RE: [WISPA] 5.4 GHz ?

[Brad Belton]

A quick email search comes up with dozens of emails with several subjects
spread out over several months all relating to this link.  

How about your 5-17-06 email?  How about Keith Edmonds (Alvarion Engineer)
5-26-06 email or should I say emails?   Skip ahead through dozens of emails
between Keith Edwards, Bob Neiman, you, Les Sparrey, me, Richard and then
check the Alvarion support emails on 8-10-06. 

Yah, it certainly supports your assertion that I was trying to sabotage the
link servicing MY client!  It certainly looks like I was just letting the VL
project die on the vine all the while expending considerable effort to
salvage the client relationship.

Geeshh...give me a break!


Brad

 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Belton
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 11:18 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] 5.4 GHz ?

Absolute mistruths.  Should I start posting emails between Alvarion
engineers and me?  I still have all the surveys...one after another and
another

Your "site visit" was to a meeting on the other side of town before the gear
was even deployed!  Lol!

The client was my client not the third party!  Why would I want to sabatoge
my own client?!?  Get a grip Patrick!

Amazing.


Brad



While I respect his loyalty to his favorite brand, I tire of the
disingenuous junk you put out there...followed by the goofy e-smiles you
try to insert to say you are only kidding. Leave it to you to turn a
thread about DFS2 kicking in being somehow indicative that our radios
are failing. 

Brad, if I said the sky was blue, you'd say it was green just for the
sake of argument. Congratulations on being the Judd Dare of 2006-2007. 

Patrick

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Belton
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 8:18 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] 5.4 GHz ?

This doesn't come as a surprise.  We deployed a couple VL units and they
were all but shut down due to a less than ideal RF environment.
Countless
hours over days if not weeks with Alvarion's finest in an effort to
remedy
the situation were unsuccessful.

Reflecting back on our particular scenario it was pretty interesting to
see
how poorly they handled peak business hours when interfering RF activity
was
high.  The radios would then speed up as hostile RF became less active
allowing more airtime for the VL to TX & RX.  This was arguably one of
the
more miserable events of our company's entire existence.  

That said it is fair to say, if the RF is clean the VL radios will
scream.  

Best,


Brad

Ps. I'll be bracing for Patrick's attempts to discredit me for opting
out of
Alvarion's $1000 class.  




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Zachery Wolfinger
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 7:58 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5.4 GHz ?

Well, since you asked ;-)

We tried to deploy an Alvarion 5.4GHz B100 link in Indianapolis.  DFS2 
kicked in big time.  To the point that the radios shut down all 
frequencies and would not communicate with each other.  Sitting in the 
lab they worked fine.  It's possible that at least one side is hearing 
the radar from the Indy airport, but on all frequencies?

We pulled the link down and put it back in the lab.  Mike Cowan from 
Wireless Connections remoted in and check it out but didn't see any 
issues.  We are getting ready to deploy these back out to the tower 
sites so he can see what they are doing in the field.

Zak Wolfinger
IT Director
CyberLink International
Phone: 888-293-3693 Ext. 4357
Fax: 888-293-3995



Patrick Leary wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> So how many of you using it have experienced the DFS2 kicking in? I am
> curious because we are not getting many reports where radars are
forcing
> the radios to vacate and move to another channel. 
>
> We are getting asked this a lot of late since we released our 5.4 PMP,
> but so far we don't see the radars much. IF you have a story, please
> indicate if you are rural, rural coastal, etc.
>
> Also how about 5.3 GHz. DFS2 is now mandatory there but I don't think
we
> have any case where those found a radar.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Patrick Leary
> AVP, Market Development
> Alvarion, Inc.
> o: 650.314.2628
> c: 760.580.0080
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
>


 This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned
by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
computer
viruses(84).



>
>
>
>
>
>  
>  
>
*

RE: [WISPA] 5.4 GHz ?

[Brad Belton]

Still has his own list.  Pretty sure Patrick is an active contributor over
there

Best,


Brad

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Gino Villarini
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 11:16 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] 5.4 GHz ?

Judd Dare  wow ... that's a old one ... I wonder ehats he's up to
lately, He kicked me off his list about 2 years ago...

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2007 12:11 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] 5.4 GHz ?

What a load of garbage. Brad resisted our help at every turn. I was on
some of the calls and I personally made a site visit. I even had some of
our engineers calling me to ask for my help to get Brad to work with
them because he would not call them back and/or refused suggestions or
offers of help. Brad repeatedly turned down offers for our guys to come
out. From day 1 Brad wanted his consulting customer to go the Trango
route (Brad is one of their first customers from back in the Sunstream
days) and he did everything in his power to sabotage the effort. We
learned that soon enough to the point where I told our guys to stop
making any effort; it did not matter what we could do to help, because
it was going to be rail-roaded. Even the company he was consulting for
recognized it. We eventually simply had to give up.

While I respect his loyalty to his favorite brand, I tire of the
disingenuous junk you put out there...followed by the goofy e-smiles you
try to insert to say you are only kidding. Leave it to you to turn a
thread about DFS2 kicking in being somehow indicative that our radios
are failing. 

Brad, if I said the sky was blue, you'd say it was green just for the
sake of argument. Congratulations on being the Judd Dare of 2006-2007. 

Patrick

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Belton
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 8:18 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] 5.4 GHz ?

This doesn't come as a surprise.  We deployed a couple VL units and they
were all but shut down due to a less than ideal RF environment.
Countless
hours over days if not weeks with Alvarion's finest in an effort to
remedy
the situation were unsuccessful.

Reflecting back on our particular scenario it was pretty interesting to
see
how poorly they handled peak business hours when interfering RF activity
was
high.  The radios would then speed up as hostile RF became less active
allowing more airtime for the VL to TX & RX.  This was arguably one of
the
more miserable events of our company's entire existence.  

That said it is fair to say, if the RF is clean the VL radios will
scream.  

Best,


Brad

Ps. I'll be bracing for Patrick's attempts to discredit me for opting
out of
Alvarion's $1000 class.  




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Zachery Wolfinger
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 7:58 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5.4 GHz ?

Well, since you asked ;-)

We tried to deploy an Alvarion 5.4GHz B100 link in Indianapolis.  DFS2 
kicked in big time.  To the point that the radios shut down all 
frequencies and would not communicate with each other.  Sitting in the 
lab they worked fine.  It's possible that at least one side is hearing 
the radar from the Indy airport, but on all frequencies?

We pulled the link down and put it back in the lab.  Mike Cowan from 
Wireless Connections remoted in and check it out but didn't see any 
issues.  We are getting ready to deploy these back out to the tower 
sites so he can see what they are doing in the field.

Zak Wolfinger
IT Director
CyberLink International
Phone: 888-293-3693 Ext. 4357
Fax: 888-293-3995



Patrick Leary wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> So how many of you using it have experienced the DFS2 kicking in? I am
> curious because we are not getting many reports where radars are
forcing
> the radios to vacate and move to another channel. 
>
> We are getting asked this a lot of late since we released our 5.4 PMP,
> but so far we don't see the radars much. IF you have a story, please
> indicate if you are rural, rural coastal, etc.
>
> Also how about 5.3 GHz. DFS2 is now mandatory there but I don't think
we
> have any case where those found a radar.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Patrick Leary
> AVP, Market Development
> Alvarion, Inc.
> o: 650.314.2628
> c: 760.580.0080
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
>

RE: [WISPA] 5.4 GHz ?

[Brad Belton]

Absolute mistruths.  Should I start posting emails between Alvarion
engineers and me?  I still have all the surveys...one after another and
another

Your "site visit" was to a meeting on the other side of town before the gear
was even deployed!  Lol!

The client was my client not the third party!  Why would I want to sabatoge
my own client?!?  Get a grip Patrick!

Amazing.


Brad



While I respect his loyalty to his favorite brand, I tire of the
disingenuous junk you put out there...followed by the goofy e-smiles you
try to insert to say you are only kidding. Leave it to you to turn a
thread about DFS2 kicking in being somehow indicative that our radios
are failing. 

Brad, if I said the sky was blue, you'd say it was green just for the
sake of argument. Congratulations on being the Judd Dare of 2006-2007. 

Patrick

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Belton
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 8:18 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] 5.4 GHz ?

This doesn't come as a surprise.  We deployed a couple VL units and they
were all but shut down due to a less than ideal RF environment.
Countless
hours over days if not weeks with Alvarion's finest in an effort to
remedy
the situation were unsuccessful.

Reflecting back on our particular scenario it was pretty interesting to
see
how poorly they handled peak business hours when interfering RF activity
was
high.  The radios would then speed up as hostile RF became less active
allowing more airtime for the VL to TX & RX.  This was arguably one of
the
more miserable events of our company's entire existence.  

That said it is fair to say, if the RF is clean the VL radios will
scream.  

Best,


Brad

Ps. I'll be bracing for Patrick's attempts to discredit me for opting
out of
Alvarion's $1000 class.  




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Zachery Wolfinger
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 7:58 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5.4 GHz ?

Well, since you asked ;-)

We tried to deploy an Alvarion 5.4GHz B100 link in Indianapolis.  DFS2 
kicked in big time.  To the point that the radios shut down all 
frequencies and would not communicate with each other.  Sitting in the 
lab they worked fine.  It's possible that at least one side is hearing 
the radar from the Indy airport, but on all frequencies?

We pulled the link down and put it back in the lab.  Mike Cowan from 
Wireless Connections remoted in and check it out but didn't see any 
issues.  We are getting ready to deploy these back out to the tower 
sites so he can see what they are doing in the field.

Zak Wolfinger
IT Director
CyberLink International
Phone: 888-293-3693 Ext. 4357
Fax: 888-293-3995



Patrick Leary wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> So how many of you using it have experienced the DFS2 kicking in? I am
> curious because we are not getting many reports where radars are
forcing
> the radios to vacate and move to another channel. 
>
> We are getting asked this a lot of late since we released our 5.4 PMP,
> but so far we don't see the radars much. IF you have a story, please
> indicate if you are rural, rural coastal, etc.
>
> Also how about 5.3 GHz. DFS2 is now mandatory there but I don't think
we
> have any case where those found a radar.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Patrick Leary
> AVP, Market Development
> Alvarion, Inc.
> o: 650.314.2628
> c: 760.580.0080
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
>


 This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned
by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
computer
viruses(84).



>
>
>
>
>
>  
>  
>



> This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
> PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
computer
viruses.
>



>
>
>
>



>
> ** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007
at
ISPCON **
> ** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
> ** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
> ** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
> ** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **
>
>



> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>

RE: [WISPA] 5.4 GHz ?

[Brad Belton]

Hello Gino,

Well, I don't want to be accused of hijacking a thread and morphing it into
an advertisement for another brand, but IMO a radio without a CSMA
mechanism, with software controlled dual polarity and with a RX threshold
would most likely perform better in a hostile RF environment.  At least
that's been our experience...

Going forward we are favoring licensed PtP links over UL for high value
clients.  For example we are deploying the first of hopefully several 80GHz
1.25Gbps links for a client in the next week or two.  Should be fun to align
with 2' antennas!  

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Gino Villarini
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 10:22 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] 5.4 GHz ?

So Brad, what did you use?

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Belton
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 11:18 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] 5.4 GHz ?

This doesn't come as a surprise.  We deployed a couple VL units and they
were all but shut down due to a less than ideal RF environment.
Countless
hours over days if not weeks with Alvarion's finest in an effort to
remedy
the situation were unsuccessful.

Reflecting back on our particular scenario it was pretty interesting to
see
how poorly they handled peak business hours when interfering RF activity
was
high.  The radios would then speed up as hostile RF became less active
allowing more airtime for the VL to TX & RX.  This was arguably one of
the
more miserable events of our company's entire existence.  

That said it is fair to say, if the RF is clean the VL radios will
scream.  

Best,


Brad

Ps. I'll be bracing for Patrick's attempts to discredit me for opting
out of
Alvarion's $1000 class.  




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Zachery Wolfinger
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 7:58 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5.4 GHz ?

Well, since you asked ;-)

We tried to deploy an Alvarion 5.4GHz B100 link in Indianapolis.  DFS2 
kicked in big time.  To the point that the radios shut down all 
frequencies and would not communicate with each other.  Sitting in the 
lab they worked fine.  It's possible that at least one side is hearing 
the radar from the Indy airport, but on all frequencies?

We pulled the link down and put it back in the lab.  Mike Cowan from 
Wireless Connections remoted in and check it out but didn't see any 
issues.  We are getting ready to deploy these back out to the tower 
sites so he can see what they are doing in the field.

Zak Wolfinger
IT Director
CyberLink International
Phone: 888-293-3693 Ext. 4357
Fax: 888-293-3995



Patrick Leary wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> So how many of you using it have experienced the DFS2 kicking in? I am
> curious because we are not getting many reports where radars are
forcing
> the radios to vacate and move to another channel. 
>
> We are getting asked this a lot of late since we released our 5.4 PMP,
> but so far we don't see the radars much. IF you have a story, please
> indicate if you are rural, rural coastal, etc.
>
> Also how about 5.3 GHz. DFS2 is now mandatory there but I don't think
we
> have any case where those found a radar.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Patrick Leary
> AVP, Market Development
> Alvarion, Inc.
> o: 650.314.2628
> c: 760.580.0080
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
>


 This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned
by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
computer
viruses(84).



>
>
>
>
>
>  
>  
>



> This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
> PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
computer
viruses.
>



>
>
>
>



>
> ** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007
at
ISPCON **
> ** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
> ** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
> ** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
> ** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **
>
>
---

RE: [WISPA] iPhone

[Brad Belton]

Have to agree the iPhone is just plain cool.  Sure makes my Sprint HTC Mogul
look like a clunky, dumpy brick by comparison!  lol

I've been a Sprint wireless subscriber since their inception.  Just can't
bring myself to jump ship...even for the iPhone.  

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 9:27 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] iPhone

Tom,

It's just plain cool. I had a Palm Treo 650 before. We use SMS more than 
anything else... it's how we talk to our techs and installers, it's how 
we get alerts, it's how I talk to my family (wife and kids), etc. so 
that part was very critical for me... and the Treo was the only phone 
before that made it very easy to send and receive messages... one button 
and you were into the most recent list of SMS talkers, one click on 
their name and you had the full conversation since it began. The iPhone 
is the same way. I send and receive about 1500-2000 text messages per 
month on my phone, so that was #1 priority.

The next issue was having a web browser that was actually usable... by 
usable I mean something that you would WANT to use to check news, alert 
systems, etc. while sitting at lunch, etc. It works very, very well for 
that.

It has a built in camera that is better than the Treo, but not awesome. 
It's a camera built in to a phone, what do you expect? I think it's 
rated at 2MP. No current GPS support.

Battery life so far is very impressive (considering WiFi is left on all 
the time). I am getting about 2 full days of use per charge.

The keyboard is a little strange to get used to, but then it's pretty 
good. It does auto correction on the mis-typed words, and seems to work 
pretty well.

It's also a full-blown iPod... same connector (so everything iPod works) 
and a very nice, easy to use interface.

The idea, as Steve Jobs mentioned, is that I now have 1 device that has 
everything I need all in one. Is it a laptop replacement? No. Is it a 
techie's dream phone for hacking, SSH, etc... probably not. But it's 
small and thin enough that it fits in my front pocket on my Levi's, and 
keeps me 100% connected to my network and the Net.

Travis
Microserv

Tom DeReggi wrote:
> I'm interested in more feedback.
>
> Cool for you as the CEO? or cool as a future phone for your techs?
> I was considering getting one, for the awesome screen, but was 
> concerned about its missing features.
> Am I correct that it will not support GPS or Camera?
>
>> You can listen to your music
>
> Do you really want to be doing that, wasting your battery life?
> How is the battery life?
> And not hearing the phone ring, because of it?
> Or does the ringer overide the music, to enable hearing it?
>
> Can you load an SSH client on it, like Putty?
>
> We know the full screen is clearly a winner.
> But how is the keypad?
>
> I really like the large keys on the slideout keyboards, on alternative 
> palmtop WindowCe style phones.
>
> Tom DeReggi
> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>
>
> - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "WISPA General List" 
> 
> Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 1:01 PM
> Subject: [WISPA] iPhone
>
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> About a week ago I decided to buy an iPhone off ebay (brand new) to 
>> play with... I wasn't planning on keeping it as my phone, but wanted 
>> to play to see what all the hype was about. We don't have AT&T 
>> service in our area, so once the phone arrived I had to "hack" it to 
>> use Edge Wireless (a subsidiary of AT&T/Cingular in our area, but not 
>> with iPhone support). After several hours, I got everything 
>> working... and I have to say I am keeping the phone!
>>
>> This is the coolest phone I have ever seen. The web browser is 
>> actually usable. You can listen to your music, look at pictures, 
>> check your email, etc. all on a beautiful touch screen. Everything is 
>> so easy to use and very responsive. It really is quite the phone 
>> compared with everything else I have looked at. Apple has done a 
>> great job for a first generation phone.
>>
>> Just wanted to share my $.02 worth. :)
>>
>> Travis
>> Microserv
>>

 
>>
>>
>> ** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 
>> at ISPCON **
>> ** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
>> ** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
>> ** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
>> ** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at 
>> http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **
>>
>>

 
>>
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>

 
>>
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@w

RE: [WISPA] 5.4 GHz ?

[Brad Belton]

This doesn't come as a surprise.  We deployed a couple VL units and they
were all but shut down due to a less than ideal RF environment.  Countless
hours over days if not weeks with Alvarion's finest in an effort to remedy
the situation were unsuccessful.

Reflecting back on our particular scenario it was pretty interesting to see
how poorly they handled peak business hours when interfering RF activity was
high.  The radios would then speed up as hostile RF became less active
allowing more airtime for the VL to TX & RX.  This was arguably one of the
more miserable events of our company's entire existence.  

That said it is fair to say, if the RF is clean the VL radios will scream.  

Best,


Brad

Ps. I'll be bracing for Patrick's attempts to discredit me for opting out of
Alvarion's $1000 class.  




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Zachery Wolfinger
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 7:58 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5.4 GHz ?

Well, since you asked ;-)

We tried to deploy an Alvarion 5.4GHz B100 link in Indianapolis.  DFS2 
kicked in big time.  To the point that the radios shut down all 
frequencies and would not communicate with each other.  Sitting in the 
lab they worked fine.  It's possible that at least one side is hearing 
the radar from the Indy airport, but on all frequencies?

We pulled the link down and put it back in the lab.  Mike Cowan from 
Wireless Connections remoted in and check it out but didn't see any 
issues.  We are getting ready to deploy these back out to the tower 
sites so he can see what they are doing in the field.

Zak Wolfinger
IT Director
CyberLink International
Phone: 888-293-3693 Ext. 4357
Fax: 888-293-3995



Patrick Leary wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> So how many of you using it have experienced the DFS2 kicking in? I am
> curious because we are not getting many reports where radars are forcing
> the radios to vacate and move to another channel. 
>
> We are getting asked this a lot of late since we released our 5.4 PMP,
> but so far we don't see the radars much. IF you have a story, please
> indicate if you are rural, rural coastal, etc.
>
> Also how about 5.3 GHz. DFS2 is now mandatory there but I don't think we
> have any case where those found a radar.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Patrick Leary
> AVP, Market Development
> Alvarion, Inc.
> o: 650.314.2628
> c: 760.580.0080
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
>

 This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer
viruses(84).


>
>
>
>
>
>  
>  
>


> This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
> PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer
viruses.
>


>
>
>
>


>
> ** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at
ISPCON **
> ** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
> ** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
> ** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
> ** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **
>
>


> 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/
>   



** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at
ISPCON **
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **



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/



** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at ISPCON 
**
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - S

RE: [WISPA] iPhone

[Brad Belton]

I read somewhere that you don't want to perform the latest "Update" from
Apple with a hacked IPhone.  Something about the update can "break" the
hacked phones.  Of course Apple says the update has no intention of doing
so...yah right!

Quick search came up with this:

http://www.daniusoft.com/news/iphone-update-thwarts-hacks.html



Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Ryan Langseth
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 12:02 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] iPhone

I would not mind trying one,  but GSM is not an option around here :(

Ryan

Travis Johnson wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> About a week ago I decided to buy an iPhone off ebay (brand new) to play 
> with... I wasn't planning on keeping it as my phone, but wanted to play 
> to see what all the hype was about. We don't have AT&T service in our 
> area, so once the phone arrived I had to "hack" it to use Edge Wireless 
> (a subsidiary of AT&T/Cingular in our area, but not with iPhone 
> support). After several hours, I got everything working... and I have to 
> say I am keeping the phone!
> 
> This is the coolest phone I have ever seen. The web browser is actually 
> usable. You can listen to your music, look at pictures, check your 
> email, etc. all on a beautiful touch screen. Everything is so easy to 
> use and very responsive. It really is quite the phone compared with 
> everything else I have looked at. Apple has done a great job for a first 
> generation phone.
> 
> Just wanted to share my $.02 worth. :)
> 
> Travis
> Microserv
>

 
> 
> 
> ** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at 
> ISPCON **
> ** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
> ** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
> ** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
> ** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at 
> http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **
> 
>

 
> 
> 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/




** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at
ISPCON **
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **



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/



** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at ISPCON 
**
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at 
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **


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] Netflix

[Brad Belton]

Curious as to why Cogent would de-peer with anyone?  

You're peered with LimeLight and WV Fiber?

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2007 9:25 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Netflix

> Anyone else having a problem viewing the images at netflix.com?
>
> All the images are coming up broken links
>
The images on netflix.com are hosted by a CDN, which is why your
connectivity to netflix.com itself has nothing to do with the images. By
chance does your company or one of your upstreams use Cogent? If so, you
may want to be aware that Cogent depeered Limelight and WV Fiber recently
both of which are heavy content distributors.

We are peered with both Limelight and WV Fiber. We pull a lot of traffic
from them, so the move by Cogent caused some serious distribution. It also
makes the experience of Cogent customers that much worse.

-Matt




** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at
ISPCON **
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **



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/



** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at ISPCON 
**
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at 
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **


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] RE: OT: video of news segment inIdaho abouta new localWiMAX service

[Brad Belton]

othing simple about it.). I know of providers pulling over
6Mbps each way over BreezeMAX at 4 miles with indoor CPE. And that's at
50/50 downlink/uplink.
 
I don't know how much more can say due to NDA's. So I better stop here.
 
The point is I bet something wasn't right.
 
Mike Bushard, Jr
Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC
320-256-WISP (9477)
320-256-9478 Fax
 
 
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Belton
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 11:39 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] OT: video of news segment in Idaho abouta new
localWiMAX service
 
Hello Travis,
 
Well now, this really doesn't come as any surprise, does it?  
 
I can easily get those speeds driving along nearly any interstate in the
country at 80MPH with my Sprint Data Card.
 
Again, the cellular providers will dominate the mobile user market if only
simply because they have the coverage.  Why would someone signup for
BridgeMAXX (with a fraction of a fraction coverage area) for equal or in
this case quite a bit slower access as compared to any of today's cellular
provider data networks?
 
Reminds me of the Sprint commercial where they are comparing coverage areas:
 
Client  Sprint  BridgeMAXX
 
Denver? Yes.   Nope.
Nashville? Yes.   Nope.
Boston? Yes.   Nope.  Wait, what was that again?  Boston?  Oh,
nope.
Vegas?  Yes.   YES!, err I mean nope, but we have limited coverage
in Rexburg!  lol
 
 
Best,
 
 
Brad
 
 
 
 
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 10:36 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] OT: video of news segment in Idaho about a new
localWiMAX service
 
Brad,
 
I received our modem from BridgeMAXX and tested on Thursday last week. 
We were located about 1 mile from their tower in Rexburg, Idaho. We had full
signal (all lights on top of the modem) while indoor.
 
We ran several speed tests to Salt Lake City and Seattle. We purchased their
"up to 2meg" service and the speed tests (using Speedtest.net, which has
been very accurate on our test cable connection and test DSL
connection) showed an average of 300kbps download and 450kbps upload. 
This was during the middle of the day (when most people are probably not
using the service).
 
Loading web pages was almost painful however... espn.com took almost 15
seconds to completely load. :(
 
Travis
Microserv
 
Brad Belton wrote:
  

Kinda funny.the video says it delivered "perfect service" in the park


while
  

only pulling up about a third of the www.localnews8.com website over


several
  

seconds.  Now compare that video to pulling up www.localnews8.com


yourself.
  

It leaves quite a bit to be desired when comparing "broadband" services.  
 
 
 
My Sprint Data card pulls up the website faster and works ANYWHERE I have
Sprint service in the USA.  Why would I choose a mobile broadband service
that only works in a couple cities?
 
 
 
Just another hyped story relating to a service that will over commit and
underperform resulting in yet another black-eye for the wireless data
industry.  This reminds me of the Ricochet service I subscribed to years


ago
  

before they went belly up.  Worked fair to ok in some areas, but was


quickly
  

overshadowed by the cellular industry guys who really know how to make
mobile Internet work.
 
 
 
Have to admit though it was a great plug for Alvarion!
 
 
 
Best,
 
 
 
 
 
Brad
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 4:06 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] OT: video of news segment in Idaho about a new
localWiMAX service
 
 
 
Patrick,
 
DBC purchased an existing company (Teton Wireless) that was using their
2.5ghz license for Television and internet service. They started 10 years
ago with just TV and added internet about 3-4 years ago. So, technically
they are not a "start-up" as they purchased an existing business and
license.
 
They also didn't raise money, but rather sold another business (cellular I
believe) and used that money to buy this business. They are in the game


for
  

the short-haul, trying to get as many customers as possible with the full
intent to sell it off.
 
And I'm not sure I really need a lecture on the "I can" model... having
started a WISP in 1997 from scratch (no outside investors, no outside


money)
  

and now with over 4,000 subs in the air, over 500 DSL customers, fiber
customers, dedicated p2p customers, etc. I think I understand how it


works.
  

We started building our own DOS based routers with WaveLan 900mhz ISA


cards
  

back in 1997, when there was NOTHING on the market that was cost effective
to make this business model work. The dot-bomb crash had ZERO affect 

RE: [WISPA] OT: video of news segment in Idaho about a new localWiMAX service

[Brad Belton]

Hello Travis,

Well now, this really doesn't come as any surprise, does it?  

I can easily get those speeds driving along nearly any interstate in the
country at 80MPH with my Sprint Data Card.

Again, the cellular providers will dominate the mobile user market if only
simply because they have the coverage.  Why would someone signup for
BridgeMAXX (with a fraction of a fraction coverage area) for equal or in
this case quite a bit slower access as compared to any of today's cellular
provider data networks?

Reminds me of the Sprint commercial where they are comparing coverage areas:
 
Client  Sprint  BridgeMAXX

Denver? Yes.Nope.
Nashville?  Yes.Nope.
Boston? Yes.Nope.  Wait, what was that again?  Boston?  Oh,
nope.
Vegas?  Yes.YES!, err I mean nope, but we have limited coverage
in Rexburg!  lol


Best,


Brad




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 10:36 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] OT: video of news segment in Idaho about a new
localWiMAX service

Brad,

I received our modem from BridgeMAXX and tested on Thursday last week. 
We were located about 1 mile from their tower in Rexburg, Idaho. We had 
full signal (all lights on top of the modem) while indoor.

We ran several speed tests to Salt Lake City and Seattle. We purchased 
their "up to 2meg" service and the speed tests (using Speedtest.net, 
which has been very accurate on our test cable connection and test DSL 
connection) showed an average of 300kbps download and 450kbps upload. 
This was during the middle of the day (when most people are probably not 
using the service).

Loading web pages was almost painful however... espn.com took almost 15 
seconds to completely load. :(

Travis
Microserv

Brad Belton wrote:
> Kinda funny.the video says it delivered "perfect service" in the park
while
> only pulling up about a third of the www.localnews8.com website over
several
> seconds.  Now compare that video to pulling up www.localnews8.com
yourself.
> It leaves quite a bit to be desired when comparing "broadband" services.  
>
>  
>
> My Sprint Data card pulls up the website faster and works ANYWHERE I have
> Sprint service in the USA.  Why would I choose a mobile broadband service
> that only works in a couple cities?
>
>  
>
> Just another hyped story relating to a service that will over commit and
> underperform resulting in yet another black-eye for the wireless data
> industry.  This reminds me of the Ricochet service I subscribed to years
ago
> before they went belly up.  Worked fair to ok in some areas, but was
quickly
> overshadowed by the cellular industry guys who really know how to make
> mobile Internet work.
>
>  
>
> Have to admit though it was a great plug for Alvarion!
>
>  
>
> Best,
>
>  
>
>  
>
> Brad
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Travis Johnson
> Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 4:06 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] OT: video of news segment in Idaho about a new
> localWiMAX service
>
>  
>
> Patrick,
>
> DBC purchased an existing company (Teton Wireless) that was using their
> 2.5ghz license for Television and internet service. They started 10 years
> ago with just TV and added internet about 3-4 years ago. So, technically
> they are not a "start-up" as they purchased an existing business and
> license.
>
> They also didn't raise money, but rather sold another business (cellular I
> believe) and used that money to buy this business. They are in the game
for
> the short-haul, trying to get as many customers as possible with the full
> intent to sell it off.
>
> And I'm not sure I really need a lecture on the "I can" model... having
> started a WISP in 1997 from scratch (no outside investors, no outside
money)
> and now with over 4,000 subs in the air, over 500 DSL customers, fiber
> customers, dedicated p2p customers, etc. I think I understand how it
works.
> We started building our own DOS based routers with WaveLan 900mhz ISA
cards
> back in 1997, when there was NOTHING on the market that was cost effective
> to make this business model work. The dot-bomb crash had ZERO affect on
our
> business and we continue to grow every year.
>
> My point to the original email was you can't just stick an AP in the air
and
> think you are going to do "truckless" installs with roaming clients like
the
> video clip pictured. With millions of dollars, yes it can be done... but
not
> otherwise.
>
> Travis
> Microserv
>
> Patrick Leary wrote: 
>
> DBC uses 2.5 GHz. They

RE: [WISPA] Anyone doing remote backup for customers?

[Brad Belton]

Exactly...we're setting up a 1.25Gbps link for a client with line speed
AES256 encryption.  I believe the link meets and will be FIPS 140-2
compliant as well.  However, even with this level of security on the link
hardware it is always best to encrypt BEFORE the data leaves your network.

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick
Sent: Friday, September 21, 2007 7:12 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Anyone doing remote backup for customers?

If they need high security, set them up with a router capable of AES or
3DES.

Jeff
 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mac Dearman
Sent: Friday, September 21, 2007 7:24 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Anyone doing remote backup for customers?

I think the real question I would ask - - going over a wireless link is:

WHERE THE HECK IS THE SECURITY? 

I mean you are going to back up someone's books with no (encryption) (like
blowfish) security? I am not talking WEP either! What about restoring the
client's data? Is that something that that will take intervention on your
part? How about the client's ability to access his backups 24/7 in case of
emergency reinstall?

Mac

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> On Behalf Of Frank Muto
> Sent: Friday, September 21, 2007 2:58 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Anyone doing remote backup for customers?
> 
> We use Handy Back Up as well and have been very pleased with it.
> Actually as someone else said they now use WinZip over HBU, we use 
> both depending on the job at hand. The sync feature on HBU works great 
> for linking files from desktop to laptop or mirroring external storage 
> drives. http://www.handybackup.net/
> 
> Another backup program we use is NTI's Shadow for real time or 
> scheduled backups. I like the real time backup when working with 
> regular daily files, which are saved to external storage drives each 
> time the file changes. We also use NTI's Backup Now and Drive Backup. 
> http://www.ntius.com
> 
> 
> 
> Frank Muto
> FSM Marketing Group, Inc
> www.secureemailplus.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - Original Message -
> From: "rabbtux rabbtux" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> > Marlon,  have a link for it?
> >
> > On 9/20/07, Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >> We use handy backup.  It's not really popular yet.
> >>
> >> We may be over charging for space.  The bitch of it is that people
> could
> >> totally screw our network up with all of the backups, even if they
> backup to
> >> our servers!
> >>
> >> Marlon
> 
> >> - Original Message -
> >> From: "Mac Dearman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> > All I can say is that we have been doing off site remote backups
> for
> >> > several
> >> > years - for many Gov't facilities, personal business and even a
> few
> >> > individuals. We chose this: http://remote-backup.com/  software
> and it has
> >> > been the greatest, most trouble free software I have ever used.
> Not one
> >> > moment's trouble in years.
> >> >
> >> > Mac
> 
> --
> -
> -
> 
> ** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 
> at ISPCON **
> ** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
> ** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
> ** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
> ** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at 
> http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **
> 
> --
> -
> -
> 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/




** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at
ISPCON **
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **



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/




** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on

RE: TowerStream (was Re: [WISPA] OT: video of news segment in Idaho about a newlocalWiMAX service)

[Brad Belton]

Matt beat me to the punch, so I'll just add a "yah...what Matt said."

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt Liotta
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 4:53 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: TowerStream (was Re: [WISPA] OT: video of news segment in Idaho
about a newlocalWiMAX service)

Patrick Leary wrote:
> Btw, Tower Stream is another good example. For years (and still today),
> they have been deploying unlicensed gear in big cities for the T1+
> capacity commercial customers (still a sweet spot for wireless
> broadband). This past spring, even without licensed spectrum holdings,
> they did an IPO and raised over $50 million. Their current valuation is
> near $100 million. Tower Stream excelled at some things that other WISPs
> neglect, which is getting their name out there and carefully groomed
> their brand (all that stuff some techy-oriented WISPs might think is
> useless fluff effort). But make no mistake, they are by definition a
> WISP...JUST LIKE YOU: they use unlicensed frequencies to deploy and sell
> Internet services. They have been cash flow positive for years. They
> just chose to aim high and not be deterred by those who said it could
> not be done.
> 
> People, what do YOU aspire to? What do YOU believe is possible?
> 
I believe your information is not correct on TowerStream. First of all, 
they didn't do an IPO. They did what is referred to as an APO 
(acquisition public offering). Specifically, they did a reverse merger 
into University Girls Calendar and were then traded on the OTBB. They 
did raise several million dollars as part of the APO. In May, the 
graduated from the OTBB to the regular Nasdaq market. The first thing 
they did afterwards was to make a secondary offering for $40 million 
dollars, which was a 32% discount at the time. This caused a huge 
dilution among their shareholders and ultimately led to them losing half 
of their market share. Nevertheless, they did raise a ton of money.

They are not cash flow positive and haven't been. In 2007Q1 they lost 
$1.64 million, which is pretty close to what they lost in 2005 and 2006 
put together. Unfortunately, their revenues are flat. If you look at 
their revenues released 2007Q2 they increased gross revenue by $46,000 
year over year. Read it again... after spending millions they only 
increased gross revenue by $46,000 in 12 months.

"We cannot anticipate when, if ever, our operations will become 
profitable," they state in their fillings, which seems honest enough. 
But hey, more power to them if they can raise that kind of money. We'd 
laugh all the way to the bank if someone offered us a similar valuation.

-Matt



** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at
ISPCON **
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **



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/



** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at ISPCON 
**
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at 
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **


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: video of news segment in Idaho about a new localWiMAX service

[Brad Belton]

Kinda funny.the video says it delivered "perfect service" in the park while
only pulling up about a third of the www.localnews8.com website over several
seconds.  Now compare that video to pulling up www.localnews8.com yourself.
It leaves quite a bit to be desired when comparing "broadband" services.  

 

My Sprint Data card pulls up the website faster and works ANYWHERE I have
Sprint service in the USA.  Why would I choose a mobile broadband service
that only works in a couple cities?

 

Just another hyped story relating to a service that will over commit and
underperform resulting in yet another black-eye for the wireless data
industry.  This reminds me of the Ricochet service I subscribed to years ago
before they went belly up.  Worked fair to ok in some areas, but was quickly
overshadowed by the cellular industry guys who really know how to make
mobile Internet work.

 

Have to admit though it was a great plug for Alvarion!

 

Best,

 

 

Brad

 

 

 

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 4:06 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] OT: video of news segment in Idaho about a new
localWiMAX service

 

Patrick,

DBC purchased an existing company (Teton Wireless) that was using their
2.5ghz license for Television and internet service. They started 10 years
ago with just TV and added internet about 3-4 years ago. So, technically
they are not a "start-up" as they purchased an existing business and
license.

They also didn't raise money, but rather sold another business (cellular I
believe) and used that money to buy this business. They are in the game for
the short-haul, trying to get as many customers as possible with the full
intent to sell it off.

And I'm not sure I really need a lecture on the "I can" model... having
started a WISP in 1997 from scratch (no outside investors, no outside money)
and now with over 4,000 subs in the air, over 500 DSL customers, fiber
customers, dedicated p2p customers, etc. I think I understand how it works.
We started building our own DOS based routers with WaveLan 900mhz ISA cards
back in 1997, when there was NOTHING on the market that was cost effective
to make this business model work. The dot-bomb crash had ZERO affect on our
business and we continue to grow every year.

My point to the original email was you can't just stick an AP in the air and
think you are going to do "truckless" installs with roaming clients like the
video clip pictured. With millions of dollars, yes it can be done... but not
otherwise.

Travis
Microserv

Patrick Leary wrote: 

DBC uses 2.5 GHz. They did not exist as an operator one year ago. They
are a start-up that raised money. Nothing prevents WISPs from doing this
sort of thing too Travis and I know a few WISPs who are in fact doing
this very thing.
 
Travis, anyone can provide tons of reasons why something can't be done,
but someone always comes along who says "I can" and they do. It is that
group of people who dare who become the next set of millionaires.
 
As for the model, the DBC guys are pros who have been around the block.
They deployed several thousand unlicensed CPEs a few years back in
another company. It is not like they are just winging it. And in any
event, chances are a guy like this gets bought out a few years from now
for a good-sized multiple of the original investment.
 
Also, WISPs need to understand that the financial world considers
licensed band leases as assets, not expenses. Why do you think a company
like Clearwire that is losing money hand over fist has a $3.5B
valuation? It is because of the value of their licensed holdings
primarily.
 
 
Patrick Leary
AVP, Market Development
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
Visit Alvarion at WiMAX World
Chicago, September 25-27
Booth #409
 
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 1:29 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] OT: video of news segment in Idaho about a new
localWiMAX service
 
Everyone should realize this is a licensed frequency (2.3ghz?) and that 
the base stations are very expensive.
 
So, if you have a few million dollars (I think they actually paid $7 
million for the license in our area about 10 years ago, with a 
population of 150,000 people) and want to spend a few more million for 
AP's and CPE's, you should be able to breakeven in about 1,000 years. ;)
 
Travis
Microserv
 
Patrick Leary wrote:
  

http://youtube.com/watch?v=6fag7cy2Nr4
 
Our customer, Digital Bridge Communications (DBC), sent this video to


me
  

today after it recently appeared on the local news. Nice piece,
especially since it was unsolicited. It is from an ABC news affiliate


in
  

Idaho. DBC calls the service BridgeMAXX.
 
Patrick
Alvarion
 
 
 
 
 



 This foot

RE: [WISPA] The MOBL Sage (Warning: Long Post)

[Brad Belton]

No worries here Allen, feel free to fire away.  It's not like Beech is
blood...lol...and it's probably good people see and hear the stories (good
and bad) for their own good.

I will say in Beech's defense that it sounds like he was saddled with an
impossible task.  

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Allen Marsalis
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 10:27 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] The MOBL Sage (Warning: Long Post)

At 03:30 PM 9/13/2007, Joel White wrote:
>Jack was also a consultant for Kite and was tasked with "solving the CPE
>problem" of the "no CPE needed" Muni-Wifi deployments.

LMAO, now Joel, out of respect for Brad I will not comment further on 
Beech on these boards.  Brad drove out of his way to loan me a AP one 
time, and not everyone does that.  Besides, I think the CEO and CFO 
had more to do with this plan, whatever it was.

Allen





** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at
ISPCON **
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **



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/



** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at ISPCON 
**
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at 
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **


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] The MOBL Sage (Warning: Long Post)

[Brad Belton]

Yes, I remember Jack always speaking very highly of Jay Wright.  I never met
Jay, but I hear he can sell ice to an Eskimo...a real slick Willy if you
know what I mean.

Did you have much contact with Jack or Jay?

Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Joel White
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 3:31 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] The MOBL Sage (Warning: Long Post)

Jack was also a consultant for Kite and was tasked with "solving the CPE 
problem" of the "no CPE needed" Muni-Wifi deployments.

Joel

NexGenAccess Inc.
www.nexgenaccess.com
740-513-4122

NexGenAccess Inc. <http://www.nexgenaccess.com>


-- Original Message ---
From: Allen Marsalis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: WISPA General List 
Sent: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 15:27:21 -0500
Subject: RE: [WISPA] The MOBL Sage (Warning: Long Post)

> At 01:04 PM 9/13/2007, Brad Belton wrote:
> >Sorry for the confusion.  No Jack Beech is my brother's (Jack Belton)
> >brother-in-law.
> 
> Ah, yeah now I remember you telling me that years ago.  I do 
> appreciate you refreshing my memory.  Jack Beech was somehow friends 
> of the CEO (Jay Wright) and after he no longer ran the ISP's, he 
> moved over to the Progames website division. But I'm not sure there 
> was anything Jack could have done to save the day considering the 
> Cornell financing deals, and ridiculous salaries, bonuses, and so forth.
> 
> Allen
> 
>


> 
> ** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 
> 2007 at ISPCON ** ** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA 
>   www.ispcon.com ** ** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT ** ** FREE 
> Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 ** ** Use 
> Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at 
> http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **
> 
>


> 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/
--- End of Original Message ---




** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at
ISPCON **
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **



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/



** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at ISPCON 
**
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at 
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **


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] The MOBL Sage (Warning: Long Post)

[Brad Belton]

Sorry for the confusion.  No Jack Beech is my brother's (Jack Belton)
brother-in-law.  

Jack Belton is my brother.

Jack Beech is Jack Belton's brother-in-law.

lol


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Allen Marsalis
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 12:53 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] The MOBL Sage (Warning: Long Post)

At 11:03 AM 9/13/2007, Brad Belton wrote:

>Thanks for taking the time to touch on some of your experiences with
>MobilePro.  As you know my interest is because Jack Beech is my brother,
>Jack Belton, brother-in-law.

Am I reading this right?  Jack Beech is your brother?  Your last name 
is Belton so do you mean that Jack Belton is your brother and Jack 
Beech is your brother-in-law?   Sorry for my confusion.  And thanks 
for the clarification.  I've got to run, but I'll pick back up later.

Allen





** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at
ISPCON **
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **



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/



** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at ISPCON 
**
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at 
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **


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] The MOBL Sage (Warning: Long Post)

[Brad Belton]

Hello Allen,

Thanks for taking the time to touch on some of your experiences with
MobilePro.  As you know my interest is because Jack Beech is my brother,
Jack Belton, brother-in-law.  Jack Beech and his ISP NationWide Internet was
instrumental in our early creation of BelWave.  Primarily we had a need to
serve tenants in our own properties that were broadband starved.  One thing
led to another and now BelWave is where it is today.

Nationwide Internet was the first MobilePro acquisition and the cornerstone
ISP of the rollup.  We've watched with great interest the ups and downs
MobilePro has undergone.  You should see the several inch thick file we have
on them!  lol

I believe about the same time ShreveNet was being courted by MobilePro we
were also being prodded for interest in participating from Jack Beech.
Honestly if we felt we had something worth selling we would have shown more
interest, but our growth was and still remains like many startups; off the
charts.  A sale multiple would have to be very aggressive in order to
attract any interest from us.  Additionally, Bill (my other brother) could
not come to grips with exactly how MobilePro was ever going to make a
profit.  Certainly the early goers could benefit from a low stock price
basis and hope to be able to convert as soon as possible (as Beech did and
it sounds like you did), but long term the business plan in our opinion
didn't make sense.

Today I can't remember the last time I've seen or spoken with Beech.  I
think he is doing something with the games side of MobilePro, but I'm not
sure of that.  Kinda funny, we used to see him at birthday parties, various
family activities etc, but lately he's been a ghost.  I don't fault him for
this as we've certainly been covered with work as well and have less time
now than we did a few years ago too.  Beech is a good guy and works hard.
I've always respected him for what he accomplished with NationWide.

Anyway, I appreciate your candidness and look forward to hearing more from
you as you get back into the swing of things.

BTW, that Sunstream AP (or any other gear we have) is always available for
you any time!  I'll be more impressed if you make the trip next time on the
unicycle!  LOL

Best,


Brad




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Allen Marsalis
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 10:24 PM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] The MOBL Sage (Warning: Long Post)


>Hello Allen,
>
>Good to see you back and doing well.  Curious to hear your take on the
>MobilePro saga.  On or off list is good with me.



The  Friends

Quite a few people have asked me (A) what have I 
been doing lately? And (B) please tell me the 
MobilePro saga.  It means a lot to me that some 
of you have asked about me.  It has hit me that 
although only have a handful of friends here in 
town, I did have 100+ friends in this 
industry!  Thank you all for your kind thoughts 
and I do apologize for dropping off the planet 
like I did.  That was my loss more than anyone 
else's.  You are some of the finest people I have 
ever met in my life, besides my old ShreveNet 
staff.  You know how I felt about my crew.  Heck, 
you all helped me train them!  ;)


The Saga

I will start with the MobilePro Saga and get it 
out of the way and move on to more positive 
things like the goodthings I have been up to in 
the past year or two.  I tell you "The Saga" not 
as an excuse for my hiatus from the wireless 
industry, and excuse for my strange behavior, but 
well...(get it? "Well", that's a deep subject, 
LOL) well.because some of you asked me too 
(cough cough Brad Belton cough cough).

Here goes..

It is somewhat of an interesting story I guess, 
for inside industry people like us, or else this 
might be extremely Off Topic for this list.  As a 
WISP, this is not as easy story for me to 
tell.  Not a happy story for me.  I would like to 
tell the story and forget as much as possible and 
move on.  Perhaps there is something that you can 
learn from this (yeah like Allen is not so smart 
after all? - (Maybe and maybe not, you decide)


The Disclaimer

It has been over 3 years since the sale of my 
(W)ISP to MobilePro.  I am no longer under any 
agreement or obligation.  I am now entitled to 
express my opinion right or wrong.  This is my opinion and only my opinion.


The Beginning

Roll the clock back to 2004.  Life is pretty 
good.  Speaking at WISPCON.  Drinking Romulan Ale 
with some of the finest people on the 
planet.  (now argue that point)   Why on earth 
would I want to sell my company?  The WISP of my 
dreams?  Whatsup wit dat?   There were a whole 
host of reasons for selling out and many of which 
were personal some were reasonable, and some 
might have been downright psychotic.  Here are 
some of the reasons I had for selling, just in 
case any of you ever consider s

RE: [WISPA] Alternate transport providers, Cogent

[Brad Belton]

Hello Jory - Matt,

Thank you for the kind words Jory and the referral Matt.

I'm only interjecting here just to clarify that nearly every opportunity
presented to BelWave has to be evaluated on a case by case basis.  In this
particular case there were several criteria that dictated the price per MB.
Certainly we can offer better per MB pricing, but that comes with different
terms.  With the constraints we had to work with I am extremely confident
there is not a better deal available that will offer a comparable level of
service.

Obviously I can't go into the details, but we're confident we met every
requirement requested for the opportunity to earn the business.  More
importantly the continued business and ongoing relationship beyond this
short term deal.

We appreciate the opportunity and look forward to working with WCCS.


Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jory Privett
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 1:59 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alternate transport providers, Cogent

Yes Belwave is there and they come highly recommended.  I have talked with 
them and they seem like good people.  I will sign a contract with them this 
week I hope.  I was just wanting to find a better price per meg  but it does

not look like it will happen.

Jory Privett
WCCS

- Original Message - 
From: "Matt Liotta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 1:31 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alternate transport providers, Cogent


> Jory Privett wrote:
>> If you sell a national backbone  what do you have in North Texas?  I
>> need bandwidth desperately and cant find anything less than about 
>> $250/Meg.
>>
> I know you meant to send this offlist and ultimately, you did, but I
> figured I would respond onlist in case others have a similar. In fact,
> this whole thread started with the concept that you shouldn't have to
> pay $250/meg.
>
> First of all, we are only built out in major cities, so we don't have a
> network near you. However, cheaper bandwidth shouldn't be too far away.
> I know there are plenty of wireless companies operating in the
> Dallas/Fort Worth area and it looks like you are about 40 miles outside
> of Fort Worth. Have you talked to another wireless company about
> bandwidth? I believe BelWave is in Fort Worth and their network may
> include parts of North West Fort Worth making the shot even less than 40
> miles.
>
> I happened to ask offlist for some information on the closest tower Jory
> has to Fort Worth. Using that information I came up with the attached
> backhaul figured using 5800Mhz. The other side of the shot is the D.R.
> Horton Tower, which I would think cheaper bandwidth would be available.
> It would also appear that plenty of other buildings should be accessible.
>
> -Matt
>






>


>
> ** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at 
> ISPCON **
> ** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
> ** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
> ** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
> ** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at 
> http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **
>
>


> 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/ 




** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at
ISPCON **
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **



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/



** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at ISPCON 
**
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when yo

RE: [WISPA] OT: rural WISP testers needed

[Brad Belton]

Oh, come on now Patrick...don't tease us!  If such a critter was born it
would certainly be considered by Alvarion Engineers as the bastard child.
However, while they're concocting such an abomination why not add software
controlled dual polarity?  

Cheers to Alvarion for expanding the product horizon a bit further!  We look
forward to learning more about the product.

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 4:04 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] OT: rural WISP testers needed

So a bunch of you are asking for a bit more detail in order to know if
you might be interested. So I can add the following in the way of
analogy. If BreezeACCESS VL is a Lexus, the new line would like a
Corolla -- still from Alvarion so the expected quality will be there,
just not all the bells and whistles that VL brings. It does have a few
unique features like one CPE for all 5 GHz bands (yes, Brad Belton, you
heard it right :) ; you select whether to make the CPE 5.3, 5.4 or 5.8
GHz. So that's a big plus on the operations side. And though still
riding the same roads, it would not share the same infrastructure.

Patrick Leary
AVP, Market Development
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Visit Alvarion at WiMAX World
Chicago, September 25-27
Booth #409

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 12:53 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] OT: rural WISP testers needed

Hi folks,

We are looking for a handful of WISPs to do some product testing on an
entirely new WISP multipoint product line from Alvarion. You need not be
a current Alvarion WISP (and this is not intended for those with
BreezeACCESS VL networks). The line is intended for the most cost
sensitive markets, especially on the residential side. No big strings
attached, but testers would be required to provide detailed feedback on
performance as well as overall value. I am looking for testers who are
in deep rural areas and I am interested in a sampling which could
include U.S., Canada and the Caribbean. Please contact me OFFLIST, but
only if you are serious. I can't offer more detail on the product in
this mail, but the whole WISP market will know about it in short order.

Again, please reach out offlist.

Patrick Leary
AVP, Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Visit Alvarion at WiMAX World
Chicago, September 25-27
Booth #409






 This footnote confirms that this email message has been
scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code,
vandals & computer viruses(84).







 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
computer viruses.







** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at
ISPCON **
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **



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/






This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by

PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
computer viruses(190).











This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by

PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
computer viruses(43).









 This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious

RE: [WISPA] IPTV

[Brad Belton]

Please expand a bit more on your offering.  Inquiring minds want to know.

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Clint Ricker
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 9:31 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] IPTV

Not ready for prime time...?  There's already several hundred thousand
subscribers on IPTV platforms in the US alone, so I'm not sure what
you're waiting for...  what shortcomings are you seeing?

The technology IS being deployed in "prime time" scenarios already
(AT&T, which is not known for being adventuresome with technology is
the biggest, but not the only domestic example; internationally, it is
being deployed much more widely).

The main problem that WISPs face is that you may have to do some
network overhauls to handle that sort of traffic...

When you "resell" DirectTV (unless they have changed their model since
2005, which is the last I looked at their agreements), it is more of a
referral/outsourced installation crew than reselling.  It does let you
offer triple play to a point, but (again, unless it's changed), you
can't do single bill and you can't really generate any reoccuring
revenue (which, as a service provider, is where your real profit tends
to be)

Although you do have increased costs in doing your own in terms of
network buildout and so forth, you also effectively (if done right,
profitably) subsidize the buildout of a better network

It probably is not quite viable for ultra-rural WISPs because of
really low densities and so forth.  In areas with higher densities
(definitely MDU), it is viable and deployable

-Clint Ricker
Kentnis Technologies





On 9/10/07, Brad Belton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Agreed, but IMO just not quite ready for prime time . yet.  
>
> Best,
>
> Brad
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
> Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 8:23 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] IPTV
>
> IPTV is also the breaking of the traditional TV mold.  You can offer
> thousands of channels from all kinds of different sources.  It doesn't
even
> have to be in the traditional channel format.
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Matt Liotta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 8:09 AM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] IPTV
>
>
> > Brad Belton wrote:
> >> We have (off and on) been looking for the same solution, however we
came
> >> to
> >> a conclusion years ago.  Why not just re-sell Direct TV or Dish?
> >>
> > For a full channel line-up or in residential settings I would agree with
> > you. However, in a MTU the ability to provide channels ala carte to
> > multiple customers using IP provides different economics.
> >
> > -Matt
> >
>

> 
> >
> > ** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at
> > ISPCON **
> > ** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
> > ** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
> > ** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
> > ** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at
> > http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **
> >
> >
>

> 
> > 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/
> >
>
>

> 
>
> ** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at
> ISPCON **
> ** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
> ** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
> ** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
> ** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at
> http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **
>
>

> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>

> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: w

RE: [WISPA] IPTV

[Brad Belton]

Good point regarding added value to the IP service we are offering.  VoIP
has added a certain "stickiness" for us already.  If we had IPTV to bundle
in as well it could only help.

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt Liotta
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 8:43 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] IPTV

Brad Belton wrote:
> Correct, we see the same requests.  However, why try re-inventing the
wheel
> when DirecTV already has a solution in place?  Every time this issue has
> popped up the client was more than happy to pay the DirecTV price even if
> they only wanted CNN or FOX.
> 
Are you reselling DirecTV now?

> It just didn't seem to make sense (yet) to put additional load on the IP
leg
> into a building when the service is already available from the roof where
we
> already have rights.
> 
Yes, but then you are running coax to various tenants and various drops. 
If it is a business park then you are putting a dish on each building.

In our case, we would like to charge them for the channels, but bundle 
the bandwidth usage into their service just like we do VoIP. As they use 
more and more bandwidth it gives the customer incentive to upgrade their 
commit.

-Matt



** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at
ISPCON **
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **



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/



** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at ISPCON 
**
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at 
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **


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] IPTV

[Brad Belton]

Agreed, but IMO just not quite ready for prime time . yet.  

Best,

Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 8:23 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] IPTV

IPTV is also the breaking of the traditional TV mold.  You can offer 
thousands of channels from all kinds of different sources.  It doesn't even 
have to be in the traditional channel format.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


- Original Message - 
From: "Matt Liotta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 8:09 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] IPTV


> Brad Belton wrote:
>> We have (off and on) been looking for the same solution, however we came 
>> to
>> a conclusion years ago.  Why not just re-sell Direct TV or Dish?
>>
> For a full channel line-up or in residential settings I would agree with 
> you. However, in a MTU the ability to provide channels ala carte to 
> multiple customers using IP provides different economics.
>
> -Matt
>


>
> ** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at 
> ISPCON **
> ** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
> ** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
> ** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
> ** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at 
> http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **
>
>


> 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/
> 




** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at
ISPCON **
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **



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/



** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at ISPCON 
**
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at 
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **


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] IPTV

[Brad Belton]

Correct, we see the same requests.  However, why try re-inventing the wheel
when DirecTV already has a solution in place?  Every time this issue has
popped up the client was more than happy to pay the DirecTV price even if
they only wanted CNN or FOX.

It just didn't seem to make sense (yet) to put additional load on the IP leg
into a building when the service is already available from the roof where we
already have rights.

Granted a cheaper "news/weather only" channel lineup would be a benefit, but
how much of a benefit?  In our experience the client would just as soon have
the basics from DirecTV that include the channels they are after and be done
with it.

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt Liotta
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 8:09 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] IPTV

Brad Belton wrote:
> We have (off and on) been looking for the same solution, however we came
to
> a conclusion years ago.  Why not just re-sell Direct TV or Dish?
> 
For a full channel line-up or in residential settings I would agree with 
you. However, in a MTU the ability to provide channels ala carte to 
multiple customers using IP provides different economics.

-Matt



** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at
ISPCON **
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **



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/



** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at ISPCON 
**
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at 
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **


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] IPTV

[Brad Belton]

We have (off and on) been looking for the same solution, however we came to
a conclusion years ago.  Why not just re-sell Direct TV or Dish?

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt Liotta
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 7:37 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] IPTV

Clint Ricker wrote:
> If there was a fairly turnkey solution to providing television service
> over your networks (ie IPTV), would you be interested?
> 
We would like to provide business TV services where we would only carry 
a few channels on an ala carte basis. Specifically, we would like to 
offer CNN, MSNBC, FOX News, and CNBC.

-Matt



** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at
ISPCON **
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **



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/



** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at ISPCON 
**
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at 
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **


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] Leaving the list

[Brad Belton]

Butthe world does revolve around the Good 'ol United States!   Nothing
new about that!  



Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Carl A jeptha
Sent: Monday, September 03, 2007 2:58 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Leaving the list

Ralph,
 From Canada, This is a list of people who did what no one else would do.

You are a Johnny (excuse me Johnny O) come lately and want the rules 
that you have in your HAM world. We never had those, no RUS, no easy 
access to the FCC, no a whole lot of help, but bunch of losers got more 
done with the scraps from the table than anyone else.

I did not see the HAM's going to the FCC and saying this is a good 
thing, you should help them. I see nothing but condemnation for the work 
we did, earthlink and the rest of the losers with their year 2005 
wireless that is not profitable does not work, etc, etc.

Good Bye people, Rick find another moderator for Canada, I'm gone. 
Scriv, Marlon, Johnny, and the rest of you Good Bye. Again WISPA general 
list is revolving around the Good ole United States.

You have a Good Day now,


Carl A Jeptha
http://www.airnet.ca
Office Phone: 905 349-2084
Office Hours: 9:00am - 5:00pm
skype cajeptha



Ralph wrote:
> John-
> I certainly hope you don't think I'm sniping at your character! 
>
> My request is simply that our organization, WISPA, state its position on
> legal operation and the use of certified systems.
> It could be a position paper, a resolution, or anything else "official"
that
> addresses this specific issue. 
> Certainly changing and improving the FCC regulations is what we all want,
> but that hasn't happened. We have to work with what we have, not go around
> it because we think its wrong, or unfair, or stupid, or whatever. As many
> have said, it is a not a popular subject, but the FCC rules are a fact of
> life and WISPA needs to decide what it does or does not support.
>
> Ralph
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of John Scrivner
> Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2007 8:48 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: [WISPA] Leaving the list
>
>
> I have tried to share what I believe are good paths to proceed for WISPs 
> and WISPA and mostly all I get back are rude comments and smug lashes at 
> my character here. I have too many things going to be bothered with all 
> the divisive rhetoric and sniping attitudes from many on this list 
> server. I am leaving the list for a while. Someone can let me know when 
> people settle down and decide they want to focus on unification instead 
> of dividing the group.
> Good bye for now...
> Scriv
>
>
>


>
> ** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at
ISPCON **
> ** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
> ** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
> ** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
> ** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **
>
>


> 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/
>
>   



** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at
ISPCON **
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **



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/



** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at ISPCON 
**
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at 
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **


WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
---

RE: [WISPA] Need Service in the following areas

[Brad Belton]

BTW we've been there done that with a long story too, but were successful.


As with anything your mileage will vary.


Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Belton
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 10:42 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Need Service in the following areas

Then as the soup nazi says:  No soup for you!

Seriously, I agree that the typical telco T1 price $450 - $1500 will be out
of the question for some franchises.  The opportunity is the up sell by
explaining the value of bringing your service in at say half the Telco price
~$300-$350 and using it for voice savings, credit card clearing savings,
security video/inventory slippage/insurance claims & premiums savings etc,
etc.

So now that T1 is doing far more than providing a WiFi hotspot and as such
is more valuable and a best effort DSL type service (read: cheap) isn't an
option.

Best,


Brad






-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Frank Muto
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 10:31 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Need Service in the following areas


I'll assume these are franchisees and no, they will not pay T1 prices... 
been there done that, long story.




Frank Muto
President
FSM Marketing Group, Inc.
Postini Gold Partner

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Belton
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 10:12 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Need Service in the following areas

McD's!!

Sheesh, don't sell yourself short.  If they want to be an ISP then they need
to pay for a T1 and pay T1 prices.

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Charles Wu
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 8:47 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Need Service in the following areas

Let me know (OFFLIST) if you might be able to service these
areas...looking at $99-150 / month basic business plans (for WiFi
hotspots)

2230 SOUTH SHERMAN DRIVEINDIANAPOLISIN  46203-4854
2830 NORTH BROADWAY ANDERSONIN  46012
1492 EAST 82ND STREET   MERRILLVILLEIN  46410-6324
8834 W STATE RD 114 RENSSELAER  IN  47978
4044 E. SOUTHPORT ROAD  INDIANAPOLISIN  46227
1033 N. MAINCLOVERDALE  IN  46120-9706
450 HWY 231 S   JASPER  IN  47547
3429 S. MAIN STREET ELKHART IN  46517-3125
3000 HWY 62 & ALLISON LANE  JEFFERSONVILLE  IN  47130-5902
14243 FRONTAGE RD   CAMBRIDGE CITY  IN  47327-9802
115 S ROSENBERGER AVE   EVANSVILLE  IN  47712-5900
533 W MAIN ST   BUTLER  IN  46721-1348
2633 SOUTH ST RD 46 TERRE HAUTE IN  47803
1051 N LUTHER RDGEORGETOWN  IN  47122
3940 E STATE BLVD   FORT WAYNE  IN  46805-4949
2363 HWY 135 NW (W*M #922)  CORYDON IN  47112
21879 STATE ROAD 120ELKHART IN  46514
5918 STATE RD 43 N  WEST LAFAYETTE  IN  47906-9609
633 W MAIN ST   WESTFIELD   IN  46074-9498
940 INDIANAPOLIS ST GREENCASTLE IN  46135
4130 NEWTON ST  JASPER  IN  47546
5935 MADISON AV INDIANAPOLISIN  46227
4376 N ST RD 59 BRAZIL  IN  47834
243 Melton RD   BURNS HARBORIN  46304
13615 Blue Lick RoadMemphis IN  47143
2310 W 75TH ST  WOODRIDGE   IL  60517
2700 CREGO RD (OASIS)   DEKALB  IL  60115
3000 E 10TH STREET  JEFFERSONVILLE  IN  47130
533 W MAIN ST   BUTLER  IN  46721
1051 N LUTHER RDGEORGETOWN  IN  47122
3940 E STATE BLVD   FORT WAYNE  IN  46805
633 W MAIN ST   WESTFIELD   IN  46074
5918 State Road HWY 43 NWEST LAFAYETTE  IN  47906


---
WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.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/



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


-- 
WISPA

RE: [WISPA] Need Service in the following areas

[Brad Belton]

Then as the soup nazi says:  No soup for you!

Seriously, I agree that the typical telco T1 price $450 - $1500 will be out
of the question for some franchises.  The opportunity is the up sell by
explaining the value of bringing your service in at say half the Telco price
~$300-$350 and using it for voice savings, credit card clearing savings,
security video/inventory slippage/insurance claims & premiums savings etc,
etc.

So now that T1 is doing far more than providing a WiFi hotspot and as such
is more valuable and a best effort DSL type service (read: cheap) isn't an
option.

Best,


Brad






-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Frank Muto
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 10:31 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Need Service in the following areas


I'll assume these are franchisees and no, they will not pay T1 prices... 
been there done that, long story.




Frank Muto
President
FSM Marketing Group, Inc.
Postini Gold Partner

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Belton
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 10:12 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Need Service in the following areas

McD's!!

Sheesh, don't sell yourself short.  If they want to be an ISP then they need
to pay for a T1 and pay T1 prices.

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Charles Wu
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 8:47 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Need Service in the following areas

Let me know (OFFLIST) if you might be able to service these
areas...looking at $99-150 / month basic business plans (for WiFi
hotspots)

2230 SOUTH SHERMAN DRIVEINDIANAPOLISIN  46203-4854
2830 NORTH BROADWAY ANDERSONIN  46012
1492 EAST 82ND STREET   MERRILLVILLEIN  46410-6324
8834 W STATE RD 114 RENSSELAER  IN  47978
4044 E. SOUTHPORT ROAD  INDIANAPOLISIN  46227
1033 N. MAINCLOVERDALE  IN  46120-9706
450 HWY 231 S   JASPER  IN  47547
3429 S. MAIN STREET ELKHART IN  46517-3125
3000 HWY 62 & ALLISON LANE  JEFFERSONVILLE  IN  47130-5902
14243 FRONTAGE RD   CAMBRIDGE CITY  IN  47327-9802
115 S ROSENBERGER AVE   EVANSVILLE  IN  47712-5900
533 W MAIN ST   BUTLER  IN  46721-1348
2633 SOUTH ST RD 46 TERRE HAUTE IN  47803
1051 N LUTHER RDGEORGETOWN  IN  47122
3940 E STATE BLVD   FORT WAYNE  IN  46805-4949
2363 HWY 135 NW (W*M #922)  CORYDON IN  47112
21879 STATE ROAD 120ELKHART IN  46514
5918 STATE RD 43 N  WEST LAFAYETTE  IN  47906-9609
633 W MAIN ST   WESTFIELD   IN  46074-9498
940 INDIANAPOLIS ST GREENCASTLE IN  46135
4130 NEWTON ST  JASPER  IN  47546
5935 MADISON AV INDIANAPOLISIN  46227
4376 N ST RD 59 BRAZIL  IN  47834
243 Melton RD   BURNS HARBORIN  46304
13615 Blue Lick RoadMemphis IN  47143
2310 W 75TH ST  WOODRIDGE   IL  60517
2700 CREGO RD (OASIS)   DEKALB  IL  60115
3000 E 10TH STREET  JEFFERSONVILLE  IN  47130
533 W MAIN ST   BUTLER  IN  46721
1051 N LUTHER RDGEORGETOWN  IN  47122
3940 E STATE BLVD   FORT WAYNE  IN  46805
633 W MAIN ST   WESTFIELD   IN  46074
5918 State Road HWY 43 NWEST LAFAYETTE  IN  47906


---
WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.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/


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] Need Service in the following areas

[Brad Belton]

McD's!!

Sheesh, don't sell yourself short.  If they want to be an ISP then they need
to pay for a T1 and pay T1 prices.

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Charles Wu
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 8:47 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Need Service in the following areas

Let me know (OFFLIST) if you might be able to service these
areas...looking at $99-150 / month basic business plans (for WiFi
hotspots)

2230 SOUTH SHERMAN DRIVEINDIANAPOLISIN  46203-4854
2830 NORTH BROADWAY ANDERSONIN  46012
1492 EAST 82ND STREET   MERRILLVILLEIN  46410-6324
8834 W STATE RD 114 RENSSELAER  IN  47978
4044 E. SOUTHPORT ROAD  INDIANAPOLISIN  46227
1033 N. MAINCLOVERDALE  IN  46120-9706
450 HWY 231 S   JASPER  IN  47547
3429 S. MAIN STREET ELKHART IN  46517-3125
3000 HWY 62 & ALLISON LANE  JEFFERSONVILLE  IN  47130-5902
14243 FRONTAGE RD   CAMBRIDGE CITY  IN  47327-9802
115 S ROSENBERGER AVE   EVANSVILLE  IN  47712-5900
533 W MAIN ST   BUTLER  IN  46721-1348
2633 SOUTH ST RD 46 TERRE HAUTE IN  47803
1051 N LUTHER RDGEORGETOWN  IN  47122
3940 E STATE BLVD   FORT WAYNE  IN  46805-4949
2363 HWY 135 NW (W*M #922)  CORYDON IN  47112
21879 STATE ROAD 120ELKHART IN  46514
5918 STATE RD 43 N  WEST LAFAYETTE  IN  47906-9609
633 W MAIN ST   WESTFIELD   IN  46074-9498
940 INDIANAPOLIS ST GREENCASTLE IN  46135
4130 NEWTON ST  JASPER  IN  47546
5935 MADISON AV INDIANAPOLISIN  46227
4376 N ST RD 59 BRAZIL  IN  47834
243 Melton RD   BURNS HARBORIN  46304
13615 Blue Lick RoadMemphis IN  47143
2310 W 75TH ST  WOODRIDGE   IL  60517
2700 CREGO RD (OASIS)   DEKALB  IL  60115
3000 E 10TH STREET  JEFFERSONVILLE  IN  47130
533 W MAIN ST   BUTLER  IN  46721
1051 N LUTHER RDGEORGETOWN  IN  47122
3940 E STATE BLVD   FORT WAYNE  IN  46805
633 W MAIN ST   WESTFIELD   IN  46074
5918 State Road HWY 43 NWEST LAFAYETTE  IN  47906


---
WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.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] Cable

[Brad Belton]

I agree the oozing gel can be a mess, but it should be nonconductive and
have no adverse effects to an Ethernet port.

Years ago I found an eight port Netgear switch nearly flooded with the oozed
gel mess.  Didn't seem to affect it in the least.

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Monday, August 06, 2007 1:37 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Cable

Definately call Shireen, (www.allrfcables.com)
He stocks the non-gel cable that is a replacement/equivelent for ArcWireless

type.
(sometimes he has it with Gel)
We use it for most of our outdoor installs, its been working well.

On a side note, as policy we now prefer to select non-Gell Filled. We found 
it unnecessary (If actually not burying cable in ground), because the gel 
usually just ended up oosing out over time causing failure of Ethernet 
connectors, or a mess dripping inside premise at terminations.  Basically we

predict that radio solutions without gel-filled would end up with a longer 
life without maintenance using non-gel filled.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Blair Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, August 06, 2007 1:56 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Cable


>I have been using an outdoor, shielded, flooded, with drain wire cat5e 
>cable from Arc Wireless/Winncom for all my outdoor work and have had great 
>luck with it.
>
> Now, it appears this cable is no longer available.  I'm looking for a 
> replacement.
>
> While I'd prefer the same cable, I'd be able to live with a non-flooded 
> version.
>
> Any recommendations?  I'm running out of cable here!
>
>
> -- 
> Blair Davis
>
> AOL IM Screen Name --  Theory240
>
> West Michigan Wireless ISP
> 269-686-8648
>
> A division of:
> Camp Communication Services, INC
>
>


> 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/
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 
> 269.11.6/938 - Release Date: 8/5/2007 4:16 PM
>
> 



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] Witching hour looms for 5.3 GHz - Can't buy anymoreaftertomorrow

[Brad Belton]

I've heard the rumor as well, but was hoping for more concrete evidence that
the product was nearing shipment.

Agreed, Trango could develop an AP with both existing and new technology
support.  Do we really need super cheap APs?  It doesn't make much if any
difference in our business model if the AP costs $500 or $1500.  I'd rather
have a faster more able AP for $1500 than something watered down without
support for existing and new technology.

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Gino Villarini
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 8:48 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Witching hour looms for 5.3 GHz - Can't buy
anymoreaftertomorrow

If I was Trango, I would add a 2nd rf card to the APs, allowing to
maintain old customers on 5.8 and adding new to the 5.4

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 8:48 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Witching hour looms for 5.3 GHz - Can't buy any
moreaftertomorrow

Rumor has it that Trango is just waiting FCC approval for a new triband 
5ghz AP (5.3ghz, 5.4ghz and 5.8ghz). It will also have more horsepower 
than the current 5830, but still be backward compatible with existing 
SU's. Same 10Mbps bandwidth limit however.

Travis
Microserv

Brad Belton wrote:
> I could swear I detect a slight jubilation in your tone Patrick.  Is
this
> rule change really in the best interest of the UL fixed wireless
operator?
>
> What better excuse could Alvarion ask for in not offering an UL dual
or
> tri-band product?  Now you are comfortably able to hang your hat on
the FCC
> mantel...well done!   
>
> This rule change does come as a disappointment to many Trango
operators.
> The ability to flip between 5.3GHz and 5.8GHz in V or H polarity on
the fly
> will be sorely missed.
>
> Sure has been quiet on the Trango front...hopefully they have a new
dual or
> tri-band product with trusty dual polarity undergoing FCC
certification.
>
> Best,
>
>
> Brad
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
> Behalf Of Patrick Leary
> Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 5:43 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: [WISPA] Witching hour looms for 5.3 GHz - Can't buy any more
> aftertomorrow
>
> Well folks, after all this time the July 20, 2007 deadline is now upon
> us. Effective tomorrow it is illegal for all vendors to sell legacy
5.3
> GHz into the U.S. Everyone must now wait for the FCC certifications to
> come for the new gear that vendors will be building. The rules require
> that 5.3 GHz gear must now conform to the same DFS2 requirements as
> incoming 5.4 GHz product. I trust most of you are aware of this.
>  
> Patrick Leary
> AVP WISP Markets
> Alvarion, Inc.
> o: 650.314.2628
> c: 760.580.0080
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
>
>


>  This footnote confirms that this email message has been
scanned by
> PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
computer
> viruses(84).
>


> 
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>  
>


> 
> This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
> PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
computer
> viruses.
>


> 
>
>
>


> 
> Would you like to see your advertisement here?  Let the WISPA Board
know
> your feelings about allowing advertisements on the free WISPA lists.
The
> current Board is taking this under consideration at this time.  We
want to
> know your thoughts.
>


> 
>   


Would you like to see your advertisement here?  Let the WISPA Board know
your feelings about allowing advertisements on the free WISPA lists.
The current Board is taking this under consideration at this time.  We
want to know your thoughts.


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Witching hour looms for 5.3 GHz - Can't buy anymoreaftertomorrow

[Brad Belton]

??  I guess you missed the  at the end of my jest.  Sorry you have so
little room for a bit of humor.

No need to continue this here.  On my way out to eat...

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 6:36 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Witching hour looms for 5.3 GHz - Can't buy
anymoreaftertomorrow

You have real issues Brad.

The simple point is that the rule change is upon us. Debating whether or
not is good is a pointless endeavor -- this has been known for YEARS and
the time to debate the rule itself has long past. If you wish to waste
your breath trying to provoke an argument, go for it, but I won't be
baited into it.

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Belton
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 4:08 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Witching hour looms for 5.3 GHz - Can't buy any
moreaftertomorrow

I could swear I detect a slight jubilation in your tone Patrick.  Is
this
rule change really in the best interest of the UL fixed wireless
operator?

What better excuse could Alvarion ask for in not offering an UL dual or
tri-band product?  Now you are comfortably able to hang your hat on the
FCC
mantel...well done!   

This rule change does come as a disappointment to many Trango operators.
The ability to flip between 5.3GHz and 5.8GHz in V or H polarity on the
fly
will be sorely missed.

Sure has been quiet on the Trango front...hopefully they have a new dual
or
tri-band product with trusty dual polarity undergoing FCC certification.

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 5:43 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Witching hour looms for 5.3 GHz - Can't buy any more
aftertomorrow

Well folks, after all this time the July 20, 2007 deadline is now upon
us. Effective tomorrow it is illegal for all vendors to sell legacy 5.3
GHz into the U.S. Everyone must now wait for the FCC certifications to
come for the new gear that vendors will be building. The rules require
that 5.3 GHz gear must now conform to the same DFS2 requirements as
incoming 5.4 GHz product. I trust most of you are aware of this.
 
Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
[EMAIL PROTECTED]







 This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned
by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
computer
viruses(84).








 
 



This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
computer
viruses.








Would you like to see your advertisement here?  Let the WISPA Board know
your feelings about allowing advertisements on the free WISPA lists.
The
current Board is taking this under consideration at this time.  We want
to
know your thoughts.



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



Would you like to see your advertisement here?  Let the WISPA Board know
your feelings about allowing advertisements on the free WISPA lists.
The current Board is taking this under consideration at this time.  We
want to know your thoughts.


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/





This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
computer viruses(190).










This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by

PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of mal

RE: [WISPA] Witching hour looms for 5.3 GHz - Can't buy any more aftertomorrow

[Brad Belton]

I could swear I detect a slight jubilation in your tone Patrick.  Is this
rule change really in the best interest of the UL fixed wireless operator?

What better excuse could Alvarion ask for in not offering an UL dual or
tri-band product?  Now you are comfortably able to hang your hat on the FCC
mantel...well done!   

This rule change does come as a disappointment to many Trango operators.
The ability to flip between 5.3GHz and 5.8GHz in V or H polarity on the fly
will be sorely missed.

Sure has been quiet on the Trango front...hopefully they have a new dual or
tri-band product with trusty dual polarity undergoing FCC certification.

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 5:43 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Witching hour looms for 5.3 GHz - Can't buy any more
aftertomorrow

Well folks, after all this time the July 20, 2007 deadline is now upon
us. Effective tomorrow it is illegal for all vendors to sell legacy 5.3
GHz into the U.S. Everyone must now wait for the FCC certifications to
come for the new gear that vendors will be building. The rules require
that 5.3 GHz gear must now conform to the same DFS2 requirements as
incoming 5.4 GHz product. I trust most of you are aware of this.
 
Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
[EMAIL PROTECTED]






 This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer
viruses(84).







 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer
viruses.






Would you like to see your advertisement here?  Let the WISPA Board know
your feelings about allowing advertisements on the free WISPA lists.  The
current Board is taking this under consideration at this time.  We want to
know your thoughts.


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Would you like to see your advertisement here?  Let the WISPA Board know your 
feelings about allowing advertisements on the free WISPA lists.  The current 
Board is taking this under consideration at this time.  We want to know your 
thoughts.

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] pricing

[Brad Belton]

This topic has come up many times over the years.  I don't recall any real
consensus was ever reached based on a multiple due to the wide variation of
one operation to another.

How is it that one operation with 500 users is worth the same as another
operation with 500 users?  

Would you pay the same for these companies if one was loosing money and the
other making money?

Would the companies hold the same value if one deployed Linksys CPE housed
in Tupperware and the other deployed Trango or Alvarion?

Would the companies hold the same value if one operated in Riggins, ID (no
offense meant towards the fine 410 residents of Gouge-Eye) and the other in
New York City, New York?

Every operation is best valued on a case by case basis as there are simply
too many variables that can influence the value.

Best,


Brad




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 3:06 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] pricing

Hey,

Anyone seen current pricing for purchase of a WISP? The last I saw it 
was around 12x the monthly... has that changed at all lately? I have the 
opportunity to purchase a neighboring WISP.

Travis
Microserv



Would you like to see your advertisement here?  Let the WISPA Board know
your feelings about allowing advertisements on the free WISPA lists.  The
current Board is taking this under consideration at this time.  We want to
know your thoughts.


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Would you like to see your advertisement here?  Let the WISPA Board know your 
feelings about allowing advertisements on the free WISPA lists.  The current 
Board is taking this under consideration at this time.  We want to know your 
thoughts.

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Low cost generator

[Brad Belton]

David,

Oh, ok...I missed the original post link to the 3800.00 generator.  After
poking around on the www.electricgeneratorsdirect.com site I came across the
$1959.00 7kW LP & Natural gas genset delivered, tax included, with transfer
switch and $40 check discount.

I'm inclined to bite off on that deal if I knew for certain all my APC's
(500VA and greater) would be happy with it.  


Ralph,

Kudos on a great score at Home Depot!  Gotta love a motivated "big box"
manager when in their eyes they have an albatross SKU.


Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Ralph
Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 9:33 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Low cost generator

We've used the Guardians (Generac) from Home Depot.  Work fine.
Every one I have ever seen came with the transfer switch.
Best deal was a 12Kw I got that was brand new, but the transfer switch and
the top of the generator were slightly dented. Seems like I gave $1500.00
for it. HD said it was 400.00 below cost.

I have been told by the HD folks that unless you have it installed by their
folks, the warranty is void, though. I am not sure how true that is.  I
don't think they (HD) sell them without installation.

Ralph



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of David E. Smith
Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 9:26 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator

Brad Belton wrote:
> So, you bought this LP & Natural Gas generator for $1460 delivered,
> including tax and transfer switch?

Not quite. I was going on the price posted with the OP's link, which had
a displayed price of about $3800 (at the time I looked at it, at least).
That unit can run on either propane or natural gas, out of the box (as
it were).

We paid about $3000 plus sales tax and delivery, which made it around
$3200, including the transfer switch and sundry bits.

I was surprised to find a good price on a generator at Lowe's, but then
I always thought of Lowe's as more of a "home improvement" store, and
didn't expect them to carry things this big. (Maybe I'm just naive or
something, dunno.)

David Smith
MVN.net

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Low cost generator

[Brad Belton]

So, you bought this LP & Natural Gas generator for $1460 delivered,
including tax and transfer switch?

http://www.electricgeneratorsdirect.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id
=370

That is an amazing deal!  Maybe Lowe's made a mistake on the price?


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2007 10:56 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator

> I'm in the market for a generator and came across this one.

[ snipped link ]

That's either the very same generator I have, or very close to it.

(Actually, it's just "very close." Ours can run on either propane or
natural gas, and it's presently wired up for the latter.)

Sadly, in the five months since we moved to our new office, with that
fancy new generator, we haven't had a single power outage. Not so much as
a flicker. It pops on once a week for its exercise cycle, and I've done
the "flip the big switch and make sure the generator fires up" test a
couple times, so I assume it works.)

As with any big purchase, shop around. Ours was $500 cheaper than the
price on that Web site; we just had Lowe's special-order it for us.

David Smith
MVN.net

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Low cost generator

[Brad Belton]

This is true on the larger more expensive APC UPSs, but the smaller 500 -
750VA models don't have this feature, do they?

 

Brad

 

 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 11:57 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator

 

Brad,

You can adjust the sensitivity of the APC UPS's to handle just about any
type of incoming power. We have run a tower off a cheap Home Depot 2000watt
by adjusting the APC so it would not keep switching off an on.

Travis
Microserv

Brad Belton wrote: 

We have found many (most all?) <10kW "job site" type generators do not work
well if at all with APC UPS.  In the event of a power failure we simply rent
a 25kW towable diesel generator.  Granted 25kW is way overkill for most any
HUB site, but apparently the larger generators provide "cleaner" power that
the APC UPS's are happy with.
 
Does anyone have one of these 7kW Guardian standby generators in use with
APC UPS's?  $1999.00 delivered with transfer switch is a pretty strong deal!
 
Best,
 
 
Brad
 
 
 
 
 
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Scott Reed
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 11:30 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator
 
The Guardian comes as small as 7KW for about $2100 and goes up a long 
way from there.
I have seen Guardians at cell sites and waste water lift stations around 
here.
 
George Rogato wrote:
  
http://www.electricgeneratorsdirect.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id
=538 
  

 
I'm in the market for a generator and came across this one.
The auto transfer switch and propane caught my eye and I figured I'd 
share it with the list.
 


 
  
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Low cost generator

[Brad Belton]

Do you mean something like this:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=150135562844

This idea actually came up as a possible idea between another ISP and me not
long ago.  I can get the 5605 joule rated version (looks identical to the
one listed above) for about $100.00.  

Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Peter R.
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2007 10:55 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator

You could just add a line conditioner.


Brad Belton wrote:

>We have found many (most all?) <10kW "job site" type generators do not work
>well if at all with APC UPS.  In the event of a power failure we simply
rent
>a 25kW towable diesel generator.  Granted 25kW is way overkill for most any
>HUB site, but apparently the larger generators provide "cleaner" power that
>the APC UPS's are happy with.
>
>Does anyone have one of these 7kW Guardian standby generators in use with
>APC UPS's?  $1999.00 delivered with transfer switch is a pretty strong
deal!
>
>Best,
>
>
>Brad
>  
>
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Low cost generator

[Brad Belton]

We have found many (most all?) <10kW "job site" type generators do not work
well if at all with APC UPS.  In the event of a power failure we simply rent
a 25kW towable diesel generator.  Granted 25kW is way overkill for most any
HUB site, but apparently the larger generators provide "cleaner" power that
the APC UPS's are happy with.

Does anyone have one of these 7kW Guardian standby generators in use with
APC UPS's?  $1999.00 delivered with transfer switch is a pretty strong deal!

Best,


Brad





-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Scott Reed
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 11:30 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Low cost generator

The Guardian comes as small as 7KW for about $2100 and goes up a long 
way from there.
I have seen Guardians at cell sites and waste water lift stations around 
here.

George Rogato wrote:
>
http://www.electricgeneratorsdirect.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id
=538 
>
>
> I'm in the market for a generator and came across this one.
> The auto transfer switch and propane caught my eye and I figured I'd 
> share it with the list.
>

-- 
Scott Reed
Owner
NewWays
Wireless Networking
Network Design, Installation and Administration
www.nwwnet.net

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] TrangoLINK Giga

[Brad Belton]

Agreed, but I think all the excitement was anticipating a new low price
point that Trango was promising.  Trango did come in a bit cheaper, but not
cheap enough to really create any street parties.

Basically the money is the same between DragonWave and Trango, but Trango
gives you 100MB for DragonWave's 50MB price.

Does that sound about right?

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Charles Wu
Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2007 11:13 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] TrangoLINK Giga

>I will tell you, the most exciting news of the year for me, is clearly
Trango's entry into the Licensed space.  

In no particular order, here's a quick list of other licensed radio
manufacturers off the top of my head w/ licensed Part 101 products
shipping today in the US

NEC
Alcatel
Harris Stratex
Nera
Ceragon
Dragonwave
AdTran
Unity Wireless (Wit-Com)
Proxim
Ericson
Microwave Data Systems
Microwave Networks
Gigacom

Dunno how it's that exciting

-Charles

---
WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.com 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] TrangoLINK Giga

[Brad Belton]

That was probably for Rev3 gear.  I believe that deal is no longer
available, but I could be wrong.

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 11:11 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] TrangoLINK Giga

I have a price quote for a Dragonwave 18ghz licensed link from 6 months 
ago for that price range. ;)

Travis
Microserv

Tom DeReggi wrote:
> Because until two months ago, there wasn't a licensed radio for 
> $10K-$12K.
> Its price competition from companies like Trango, that forces other 
> manufacturers to drop their prices also.
> Its the message that Licensed is not jsut for carriers anymore, as 
> soon as manufacturers that historically targeted WISPs, start making a 
> product for WISPs.
> The technology has been available for years, why not the lower costs 
> until now?
>
> With that said, I recognize that Dragonwave also is a key competitor 
> driving the price down.
>
> Tom DeReggi
> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>
>
> - Original Message - From: "Charles Wu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 12:12 AM
> Subject: RE: [WISPA] TrangoLINK Giga
>
>
>> I will tell you, the most exciting news of the year for me, is clearly
> Trango's entry into the Licensed space.
>
> In no particular order, here's a quick list of other licensed radio
> manufacturers off the top of my head w/ licensed Part 101 products
> shipping today in the US
>
> NEC
> Alcatel
> Harris Stratex
> Nera
> Ceragon
> Dragonwave
> AdTran
> Unity Wireless (Wit-Com)
> Proxim
> Ericson
> Microwave Data Systems
> Microwave Networks
> Gigacom
>
> Dunno how it's that exciting
>
> -Charles
>
> ---
> WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
> Coming to a City Near You
> http://www.winog.com
>
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Service Request

[Brad Belton]

Hey Charles,

I tried contacting you off list, but got a reply from your filter
application.  Just making sure you got my email.

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Charles Wu
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2007 9:10 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Service Request

Does anyone cover...looking for T1 (or possibly better) level service 

909 Avenue T, Suite 200
Grand Prairie, TX 75050

Ping me offlist

-Charles
 


---
WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.com 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] LIST HIJACKED AGAIN

[Brad Belton]

I didn't until now

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transponder_code#Transponder_codes

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tim Kerns
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 10:31 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] LIST HIJACKED AGAIN

LOL..

wonder how many understand 7500..

Tim

- Original Message - 
From: "Ralph" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:36 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] LIST HIJACKED AGAIN


Please squawk 7500 and continue on course...

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Marty Dougherty
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 8:40 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: [WISPA] LIST HIJACKED AGAIN


This list has been hijacked AGAIN by a few folks who send never ending
emails-day and night-  please stop, your killing the usefulness of the whole
thing.

Martyes: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] MT Babble

[Brad Belton]

"How would the number of customers I had on my network have any bearing on
this discussion?"


Well, it's a lot like having a medical intern weigh in on what a resident is
more qualified to answer.  Certainly the intern is not to be considered a
dummy, but the intern's general lack of tenure, real world experience and
overall knowledge can not be considered equal to an experienced resident.

Questioning your ISP experience and specifically your fixed wireless
experience is certainly relevant to this discussion.  Anyone that has scaled
their operation beyond a few dozen or even a few hundred clients knows the
difficulty and complexity is compounded.  It is quite a different animal to
run an ISP with several thousand users behind it as compared to a few
hundred.

No offense is intended Dawn.  I enjoy reading your posts and agree with your
FCC Certification Crusade, but until you have walked a mile (or more in many
cases) in the shoes of those you are speaking of many will rightly question
what you offer here as the gospel.

Best,


Brad




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dawn DiPietro
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 2:37 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

George,

As I said in my post wireless providers do not get to decide what has to 
be certified this is up to the FCC and if there are any questions they 
need to be clarified not argued against which seems to be the norm among 
some on this list.

How would the number of customers I had on my network have any bearing 
on this discussion?

Regards,
Dawn DiPietro


George Rogato wrote:
> Dawn,
>
> Just how many wisp customers did you have in your short career as a wisp?
>
> Why is it that some people who don't actually participate in running a 
> wireless service want to come in and try to tell us how to run our wisps?
>
>
>
>
>
> Dawn DiPietro wrote:
>> All,
>>
>> I have come to the conclusion that there are some on this list that 
>> think FCC certification is up for debate. There may be a need for 
>> clarification in some cases but like it or not the FCC has the final 
>> say in what can and cannot be certified.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dawn DiPietro
>

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

[Brad Belton]

Or maybe it was Adaptive Broadband gear that allowed the end user to break
the rules?  Anyone remember?

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: Brad Belton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 12:56 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

Wasn't there an ISP in Puerto Rico that was fined because they had set their
gear (Aperto I think) to a higher power than they should have?  The
manufacturer's manual clearly stated it was up to the user to follow the
rules and regulations of the country the gear is deployed.

So, if this is the case how did this gear get FCC certified if the end user
was able to make these changes?

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Stephen Patrick
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 12:49 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

This "FCC country-code-lock-down" question is interesting.

Doing a quick "google" I found this:
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/wireless/airo1200/accsspts/a
p120scg/bkscgaxa.htm
Don't know how up-to-date those lists are, as it was posted in 2003.
Clearly some countries (e.g. Japan) have channels that are (or were in 2003)
not legal in USA.
And an interesting page here:
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/wireless/airo1200/accsspts/a
p120scg/bkscgch3.htm
"Note   Government regulations define the highest allowable power level for
radio devices. This setting must conform to established standards for the
country in which you use the access point."
Clearly implies the user could set a "wrong" country and use their
frequencies.
And
"Note   Government regulations define the highest allowable power level for
radio devices. This setting must conform to established standards for the
country in which you use the access point. "
I have to say I've never used the above product myself.

Here, I have a business-grade Netgear AP (bought in UK) that has a
country-list which allows the same, i.e. you can select any country.  I'd
assume they ship the same firmware in USA, as you can re-flash the device
for upgrade using a common code set, i.e. there is no US-specific software
version that I can see.  
Again, the software says on the config screen "It is illegal to use this
device in any location outside of the regulatory domain. The radio for 11a
interface is default to off, you have to select a correct country to turn on
the radio."

So I don't know the answer here, i.e. I'd have assumed these devices (Cisco
and Netgear) adhere to the rules.  These devices appear not to have a
"locked" country ID.  Interesting debate- look forward to hearing more

Regards

Stephen

-Original Message-
From: Mike Hammett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: 11 June 2007 16:25
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

I have no means of testing that.  However, if the hardware can't do it, why
does the software by the same manufacturer of this FCC certified device have
the option of setting non-FCC?

I've read every message up to this one and don't recall anything that would
change what I said.  That's not to say it wasn't said, I just don't remember
it.  :-p


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


- Original Message -
From: "Jack Unger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 10:02 AM
Subject: Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble


> One or two people have asked this question also. I asked them to test and 
> see if their equipment actually did transmit outside the U.S. band. So 
> far, I've received no confirmation that outside-the-band transmissions 
> were actually taking place. If you have equipment that you believe will 
> transmit outside the US band, please test it yourself and report back. 
> Also, to increase your understanding and make this discussion more 
> accurate and valuable, please read my recent posts that provide my more 
> technical opinions of the definition of "outside the band" and "non-FCC 
> frequencies".
>
> jack
>
>
> Mike Hammett wrote:
>> Don't a whole slew of FCC certified wireless equipment for standard 
>> PC\laptop use allow you to pick USA, Japan, Europe, etc?  Picking a 
>> different country allows you to use different, non-FCC frequencies.
>>
>> Why are they allowed if the user cannot select something outside of FCC 
>> permission?
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>> - Original Message - From: "Jack Unger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: 

RE: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

[Brad Belton]

Wasn't there an ISP in Puerto Rico that was fined because they had set their
gear (Aperto I think) to a higher power than they should have?  The
manufacturer's manual clearly stated it was up to the user to follow the
rules and regulations of the country the gear is deployed.

So, if this is the case how did this gear get FCC certified if the end user
was able to make these changes?

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Stephen Patrick
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 12:49 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

This "FCC country-code-lock-down" question is interesting.

Doing a quick "google" I found this:
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/wireless/airo1200/accsspts/a
p120scg/bkscgaxa.htm
Don't know how up-to-date those lists are, as it was posted in 2003.
Clearly some countries (e.g. Japan) have channels that are (or were in 2003)
not legal in USA.
And an interesting page here:
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/wireless/airo1200/accsspts/a
p120scg/bkscgch3.htm
"Note   Government regulations define the highest allowable power level for
radio devices. This setting must conform to established standards for the
country in which you use the access point."
Clearly implies the user could set a "wrong" country and use their
frequencies.
And
"Note   Government regulations define the highest allowable power level for
radio devices. This setting must conform to established standards for the
country in which you use the access point. "
I have to say I've never used the above product myself.

Here, I have a business-grade Netgear AP (bought in UK) that has a
country-list which allows the same, i.e. you can select any country.  I'd
assume they ship the same firmware in USA, as you can re-flash the device
for upgrade using a common code set, i.e. there is no US-specific software
version that I can see.  
Again, the software says on the config screen "It is illegal to use this
device in any location outside of the regulatory domain. The radio for 11a
interface is default to off, you have to select a correct country to turn on
the radio."

So I don't know the answer here, i.e. I'd have assumed these devices (Cisco
and Netgear) adhere to the rules.  These devices appear not to have a
"locked" country ID.  Interesting debate- look forward to hearing more

Regards

Stephen

-Original Message-
From: Mike Hammett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: 11 June 2007 16:25
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

I have no means of testing that.  However, if the hardware can't do it, why
does the software by the same manufacturer of this FCC certified device have
the option of setting non-FCC?

I've read every message up to this one and don't recall anything that would
change what I said.  That's not to say it wasn't said, I just don't remember
it.  :-p


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


- Original Message -
From: "Jack Unger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 10:02 AM
Subject: Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble


> One or two people have asked this question also. I asked them to test and 
> see if their equipment actually did transmit outside the U.S. band. So 
> far, I've received no confirmation that outside-the-band transmissions 
> were actually taking place. If you have equipment that you believe will 
> transmit outside the US band, please test it yourself and report back. 
> Also, to increase your understanding and make this discussion more 
> accurate and valuable, please read my recent posts that provide my more 
> technical opinions of the definition of "outside the band" and "non-FCC 
> frequencies".
>
> jack
>
>
> Mike Hammett wrote:
>> Don't a whole slew of FCC certified wireless equipment for standard 
>> PC\laptop use allow you to pick USA, Japan, Europe, etc?  Picking a 
>> different country allows you to use different, non-FCC frequencies.
>>
>> Why are they allowed if the user cannot select something outside of FCC 
>> permission?
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>> - Original Message - From: "Jack Unger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>> Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 2:00 AM
>> Subject: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble
>>
>>
>>> Michael,
>>>
>>> Just for info -
>>>
>>> The question of being required to use a software version that denied 
>>> operation on non-US frequencies has been hanging over Mikrotik and WISPs

>>> now for several months. Seems this is the last issue that needs to be 
>>> addressed before we will see a potential flood of Mikrotik-based 
>>> certified products because a lot of WISPs want to certify and/or use 
>>> Mikrotik-based equipment. To clear up any confusion, I submitted this 
>>> issue to the FCC via email. Here's my submission and t

RE: [WISPA] MikroTik Hardware

[Brad Belton]

The issue you are seeing with minor packet loss may be due to the RB44G
cards.  I know they initially had issues, but I haven't personally had the
time to test the RB44G again since my post on the MT forum back in March.

http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=14316&hilit=

If you need GigE Interfaces for your Intel based MT router I would suggest
sticking with Intel NICs.  We have many, many Intel MF and Intel MT NICs in
production with great success.  Sure beats the Hell out of paying $1000 -
$1500+ per GigE fiber NIC from Imagestream!

We use an Evercase 4U chassis and for the past several months are including
redundant hot-swap power supplies for an additional $200-$300.

BTW, what Intel motherboard are you using?  Unfortunately not all
motherboards are created equal when it comes to building a MT router!

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Don Annas
Sent: Sunday, May 27, 2007 7:38 AM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] MikroTik Hardware

Guys, I'm looking for a solid state, rack mountable hardware to run MikroTik
OS on.  I need the device to be able to handle around 200 MB of actual
throughput.  We use quite a few of the RB532s today and seem to cap out
around 40MB or so.
 
We have tried a few of the PC based platforms using Intel 915 boards and the
gig RB PCI cards.  When testing with these, we do get minor packet loss that
we do not get on the 532s or our Cisco routers.
 
Any suggestions?  Thanks.
 
 

 

 

_

Don Annas

336.510.3800 x111

336.510.3801 fax

HYPERLINK "mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]"[EMAIL PROTECTED]

HYPERLINK "http://www.triadtelecom.com/"www.TriadTelecom.com

_



 

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.0/819 - Release Date: 5/26/2007
10:47 AM
 
  

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Mikrotik PC

[Brad Belton]

Hello Tom,

Interesting...we've never seen this problem before with countless RB44s
deployed.  I suspect it isn't solely a RB44 issue, but probably a hardware
combination of some sort.

Best,


Brad




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2007 5:49 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik PC

RB44.

We've used combo of 3 RB44 (via-rhine) in RouterPC for years at many cell 
sites, with great success. Never had habitual problem with Lockup. Never 
tried more than 3 cards. We use Mandrake Linux though, not Mikrotik.

However, the problem we have with RB44 is they do not auto-detect correctly 
after the cards are reset.  (For example rebooting PC or doing a 
Mii-tool -R).
We see it is not correct by seeing incomplete speed descriptions viewing w/ 
Mii-tool. To fix, do Mii-tool -r to force auto-renegotiate.  This is a BIG 
pain in the neck to remember to watch for, as otherwise cards are left with 
a Duplex Mismatch to radio.

We are investigating whether this is possibly a driver problem, or config 
file misconfig, apposed to the card itself. Not sure.

For that reason we prefer the MT RB24 card w/natsemi.

We are planning on testing possibly using the new RB44G, since it uses a 
different driver (Realtek)..

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Robert Norris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2007 2:16 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Mikrotik PC


> Did a little research on Mikrotik and number of MT RB44 nic cards used. 
> Here
> is the link.
>
http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?t=10803&highlight=rb44&sid=996f59c0f
> b2ae60da05f3cc91d149375
>
> I hope this helps you.
>
> Robert
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Mark Nash
> Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2007 11:42 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: [WISPA] Mikrotik PC
>
> I need more horsepower at one router site.
>
> It's got a MT RB532 (233MHz/32MB) and it is pegging at 100% at times, 
> mostly
>
> in the 85% range, though.  The location has a 19" rack (only about 18" 
> deep,
>
> though).  Need 8 FastEthernet ports.  No wireless.  Want to user Mikrotik
> RouterOS.
>
> Can anyone recommend a box for this?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Mark Nash
> Network Engineer
> UnwiredOnline.Net
> 350 Holly Street
> Junction City, OR 97448
> http://www.uwol.net
> 541-998-
> 541-998-5599 fax
>
>
>
> -- 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
> -- 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.6.8/800 - Release Date: 5/11/2007 
> 7:34 PM
>
> 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Mikrotik PC

[Brad Belton]

Correct.  The RB44g had issues with earlier MT OS versions.  I haven't
tested the RB44g yet again, but I think they have resolved the issue.

http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?t=14316&highlight=rb44g&sid=479f896a
017421b1fc3b34a37f5135e6


The RB44 is a solid performer.  We've ever had any issues with them since
the day of their release.

Best,

Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Robert Norris
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2007 7:37 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Mikrotik PC

If remember correctly it was RB44G that had problem not The RB44.



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mark Nash
Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2007 11:27 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik PC

Thanks, everyone.

I had heard that the RB44's have issues under load (performance/lockup). 
Seeing as I will need 8 ethernet ports for this router, any recommendations 
instead of the RB44?

Mark Nash
Network Engineer
UnwiredOnline.Net
350 Holly Street
Junction City, OR 97448
http://www.uwol.net
541-998-
541-998-5599 fax
- Original Message - 
From: "Dennis Burgess - 2K Wireless" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2007 6:27 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Mikrotik PC


> Mark,
>
> Just build yourself a 1gig VIA PC.  Simple, easy, or grab yourself 
> something
> faster, such as a standard HP PC etc, The simplest thing would be to grab 
> a
> 64meg IDE Flash card with MT loaded, else, you can load it up on a HD if 
> you
> wish!
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Mark Nash
> Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2007 11:42 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: [WISPA] Mikrotik PC
>
> I need more horsepower at one router site.
>
> It's got a MT RB532 (233MHz/32MB) and it is pegging at 100% at times, 
> mostly
>
> in the 85% range, though.  The location has a 19" rack (only about 18" 
> deep,
>
> though).  Need 8 FastEthernet ports.  No wireless.  Want to user Mikrotik
> RouterOS.
>
> Can anyone recommend a box for this?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Mark Nash
> Network Engineer
> UnwiredOnline.Net
> 350 Holly Street
> Junction City, OR 97448
> http://www.uwol.net
> 541-998-
> 541-998-5599 fax
>
>
>
> -- 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
> -- 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Fw: [WISP] Nifty new tool for the cable ops

[Brad Belton]

BTW, how is the 80GHz system coming along?  Any information you can share
yet?

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Stephen Patrick
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 10:56 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Fw: [WISP] Nifty new tool for the cable ops

Zack, you flatter us!

Seriously, answering a few questions that were voiced
- 30degrees is very wide for FSO - the link budgets for 350feet (~100m)
would normally entail a narrower beam.
- I don't believe Plaintree use automatic tracking, but they could speak for
themselves of course
- Automatic tracking is needed for narrow beam (~1mRad) systems because
buildings move more than that.

Without trying to make a commercial pitch, our co. does both fixed wide-beam
and tracked systems for a variety of applications.
Have a look here if you want to see a demonstrator of an aerospace solution
for mobile platforms:
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=4945168689485668209&pr=goog-sl
It has full 360degree mobile tracking and in the demo is doing 1.25Gbps
Gigabit Ethernet on/off the vehicle.

For the "cableco" application, that's interesting, and we do have very low
cost, stable widebeam systems that can be used exactly for that.

Best regards

Stephen

-Original Message-
From: Zack Kneisley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: 02 May 2007 16:05
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Fw: [WISP] Nifty new tool for the cable ops

These guys know their stuff when it comes to FSO

http://www.cablefreesolutions.com/products_serviceprovider.htm

Zack
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
This email has been verified as Virus free Virus Protection and more
available at http://www.plus.net


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.6.2/784 - Release Date: 01/05/2007
14:57
 
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Fw: [WISP] Nifty new tool for the cable ops

[Brad Belton]

Very cool video Stephen!

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Stephen Patrick
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 10:56 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Fw: [WISP] Nifty new tool for the cable ops

Zack, you flatter us!

Seriously, answering a few questions that were voiced
- 30degrees is very wide for FSO - the link budgets for 350feet (~100m)
would normally entail a narrower beam.
- I don't believe Plaintree use automatic tracking, but they could speak for
themselves of course
- Automatic tracking is needed for narrow beam (~1mRad) systems because
buildings move more than that.

Without trying to make a commercial pitch, our co. does both fixed wide-beam
and tracked systems for a variety of applications.
Have a look here if you want to see a demonstrator of an aerospace solution
for mobile platforms:
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=4945168689485668209&pr=goog-sl
It has full 360degree mobile tracking and in the demo is doing 1.25Gbps
Gigabit Ethernet on/off the vehicle.

For the "cableco" application, that's interesting, and we do have very low
cost, stable widebeam systems that can be used exactly for that.

Best regards

Stephen

-Original Message-
From: Zack Kneisley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: 02 May 2007 16:05
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Fw: [WISP] Nifty new tool for the cable ops

These guys know their stuff when it comes to FSO

http://www.cablefreesolutions.com/products_serviceprovider.htm

Zack
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
This email has been verified as Virus free Virus Protection and more
available at http://www.plus.net


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.6.2/784 - Release Date: 01/05/2007
14:57
 
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] WISP Peering

[Brad Belton]

All,

I really don't think Travis is trying to insult anyone, but simply stating
the facts.  

Everyone here that has scaled to any level understands the complexities of a
network and the business are compounded as it grows.

Nothing against Marlon, but his argument of comparing multiple upstream
providers in the same breath as servicing a client on another's wireless
network is pretty ridiculous.


Best,


Brad




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Ty Carter 
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 8:54 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] WISP Peering

Travis:

I think you are way out of line here... Just because your network has
"x" number of clients does not mean that other entities that have less
than you are not as capable to run a "large network".

I will tell you; here and now, I come from a background of having
thousands of users on my network and the little guys are just as
important, if not more important to talk to because of the reason they
are willing to talk the issue through and not shove SLA's.

People that take your attitude and continually shove SLA's in a
providers face often, at least in my case, take a back seat because what
we as a service provider had a window of time to fix for them what could
easily be fixed immediately; but because the little guy was willing to
call and discuss the issue and was willing to work with me, this put me
as a service provider in a better position to isolate the problem and
bring it to a resolution.  So what if my SLA window was missed by a few
minutes; a little credit on the account for the inconvience is all they
(Mr. SLA) were looking for anyway.

So please don't insult the smaller provider with that type of attitude
that you are or companies of size are more capable of running a larger
network.  The principals are all the same in this type of arrangement
just the scale is larger.

BTW...I'm not in any way invalidating the value of an SLA... as a mater
a fact I very much advocate having them; but a little reality check is
from time to time appropriate.

Ty Carter

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 9:28 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering

Marlon,

When you hit 3,000 subs give me a call. I'd love to chat with you then. 
Until then, you really don't have a clue what it takes to run a large 
network.

Travis
Microserv

Marlon K. Schafer wrote:
> Oh brother.  Now you're just being obstinate Travis.
>
> I honestly thought you were smart enough to substitute the appropriate

> level technician for "some guys on cell phone".
>
> What you just said is that most (all) of your peers, including 
> your OWN techs, aren't as smart or as capable of running their own 
> networks as the boys from Level3.
>
> Guess which part of my dialup network is usually the culprit when 
> something goes down?  Not my "some guy on a cell phone" gear.  It's 
> usually L3!  2 or 3 to one over the last couple of years.
> marlon
>
> - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 9:43 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
>
>
>> I'm calling Qwest, AT&T or Level3. Places that have senior level BGP 
>> techs on staff 24x7. With a full SLA in place for outages. Not "some 
>> guys cell phone".
>>
>> Travis
>> Microserv
>>
>> Marlon K. Schafer wrote:
>>> Really?  um, exactly WHO do you call when your upstream goes down?
>>>
>>> As ours did with a major fiber cut a couple of weeks ago?
>>>
>>> We're ALREADY, ALWAYS dependant on others.
>>>
>>> Teamwork!
>>> marlon
>>>
>>> - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>>> Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 7:11 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
>>>
>>>
 Except in Marlon's case that user will NEVER be on your own 
 network. Roaming is the exception not the norm with cell companies.

 Personally I think a better solution (if you absolutely don't want 
 to just put up your own towers) is to just refer the customer to 
 the other provider and hope they do the same in the future. 
 Honestly, in Marlon's model, you aren't any different than just 
 reselling DSL or Cable service. You don't have control of the 
 network and you don't have control of the user's radio and/or 
 router. And calling the other WISP's cell phone when a customer is 
 down does NOT scale... especially to the levels Marlon is hoping to

 be at one day.

 Travis
 Microserv

 Mike Hammett wrote:
> Roaming is the exact same thing as Marlon does, which is what 
> we're talking about.  You collect the revenues from the user, but 
> the user is on someone else's equipment.  You pay the other 
> network for the use of it.
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent

RE: [WISPA] WISP Peering

[Brad Belton]

Sometimes putting up your own tower isn't an option for a variety of
reasons.  However, I agree the idea of "hanging" a client of ours off of
somebody else's system doesn't give me the warm and fuzzies either for
obvious reasons.  

Sometimes it's best to just refer the potential client to the ISP that can
best service them.  We have done this countless times both directions and
often there is a referral fee paid if the lead pans out.  

Best,


Brad





-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 10:16 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering

Why wouldn't you just put up your own AP's and service the same area 
rather than give that customer away to the competition?

I would spend $5k and put up my own tower before I turn a "potential" 
customer away to the competition. I've done it many times over the years 
and it has always paid off. Once one person is connected, they tell 
their neighbors about it. Pretty soon an AP that was put up for a single 
customer has 10 or 20 customers on it.

Doesn't seem to make business sense to me. Plus when they need tech 
support, how do you troubleshoot the competitors AP's? How do you do RF 
link tests and packet loss tests at 10:00PM when the customer is on the 
phone?

Travis
Microserv

Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote:
>
> - Original Message - From: "George Rogato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 6:42 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
>
>
>> Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote:
>>> Two of my competitors just sat down for lunch and worked out a 
>>> network sharing agreement.  It's a handshake deal at this point though.
>>>
>>> Basically we carved up a hilltop laying out coverage zones for each 
>>> of us, and we set a price for using each other's ap's.
>>>
>>> Marlon
>>
>> Hey I think thats a good thing you've done there Marlon, getting 
>> along and even doing business with your competitors.
>
> Yeah.  It's something that the three of us have already been doing for 
> a couple of years.  We sell on each other's ap's at the same price.  
> The only catch is that each of us has to live under the bw, and bit 
> cap rules of the other guys network vs. our own.  But that seems 
> perfectly fair to me.
>
> We also handle all tech support for the cusotmer.  The customer should 
> NEVER contact the other isp.  We have however, shown up together at 
> problematic customers and worked jointly to fix any issues.
>
>>
>> But where do you think the line would be drawn in respect to anti 
>> competitive practices?
>
> I'm not sure.  We've not had that come up yet.
>
> Did you have a specific situation in mind?
>
>>
>> -- 
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 
>
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] WISP Peering

[Brad Belton]

You make it sound like that can happen in a matter of minutes or even
seconds.  Not likely the case.  All the while your clients are getting hosed
due to the negligence of another.

Best,

Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Adam Kennedy
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 1:11 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering

That's where peering agreements come into play.

Last case scenario you (WISP-A) just want to drop peering entirely but 
WISP-B doesn't stop advertising your route, then call up whoever their 
upstream is and talk to their NOC. If the /20 is your allocation from 
ARIN, and you aren't peering anymore, explain the situation to the NOC 
and they can stop accepting your /20 from WISP-B's advertisement.

Easy as that.

Travis Johnson wrote:
> This is not correct. Let's do an example:
> 
> WISP-A is getting bandwidth from Provider A. They have a /20 network. 
> Provider A has to allow that /20 in their BGP filters.
> WISP-B is getting bandwidth from Provider B. They have a /20 network. 
> Provider B has to allow that /20 in their BGP fitlers.
> 
> WISP-A and WISP-B setup a peering, but also to allow failover if either 
> Provider goes down. Thus Provider A and Provider B both have to allow 
> BOTH /20 networks in their BGP filters.
> 
> Now, for some unknown reason, WISP-B decides to start announcing 
> WISP-A's /20 network as local to their network. BGP will become very 
> confused, and thus WISP-A will essentially be down. All of this with a 
> single network entry by WISP-B... they just wiped out WISP-A.
> 
> Travis
> Microserv
> 
> Zack Kneisley wrote:
>> On 4/26/07, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> My personal concern would be turning over my IP block to my competition.
>>> They would have to have enough control to allow BGP routes from their
>>> upstream. Technically they could misconfigure a router accidentally and
>>> take your entire network down. :(
>>
>> That is what BGP filtering and prefixes are about. Either you peer
>> correctly or incorrectly and don't peer. No turning over blocks
>> happen.
>>
>>>
>>> Travis
>>> Microserv
>>>
>>> Mike Hammett wrote:
>>> > If they're network peering, they'd be connecting each other's networks
>>> > together to exchange local traffic that way.  They could also have an
>>> > alliance where if someone's Internet feeds go out, they use another
>>> > WISP's Internet feed until restoration.
>>> >
>>
>> This is great and what a reliable network is made of.

-- 

Adam Kennedy
Network Administrator
Cyberlink International
Phone: 888-293-3693
Fax: 888-293-3995
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] WISP Peering

[Brad Belton]

This is exactly what we have done.  We brought two DS3's out to a rural area
and have broken off parts of that bandwidth to other ISPs.  In fact as I
type we have failed over part of one ISP's network over a geographically
diverse third backhaul we have back into town.  

I believe we extended an offer to Jory last year or maybe even longer ago
than that, but somewhere along the line the idea stalled.

We are certainly interested in pursuing this again as long as there is a
clear frequency and target market understanding.  I think that might have
been the stumbling block the last go around.  As you've stated there are
already several ISPs in the market and there isn't any reason they should
need to step on each other's toes.  There is plenty of business to go around
as long as everyone is on the same page.  I've slept since then, so I might
be mistaken as to why the first attempt didn't play out.

Jory, I'm out of the office right now, but feel free to contact be directly
if you are interested.

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 2:29 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering

There are many issues involved... we used to peer with one of our 
competitors in the area. It worked pretty well, but honestly wasn't 
worth the extra time and efforts for what it actually saved in 
bandwidth, etc.

Now, if you could find a neutral location to bring in a bigger pipe, and 
then everyone "share" from that location, you may have something. For 
me, I would never allow my IP block to be controlled by anyone other 
than me. Routing mistakes do happen, and it could cause you downtime or 
routing problems without your knowledge or control.

Travis
Microserv

Jory Privett wrote:
> I have two PoPs where I have bandwidth for my network.  In the  same 
> area I know of at least 4 other WISPs that have bandwidth also.  I was 
> just wanting to establish a link to one or more of them and start 
> routing (BGP most likely) and pass traffic over each others network.  
> This would allow each to have more capacity and redundancy and not 
> have to pay any large amount for it.  I know all of the big players do 
> it and it is the basic fabric the internet is made of.  I was just 
> wondering if any WISPs do it and how?
>
> Jory Privett
> WCCS
>
> - Original Message - From: "Dawn DiPietro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 1:48 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
>
>
>> Jory,
>>
>> I am not sure what you are trying to do with the other WISP's in your 
>> area. Can you a little more clear on what you are thinking of?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dawn DiPietro
>>
>> Jory Privett wrote:
>>> There are several WISP in my area I was  wanting to talk to some of 
>>> them about bandwidth peering.  I know that most will not want 
>>> anything to do with it since they refuse to co-operate in any other 
>>> way but I wanted to make the effort.  Has anyone else done this type 
>>> of thing?  What paperwork needs to be done to protect each company? 
>>> How do you control throughput to and from each network and routing 
>>> issues?  Any help her would be greatly appreciated.
>>>
>>> Jory Privett
>>> WCCS
>>>
>>
>> -- 
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Slow Internet across MT Router

[Brad Belton]

Wow, then it has to be a MikroTik issue.  We ran them under v2.8.x for
better than a year (or two?) can't remember that far back these days it
seems!  

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Saturday, April 14, 2007 8:08 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Slow Internet across MT Router

Yes... MT in combination with the SBE card will cause lockups. Never 
found a fix, instead just had to replace with a different solution.

Travis
Microserv

Sam Tetherow wrote:
> Ron, when I was at 2xT1 I was running it through a RB230 without any 
> issues for BW shaping (only  a couple of queues).  I don't think it is 
> MT in particular that is the problem.  Could be the specific hardware 
> that is the issue though.
>
> I am currently running 45MB through a 3.0GHz MT box with an SBE 
> interface and it handles the bandwidth just fine, although I am having 
> some locking problems from time to time, but I think they are related 
> to the sbe DS3 card as opposed to MT itself.
>
>Sam Tetherow
>Sandhills Wireless
>
> Ron Wallace wrote:
>> To All,
>> I have had a good system. I have a 3 Mbps Bonded T1, 100 users. Right 
>> now when I run a speed test to Speakeasy, it starts at 2.6 or2.7 mbps 
>> and quickly windsdown to 15-20 kbps. This is only in the evening and 
>> from 7-9AM. I have a MikroTik in P3 900MHz, w/ 500Mb of ram. 
>> Thisonlyhappens across theMikroTik box. Any ideas, Mycustopmers are 
>> pissed. Some Are threatening to quit.
>> PLEASE HELP, I'M A DUNCE.
>>
>> Ron Wallace Hahnron, Inc. 220 S. Jackson Dt. Addison, MI 49220
>> Phone: (517)547-8410 Mobile: (517)605-4542 e-mail: 
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>   
>
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Slow Internet across MT Router

[Brad Belton]

Hello Sam,

Curious if both DS3 cards have the lockup problem?  You do still have two of
them, right? If so, it is unlikely you have two bad DS3 cards.  Especially
because if they are the ones you bought from me I know they are good!


We never had any trouble with them interfacing our AT&T DS3s.  Sure sounds
like a hardware issue or possibly MikroTik made a change in their code that
now causes this problem.  MikroTik has been known to make a change in their
drivers (unknowingly) and render an entire revision of make and model
interface useless.  Happened to us with Intel SC Fiber adapters.

Best,


Brad




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Sam Tetherow
Sent: Saturday, April 14, 2007 4:04 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Slow Internet across MT Router

Ron, when I was at 2xT1 I was running it through a RB230 without any 
issues for BW shaping (only  a couple of queues).  I don't think it is 
MT in particular that is the problem.  Could be the specific hardware 
that is the issue though.

I am currently running 45MB through a 3.0GHz MT box with an SBE 
interface and it handles the bandwidth just fine, although I am having 
some locking problems from time to time, but I think they are related to 
the sbe DS3 card as opposed to MT itself.

Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless

Ron Wallace wrote:
> To All,
> I have had a good system. I have a 3 Mbps Bonded T1, 100 users. Right now
when I run a speed test to Speakeasy, it starts at 2.6 or2.7 mbps and
quickly windsdown to 15-20 kbps. This is only in the evening and from 7-9AM.
I have a MikroTik in P3 900MHz, w/ 500Mb of ram. 
> Thisonlyhappens across theMikroTik box. 
> Any ideas, Mycustopmers are pissed. Some Are threatening to quit.
> PLEASE HELP, I'M A DUNCE.
>
> Ron Wallace 
> Hahnron, Inc. 
> 220 S. Jackson Dt. 
> Addison, MI 49220 
>
> Phone: (517)547-8410 
> Mobile: (517)605-4542 
> e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>   

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] MuniFi: Build it and they stilldon't come?

[Brad Belton]

Surely you don't see this as any kind of surprise?

Like I've been saying all along, the Cellular guys will dominate the Mobile
User market.  Muni-Networks are, IMO, largely a "get rich quick scheme" for
the few that are talented enough to sway overeager city counsels into
writing big checks for a service nobody wants.

It's all a "feel good" scam at the expense of the taxpayer.

Best,


Brad






-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt Liotta
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2007 5:27 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] MuniFi: Build it and they stilldon't come?

http://gigaom.com/2007/04/10/munifi-build-it-and-they-still-dont-come/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] When to get license

[Brad Belton]

In order for the license to be enforced it has to be in use.  There are
obvious exceptions; building the link, link is down for maintenance etc.  

For the most part if the link isn't up for a consecutive period of time (and
demonstrated as such) then it could be passed on to someone else.  Seems to
me I remember hearing 6 months was the outside limit for a license to be
"held" with out being "in use".  

I could be completely wrong on this.  Check with the people you choose to
facilitate your license with to be sure, but I am pretty certain you can't
just buy a 18GHz license from point A to point B and sit on it.

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2007 12:12 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] When to get license

What is the use it or loose it time for licenses in 11Ghz, 18Ghz, 23 Ghz, 
70Ghz, 80Ghz?
How soon in advance is it acceptable to obtain a license for a planned link?
(Someone may not want to buy equipment right away to save on cash flow and 
finance charges, and buy the gear just in time, as customers are ready to 
install, but may want to have things(licenses) ready and waiting for when 
you get to that stage of the plan, or to save on costs when licensing 
mutiple radios at a Single site, but funds may not be in yet for all the 
link at that site.)

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "wispa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 2:36 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA compliance methods


> On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 22:09:23 -0700, Marlon K. Schafer wrote
>> Mark, your info is 3 years old
>>
>> We have to be ready to "tap our lines".  Even IMs.
>> marlon
>>
>
> I think you missed my point, Marlon... That being that not even the
> government is a reliable source of information about what the government
> wants and demands.
>
> www.askcalea.com is direct from their mouths.
>
> Yes, it's "old", but then the site is still considered live.
>
> THE FCC is saying one thing, a different agency is saying another.
> Concurrently.
>
> I have been attempting for how long now, to get across to you people that
> this whole CALEA flap for ISP's is NOT LAW, but opinion from the FCC, 
> where
> it's attempting to write law instead of Congress.
>
> It's a mess, because it's NOT LAW, only Congress can write law and it has 
> yet
> to write a law that says we have to do squat.
>
> Frankly, I think every broadband ISP should file and say "we will never be
> compliant" and just let them TRY to shut down every ISP in the country. 
> It's
> about time we told THEM where to get off, rather than being lambs to the
> slaughter.
>
> But no. WISPA leads the charge to slaughter it's own industry by begging 
> to
> be regulated out of existence.
>
> Just three years ago, the WISP industry and WISPA was going to show the 
> world
> just how scrappy, independent and courageous we were.
>
> We did alright.  We turned into worms and mashed ourselves into the 
> pavement
> instead.
>
> One can only imagine the reaction if some actual competitive threat came
> along.
>
>
>
> 
> Mark Koskenmaki  <> Neofast, Inc
> Broadband for the Walla Walla Valley and Blue Mountains
> 541-969-8200
>
> -- 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

[Brad Belton]

Hello John,

Nope, I'm not a RF Engineer and not qualified to make formal comment on the
petition.  Does the affect of smaller antennas really need to be revisited?
Isn't it safe to say smaller antennas result in wider patterns?  Wider
patterns result in less frequency reuse ability and the basis of the
resistance to the petition?

The question was; should we as a group care about this?  The initial
response Jack and you made was misinterpreted as "we don't have time for
it."

I among others commented that we should care and why.
Jack clarified his intent was not that he didn't care.
I commented no harm no foul.
You continue to beat a dead horse by suggesting a committee be formed?

What am I missing?  

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 12:06 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

Brad,
Do you care to address my comments about F/D ratios and beam width? I 
think that is more pertinent in mitigating interference than dish size. 
If there is one qualified RF engineer in this group who can post a 
single message here that is thought out about the issues around 11 GHz 
dish size, F/D ratios, etc. then we can and should consider the 
possibility of addressing this as a genuine concern of WISPA. If all we 
have are people saying we should comment on this with no basis of RF 
fact as to why we should comment then I will stand by my original 
assertion that it is not an issue we will be addressing here.

Are you an engineer Brad? Do you know the actual facts concerning this 
issue along with the outcomes of supporting or denying support to the 
petition? I guess we should address this issue since it looks like we 
are addressing the idea of addressing this over and over again. If this 
issue is that important to you, Brad, then why don't you Chair this 
effort yourself and convince us of what the issues are, what the RF 
facts are supporting the issues and why and how we should comment as 
WISPA. I am not trying to stop you from helping, quite the contrary. You 
obviously feel strongly about this issue so please send us what you find 
so we can make an informed decision on how best to proceed.
Scriv



Brad Belton wrote:

>"... I am sure we could setup a committee to work on 11 GHz dish size
>issues."
>
>That's beginning to sound like congress, the true epitome of efficiency.
>
>
>No, I do not believe a committee of engineers is required to study the
issue
>as the RF impact of smaller antennas is largely already known.  The simple
>question was what do we think about it and possibly should we as a group
>comment on it.
>
>Best,
>
>
>Brad
>
>
>
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>Behalf Of John Scrivner
>Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 12:27 AM
>To: WISPA General List
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz
>
>The truth is we need qualified RF engineers to speak up if they are 
>here. It is my limited RF engineering knowledge which has always led me 
>to believe that F/D Ratio (Focal Length to Diameter Ratio) which 
>determines the beamwidth of the focused RF beam including the spread of 
>the spurious side lobes in microwave parabolic dish antenna systems. If 
>that is the case then the F/D ratio (not the diameter) should be the 
>root of the discussion. The truth is though that I am NOT an RF engineer 
>and therefore not truly qualified to make any genuine comment on the 
>issue until I hear more from engineers who know. If this group wants to 
>devote resources to this issue I am sure we could setup a committee to 
>work on 11 GHz dish size issues. I am just seeing this as a minor issue. 
>I am sorry to those out there who think this makes me short-sighted.
>Scriv
>
>
>Jack Unger wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Brad,
>>
>>I see how my original comment could have been misinterpreted. There 
>>was an element of "I don't have time for this". Now that I've taken 
>>the time (that I didn't have) and (hopefully) asked the right 
>>questions, I think it's time for others to follow up if they feel it's 
>>an important issue.
>>
>>Personally, I'm not worried at this point about allowing smaller 11 
>>GHz antennas. I don't think it's going to cause us any problems with 
>>frequency availability. I think 11 GHz frequencies will be available 
>>when they are needed. FiberTower's investors include American Tower, 
>>Crown Castle and SpectraSite. I can't believe that those companies 
>>would want to do anything to "screw up" either the availability of 

RE: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

[Brad Belton]

"... I am sure we could setup a committee to work on 11 GHz dish size
issues."

That's beginning to sound like congress, the true epitome of efficiency.


No, I do not believe a committee of engineers is required to study the issue
as the RF impact of smaller antennas is largely already known.  The simple
question was what do we think about it and possibly should we as a group
comment on it.

Best,


Brad





-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 12:27 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

The truth is we need qualified RF engineers to speak up if they are 
here. It is my limited RF engineering knowledge which has always led me 
to believe that F/D Ratio (Focal Length to Diameter Ratio) which 
determines the beamwidth of the focused RF beam including the spread of 
the spurious side lobes in microwave parabolic dish antenna systems. If 
that is the case then the F/D ratio (not the diameter) should be the 
root of the discussion. The truth is though that I am NOT an RF engineer 
and therefore not truly qualified to make any genuine comment on the 
issue until I hear more from engineers who know. If this group wants to 
devote resources to this issue I am sure we could setup a committee to 
work on 11 GHz dish size issues. I am just seeing this as a minor issue. 
I am sorry to those out there who think this makes me short-sighted.
Scriv


Jack Unger wrote:

> Brad,
>
> I see how my original comment could have been misinterpreted. There 
> was an element of "I don't have time for this". Now that I've taken 
> the time (that I didn't have) and (hopefully) asked the right 
> questions, I think it's time for others to follow up if they feel it's 
> an important issue.
>
> Personally, I'm not worried at this point about allowing smaller 11 
> GHz antennas. I don't think it's going to cause us any problems with 
> frequency availability. I think 11 GHz frequencies will be available 
> when they are needed. FiberTower's investors include American Tower, 
> Crown Castle and SpectraSite. I can't believe that those companies 
> would want to do anything to "screw up" either the availability of 
> frequencies or the sale of "vertical real estate" on their tower 
> properties.
>
> Have a good day,
>
> jack
>
>
>
> Brad Belton wrote:
>
>> Hello Jack,
>>
>> Good to see you're back on track with, IMO, a proper response to the 
>> 11GHz
>> question/concerns.
>>
>> Your initial comment came off as who cares and we don't have time for 
>> this.
>> John simply dittoed your comments, so what was the group left to 
>> believe?  I
>> apologize if I misunderstood your intent.  
>> Your questions/response below illustrate the type of post I would have
>> expected from you in the first place.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>>
>> Brad
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>> Behalf Of Jack Unger
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 1:33 AM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz
>>
>> Brad,
>>
>> I think you may be misquoting or misunderstanding me. No good can 
>> come from that. Real questions need to be asked and need to be 
>> correctly answered before we risk our reputation by filing comments 
>> with the FCC that are technically incomplete or technically incorrect.
>>
>> Here's a repost of my original post.
>>
>> ** Begin Original Post *
>>
>> It would be good to know the minimum required dish size now and the 
>> changes that FiberTower is proposing before deciding what to do or say.
>>
>> I'm not sure this dish-size issue would impact any WISPs so we may 
>> want to ask ourselves if there are more important issues that we need 
>> to be focusing on, given the limited time and resources that we have.
>>
>> I think this is an issue that the licensed microwave vendors will 
>> probably deal with adequately, without harming our interests. When we 
>> decide to purchase a licensed 11 GHz link, we'd be buying it from 
>> them anyway.
>>
>> Finally, WISPA doesn't have an engineering staff that can adequately 
>> analyze the technical implications and prepare an informed technical 
>> response to submit to the FCC.
>>
>>  End Original Post *
>>
>>
&

RE: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

[Brad Belton]

Hello John,

Read Jack's follow up and you'll see where I (and possibly a few others)
were coming from.  It is easily plausible to misunderstand Jack's intent and
Jack acknowledged there was an "I don't have time for this" element to his
original post.

No harm no foul.  

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 11:54 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

Brad,
Jack and I did not say this is something WISPA should ignore. Read what 
Jack said and I agreed with. I own an AWS license myself so trust me 
when I say I believe licensed interests can match our own. I just do not 
agree with your assessment that this is a big issue for WISPA to devote 
time, energy and resources to right now UNLESS we have more information 
about what is at stake, how it effects us, how we can and should work to 
work on this issue.

Brad, the answer here is for YOU or someone else to take this issue on 
and show us why it is an issue for our involvement. I do not support 
constant "knee-jerk" reactionary policy initiatives. We need to have 
some degree of focus and purpose beyond just slapping comments on top of 
other people's petitions for changes. Maybe if we start actually 
studying the issues and making informed and targeted policy initiatives 
then we can actually start drafting petitions of our own which will 
become the policy for our industry in the future as opposed to rapid 
fire commenting on other people's work all the time.
Scriv


Brad Belton wrote:

>Agreed.  Just getting caught up on some of my email readings and strongly
>believe Jack and John are off the mark here.  
>
>6GHz, 11GHz, 18GHz, 23GHz, 24GHz, 60GHz and 80-90GHz should all be
important
>to us as a group.  Any frequency that can be used by fixed wireless
>operators should be important to the group.
>
>For Jack and John to assume the focus as a group should be limited to UL
>frequencies is short sighted to say the least.  Many operations, ours
>included, are already utilizing licensed spectrum were we can.
>
>Best,
>
>
>Brad
>
>
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
>Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 2:10 PM
>To: WISPA General List
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz
>
>Anything related to 11Ghz, should be WISPs concern.  It is my belief that 
>all serious unlicensed ISPs will at some point start to migrate to Licensed

>spectrums for backhauls. 11Ghz is one of the few upgrade options available 
>for WISP's that designed their existing backhaul to 5.8Ghz functionality. 
>(meaning needing 4ft dish 11Ghz to reach equivellent distances of 5.8Ghz
2ft
>
>dish links, in practicality).  There really aren't very many Long range 
>backhaul spectrum range options out there.  Relaxing the rules could result

>in the inabilty for many WISPs to obtain 11Ghz licenses, because of 
>unavailable spectrum, when they are ready to need it.  A 2ft dish beamwidth

>(9-10 degrees) will cover the width of most of a small city at 10 miles. 
>(Sorry I didn't do the Angle math yet).  Compared to that of 4 ft dish 
>beamwidths.  As much as I'd like a 2 ft Dish, how would that effect my 
>future abilty to get a license?  Thats an important question. Fibertower 
>wants 2ft dishes today because they are ready to buy up the licenses today.

>Are the rest of the WISPs ready to buy the licenses today? How much license

>space is available still? I think some propogation data and current 
>saturation data (number of links / potential for more links) would need to 
>be disclosed first to develop a relevant opinion.  And how would the rules 
>effect cost? Currently 11Ghz is significantly more expensive to obtain 
>because of dish size. If smaller more advanced dishes were allowed, a 2ft 
>dish that had the characteristics of 3-4ft dishes, would those dishes be 
>more expensive because of their unique better characterisitcs?   The truth 
>is, every provider would chose 11Ghz over 18Ghz, if they could get away
with
>
>a smaller dish. It would likely lead to less use of 18Ghz and 23 Ghz. Is 
>18Ghz getting saturated? If so it would be relevent to allow 11Ghz to take 
>over the load.  But I'd argue that 18Ghz should be near at capacity before 
>11Ghz be allowed to be more leanent in antenna size.
>
>The bigger fight for smaller antennas is to allow 6Ghz to be allowed to use

>4 ft dishes. 6ft dish requirement is insane. If 6Ghz was allowed to use 4ft

>dished, it would then give another option for long range, (within a 
>realistic antenna size for roof tops), then justifyi

RE: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

[Brad Belton]

Hello Marlon,

Sure, low power levels may work for those that adhere to the rules.
Unfortunately I don't believe this rule change request mentions lowering
power levels for smaller antennas.

I do believe the band that is best suited for the application should be used
and not open up all bands for every application.  I can only imagine what a
mess that would make of the airwaves.

Yes, I agree emissions do not stop at each side of the link and continue
beyond, but I'd rather deal with a direct inline issue than one that is
several degrees off axis and shouldn't be there in the first place.  Again,
the point I trying to make is use the correct tool for the job.  11GHz is
not the correct tool for a 100' link.

Just because you can turn a bolt with a pair of vise grips doesn't mean you
are using the right tool for the job.

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 10:57 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

And exactly HOW do you suppose that a very low power link will somehow screw

up the band?

Using higher power kills off everything on BOTH ends of the link.  The 
signal doesn't just stop, it continues on past the rec. antenna.

Your argument make no sense to me.  Not from a frequency reuse standpoint.

Also, what should we be pushing?  MAXIMUM utilization for all bands.  The 
rules for 11 gig and 6 gig cut down on the utilization and therefore waste a

natural resource.

I live on the farm.  We use every drop of farmable ground.  We plant the 
crops that grow the best out here and are always looking for new ones.

Should be the same for wireless spectrum.  Use up every drop.  THEN, IF 
there's a problem, figure out how to deal with it.
marlon

----- Original Message - 
From: "Brad Belton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 10:00 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz


Marlon,

11GHz is intended for medium to long range links.  That is why they require
a relatively larger antenna to keep the beam narrow to increase the freq
reuse ability.  6GHz requires a 6' minimum antenna and this is a GOOD thing
otherwise there would be fewer 6GHz licenses available in any given
geographic area.

If you have a 100' link then by all means use an 80-90GHz licensed link or
even sub-lease a 38GHz license.  Or use FOS or 60GHz or 24GHz for 100'
links, but 11GHz for a 100' shot is a waste and not a good use of the band.


Opening 11GHz to smaller dishes means more chance the band will be "used up"
by short links that could have been achieved with the same (or even better)
results by using a higher freq band.

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 11:44 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

I TOTALLY disagree with that.

On two fronts.

First, what's wrong with a short licensed link?  If that's what I want to
use that's up to me.  Maybe I want to put a link that requires 100% uptime
guarantee and has to be licensed but only has to cross the train tracks.
Ever try to push a cable across the tracks or freeway?  It'll make Jack's
$30,000 link look cheap!

Second, how would use of smaller antennas screw anything up?

I've been blown offline from interference that came from 30 MILES away.  It
was only an 11 mile link.  They had 6' dishes an had the power cranked all
the way up.  I think I figured it at a 60 dB fade margin.  And there was
nothing in the rules that said they couldn't do that!  Luckily they turned
the power way down and my problem went away.  With an ATPC requirement
that never would have happened.

Just because they mandate antenna sizes in no way means that it's the only,
or today, even the best way to maximize frequency reuse.

laters,
Marlon
(509) 982-2181
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



- Original Message - 
From: "Brad Belton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 6:08 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz


I don't think you would select 11GHz to go 100'.  That's the whole
point...let's hope  FCC doesn't screw up 11GHz by allowing it's use for
short haul applications.

Best,

Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Marlon K. Schaf

RE: [WISPA] McCaw losing money?

[Brad Belton]

Or possibly called BGP...

Best,


Brad

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Ryan Langseth
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 9:41 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] McCaw losing money?

Yea there is, its call DNS

Ryan

On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 22:34 -0400, Gino Villarini wrote:
> Well yeah, he exited the cell biz bout 4 years ago .., and theres no Num
> portability with internet
> 
>  
> 
> Gino A. Villarini 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. 
> tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145 
> 
> 
> 
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Travis Johnson
> Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 10:00 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] McCaw losing money?
> 
>  
> 
> The cellular business was different 2-3 years ago... before number
> portability...
> 
> Travis
> Microserv
> 
> Gino Villarini wrote: 
> 
> Hes basically emulating the Cellular Biz ...
>  
> Gino A. Villarini
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
> tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 9:31 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] McCaw losing money?
>  
> Smart people sometimes do foolish things.  However, he isnt the  
> dumbest guy in the world either.  So what is his bet?  Why would a guy  
> who cut his teeth in cellular come out so hard against the cell  
> carriers with a new wireless product?
>  
> chris
>  
> Quoting Ryan Spott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>  :
>  
>   
> 
>   Just a little bit!
>
>   I was just talking to a local PC reseller and I asked him what
>   ClearWire gave him when he signed up a new customer.
>
>   180 bucks! Per sub!
>
>   It is normally 80 bucks per sub but when he reaches a certain
>   threshold, he gets 180.
>
>   So what does the next-net equipment cost?
>   and then bandwidth
>   and then tower leases
>   and then spiffs for your "resellers"
>
>   WOW!
>
>   ryan
>   -- 
>   WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
>   Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>   http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
>   Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>   
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
>  
> 
>   

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

[Brad Belton]

Marlon,

11GHz is intended for medium to long range links.  That is why they require
a relatively larger antenna to keep the beam narrow to increase the freq
reuse ability.  6GHz requires a 6' minimum antenna and this is a GOOD thing
otherwise there would be fewer 6GHz licenses available in any given
geographic area.

If you have a 100' link then by all means use an 80-90GHz licensed link or
even sub-lease a 38GHz license.  Or use FOS or 60GHz or 24GHz for 100'
links, but 11GHz for a 100' shot is a waste and not a good use of the band.


Opening 11GHz to smaller dishes means more chance the band will be "used up"
by short links that could have been achieved with the same (or even better)
results by using a higher freq band.

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 11:44 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

I TOTALLY disagree with that.

On two fronts.

First, what's wrong with a short licensed link?  If that's what I want to 
use that's up to me.  Maybe I want to put a link that requires 100% uptime 
guarantee and has to be licensed but only has to cross the train tracks. 
Ever try to push a cable across the tracks or freeway?  It'll make Jack's 
$30,000 link look cheap!

Second, how would use of smaller antennas screw anything up?

I've been blown offline from interference that came from 30 MILES away.  It 
was only an 11 mile link.  They had 6' dishes an had the power cranked all 
the way up.  I think I figured it at a 60 dB fade margin.  And there was 
nothing in the rules that said they couldn't do that!  Luckily they turned 
the power way down and my problem went away.  With an ATPC requirement 
that never would have happened.

Just because they mandate antenna sizes in no way means that it's the only, 
or today, even the best way to maximize frequency reuse.

laters,
Marlon
(509) 982-2181
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



- Original Message - 
From: "Brad Belton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 6:08 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz


I don't think you would select 11GHz to go 100'.  That's the whole
point...let's hope  FCC doesn't screw up 11GHz by allowing it's use for
short haul applications.

Best,

Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 1:07 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

All due respect right back at ya!  grin

Anyhow, to think that manufacturers all have our best interests at heart is
a bit naive I think.  What's better for them?  A 4' dish sale or a cheap and

easy 2' or 1' dish?

I'm not willing to get into technical arguments about this issue.  The fact
is, each link is different.  Each tower is different.  It should be left up
to the local operator to figure out what's best.  ESPECIALLY in a licensed
band.  If they get interference, they can fix it.  If they cause
interference they have to fix it.

I just don't like the idea of micro managing the pro's in our industry.
Keep the interference issues dealt with but let folks use the latest and
greatest technologies available to them.

If I want to build a link across the train tracks, 100', there's NO reason
for a large dish.  Small dishes with lower power radios will do the trick
nicely.  And if we mandate atpc we can get away with 3 to 5 (or some other
such really small number) fade margins too.  No need for the typical
microwave 30 dB fade margins.

The problem with trying to engineer everything is that the real world often
doesn't give a rats behind what the engineers say.  I've spend my adult life

(such as it is) finding ways to make what works on paper really work in the
field.

We need the paper, to be sure.  But we also need the flexibility to do
what's expedient in the field.

marlon

- Original Message - 
From: "Jack Unger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 10:26 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz


> Marlon,
>
> With all due respect... We need solid engineering arguements if we're
> going to present an official WISPA position to the FCC. If we submit
> comments based on faulty engineering then it will be obvious to the FCC
> (the FCC has real engin

RE: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

[Brad Belton]

.

QUESTION - DO WE HAVE THE ENGINEERING KNOWLEDGE TO REALLY KNOW WHAT THE 
TRUE EFFECTS OF ALLOWING SMALLER DISH SIZES WILL BE?

QUESTION - A SMALLER ANTENNA WILL HAVE LARGER SIDELOBES. IS THIS REALLY 
AN ISSUE OR ARE 11 GHz ANTENNAS NORMALLY MOUNTED WITH A FEW FEET OF 
VERTICAL SEPARATION ANYWAY SO THAT A MARGINAL INCREASE IN SIDELOBES WILL 
REALLY HAVE NO IMPACT ON ANYONE ELSE ANYWAY?

QUESTION - SHOULD THE FCC GIVE ANY WEIGHT OR CREDIBILITY TO OUR OPINIONS 
AND OUR GUESSES OR SHOULD THEY ONLY GIVE WEIGHT TO REAL ENGINEERING 
ANALYSIS?

QUESTION - WHO IN WISPA IS AN ENGINEER AND HAS ACTUALLY DESIGNED, 
ENGINEERED, AND DEPLOYED A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF 11 GHz LINKS? SURELY 
SOMEONE HAS... WHO IS THAT PERSON? WILL THEY STEP UP AND DO SOME REAL 
ENGINEERING ANALYSIS FOR US ON THIS ISSUE?

QUESTION: WILL THAT ENGINEERING ANALYSIS SHOW THAT THERE IS ANY REAL 
IMPACT TO OUR ABILITY TO OBTAIN AND USE LICENSED 11 GHz LINKS IF THE FCC 
ALLOWS SMALLER ANTENNAS TO BE USED?

QUESTION: WILL ALLOWING SMALLER ANTENNAS ACTUALLY BENEFIT US BECAUSE OUR 
COSTS TO DEPLOY LICENSED LINKS WILL BE LOWER? (SMALLER ANTENNAS COST 
LESS TO BUY AND SMALLER ANTENNAS COST LESS TO MOUNT ON TOWERS).

***

That's it, Brad. Your help would be most appreciated to get real 
answers. If I'm "off the mark" as you believed, that's OK with me as 
long as it leads to an understanding of what the real issues are and 
builds our credibility with the FCC, the manufacturers, and the public 
at large. Real understanding benefits everybody.

Best Regards,
jack



Brad Belton wrote:

> Agreed.  Just getting caught up on some of my email readings and strongly
> believe Jack and John are off the mark here.  
> 
> 6GHz, 11GHz, 18GHz, 23GHz, 24GHz, 60GHz and 80-90GHz should all be
important
> to us as a group.  Any frequency that can be used by fixed wireless
> operators should be important to the group.
> 
> For Jack and John to assume the focus as a group should be limited to UL
> frequencies is short sighted to say the least.  Many operations, ours
> included, are already utilizing licensed spectrum were we can.
> 
> Best,
> 
> 
> Brad
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
> Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 2:10 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz
> 
> Anything related to 11Ghz, should be WISPs concern.  It is my belief that 
> all serious unlicensed ISPs will at some point start to migrate to
Licensed 
> spectrums for backhauls. 11Ghz is one of the few upgrade options available

> for WISP's that designed their existing backhaul to 5.8Ghz functionality. 
> (meaning needing 4ft dish 11Ghz to reach equivellent distances of 5.8Ghz
2ft
> 
> dish links, in practicality).  There really aren't very many Long range 
> backhaul spectrum range options out there.  Relaxing the rules could
result 
> in the inabilty for many WISPs to obtain 11Ghz licenses, because of 
> unavailable spectrum, when they are ready to need it.  A 2ft dish
beamwidth 
> (9-10 degrees) will cover the width of most of a small city at 10 miles. 
> (Sorry I didn't do the Angle math yet).  Compared to that of 4 ft dish 
> beamwidths.  As much as I'd like a 2 ft Dish, how would that effect my 
> future abilty to get a license?  Thats an important question. Fibertower 
> wants 2ft dishes today because they are ready to buy up the licenses
today. 
> Are the rest of the WISPs ready to buy the licenses today? How much
license 
> space is available still? I think some propogation data and current 
> saturation data (number of links / potential for more links) would need to

> be disclosed first to develop a relevant opinion.  And how would the rules

> effect cost? Currently 11Ghz is significantly more expensive to obtain 
> because of dish size. If smaller more advanced dishes were allowed, a 2ft 
> dish that had the characteristics of 3-4ft dishes, would those dishes be 
> more expensive because of their unique better characterisitcs?   The truth

> is, every provider would chose 11Ghz over 18Ghz, if they could get away
with
> 
> a smaller dish. It would likely lead to less use of 18Ghz and 23 Ghz. Is 
> 18Ghz getting saturated? If so it would be relevent to allow 11Ghz to take

> over the load.  But I'd argue that 18Ghz should be near at capacity before

> 11Ghz be allowed to be more leanent in antenna size.
> 
> The bigger fight for smaller antennas is to allow 6Ghz to be allowed to
use 
> 4 ft dishes. 6ft dish requirement is insane. If 6Ghz was allowed to use
4ft 
> dished, it would then give another option for long range, (within a 
> 

RE: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

[Brad Belton]

I don't think you would select 11GHz to go 100'.  That's the whole
point...let's hope  FCC doesn't screw up 11GHz by allowing it's use for
short haul applications.

Best,

Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 1:07 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

All due respect right back at ya!  grin

Anyhow, to think that manufacturers all have our best interests at heart is 
a bit naive I think.  What's better for them?  A 4' dish sale or a cheap and

easy 2' or 1' dish?

I'm not willing to get into technical arguments about this issue.  The fact 
is, each link is different.  Each tower is different.  It should be left up 
to the local operator to figure out what's best.  ESPECIALLY in a licensed 
band.  If they get interference, they can fix it.  If they cause 
interference they have to fix it.

I just don't like the idea of micro managing the pro's in our industry. 
Keep the interference issues dealt with but let folks use the latest and 
greatest technologies available to them.

If I want to build a link across the train tracks, 100', there's NO reason 
for a large dish.  Small dishes with lower power radios will do the trick 
nicely.  And if we mandate atpc we can get away with 3 to 5 (or some other 
such really small number) fade margins too.  No need for the typical 
microwave 30 dB fade margins.

The problem with trying to engineer everything is that the real world often 
doesn't give a rats behind what the engineers say.  I've spend my adult life

(such as it is) finding ways to make what works on paper really work in the 
field.

We need the paper, to be sure.  But we also need the flexibility to do 
what's expedient in the field.

marlon

- Original Message - 
From: "Jack Unger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 10:26 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz


> Marlon,
>
> With all due respect... We need solid engineering arguements if we're 
> going to present an official WISPA position to the FCC. If we submit 
> comments based on faulty engineering then it will be obvious to the FCC 
> (the FCC has real engineers on staff) that we don't know what we're 
> talking about. We will lose our hard-earned credibility with the FCC. 
> What's the benefit of losing our credibility?
>
> No one here needs to be reminded that we're here "to serve the interests 
> of the WISP community". We all know that. A few of us have been in this 
> industry since 1993. Some of us first offered WISP service in 1995. Some 
> of us having been unselfishly serving the needs of the WISP community 
> since 1995.
>
> The "manufacturers" are the ones that we are going to be buying our 
> licensed 11 GHz equipment from. Why would "their" interest in 11 GHz dish 
> size be any different from "our" interest? Wouldn't it be in "their" 
> interest to make the best equipment to serve "us"? If allowing smaller 
> dishes on 11 GHz was "bad" and if it would lead to fewer licensed links 
> being deployable then wouldn't the equipment manufacturers oppose the 
> proposed changes?
>
> Again, with all due respect... I really don't understand what you are 
> trying to say in your post. Can you please state your points more 
> clearly - for everyone's benefit?
>
> By the way, thank you for all the energy and the effort that you have put 
> into improving the WISP community since 1999.
>
> jack
>
>
> Marlon K. Schafer wrote:
>> Jack,
>>
>> With all due respect  We don't need engineers to know what we'd like 
>> the rules to be like!  WISPA is here to serve the interests of the wisp 
>> community.  The manufacturers can look after themselves.
>> marlon
>>
>> - Original Message - From: "Jack Unger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>> Sent: Saturday, March 24, 2007 10:22 AM
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz
>>
>>
>>> Dylan,
>>>
>>> It would be good to know the minimum required dish size now and the 
>>> changes that FiberTower is proposing before deciding what to do or say.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure this dish-size issue would impact any WISPs so we may want 
>>> to ask ourselves if there are more important issues that we need to be 
>>> focusing on, given the limited time and resources that we have.
>>>
>>> I think this is an issue that the licensed microwave vendors will 
>>> probably deal with adequately, without harming our interests. When we 
>>> decide to purchase a licensed 11 GHz link, we'd be buying it from them 
>>> anyway.
>>>
>>> Finally, WISPA dosn't have an engineering staff that can adequately 
>>> analyze the technical implications and prepare an informed technical 
>>> responese to submit to the FCC.
>>>
>>> jack
>>>
>>>
>>> Dylan Oliver wrote:
>>>
 I recall some past discussion bemoaning the large dish sizes required 
 

RE: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

[Brad Belton]

Agreed.  Just getting caught up on some of my email readings and strongly
believe Jack and John are off the mark here.  

6GHz, 11GHz, 18GHz, 23GHz, 24GHz, 60GHz and 80-90GHz should all be important
to us as a group.  Any frequency that can be used by fixed wireless
operators should be important to the group.

For Jack and John to assume the focus as a group should be limited to UL
frequencies is short sighted to say the least.  Many operations, ours
included, are already utilizing licensed spectrum were we can.

Best,


Brad




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 2:10 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz

Anything related to 11Ghz, should be WISPs concern.  It is my belief that 
all serious unlicensed ISPs will at some point start to migrate to Licensed 
spectrums for backhauls. 11Ghz is one of the few upgrade options available 
for WISP's that designed their existing backhaul to 5.8Ghz functionality. 
(meaning needing 4ft dish 11Ghz to reach equivellent distances of 5.8Ghz 2ft

dish links, in practicality).  There really aren't very many Long range 
backhaul spectrum range options out there.  Relaxing the rules could result 
in the inabilty for many WISPs to obtain 11Ghz licenses, because of 
unavailable spectrum, when they are ready to need it.  A 2ft dish beamwidth 
(9-10 degrees) will cover the width of most of a small city at 10 miles. 
(Sorry I didn't do the Angle math yet).  Compared to that of 4 ft dish 
beamwidths.  As much as I'd like a 2 ft Dish, how would that effect my 
future abilty to get a license?  Thats an important question. Fibertower 
wants 2ft dishes today because they are ready to buy up the licenses today. 
Are the rest of the WISPs ready to buy the licenses today? How much license 
space is available still? I think some propogation data and current 
saturation data (number of links / potential for more links) would need to 
be disclosed first to develop a relevant opinion.  And how would the rules 
effect cost? Currently 11Ghz is significantly more expensive to obtain 
because of dish size. If smaller more advanced dishes were allowed, a 2ft 
dish that had the characteristics of 3-4ft dishes, would those dishes be 
more expensive because of their unique better characterisitcs?   The truth 
is, every provider would chose 11Ghz over 18Ghz, if they could get away with

a smaller dish. It would likely lead to less use of 18Ghz and 23 Ghz. Is 
18Ghz getting saturated? If so it would be relevent to allow 11Ghz to take 
over the load.  But I'd argue that 18Ghz should be near at capacity before 
11Ghz be allowed to be more leanent in antenna size.

The bigger fight for smaller antennas is to allow 6Ghz to be allowed to use 
4 ft dishes. 6ft dish requirement is insane. If 6Ghz was allowed to use 4ft 
dished, it would then give another option for long range, (within a 
realistic antenna size for roof tops), then justifying the allowance for 
11Ghz to have smaller antennas.  The question is, why isn't Fibertower just 
using 18Ghz in their applications? Can they prove that 18Ghz is to limiting 
or unavailable for them?

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband





John Scrivner wrote:

Thank you Jack. You said it better than I could have.
:-)
Scriv


Jack Unger wrote:

> Dylan,
>
> It would be good to know the minimum required dish size now and the
> changes that FiberTower is proposing before deciding what to do or say.
>
> I'm not sure this dish-size issue would impact any WISPs so we may
> want to ask ourselves if there are more important issues that we need 
> to be focusing on, given the limited time and resources that we have.
>
> I think this is an issue that the licensed microwave vendors will
> probably deal with adequately, without harming our interests. When we 
> decide to purchase a licensed 11 GHz link, we'd be buying it from them 
> anyway.
>
> Finally, WISPA dosn't have an engineering staff that can adequately
> analyze the technical implications and prepare an informed technical 
> responese to submit to the FCC.
>
> jack
>
>
> Dylan Oliver wrote:
>
>> I recall some past discussion bemoaning the large dish sizes required
>> for
>> licensed links .. I just found this in the latest "Rural Spectrum 
>> Scanner"
>> from Bennett Law (http://www.bennetlaw.com/rss.php?vol=13&issue=12). 
>> Should
>> WISPA endorse this? I'm not familiar with the details of 11 GHz 
>> regulation.
>>
>> *FCC Seeks Comment on the Use of Smaller Antennas in the 11 GHz Band*
>>
>> The FCC has released a *Public Notice* announcing that it has adopted
>> a *Notice
>> of Proposed Rulemaking* seeking comment on whether to permit the
>> installation of smaller antennas by Fixed Service (FS) operators in the
>> 10.7-11.7 GHz band.  The FCC initiated the rulemaking pursuant to a 
>> Petition
>> for Rulemaking filed by FiberTow

RE: [WISPA] New Alvarion CPE- Excellent

[Brad Belton]

Hello Tom,

Got any pictures?

Good to hear they improved the mounting design.  The old design was too
small for many of the pipes we use.  If the new design will accommodate 3
1/2" - 4" pipes then that is a nice improvement.

Wow, they changed the CAT5 weather seal and now a terminated CAT5 cable will
pass through!?!  I wonder if they are also now adhering to 568A & 568B
standards too?  (friendly jab in the side)  

Seems to me I remember Patrick attempting to belittle me after I shed a
little light on this design flaw.  Patrick's statement not long ago:

"The gaul of us to create a tight seal. I am sorry you are not able to
figure out how to attach the connector Brad. Thousands of others seem to
manage just fine and when is the last time you ever heard of anyone
complaining about water intrusion into a VL VPE or PoE line?"

H...So, do I get an apology now Patrick?  Looks like your own design
team has rethought the CAT5 weather seal.   

It is good to see Alvarion is listening to the end user even if they don't
admit it.  Maybe dual band and dual polarity is just around the corner.
They had better hurry up with it before Trango releases their OFDM product
with DB and DP.

Best,


Brad




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 1:44 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] New Alvarion CPE- Excellent

I just received my first order of  the new Alvarion, Horiz or Vert Polarity 
mountable, CPE.
I have to say, SWET!!

The units come with a Solid heavy Duty Mounting Design. I believe it will 
mount on anything from 1-1/4" to 5" pipes. Comes with thick all-thread, less

likely to strip. Teethed Mounting Angles are part of the Case to prevent 
rotation slip.  Still solid metal backing for optimal Heat-disapation and 
F/B ratio shielding. Its foot print is also significantly smaller now.  Also

probably one of the most cosmetically pleasing designs I have ever seen.  It

just has quality written all over it.  I really like the new CAT5 
Feed-through Joint.  Its a molder rubber plug that slips in and clips into 
place securely. When you pull the Plug out, it can open up to feed a 
pre-terminated cable through, and then closes back around it. Its molded 
around the Cat5 Jack, so the rubber is what holds the CAT5 in place, when 
you slide it in place.  Whoever came up with this design is Brilliant. 
Installation times and Customer Approval times, are going to be Lightning 
QUICK, with this CPE!  Its just a plain predictable time-saver.

It does not offer the flexibilty of Optional add-on Mutli-Card radios or 
External ports in the one unit, but its not intended to.  Its a fantastic 
all-in-one unit for needs up to 21db antenna gain, where you just take it 
out of the box and get rolling.  This unit is my nominee for Best CPE Design

of the Year, and will be a hard act to follow. (From a Physical perspective,

not meaning to spawn Technology Software Debates, which were argued to death

last month)

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Mikrotik Simple Queues

[Brad Belton]

Hello Don,

If you are running current firmware (v2.9.3x or greater) under the Simple
Queue Advanced tab try changing the Queue Type to "Ethernet-default".  

We have seen more accurate bandwidth limiting using the Ethernet-default
setting.

YMMV, but worth a try.

Best,


Brad

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Don Annas
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 8:16 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: [WISPA] Mikrotik Simple Queues

We are trying to use Simple Queues to rate limit some of our hardwired
clients in the building and are having some problems with the faster
connections.  Using the routerboard 532, we are trying to limit a client to
a 10mb x 10mb connection.  Their is not much traffic on the box and the
processor is low even in the midst of the speed test to an on-net server.
The queue seems to work fine on the download and the client pulls about
9.79MB, however, on the upload, it caps out around 6.5MB.  If we remove or
disable the queue, the clients is able to do around 24MB symmetric.  
 
Are their any known issues with throughput when sending traffic through a
queue?  Should a 532 not be able to handle 10MB w/ the queue?  Any tricks or
settings that I may need to look at?
 
Thanks.
 
 

 

 

_

Don Annas

336.510.3800 x111

336.510.3801 fax

HYPERLINK "mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]"[EMAIL PROTECTED]

HYPERLINK "http://www.triadtelecom.com/"www.TriadTelecom.com

_



 

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.16/729 - Release Date: 3/21/2007
7:52 AM
 
  

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Spring has sprung!

[Brad Belton]

Oh dear, please keep the off topic comments off list and under your tinfoil
hat.

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 11:16 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Spring has sprung!

Remember... There's no such thing as global warning...

Travis Johnson wrote:

> Wow... we are having record temps here in Idaho... hit 68F yesterday and 
> our "normal" temp for this time of year is in the mid 30's. Supposed to 
> be 65F again today.
> 
> Travis
> Microserv
> 
> Blair Davis wrote:
> 
>> No leaves here, yet
>>
>> BUT,
>>
>> Was warm last week, got cooler this weekend...
>>
>> And this AM, it was WHITE outside again  $%#%^!
>>
>> Wish winter would get done...
>>
>> Jim Stout wrote:
>>
>>> ..and the leaves have started to absorb my 2.4 GHz signal!
>>>
>>> Good morning everyone!
>>>
>>> With the sap rising in the trees, I've started losing a lot of signal 
>>> with some of my customers on the "other side of the tree line."  I 
>>> thought this might happen but was hopeful it wouldn't.  Wi this said, 
>>> I am committed to adding 900 MHz gear to my portfolio,. but have some 
>>> questions for the group.
>>>
>>> I'll be using the same tower for both 2.4 GHz and 900 MHz.  I'm 
>>> assuming antennae separation is important but how much and should 
>>> they be spaced vertically or is horizontal spacing OK?
>>>
>>> I'm planning to use an RB112 with an SR9 for the NLOS clients and 
>>> adding a second RB112 with an Xtreme Range 2 for my 2.4 customers.  I 
>>> would like to run these in bridge mode instead of having them do any 
>>> routing.  Any thoughts or gotchas here?
>>>
>>> I'm assuming that my EIRP for both implementations is 36 dbw.  Is 
>>> this the case?
>>>
>>> I'm running my 2.4 gear in HPOL but am considering running the 900 
>>> gear in VPOL.  Any thoughts here?
>>>
>>> And lastly, I have read that a cavity filter is strongly recommended 
>>> for the 900 MHz gear.  Any thoughts and/or suggestions here.
>>>
>>> As always, thanks in advance for the help.
>>>
>>> Regards, Jim in Kansas City
>>>
>>>
>>> Jim Stout
>>> LTO Communications, LLC
>>> 15701 Henry Andrews Dr
>>> Pleasant Hill, MO 64080
>>> (816) 305-1076 - Mobile
>>> (816) 497-0033 - Pager
>>>   
>>
>>

-- 
Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
FCC License # PG-12-25133
Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993
Author of the WISP Handbook - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs"
True Vendor-Neutral Wireless Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting
Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220  www.ask-wi.com



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] anyone see this?

[Brad Belton]

lol...exactly.  

It is fun (sometimes) when confronted by the "IT guy" that claims they have
zero tolerance for downtime.  

We say ok, you need to place your operation inside a telco hotel or you'll
need to bring in power from two separate grids, build out fully redundant
HVAC, fire suppression, fiber, UPS, generators and redundant microwave paths
(from us of course) for starters.  

Then they come off cloud nine and start thinking realistically.

Best,


Brad






-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of George Rogato
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 2:30 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] anyone see this?

You know, this really is the answer. Two different isp's

  I've had the customers over the years,  that want 10- 9's because 
their business depends upon the internet, but then they don't want to 
pay an extra 30 - 40.00 per month to get it.


John Scrivner wrote:
> I tell them the fiber is down. I guess I could go broke trying to be 
> more fault tolerant. Please understand I appreciate your feedback but 
> understand that my service area does not have a single fault tolerant 
> broadband solution. If people want fault tolerance here then the option 
> is to buy two broadband connections from two providers and have an 
> auto-fail over router. I promote this to people who want fault tolerant 
> connectivity. If/when we roll out our 12 county AWS based broadband / 
> cell network we will be multi-homed. Until then the economics of this 
> would make us broke. I am not exaggerating.
> Scriv
> 
> 
> Matt Liotta wrote:
> 
>> Sure it is more costly than being single-homed, but being multi-homed 
>> is pretty important. If your single provider goes down what do you 
>> tell your customers?
>>
>> -Matt
>>
>> John Scrivner wrote:
>>
>>> Maybe it is very costly to do? Charter Pipeline service in my market 
>>> is not multi-homed either. Neither am I at this point. I used to be 
>>> multi-homed in the days when 2 T1s did the job. It is not easy to 
>>> swing redundant fiber runs in a town that is 75 miles from the 
>>> nearest telco-hotel. When I get multi-homed fibers here then I will 
>>> probably do that through a mini-telco-hotel facility here and make 
>>> that place a new business opportunity in itself.
>>> Scriv
>>>
>>>
>>> Matt Liotta wrote:
>>>
 It does make you wonder why the ISP in question wasn't multi-homed.

 -Matt

 Tim Wolfe wrote:

> Thank The good Lord above that I never signed the TelCove contract 
> for bandwidth last year!. I mean, you really have no idea what the 
> local provider was doing wrong, but to turn off a school district 
> and fire CO on that system, COME ON!. You can bet the lawsuits from 
> the school district alone will make Level 3 think twice about doing 
> this again?. If  you have an offending server, the stupid thing has 
> an IP address, Block it!. I would hope that Level 3 has enough 
> smarts to do this?. Even a little guy like me knows how to block an 
> offending IP address, and I am stupid, LOL!
>
>
> Matt Liotta wrote:
>
>> http://gigaom.com/2007/03/14/why-did-level-3-turn-off-a-rural-isp/
>
>
>

>>

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] outside connection

[Brad Belton]

In the event we need to extend a CAT5 cable we use the 3M UY connectors.
Keep the twist of each wire as close as possible and then tape, Coax-Seal
and more tape.  We've never had a problem with this method...knock on wood.

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 12:44 PM
To: isp-wireless@isp-wireless.com; WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] outside connection

Hi,

We sometimes have to move people's radios because of tree growth, 
changing towers, etc. The biggest pain is having to re-run the CAT5 
cable because it won't reach. Has anyone ever seen some type of outdoor 
coupler or even something you could put around a normal coupler and just 
extend the cable without re-running the whole thing?

Thanks,

Travis
Microserv
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Clearwire stock dropping

[Brad Belton]

It's largely irrelevant to me as I don't own CLWR or have any immediate
plans to own any shares.  

As for our industry I believe CLWR's value and performance could have some
impact on future fixed wireless ventures public or private.  Bankers and
investors alike will look at CLWR and may be more inclined to think if McCaw
couldn't pull it off with billions at his disposal how could the next guy?

Let's just hope CLWR doesn't give the industry yet another black eye like
Teligent and WindStar did.  We still run into property owners/managers that
are reeling from their dismal "wireless" experiences.

Best,


Brad





-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 3:26 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Clearwire stock dropping

Isn't Clearwire's value irrelevent? If we have lots of extra money sitting 
around to invest, shouldn't we be investing it in ourselves for a higher 
return and less risk?

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Brad Belton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 1:15 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Clearwire stock dropping


Nothing, and why I feel the way I do about the stock.  I believe CLWR will
bounce back up, but will ultimately slide downward until profits are
realized.  No stock has ever been able to hold value without realizing
profits at one point or another.  Why should CLWR be any different?

People invest into companies because they believe the company is solvent and
profitable or will be before they need or want to sell.  This isn't to say
there isn't ample opportunity for investors to profit on the buying and
selling of a stock during these periods.  Eventually the shorts will get a
hold of it and the stock will only continue to drop until profits are
realized.  Even then we've seen stocks continue to drop even after they
become profitable.  There are no guarantees!

The bottom line after all the good news, bad news, market swings etc.  The
company needs to make a profit in order to sustain value long term.  Many
believe CLWR's profitability future is unclear at best.  The swings you see
on many IPOs are due to the market makers timing their in's and out's taking
profits when they can.

As they say for every buyer there is a seller, but that doesn't always work
the other way around.  I certainly have a few shares of various companies
over the years that I'd love to sell, but no buyers are to be found.  

Like I said before, I'm hoping CLWR does well and McCaw brings the company
into the black...I just don't see it happening.

Best,


Brad





-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 1:47 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Clearwire stock dropping

Who says they ever have to make money, for their stock to hold or increase
its value?
And who says a profit needs to be made for a company to survive long term,
when they are kept alive by the stock market?

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Brad Belton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 11:55 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Clearwire stock dropping


Correct and that I believe is what Matt's point is.  Too early to kick CLWR
to the curb for at least two reasons:

(1)  short term market downturn
(2)  additional 4M shares issued

Both of these items can and often will soften a stock value.

All that said I think $20 - $24 a share is ridiculous for CLWR.  I expect
CLWR will bump back up maybe even beyond the IPO price once the market
bounces back.  The smart money will jump ship saving their skin and the
stock will turn downward from that point on.

"Clearwire has lost more than $460 million during its four-year existence.
The company generates about $100 million in annual sales..."

Certainly McCaw can afford this type of bleeding, but for how long and more
importantly how long will Wall Street wait to see the light at the end of
the tunnel?  Will CLWR ever bask in the sunshine?

Long term I only see a decline in value unless they start producing profits
real quick!  CLWR isn't making any money and doesn't have a bright future of
EVER making any money.  Hope I'm wrong because a CLWR failure is a failure
for fixed wireless as a whole.

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Peter R.
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 9:37 AM
To: Matt Liotta
Cc: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Clearwire stock dropping

RE: [WISPA] Clearwire stock dropping

[Brad Belton]

Nothing, and why I feel the way I do about the stock.  I believe CLWR will
bounce back up, but will ultimately slide downward until profits are
realized.  No stock has ever been able to hold value without realizing
profits at one point or another.  Why should CLWR be any different?  

People invest into companies because they believe the company is solvent and
profitable or will be before they need or want to sell.  This isn't to say
there isn't ample opportunity for investors to profit on the buying and
selling of a stock during these periods.  Eventually the shorts will get a
hold of it and the stock will only continue to drop until profits are
realized.  Even then we've seen stocks continue to drop even after they
become profitable.  There are no guarantees!

The bottom line after all the good news, bad news, market swings etc.  The
company needs to make a profit in order to sustain value long term.  Many
believe CLWR's profitability future is unclear at best.  The swings you see
on many IPOs are due to the market makers timing their in's and out's taking
profits when they can.  

As they say for every buyer there is a seller, but that doesn't always work
the other way around.  I certainly have a few shares of various companies
over the years that I'd love to sell, but no buyers are to be found.  

Like I said before, I'm hoping CLWR does well and McCaw brings the company
into the black...I just don't see it happening.

Best,


Brad





-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 1:47 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Clearwire stock dropping

Who says they ever have to make money, for their stock to hold or increase 
its value?
And who says a profit needs to be made for a company to survive long term, 
when they are kept alive by the stock market?

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Brad Belton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 11:55 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Clearwire stock dropping


Correct and that I believe is what Matt's point is.  Too early to kick CLWR
to the curb for at least two reasons:

(1)  short term market downturn
(2)  additional 4M shares issued

Both of these items can and often will soften a stock value.

All that said I think $20 - $24 a share is ridiculous for CLWR.  I expect
CLWR will bump back up maybe even beyond the IPO price once the market
bounces back.  The smart money will jump ship saving their skin and the
stock will turn downward from that point on.

"Clearwire has lost more than $460 million during its four-year existence.
The company generates about $100 million in annual sales..."

Certainly McCaw can afford this type of bleeding, but for how long and more
importantly how long will Wall Street wait to see the light at the end of
the tunnel?  Will CLWR ever bask in the sunshine?

Long term I only see a decline in value unless they start producing profits
real quick!  CLWR isn't making any money and doesn't have a bright future of
EVER making any money.  Hope I'm wrong because a CLWR failure is a failure
for fixed wireless as a whole.

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Peter R.
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 9:37 AM
To: Matt Liotta
Cc: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Clearwire stock dropping

Matt Liotta wrote:

> It seems premature to suggest that Clearwire is tanking. When you
> consider that an additional 4 million shares were issued and that the
> overall market is currently down, I think their stock has move as
> expected. I bought in at $20.68 and am quite happy with my position.
>
> -Matt
>
>
Issuing the extra 4 million shares actually diluted the value of the stock.

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Clearwire stock dropping

[Brad Belton]

Correct and that I believe is what Matt's point is.  Too early to kick CLWR
to the curb for at least two reasons:

(1)  short term market downturn
(2)  additional 4M shares issued

Both of these items can and often will soften a stock value.  

All that said I think $20 - $24 a share is ridiculous for CLWR.  I expect
CLWR will bump back up maybe even beyond the IPO price once the market
bounces back.  The smart money will jump ship saving their skin and the
stock will turn downward from that point on. 

"Clearwire has lost more than $460 million during its four-year existence.
The company generates about $100 million in annual sales..."  

Certainly McCaw can afford this type of bleeding, but for how long and more
importantly how long will Wall Street wait to see the light at the end of
the tunnel?  Will CLWR ever bask in the sunshine?

Long term I only see a decline in value unless they start producing profits
real quick!  CLWR isn't making any money and doesn't have a bright future of
EVER making any money.  Hope I'm wrong because a CLWR failure is a failure
for fixed wireless as a whole.

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Peter R.
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 9:37 AM
To: Matt Liotta
Cc: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Clearwire stock dropping

Matt Liotta wrote:

> It seems premature to suggest that Clearwire is tanking. When you 
> consider that an additional 4 million shares were issued and that the 
> overall market is currently down, I think their stock has move as 
> expected. I bought in at $20.68 and am quite happy with my position.
>
> -Matt
>
>
Issuing the extra 4 million shares actually diluted the value of the stock.

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] McKinney and longview TExas Service

[Brad Belton]

The McKinney, TX address doesn't come up as a good address using Yahoo or
Google maps.  Can you confirm the address, provide coordinates or possibly
identify the closest major intersection?

What type of service are they looking for?

Best,


Brad

 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mike Delp
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2007 1:57 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: [WISPA] McKinney and longview TExas Service

Looking for service at the following addresses.

8900 State Hwy 12, McKinney, TX 75050

3092 N. Eastman Road, Suite 100, Longview, TX 75605

Let me know if you service these areas.

Thanks

Mike

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.7/711 - Release Date: 3/5/2007
9:41 AM
 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules ?????

[Brad Belton]

No kidding.  

So...in one breath you're saying WISPA isn't playing the FCC Cop, and in
another you make a completely unfounded comment like this?  

I must have missed where Travis said he was deploying 5.4GHz APs and
thumbing his nose at the FCC.

Geesh, what an outlandish and overreaching comment from John Scrivner.  Talk
about FUD.

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of J. Vogel
Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 6:22 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules ?

John,

Maybe I missed something, but how do you get from Travis' statement that
any user could do it, to questioning Travis as to whether that was a
claim to
have done it himself?

John Vogel

John Scrivner wrote:
>
> Travis,
> Are saying you are using 5.4 GHz radios in the US?
> Scriv
>
>
> Travis Johnson wrote:
>
>> 
>>
>> Yes, DoD may have a little more push with the FCC, but, who's to say
>> someone can't buy 5.4ghz right now today and put it up? Any user with
>> internet access could order and install a 5.4ghz AP tomorrow for
>> less than $300...
>>
>> Travis
>>
>>
>>
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

OT...RE: [WISPA] Disagree with me and I won't buy your product

[Brad Belton]

Just keeping up with current events...  Yes, SHE was wearing a diaper so as
to refrain from having to stop during her 900 mile drive from Houston to
Orlando.  lol 

Then again what car or truck with a factory sized fuel tank has the legs to
go 900 miles on one tank?   Pretty funny story though.

Keep in mind she was working in the International Space Station only a few
months ago.  She clearly just snapped.

Best,

Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 6:12 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Disagree with me and I won't buy your product

Brad, aren't you describing that woman astronaut busted in FL today!
(was it really wrapped in diaper?)

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Belton
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 3:25 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Disagree with me and I won't buy your product

Crazy as an astronaut with a BB gun in a diaper on a road trip on a
mission
to kill someone.  

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Forbes Mercy
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 5:21 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Disagree with me and I won't buy your product

Whoa WHOA I SAY BESSIE!   I never threatened anyone's employer, I was
just
pointing out that if my System Administrator was on here making me look
bad
I'd have a word to say.  I said my piece just like Patrick and John did
and
you all have too.  But threaten Patrick with telling his boss boss?  Not
a
chance!  I was just trying to get him to see it from a different angle
because just like my response it was purely from "here is how I feel"
statement.  Patrick doesn't have that luxury because how he feels is
subsequently how his boss feels and his boss may not, that was my ONLY
point.  Let's keep the imaginations down here, I knew as soon as I sent
that
it would continue what shouldn't have continued, ironic this came right
after taking away moderation - interesting play on words there.  Anyway
my
one regret to having contributed to this thread is the old phrase "if
you
have nothing constructive to add, shut-up".  OH and before someone on
here
says "He told me to shut up", NO I DIDN'T!

So shall we go back to talking about making Wireless a more efficient
and
desirable product for the masses now?!

Forbes Mercy
President - Washington Broadband, Inc.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Blake Bowers
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 3:08 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Disagree with me and I won't buy your product

Agreed.  Seems kind of strong-arm.  Threats against
ones employer because you disagree with an employee, that ain't right.


- Original Message - 
From: "Jack Unger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 3:50 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Disagree with me and I won't buy your product


> I've been following the increasingly threatening discussions on this 
> list that are saying (I'm paraphrasing here) - "Disagree with me and I

> won't buy your product". These threats are IMHO, out of line. Even
more 
> disturbing, these comments are coming from people that I know and who
I 
> greatly respect within our industry.
> 
> We all have a right to express ourselves on issues that we feel are 
> significant. Further, we all have an OBLIGATION to responsibly express

> ourselves on issues of the day and issues that face our industry.
> 
> Instead of posting threats, can't we all resolve to take a little more

> time to compose and post thoughtful, well-reasoned, and constructive 
> comments that truly strengthen our industry?
> 
> jack
> 
> 
> -- 
> Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
> Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993
> Author of the WISP Handbook - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs"
> True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting
> Newsletters Downloadable from http://ask-wi.com/newsletters.html
> Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220  www.ask-wi.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


-- 
No virus found in th

RE: [WISPA] Disagree with me and I won't buy your product

[Brad Belton]

Crazy as an astronaut with a BB gun in a diaper on a road trip on a mission
to kill someone.  

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Forbes Mercy
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 5:21 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Disagree with me and I won't buy your product

Whoa WHOA I SAY BESSIE!   I never threatened anyone's employer, I was just
pointing out that if my System Administrator was on here making me look bad
I'd have a word to say.  I said my piece just like Patrick and John did and
you all have too.  But threaten Patrick with telling his boss boss?  Not a
chance!  I was just trying to get him to see it from a different angle
because just like my response it was purely from "here is how I feel"
statement.  Patrick doesn't have that luxury because how he feels is
subsequently how his boss feels and his boss may not, that was my ONLY
point.  Let's keep the imaginations down here, I knew as soon as I sent that
it would continue what shouldn't have continued, ironic this came right
after taking away moderation - interesting play on words there.  Anyway my
one regret to having contributed to this thread is the old phrase "if you
have nothing constructive to add, shut-up".  OH and before someone on here
says "He told me to shut up", NO I DIDN'T!

So shall we go back to talking about making Wireless a more efficient and
desirable product for the masses now?!

Forbes Mercy
President - Washington Broadband, Inc.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Blake Bowers
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 3:08 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Disagree with me and I won't buy your product

Agreed.  Seems kind of strong-arm.  Threats against
ones employer because you disagree with an employee, that ain't right.


- Original Message - 
From: "Jack Unger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 3:50 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Disagree with me and I won't buy your product


> I've been following the increasingly threatening discussions on this 
> list that are saying (I'm paraphrasing here) - "Disagree with me and I 
> won't buy your product". These threats are IMHO, out of line. Even more 
> disturbing, these comments are coming from people that I know and who I 
> greatly respect within our industry.
> 
> We all have a right to express ourselves on issues that we feel are 
> significant. Further, we all have an OBLIGATION to responsibly express 
> ourselves on issues of the day and issues that face our industry.
> 
> Instead of posting threats, can't we all resolve to take a little more 
> time to compose and post thoughtful, well-reasoned, and constructive 
> comments that truly strengthen our industry?
> 
> jack
> 
> 
> -- 
> Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
> Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993
> Author of the WISP Handbook - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs"
> True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting
> Newsletters Downloadable from http://ask-wi.com/newsletters.html
> Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220  www.ask-wi.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.411 / Virus Database: 268.17.28/672 - Release Date: 2/6/2007
 

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.411 / Virus Database: 268.17.28/672 - Release Date: 2/6/2007
 
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Disagree with me and I won't buy your product

[Brad Belton]

Agreed.  Crazy.

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 3:51 PM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] Disagree with me and I won't buy your product

I've been following the increasingly threatening discussions on this 
list that are saying (I'm paraphrasing here) - "Disagree with me and I 
won't buy your product". These threats are IMHO, out of line. Even more 
disturbing, these comments are coming from people that I know and who I 
greatly respect within our industry.

We all have a right to express ourselves on issues that we feel are 
significant. Further, we all have an OBLIGATION to responsibly express 
ourselves on issues of the day and issues that face our industry.

Instead of posting threats, can't we all resolve to take a little more 
time to compose and post thoughtful, well-reasoned, and constructive 
comments that truly strengthen our industry?

jack


-- 
Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993
Author of the WISP Handbook - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs"
True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting
Newsletters Downloadable from http://ask-wi.com/newsletters.html
Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220  www.ask-wi.com




-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces

[Brad Belton]

Somebody turn the flip'n moderation back on!

 

Patrick, let's be clear; you're motivation is driven only by pushing more
Alvarion boxes off the shelf.  Don't try to play the white knight here under
the guise of looking out for everyone.  You're a company man simply after
what puts food on your table.  Frankly there is nothing wrong with that, but
for everyone's stomach please just state it for what it really is.

 

John, I'm not sure where you are headed with your comments.  I'm sure the
B100 is a fine PtP radio set and will meet your requirements.  I agree with
Jack Unger's post.threatening to boycott product because of a sales rep's
comments?  

 

Best,

 

 

Brad

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Forbes Mercy
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 3:35 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces

 

Patrick, 

Does your boss know you are taking on the industry you are trying to sell
to?  I agree with John, know when to back off and realize what a vendor is
supposed to know "buyer is right".   Not to speak for John but you taking on
John again should really make him want to return equipment and it certainly
has affected my desire to by Alvarion.   You came after me once and it
certainly soured my desire to deal with your company as I admitted to
Marlon.  I have learned the hard way that I can't force my opinion on people
and hell I'm an owner not a supplier.  I've probably already said too much
but I can just feel the same thought I had before when I was in your
crosshairs and that was 'this is no way for a vendor to act'.

Forbes

John, 

I have railed against illegal vendors for years -- before you put up 
your first link. I (in official "corporate" capacity) have met with 
officials on the topic. I (in official corporate capacity) have met with 
lawyers on the topic. I have publicly spoken out at events on the topic. 

Who is stereotyping? I have said "many" and that's the truth and it's 
not even a debate. What's "trying to do right"? One either follows the 
rules or does not. 

No FUD being slung here. On the 4.9 issue I filed that question and deal 
with that assumption quite a bit. I suspect your definition of WISP is 
more narrow than mine. Mine includes ANY entity providing services with 
wireless broadband gear. There are utility-based WISPs, telco WISPs, 
large funded WISPs, Mom and Pop WISPs, rural WISPs, etc. The fact is 
that the public is not able and does not differentiate between all the 
competing groups of WISPs and groups like WISPA should understand that. 

You "want it to stop," John? Well, you have the power to censure your 
list from those you disagree with. You will have to mute dissent then, 
as I will not subdue my opinion on the topic because you wield power. 
Has does one best use their power John? To silence rational opinion one 
disagrees with? Must we all be sensitive or averse to differing from 
your opinion? Should I watch my back and wait to be called into the 
corner office for expressing my qualified opinion because you "want it 
to stop"? 

Patrick 

-Original Message- 
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On 
Behalf Of John Scrivner 
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 12:47 PM 
To: WISPA General List 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces 

Patrick, what is Alvarion doing as a corporation to police the majority 
of BWIA vendors who now pollute our industry with uncertified gear? 
These are your peers. Do you like being stereotyped with them? 

Your stereotyping of WISP operators as being predominantly illegal and 
the source of the problem is not accurate or fair and I want it to stop. 

The majority of the WISPs out there are trying to do right. It is the 
vendors who are the real problem. The majority of vendors ignore the 
law. The last gear purchase I made was for an Alvarion B100 backhaul 
link which is due in here today. It is certified but now I wonder if 
buying from a vendor who stereotypes the industry is a good idea. Maybe 
I made a mistake buying from your company? 

By the way, the slam about 4.9 GHz is completely erroneous and you need 
to apologize. The vast majority of WISPs stay the hell away from 4.9 and 

other bands which we are not allowed in. You need to watch your tack on 
this public list. Being a paid vendor member does not give you the right 

to sling mud or FUD. 
Scriv 

 

Patrick Leary wrote: 

>I understand and agree, but that's all the more reason why WISPs need 
to 
>police themselves because the public impression and liabilities are 
>there just as well. 
> a 
>Sometimes I wonder if the FCC is not content to let WISPs sort of stay 
>partially self-destructing. It gives them and the major operators an 
ace 
>in the hole against WISPs if and when they need it. 
> 
>Patrick Leary 
>AVP WISP Markets 
>Alvarion, Inc. 
>o: 650.314.2628 
>c: 760.580.0080 
>Vonage: 650.641.1243 
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> 
>-Original Message--

RE: [WISPA] high bandwidth service offerings

[Brad Belton]

Simple, you price it for what your market will bear.  15Mbps handed off via
a few feet of CAT5 inside a CoLo center is obviously less costly than 15Mbps
several miles from the central business district.

Per MB prices can range from several hundred (or more) dollars a MB to less
than a few bucks a MB.  

Call your LEC and cLEC's in the area and get a few quotes for bandwidth at
your customer's address.  You will quickly get an idea what their options
are and this will help you put your offer together.

Best,


Brad




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Rick Smith
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 3:30 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [WISPA] high bandwidth service offerings

If I had a customer wanting 5 meg committed, with burst rates up to 15,
assuming I could provide 15 to him via mikrotik / alvarion / etc etc., how
would you price such an offering ?   Not like I could call other ISPs and
check out the same thing
 
What's the "going rate" per meg for bandwidth these days if you were to buy
bandwidth at meet-me centers ?
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

wireless@wispa.org

[Brad Belton]

Appears to be a manual thing...

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of George Rogato
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 1:42 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] I'm gonna do the honors without permission--
WELCOMEMarty&Roadstar!

Thanks Rick, your the man!

Hey, does every paid member automatically get signed up to the membes 
list or is a manual thing?

George

Rick Harnish wrote:
> It's taken care of George.  
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Rick Harnish
> President
> OnlyInternet Broadband & Wireless, Inc.
> 260-827-2482
> Founding Member of WISPA
> 



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Service Offerings, By Speed or All You Can Eat? Was: Advanced Bandwidth Management

[Brad Belton]

Holy cow!  Stepped away from the 'puter for a bit and see that everyone's
beating up on poor 'ol Matt for making a perfectly correct statement!

No surprise as to some of the people commenting here that largely promote
"best effort" gear, but others that have commented should know better.

Rick, you're on the right track.  Keep it up.  We have been selling
bandwidth packages since day one.  If we had not been we wouldn't have seen
the organic increase to our bottom line over the past few years as customers
upgrade bandwidth packages.

The ones complaining about VoIP quality issues are largely the ones that
have an "open spigot" for all their users.  The VoIP revolution has been
great because many times it requires the client to come back to us for MORE
bandwidth.  When you sell bandwidth packages that gives you an opportunity
to put more dollars in the register.  This opportunity can lead to other
sales like client network upgrades, extending the service agreement...the
list goes on and on.

Matt's comment:
"Have you thought about selling the customer a pipe that works for any and
all traffic at the speed the customer signed up for as opposed to deciding
for the customer?"

I see no problem with this comment.  Why should it matter to the provider if
the bits of data are VoIP, FTP, HTTP, or Xbox?   It's all ones and zeros.
Build your network to handle it at the levels you are committing to your
clients.  As they require more they PAY for more!  What a concept!

Bottom line is don't join the "great race to zero" with the likes of cable
and DSL.  Nobody wants to be there fighting it out on price alone against
the big guys.  Believe me they have more money than you.  Instead sell a
better service at a fair price.  Your clients will thank you and your wallet
will too.

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of RickG
Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 8:36 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Service Offerings,By Speed or All You Can Eat? Was:
Advanced Bandwidth Management

Sorry guys for hijacking the thread but this hit a chord...

I've sold bandwidth in all sorts of ways but the most prevalent is by
speed which is the  way  am currently doing it. My question is this:
What if you played the "cable game" and just sell  all you can eat?
Would that not free up your network more quickly for everybody else?
Example: Joe Surfer downloads movies on demand but is too cheap to buy
your highest speed offering. So, he buys your slowest speed and ties
up your network much longer. Just  looking for some opinions here ;)

Thanks!
RickG

On 1/24/07, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> OR, we could stop playing the Cable Co. and Telco "games" with their "up
> to 3meg" and "up to 7meg" connections for $34.95 and just start selling
> what they get.
>
> We started selling 512k, 1meg, 1.5meg and 2meg connections (up and down,
> guaranteed speed 24x7) about 3 years ago. It was the best thing we ever
> did... people get what they pay for, and when they need more, they buy
> more. No games, no "burstable" speeds, etc.
>
> Make your customers pay for what they need and use.
>
> Travis
> Microserv
>
> Blair Davis wrote:
> > We sell mainly to residential users and to some small businesses.
> >
> > We are quite rural, and my cost for a T-1 is $450 per month.  My
> > pending fiber hookup is $1100 per month for 5Mbit.
> >
> > A bit ago, a business customer's new IT consultant complained that the
> > 256Kbit committed rate for $60 a month was over priced.  He demanded a
> > 1Mbit committed rate and no price change.  I explained this was not
> > possible.  He was quite nasty and told me he was recommending that the
> > customer find a new ISP.  I, fed up with his big city attitude, told
> > him to go right ahead.  He said to come pick up the gear on this
> > Friday.  Although, I might have lost my temper a bit and used some
> > words that the FCC doesn't permit on the phone..
> >
> > After he was quoted $600 per month for a T1, (and $9500 install), and
> > a 3 month lead time, he called me back...
> >
> > He decided that my offer of 1Mbit committed rate (6am-6pm, Mon-Fri)
> > and a 256Kbit committed rate at other times) for $250 a month was a
> > damn good deal..
> >
> > The point of this, is that, for many customers, pricing and bandwidth
> > expectations are being driven by the cheap bandwidth in the large
> > cites  Out here in the real world, it don't work that way.
> >
> > The other point is, that with a good mix of residential and business
> > customers, and a little creative thinking, one can match their usage
> > patterns to minimize ones peak bandwidth requirements while still
> > providing the 'fast, snappy feel' that the users prefer
> >
> > Just my $.02
> >
> >
> > J. Vogel wrote:
> >
> >> I would suspect that the customer (as is the case in much of the world,
> >> not necessarily in the limited
> >> world you may operate in) does no

RE: [WISPA] Advanced Bandwidth Management

[Brad Belton]

...read my mind.

Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt Liotta
Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 11:49 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Advanced Bandwidth Management

Have you thought about selling the customer a pipe that works for any 
and all traffic at the speed the customer signed up for as opposed to 
deciding for the customer?

-Matt

Jason wrote:
> List,
>
>Several times in the last few weeks the topic of bandwidth 
> management has been discussed, but "I Still Haven't Found What I'm 
> Lookin' For"...  Here's what I'd like to do:
>
> 1.  Each user starts with a big "Internet Pipe".  This way casual 
> surfing and emails, etc. happen nice and snappy.
>
> 2.  If a user downloads a big chunk of data, he needs to be "shaped" 
> to a lower data rate after a few minutes (I'm thinking 2 or 3 minutes).
>
> 3.  Step 2 repeats over and over several times if the user continues 
> to download.
>
> 4.  After the user quits hogging the network, his bandwidth is 
> restored in stages (backwards of 2 and 3).
>
> I know this, or at least similar things to it, are being done out 
> there.  The HughesNet satellite FAP works something like this (I don't 
> know the actual values):
>
> 1.  Each user has a "Bit Bucket" that holds 1 Gig of bandwidth.
>
> 2.  The "Bit Bucket is replenished at 128k.
>
> 3.  The speed at which the user can download from his "bit bucket" is 
> 1meg.
>
> 4.  If the user uses all the bits in his bucket faster than they are 
> replenished, he eventually gets only 128k.
>
> Does anyone know how to get something like this going?  I am 
> especially interested in Linux/Ubuntu solutions.
>
> Jason
>
>

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Muni networks, the good, bad and ugly

[Brad Belton]

Hello Dawn,

I appreciate the link.  Pretty sure I've been there in the past, but
nevertheless I'm sure the muniwireless website will offer completely
unbiased viewpoints.  

I still believe the cellular guys will ultimately be the best choice for the
mobile user.  Even with today's technology I prefer my Sprint Data card over
hotspots simply due to coverage and the ability to drive from one side of
town to another without so much as a dropped ping.  Stay on the highway and
you could probably do the same from one coast to the other!

The phones today are only going to get faster and offer better services
under one bill with far and away better coverage.  Bluetooth between the
phone and laptop will seamlessly bridge the mobile user's laptop to the
Internet.  More laptops will begin to offer cellular data cards as a
built-in option as some already have.  The muni-wireless play as I see it
today has a very limited window of profitability that is quickly being
closed by the cellular guys.

Best,


Brad




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dawn DiPietro
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 12:23 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Muni networks, the good, bad and ugly

Brad,

Here is a link you might want to read up on.
http://muniwireless.com/municipal/1556

Regards,
Dawn DiPietro

Brad Belton wrote:

>I'll agree with Mark on this.  There are many that are exploiting city
>counsel's across the country to only line their own pockets.  I have read
>about one muni-wifi failure after another...point me to a real success
>story.  As a percentage my guess is the failures far, far outweigh the
>successes.
>
>If a city wants to drive business and people to their community then how
>about offering free water or free garbage pickup instead of free Internet.
>How about offering lower taxes?  
>
>Let the city offer something free to drive people into the community that
>EVERYONE can benefit from.  After all the Internet is only for the 'rich',
>right?  
>
>Brad
>
>
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>Behalf Of Dawn DiPietro
>Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 11:21 AM
>To: WISPA General List
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] Muni networks, the good, bad and ugly
>
>Mark,
>
>Many if not most RFP's today require a percentage of accounts be 
>discounted heavily or given away for just the reasons you are describing.
>
>The term "Digital Inclusion" is used in this document to describe the 
>goal of expanding the capabilities of computing technology worldwide to 
>better serve social and economic challenges of underserved communities, 
>both rural and urban.
>
>If you would get off your own train and look around and maybe read a 
>thing or two on this subject maybe you would understand this a little 
>better.
>
>Regards,
>Dawn DiPietro
>
>
>
>Mark Koskenmaki wrote:
>
>  
>
>>- Original Message - 
>>From: "Peter R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>To: "WISPA General List" 
>>Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 6:13 AM
>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] Muni networks, the good, bad and ugly
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>>
>>
>>>There are numerous studies that demonstrate that towns that lack
>>>broadband are economically deficient compared to towns with broadband.
>>>Job growth, tax base increase, home value stability, higher per capita
>>>income.
>>>   
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>The economic deficiency drives the lack of broadband, not the other way
>>around.
>>
>>You can't raise the dog to life by wagging it's tail.
>>
>>I live in one of those towns, and have many of them in the region
>>surrounding me.   Broadband is not the issue.  The economic conditions are
>>driven ENTIRELY by other factors.Just like poor roads don't help, a
>>
>>
>lack
>  
>
>>of connectivity may be some hindrance, but building a superhighway to a
>>depressed community will simply NOT create magic.Broadband brought to
>>these places may have some neglible impact, but the lack is not  the cause
>>of economic problems, nor will provisioning it "fix" things.
>>
>>Unfortunately, too many people are riding this train.Politicians are
>>holding it out as a "fix" ( BB access has never hurt a town's economy, of
>>course) for things when it isn't, and lots of businessmen are exploiting
>>that for thier own pocketbooks.   The people who are being sold this are
>>
>>
>the
>  
>
>>unwitting victims.   They need real solutions t

RE: [WISPA] Muni networks, the good, bad and ugly

[Brad Belton]

I'll agree with Mark on this.  There are many that are exploiting city
counsel's across the country to only line their own pockets.  I have read
about one muni-wifi failure after another...point me to a real success
story.  As a percentage my guess is the failures far, far outweigh the
successes.

If a city wants to drive business and people to their community then how
about offering free water or free garbage pickup instead of free Internet.
How about offering lower taxes?  

Let the city offer something free to drive people into the community that
EVERYONE can benefit from.  After all the Internet is only for the 'rich',
right?  

Brad




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dawn DiPietro
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 11:21 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Muni networks, the good, bad and ugly

Mark,

Many if not most RFP's today require a percentage of accounts be 
discounted heavily or given away for just the reasons you are describing.

The term "Digital Inclusion" is used in this document to describe the 
goal of expanding the capabilities of computing technology worldwide to 
better serve social and economic challenges of underserved communities, 
both rural and urban.

If you would get off your own train and look around and maybe read a 
thing or two on this subject maybe you would understand this a little 
better.

Regards,
Dawn DiPietro



Mark Koskenmaki wrote:

>- Original Message - 
>From: "Peter R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "WISPA General List" 
>Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 6:13 AM
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] Muni networks, the good, bad and ugly
>
>
>  
>
>>There are numerous studies that demonstrate that towns that lack
>>broadband are economically deficient compared to towns with broadband.
>>Job growth, tax base increase, home value stability, higher per capita
>>income.
>>
>>
>
>The economic deficiency drives the lack of broadband, not the other way
>around.
>
>You can't raise the dog to life by wagging it's tail.
>
>I live in one of those towns, and have many of them in the region
>surrounding me.   Broadband is not the issue.  The economic conditions are
>driven ENTIRELY by other factors.Just like poor roads don't help, a
lack
>of connectivity may be some hindrance, but building a superhighway to a
>depressed community will simply NOT create magic.Broadband brought to
>these places may have some neglible impact, but the lack is not  the cause
>of economic problems, nor will provisioning it "fix" things.
>
>Unfortunately, too many people are riding this train.Politicians are
>holding it out as a "fix" ( BB access has never hurt a town's economy, of
>course) for things when it isn't, and lots of businessmen are exploiting
>that for thier own pocketbooks.   The people who are being sold this are
the
>unwitting victims.   They need real solutions to other real problems, and
>ignoring them and offering fashionable modern services as a fix is a red
>herring...
>
>
>
>+++
>neofast.net - fast internet for North East Oregon and South East Washington
>email me at mark at neofast dot net
>541-969-8200
>Direct commercial inquiries to purchasing at neofast dot net
>
>  
>

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Scrivner's story

[Brad Belton]

Nice job.

Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Peter R.
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 8:57 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Scrivner's story

*A WISP with Vision * 
*
Gerry 
Blackwell* 
* 
* 
[January 5, 2007] He has navigated federal, state, and local 
bureaucracies, runs an ISP association, and has built a WISP that's 
always a step ahead of the industry.
http://www.isp-planet.com/fixed_wireless/business/2007/mt.vernon.net.html

-- 


Regards,

Peter Radizeski
RAD-INFO, Inc. - NSP Strategist
We Help ISPs Connect & Communicate
813.963.5884 
http://www.marketingIDEAguy.com


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Optimally taking advantage of GB Ethernet

[Brad Belton]

Hello Tom,

First let me saydamn Cowboys...

I'm not sure I follow exactly what you are saying, but we have pushed better
than 800Mbps HDX and more than 700Mbps FDX aggregate between GigE MT
routers.  Checking the router Interfaces show a 1500MTU setting.  Is that
what you are talking about?

Brad

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 10:43 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Optimally taking advantage of GB Ethernet

Tom,

How are the "big boys" doing it? Surely AT&T and others are transporting 
more than 200Mbps across their 1GB fiber links.

Travis
Microserv

Tom DeReggi wrote:
> Gigabit Ethernet, can pass 1 gbps when it uses greater than a 9600 MTU 
> frame.
> But with a 1500MTU frame, it can barely pass 200 mbps.
> The problem is that most Internet and subscriber traffic is using a 
> 1500MTU or smaller frame.
> So in theory, its would be just as efficient and fast to bond two 100 
> mbps fiber connections than it would to buy 1- 1GB fiber connection.
>
> So the question is How do we most efficiently use 1GB fiber to get 
> the advantage of the full 1GB of capacity?
> Do we need to use some sort of packet agreegation/stuffing technology?
> Is GB etherner pointless for Internet transit backbones?
> Is GB just good for high capacity Transports, recognizing that routers 
> will likely split traffic to different smaller bandwidth peers?
> Is there a special router or router feature used to solve this problem?
> Is that method available to Linux?
>
> The reason I ask is several fold.  In a network design where all 
> traffic flows to a single source (for example many 100mbps baclhauls 
> to remote areas to 1 central data center), it would be beneficial 
> because the cost of 1 big 1GB pipe could be shared to deliver capacity 
> to everything, better apt to handle peak traffic and get higher 
> oversubscription rates.   However, if teh GB INternet pipe can not be 
> efficiently used, this method would be severally flawed. It might be 
> better to have multipel 100mvps transit connections spread out across 
> one's network, so there was a shorter path to transit, and the 
> network's bandwdith spread out amungst multiple 100mbps transit 
> connection, for better over all throughput.  In other words, in a 10 
> city network, 1- 100mbps pipe in each of teh 10 cities would allow a 
> full combined 1 gbps of Internet transit, where as agregating 100mbps 
> from each city to one central source where their was a single 1GB 
> transit, would result in only a 200mbps throughput, assuming traffic 
> was delivered to it as a 1500 MTU.
>
> Any feedback?
>
> Take note that my comment that a 1500MTU frame 1 Gbps Ethernet card 
> could only pass 200kbps was based on some lab tests.  With the 1500MTU 
> frame acheiving only 200kbps, our routers CPU utilization was less 
> than 20%, so it was not a saturated router. The second we changed MTU 
> to 9600, we got over 800 mbps, and CPU utilization was still very low, 
> forget exact number but under 40%.  These tests were replicated going 
> PC to PC (no switch) and with a high end SMC GB switch in-line.
>
> Tom DeReggi
> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Brad B, I got your answer on the pinout for BreezeACCESS VL

[Brad Belton]

Ahh ok, neither do I or the people I've spoken with about this.  In another
post I illustrated the Alvarion VL pin out is simply inverted.  Don't see
how that could make any difference in cross talk rejection.

So, can we expect Alvarion will at some point begin to adhere to industry
wiring codes?  

Several weeks ago you agreed a RSSI reading would be a good item to add.  Is
there any update as to when that will be available?

Best,

Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 11:00 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Brad B,I got your answer on the pinout for BreezeACCESS
VL

Frankly I'm not sure I actually buy the reason, but that's what I've been
told. 

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 6:17 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Brad B,I got your answer on the pinout for BreezeACCESS
VL

Patrick,

That is good to know, that there was actually technical merit, "brains", 
behind the decission to do it Alvarion's way.
I think whats more important from this is that anyone installing VL, and 
needing to extend the cable longer than the cable included with the unit, 
probably then also needs to wire the new longer cable or extenstion cable 
with the same pinout.
I bet many had attempted to use a 568B extension with a coupler to the 
Alvarion cable, if they were not aware of this.
The cable length that comes with it is probably fine for Residential, but 
for MTU's 150-300ft is not uncommon.
What is the cable limit for  Alvarion's CAT5 connection?

Now to give you a hard time Why does the Alvarion use 56V instead of 
standard 48V, 24V, or 802.11af?  :-)

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Patrick Leary" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 3:55 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Brad B, I got your answer on the pinout for BreezeACCESS VL


So Brad, I finally have the answer as to why we do not use the standard 568B

(or 568A for that matter) pinot. We can't. The VL PoE pushes 55 volts and ½ 
an amp up the cat 5 cable. If the standard pinout is used the cable range 
due to cross talk can't make it much past 30 feet. With this pinout we are 
able to maintain the long distance.

So, you may not like it, but at least I've finally been able to give an 
actual reason.

Regards,

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243
[EMAIL PROTECTED]









This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer 
viruses.




-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/





This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer
viruses(190).







 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer
viruses(42).








 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer
viruses.





-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Brad B, I got your answer on the pinout for BreezeACCESS VL

[Brad Belton]

Hello Patrick,

Thanks for the explanation, however I'm not sure how simply reversing the
pin-outs will improve cross talk.  

The Alvarion VL Manual doesn't specify the function of each Pin/Wire color.
I assume Green & Orange pairs are still used for Data and the Blue & Brown
pairs are used for power?  If so, it appears Alvarion has simply inverted
the pin out starting the standard 568A color code with Pin 8 rather than Pin
1.  I'd love to learn more as to how starting with Pin 8 as opposed to Pin 1
would make any difference as it relates to cross talk.

Alvarion VL Manual page 168:

1   Blue
2   Blue/White
3   Orange  Data?
4   Brown
5   Brown/White
6   Orange/WhiteData?
7   Green   Data?
8   Green/White Data?

Vs.

The rest of the World aka 568B:

1   Orange/WhiteData
2   Orange  Data
3   Green/White Data
4   Blue
5   Blue/White
6   Green   Data
7   Brown/White
8   Brown


BTW, I stumbled across a pretty nifty URL with a business card sized PDF
Avery Stock printout of 586A & 586B pin out configurations.

http://www.bluemax.net/techtips/networking/Wiring_Tips/Wiring100TX/colorcode
standards.htm


Best,


Brad




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 8:17 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Brad B,I got your answer on the pinout for BreezeACCESS
VL

Patrick,

That is good to know, that there was actually technical merit, "brains", 
behind the decission to do it Alvarion's way.
I think whats more important from this is that anyone installing VL, and 
needing to extend the cable longer than the cable included with the unit, 
probably then also needs to wire the new longer cable or extenstion cable 
with the same pinout.
I bet many had attempted to use a 568B extension with a coupler to the 
Alvarion cable, if they were not aware of this.
The cable length that comes with it is probably fine for Residential, but 
for MTU's 150-300ft is not uncommon.
What is the cable limit for  Alvarion's CAT5 connection?

Now to give you a hard time Why does the Alvarion use 56V instead of 
standard 48V, 24V, or 802.11af?  :-)

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Patrick Leary" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 3:55 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Brad B, I got your answer on the pinout for BreezeACCESS VL


So Brad, I finally have the answer as to why we do not use the standard 568B

(or 568A for that matter) pinot. We can't. The VL PoE pushes 55 volts and ½ 
an amp up the cat 5 cable. If the standard pinout is used the cable range 
due to cross talk can't make it much past 30 feet. With this pinout we are 
able to maintain the long distance.

So, you may not like it, but at least I've finally been able to give an 
actual reason.

Regards,

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243
[EMAIL PROTECTED]









This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer 
viruses.




-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent

[Brad Belton]

Nice job of cherry picking posts Patrick.  I am impressed!

I stand corrected that Allen was more of an Alvarion shop than I remember.
I largely recall our Trango discussions and I believe Allen and I even
exchanged Trango product once upon a time.  My how time flys.

Best,

Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 6:56 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent

And one of my favorites:
-Original Message-
From: Allen Marsalis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2003 9:54 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [WISP] Trango on crack (all weekend long!)

George said:
 >
 >Well said Matt
 >To further proof that Alvarion is turning a deaf ear to even their own
 >Alvarion operators...
 >Ask Allen and Eje, why BOTH of them are deploying Trango and non
 >Alvarion DSSS 2.4 gear in addition to their Alvarion networks!
 >Let the flames begin!

Wow, George, you must know something about my network that
I don't know.  On second thought, you don't know.  I hate
ignorance almost as much as crack..  Here I'll help you:

Alvarion FH AP's:  11
Alvarion FH CPE:   130
Alvarion DS AP's:  1
Non-Alvarion DS AP's:  4
Non-Alvarion DS CPE:   1
Trango AP's:   6
Trango CPE:20

Heh, lets see what entire network I put on ebay first.  ;-)

Allen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Belton
Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 4:51 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent

I don't consider FHSS broadband   Allen quickly moved to broadband
fixed wireless gear like Trango, WMUX among others.

Yes, MobilePro bought ShreveNet along with Kite and a few others.
MobilePro's first acquisition was NationWide Internet...primarily a
conventional ISP with little wireless.  We are very familiar with
MobilePro.

Best,

Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 6:41 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent

Wrong Brad. Allen Marsalis was originally an Alvarion shop going back
into the late 1990's (when were BreezeCOM).

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Belton
Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 4:39 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent

Nope on both accounts.

Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of George Rogato
Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 6:33 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent

Are they the company that bought Allen M. 's WISP? As I recall he was an

Alvarion shop

Patrick Leary wrote:
> U.S. Wireless Online is a conglomeration. Originally it was started by
> buying at bankruptcy the assets of late firms like Darwin Networks. A
> few years later they merged with Air2LAN (Jai Baghat's old company)
out
> of Jackson, MS. They then rolled up a number of WISPs. So they got old
> MY customers, some Wi-Fi customers, some hotspot business, some
> traditional WISP business, etc. Lots of different brands in there,
> including us among many others.
> 
> So I suppose it'd be tricky to get a good count that we easily compare
> with WISP pure play type business.
> 
> Patrick Leary
> AVP WISP Markets
> Alvarion, Inc.
> o: 650.314.2628
> c: 760.580.0080
> Vonage: 650.641.1243
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
> Behalf Of George Rogato
> Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 4:17 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent
> 
> I wonder how many subs US Wireless has?
> 
> 
> Peter R. wrote:
>> US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent Ownership Stake to Sutioc
> Enterprises
>> Tuesday January 2, 2007
>>
>> http://biz.yahoo.com/pz/070102/04.html
>>
>> Operational Management and Support Services to be Provided by
IElement
> 
>> Corporation
>>
>> LOUISVILLE, Ky., Jan. 2, 2007 (PRIME NEWSWIRE) -- US Wireless Online,

>> one of the nation's largest wireless broadband network operators, 
>> announced today that it has completed the sale of a 50.1% ownership 
>> st

RE: [WISPA] US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent

[Brad Belton]

Yes, Mobilepro bought ShreveNet along with a payphone company and a variety
of other small companies.  Bottom of this webpage http://www.nationwide.net
lists some of the companies they have acquired.

Best,

Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 6:40 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent

I don't know if they bought ShreveNet. That might have been MobilePRO.
MobilePRO bought a number of Alvarion WISPs, including the former DHR in
Ft. Myers.

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of George Rogato
Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 4:33 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent

Are they the company that bought Allen M. 's WISP? As I recall he was an

Alvarion shop

Patrick Leary wrote:
> U.S. Wireless Online is a conglomeration. Originally it was started by
> buying at bankruptcy the assets of late firms like Darwin Networks. A
> few years later they merged with Air2LAN (Jai Baghat's old company)
out
> of Jackson, MS. They then rolled up a number of WISPs. So they got old
> MY customers, some Wi-Fi customers, some hotspot business, some
> traditional WISP business, etc. Lots of different brands in there,
> including us among many others.
> 
> So I suppose it'd be tricky to get a good count that we easily compare
> with WISP pure play type business.
> 
> Patrick Leary
> AVP WISP Markets
> Alvarion, Inc.
> o: 650.314.2628
> c: 760.580.0080
> Vonage: 650.641.1243
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
> Behalf Of George Rogato
> Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 4:17 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent
> 
> I wonder how many subs US Wireless has?
> 
> 
> Peter R. wrote:
>> US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent Ownership Stake to Sutioc
> Enterprises
>> Tuesday January 2, 2007
>>
>> http://biz.yahoo.com/pz/070102/04.html
>>
>> Operational Management and Support Services to be Provided by
IElement
> 
>> Corporation
>>
>> LOUISVILLE, Ky., Jan. 2, 2007 (PRIME NEWSWIRE) -- US Wireless Online,

>> one of the nation's largest wireless broadband network operators, 
>> announced today that it has completed the sale of a 50.1% ownership 
>> stake to Sutioc Enterprises, Inc.
>>
>> In conjunction with the transaction, which closed on December 27,
> 2006, 
>> Sutioc has entered into an agreement with IElement Corporation, Inc. 
>> whereby IElement will provide certain management and support services
> to 
>> US Wireless. As part of the agreement, IElement will provide out
> sourced 
>> customer service, technical support, network management, accounting, 
>> billing and collection services as well as act as an advisor to US 
>> Wireless' current management team. IElement is a nationwide provider
> of 
>> advanced communication services and Voice over Internet Protocol
> (VoIP) 
>> solutions with a network presence in 18 major markets in the United 
>> States, including facilities in Los Angeles, Dallas and Chicago.
>>
>> At the time of the sale, Sutioc and US Wireless were able to retire
> over 
>> $3.5 million in US Wireless' debt.
>>
>> US Wireless also expects to quickly benefit from efficiencies
> resulting 
>> from the transactions including the ability to streamline its
> operations 
>> and reduce administrative and operational costs. In addition, US 
>> Wireless will soon be able to offer its current and new customers a 
>> complete suite of voice and data products and services through 
>> IElement's product offering.
>>
>> ``The combination of US Wireless' organization and network facilities

>> with IElement's management experience, infrastructure, broad product 
>> range and service capability should significantly improve the
> Company's 
>> competitive position,'' commented Rick E. Hughes, CEO of US Wireless 
>> Online, Inc. ``We look forward to working with Sutioc and IElement.
We
> 
>> anticipate leveraging their strengths and resources to resume the
> growth 
>> and expansion of our business in the near future.''
>>
>> Additional announcements relating to the transaction, new product 
>> launches, Wi-Fi Pittsburgh and other evolving developments are
> expected 
>> in the near future.
>>
>> About IElement Corporation:
>>
>> IElement, based in Dallas, Texas, is a facilities-based nationwide 
>> communications service provider that offers state-of-the-art 
>> telecommunications services to small and medium sized businesses 
>> (``SMBs''). IElement provides broadband data, voice and wireless 
>> services by offering integrated T-1 lines as well as a Layer 2
Private
> 
>> Network and VOIP solutions. These solutions provide S

RE: [WISPA] US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent

[Brad Belton]

I don't consider FHSS broadband   Allen quickly moved to broadband
fixed wireless gear like Trango, WMUX among others.

Yes, MobilePro bought ShreveNet along with Kite and a few others.
MobilePro's first acquisition was NationWide Internet...primarily a
conventional ISP with little wireless.  We are very familiar with MobilePro.

Best,

Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 6:41 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent

Wrong Brad. Allen Marsalis was originally an Alvarion shop going back
into the late 1990's (when were BreezeCOM).

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Belton
Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 4:39 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent

Nope on both accounts.

Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of George Rogato
Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 6:33 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent

Are they the company that bought Allen M. 's WISP? As I recall he was an

Alvarion shop

Patrick Leary wrote:
> U.S. Wireless Online is a conglomeration. Originally it was started by
> buying at bankruptcy the assets of late firms like Darwin Networks. A
> few years later they merged with Air2LAN (Jai Baghat's old company)
out
> of Jackson, MS. They then rolled up a number of WISPs. So they got old
> MY customers, some Wi-Fi customers, some hotspot business, some
> traditional WISP business, etc. Lots of different brands in there,
> including us among many others.
> 
> So I suppose it'd be tricky to get a good count that we easily compare
> with WISP pure play type business.
> 
> Patrick Leary
> AVP WISP Markets
> Alvarion, Inc.
> o: 650.314.2628
> c: 760.580.0080
> Vonage: 650.641.1243
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
> Behalf Of George Rogato
> Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 4:17 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent
> 
> I wonder how many subs US Wireless has?
> 
> 
> Peter R. wrote:
>> US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent Ownership Stake to Sutioc
> Enterprises
>> Tuesday January 2, 2007
>>
>> http://biz.yahoo.com/pz/070102/04.html
>>
>> Operational Management and Support Services to be Provided by
IElement
> 
>> Corporation
>>
>> LOUISVILLE, Ky., Jan. 2, 2007 (PRIME NEWSWIRE) -- US Wireless Online,

>> one of the nation's largest wireless broadband network operators, 
>> announced today that it has completed the sale of a 50.1% ownership 
>> stake to Sutioc Enterprises, Inc.
>>
>> In conjunction with the transaction, which closed on December 27,
> 2006, 
>> Sutioc has entered into an agreement with IElement Corporation, Inc. 
>> whereby IElement will provide certain management and support services
> to 
>> US Wireless. As part of the agreement, IElement will provide out
> sourced 
>> customer service, technical support, network management, accounting, 
>> billing and collection services as well as act as an advisor to US 
>> Wireless' current management team. IElement is a nationwide provider
> of 
>> advanced communication services and Voice over Internet Protocol
> (VoIP) 
>> solutions with a network presence in 18 major markets in the United 
>> States, including facilities in Los Angeles, Dallas and Chicago.
>>
>> At the time of the sale, Sutioc and US Wireless were able to retire
> over 
>> $3.5 million in US Wireless' debt.
>>
>> US Wireless also expects to quickly benefit from efficiencies
> resulting 
>> from the transactions including the ability to streamline its
> operations 
>> and reduce administrative and operational costs. In addition, US 
>> Wireless will soon be able to offer its current and new customers a 
>> complete suite of voice and data products and services through 
>> IElement's product offering.
>>
>> ``The combination of US Wireless' organization and network facilities

>> with IElement's management experience, infrastructure, broad product 
>> range and service capability should significantly improve the
> Company's 
>> competitive position,'' commented Rick E. Hughes, CEO of US Wireless 
>> Online, Inc. ``We look forwar

RE: [WISPA] US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent

[Brad Belton]

Nope on both accounts.

Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of George Rogato
Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 6:33 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent

Are they the company that bought Allen M. 's WISP? As I recall he was an 
Alvarion shop

Patrick Leary wrote:
> U.S. Wireless Online is a conglomeration. Originally it was started by
> buying at bankruptcy the assets of late firms like Darwin Networks. A
> few years later they merged with Air2LAN (Jai Baghat's old company) out
> of Jackson, MS. They then rolled up a number of WISPs. So they got old
> MY customers, some Wi-Fi customers, some hotspot business, some
> traditional WISP business, etc. Lots of different brands in there,
> including us among many others.
> 
> So I suppose it'd be tricky to get a good count that we easily compare
> with WISP pure play type business.
> 
> Patrick Leary
> AVP WISP Markets
> Alvarion, Inc.
> o: 650.314.2628
> c: 760.580.0080
> Vonage: 650.641.1243
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of George Rogato
> Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 4:17 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent
> 
> I wonder how many subs US Wireless has?
> 
> 
> Peter R. wrote:
>> US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent Ownership Stake to Sutioc
> Enterprises
>> Tuesday January 2, 2007
>>
>> http://biz.yahoo.com/pz/070102/04.html
>>
>> Operational Management and Support Services to be Provided by IElement
> 
>> Corporation
>>
>> LOUISVILLE, Ky., Jan. 2, 2007 (PRIME NEWSWIRE) -- US Wireless Online, 
>> one of the nation's largest wireless broadband network operators, 
>> announced today that it has completed the sale of a 50.1% ownership 
>> stake to Sutioc Enterprises, Inc.
>>
>> In conjunction with the transaction, which closed on December 27,
> 2006, 
>> Sutioc has entered into an agreement with IElement Corporation, Inc. 
>> whereby IElement will provide certain management and support services
> to 
>> US Wireless. As part of the agreement, IElement will provide out
> sourced 
>> customer service, technical support, network management, accounting, 
>> billing and collection services as well as act as an advisor to US 
>> Wireless' current management team. IElement is a nationwide provider
> of 
>> advanced communication services and Voice over Internet Protocol
> (VoIP) 
>> solutions with a network presence in 18 major markets in the United 
>> States, including facilities in Los Angeles, Dallas and Chicago.
>>
>> At the time of the sale, Sutioc and US Wireless were able to retire
> over 
>> $3.5 million in US Wireless' debt.
>>
>> US Wireless also expects to quickly benefit from efficiencies
> resulting 
>> from the transactions including the ability to streamline its
> operations 
>> and reduce administrative and operational costs. In addition, US 
>> Wireless will soon be able to offer its current and new customers a 
>> complete suite of voice and data products and services through 
>> IElement's product offering.
>>
>> ``The combination of US Wireless' organization and network facilities 
>> with IElement's management experience, infrastructure, broad product 
>> range and service capability should significantly improve the
> Company's 
>> competitive position,'' commented Rick E. Hughes, CEO of US Wireless 
>> Online, Inc. ``We look forward to working with Sutioc and IElement. We
> 
>> anticipate leveraging their strengths and resources to resume the
> growth 
>> and expansion of our business in the near future.''
>>
>> Additional announcements relating to the transaction, new product 
>> launches, Wi-Fi Pittsburgh and other evolving developments are
> expected 
>> in the near future.
>>
>> About IElement Corporation:
>>
>> IElement, based in Dallas, Texas, is a facilities-based nationwide 
>> communications service provider that offers state-of-the-art 
>> telecommunications services to small and medium sized businesses 
>> (``SMBs''). IElement provides broadband data, voice and wireless 
>> services by offering integrated T-1 lines as well as a Layer 2 Private
> 
>> Network and VOIP solutions. These solutions provide SMBs with
> dedicated 
>> internet access, customizable business solutions for voice, data, 
>> wireless, internet, and secure communications channels between the SMB
> 
>> offices, partners, vendors, customers and employees without the use of
> a 
>> firewall or encryption device. IElement has a network presence in 18 
>> major markets in the United States, including facilities in Los
> Angeles, 
>> Dallas and Chicago. For more information on IElement, please visit 
>> http://www.ielement.com.
>>
>> About US Wireless Online:
>>
>> US Wireless Online owns and operates one of the nation's largest 
>> wireless Internet broadband networks with significant coverage areas
> in 
>> 

RE: [WISPA] Alvarion Comnet Radios have arrived -regardinginterference - Part 1

[Brad Belton]

lol...gotta love it!  I'd argue it doesn't have to be only $300 to sell.
I'd pay two or three times that for such a product.  

But honestly that isn't that much to ask as many products are already so
close...Alvarion VL being one of the closest, but still no cigar.  

I like what you said about developing Trango products and agree they are way
past due to "leapfrog" back to the front of the pack.  Oh those were the
days when Sunstream/Trango was the undisputed leader with the début of the
M5800 and then the M5830.Maybe they can do it again!

Best,


Brad





-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2006 6:05 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion Comnet Radios have arrived
-regardinginterference - Part 1

Charles,

WOW! Great Post! That covers about everything.

It increases the understanding of the complexity, but it doesn't answer the 
ultimate question, "What to use".

What we really want is an efficient OFDM system, with a strong TDD w/ARQ 
MAC, RFThreshold, Good Noise Filtering, Packet aggregating/compressing, 
adeqaute CPU processing, Quality narrow beam diversity antennas, all 
pre-packaged in a system/box under $300.  But that product does not exist 
today.

So why doesn't a manufacturer just make it, so we can stop debating what is 
best, and just deploy radios!

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Charles Wu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2006 4:47 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Alvarion Comnet Radios have arrived - 
regardinginterference - Part 1


I go to see Mickey Mouse for a few days and look where this thread has
gone...wow

So, my 2 cents...

One of the largest concerns in the license-exempt world is the question of a
system's interference robustness.  However, before we can get into further
detail on the pros and cons of Alvarion VL vs Canopy, CSMA/CA vs GPS, etc --
it is necessary to realize that interference as a term is extremely broad
and vague, and can mean just about anything to anyone.  Heck, all radios in
the market have some sort of "interference robustness / avoidance
capability" -- the trick to understanding a system's capabilities is knowing
what TYPE of interference the system can actually handle.  Read on...I'll
talk more about each particular platform when I get some time to write Part
2 =)



WHAT IS INTERERENCE?

In the wireless world, interference, by definition, is a situation where
unwanted radio signals operate in the same frequency channels or bands -
i.e. they mutually "interfere," disrupt or add to the overall noise level in
the intended transmission.

Interference can be divided into two forms, based on whether it comes from
your own network(s) or from an outside source.  If the interfering RF
signals emanate from a network under your control, whether it is on the same
tower or several miles away, it is termed "self-interference."  If the
opposing signals come from a network, device or other source that is not
under your control, it is termed "outside interference."  Thus, the
definition of what type of interference is being combated is not based on
technology, but ownership.

In licensed bands, where spectrum is relatively scarce (due to high costs)
self-interference alone must be taken into account; however given a more or
less known operating environment (the radio spectrum will only have signals
transmitting that are under control by a single entity) proper product
design and network deployment can reduce these interferes to a level where
they do not impact network performance.

Self-interference is not a phenomenon that is confined to licensed band
operations; license-exempt bands must address the same issues.  The
techniques and design elements of a given product that serve to reduce and
tame self-interference in licensed band operations can be applied directly
to license-exempt systems.

THE LICENSE-EXEMPT CHALLENGE OF INTERFERENCE

In the license-exempt bands, not only must self-interference be accounted
for, but, given the nature of the regulations governing these bands,
external interference must be designed for as well.  This can be extremely
challenging, as there is no way of knowing in advance where these outside
signals may be or will be sourced from, or even how strong the interfering
transmissions will be relative to the desired transmission.  This aspect of
the license-exempt bands represents the possible "downside" of
license-exempt network operation.

Yet as potentially damaging and unpredictable as external interference can
be in license-exempt networks, a properly designed and implemented broadband
wireless system can make a significant difference in the performance of a
network under siege from unwanted external radio transmissions.

DEALING WITH COCHANNEL INTERFERENCE: PHY LAYER

1. Modulation & the C/I Ratio

At the

RE: [WISPA] Alvarion Comnet Radios have arrived

[Brad Belton]

Hello Rich,

Exactly my point and exactly why users operating in the unlicensed spectrum
need as many tools available at their disposal as possible.  My criticism
and suggestions have been to illuminate just those features as extremely
valuable to guys like me that sell CIR not MIR.  

Frankly the DP & DB features should be extremely valuable to any unlicensed
operator regardless of the business plan.  How can it be that greater
flexibility as I have described isn't going to better a product?

Just like many believe ATPC should be mandatory on all future unlicensed
products I believe DP & DB should be mandatory!  Not going to happen, but
the products that do offer these features will be superior in their
abilities to avoid and/or work around interference.

Best,


Brad




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Rich Comroe
Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 10:56 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion Comnet Radios have arrived

There's no unlicensed product which guarantees business class services in
interference.  To suggest product A does and product B doesn't is nonsense.
I think you've done a good job of describing why you think some products do
a better job of than others.  That's fair.  Sharing experiences where one
product did better than another is fair.  I love reading your posts and
others comparing the attributes which impact on this.  It's educational and
I get insights into equipment that I haven't personally had direct
experience.  But the constant bashing that some product will guarantee
business class services in interference and another won't is tiresome, and
just turns people off from the good content that people appreciate.

Rich
  - Original Message - 
  From: Brad Belton 
  To: 'WISPA General List' 
  Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2006 7:26 PM
  Subject: RE: [WISPA] Alvarion Comnet Radios have arrived


  Certainly you can do committed rate business class services with
unlicensed
  products.  WMUX, Terabridge, Trango just to name a few.  Are they
  interchangeable in application?  Nope, they require you use the right
  product for the job at hand.  What may work well on one project may not on
  the next.

  Interference typically isn't temporary...at least not around these parts!
  No, you need to engineer the link with enough forethought and available
  tools on hand to give yourself options in the event a link does begin to
  incur interference.

  In our experience the VL was erratic in its ability to consistently
produce
  the same end result day in and day out.  Alvarion, me and the third party
  client all knew before hand the site was very RF unfriendly.  I visited
the
  site personally to run surveys before any gear was deployed.  We spent the
  better part of a month with Alvarion trying to get the VL to produce a
  consistent level of throughput at any level without success.  Just as I
  began to believe we had it licked we would get another call from the
client.
  The really frustrating part of all this is the throughput would vary
  depending on just how busy the other gear in the area was.  The busiest
  times of day is when we realized the link really suffered.

  I felt obligated to share our VL results here because Marlon indicated he
  was looking for a business class product.  VL is not that...at least not
in
  our book.

  Best,


  Brad



  -Original Message-
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
  Behalf Of Rich Comroe
  Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2006 5:35 PM
  To: WISPA General List
  Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion Comnet Radios have arrived

  >Products that are best effort [snip product name]
  >end up making guys like us look bad.

  I'm confused how can anyone do better than "best effort" in unlicensed
  spectrum, regardless of manufacturer?

  >There is nothing worse than installing one day at 6Mbps and the next day
  >getting a call saying they are getting something less than that.

  If you have no allowance for even temporary interference, what short of a
  licensed channel can accomplish that?

  Rich
- Original Message - 
From: Brad Belton 
To: 'WISPA General List' 
Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2006 5:17 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Alvarion Comnet Radios have arrived


If we are in an environment where ANY particular solution will not
produce
the results we are after then we look at other products.  We will not
tie
our hands to one brand.  No reason to.

Our business model is different than the next and so on and so on.  Yes,
  CIR
is what we sell not MIR.  That may be a good thing for us or it may turn
  out
to be a bad thing for us, but that is the level of service we strive to
deliver.  

Products that are best effort like VL end up making guys like us look
bad.
There is nothing worse than in

RE: [WISPA] Alvarion Comnet Radios have arrived

[Brad Belton]

My statement below is simply a fact regarding committed rate business class
service.  If Alvarion Support could have made it work then the gear would
still be up and the client would still be using it.

How many times have I said Alvarion makes a quality product?  How many times
have I said I'd love to be able to use Alvarion?  How many times have I said
this isn't about one brand vs. another, but rather results?

John, I get the feeling you just aren't reading through the posts
completely.  Clearly I do not "hate VL" instead I'd love to see the product
IMPROVED!  What is so wrong with that?

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 12:09 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion Comnet Radios have arrived


>The Alvarion VL is great for bursty, best effort requirements where 90% of
>the user applications can wait for that clear air within the noise floor,
>but not for committed rate business class service.
>
>Best,
>
>
>Brad
>
>  
>
Brad, I see your almost continuous negative posts about VL and cannot 
help but wonder why you continue to send these posts over and over and 
over to this list. I do not need to be told every day that VL is bad in 
the "world according to Brad Belton". We have all heard you say it 100 
times I think. (Maybe several time that if we look at your posts to 
other lists about the same issues) Please change the record. There are 
many of us who do not agree with you that find your non-stop nitpicking 
posts to be a nuisance to this list.

We get ityou hate VL. You stated your piece and we all read about 
it, OVER and OVER. Alvarion is open to criticism just as any other 
platform and we show no favoritism but enough is enough. Please move on 
to another topic.
Respectfully,
Scriv



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Alvarion Comnet Radios have arrived

[Brad Belton]

Correct.  Any medium used to deliver broadband can be broken.  However,
frankly due to the fewer points of failure we typically see less downtime on
unlicensed wireless links than we do conventional LEC T1 circuits.  

Like many things it all comes down to the geographic area.  Would you expect
a hardline T1 or a wireless T1 to deliver better uptime in or near a
construction site?

Most SLA's I've read (and that we offer if required to do so) are largely
without teeth.  Sure if a client is down an entire day or days on end most
SLA's require some form of credit, but if a client was down for that long
wouldn't you offer the credit in some cases anyway?

Clients that have little threshold for pain due to downtime will quickly
realize they need redundancy.  I love the prospects that claim they have a
zero threshold for pain regarding downtime.  Oh ok, well then you'll need to
move all your stuff into a Co-Lo facility with multiple redundant power,
HVAC, upstreams etc, etc.  That typically is received with silence and they
come back down to Earth.

Bottom line is Internet is only going to become more important in everyday
life.  Five years ago loosing Internet access for a day wasn't the end of
the world...today it can be, but those people know it and plan for it by
having backups in place.

Best,

Brad






-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181
Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2006 6:42 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion Comnet Radios have arrived


- Original Message - 
From: "Rich Comroe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2006 3:34 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion Comnet Radios have arrived


>Products that are best effort [snip product name]
>end up making guys like us look bad.

I'm confused how can anyone do better than "best effort" in unlicensed 
spectrum, regardless of manufacturer?

mks:  I agree with you here Rich.  I've always thought it silly to try to 
offer an SLA when using unlicensed gear.  People do it all of the time 
though.  Heck, it's silly with wires too, they get cut all of the time eh? 
grin.

mks:  Having said that, there are technologies that are allowed under the 
part-15 rules that are more or less robust than others.  Full duplex radios 
that transmit on one channel and receive on another are really really hard 
to take offline.  WiFi radios that must first have relatively clear air to 
transmit are also easy to take offline.

mks:  The current race out there, to which we're watching and arguing about 
with great gusto is to see who's technology is going to be the best long 
term.  Right now, were all arguing about which technology is best.  The 
truth of the matter is that they are all better than the other in the right 
conditions.  What I did here might not work for you and what you do might 
not work for the next guy.  That's part of why us consultants that are also 
wisps are so valuable, we get to see more real world stuff than most.

mks:  One thing I do know.  I'll keep watching threads like this.  I'll keep

trying new toys.  I'll keep making MY service better for my customers.  I'll

use the tools that work best today, for me.

>There is nothing worse than installing one day at 6Mbps and the next day
>getting a call saying they are getting something less than that.

If you have no allowance for even temporary interference, what short of a 
licensed channel can accomplish that?

mks:  Too true!  I just got a call from a gal that was upset that she was 
only uploading at 79k.  Come to find out she was using FTP not a web based 
mechanism.  Her speakeasy.net test per her at 750 down 1400 up.  Sure I'd 
like to see it go even faster, but my God, what does she want for $40 per 
month?

marlon


Rich
  - Original Message - 

<> 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Alvarion Comnet Radios have arrived

[Brad Belton]

Certainly you can do committed rate business class services with unlicensed
products.  WMUX, Terabridge, Trango just to name a few.  Are they
interchangeable in application?  Nope, they require you use the right
product for the job at hand.  What may work well on one project may not on
the next.

Interference typically isn't temporary...at least not around these parts!
No, you need to engineer the link with enough forethought and available
tools on hand to give yourself options in the event a link does begin to
incur interference.

In our experience the VL was erratic in its ability to consistently produce
the same end result day in and day out.  Alvarion, me and the third party
client all knew before hand the site was very RF unfriendly.  I visited the
site personally to run surveys before any gear was deployed.  We spent the
better part of a month with Alvarion trying to get the VL to produce a
consistent level of throughput at any level without success.  Just as I
began to believe we had it licked we would get another call from the client.
The really frustrating part of all this is the throughput would vary
depending on just how busy the other gear in the area was.  The busiest
times of day is when we realized the link really suffered.

I felt obligated to share our VL results here because Marlon indicated he
was looking for a business class product.  VL is not that...at least not in
our book.

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Rich Comroe
Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2006 5:35 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion Comnet Radios have arrived

>Products that are best effort [snip product name]
>end up making guys like us look bad.

I'm confused how can anyone do better than "best effort" in unlicensed
spectrum, regardless of manufacturer?

>There is nothing worse than installing one day at 6Mbps and the next day
>getting a call saying they are getting something less than that.

If you have no allowance for even temporary interference, what short of a
licensed channel can accomplish that?

Rich
  - Original Message - 
  From: Brad Belton 
  To: 'WISPA General List' 
  Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2006 5:17 PM
  Subject: RE: [WISPA] Alvarion Comnet Radios have arrived


  If we are in an environment where ANY particular solution will not produce
  the results we are after then we look at other products.  We will not tie
  our hands to one brand.  No reason to.

  Our business model is different than the next and so on and so on.  Yes,
CIR
  is what we sell not MIR.  That may be a good thing for us or it may turn
out
  to be a bad thing for us, but that is the level of service we strive to
  deliver.  

  Products that are best effort like VL end up making guys like us look bad.
  There is nothing worse than installing one day at 6Mbps and the next day
  getting a call saying they are getting something less than that.

  Expectations and end results are everything to us.  We meet expectations
or
  we'd rather not do it, part ways amiability and maintain our reputation.
  It's a small town!  

  Best,


  Brad



  -Original Message-
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
  Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
  Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2006 2:57 PM
  To: WISPA General List
  Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion Comnet Radios have arrived

  >The Alvarion VL is great for bursty, best effort requirements where 90%
of
  >the user applications can wait for that clear air within the noise floor,
  >but not for committed rate business class service.

  Agreed.  But what about when you are in an environment that TDD won't work

  well? Sometimes the answer is to modify your offering to what the beset 
  thing is that can be delivered.
  CIR service may need to be changed to MIR. In what cases is CIR really 
  needed? And what areas of your business or network also prevent the CIR
Full

  QOS guarantee from being realized?

  Tom DeReggi
  RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
  IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


  - Original Message - 
  From: "Brad Belton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  To: "'WISPA General List'" 
  Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2006 1:03 PM
  Subject: RE: [WISPA] Alvarion Comnet Radios have arrived


  My thoughts exactly.

  If the VL had a mechanism to "tune out" noise and a few other tools (dual
  pol - dual band) that would enable the user avoid noise then it is
possible
  there simply would not be a better PtMP LE product available today.
Without
  those critical elements the VL is just not able to perform consistently in
  RF hostile environments.

  The Alvarion VL is great for bursty, best effort requirements where 90% of
  the user applications can wait for that clear air within the noise floor,
  but not for committed rate business class service.

  Best,


  Brad





  -Origi