Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had...
Hi Sam we have some operators in Italy using WiMAX in licensed and unlicensed. In licensed it works well, in unlicensed it woks not so well I have heard some marketing guy saying things like it works till 20 miles and it gives you a lot of bandwidth which is technically wrong but it's a good commercial white lie. the reality is it works till 20 miles OR it gives you a lot of bandwidth meaning that yes you can do 20miles but at lower efficiencies (=bandwidth) or you can have high bandwidth if you have near customers with a good signal. WiMAX does not do miracles Lately I have heard that some WISP/operators are abandoning WiMAX and moving to LTE or dual stack WiMAX/LTE because frequencies are usually technology independent and LTE seems more supported by some vendors and the new marketing magic word. The problem is that devices are really expensive so you must have some really good reason to convince the customer to buy that thing or you must be sure that the customer will never abandon you. So the WiMAX is not working in the WISP unlicensed business because if you have clean channels you can give the same service with unlicensed 5Ghz and at lower prices. Indeed for the unlicensed market there are two options: 1) the channels are empty/clean and you can do whatever you want even with a 5Ghz device 2) the channels are dirty/noisy and WiMAX does not work well there Regards Today we had a company come to us pushing wimax. Admittedly I've never used wimax, nor do I know a lot about it. From what I can see looking at Google images of the technology and how it's deployed, it looks no different than the PtP and PtMP that we all use with 900 MHz, or 2.4 and 5.x GHz. Is the only advantage to wimax the presumably clearer and less-used frequencies upon which they operate? I had (evidently mistakenly) thought that perhaps wimax was a code word for some sort of mesh, and that's how it achieved NLOS service. However in looking at the network layouts on Google, it doesn't look like that at all. Rather, it looks like that add another AP to get around the obstruction(s), and simply backhaul it to an intermediary AP/tower to get it back to the PoP. Thanks Sam ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless -- Ing. Paolo Di Francesco Level7 s.r.l. unipersonale Sede operativa: Largo Montalto, 5 - 90144 Palermo C.F. e P.IVA 05940050825 Fax : +39-091-8772072 assistenza: (+39) 091-8776432 web: http://www.level7.it ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had...
Thanks to everyone who replied to my question. This was a good learning experience for me from you all. Thank you again, Sam ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
[WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had...
Today we had a company come to us pushing wimax. Admittedly I've never used wimax, nor do I know a lot about it. From what I can see looking at Google images of the technology and how it's deployed, it looks no different than the PtP and PtMP that we all use with 900 MHz, or 2.4 and 5.x GHz. Is the only advantage to wimax the presumably clearer and less-used frequencies upon which they operate? I had (evidently mistakenly) thought that perhaps wimax was a code word for some sort of mesh, and that's how it achieved NLOS service. However in looking at the network layouts on Google, it doesn't look like that at all. Rather, it looks like that add another AP to get around the obstruction(s), and simply backhaul it to an intermediary AP/tower to get it back to the PoP. Thanks Sam ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had...
Different frequencies (2.5 in the US, 2.3 in Asia, 3.3 and 3.5GHz in other areas) 5bps/Hz vs 2.7bps/Hz on 802.11-stuff smart antenna systems on the fly bandwidth and channel changes channel bandwidths of things like 1.25MHz - 20MHz hybrid automatic repeat-request (HARQ - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_automatic_repeat-request) etc. It's a different animal. It's very expensive though, and I've heard some pretty outrageous claims from it that I just don't believe. *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 03/27/2014 11:25 AM, Sam wrote: Today we had a company come to us pushing wimax. Admittedly I've never used wimax, nor do I know a lot about it. From what I can see looking at Google images of the technology and how it's deployed, it looks no different than the PtP and PtMP that we all use with 900 MHz, or 2.4 and 5.x GHz. Is the only advantage to wimax the presumably clearer and less-used frequencies upon which they operate? I had (evidently mistakenly) thought that perhaps wimax was a code word for some sort of mesh, and that's how it achieved NLOS service. However in looking at the network layouts on Google, it doesn't look like that at all. Rather, it looks like that add another AP to get around the obstruction(s), and simply backhaul it to an intermediary AP/tower to get it back to the PoP. Thanks Sam ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had...
It's not as different or complicated as you think. Basically it's a standard protocol that was designed for ptmp broadband access. It's a standard, so in theory different operators equipment will talk to each other unlike most of the popular WISP products that have drifted toward proprietary protocols. The protocol is rather sophisticated and has some tricks that help it have better success in nLOS situations than a wifi-based protocol or canopy. The main downside from a performance standpoint is higher latency due to how the scheduling works. Your statement about adding another AP to get around obstructions is not quite right, what you might be looking at is a base station that uses antenna diversity to increase signal gain for nlos situations. Basically multiple receive antennas on the same base station giving it ability to hear the CPE better. On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 3:25 PM, Sam w...@csilogan.com wrote: Today we had a company come to us pushing wimax. Admittedly I've never used wimax, nor do I know a lot about it. From what I can see looking at Google images of the technology and how it's deployed, it looks no different than the PtP and PtMP that we all use with 900 MHz, or 2.4 and 5.x GHz. Is the only advantage to wimax the presumably clearer and less-used frequencies upon which they operate? I had (evidently mistakenly) thought that perhaps wimax was a code word for some sort of mesh, and that's how it achieved NLOS service. However in looking at the network layouts on Google, it doesn't look like that at all. Rather, it looks like that add another AP to get around the obstruction(s), and simply backhaul it to an intermediary AP/tower to get it back to the PoP. Thanks Sam ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had...
Wimax on the pmp320 and others is 3.65 Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 27, 2014 2:36 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com wrote: Different frequencies (2.5 in the US, 2.3 in Asia, 3.3 and 3.5GHz in other areas) 5bps/Hz vs 2.7bps/Hz on 802.11-stuff smart antenna systems on the fly bandwidth and channel changes channel bandwidths of things like 1.25MHz - 20MHz hybrid automatic repeat-request (HARQ - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_automatic_repeat-request) etc. It's a different animal. It's very expensive though, and I've heard some pretty outrageous claims from it that I just don't believe. *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 03/27/2014 11:25 AM, Sam wrote: Today we had a company come to us pushing wimax. Admittedly I've never used wimax, nor do I know a lot about it. From what I can see looking at Google images of the technology and how it's deployed, it looks no different than the PtP and PtMP that we all use with 900 MHz, or 2.4 and 5.x GHz. Is the only advantage to wimax the presumably clearer and less-used frequencies upon which they operate? I had (evidently mistakenly) thought that perhaps wimax was a code word for some sort of mesh, and that's how it achieved NLOS service. However in looking at the network layouts on Google, it doesn't look like that at all. Rather, it looks like that add another AP to get around the obstruction(s), and simply backhaul it to an intermediary AP/tower to get it back to the PoP. Thanks Sam ___ Wireless mailing listWireless@wispa.orghttp://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had...
Thought I should add, the wimax protocol is independent from the frequency band used. 3.65ghz is commonly used for wimax by WISPs in this country due to the light licensing, but equipment is available to run wimax in 5.8, 3.65, 3.5, 2.3/2.5, 900, 700 that I'm aware of. There is also non-wimax equipment that will operate in all of those bands as well. On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 3:37 PM, Chris Fabien ch...@lakenetmi.com wrote: It's not as different or complicated as you think. Basically it's a standard protocol that was designed for ptmp broadband access. It's a standard, so in theory different operators equipment will talk to each other unlike most of the popular WISP products that have drifted toward proprietary protocols. The protocol is rather sophisticated and has some tricks that help it have better success in nLOS situations than a wifi-based protocol or canopy. The main downside from a performance standpoint is higher latency due to how the scheduling works. Your statement about adding another AP to get around obstructions is not quite right, what you might be looking at is a base station that uses antenna diversity to increase signal gain for nlos situations. Basically multiple receive antennas on the same base station giving it ability to hear the CPE better. On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 3:25 PM, Sam w...@csilogan.com wrote: Today we had a company come to us pushing wimax. Admittedly I've never used wimax, nor do I know a lot about it. From what I can see looking at Google images of the technology and how it's deployed, it looks no different than the PtP and PtMP that we all use with 900 MHz, or 2.4 and 5.x GHz. Is the only advantage to wimax the presumably clearer and less-used frequencies upon which they operate? I had (evidently mistakenly) thought that perhaps wimax was a code word for some sort of mesh, and that's how it achieved NLOS service. However in looking at the network layouts on Google, it doesn't look like that at all. Rather, it looks like that add another AP to get around the obstruction(s), and simply backhaul it to an intermediary AP/tower to get it back to the PoP. Thanks Sam ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had...
Yeah, I had heard canopy/cambium was doing other stuff. What are the other companies using though? *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 03/27/2014 11:42 AM, Josh Luthman wrote: Wimax on the pmp320 and others is 3.65 Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 27, 2014 2:36 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com mailto:j...@spitwspots.com wrote: Different frequencies (2.5 in the US, 2.3 in Asia, 3.3 and 3.5GHz in other areas) 5bps/Hz vs 2.7bps/Hz on 802.11-stuff smart antenna systems on the fly bandwidth and channel changes channel bandwidths of things like 1.25MHz - 20MHz hybrid automatic repeat-request (HARQ - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_automatic_repeat-request) etc. It's a different animal. It's very expensive though, and I've heard some pretty outrageous claims from it that I just don't believe. *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com mailto:j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com http://www.spitwspots.com On 03/27/2014 11:25 AM, Sam wrote: Today we had a company come to us pushing wimax. Admittedly I've never used wimax, nor do I know a lot about it. From what I can see looking at Google images of the technology and how it's deployed, it looks no different than the PtP and PtMP that we all use with 900 MHz, or 2.4 and 5.x GHz. Is the only advantage to wimax the presumably clearer and less-used frequencies upon which they operate? I had (evidently mistakenly) thought that perhaps wimax was a code word for some sort of mesh, and that's how it achieved NLOS service. However in looking at the network layouts on Google, it doesn't look like that at all. Rather, it looks like that add another AP to get around the obstruction(s), and simply backhaul it to an intermediary AP/tower to get it back to the PoP. Thanks Sam ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org mailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org mailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had...
As stated earlier Wimax is frequency independent. Wimax is also referred to as 802.16x. Last I knew they were up to revisionE, but I could be wrong. Wimax is the ³generic term² for 802.16 just like wifi is the generic term for 802.11. Wimax allows 8 bits per hertz no matter the frequency used. 3.65 Wimax is the common frequency available to the normal WISP operator. Some Reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WiMAX http://compnetworking.about.com/od/wirelessinternet/g/bldef_wimax.htm Justin -- Justin Wilson j...@mtin.net MTCNA CCNA MTCRE MTCWE - COMTRAIN Aol Yahoo IM: j2sw http://www.mtin.net/blog xISP News http://www.zigwireless.com High Speed Internet Options http://www.thebrotherswisp.com The Brothers Wisp -Original Message- From: Sam w...@csilogan.com Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Date: Thursday, March 27, 2014 at 3:25 PM To: wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had... Today we had a company come to us pushing wimax. Admittedly I've never used wimax, nor do I know a lot about it. From what I can see looking at Google images of the technology and how it's deployed, it looks no different than the PtP and PtMP that we all use with 900 MHz, or 2.4 and 5.x GHz. Is the only advantage to wimax the presumably clearer and less-used frequencies upon which they operate? I had (evidently mistakenly) thought that perhaps wimax was a code word for some sort of mesh, and that's how it achieved NLOS service. However in looking at the network layouts on Google, it doesn't look like that at all. Rather, it looks like that add another AP to get around the obstruction(s), and simply backhaul it to an intermediary AP/tower to get it back to the PoP. Thanks Sam ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had...
http://resources.wimaxforum.org/sites/wimaxforum.org/files/document_library/wimax_hspa+and_lte_111809_final.pdf wikipedia other sources All are saying 5bps/Hz for DL efficiency, 2.5bps/Hz for upload *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 03/27/2014 12:08 PM, Justin Wilson wrote: As stated earlier Wimax is frequency independent. Wimax is also referred to as 802.16x. Last I knew they were up to revisionE, but I could be wrong. Wimax is the ³generic term² for 802.16 just like wifi is the generic term for 802.11. Wimax allows 8 bits per hertz no matter the frequency used. 3.65 Wimax is the common frequency available to the normal WISP operator. Some Reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WiMAX http://compnetworking.about.com/od/wirelessinternet/g/bldef_wimax.htm Justin -- Justin Wilson j...@mtin.net MTCNA CCNA MTCRE MTCWE - COMTRAIN Aol Yahoo IM: j2sw http://www.mtin.net/blog xISP News http://www.zigwireless.com High Speed Internet Options http://www.thebrotherswisp.com The Brothers Wisp -Original Message- From: Sam w...@csilogan.com Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Date: Thursday, March 27, 2014 at 3:25 PM To: wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had... Today we had a company come to us pushing wimax. Admittedly I've never used wimax, nor do I know a lot about it. From what I can see looking at Google images of the technology and how it's deployed, it looks no different than the PtP and PtMP that we all use with 900 MHz, or 2.4 and 5.x GHz. Is the only advantage to wimax the presumably clearer and less-used frequencies upon which they operate? I had (evidently mistakenly) thought that perhaps wimax was a code word for some sort of mesh, and that's how it achieved NLOS service. However in looking at the network layouts on Google, it doesn't look like that at all. Rather, it looks like that add another AP to get around the obstruction(s), and simply backhaul it to an intermediary AP/tower to get it back to the PoP. Thanks Sam ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had...
PureWave, RunCom, Alvarion (well, whatever their name is now), the Aperto\Tranzeo guys, AirSpan was the first for the full 50 MHz, etc. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com To: wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2014 2:51:51 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had... Yeah, I had heard canopy/cambium was doing other stuff. What are the other companies using though? Josh Reynolds Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 03/27/2014 11:42 AM, Josh Luthman wrote: Wimax on the pmp320 and others is 3.65 Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 27, 2014 2:36 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com wrote: blockquote Different frequencies (2.5 in the US, 2.3 in Asia, 3.3 and 3.5GHz in other areas) 5bps/Hz vs 2.7bps/Hz on 802.11-stuff smart antenna systems on the fly bandwidth and channel changes channel bandwidths of things like 1.25MHz - 20MHz hybrid automatic repeat-request (HARQ - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_automatic_repeat-request ) etc. It's a different animal. It's very expensive though, and I've heard some pretty outrageous claims from it that I just don't believe. Josh Reynolds Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 03/27/2014 11:25 AM, Sam wrote: blockquote Today we had a company come to us pushing wimax. Admittedly I've never used wimax, nor do I know a lot about it. From what I can see looking at Google images of the technology and how it's deployed, it looks no different than the PtP and PtMP that we all use with 900 MHz, or 2.4 and 5.x GHz. Is the only advantage to wimax the presumably clearer and less-used frequencies upon which they operate? I had (evidently mistakenly) thought that perhaps wimax was a code word for some sort of mesh, and that's how it achieved NLOS service. However in looking at the network layouts on Google, it doesn't look like that at all. Rather, it looks like that add another AP to get around the obstruction(s), and simply backhaul it to an intermediary AP/tower to get it back to the PoP. Thanks Sam ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless /blockquote ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless /blockquote ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had...
Purewave also falls under whatever their name is now ... On Mar 27, 2014 5:13 PM, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net wrote: PureWave, RunCom, Alvarion (well, whatever their name is now), the Aperto\Tranzeo guys, AirSpan was the first for the full 50 MHz, etc. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- *From: *Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com *To: *wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Thursday, March 27, 2014 2:51:51 PM *Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had... Yeah, I had heard canopy/cambium was doing other stuff. What are the other companies using though? *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 03/27/2014 11:42 AM, Josh Luthman wrote: Wimax on the pmp320 and others is 3.65 Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 27, 2014 2:36 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com wrote: Different frequencies (2.5 in the US, 2.3 in Asia, 3.3 and 3.5GHz in other areas) 5bps/Hz vs 2.7bps/Hz on 802.11-stuff smart antenna systems on the fly bandwidth and channel changes channel bandwidths of things like 1.25MHz - 20MHz hybrid automatic repeat-request (HARQ - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_automatic_repeat-request) etc. It's a different animal. It's very expensive though, and I've heard some pretty outrageous claims from it that I just don't believe. *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 03/27/2014 11:25 AM, Sam wrote: Today we had a company come to us pushing wimax. Admittedly I've never used wimax, nor do I know a lot about it. From what I can see looking at Google images of the technology and how it's deployed, it looks no different than the PtP and PtMP that we all use with 900 MHz, or 2.4 and 5.x GHz. Is the only advantage to wimax the presumably clearer and less-used frequencies upon which they operate? I had (evidently mistakenly) thought that perhaps wimax was a code word for some sort of mesh, and that's how it achieved NLOS service. However in looking at the network layouts on Google, it doesn't look like that at all. Rather, it looks like that add another AP to get around the obstruction(s), and simply backhaul it to an intermediary AP/tower to get it back to the PoP. Thanks Sam ___ Wireless mailing listWireless@wispa.orghttp://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing listWireless@wispa.orghttp://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had...
haha, yeah, I know someone bought PureWave, but I think they're just doing a DBA PureWave. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Chris Fabien ch...@lakenetmi.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2014 4:37:55 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had... Purewave also falls under whatever their name is now ... On Mar 27, 2014 5:13 PM, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net wrote: PureWave, RunCom, Alvarion (well, whatever their name is now), the Aperto\Tranzeo guys, AirSpan was the first for the full 50 MHz, etc. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com From: Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com To: wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2014 2:51:51 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had... Yeah, I had heard canopy/cambium was doing other stuff. What are the other companies using though? Josh Reynolds Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 03/27/2014 11:42 AM, Josh Luthman wrote: blockquote Wimax on the pmp320 and others is 3.65 Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 27, 2014 2:36 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com wrote: blockquote Different frequencies (2.5 in the US, 2.3 in Asia, 3.3 and 3.5GHz in other areas) 5bps/Hz vs 2.7bps/Hz on 802.11-stuff smart antenna systems on the fly bandwidth and channel changes channel bandwidths of things like 1.25MHz - 20MHz hybrid automatic repeat-request (HARQ - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_automatic_repeat-request ) etc. It's a different animal. It's very expensive though, and I've heard some pretty outrageous claims from it that I just don't believe. Josh Reynolds Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 03/27/2014 11:25 AM, Sam wrote: blockquote Today we had a company come to us pushing wimax. Admittedly I've never used wimax, nor do I know a lot about it. From what I can see looking at Google images of the technology and how it's deployed, it looks no different than the PtP and PtMP that we all use with 900 MHz, or 2.4 and 5.x GHz. Is the only advantage to wimax the presumably clearer and less-used frequencies upon which they operate? I had (evidently mistakenly) thought that perhaps wimax was a code word for some sort of mesh, and that's how it achieved NLOS service. However in looking at the network layouts on Google, it doesn't look like that at all. Rather, it looks like that add another AP to get around the obstruction(s), and simply backhaul it to an intermediary AP/tower to get it back to the PoP. Thanks Sam ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless /blockquote ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless /blockquote ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless /blockquote ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had...
Somethings are not a matter of belief, they are either demonstratably true or not. Sent from my iPhone On Mar 27, 2014, at 14:39, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.netmailto:wispawirel...@ics-il.net wrote: haha, yeah, I know someone bought PureWave, but I think they're just doing a DBA PureWave. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com From: Chris Fabien ch...@lakenetmi.commailto:ch...@lakenetmi.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.orgmailto:wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2014 4:37:55 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had... Purewave also falls under whatever their name is now ... On Mar 27, 2014 5:13 PM, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.netmailto:wispawirel...@ics-il.net wrote: PureWave, RunCom, Alvarion (well, whatever their name is now), the Aperto\Tranzeo guys, AirSpan was the first for the full 50 MHz, etc. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com From: Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.commailto:j...@spitwspots.com To: wireless@wispa.orgmailto:wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2014 2:51:51 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had... Yeah, I had heard canopy/cambium was doing other stuff. What are the other companies using though? Josh Reynolds Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.commailto:j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 03/27/2014 11:42 AM, Josh Luthman wrote: Wimax on the pmp320 and others is 3.65 Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340tel:937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343tel:937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 27, 2014 2:36 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.commailto:j...@spitwspots.com wrote: Different frequencies (2.5 in the US, 2.3 in Asia, 3.3 and 3.5GHz in other areas) 5bps/Hz vs 2.7bps/Hz on 802.11-stuff smart antenna systems on the fly bandwidth and channel changes channel bandwidths of things like 1.25MHz - 20MHz hybrid automatic repeat-request (HARQ - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_automatic_repeat-request) etc. It's a different animal. It's very expensive though, and I've heard some pretty outrageous claims from it that I just don't believe. Josh Reynolds Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.commailto:j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.comhttp://www.spitwspots.com On 03/27/2014 11:25 AM, Sam wrote: Today we had a company come to us pushing wimax. Admittedly I've never used wimax, nor do I know a lot about it. From what I can see looking at Google images of the technology and how it's deployed, it looks no different than the PtP and PtMP that we all use with 900 MHz, or 2.4 and 5.x GHz. Is the only advantage to wimax the presumably clearer and less-used frequencies upon which they operate? I had (evidently mistakenly) thought that perhaps wimax was a code word for some sort of mesh, and that's how it achieved NLOS service. However in looking at the network layouts on Google, it doesn't look like that at all. Rather, it looks like that add another AP to get around the obstruction(s), and simply backhaul it to an intermediary AP/tower to get it back to the PoP. Thanks Sam ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.orgmailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.orgmailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.orgmailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.orgmailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.orgmailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.orgmailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.orgmailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses
Re: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had...
Wimax -GPS Sync: needed for good frequency reuse -Automatic transmit power control: so that CPEs only transmit at minimum necessary level instead of blasting all the time into the adjacent cells. -uplink sub-channelization! Think of it like this: Rather than a CPE transmitting across the whole say 10mhz channel. 2 CPEs could each be transmitting using half the available subcarriers like Two 5mhz channels or 5 2mhz channels which dramatically increases uplink non-line of site penetration. Sma -MIMOA and MIMOB, A is more important for non line of site. Use one of many 5ghz vendors for LineOfSite Customers. Use wimax for non-lineOfSite customers. On 3/27/14, 4:08 PM, Justin Wilson li...@mtin.net wrote: As stated earlier Wimax is frequency independent. Wimax is also referred to as 802.16x. Last I knew they were up to revisionE, but I could be wrong. Wimax is the ³generic term² for 802.16 just like wifi is the generic term for 802.11. Wimax allows 8 bits per hertz no matter the frequency used. 3.65 Wimax is the common frequency available to the normal WISP operator. Some Reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WiMAX http://compnetworking.about.com/od/wirelessinternet/g/bldef_wimax.htm Justin -- Justin Wilson j...@mtin.net MTCNA CCNA MTCRE MTCWE - COMTRAIN Aol Yahoo IM: j2sw http://www.mtin.net/blog xISP News http://www.zigwireless.com High Speed Internet Options http://www.thebrotherswisp.com The Brothers Wisp -Original Message- From: Sam w...@csilogan.com Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Date: Thursday, March 27, 2014 at 3:25 PM To: wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Help Me Understand This WiMax Show We Had... Today we had a company come to us pushing wimax. Admittedly I've never used wimax, nor do I know a lot about it. From what I can see looking at Google images of the technology and how it's deployed, it looks no different than the PtP and PtMP that we all use with 900 MHz, or 2.4 and 5.x GHz. Is the only advantage to wimax the presumably clearer and less-used frequencies upon which they operate? I had (evidently mistakenly) thought that perhaps wimax was a code word for some sort of mesh, and that's how it achieved NLOS service. However in looking at the network layouts on Google, it doesn't look like that at all. Rather, it looks like that add another AP to get around the obstruction(s), and simply backhaul it to an intermediary AP/tower to get it back to the PoP. Thanks Sam ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
