[WISPA] Users Still Cling to Dialup
FYI Interesting, http://www.dailytech.com/Users+Still+Cling+to+Dialup/article12283.htm http://www.newser.com/article/D91M6BCO1.html Small quote from that The survey does illustrate a concern that some Americans want broadband but can't get it, denying them opportunities to work online or take classes online. Of the rural Americans on dialup, 24 percent said they would upgrade if it was available in their area, whereas only 11 percent of suburban users in areas of non-availability and 3 percent of urban users would upgrade. Regards Stephen Patrick == CABLEFREE CableFree Solutions Ltd, Holly House, St. Clare Business Park, 22 Holly Road, Hampton Hill, Middlesex, TW12 1QH, UK Tel: +44(0)20 8941 7975 Fax:+44(0)20 8941 2410 Web:www.cablefreesolutions.com Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] == CAUTION - This message is confidential and may contain privileged information intended only for the use of the addressee named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this message is prohibited. If you have received this message in error please notify CableFree Solutions immediately. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of CableFree Solutions Ltd. 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] free optics / MRV's Terescope soln
Dear all, Reading this thread I thought it appropriate to comment. My aim is to make an objective and informative post, and trust it's taken as such. [disclaimer - our company makes and sells both FSO and RF (radio, microwave etc) products - we don't have an axe to grind/side to take here] FSO has historically had a mixed reputation, partly due to a few vendors over-selling it's capability, and partly because of a few genuinely bad products on the market. When implemented properly (realistic distances, good product) FSO can work excellently, and for years without any attention. But FSO is less forgiving than radio or RF technology, so you have to get it right - a bad installation will definitely cause problems for example - and it's fair to say that not all products are created equal, and the bad products do suffer like Javier mentioned. Addressing Javier's points: - FSO units with narrow beams *do* need to be re-aligned, wide beam (read: 0.5degrees etc) do not. Different vendors offer various beamwidths. - Narrow beam units can't be put on towers or certain other structures. Same problems with wind. Wide beam ones work fine. - FSO units from some vendors have spot beams (like a laser-pointer): those have cleaning problems because dirt can obscure the tiny beam at source. Other vendors have large-aperture beams which don't have these problems or require regular cleaning. - East-West is a problem only on units that don't have proper solar filtering: some vendors do, some don't. Without either being defensive or making a sales pitch, it's fair to say that a decent FSO system installed properly will work well and give excellent throughput, uptime and customer satisfaction. But the opposite has been/is certainly true elsewhere in the industry, and the bad stories are out there, just as with any technology. It's also worth noting which RF and Microwave systems don't have such problems - mostly to do with the much larger beamwidths, and the fact that precision optics aren't required. But, you have different issues with RF and microwave technology, such as interference and rainfade. The FSO market is still there, for people who want high bandwidth, short distances and don't want to pay frequency licenses or risk interference; but for everything else, there's a whole spectrum (literally) of radio, microwave and millimeter wave solutions. In summary, it is fair to say FSO can and does work well, when implemented correctly. Best regards Stephen -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Javier Arigita Sent: 26 June 2008 09:07 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] free optics / MRV's Terescope soln Nowadays I would not recommend to use a FSO in any case. They require a tremendous support since they have to be periodically aligned, cleaned... Moreover, if the building is high or you live in a windy area your link will get down many times a day. You have to take care about the direction of the link, if you install it east-west sun may affect you on the morning or during the sunset. Summarizing, you have to babysit them so much to be worth. Have a look to licensed links such as Dragonwave. If you still plan to use FSO, MRV is the best option, in the past Lightpointe was the option but they went to bankrupt. I think that you can still buy them somewhere but you will have problems with the spare parts and warranty. BR, Javier 2008/6/26, Rogelio [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I'm researching various free space optics solutions, particular MRV's Terescope with the backup radios (~$45K) http://www.mrv.com/products/line/terescope.php http://internetcommunications.tmcnet.com/news/2008/04/18/3395257.htm http://www.mrv.com/library/library.php?ctl=MRV-OTHER-MRW55-Prod http://www.go-nowires.com/wireless-blog/wireless-10gige/ Like any technology, I hear glowing reviews from some people and horrible reviews from others. I'd be curious as to what others there thought of FOS solns in general, and MRV in particular. In many cases, I'm seeing cameras feeds coming together to a wifi multipoint / mesh scenario, and from there the traffic that needs to be backhauled to somewhere else (e.g. a police station) exceeds the 20-25 Mbps that one can reasonably expect from current wi-fi radios (I've seen more in more modern radios that start to use draft-n technologies). 10 Gbps is a overkill in all of my situations, but I can envision some times in which it might be useful. 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] mission critical 100Mbps links
Excellent discussion going here, I'd propose something similar to Brad, with a single antenna, but with a combiner and dual ODUs for licensed on both paths. Those go down to separate IDUs, with separate Ethernet ports to different upstreams or routers. That gives you complete isolation i.e. no components (actives, power or cables) in common except the physical antenna and RF combiner which are passive mechanical hardware. It's a standard technique for licensed MW, and gives telco-grade resilience. The advantage is that you get 100Mbps on both legs - which potentially you could use both of which when they are up, and also, neither is worse than the other in use. The only disadvantage is that needs 2 licenses (unless using hotstandby, which only needs one, but requires the equipment to be coupled together to effect the switch-over), whereas Brad's suggestion uses 5.8 for the second leg. We have and do ship such equipment, particularly for service providers: feel welcome drop me a line off-list if anyone's interested. Best regards Stephen CableFree Solutions -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brad Belton Sent: 18 June 2008 17:38 To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] mission critical 100Mbps links Mission critical equates to multiple paths and technologies in my book. Network hardware can break whether it costs $100 or $100,000. I would consider a licensed unlicensed combination for this path. If your sites will allow you could go with 6GHz and a 5Ghz failover path. Both links could probably use the same 6' antenna with a dual polarity feed, but then again you are depending on one common point of failure by serving this mission critical site with two links from the same upstream site. The better solution would be to feed the site from completely diverse upstream paths. Best, Brad -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of RickG Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 11:03 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] mission critical 100Mbps links Any opinions on 100Mbps radios for mission critical 100Mbps PTP links? I need to go 10-15 miles. Licensed or unlicensed OK. -RickG 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/ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 270.4.0/1506 - Release Date: 17/06/2008 16:30 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] mission critical 100Mbps links
No problem and great to hear from you Brad. Just for the record, here we have the English Summer. Take that as a daily lottery of whether it's going to be sunny, drizzle or deluge. Most probably explains why we Brits all talk about the weather - it's just so random. Best regards Stephen -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brad Belton Sent: 18 June 2008 19:32 To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] mission critical 100Mbps links Sorry everyone. Meant to be off list. Brad -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brad Belton Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 1:28 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] mission critical 100Mbps links Hello Stephen, Good to hear from you and trust all is well on your side of the pond. grin 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. Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 270.4.0/1506 - Release Date: 17/06/2008 16:30 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] Future -SPECTRUM MARKET PLACE
Very interesting topic - In the UK similar bands (28, 32, 40) just got allocated on a regional/national basis, and some of the prices paid were very modest. Google OFCOM and have a look if interested. One of the national spectrum winners informally offered us access to their spectrum on a per link basis i.e. reselling use of it to integrators or end users. Interesting model. It is P2P LOS-only in those bands generally. P2MP is technically possible but I don't know of any equipment out there - like the old LMDS gear. You can get complete P2P links for well under US$10k, quite a bit less than that actually, and in high volume expect a good reduction from that. I will probably get into trouble here for saying that, as our own products cover those bands. /advertising Distance-wise it's all down to rain fade, availability requirements (four or five nines required?) antenna sizes, EIRP, modulation/sensitivity and smart features like adaptive modulation and ATPC to keep the links up in fade conditions - and of course any restrictions the regulator puts on you. A few miles is realistic - depends on location. I can run a link calc if anyone's interested. For example I ran one at 26GHz, 155Mbps throughput, 60cm antennas, Rain Zone H (32mmhr) and at 8km (about 5 miles) it looks like 99.993%. Allow for adaptive modulation (drops the throughput during rain storms) and that comes quite a bit higher. I recall the CLECs (Winstar, etc) were the ones that ran into trouble building out large microwave networks in similar bands, but IMHO a lot of that was faulty business plan and network design - unable to deliver what was promised, either at all or profitably. Licensed equipment has improved hugely in throughput, spectral efficiency, uptime and of course in price since then - a sea-change in the microwave market. There are also a new breed of all-outdoor radios coming up which further reduce costs (equipment + installation costs) which are ideal for WISPs in particular. Am sure plenty of other readers will have some very interesting comments or experiences - and possibly corrections too - Regards Stephen Patrick == Cablefree Solutions Ltd www.cablefreesolutions.com == -Original Message- From: Jack Unger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 24 April 2008 17:22 To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Future -SPECTRUM MARKET PLACE Thanks for the link; here are some quick thoughts... 1. Buying (or leasing) licensed spectrum sounds good... if the spectrum and equipment costs are affordable. 2. Wouldn't it be nice to have quick and easy, affordable access to spectrum that could be used for point-to-multipoint in a rural environment - like at 400 or 700 MHz? 3. This 28-31 GHz spectrum will probably only be useful for short-range work where there are absolutely no obstructions end-to-end (like in big city centers, etc.) jack CHUCK PROFITO wrote: http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/marketwire/0388456.htm OR http://tinyurl.com/66rnd5 The nation's largest online marketplace for licensed broadband wireless spectrum went live today, enabling businesses, government agencies and communications service providers to quickly and easily obtain licensed high-capacity wireless spectrum in the United States. 28-31 GHz Chuck Profito 209-988-7388 CV-ACCESS, INC [EMAIL PROTECTED] Providing High Speed Broadband to Rural Central California 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 of the Cisco Press Book - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs Vendor-Neutral Wireless Training-Design-Troubleshooting-Consulting FCC License # PG-12-25133 Phone 818-227-4220 Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.4/1394 - Release Date: 23/04/2008 19:16 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless
Re: [WISPA] Wi-Fi Blocking Paint
I wonder if it also works well as WiMax-blocking paint ... == Stephen Patrick Cablefree Solutions Ltd Web:www.cablefreesolutions.com == -Original Message- From: Kurt Fankhauser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 23 April 2008 14:44 To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: [WISPA] Wi-Fi Blocking Paint Surprised no one has posted this before. Looks like an old article. http://tech.yahoo.com/blogs/hughes/10031/wi-fi-blocking-paint 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. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.3/1392 - Release Date: 22/04/2008 15:51 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] Future
That's an interesting point to discuss. WiMax profiles AFAIK go up to 64QAM So does WiFi 802.11a, g, n Orthogon AFAIK goes to higher order modulation, but are for P2P links where SNR is (or can be) higher - at least with high gain antennas. AFAIK No-one seems to be proposing more than 64QAM for P2MP. Fading, variable channel characteristics particularly for non-LOS and of course noise at the RX I am sure are key reasons. Other spectral efficiencies in newer systems are gained with MIMO in it's various permutations. Comments/corrections welcome - Regards Stephen Patrick == Cablefree Solutions Ltd, www.cablefreesolutions.com -Original Message- From: Mike Hammett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 23 April 2008 20:37 To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Future From a spectral efficiency standpoint, WiMax is better than anything but Orthogon. I'm not saying to do mobile stuff, but for PtMP fixed wireless that we do now. More spectral efficiency is always better for the industry. -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 2:12 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Future Mike, My personal opinion is... in 5Ghz, Wimax is not the ideal solution. In 5.3-4 G, the allowable power is not high enough. In 5.8G, there is to much noise, from traditional legacy gear. We proved that in our trials 4 years ago, beta testing Aperto, pre-Wimax. It wasn't affordable to deploy a small channel and waste polarity with diversity, based on tower colo costs. In DC for example, we were lucky to get 1.5mbps total throughout, on a 6Mhz channel capable of 16-20mbps in the lab. Diversity helps get around NLOS, but it also prevents muting out interference on the non-needed polarity. In DC, only Spatial diversity was viable, because Spatial diversity does not pickup out of polarity noise. But we found, polarity diversity is really what best helped get around NLOS. Many of the WiMax vendors are working towards 5.8Ghz platforms, but personally, I think these are really only ideal for deployments to new underserved areas. Its a different stroy in areas of low noise or low cost to colocate, where mobile/NLOS is the goal and not high capacity. Many will disagree with me, but that is my opinion. I personally think, Alvarions existing unlicensed VL or Newer less expensive line products are more preferred than their Wimax in the 5.8 band. In 3.6, I think WiMax is needy for the advanced WiMax feature. Because it is virgin spectrum still. But it will be interesting to see how it all plays out, as more providers all try and use it in one area. My experience is of course based on old gear. The questions that I ask is whether the newer more advanced WiMax level gear has also added any new noise cancellation techniques to combine with diversity, so that diversity can be used more often, without a negative effect if noise exists on the other pol? The maximum benefit in gain was gained via receive diversity. A beam turning 90 deg out of pol could degrade over 20db, where as pol diverse signal transmitted only adds a db or so, only because the gain is contracdicted by the loss associated with splitting the signal. Transmit diversity does however, have other benefits, as we know with Mimo style designs, and beam steering technologies. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 1:14 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Future Who have you been getting information\pricing from on the Aperto and Airspan products? -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Jeff Booher [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 11:16 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Future comments inline. On Apr 22, 2008, at 12:17 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: Anyone doing a 20 MHz channel? Not to my knowedge. Would that be enough capacity to allow for typical oversubscription on say a 10 meg client? Certainly. What does it cost to get the first AP up ($5k, $15k, $50k)? Between 5-10k What does it cost to get additional APs up ($2k, $10k, $30k)? Between 5-10k -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Jeff Booher [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 12:46 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Future Chuck, Airspan / Aperto are both shipping 5x Ghz wimax products. Throughput is about 26mb peak for the Airspan product on 10mhz channels, and 22mb on the Aperto product in 7mhz
Re: [WISPA] 30megs @ 10MHz
AFAIK Orthogon uses high-order modulation to do that, in 30MHz channels both H and V polarisation. Atheros WiFi cards in most radios use 64QAM maximum, single polarisation (unless you use 2 cards) in 5, 10, 20 or 40MHz channels. All WiMax/802.16 profiles I've see use 64QAM maximum, single polarisation, and mostly on narrower channels (3.5, 7, 10MHz, though there is a 20MHz defined, not all chipsets can do it). Higher order modulation, plus H and V polarisations over 30MHz is how Orthogon achieves high P2P throughput in the spectrum. Regards Stephen Patrick -Original Message- From: Mike Hammett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 14 February 2008 14:22 To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 30megs @ 10MHz Orthogon far eclipses that in the PtP world. 802.16 is right around there for PtMP. -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 8:05 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 30megs @ 10MHz Are you using compression on the link? I've never heard of a product that can deliver 3:1 on bandwidth vs. spectrum. Travis Microserv George Rogato wrote: http://www.oregonfast.net/gofast/30megs/30megs.JPG This afternoon while I was at the shop I noticed the internet was very sluggish. So I opened up an ssh session into the tower ap that is serving my shop. It was saying 3,900 to 4,000 something kbps in the interface. I was thinking for a second, hey thats BYTES not bits in star, 32 megs. Not sure who was pushing that much traffic, maybe a virus infected pc on the bench. But this was a Star-os war4 at 5.8 10MHz wide channel PtP 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/ -- 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: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.4/1277 - Release Date: 13/02/2008 20:00 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] MT announces RB192 and RB333
Chipping in here, To be fair to MT: AFAIK It's harder/more expensive to design 48V-input power supplies (the chips on most boards require some mix of 5.0/3.3/2.5V or other rails) than lower voltages. Of course 48V is desirable by users, because of lower cable loss, enabling longer runs. I had this debate with the MT people some time back, in favour of 48V. It seems there are far more 12-30V chipsets, and easier-to-implemet designs, than at 48V. Also, telco environments always have 48V (36-72 a common spec) But commercial pressures (people only buy high volumes at low price points) probably guided the 28V max non-isolated decision. Also, relevant point: Some boards out ther have **isolated** input PSUs. The RB532 and 112 for example. However, most boards don't. Well isolation costs money (read: custom-wound transformer, other components) but non-isolated designs are cheaper. Well that depends on your deployments - some environments cope with non-isolated roof/tower-top devices fine - and some don't. Important to consider that. I hope that comment is of help - Regards Stephen Patrick CableFree Solutions -Original Message- From: Travis Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 04 August 2007 19:13 To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT announces RB192 and RB333 Maybe someone can post the link to the FCC docs showing their certification? Also, you will notice their PoE only supports up to 28VDC now, rather than 48VDC like the RB532. They probably couldn't get the boards to pass FCC at 48V. Travis Microserv Butch Evans wrote: On Fri, 3 Aug 2007, Travis Johnson wrote: And even if they do, that doesn't make a complete radio system FCC compliant... only their board. No, but it is a GOOD first step toward creating certified systems. If I were to try to build a certified system on the older boards, I'd have to spend more money, because more tests would have to be run. FWIW, I'm not sure where the idea that they would put the sticker on and not hold the paperwork. That's a bit over the top paranoia. 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 email has been verified as Virus free Virus Protection and more available at http://www.plus.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/
RE: [WISPA] Nstreme2 Link Pacwireless
I don't want this to appear an advert, because that wouldn't go down well on WISPA. But reading the posts, thought it might be of interest to note our co makes complete x86 boxes with 500MHz or 1GHz CPUs that run Nstreme2 at full speed (77Mbps Full Duplex with bandwidth test utility) with plenty of CPU horsepower to spare. They've been shipping for a while and we have excellent feedback. Data here: http://www.cablefreesolutions.com/radio/CableFree%20HPR%20Radio%20Datasheet. pdf HPR boxes have 24V proprietary POE and will support reasonable length cables (50m or more), and have been proven to operate in some harsh climates round the world. Specifically, we have several installed in the UAE/Dubai where they have extreme heat of +60C on rooftop sites. The boxes are waterproof passively cooled, will take up to 5 radio cards, are supplied complete and tested with full version of RouterOS 2.9.x installed - does not require V3 beta to operate. Our customers have used them with Gabriel dual-pol antennas, and I know have tested with a couple others too. Not tried the Pacwireless but am sure someone soon will. Very happy to share more info if anyone wants - just drop a line. Best regards Stephen CableFree Solutions -Original Message- From: Travis Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 02 August 2007 14:27 To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Nstreme2 Link Pacwireless Yes, but nothing is shipping right now (that I know of). Several of our towers will be wintered here in about 3 months (meaning harder access, PITA to climb and work on, etc.). Plus, doesn't one or more of the new boards require v3 of the OS? I have tried several times with v3 to load on existing RB532's and had horrible problems (lock-ups, random reboots, incorrect software loads, etc.) and when I go back to 2.9.40 everything was fine. This was only about a month ago. I have also done the mini-ITX boards with the PicoPSU units (running a seperate 18AWG cable for power). It worked fine, but it was kind of a cluster. Travis Microserv Mike Hammett wrote: They make ATX power supplies with DC inputs, but I don't know if PoE can pass enough wattage for them. Have you seen any of the RB announcements? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 3:50 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Nstreme2 Link Pacwireless Hi, Now you are understanding what the rest of us have been going thru for the past couple of years. ;) The RB532 is underpowered for big backhaul links, yet any of the mini-itx or micro-itx boards need 120VAC or a seperate power cable and a power converter inside the box. Running LMR cable works for short runs (20-30ft), but after that it just limits the signal too much. What we really need is an 800mhz Routerboard in the same form factor as the current RB532. :) Travis Microserv Jory Privett wrote: I have been doing some research and these seem great, almost. The main problem I have is power where it needs to be. If I could get 120v then I could easily use one of these units or a standard PC. Most of my sights are on water towers so there is no electricity at the top of them and the radio ahs to be feed with PoE. I have tried putting the radios lower and using LMR cableis to the antennas but have had bad experiences with that in the past. Jory Privett WCCS - Original Message - From: David E. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 12:19 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Nstreme2 Link Pacwireless Jory Privett wrote: These look very interesting. Does anyone have any recomendations/experinces with any in particular? Do they support the MikroTik RouterOS? Just get something fanless and low-power, and you're good. I usually suggest fanless because you can get the whole No Moving Parts assembly, which means fewer things that can break; the benefit of that should be obvious :) Low-power is optional, but usually goes along with fanless, because otherwise your computer could cook itself. The biggest downside is probably the some assembly required bit - you're basically buying all the parts for a small desktop computer, and assembling them yourself. There's a bit of learning curve even if you've worked with desktop PCs before (those power supplies especially are tiny, and can be annoying to work with). Your first system will probably take an hour or two to assemble. It will be a bit bigger than a Routerboard 500 - probably six inches square, two or three inches tall. And you'll need real power, as you can't usually run these with POE. RouterOS is available for standard x86 hardware, which most mini-ITX boards would be. You may also want to look at the new Soekris 5501. I haven't tested RouterOS
RE: [WISPA] Google makes it official -- putting up $4.6 billion
And this of course is the corp with the corporate motto: Don't be evil. http://investor.google.com/conduct.html I'm sure we all hope they stand to that themselves - Regards Stephen CableFree Solutions -Original Message- From: Travis Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 21 July 2007 17:48 To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Google makes it official -- putting up $4.6 billion Google is quietly and methodically taking control of the internet. They already control what results we see on a search... and with the purchase of Postini, they will be able to control what emails we actually receive. And now they are bidding on wireless spectrum. They are just slowly taking over little pieces of the net... bit by bit... :( Travis Microserv Jeromie Reeves wrote: For now Google will be better. I just hope that it stays that way. I think the telcos will pull out more money then 4.6b. Will Google be willing to up the ante? On 7/21/07, Jory Privett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I agree better Google than the telcos Jory Privett WCCS - Original Message - From: Drew Lentz [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, July 20, 2007 12:58 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] Google makes it official -- putting up $4.6 billion That is wonderful news if you ask me! Drew Lentz [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: Friday, July 20, 2007 12:24 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [WISPA] Google makes it official -- putting up $4.6 billion http://64.233.179.110/blog_resources/Google_Ex_Parte_Letter_Signed. pdf 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/ - --- 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. -- -- Would you like to see your advertisement here? Let the WISPA Board know your feelings
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 wireless@wispa.org 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 wireless@wispa.org 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 the FCC response: _My Submission: _ For intentional radiators certified under Parts 15.247 and 15.401 must the software allow operation ONLY on FCC permitted frequencies and at FCC permitted power levels or can an equipment manufacturer submit a system for certification that includes the ability to software-select the country of operation as long as U.S. - FCC is included as one of the selections? _FCC Response: _ The current policy is that the manufacturer must employ some mechanism on devices marketed in US so that the devices will not transmit in unauthorized frequencies, and the mechanism must be outside of control of the users. Therefore the method you mentioned is
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=4945168689485668209pr=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/
RE: [WISPA] Fw: [WISP] Nifty new tool for the cable ops
Hi Brad, Quick answer is Shipping ... And legal/FCC certified as well as UK OFCOM approved .. And we have reference installations too. The model we recommend is 70GHz and there are 100Mbps and Gigabit Ethernet versions, and 30 and 60cm antenna options Interface fibre LC with MM and SM options. Any info you need, glad to send. Best regards Stephen -Original Message- From: Brad Belton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 02 May 2007 17:04 To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Fw: [WISP] Nifty new tool for the cable ops 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=4945168689485668209pr=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/ -- 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/
RE: [WISPA] FCC requests .. Bob M. what about FSO
Just chiming in here on FSO, FSO is absolutely a great solution typically for anything up to a mile. In many areas you can push it a lot further, some of our users have installations over 4km in some regions. The infrared spectrum is license-free, and there's no risk of interference due to highly directional beams (2-8mRad - i.e. up to 0.5deg), and properly-built products don't suffer scatter/back-reflections. FSO is anything T1 up to 1.25Gbps; full duplex; Anyone interested have a look at some real-world installations: http://www.cablefreesolutions.com/imagelib1.htm (older ones here) http://www.wirelessexcellence.com/cablefree/gallery1.htm more recent enterprise http://www.wirelessexcellence.com/cablefree/gallery2.htm telco installs http://www.wirelessexcellence.com/cablefree/gallery3.htm mobile/broadcast Obviously FSO can't do P2MP, Non-LOS, huge long distances and you can't put them on flexible/narrow masts/monopoles; and there are other technologies that do all those excellently; but for your shorter P2P links on stable structures, it's absolutely ideal. Related to the original thread, FSO isn't using up valuable radio spectrum that can be better used for your longer shots. Regards Stephen Patrick CableFree Solutions www.cablefreesolutions.com -Original Message- From: George Rogato [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 28 March 2007 05:47 To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests .. Bob M. what about FSO Hey Bob M. Seeing your on list and talking about short PtP sots. What do you think about FSO, Plaintree? Have you installed much and do you like? I'm thinking that I might have to go that way and figured you could advise. George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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 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: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.18/734 - Release Date: 26/03/2007 14:31 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Using DECT phones to avoid interference issues.
.. There are also now dual-mode DECT/Skype phones, which I like the look of ... Also, in EU DECT is very popular for cordless home phones, and they have nice looks/features. [helpful post, BTW, Ralph] Best regards Stephen Patrick CableFree Solutions www.cablefreesolutions.com -Original Message- From: Ralph [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 22 March 2007 17:45 To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Using DECT phones to avoid interference issues. I deployed a DECT (Digital European Cordless Telecommunications) system with 450 handsets several years ago. The phones were single line units made by Phillips. They system worked OK, but the features were very lacking. The frequency range was 1880-1900 MHz This deployment was in Paris, France and was connected behind a PBX. There were about 21 base stations, each one capable of supporting many conversations. The DECT system is interesting because it is the standard in Europe and people's home handsets could be registered on this system. All I had to do was enter the code # into the management system. We were afraid that the handsets might begin disappearing due to the interoperability, but these handsets were so cheesy that the home models were much better. The DECT system did handoff calls as the users walked between base stations, which was pretty cool. A year or so aqo, DECT was authorized here in the US, on slightly different frequencies: 1920-1930 MHz. There was not any general hoopla at all around this introduction. DECT isn't GSM, but the two are made to be very compatible and in Europe, there are dual mode DECT/GSM phones. These systems, which are sometimes used in installations like mine, allow the user to switch over to a more cost-effective DECT connection when in range, and the GSM signaling is passed over to the DECT system, but in DECT format. I haven't seen but one DECT phone here and it was very basic, but I expect that the technology will quickly be expanded to products like the multi handset systems, etc that are getting popular from Uniden and all the others. It should eliminate all WISP interference for sure! Ralph -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dawn DiPietro Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2007 9:54 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Using DECT phones to avoid interference issues. All, I am sure some of you have already thought of this but I would suggest a great alternative to avoid interference with the most common frequencies used to deploy wireless networks would be to use DECT cordless phones in the house. They use the 1.9Ghz frequency and are relatively inexpensive. We use a DECT phone system here with all the features we could ever ask for and we got them for a song after the rebate. Just a thought. 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/ -- 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: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.16/729 - Release Date: 21/03/2007 07:52 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] PtP pricing
Dear all, We're an FSO vendor - as well as our other radio and micrwoave products. Actually I feel we should pitch in on the LEDs vs lasers - a topic we know very well: - LEDs are limited in power and bandwidth (more than 50Mbps at reasonable power is a real problem for the raw LED devices) - LEDs fade with lifetime, and there is no closed-loop control to compensate this - LEDs don't collimate into very nice beams - LEDs generally are at 975nm which is the same as some laser products (such as our 980nm Access series) 980nm transmits better at long distances than shorter wavelengths, but at short distances there is no disadvantage with short wavelengths - LEDs are cheaper devices than laser, which is actually the only reason they are used. There is no advantage of LEDs with dust, except in the case of a few vendors that have narrow-aperture laser systems (avoid those: known to cause problems). We have LED technology and only use it for very short (a few feet) customised and indoor links. For outdoor links, use laser, it's far better. Using Laser we have achieved better than 5 nines for some operators even in foggy areas like London, on sub-kilometer links. For one network operator (broadband ISP) they have under 15 seconds downtime over 7 years - 155Mbps sub-kilometer links - which rather proves the point. Though we have long distance laser installations at 4km+, those require relatively clear conditions, or RF resilient path. Generally, below 1km (say, 3/4 a mile) laser is absolutely a great solution. In the USA, our lasers are deployed with cell carriers like Nextel, for example, for backhaul from base stations on similar short hops. Elsewhere in the world we have several hundred lasers for individual cell carriers where microwave was considered too expensive. Equipment reliability, vendors differ enormously - caveat emptor. We have installations back to 1997 still in service, so we're good on that score. Some features like peltier cooling (solid state TEC) radically improves lifetime, as laser lifetime drops off with temperature. Automatic Transmit Power Control (ATPC) increases TX power in fade conditions, and reduces in clear weather, improving availability and lifetime. Power supplies generally mounted indoors and DC run to the laser units; though it is possible to put PSUs in roof/tower locations. Generally, our customers fit and forget and just as you say, walk away and leave them running. Software NMS tells you the links are solid and working. Laser certainly has it's place: you get no inteference and high 100Mbps and true Gigabit Ethernet throughput. For short links, laser is currently cheaper than E-band MMW and (assuming a good product) no less reliable. For the longer links, OFDM radios and licensed microwave (we make/sell them too) are the best options. /sales pitch Anyone who wants information or some real-world case studies, please don't hesitate to ask - we have many, including WISPs. Questions/comments welcome - Best regards Stephen Patrick CableFree Solutions www.cablefreesolutions.com [mail sent in text format: advance apologies if it arrives in HTML, our ISP/mail server is the culprit when this happens] -Original Message- From: George Rogato [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 16 March 2007 08:06 To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] PtP pricing Whats the reliability factor? I've been thinking of adding fso for a couple links now for a couple years. Now I could put 100megs duplex to use rather than waste the spectrum. But how well does this stuff stand up? Haven't heard much about anyones experiences good or bad. is it 6 9's? does the power supplies burn out or the units need to be repaired often? Or are they switch em on and walk a way for a few years? George Marlon K. Schafer wrote: Hard to beat orthogon! And for a link that short I'd look REALLY hard at fso gear. http://www.plaintree.com/ Plaintree has some cool infrared systems. They handle dust and such better than lasers. If you want laser systems, EC has some that are pretty cool too. Not too expensive either. marlon - Original Message - From: George Rogato [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 9:13 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] PtP pricing Non set budget. Marlon K. Schafer wrote: what's the budget? - Original Message - From: George Rogato [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 3:02 PM Subject: [WISPA] PtP pricing I need a couple very short range PtP links. A few hundred feet at most for each one. Something that did close to 50 or even 100 megs duplex would be good Has anyone worked with Free Space Optics and can advice? Also looking to be frugal. But don't want 5 gig. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail
RE: [WISPA] PtP pricing
Thanks very much Tom. That is a very interesting subject indeed: I think you have a very good insight on the current broadband/gigabit marketplace, a very well written piece. MMW is currently high price - low volume and there are far fewer MMW deployments than FSO in the world so far AFAIK. Part of that is also regulatory, relatively few countries have followed the FCC lead and deregulated E-band (70-80GHz). UK just has done (three cheers!) Prices WILL come down on MMW as the volumes go up. And products will become more mature too. BTW, we sell both MMW and FSO, we're not picking a fight between the two. FSO fades in fog, MMW in rain. Some of the choice therefore depends where you live! Tropics is probably not too good a place for MMW ... And there are some places where FSO suffers too. We have deployed Twinpath FSO+MMW for some mission-critical applications where 100% uptime was required - i.e. no single point of failure. Sounds a strange thing to do, but the result is about the most resilient wireless connection you can get. Required price points - interesting. Both MMW and FSO technology is inherently more expensive than current OFDM gear. (We make/sell that too). And being limited in range, requiring LOS, there are fewer MMW or FSO applications - an OFDM radio can go 20km, or a few km near-LOS. Right now, there's a lot of buzz about MMW, which is like FSO was 7-8 years ago. It will be interesting to see what happens as the MMW market matures. Look forward to hearing more on this debate - Best regards Stephen Patrick CableFree Solutions -Original Message- From: Tom DeReggi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 16 March 2007 15:38 To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] PtP pricing Stephen, Excellent post. I agree that every product has it's place. The industry is lucky to have so many options to choose from. The negative side is the options are often still expensive (perception of expense is relative :-) The reasons, is vendors put a value on their product based on the worst case special unique need a customer might have for the product, instead of looking at how the product can compete with other technologies in the space, and price it to work for every case. Meaning going for Profit margin, not volume. I think its because leading edge vendors are underfinanced as well. MMW is still averaging 11-35K for short links, and Long range License around 20K, which puts them outside of the budget for the majority of the potential applications, although the price can easilly be justified for 10% of the potential applications. I can give an example, of I just recently finished some engineering for about a half mil worth of MMW links, and my conclusion was I could buy Fiber for an over all lower cost than the MMW gear, so why go wireless? What I found surprizing is that when push came to shove, when I put the money on the table, Lendors and Vendors weren't yet willing to drop the price to compete with Fiber Deployment /Dark Fiber costs. (Based on planned deployment which was not time sensitive). Take away the now benefit of Time to Market that wireless offered, and it wasn;t a winner, yet. But still MMW works for many that don't have the fiber available to their locations. I think the race this next year is going to be about how low they (non-fiber) vendors can go. In 2006, Proxim set the bar (Like Trango did for Unlicenced 6 years ago), by putting Short range GB wireless ( 1/2mile) on the table for $10K a link, about what Free-Space Optics was until then. (Some argue its Bridgewave that set that price, by releasing a far superior product to generate competitive preasure). This year we are going to see who is going to be the first to be the Cogent of Wireless gear manufacturering. Short Range GB, needs to come down, Lease payments closer to Local Loop Costs ($80 /month), and Longer range shots need to come down below Dark Fiber Costs (sub $500 /mon.). I have to say currently there is little demand to lower the short range cost, because their isnl;t a lower cost long range solution yet. But when the lower cost Long range product comes, the demand for lower cost short range will skyrocket. The BEST thing a MMW product vendor could do strategically, is LOWER the price on LONG RANGE links, to enable carriers to have fast Backhauls, so that they can support buying a HUGE number of Fast Short Range Local Loop MMW products. Most argue that MMW is superior to Laser, if obtained at the same cost. (although I'm sure their are arguements that may differ that opinion, in more controlled climates). It will be interesting to see what Happens in laser technology If they are the first to bring GB to the masses (cheaper), sub $5000 range, or if the product just loses significant market share as MMW drops in price, and it will. I'd argue that Laser technology most likely is more cost effective to make nowadays, with years of the RD behind it already. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless
RE: [WISPA] frame size and fps - was OT: about 70Mbps for under $ 6K
Title: Message Dear Travis, We have "end user pricing" and "reseller/WISP" pricing and the two are different; that keeps margin in there for resellers to sell the product on, which is why our price list isn't on the website: just a matter of history, 60-70% of our customers are corporates, not service providers. That may change and we're considering an e-commerce site specifically to support WISP business. For now, to "set expectation" a complete HPR bridge (that's the one that can clock over 80Mbps through it per radio card) is less than half the price suggested by the "subject line" of this post. In quantity that drops further. That price includes all hardware, Passively-cooled HPR radio units with 1GHz CPU with 10/100 and Gig ports, 1 radio card expandable up to 5, POE injectors, pole mount U-boltsand software including fully-licensed RouterOS and our own PC-based RadioManager; comes complete pre-configured to run "out of the box" and with support from ourselves. Doesn't include RF or Ethernet cables. Anyone interested, please send me a mail and you'll get a personalised (human!) response. Have had some good response already. Best regards Stephen -Original Message-From: Travis Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: 23 June 2006 05:14To: WISPA General ListSubject: Re: [WISPA] frame size and fps - was OT: about 70Mbps for under $ 6KStephen,Could you share retail pricing on your products? I don't see any pricing listed on your website. I'm sure many people (including myself) could be interested in getting more information, etc. but it's nice to see if the product is even close to the price range we are looking.TravisMicroservStephen Patrick wrote: Hi Charles, Well I can't comment on what software Alvarion uses - they of course can. Sure we can share more information with people on our solution. It uses apassively-cooled, 1GHz CPU in outdoorgrade housing with a powerful architecture capable of driving 5 radio cards with over 200Mbps bridged wireless-ethernet throughput demonstrated in P2MP configuration. It has both 10/100 POE and Gig-E ports. Several users tell us that's a pretty unique solution on the market just now. The Routerboards are great, but are optimised for a completely different cost/performance point. Apples and Oranges. You are right that on slower platforms, the "software overhead" of Nstreme actually reduces net throughput, i.e. CPU is limiting and the extra processing slows things down. On our boxes the opposite is true, the radio cards are the limiting factor and we can extract the very last bps/pps from them. Re: your comment about MT's documentation, we have our own user manuals for customers, to support our product range. Nstreme "repackages" the data into frames, which with polling greatly improves P2MP performance as well as the huge improvements seen on P2P links. This is reality not myth. I'd strongly recommend trying the solution "for real" rather than "believing the vendor" (us in this case). Coupled with a MT-based CPE (we have our own also, now at pretty aggressive prices in volume) you have major benefits in a P2MP environment and the security improvements that are inherent with the "proprietary extension" nature of Nstreme - you can't see or connect toit using a WiFi or "Brand X" client. I am sure other users can comment on the latest StarOS versions, but AFAIK that uses "plain vanilla" 802.11a with the Atheros WiFi extensions. That isn't the same, MT's Nstreme adds a completely new layer, with "small packet performance" being a major benefit, as other users commented. I think Lonnie is on this list and can comment on the latest in StarOS/StarVX. Best regards Stephen -Original Message-From: Charles Wu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: 23 June 2006 00:49To: 'WISPA General List'Subject: RE: [WISPA] frame size and fps - was OT: about 70Mbps for under $ 6K Screenshot of NMS from full-speed lab testing, 83Mbps UDP traffic with ~20% CPU loadhttp://www.cablefreesolutions.com/radio/HPR%20lab%20testing%20UDP.pngScreenshot of NMS from full-speed lab testing, 74Mbps TCP/IP traffic with ~20% CPU loadhttp://www.cablefreesolutions.com/radio/HPR%20lab%20testing%20TCP.png Hi Steven, Wouldn't it be funny if the Alvarion product was actually Mikrotik Nstream? ducking On or offlist, I am curious if you'd be willing to share your settings required to achieve this (both hardware and software) 38 Mbps TCP throughput on a 20 MHz channel w/ 54 Mb air rate is quite impressive, and I would like to try to duplicate these results if
RE: [WISPA] frame size and fps - was OT: about 70Mbps for under $ 6K
Title: Message Hi Charles, Well I can't comment on what software Alvarion uses - they of course can. Sure we can share more information with people on our solution. It uses apassively-cooled, 1GHz CPU in outdoorgrade housing with a powerful architecture capable of driving 5 radio cards with over 200Mbps bridged wireless-ethernet throughput demonstrated in P2MP configuration. It has both 10/100 POE and Gig-E ports. Several users tell us that's a pretty unique solution on the market just now. The Routerboards are great, but are optimised for a completely different cost/performance point. Apples and Oranges. You are right that on slower platforms, the "software overhead" of Nstreme actually reduces net throughput, i.e. CPU is limiting and the extra processing slows things down. On our boxes the opposite is true, the radio cards are the limiting factor and we can extract the very last bps/pps from them. Re: your comment about MT's documentation, we have our own user manuals for customers, to support our product range. Nstreme "repackages" the data into frames, which with polling greatly improves P2MP performance as well as the huge improvements seen on P2P links. This is reality not myth. I'd strongly recommend trying the solution "for real" rather than "believing the vendor" (us in this case). Coupled with a MT-based CPE (we have our own also, now at pretty aggressive prices in volume) you have major benefits in a P2MP environment and the security improvements that are inherent with the "proprietary extension" nature of Nstreme - you can't see or connect toit using a WiFi or "Brand X" client. I am sure other users can comment on the latest StarOS versions, but AFAIK that uses "plain vanilla" 802.11a with the Atheros WiFi extensions. That isn't the same, MT's Nstreme adds a completely new layer, with "small packet performance" being a major benefit, as other users commented. I think Lonnie is on this list and can comment on the latest in StarOS/StarVX. Best regards Stephen -Original Message-From: Charles Wu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: 23 June 2006 00:49To: 'WISPA General List'Subject: RE: [WISPA] frame size and fps - was OT: about 70Mbps for under $ 6K Screenshot of NMS from full-speed lab testing, 83Mbps UDP traffic with ~20% CPU loadhttp://www.cablefreesolutions.com/radio/HPR%20lab%20testing%20UDP.pngScreenshot of NMS from full-speed lab testing, 74Mbps TCP/IP traffic with ~20% CPU loadhttp://www.cablefreesolutions.com/radio/HPR%20lab%20testing%20TCP.png Hi Steven, Wouldn't it be funny if the Alvarion product was actually Mikrotik Nstream? ducking On or offlist, I am curious if you'd be willing to share your settings required to achieve this (both hardware and software) 38 Mbps TCP throughput on a 20 MHz channel w/ 54 Mb air rate is quite impressive, and I would like to try to duplicate these results if possible (I'd more than happy to share our testing scripts, platform, etc) Thus far, our Mikrotik testing has been limited to routerboards, and it seems that the limited processing power on the routerboard prevents us from seeing thebenefits Nstream (our current testing w/ Nstream has actually shown decreased performance as opposed to just straight WDS bridging, but we are by no means Mikrotik experts) That said, compared to the rest of Mikrotik, the documentation surrounding Nstream is a bit sparse -- looking at what is available, it seems to me that most of the performance gains of Nstream are achieved through "fast-framing" -- e.g.,it looks like Nstream utilizescombination of timing modications and frame concatenation to increase throughput by transmitting more data per frame and removing interframe pauses. My understanding of this is that Nstream is bundling several frames (depending on settings, default of 3200 looks like it has enough space for 2 frames) together into a single larger frame; in the case of 2 for 1 bundling, this would essentially halve the amountSIFs and ACKs that the protocol has to transmit for a given payload So a few observations/questions for either you (or maybe John will speak up?) 1. Nstream has the ability to set this framing concatenation mechanism (via framer-policy attribute) to none -- if this is set to 0, will there be any performance differences b/n Nstream and "standard WiFi" 2. Whatare the parameters forthe framer-limit setting (if 3200 lets me concatenate 2 packets, wouldn't 5800 work even better as I would be able to concatenate 3 packets and eliminate additional overhead?) 3. While frame concatenation does improve throughput for low density situations -- in high density PtMP situations, we've seen multiple small packet streams basically bring polling-based systems to their knees -- is there any data, testing, experiences on
RE: [WISPA] frame size and fps - was OT: about 70Mbps for under $ 6K
Title: RE: [WISPA] frame size and fps - was OT: about 70Mbps for under $ 6K Hi there, Not detracting from this great debate, but I'd have to make some Mikrotik comments at this point. We use their OS in our radios and the end product we have on the market does out-perform several well-known brands in terms of many parameters including throughput, stability and RX sensitivity. The extras (essentials for some customers) i.e. L3 features, wireless extensions, security add huge value and reduce total network cost as extra boxes suddenly vanish. Shameless plug, we not only offer completed products with warranty but training and full tech support (not the e-mail us variety: real people to speak to, on-site presence when it matters, etc). Of course Mikrotik performance gains might not apply if you were to take a DIY approach: performance can be terrible on the wrong hardware, tech support absent and you wouldn't have vital (legally required) certifications either. But as a vendor having built and shipped wireless products that use RouterOS and hearing the (cynical and wireless savvy) customer feedback saying consistently performance better than Brand X even comparing a simple L2 wireless bridge then I'd have to voice support for the OS. Sure do compare with Star-OS and others; or a real DIY: build it from bare hardware and FreeBSD/Linux with WiFi drivers or whatever... but as this thread came from vendor products I thought it worth chipping in - just my £0.01's worth. Regards Stephen CableFree Solutions www.cablefreesolutions.com -Original Message- From: Charles Wu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 20 June 2006 20:15 To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] frame size and fps - was OT: about 70Mbps for under $ 6K Hi Tom, Not to add another chink to your debate -- but it is worth noting that Mikrotik is more of a jack of all trades solution (they do routing, hotspot, etc) than a wireless solution While they do an ok job w/ wireless, IMO, their strength is more the convenience coming from the integration of multiple packages and its flexibility rather than the performance of any single feature If you're looking at purely a wireless solution (in this do-it-yourself genre) -- you need to include Star-OS / Ikarus in your evaluation (but then, documentation gets a bit sparse there...) -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 5:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] frame size and fps - was OT: about 70Mbps for under $ 6K Paul, Although many have reported very high speeds with Mikrotik. Our live tests in noisy environments (wether accepted as accurate or not) showed we were not able to get the peak speeds out of Mikrotik where we could get them from Alvarion. Our comparative tests were done with the Alvarion ver 3 firmware (not 4 yet). The Alvarion speeds that we got were right on the numbers with the speeds test Alvarion tech support sent us. Actually our tested speeds were a bit higher in some some cases. (Take note we only got accurate speeds when we hard set modulation to optimal (picked the best one for the situation) modulation for testing). I do not mean this as a negative comment on Mikrotik. Our competition to Alvarion is NOT Trango, Trango does not yet have a 20 mbps product for PtMP. We look at our Trango as the best choice to tackle the worse noisy environments (for us almost everywhere :-) Our competition for Alvarion is actually Mikrotik. Mikrotik probably has the single highest value from a feature cost perspective. Why pay Alvarion price, when Mikrotik can do almost the same thing at a fraction of the cost. Mikrotik has changed this market and forced competing vendors to look at how to be more competitive. Mikrotik is doing what Trango did 4 years ago to drive the price down. (I'd argue that Trango is still doing it also). It will be real interesting to see how Alvarion performs side by side to Mikrotik. The initial look show to me that Alvarion adds significant features that make it the premium choice, possibly the leader in OFDM today, if price not part of the consideration. However, Mikrotik's flexibilty and price clearly will keep them a major player for many WISPs. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Paul Hendry [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 3:45 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] frame size and fps - was OT: about 70Mbps for under $ 6K Are these figures in the lab? I have seen similar with a Mikrotik/N-Streme solution. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: 16 June 2006 19:57 To: WISPA General List Subject:
RE: [WISPA] frame size and fps - was OT: about 70Mbps for under $ 6K
Title: RE: [WISPA] frame size and fps - was OT: about 70Mbps for under $ 6K Nice one Jeff... Absolutely right - and our over-priced currency deserves some stick, not us (the people) :-) -Original Message- From: Jeff Broadwick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 20 June 2006 21:07 To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] frame size and fps - was OT: about 70Mbps for under $ 6K I thought it worth chipping in - just my £0.01's worth. Now that's harsh...the English Pence isn't worth 2 cents...yet. Figuring it correctly: just my 1.0871p worth :-) -- 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] 2.4GHz Omni in 5.8GHz
Title: RE: [WISPA] 2.4GHz Omni in 5.8GHz Mars - Have tried them, are fine. Regards -Original Message- From: Paul Hendry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 03 June 2006 23:02 To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] 2.4GHz Omni in 5.8GHz Because I can't find any. Got a good source? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: 03 June 2006 21:07 To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 2.4GHz Omni in 5.8GHz Paul, This is like having two flat tires on a car but going ahead and driving anyway because the car still goes. In short, you are going to be penalizing yourself significantly. Why not be good to yourself and get some 5.8 GHz antennas? jack Paul Hendry wrote: Ola, I’m looking at deploying a small WDS mesh using only Mikrotik in the mini-box enclosures. I want it to be 5.8GHz only to avoid future interference but I can only find cheap outdoor omni’s with N-Type at 2.4GHz. I have run a couple of 5.8GHz antennae temporarily at 2.4GHz before (obviously with a lot lower antenna gain) but never experimented with it the other way round. Any thoughts or experiences?? Cheers, P Skyline Networks Consultancy Ltd Web: http://www.skyline-networks.com This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender. Whilst every endeavour is taken to ensure that emails are free from viruses, no liability can be accepted for any damage arising from using this email. -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.1/354 - Release Date: 01/06/2006 -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.1/355 - Release Date: 02/06/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.1/355 - Release Date: 02/06/2006 -- 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 Our next WISP Workshop is June 21-22 in Atlanta, GA. 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/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.1/354 - Release Date: 01/06/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.1/354 - Release Date: 01/06/2006 -- 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: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.1/355 - Release Date: 02/06/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.1/355 - Release Date: 02/06/2006 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Wimax Hardware for sale?
Title: RE: [WISPA] Wimax Hardware for sale? Absolutely right regarding non-WiMax solution - Well worth a look at systems built using Mikrotik O/S, which supports 5, 10, 20 and 40MHz channels, and the latest atheros cards. Very feature-rich and good hardware support from various vendors (including us!). If you want interoperability and roadmap, WiMax is a great (and we think so too) - But otherwise, there are plenty of other options Regards Stephen == Cablefree Solutions Ltd www.cablefreesolutions.com -Original Message- From: Charles Wu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 05 May 2006 18:39 To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Wimax Hardware for sale? You can do a 5 MHz channel size on an Atheros chip (Off the top of my head, Alvarion Airaya have implemented it so far) -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 10:11 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Wimax Hardware for sale? Patrick Leary wrote: But which WiMAX are you talking about? There are lots of versions and the one version that no one has...and no one should be clamoring for just yet...is unlicensed WiMAX. I am certainly looking for WiMAX features such as spectral efficiency in 5 Ghz unlicensed gear right now. I don't really care about the standard. -Matt -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
