Re: [WISPA] The Bottom Line
Sorry I wasn't clearer on my location; didn't occur to me in my moment of exasperation ;-) My coverage area centers on Pearce, AZ. I can see the flashing tower lights in Willcox. Douglas is 60 miles south, and Sierra Vista is on the other side of the Dragoon mountain range. Dragoon (the town) is just around the northern edge of the Dragoon Mtns, and is not reachable by a direct shot from my NOC, but might be with 1 hop. Blake Covarrubias wrote: > The mailing address on the site says Pearce, AZ. He says he's in the heart of > the Sulphur Valley. I'm not too familiar with that side of AZ, but a search > for "Sulphur Valley, AZ" on GMaps turns up quite a few businesses located all > over that region. I didn't want to assume he was only in Pearce. > > We've got coverage all around Yuma and throughout California's Imperial > Valley, and pick up transit at several points within our coverage area. > > -- > Blake Covarrubias > > On Jun 14, 2010, at 6:43 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: > >> I went to his website to see where he was. ;-) >> >> - >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions >> http://www.ics-il.com >> >> >> >> On 6/14/2010 7:41 PM, Blake Covarrubias wrote: >>> Where in AZ are you? I just noticed you said you're 25-30 miles from, and >>> not in, Willcox. >>> >>> I have a great working relationship with a provider who has service in >>> Sierra Vista. Are you close to that? >>> >>> -- >>> Blake Covarrubias >>> >>> On Jun 14, 2010, at 17:00, Charles Wu wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Lol Blake...beat me to the punch =) >>>> >>>> -Charles >>>> >>>> -Original Message- >>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On >>>> Behalf Of Blake Covarrubias >>>> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 6:31 PM >>>> To: WISPA General List >>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Bottom Line >>>> >>>> Jason, >>>> >>>> Have you SparkPlug.net to see they have service in your area? >>>> >>>> We operate in Yuma, AZ (and surrounding areas). If I recall correctly >>>> SparkPlug approached us a while back trying to sell us very cheap 100mbps >>>> transit. If they have connectivity in your area they may be able to offer >>>> similar pricing. >>>> >>>> We own most of our tower sites throughout our service area. If you'd like >>>> to contact me off-list I could put you in touch with someone at my company >>>> would be able to help you find or build towers in your area. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Blake Covarrubias >>>> >>>> On Jun 14, 2010, at 3:33 PM, Jeremie Chism wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Antennasearch.com might help. >>>>> >>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>> >>>>> On Jun 14, 2010, at 5:31 PM, Jerry Richardson >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Do an FCC search for towers between yourself and Tuscon and/or >>>>>> Willcox. you may be able to put together a path across existing >>>>>> towers. >>>>>> >>>>>> You may even find a tower that has bandwidth that you can buy at a >>>>>> better rate than 533.00/Meg. >>>>>> >>>>>> Jerry >>>>>> >>>>>> -Original Message- >>>>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] >>>>>> On Behalf Of Jason Wallace >>>>>> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 3:27 PM >>>>>> To: WISPA General List >>>>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Bottom Line >>>>>> >>>>>> The nearest town of any size is Willcox Arizona, 25 to 30 miles away. >>>>>> T1's there are $400 ish per month, which is an improvement. Because >>>>>> of >>>>>> regulations and contractors, etc, towers in Arizona are a huge >>>>>> expense; >>>>>> 30k or so minimum. No do-it-yourselfing. I am looking at this >>>>>> option, >>>>>> but it is a lot of effort for a little improvement. >>>>>> >>>>>> Tucson is the nearest major city. It is 80 miles and 2 mountain >>>>>> ranges >>>>>> away.
Re: [WISPA] The Bottom Line
The nearest town of any size is Willcox Arizona, 25 to 30 miles away. T1's there are $400 ish per month, which is an improvement. Because of regulations and contractors, etc, towers in Arizona are a huge expense; 30k or so minimum. No do-it-yourselfing. I am looking at this option, but it is a lot of effort for a little improvement. Tucson is the nearest major city. It is 80 miles and 2 mountain ranges away. David E. Smith wrote: > On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 17:09, Jason Wallace wrote: >> My biggest obstacle (and expense) is bandwidth. I am in the high desert >> of SE Arizona, and there are $800 T1's. That's all I've found. > > What's the nearest major city? Is bandwidth substantially cheaper > there? You may want to consider investing in a big backhaul link from > there, to you. Yeah, the one-time costs of putting up a tower or > three, especially if you need to invest in licensed links, can be > pretty harsh, but if you're in it for the long haul it may be > worthwhile. > > David Smith > MVN.net > > > > 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] The Bottom Line
Gang, I've been working away, keeping my head down and nose to the grindstone for a while. Last week, I finally looked up and calculated what my little WISP is making after 5 years of working on it and working another job (sometimes 2 jobs, one of which is being a youth pastor) for 60 to 80 hours per week. For the time I put into the WISP, I make somewhere between 5 and 6 dollars per hour. My biggest obstacle (and expense) is bandwidth. I am in the high desert of SE Arizona, and there are $800 T1's. That's all I've found. Is there any one out there that knows something I don't about bandwidth possibilities? Currently, the margin is just too thin. Jason 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] 2.4 Airgrids?
Does anyone on the north American continent have Ubiquiti AirGrids (20dbi 2.4ghz) in stock? 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] QOS tc filter examples
Rick, I had considered that. Then I read Butch's blog about when he developed it, and there were a few things that I think would prevent it from working correctly in my network: 1. His script seems to be tailored for RouterOS; he mentions that the script uses the PCQ qdisc (which is RouterOS only) and my router is linux based. 2. It sounds like it was built to control the flows in a macroscopic network-wide way, I will need the filters to be applied to every IP individually. I could start with his script, but I'd have to do a lot of rewriting, I think. The router I have is just loafing and I really don't want another box to do this if I don't have to. Jason RickG wrote: Contact Butch Evans, pay small amount for his script, problem solved! -RickG On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 1:28 PM, Jason Wallace wrote: I am finding that I need to improve the QOS of my network (I picked up a few customers with lots of teens, etc). Right now I use tc rules to limit everyone to the contracted speeds, but would like to use tc filter rules to give KNOWN GOOD traffic a good priority and UNKNOWN traffic a lesser priority. This will probably be done for each individual ip address (this is how it's set up right now). Does anyone know where I can find some examples of tc filters that will "catch" good traffic like html, dns, interactive, VOIP, maybe video/flash/streaming? Also, can anyone direct me to a info on using tc/iptables to limit the number of connections per ip address? Jason 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/
[WISPA] QOS tc filter examples
I am finding that I need to improve the QOS of my network (I picked up a few customers with lots of teens, etc). Right now I use tc rules to limit everyone to the contracted speeds, but would like to use tc filter rules to give KNOWN GOOD traffic a good priority and UNKNOWN traffic a lesser priority. This will probably be done for each individual ip address (this is how it's set up right now). Does anyone know where I can find some examples of tc filters that will "catch" good traffic like html, dns, interactive, VOIP, maybe video/flash/streaming? Also, can anyone direct me to a info on using tc/iptables to limit the number of connections per ip address? Jason 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] Court: FCC has no power to regulate Net neutrality
I did not see this come across the list yet. http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20001825-38.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20 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] Bit Cap Thresholds, etc
I have a few questions for those of you who sell bandwidth by the byte: 1. What is the threshold you use, ie, 3Gb in 30 days, or do you have different packages? 2. Is this total bytes in & out or just in? 3. What do you charge for overages? 4. Have you considered just throttling back customers like the satellite guys do? Jason 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] NPR Story on FCC Broadband Plan and Internet AccessinTrinity County California
Mostly, it broke the uploader. No one could upload pictures. Also,things would just time-out or facebook would just not log in. I was doing transparent interception and redirecting with iptables. The network is NAT'ed and squid was on the NAT machine. I worked hard to make it work, even corresponding with the developers, but finally gave up. Jason W Josh Luthman wrote: How did it break Facebook? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” --- Winston Churchill On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 2:00 PM, Jason Wallace wrote: I ran a squid cache (3.1.X) and saw about a 30% bandwidth savings. But it broke facebook... No more squid. Jason W RickG wrote: Then you get the calls saying "I cant get to this website" or "the website doesnt come up right", etc.etc. On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 11:09 AM, Jeromie Reeves wrote: A caching proxy server would help that a lot. I am in the middle of moving things around but when it was active I was seeing a 30% drop in traffic that was not P2P. On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 10:03 AM, MDK wrote: I'm a provider for a small rural school, where the computer lab has about 25 machines in it. I provide them 5 meg, and have been thinking about turning it up a little, because during certain times in their computer classes, they seriously swamp that 5 megs, and they don't do p2p or download ISO's or anything else. It's just that 25 people clicking on the same links at the same moment, especially if it's some site with a small video clip or something, easily can use all 5 meg and even 10 meg and still have it feel slow. Not only that, to save money, the school IT guy moved the school's website to a server located at the school. Satellite... Is not adequate for school use, as far as I'm concerned. ++ Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy 541-969-8200 509-386-4589 ++ Yes Hughes Satelite performs very poorly. But I'd also argue, how fast does 20 computers for elementary school kids really need to be? 5. What would it cost to deploy a 100 mile microwave link between Corning and Weaverville with a minimum of 50Mbps of bandwidth but preferably 100Mbps I'm sure they could do it for much less than the $50k. 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/ 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] NPR Story on FCC Broadband Plan and Internet AccessinTrinity County California
I ran a squid cache (3.1.X) and saw about a 30% bandwidth savings. But it broke facebook... No more squid. Jason W RickG wrote: Then you get the calls saying "I cant get to this website" or "the website doesnt come up right", etc.etc. On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 11:09 AM, Jeromie Reeves wrote: A caching proxy server would help that a lot. I am in the middle of moving things around but when it was active I was seeing a 30% drop in traffic that was not P2P. On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 10:03 AM, MDK wrote: I'm a provider for a small rural school, where the computer lab has about 25 machines in it. I provide them 5 meg, and have been thinking about turning it up a little, because during certain times in their computer classes, they seriously swamp that 5 megs, and they don't do p2p or download ISO's or anything else. It's just that 25 people clicking on the same links at the same moment, especially if it's some site with a small video clip or something, easily can use all 5 meg and even 10 meg and still have it feel slow. Not only that, to save money, the school IT guy moved the school's website to a server located at the school. Satellite... Is not adequate for school use, as far as I'm concerned. ++ Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy 541-969-8200 509-386-4589 ++ Yes Hughes Satelite performs very poorly. But I'd also argue, how fast does 20 computers for elementary school kids really need to be? 5. What would it cost to deploy a 100 mile microwave link between Corning and Weaverville with a minimum of 50Mbps of bandwidth but preferably 100Mbps I'm sure they could do it for much less than the $50k. 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/ 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] Data Site Consortium Threats?
Does anyone know anything about a company named Data Site Consortium? Someone named Debra Dupée is calling and asking for information about my company that has to do with the "Federal Broadband Mapping Program" She said she got my information from FCC Form 477! And is working with all ISPs in Arizona. 1. Doesn't this mean that the FCC broke it's word about the non-disclosure part of 477, since Data Site Consortium is a privately owned company? 2. Do I have to reply to their demands? Worst of all, I got a message on my cell yesterday that said (and I quote): "We will escalate this up to the State Level and then to the Federal level if we don't hear from you." The email addresses she provides aren't even branded: azbroadb...@gmail.com ddu...@cox.net Is she legit? Anyone? Shouldn't they have to provide proof of who they are or a warrant or something before I have to provide info? Jason 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] T1 pci card
The pc is Linux and acts as a nat and dns/dhcp server. It connects to the 2610 with a crossover cable. Ultimately, I want to put everything in an outdoor enclosure and hang it on a pole Is this terribly harder to do than set up a 2610? Jason RickG wrote: What are you running on the PC that you want to add the card to? I like integration equipment as well but you're probably better of letting the Cisco do its job and the PC do its job. -RickG On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Jason Wallace wrote: Anyone know where (if?) I can get a PCI card to connect to a T1 for less than the $400 or so I have found on my own? I'd like to "Integrate" some of my equipment and eliminate a cisco 2610 that's really doing nothing but converting my T1 to an ethernet port. It's no worth $400 to do this however... Jason 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/
[WISPA] T1 pci card
Anyone know where (if?) I can get a PCI card to connect to a T1 for less than the $400 or so I have found on my own? I'd like to "Integrate" some of my equipment and eliminate a cisco 2610 that's really doing nothing but converting my T1 to an ethernet port. It's no worth $400 to do this however... Jason 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] powering finicky mikrotiks on 24v solar
These guys have dc to dc converters. IIRC, some are 90%+ efficient. I have used their stuff in my solar deployment. http://www.solarconverters.com You can buy their stuff at several online solar stores. Jason Randy Cosby wrote: What do you use to convert? The tycon power item Jayson pointed to is only 75% efficient, and only can handle up to 1 amp of load (a little too small for me). http://www.tyconpower.com/products/POE_Inserters.htm Any other solutions? Randy Dennis Burgess wrote: Should hook directly to the batteries, and convert dc to dc at 20v. --- Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer WISPA Board Member - wispa.org Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services WISPA Vendor Member Office: 314-735-0270 Website: http://www.linktechs.net LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training Author of "Learn RouterOS" -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Randy Cosby Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 9:24 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] powering finicky mikrotiks on 24v solar Is anyone powering Mikrotiks on Solar? What do you use to keep your solar "boost" voltage from forcing a shutdown on the Mikrotik? I've used some 24 regulators, but they seem inefficient, and have low voltage disconnects that are sometimes too sensitive - ie: if my battery goes down to 22v, it will shut down completely (yes I know the batteries should never go that low, but I don't live in a perfect world). 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] Mikrotik Redirect
Could someone sue for this?
In a pizza shop in a town I used to live by, there "was a wall of
shame" where they posted all
bounced checks for everyone to see with a little sign at the top that
if your check bounced it
would be posted there until you paid up. I would never do it, but it
was a great incentive!
Jason
Jonathan Schmidt wrote:
Yes, Mike, it isn't the same as sending a letter...even if the color of
the envelope is indicative of some situation. Nevertheless, the legal
rules are very strict...nobody but the addressee can open it.
When you put something on every screen on every PC using a subscriber's
account and reveal any financial matter, especially an embarrassing one, a
"hot head" may, when enraged, do all sorts of things...especially if the
mistake isn't theirs (which is a small but possible event).
If you can get the account holder to sign into a Web site with their
assigned USERNAME and PASSWORD...that's OK and you can exchange
confidential information. If you can get them to call, that's OK ("...can
I have your name and last 4 digits of your SS#?).
Creating a "gated garden" which allows an immediate click-to-restore but
states that a situation exists that requires the account holder to call a
phone number is OK since it doesn't slander the account holder (maybe
mistakenly), can verify the account holder, and, if the message screen is
only on port 80 and doesn't stop the VoIP phone from accessing 911, etc.,
there is no jeopardy. And, that screen can come more and more
frequently...maybe every 5 minutes until they call.
...just a further thought.
. . . j o n a t h a n
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 11:27 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik Redirect
You're correct with the liability thing... it sucks that people sue over
such petty things.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
--
From: "Jonathan Schmidt"
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 6:38 PM
To: "'WISPA General List'"
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik Redirect
There is some potential liability in this.
You don't know if friends are visiting and using the computer...or, the
subscriber has an Wi-Fi w/o WAP/WEP and others are (potentially
accidentally) using it. In any case, you could be slandering the
subscriber by calling them deadbeats to other people.
It seems more polite to hit them over and over or persistantly with a
demand that they contact a phone number to address a problem with their
subscription. It also may stop a law suit...a typical response from a
real deadbeat.
Cutting off the service is an option but it may enrage the person to
"never do business with that company again." What you need to do is
talk
with them without slandering them.
...just a thought...
. . . J o n a t h a n
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of sa...@michianawireless.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 6:03 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik Redirect
Well. We kinda do this now. When a customer get to far out. We manually
add a rule to the router at the tower site he is connected to that
redirects all his port 80 traffic to a webpage that says basically, "You
didn't pay you bill for a long time and you need to contact us and make
a
payment to before your web surfing will be available again." Email still
works, etc...
We will still do that. But what I am trying to accomplish is to have my
billing system log into the client as soon as is hits 31+ in the billing
system and set a rule on the router board that will now occasionally
interrupt the clients web browsing by redirecting them to a page letting
them know they are now 31+ past due and offer them the chance to pay
now.
If they chose to not pay now, they can just continue with what they were
doing. This way they are always in the "know" that they are behind and
are
presented with a way to cure that immediately. Again since the client is
not way behind I just want the surfing to be redirect occasionally.
Next step would be after this is gone on and they hit 40 days the next
script would be ran where it redirects all there web traffic
indefinitely
to the pay your bill page until paid.
I hope that explains it better.
Thanks,
John
- Original Message -
From: "Chuck Profito"
To: "WISPA General List"
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 11:45:59 AM GMT -05:00 Columbia
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik Redirect
Why not just a redirect of all port 80 traffic on that ip at 60 days, to
the 'Gracious Offer' page, "If you call in the next seven days there
will
be no reup fees, please see your e-mail!", Or maybe just redirect them
Re: [WISPA] Throttle
What we've done to date is throttle at the CPE; we have always chosen cpe's with this capability. It was super important because we started in a very rural area with a satellite as our upstream...painful because of FAP's and such. We've moved on. The above method keeps the congestion lower over the wireless links, but it isn't perfect. Ideally, throttling is done at the data source only. If you throttle downloads at the CPE, when the customer requests data, ethernet dictates that the flow starts fast and then backs off as packets are dropped, which is exactly what the cpe does to throttle the flow. This wastes your network and upstream bandwidth. So, throttle downloads at your NOC as soon as possible in your network's flow. Throttle uploads at the CPE. This is what I am about to do on my network. I have everything in place; just got to throw the (linux based) switch. The linux box has big queues and won't waste as much of my upstream link this way. Also, if you cache or have a local email server, as we do, that stuff can go out to customers at a much higher rate. Their perceived speed's better when the google logo loads instantly ;-) My 2 cents, Jason RickG wrote: I do the same but wonder if there is a better way? Doesnt this load unwanted traffic on the backhauls? -RickG On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 1:36 PM, Blair Davis wrote: I use MikroTik Queue's for my D/L limiting. My border router is big enough to handle quite a few clients... os10ru...@gmail.com wrote: I understood that download limiting can only be properly done by queuing and delaying the user's uplink requests/acks since managing the actual download traffic would involve dropping packets or queuing a large amount of data. This is according to the documentation of the Linux based firewalls I've tried which do QoS and bandwidth limiting. How are you accomplishing D/L limiting at the border router? Greg On Aug 4, 2009, at 4:57 AM, Blair Davis wrote: For 802.11 systems, I prefer to split it. I limit D/L, from internet to client, at the border router. This allows the limiting to be done before the traffic enters my wireless network, reducing congestion and load on my backhauls I limit U/L, from client to internet, at the cpe. This helps keep one cpe from monopolizing the 802.11 AP. In general, I try to limit traffic where it enters my network. YMMV sa...@michianawireless.com wrote: Question: Which is better? Throttle the cpe at the cpe or at the router? Currently we have a router setup at each tower site and do bandwidth limiting on it with simple queues and the users ip. But we want to setup our billing system so the office help can change packages and we just have it login to the ip in billing and automatically run a script to set the bandwidth throttle. But is the a disadvantage to limiting at the cpe vs. the tower? Thanks, John Buwa Michiana 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/ 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/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org
Re: [WISPA] Canopy Distance
Any chance it could do 30 to 40 miles from ap to cpe with that setup? Jason Gino Villarini wrote: Charles Actually now it's FCC certified with the low power setting Sent from my Motorola Startac... On Jul 30, 2009, at 7:12 PM, "Charles Wu" wrote: It's generally illegal to use a dish on a 5.2 SM From a *theoretical* perspective, 5.2 will propagate just as good as 5.8 -Charles -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jason Wallace Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 5:48 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Canopy Distance Sorry, I thought I'd read in their literature that the 5200sm could operate at 5.8... The 5200sm is what I am interested in. Does anyone know what the maximum useful distance is with the dish mounted 5200sm like: http://www.ojbox.com/ebay/new/5200sm-dish/5200sm-dish.htm Jason Charles Wu wrote: Hi, A 5200 SM operates in 5.2, not 5.8 The difference between 5.2 and 5.8 is FCC rules -Charles -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless- boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jason Wallace Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 11:01 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Canopy Distance Speaking of 5.8 distance... Does anyone know what the real world maximum distance the canopy 5200sm can do? Assuming a quiet noise floor, best ap setup, etc. Jason --- --- --- --- 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/ --- --- --- --- 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] Canopy Distance
Sorry, I thought I'd read in their literature that the 5200sm could operate at 5.8... The 5200sm is what I am interested in. Does anyone know what the maximum useful distance is with the dish mounted 5200sm like: http://www.ojbox.com/ebay/new/5200sm-dish/5200sm-dish.htm Jason Charles Wu wrote: > Hi, > > A 5200 SM operates in 5.2, not 5.8 > > The difference between 5.2 and 5.8 is FCC rules > > -Charles > > -Original Message- > From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On > Behalf Of Jason Wallace > Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 11:01 AM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: [WISPA] Canopy Distance > > Speaking of 5.8 distance... > > Does anyone know what the real world maximum distance the canopy 5200sm > can do? Assuming a quiet noise floor, best ap setup, etc. > > Jason > > > > 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/
[WISPA] Canopy Distance
Speaking of 5.8 distance... Does anyone know what the real world maximum distance the canopy 5200sm can do? Assuming a quiet noise floor, best ap setup, etc. Jason 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] 802.11 CPE's
Everyone, Any recommendations on an FCC CERTIFIED 802.11 cpe that has a higher gain than Deliberant''s 15dbi? I really liked Deliberant's 19 dbi's but they are gone... Jason Integrity Internet 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] Sector separation/isolation
You could try ferrite beads on all the cables involved at each ap. Especially on each end of the coax, right next to the connectors. Coax is made for "unbalanced" transmission; some antennas are "balanced". Connecting unbalanced cables to balanced antennas will cause the outer jacket of the coax to radiate. Ask any HAM. Jason Wallace Michael Baird wrote: Cable length to AP 1 foot, I'm not sure what type of cable is installed, presumably LMR-400. I will check on this as well. The Water tower we are using for testing is located on the outskirts of the town. The town itself has about 4 businesses, no stoplights, looks like about 10 AP's in the whole town, population about 800 folks. The land is as flat as a pancake, no hills or great obstructions, minimal treelines. Regards Michael Baird Whats the lenghs of the cables? They could be acting as antennas themselves. Kurt Fankhauser WAVELINC P.O. Box 126 Bucyrus, OH 44820 419-562-6405 www.wavelinc.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of os10ru...@gmail.com Sent: Sunday, May 03, 2009 8:52 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Sector separation/isolation What kind of cable are you using between the APs and the antennas? On May 3, 2009, at 8:27 AM, Michael Baird wrote: Yes, I tried the 10mhz/5mhz channel widths, per recommendation, the AP's still saw each other at similar signal strengths (w/antenna). I will see if I can check the rest of the stuff, there is no vertical separation either as another recommended, the antennas themselves are at least 20 foot apart. They are on 3 sides of a water tower, with the water tower in between. I didn't install the equipment and haven't been up on the tower, so I can't say firsthand how it has been installed. Can you give me a rundown of how it should be installed, so I can know what to look for. Defective antenna is an idea though, they are Tranzeo 120's, the sectorization barely works at distance. I can see all 3 AP's at each sector 7 miles away, can peer with two of them, associate with all 3, I think this is wrong. I think I should only see one, unless I'm at the overlap point. Regards Michael Baird The problem of the APs seeing each other could be due to unusually high signal leakage (defective antenna, coax, enclosure etc resulting in poor shielding/signal leakage). If that's the case the equipment should be performing better than it is (less mutual interference) and for some reason it's not. You'd have to investigate and/or swap out gear to find the problem. Or is it that the equipment and install are all good and this is normal due to the proximity? If it's proximity then physical separation and/or frequency separation is the only thing that will help, hence the suggestion of using narrower channels and moving the antennas from previous posts. Did you try going to 10 MHz channels? Can you disconnect the antenna and put dummy loads on the ends of the coax and see how strong the APs can see each other? If the problem goes away then it's either a) defective antennas with too much leakage or side/rear lobes) or b) antenna proximity. Greg On May 3, 2009, at 7:13 AM, Michael Baird wrote: I think I didn't explain my problem clearly. 10mhz/5mhz channel sep makes no difference on how each AP see's each other on a site survey on the tower. I want to isolate the sectors from each other in a better way, they are too hot to each other and too much overlap. I was looking for good ways to do it, I have no noise problems to clients, and my channels on the 3 AP's are 1/6/11, none overlapping, and all with -100 noise floor's. Regards Michael Baird Right now channel 1 uses channel 1, 2 and 3. Channel 6 uses 4-8. When you go to 10MHz channels 1 will use 1 and 2. 6 will use 5, 6 and 7. Therefore, you are no longer on adjacent channels, there is a gap of channels 3 and 4 between. Also, you will cut down on the amount of other noise you hear because you listen to only half as much spectrum. And, you will have more effective power so noise may be less of a problem. I am sure there are some RF savvy folks out there that can explain it better. Michael Baird wrote: I can try that, can you tell me why that would make a difference though with the AP's seeing each other at such signal levels? Will changing to 10mhz channel width's cause the AP's to see each other at a lower RSSI? Regards Michael Baird Use 10mhz channels instead of 20mhz. Kurt Fankhauser WAVELINC P.O. Box 126 Bucyrus, OH 44820 419-562-6405 www.wavelinc.com ---
Re: [WISPA] RB333/433 eliminating self-interference test
Also, some dummy loads can act as a poor antenna. Was this part of the experiment consistent both times? Maybe run some coax from the boxes separate directions and then attach the dummy loads? Scott Carullo wrote: Another quick note... if you have individual units why even mount them like this inside a larger box? Why not put individual RB411s in their own small box (say DCE 7x6x2) and put the box outside right under the antenna? Then you would have even more seperation and distribute you eggs a bit more too... Scott Carullo Brevard Wireless 321-205-1100 x102 Original Message From: "Kurt Fankhauser" Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2009 10:36 AM To: "WISPA General List" Subject: [WISPA] RB333/433 eliminating self-interference test About a week ago there was some discussion about 5ghz radio's being installed in the same board and causing self-interference on adjacent channels and possible even on the entire band thus decreasing throughput on backhauls. Because even if you were operating on frequency's 5745 and 5825 the two radio's would have side lobe harmonics that if installed in the same enclosure they would still "hear" each other at that short of separation. I decided to combat this problem and find a solution and share my experience with the list. I installed a single XR5 card into 3 different RB433's with indoor enclosures. I also installed foil tape which I obtained from the local True Value store for $2.49 on all the vent holes and unused bulkhead connector holes. This was done in order to prevent RF side lobe leaks from the three radio's that would escape from the indoor enclosures themselves. Having only 1 card inside each enclosures I should not have a heat problem as the outdoor box will not be in direct sunlight. I then stacked all 3 enclosures on top of each other with dummy loads on each of the N-bulkhead connectors and did some testing. This is what I found: I set the bottom board as AP and the middle board as Client on frequency 5825. Even with this close of separation the two XR5's could only see each other at -83 on the same channel. With the top board connecting to the bottom board they could only see each other at -90. Keep in mind this is on the same frequency so adjacent channels should be much less than that possibly even in the -100 ranges. Wish I had a spectrum analyzer. With two boards separating the AP and Client there was no link at all. The two boards could not even see each other in an AP scan. Just as a comparison with the same radio's installed all on a RB600 not on top of each other but in the adjacent mpci slots the radio's were all seeing each other at -30's. So I gained roughly -55 db of separation by doing it this way. So all I would have to do now is make sure that the antennas on the tower have at least 10 foot of vertical separation and the self-interference problem should be gone and I should be enjoying much more throughput! Thoughts anyone? Kurt Fankhauser WAVELINC P.O. Box 126 Bucyrus, OH 44820 419-562-6405 www.wavelinc.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] SOLVED - Signal Strengths
Well, There was only a desert floor of dirt between me and the AP about 4 miles away. Not even any houses to speak of. There were no metal roofs directly in the way. There WAS a very large steel building perpendicular to me about 40 feet away. Also, within 2 miles, there's grain silos scattered around that could cause a reflection. It was either this or it was right at the edge of Fresnel effects. SOLUTION? I changed to a CPE with a higher gain (Deliberating 15dbi). I think the tighter antenna pattern acted like "blinders" to the out of phase signals. I did not have to move the installation point. 70's db. All is well. Thanks everyone, for your encouraging input. Jason PS. I'm keeping an eye on it... Josh Luthman wrote: This happens a lot with metal roofs in the way. 10 feet over, around the mentioned building we go from -90 to -65 On 4/25/09, Jack Unger wrote: You're seeing normal RF behavior. Simply mount the antenna where the signal is the strongest then use your network monitoring system to keep an "eye" on it. Jason Wallace wrote: Everyone, I had trouble during an install today regarding signal strengths. 2.4Ghz CPE in a location that should be no problem. Moving the CPE two feet in any direction from the point where the CPE was installed increased the signal by around 20db (-90 to -70!) Any idea of what phenomenon I am dealing with? Anything I should consider as I correct this install? Jason WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993 Author - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs" Phone 818-227-4220 Email No-cost Wireless Video Training April 23-24 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] Signal Strengths
No big walls within sight. I though the same thing, and even moved my work truck in case I was catching a reflection from it. Didn't help though. I'm concerned that if I move it, whatever is causing the "highs" & "lows" in signal strength will move too - eventually putting the cpe in a "low" again... Adam Greene wrote: You could be dealing with reflection, where the signal bounces off a nearby object(s) and cancels itself out at certain locations -- any big walls in the vicinity? - Original Message - From: "Jason Wallace" To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, April 24, 2009 11:38 PM Subject: [WISPA] Signal Strengths Everyone, I had trouble during an install today regarding signal strengths. 2.4Ghz CPE in a location that should be no problem. Moving the CPE two feet in any direction from the point where the CPE was installed increased the signal by around 20db (-90 to -70!) Any idea of what phenomenon I am dealing with? Anything I should consider as I correct this install? Jason 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/
[WISPA] Signal Strengths
Everyone, I had trouble during an install today regarding signal strengths. 2.4Ghz CPE in a location that should be no problem. Moving the CPE two feet in any direction from the point where the CPE was installed increased the signal by around 20db (-90 to -70!) Any idea of what phenomenon I am dealing with? Anything I should consider as I correct this install? Jason 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] Metered Broadband
Question: If you are privately owned and have received no federal (or otherwise) money for your network AND it is spelled out in your contract, could the FCC actually tell you you have to run wide open / allow any app? If so, where would the line get drawn (Universities, Libraries, etc...)? My contract prohibits running "servers" or "peer to peer applications" on the connection. Jason Scottie Arnett wrote: > I am not sure what the costs should or will be? But...I will say that is > where I think broadband will be headed, for sure, if the FCC keeps going the > way they are headed(since the Comcast deal) with the completely "open" > concept, such as no bandwidth shaping of any sort. > > Even the BIG players such as the major cable companies and the major telcos > cannot operate their networks very long with the new bandwidth intensive apps > coming along(unless its on their own network) with no bandwidth shaping. > > IMHO, I think this is how it should be, a cost per data transfer or a limit > and then overage charges, just as electric, long distance, water usage, > etc... have been for a long time. > > My 2 pence worth. > > Scott > > -- Original Message -- > From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: WISPA General List > Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 20:23:58 -0500 > > >> So what types of rates would be appropriate for a metered broadband service? >> It obviously depends on what your costs are. I'll just throw something out >> to start a conversation, not necessarily reflective of any costs. >> >> $2/gig transferred, no other costs or limits. >> >> $10 base, $1.50/gig transferred, no other limits. >> >> >> -- >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions >> http://www.ics-il.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/ >> --- >> [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] >> >> >> > > Dial-Up Internet service from Info-Ed, Inc. as low as $9.99/mth. > Check out www.info-ed.com for information. > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > --- AV & Spam Filtering by M+Guardian - Risk Free Email (TM) --- > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] LMR600 Vendor?
Gang, I am looking for some 15' LMR600 cables, N-type males both ends, one end 90°. Anyone know where to find them? Jason Wallace WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Advanced Bandwidth Management
That is exactly the issue I have. The system I need this for is an extremely rural retirement community, satellite-connected WISP with 1meg down 128k up and 266megs total per day limit (8gig spread over 30 days). Just one all night P2P session will cause the upstream provider to cut the connection to 56k up/down for weeks until the total usage drops to 6gig in the previous 30 days. Then nobody's happy. Meanwhile, babyboomers are retiring and moving from the city where they got 4 to 6 meg Roadrunner and Cox connections and expect the same service at the same pricepoint. T1's run up to 2200$/month. Needless to say, I am also looking for other bandwidth sources... Even with a GOOD Internet pipe, I'll need software to make sure everyone plays fair, especially at the dawn of IPTV. Jason On Wed, 24 Jan 2007, Matt Liotta wrote: 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? When your head dips below the cloud cover, you will realize that not everyone has this luxury. Many on this list are selling residential service at lowball rates. Also, most of them are paying premium prices for bandwidth. You can't build a business model around unlimited access for $30/month and pay for an $800+ T1, if you allow every even 128k without restrictions. -- Butch Evans Network Engineering and Security Consulting 573-276-2879 http://www.butchevans.com/ My calendar: http://tinyurl.com/y24ad6 Training Partners: http://tinyurl.com/smfkf Mikrotik Certified Consultant http://www.mikrotik.com/consultants.html -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] DC Inverter help
Joe, 1. Right, every time you convert from one type of power to another you're only going to get 80 to 90% typ. Some devices claim up to 98% eff, but that's only over a very specific operating range. Most inverters are terribly inefficient for small loads. Some use 20 or 50 watts just idling! So coming right off the batteries will give you the longest runtime in general. 2. A good charger stops when it's supposed to. A cheap-o charger from wal-mart could cook the batteries. You need a good charger that has several charging stages to take good care of the batteries. The solar electric people like Outback and Xantrax make excellent ones, but they're expensive. There are inexpensive units that do a good job too. Just make sure that they back off the output when the batteries are charged. Look for something called a "float" charge. Sometimes chargers that have a "trickle" charge as the last charging stage will cook a battery over time. There are dc-to-dc converters (check mouser.com and digi-key.com) that can take a wide range of input voltages and deliver a consistent output voltage. These allow you to really discharge a battery and keep your equipment running at a constant voltage. For instance, a dc-dc converter could take 12 volts from a battery and deliver 48 v. Even as the battery discharges to 9v or less, you could get 48 v. This however is REALLY hard on the batteries, which are considered to be completely discharged in the 10V range. How it will behave will depend on the charger and the load. Most good chargers have 3 or 4 charging "stages" and choose the correct "stage" depending on how deeply discharged the batteries are. It goes something like equalize-bulk charge-maintenance charge. I have a feeling that with a small load like an AP, the charger would oscillate from charge to maintenance charge over time as the batteries are slightly discharged, then recharged, slightly discharged, recharged... Or the maintenance charge might be enough that the batteries see no discharging at all. It'll depend on the charger. Here's one of my favorite links about batteries: http://www.uuhome.de/william.darden/carfaq.htm I've been studying up on it for quite a while now because I'm building an off-the-grid home. Jason Joe Laura wrote: As I understand it in order to be efficient you need to run right off the batterys. Right? Would the battery charger stop charging precisly when needed? Superior Wireless New Orleans,La. www.superior1.com - Original Message - From: "Jason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 1:41 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] DC Inverter help Gang, I'm not a UPS expert, but if the batteries were deeply discharged, wouldn't the extra load of the external batteries would make it hard on the ups when it tries to bring them back up? Maybe I misunderstood the question; but, if I needed 48VDC uninterrupted, I'd string 4 deep cycle batteries together and connect a good multi-stage battery charger. Then I'd run my 48 V devices right from the batteries. If you don't need 120AC, then there's no need for a UPS. If the UPS is already there and uses a 48V stack, then I'd tap into that... Jason Gino A. Villarini wrote: yes 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 Mark Nash Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 1:14 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] DC Inverter help Gino, are you saying a) that you've got external, non-APC batteries plugged into your UPS and b) that your UPS/SNMP card recognizes the charge level? 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: "Gino A. Villarini" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 9:02 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] DC Inverter help We do it 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 Mark Nash Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 11:14 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] DC Inverter help I'm curious if anyone has a) connected external batteries to an APC UPS... AND ... used the APC SNMP card to monitor the status of battery consumption. I currently use APC SU700NET UPSs in external 6"-deep boxes to condition power and provide battery backup. The SNMP card (AP9617) will e-mail our support if the site goes on battery power, giving us about 2.5 hours to get up the hill with a generator. When the batteries go below a threshold of charge left, it e-mails to let us know it's in a critically low charge st
Re: [WISPA] Best system for a new WISP
John Scrivner: " Sadly the best Wifi solutions available do not have 100% FCC compliance. There are some that do though. Tranzeo is a good example. Look at Tranzeo for your Wifi based gear needs. " Tranzeo is 100% FCC legal? I've been looking for the certs... Jason -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Custom LMR-400 Cables?
Anyone know where I can get custom lmr-400 cables made that have right angle n-type male connectors? Jason -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Teletronics Sectors
Thanks for the link; I swear it wasn't there yesterday... Jason Julius Igugu wrote: http://www.teletronics.com/tant24sector19dbi.html#specs - Original Message - From: "Jason Wallace" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 11:24 PM Subject: [WISPA] Teletronics Sectors Anyone using the 19 dbi Hz Pol 120 deg sector from Teletronics, p/n 15-124, in a 3 antenna array? Anyone know what the front to back ratio is on one of these? How about weatherability? Jason Wallace -- 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] Teletronics Sectors
Anyone using the 19 dbi Hz Pol 120 deg sector from Teletronics, p/n 15-124, in a 3 antenna array? Anyone know what the front to back ratio is on one of these? How about weatherability? Jason Wallace -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Ethernet Opto Isolator
Friends, Does anyone know of a good isolator for cat5? I want to really protect my network from a tower mounted radio. Jason -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] HPOL 2.45 Sector
Ron, Teletronics has lots of nice stuff including 17, 19 and even 22 dbi HZ pol sectors. http://www.teletronics.com/antenna2-419dBSector.html Jason Ron Wallace wrote: All Does anyone know of a HPOL 2.45 GHz 120* Sector other than PacWireless. I have the PacWireless and the F-B is killing me. More interference from my own APs than my competitors. I have been looking and other than Superpass, F-B ratio is not too good there either, really need to get this changed. Any asistance or advice is greatly appreciated. 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: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] TV band issue.
Most TV antennas are combination of a yagi for UHF (probably tuned near the upper end of the UHF band because yagi performance drops rapidly above it's design frequency, but not as bad below) and a Log-Periodic antenna for the VHF. The Log-Periodic antenna is a very wide band antenna. Both antennas are HZ polarized, directional, and have forward gain, but this depends a great deal on the frequency you're referencing. I do know that the low end of the VHF freqs has a gain of about 6dbi an most decent sized home TV antennas. TV frequencies: http://www.chem.hawaii.edu/uham/catvfreq.html http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/catv-ch.html LOG-periodics http://www.radio-electronics.com/info/antennas/log_p/log_periodic.php FYI, Jason Tom DeReggi wrote: John, I was not aware that most television antennas were directional Yagis. I thought they picked up from every which direction. Now that you mention it, that makes since based on their shape. :-) Thanks for the info. Would we need to be concerned about the amount of loss over the existing TV Coax cable (RG6?), or beable to re-use it? I'm assuming it would be beneficial to be recabled with low loss LMR? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 11:55 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV band issue. There is no physics to back up that using a directed television yagi antenna would be a bad thing. With that said I do not think using existing TV antennas would be very practical. The 75 ohm impedance for a 50 ohm radio is a problem. This would require a 50 to 75 ohm balun connector at the radio to make it work. Existing television yagi antennas will easily transmit as well as receive within the television band without any noise problems. If you ever used an old television tower rotor you know the antennas are fairly directive in nature. I would likely always install my own antenna unless the customer just happened to have a great outdoor setup in place. I would not like to have customers complaining that they lost their Internet when someone in the house turned the rotor. :-) Scriv Tom DeReggi wrote: AND many homes already have the antennas we need installed Don't forget, TV was a broadcast technology, withthe antenna's puirpose to receive only. Not sure I'd want to use those existing TV antenna, for transmitting. Talk about creating noise in the spectrum. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "FCC Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: ; Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 11:02 AM Subject: [WISPA] TV band issue. Hi All, You may be interested in this. http://www.jhsnider.net/telecompolicy/ First article, click on the word "here". It's in word format. I think this is something that we need to be working on. WISPA is to some extent, but it's a big issue against powerful opponents and those working on this issue are already time crunched big time. Please be aware, if we can get TV bands or even TV band white spaces opened up we'll have tree and house penetration abilities. AND many homes already have the antennas we need installed This may well be the biggest issue for the wisp industry since unlicensed in the first place. laters, Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! 64.146.146.12 (net meeting) www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam -- 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] Legal Radio and Antenna Combos - Are there any in existance?
Marlon, What would you suggest? I am afraid of proprietary stuff because I don't know enough industry history to understand the players. Jason Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: Hiya Jason, Why not just buy ISP grade product? Then you don't have to worry about all of this. AND at 2.4 the CLIENT side isn't limited to 36 dB. It starts there with a 30 dB radio with a 6 dB antenna. For every one db of radio tx dB you drop you can go up 3 dB of antenna gain. Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! 64.146.146.12 (net meeting) www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: "Jason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2006 12:26 PM Subject: [WISPA] Legal Radio and Antenna Combos - Are there any in existance? Everyone, I am at my wits end. I have searched high and low for a mini-pci radio & sector antenna combo for an 802.11b AP that are legal under the current FCC rules, which by my interpretation are: 1. Total output is 36 dbm or less. 2. Antenna characteristics must be the same as an antenna that has been approved for use with that radio, where TYPE refers to antennas with SIMILAR in and out of band radiation patterns. 3. Antenna gain must be equal to or less than the maximum the radio has been approved to work with. I can NOT find a radio that is approved for any antenna with real gain. I don't want to mind just the SPIRIT of the law, but the law itself. What combos are you other guys who like building your own system. I want to put together a Mikrotik with 3 radios and sectors for an AP. The sectors I am looking at are: AntennaGainWidthPol WRW2400-VF/A/H13dbi120H http://www.winncom.com/moreinfo/item/WRW2400-VF/A/H/index.html DT-AN-24-120H-13513.5120H https://www.demarctech.com/products/reliawave-antennas/2_4Ghz/DT-AN-24-120H-135.html DT-AN-24-60120V-152115120V https://www.demarctech.com/products/reliawave-antennas/2_4Ghz/DT-AN-24-AS-60120V-2115.html HyperGain® HG2417P-12017dbi120V http://www.hyperlinktech.com/index.php Teletronics19120H http://www.teletronics.com/antenna2-419dBSector.html Teletronics22140H http://www.teletronics.com/antenna2-422dBidirectional.html I am sorry if this table doesn't wrap well on some email clients. I am still looking for a 18 dbi HZ pol antenna with FCC certs because I think it can be used with a DT-RWZ-200mW-WC, although it is pcmcia and I'll have to figure out how to use it with a 500 series RB (Note, there are foreign antennas that have 18 dbi, but don't come with FCC certs; see my last post). As far as I can tell, the CM9's can't be used anywhere. Ideally, I would like to use the 22 dbi Teletronics in my application with a 14dbm radio for the greatest receive gain. Or at least a HZ polarized antenna with decent gain. Anyway, can someone please help. I appreciate those of you who have helped me to even reach this point. Jason Wallace WISP startup -- 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] Foreign Antennas
Gang, I have found several 802.11b antennas produced outside the US that I'd like to use. They are not FCC certified, however. Do the antennas need to be fcc certified or just the radios? This is assuming that all the gain/ERP rules are met. Jason Wallace -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Outdoor Ethernet Splice
Uncured silicone contains acetic acid (cheap formulations may contain some after curing) and might corrode reactive metals. I THINK that the silicones that have a low odor also have lower acetic acid content. BTW, acetic acid is what gives vinegar its punch. Jason Wallace Marlon K. Schafer wrote: I've found that silicon has something in it that corrodes connections. especially those in rf connectors. I think it's amonia or something like it. Anyway, I only use silicon to seal the building penetration these days. marlon - Original Message - From: "Todd Barber" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 8:47 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] Outdoor Ethernet Splice You can also fill the end around the o-rings with silicon to eliminate any place for water to pool if they happen to be mounted vertically. Todd Barber Skylink Broadband Internet [EMAIL PROTECTED] 970-454-9499 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 9:41 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Outdoor Ethernet Splice I always put in 3 or 4 feet of extra cat 5 at the radio end :-P. That's the same connector as sb uses. They are nice but make sure they sit horrizontal as water will eventually leak past the o-rings etc. marlon - Original Message - From: "J. Vogel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 7:53 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Outdoor Ethernet Splice I haven't used these, but someone on one of these lists pointed them out a while back. http://www.alliedelec.com/Search/ProductDetail.asp?SKU=565-0107 I am going to order some in one of these days. They look good to me. John Vogel Mark Nash wrote: Anyone have recommendations on products you use for outdoor, weatherproof ethernet splices? 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: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.22/238 - Release Date: 1/23/2006 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Multiple Radios on Single antenna
Bob, Item 4 is what I am talking about. If your radios have very good adjacent channel rejection, are not transmitting at high levels, and the antenna has minimized any of the coupling I mentioned, then they may be able to listen through the "noise" from the other transmitter. A lot of this depends on output power; it is possible to just totally swamp one receiver with another transmitter and create a noise floor too high to listen through. In my last post I was thinking like a HAM operator (theory-wise) that deals with much greater power levels. With 802.11 power levels, it may work better. It has to be designed right, like you said. No one should think that you can just hang a dual pol and do anything with it. Jason Wallace Bob Moldashel wrote: Sorry but this whole thread is going sour fast. 1. Dual Polarity antennas work for transmit and receive. They are not TX only or RX only in configuration. 2. The normal isolation between vertical polarity and horizontal polarity can range from 10-30 dB depending on the operating frequency. 3. The biggest issues to using 2 radios on the same dual polarity antenna is the adjacent channel rejection, x-pole polarity, TX power levels and Receiver sensitivity.. 4. 802.XX radios will not work on the same channel because while one radio is transmitting on 5825 GHz. the radio on the other polarity is receiving on the same channel. Considering there is only 10-30 dB of seperation, the radio RX levels will only be reduced by that amount causing receive interference. 5. We have more than 20 dual polarity links running FD radios such as Proxim Tsunamis operating in the same band. Granted, they have much better filtering than the basic 802.XX radio but they work flawlessly.. 6. We presently have 2 DP links in place with 802 style radios. One of the links consists of WRAP/CM9's operating in 5.7-5.8 Ghz. The other has a Proxim MP.11a on one plane and Tranzeo TR-5a on the other. One link is 6.5 miles, the other is 7 miles. There is no desense between radios and both operate fine without interference issues. 7. While Tom may be experiencing the tower rental issues regarding antennas, we have not seen this in the NE. Most leases we have negotiated are based around wind loading on the tower. Like everything, dual polarity antennas have a place like all other equipment. The link just needs to be engineered to operate properly. -B- -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Multiple Radios on Single antenna
List, When antennas are separated by normal distances, they can only "see" each other electromagnetically (ie, radio waves). However, when they are close they will experience capacitive and inductive coupling. Dual pol antennas work fine when only receiving (as in those large satellite dishes from the 80's that used 90° pol changes between adjacent channels). I think you will always have trouble overloading the receiver when transmitting with this setup. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
