 and 3.5GHz in other areas) 5bps/Hz vs 2.7bps/Hz on 802.11-stuff smart antenna systems on the fly bandwidth and channel changes channel bandwidths of things like 1.25MHz - 20MHz hybrid automatic repeat-request (HARQ - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_automatic_repeat-request) etc. It's a different animal. It's very expensive though, and I've heard some pretty outrageous claims from it that I just don't believe. *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 03/27/2014 11:25 AM, Sam wrote: Today we had a company come to us pushing wimax. Admittedly I've never used wimax, nor do I know a lot about it. From what I can see looking at Google images of the technology and how it's deployed, it looks no different than the PtP and PtMP that we all use with 900 MHz, or 2.4 and 5.x GHz. Is the only advantage to wimax the presumably clearer and less-used frequencies upon which they operate? I had (evidently mistakenly) thought that perhaps wimax was a code word for some sort of mesh, and that's how it achieved NLOS service. However in looking at the network layouts on Google, it doesn't look like that at all. Rather, it looks like that add another AP to get around the obstruction(s), and simply backhaul it to an intermediary AP/tower to get it back to the PoP. Thanks Sam ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had...
It's not as different or complicated as you think. Basically it's a standard protocol that was designed for ptmp broadband access. It's a standard, so in theory different operators equipment will talk to each other unlike most of the popular WISP products that have drifted toward proprietary protocols. The protocol is rather sophisticated and has some tricks that help it have better success in nLOS situations than a wifi-based protocol or canopy. The main downside from a performance standpoint is higher latency due to how the scheduling works. Your statement about adding another AP to get around obstructions is not quite right, what you might be looking at is a base station that uses antenna diversity to increase signal gain for nlos situations. Basically multiple receive antennas on the same base station giving it ability to hear the CPE better. On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 3:25 PM, Sam w...@csilogan.com wrote: Today we had a company come to us pushing wimax. Admittedly I've never used wimax, nor do I know a lot about it. From what I can see looking at Google images of the technology and how it's deployed, it looks no different than the PtP and PtMP that we all use with 900 MHz, or 2.4 and 5.x GHz. Is the only advantage to wimax the presumably clearer and less-used frequencies upon which they operate? I had (evidently mistakenly) thought that perhaps wimax was a code word for some sort of mesh, and that's how it achieved NLOS service. However in looking at the network layouts on Google, it doesn't look like that at all. Rather, it looks like that add another AP to get around the obstruction(s), and simply backhaul it to an intermediary AP/tower to get it back to the PoP. Thanks Sam ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had...
Wimax on the pmp320 and others is 3.65 Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 27, 2014 2:36 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com wrote: Different frequencies (2.5 in the US, 2.3 in Asia, 3.3 and 3.5GHz in other areas) 5bps/Hz vs 2.7bps/Hz on 802.11-stuff smart antenna systems on the fly bandwidth and channel changes channel bandwidths of things like 1.25MHz - 20MHz hybrid automatic repeat-request (HARQ - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_automatic_repeat-request) etc. It's a different animal. It's very expensive though, and I've heard some pretty outrageous claims from it that I just don't believe. *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 03/27/2014 11:25 AM, Sam wrote: Today we had a company come to us pushing wimax. Admittedly I've never used wimax, nor do I know a lot about it. From what I can see looking at Google images of the technology and how it's deployed, it looks no different than the PtP and PtMP that we all use with 900 MHz, or 2.4 and 5.x GHz. Is the only advantage to wimax the presumably clearer and less-used frequencies upon which they operate? I had (evidently mistakenly) thought that perhaps wimax was a code word for some sort of mesh, and that's how it achieved NLOS service. However in looking at the network layouts on Google, it doesn't look like that at all. Rather, it looks like that add another AP to get around the obstruction(s), and simply backhaul it to an intermediary AP/tower to get it back to the PoP. Thanks Sam ___ Wireless mailing listWireless@wispa.orghttp://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had...
Thought I should add, the wimax protocol is independent from the frequency band used. 3.65ghz is commonly used for wimax by WISPs in this country due to the light licensing, but equipment is available to run wimax in 5.8, 3.65, 3.5, 2.3/2.5, 900, 700 that I'm aware of. There is also non-wimax equipment that will operate in all of those bands as well. On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 3:37 PM, Chris Fabien ch...@lakenetmi.com wrote: It's not as different or complicated as you think. Basically it's a standard protocol that was designed for ptmp broadband access. It's a standard, so in theory different operators equipment will talk to each other unlike most of the popular WISP products that have drifted toward proprietary protocols. The protocol is rather sophisticated and has some tricks that help it have better success in nLOS situations than a wifi-based protocol or canopy. The main downside from a performance standpoint is higher latency due to how the scheduling works. Your statement about adding another AP to get around obstructions is not quite right, what you might be looking at is a base station that uses antenna diversity to increase signal gain for nlos situations. Basically multiple receive antennas on the same base station giving it ability to hear the CPE better. On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 3:25 PM, Sam w...@csilogan.com wrote: Today we had a company come to us pushing wimax. Admittedly I've never used wimax, nor do I know a lot about it. From what I can see looking at Google images of the technology and how it's deployed, it looks no different than the PtP and PtMP that we all use with 900 MHz, or 2.4 and 5.x GHz. Is the only advantage to wimax the presumably clearer and less-used frequencies upon which they operate? I had (evidently mistakenly) thought that perhaps wimax was a code word for some sort of mesh, and that's how it achieved NLOS service. However in looking at the network layouts on Google, it doesn't look like that at all. Rather, it looks like that add another AP to get around the obstruction(s), and simply backhaul it to an intermediary AP/tower to get it back to the PoP. Thanks Sam ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had...
Yeah, I had heard canopy/cambium was doing other stuff. What are the other companies using though? *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 03/27/2014 11:42 AM, Josh Luthman wrote: Wimax on the pmp320 and others is 3.65 Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 27, 2014 2:36 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com mailto:j...@spitwspots.com wrote: Different frequencies (2.5 in the US, 2.3 in Asia, 3.3 and 3.5GHz in other areas) 5bps/Hz vs 2.7bps/Hz on 802.11-stuff smart antenna systems on the fly bandwidth and channel changes channel bandwidths of things like 1.25MHz - 20MHz hybrid automatic repeat-request (HARQ - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_automatic_repeat-request) etc. It's a different animal. It's very expensive though, and I've heard some pretty outrageous claims from it that I just don't believe. *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com mailto:j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com http://www.spitwspots.com On 03/27/2014 11:25 AM, Sam wrote: Today we had a company come to us pushing wimax. Admittedly I've never used wimax, nor do I know a lot about it. From what I can see looking at Google images of the technology and how it's deployed, it looks no different than the PtP and PtMP that we all use with 900 MHz, or 2.4 and 5.x GHz. Is the only advantage to wimax the presumably clearer and less-used frequencies upon which they operate? I had (evidently mistakenly) thought that perhaps wimax was a code word for some sort of mesh, and that's how it achieved NLOS service. However in looking at the network layouts on Google, it doesn't look like that at all. Rather, it looks like that add another AP to get around the obstruction(s), and simply backhaul it to an intermediary AP/tower to get it back to the PoP. Thanks Sam ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org mailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org mailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Number's that can't port to VOIP
On 3/27/2014 3:11 PM, Chris Fabien wrote: This is the adjacent rate center to one of our main service areas, it is a local call. Different telco though. As a general rule, any rate center's numbers can be made portable if they aren't already so. It can worst case take six moths to implement. But that was usually done long ago. However, in order to port a number into a rate center, the carrier (CLEC) needs connectivity to the tandem switch that serves that rate center, which may belong to the ILEC in that rate center, or a third ILEC, not the one in the bigger exchange next door. If you tell me the rate centers in question I may be able to determine that for you. CenturyTel[/link] is notorious for being uncooperative, hoping state regulators let them bend the rules their way. And some rural ILECs think they're exempt from interconnection rules, though they're not. So it would not be surprising if the underlying CLECs just don't touch those RCs. On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net mailto:wispawirel...@ics-il.net wrote: Typically, you can check to the local calling guide and if the rate center with the numbers is local to a rate center your providers are in, you should be good to go. YMMV. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *Chris Fabien ch...@lakenetmi.com mailto:ch...@lakenetmi.com *To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org mailto:wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Thursday, March 27, 2014 2:01:38 PM *Subject: *[WISPA] Number's that can't port to VOIP We have a customer on fringe of a rural Century Tel area and both of our voip providers came back saying they were unable to port the number for us. Are there remote areas where you still can't port a number? Is there a way to find out if anyone can port this number? Like a master list or database I can search? ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org mailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org mailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless -- Fred R. Goldstein k1io fred at interisle.net Interisle Consulting Group +1 617 795 2701 ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had...
As stated earlier Wimax is frequency independent. Wimax is also referred to as 802.16x. Last I knew they were up to revisionE, but I could be wrong. Wimax is the ³generic term² for 802.16 just like wifi is the generic term for 802.11. Wimax allows 8 bits per hertz no matter the frequency used. 3.65 Wimax is the common frequency available to the normal WISP operator. Some Reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WiMAX http://compnetworking.about.com/od/wirelessinternet/g/bldef_wimax.htm Justin -- Justin Wilson j...@mtin.net MTCNA CCNA MTCRE MTCWE - COMTRAIN Aol Yahoo IM: j2sw http://www.mtin.net/blog xISP News http://www.zigwireless.com High Speed Internet Options http://www.thebrotherswisp.com The Brothers Wisp -Original Message- From: Sam w...@csilogan.com Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Date: Thursday, March 27, 2014 at 3:25 PM To: wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had... Today we had a company come to us pushing wimax. Admittedly I've never used wimax, nor do I know a lot about it. From what I can see looking at Google images of the technology and how it's deployed, it looks no different than the PtP and PtMP that we all use with 900 MHz, or 2.4 and 5.x GHz. Is the only advantage to wimax the presumably clearer and less-used frequencies upon which they operate? I had (evidently mistakenly) thought that perhaps wimax was a code word for some sort of mesh, and that's how it achieved NLOS service. However in looking at the network layouts on Google, it doesn't look like that at all. Rather, it looks like that add another AP to get around the obstruction(s), and simply backhaul it to an intermediary AP/tower to get it back to the PoP. Thanks Sam ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had...
http://resources.wimaxforum.org/sites/wimaxforum.org/files/document_library/wimax_hspa+and_lte_111809_final.pdf wikipedia other sources All are saying 5bps/Hz for DL efficiency, 2.5bps/Hz for upload *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 03/27/2014 12:08 PM, Justin Wilson wrote: As stated earlier Wimax is frequency independent. Wimax is also referred to as 802.16x. Last I knew they were up to revisionE, but I could be wrong. Wimax is the ³generic term² for 802.16 just like wifi is the generic term for 802.11. Wimax allows 8 bits per hertz no matter the frequency used. 3.65 Wimax is the common frequency available to the normal WISP operator. Some Reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WiMAX http://compnetworking.about.com/od/wirelessinternet/g/bldef_wimax.htm Justin -- Justin Wilson j...@mtin.net MTCNA CCNA MTCRE MTCWE - COMTRAIN Aol Yahoo IM: j2sw http://www.mtin.net/blog xISP News http://www.zigwireless.com High Speed Internet Options http://www.thebrotherswisp.com The Brothers Wisp -Original Message- From: Sam w...@csilogan.com Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Date: Thursday, March 27, 2014 at 3:25 PM To: wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had... Today we had a company come to us pushing wimax. Admittedly I've never used wimax, nor do I know a lot about it. From what I can see looking at Google images of the technology and how it's deployed, it looks no different than the PtP and PtMP that we all use with 900 MHz, or 2.4 and 5.x GHz. Is the only advantage to wimax the presumably clearer and less-used frequencies upon which they operate? I had (evidently mistakenly) thought that perhaps wimax was a code word for some sort of mesh, and that's how it achieved NLOS service. However in looking at the network layouts on Google, it doesn't look like that at all. Rather, it looks like that add another AP to get around the obstruction(s), and simply backhaul it to an intermediary AP/tower to get it back to the PoP. Thanks Sam ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had...
PureWave, RunCom, Alvarion (well, whatever their name is now), the Aperto\Tranzeo guys, AirSpan was the first for the full 50 MHz, etc. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com To: wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2014 2:51:51 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had... Yeah, I had heard canopy/cambium was doing other stuff. What are the other companies using though? Josh Reynolds Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 03/27/2014 11:42 AM, Josh Luthman wrote: Wimax on the pmp320 and others is 3.65 Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 27, 2014 2:36 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com wrote: blockquote Different frequencies (2.5 in the US, 2.3 in Asia, 3.3 and 3.5GHz in other areas) 5bps/Hz vs 2.7bps/Hz on 802.11-stuff smart antenna systems on the fly bandwidth and channel changes channel bandwidths of things like 1.25MHz - 20MHz hybrid automatic repeat-request (HARQ - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_automatic_repeat-request ) etc. It's a different animal. It's very expensive though, and I've heard some pretty outrageous claims from it that I just don't believe. Josh Reynolds Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 03/27/2014 11:25 AM, Sam wrote: blockquote Today we had a company come to us pushing wimax. Admittedly I've never used wimax, nor do I know a lot about it. From what I can see looking at Google images of the technology and how it's deployed, it looks no different than the PtP and PtMP that we all use with 900 MHz, or 2.4 and 5.x GHz. Is the only advantage to wimax the presumably clearer and less-used frequencies upon which they operate? I had (evidently mistakenly) thought that perhaps wimax was a code word for some sort of mesh, and that's how it achieved NLOS service. However in looking at the network layouts on Google, it doesn't look like that at all. Rather, it looks like that add another AP to get around the obstruction(s), and simply backhaul it to an intermediary AP/tower to get it back to the PoP. Thanks Sam ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless /blockquote ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless /blockquote ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had...
Purewave also falls under whatever their name is now ... On Mar 27, 2014 5:13 PM, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net wrote: PureWave, RunCom, Alvarion (well, whatever their name is now), the Aperto\Tranzeo guys, AirSpan was the first for the full 50 MHz, etc. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- *From: *Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com *To: *wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Thursday, March 27, 2014 2:51:51 PM *Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had... Yeah, I had heard canopy/cambium was doing other stuff. What are the other companies using though? *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 03/27/2014 11:42 AM, Josh Luthman wrote: Wimax on the pmp320 and others is 3.65 Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 27, 2014 2:36 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com wrote: Different frequencies (2.5 in the US, 2.3 in Asia, 3.3 and 3.5GHz in other areas) 5bps/Hz vs 2.7bps/Hz on 802.11-stuff smart antenna systems on the fly bandwidth and channel changes channel bandwidths of things like 1.25MHz - 20MHz hybrid automatic repeat-request (HARQ - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_automatic_repeat-request) etc. It's a different animal. It's very expensive though, and I've heard some pretty outrageous claims from it that I just don't believe. *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 03/27/2014 11:25 AM, Sam wrote: Today we had a company come to us pushing wimax. Admittedly I've never used wimax, nor do I know a lot about it. From what I can see looking at Google images of the technology and how it's deployed, it looks no different than the PtP and PtMP that we all use with 900 MHz, or 2.4 and 5.x GHz. Is the only advantage to wimax the presumably clearer and less-used frequencies upon which they operate? I had (evidently mistakenly) thought that perhaps wimax was a code word for some sort of mesh, and that's how it achieved NLOS service. However in looking at the network layouts on Google, it doesn't look like that at all. Rather, it looks like that add another AP to get around the obstruction(s), and simply backhaul it to an intermediary AP/tower to get it back to the PoP. Thanks Sam ___ Wireless mailing listWireless@wispa.orghttp://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing listWireless@wispa.orghttp://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had...
haha, yeah, I know someone bought PureWave, but I think they're just doing a DBA PureWave. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Chris Fabien ch...@lakenetmi.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2014 4:37:55 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had... Purewave also falls under whatever their name is now ... On Mar 27, 2014 5:13 PM, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net wrote: PureWave, RunCom, Alvarion (well, whatever their name is now), the Aperto\Tranzeo guys, AirSpan was the first for the full 50 MHz, etc. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com From: Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com To: wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2014 2:51:51 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had... Yeah, I had heard canopy/cambium was doing other stuff. What are the other companies using though? Josh Reynolds Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 03/27/2014 11:42 AM, Josh Luthman wrote: blockquote Wimax on the pmp320 and others is 3.65 Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 27, 2014 2:36 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com wrote: blockquote Different frequencies (2.5 in the US, 2.3 in Asia, 3.3 and 3.5GHz in other areas) 5bps/Hz vs 2.7bps/Hz on 802.11-stuff smart antenna systems on the fly bandwidth and channel changes channel bandwidths of things like 1.25MHz - 20MHz hybrid automatic repeat-request (HARQ - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_automatic_repeat-request ) etc. It's a different animal. It's very expensive though, and I've heard some pretty outrageous claims from it that I just don't believe. Josh Reynolds Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 03/27/2014 11:25 AM, Sam wrote: blockquote Today we had a company come to us pushing wimax. Admittedly I've never used wimax, nor do I know a lot about it. From what I can see looking at Google images of the technology and how it's deployed, it looks no different than the PtP and PtMP that we all use with 900 MHz, or 2.4 and 5.x GHz. Is the only advantage to wimax the presumably clearer and less-used frequencies upon which they operate? I had (evidently mistakenly) thought that perhaps wimax was a code word for some sort of mesh, and that's how it achieved NLOS service. However in looking at the network layouts on Google, it doesn't look like that at all. Rather, it looks like that add another AP to get around the obstruction(s), and simply backhaul it to an intermediary AP/tower to get it back to the PoP. Thanks Sam ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless /blockquote ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless /blockquote ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless /blockquote ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had...
Somethings are not a matter of belief, they are either demonstratably true or not. Sent from my iPhone On Mar 27, 2014, at 14:39, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.netmailto:wispawirel...@ics-il.net wrote: haha, yeah, I know someone bought PureWave, but I think they're just doing a DBA PureWave. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com From: Chris Fabien ch...@lakenetmi.commailto:ch...@lakenetmi.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.orgmailto:wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2014 4:37:55 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had... Purewave also falls under whatever their name is now ... On Mar 27, 2014 5:13 PM, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.netmailto:wispawirel...@ics-il.net wrote: PureWave, RunCom, Alvarion (well, whatever their name is now), the Aperto\Tranzeo guys, AirSpan was the first for the full 50 MHz, etc. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com From: Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.commailto:j...@spitwspots.com To: wireless@wispa.orgmailto:wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2014 2:51:51 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had... Yeah, I had heard canopy/cambium was doing other stuff. What are the other companies using though? Josh Reynolds Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.commailto:j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 03/27/2014 11:42 AM, Josh Luthman wrote: Wimax on the pmp320 and others is 3.65 Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340tel:937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343tel:937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 27, 2014 2:36 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.commailto:j...@spitwspots.com wrote: Different frequencies (2.5 in the US, 2.3 in Asia, 3.3 and 3.5GHz in other areas) 5bps/Hz vs 2.7bps/Hz on 802.11-stuff smart antenna systems on the fly bandwidth and channel changes channel bandwidths of things like 1.25MHz - 20MHz hybrid automatic repeat-request (HARQ - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_automatic_repeat-request) etc. It's a different animal. It's very expensive though, and I've heard some pretty outrageous claims from it that I just don't believe. Josh Reynolds Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.commailto:j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.comhttp://www.spitwspots.com On 03/27/2014 11:25 AM, Sam wrote: Today we had a company come to us pushing wimax. Admittedly I've never used wimax, nor do I know a lot about it. From what I can see looking at Google images of the technology and how it's deployed, it looks no different than the PtP and PtMP that we all use with 900 MHz, or 2.4 and 5.x GHz. Is the only advantage to wimax the presumably clearer and less-used frequencies upon which they operate? I had (evidently mistakenly) thought that perhaps wimax was a code word for some sort of mesh, and that's how it achieved NLOS service. However in looking at the network layouts on Google, it doesn't look like that at all. Rather, it looks like that add another AP to get around the obstruction(s), and simply backhaul it to an intermediary AP/tower to get it back to the PoP. Thanks Sam ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.orgmailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.orgmailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.orgmailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.orgmailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.orgmailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.orgmailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.orgmailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses.
Re: [WISPA] Number's that can't port to VOIP
We've got a local Telco and Frontier prefixed that we can't port to ANY voip provider, only to cellular providers. No one has been able to find a way to port these prefixes or some other ones I didn't list here. 507-634 507-635 507-365 507-528 507-527 On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.comwrote: On 3/27/2014 3:11 PM, Chris Fabien wrote: This is the adjacent rate center to one of our main service areas, it is a local call. Different telco though. As a general rule, any rate center's numbers can be made portable if they aren't already so. It can worst case take six moths to implement. But that was usually done long ago. However, in order to port a number into a rate center, the carrier (CLEC) needs connectivity to the tandem switch that serves that rate center, which may belong to the ILEC in that rate center, or a third ILEC, not the one in the bigger exchange next door. If you tell me the rate centers in question I may be able to determine that for you. CenturyTel[/link] is notorious for being uncooperative, hoping state regulators let them bend the rules their way. And some rural ILECs think they're exempt from interconnection rules, though they're not. So it would not be surprising if the underlying CLECs just don't touch those RCs. On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.netwrote: Typically, you can check to the local calling guide and if the rate center with the numbers is local to a rate center your providers are in, you should be good to go. YMMV. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- *From: *Chris Fabien ch...@lakenetmi.com *To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Thursday, March 27, 2014 2:01:38 PM *Subject: *[WISPA] Number's that can't port to VOIP We have a customer on fringe of a rural Century Tel area and both of our voip providers came back saying they were unable to port the number for us. Are there remote areas where you still can't port a number? Is there a way to find out if anyone can port this number? Like a master list or database I can search? ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing listWireless@wispa.orghttp://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless -- Fred R. Goldstein k1io fred at interisle.net Interisle Consulting Group +1 617 795 2701 ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless -- Darin Steffl Minnesota WiFi www.mnwifi.com 507-634-WiFi http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi Like us on Facebookhttp://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had...
Wimax -GPS Sync: needed for good frequency reuse -Automatic transmit power control: so that CPEs only transmit at minimum necessary level instead of blasting all the time into the adjacent cells. -uplink sub-channelization! Think of it like this: Rather than a CPE transmitting across the whole say 10mhz channel. 2 CPEs could each be transmitting using half the available subcarriers like Two 5mhz channels or 5 2mhz channels which dramatically increases uplink non-line of site penetration. Sma -MIMOA and MIMOB, A is more important for non line of site. Use one of many 5ghz vendors for LineOfSite Customers. Use wimax for non-lineOfSite customers. On 3/27/14, 4:08 PM, Justin Wilson li...@mtin.net wrote: As stated earlier Wimax is frequency independent. Wimax is also referred to as 802.16x. Last I knew they were up to revisionE, but I could be wrong. Wimax is the ³generic term² for 802.16 just like wifi is the generic term for 802.11. Wimax allows 8 bits per hertz no matter the frequency used. 3.65 Wimax is the common frequency available to the normal WISP operator. Some Reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WiMAX http://compnetworking.about.com/od/wirelessinternet/g/bldef_wimax.htm Justin -- Justin Wilson j...@mtin.net MTCNA CCNA MTCRE MTCWE - COMTRAIN Aol Yahoo IM: j2sw http://www.mtin.net/blog xISP News http://www.zigwireless.com High Speed Internet Options http://www.thebrotherswisp.com The Brothers Wisp -Original Message- From: Sam w...@csilogan.com Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Date: Thursday, March 27, 2014 at 3:25 PM To: wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had... Today we had a company come to us pushing wimax. Admittedly I've never used wimax, nor do I know a lot about it. From what I can see looking at Google images of the technology and how it's deployed, it looks no different than the PtP and PtMP that we all use with 900 MHz, or 2.4 and 5.x GHz. Is the only advantage to wimax the presumably clearer and less-used frequencies upon which they operate? I had (evidently mistakenly) thought that perhaps wimax was a code word for some sort of mesh, and that's how it achieved NLOS service. However in looking at the network layouts on Google, it doesn't look like that at all. Rather, it looks like that add another AP to get around the obstruction(s), and simply backhaul it to an intermediary AP/tower to get it back to the PoP. Thanks Sam ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Number's that can't port to VOIP
On 3/27/2014 5:57 PM, Darin Steffl wrote: We've got a local Telco and Frontier prefixed that we can't port to ANY voip provider, only to cellular providers. No one has been able to find a way to port these prefixes or some other ones I didn't list here. 507-634 507-635 507-365 Ah, the world-famous Kasson and Mantorville Telephone Company! :-) Those tiny ones can be tough. They are in LATA 620 but subtend the Plymouth tandem, which is in Minneapolis LATA 628. Odd, but there are a number of those exchanges in the Rochester LATA. That tandem belongs to Minnesota Equal Access, a sort of CLEC that runs a tandem on behalf of many small ILECs. Maybe they could help you. Their prefix codes are local but a CLEC generally needs an interconnection agreement with them, and I doubt many have them. Just not worth the bother. But I do see Mantorville numbers belonging to Sprint-CLEC, MCC, and bandwidth.com. So they may have arrangements. 507-528 507-527 Those are Frontier Citizens, the old (not ex-GTE) rural ILEC. Portable but not pooled. Both remotes of the Kenyon switch, on CLQwest's Owatonna tandem. Jaguar Communications is the only CLEC with Claremont numbers; Sprint and MCC have West Concord numbers. On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com mailto:fgoldst...@ionary.com wrote: On 3/27/2014 3:11 PM, Chris Fabien wrote: This is the adjacent rate center to one of our main service areas, it is a local call. Different telco though. As a general rule, any rate center's numbers can be made portable if they aren't already so. It can worst case take six moths to implement. But that was usually done long ago. However, in order to port a number into a rate center, the carrier (CLEC) needs connectivity to the tandem switch that serves that rate center, which may belong to the ILEC in that rate center, or a third ILEC, not the one in the bigger exchange next door. If you tell me the rate centers in question I may be able to determine that for you. CenturyTel[/link] is notorious for being uncooperative, hoping state regulators let them bend the rules their way. And some rural ILECs think they're exempt from interconnection rules, though they're not. So it would not be surprising if the underlying CLECs just don't touch those RCs. On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net mailto:wispawirel...@ics-il.net wrote: Typically, you can check to the local calling guide and if the rate center with the numbers is local to a rate center your providers are in, you should be good to go. YMMV. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *Chris Fabien ch...@lakenetmi.com mailto:ch...@lakenetmi.com *To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org mailto:wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Thursday, March 27, 2014 2:01:38 PM *Subject: *[WISPA] Number's that can't port to VOIP We have a customer on fringe of a rural Century Tel area and both of our voip providers came back saying they were unable to port the number for us. Are there remote areas where you still can't port a number? Is there a way to find out if anyone can port this number? Like a master list or database I can search? ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org mailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org mailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org mailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless -- Fred R. Goldstein k1io fred atinterisle.net http://interisle.net Interisle Consulting Group +1 617 795 2701 tel:%2B1%20617%20795%202701 ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org mailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless -- Darin Steffl Minnesota WiFi www.mnwifi.com http://www.mnwifi.com/ 507-634-WiFi http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi Like us on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless -- Fred R. Goldstein k1io fred at interisle.net Interisle Consulting Group +1 617 795 2701 ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org
Re: [WISPA] Number's that can't port to VOIP
We've found that we can't get anything ported here in Alaska... something to do with agreements that Alaska Communications Systems and GCI did. 907-226 907-299 907-399 *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 03/27/2014 03:04 PM, Fred Goldstein wrote: On 3/27/2014 5:57 PM, Darin Steffl wrote: We've got a local Telco and Frontier prefixed that we can't port to ANY voip provider, only to cellular providers. No one has been able to find a way to port these prefixes or some other ones I didn't list here. 507-634 507-635 507-365 Ah, the world-famous Kasson and Mantorville Telephone Company! :-) Those tiny ones can be tough. They are in LATA 620 but subtend the Plymouth tandem, which is in Minneapolis LATA 628. Odd, but there are a number of those exchanges in the Rochester LATA. That tandem belongs to Minnesota Equal Access, a sort of CLEC that runs a tandem on behalf of many small ILECs. Maybe they could help you. Their prefix codes are local but a CLEC generally needs an interconnection agreement with them, and I doubt many have them. Just not worth the bother. But I do see Mantorville numbers belonging to Sprint-CLEC, MCC, and bandwidth.com. So they may have arrangements. 507-528 507-527 Those are Frontier Citizens, the old (not ex-GTE) rural ILEC. Portable but not pooled. Both remotes of the Kenyon switch, on CLQwest's Owatonna tandem. Jaguar Communications is the only CLEC with Claremont numbers; Sprint and MCC have West Concord numbers. On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com mailto:fgoldst...@ionary.com wrote: On 3/27/2014 3:11 PM, Chris Fabien wrote: This is the adjacent rate center to one of our main service areas, it is a local call. Different telco though. As a general rule, any rate center's numbers can be made portable if they aren't already so. It can worst case take six moths to implement. But that was usually done long ago. However, in order to port a number into a rate center, the carrier (CLEC) needs connectivity to the tandem switch that serves that rate center, which may belong to the ILEC in that rate center, or a third ILEC, not the one in the bigger exchange next door. If you tell me the rate centers in question I may be able to determine that for you. CenturyTel[/link] is notorious for being uncooperative, hoping state regulators let them bend the rules their way. And some rural ILECs think they're exempt from interconnection rules, though they're not. So it would not be surprising if the underlying CLECs just don't touch those RCs. On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net mailto:wispawirel...@ics-il.net wrote: Typically, you can check to the local calling guide and if the rate center with the numbers is local to a rate center your providers are in, you should be good to go. YMMV. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *Chris Fabien ch...@lakenetmi.com mailto:ch...@lakenetmi.com *To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org mailto:wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Thursday, March 27, 2014 2:01:38 PM *Subject: *[WISPA] Number's that can't port to VOIP We have a customer on fringe of a rural Century Tel area and both of our voip providers came back saying they were unable to port the number for us. Are there remote areas where you still can't port a number? Is there a way to find out if anyone can port this number? Like a master list or database I can search? ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org mailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org mailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org mailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless -- Fred R. Goldstein k1io fred atinterisle.net http://interisle.net Interisle Consulting Group +1 617 795 2701 tel:%2B1%20617%20795%202701 ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org mailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless -- Darin Steffl Minnesota WiFi www.mnwifi.com http://www.mnwifi.com/ 507-634-WiFi http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi Like us on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi
