Re: [AFMUG] Laptop for Installers

[Jesse DuPont]

  
  
Amazon has used Getac V110 laptops for around $400 - ruggedized like
a Toughbook. Really great buy, actually! Dual batteries, touch
screen, good daylight screen.


  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
Jesse DuPont

  Network
  Architect
  email: jesse.dup...@celeritycorp.net
  Celerity Networks LLC
  Celerity
  Broadband LLC
Like us! facebook.com/celeritynetworksllc
  Like us! facebook.com/celeritybroadband
  

  

On 6/28/17 11:25 AM, Matt wrote:


  Looking for a good laptop for installers.  Prefer refurbished.  Any suggestions?



  

Re: [AFMUG] Radwin 5000 Pro vs. Cambium 450m

[Rory Conaway]

Josh, you are dead on.  I think that the speed of equipment and the quality of 
what we are seeing from several vendors, is pretty amazing.  Cambium has taken 
802.11n to places I didn’t think it would go but is last generation for us.  
Ubiquiti has exploded with 802.11ac products across the board that is finally 
stable and the results we are seeing are impressive enough that we are 
expanding some rural areas with it.  Mimosa has opened up new markets for us 
and have changed the way we deploy backhaul design.  Ignitenet has allowed us 
to upgrade backhaul speeds on short links at budget prices and are still 
expanding.

So, Radwin or Cambium 450m?  Both are solid products but at this point and 
based on price/profitability/results, I think multiple vendors are leaving 
those products behind for the majority of deployments.

Rory

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Reynolds
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 6:09 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Radwin 5000 Pro vs. Cambium 450m

I don't think they have any desire to open up SNMP, it doesn't seem part of 
their strategy.

They have yet another NMS, in UNMS, which seems to be supporting everything 
from ptmp radios, to backhauls, switches, routers, gpon, and cpe devices.

They have radios with severe RF filtering, GPS sync, real-time spectrum 
analysis, their own silicon... indoor radios with with MU-MIMO, 802.11r, and 
beamforming... Their UniFi offering is actually pretty solid now, though the 
router management needs real work still, but they are progressing rapidly. DPI 
is nice. MPLS is good, but obviously needs hardware acceleration.

Anyway, my point is that this in many ways is not the company of even just a 
few years ago. They still have things to work on, as does any company, but 
overall I think they offer incredible performance on top of reasonable costs 
without license key hell.

FCC is posting new stuff from their various branches all the time, and LTU 
might be very interesting.

It's a good time to be in this market as an end user... Better than in many 
years.
- Josh

On Jun 28, 2017 7:20 PM, "Chris Wright" 
> wrote:
I’m going to infer you’d like to talk about Mimosa and Ubiquiti, both of which 
are still wet behind their ears when it comes to providing a mature platform 
for PTMP > 3 mile. They’re cheaper and underdeveloped. Case in point: SNMPv3 
has been defined for fifteen years now and UBNT still hasn’t implemented it. 
Mimosa didn’t support SNMP at all in their A5 until the latest firmware update 
this month. Not unlike Apple computers in the early 2000’s, they’re poised to 
make a significant impact on the market in the future, but currently still 
pretty much a joke.

Chris Wright
Network Administrator

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf 
Of Rory Conaway
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 4:15 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Radwin 5000 Pro vs. Cambium 450m

Are these the only 2 choices?

Rory

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Eric Muehleisen
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 11:46 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] Radwin 5000 Pro vs. Cambium 450m

Let's assume you have an unlimited budget. Which platform would you choose and 
why?

Re: [AFMUG] Building a POP into an underbed truck box

[Adam Moffett]

I regrettably don't have pictures.  We had room on one side to bolt down 
a mini size 19" rack and room on the opposite side for batteries.  I'm 
guessing the box was closer to 3' wide.  We debated whether the door 
should open up or down: down makes a laptop shelf and up makes a rain 
hood.  I think we went with down.


Sorry for lack of photos, but it was done at a company I no longer work 
for.



-- Original Message --
From: "Eric Kuhnke" 
To: "af@afmug.com" 
Sent: 6/28/2017 8:26:03 PM
Subject: [AFMUG] Building a POP into an underbed truck box

If you've built a site into an underbed truck box (instead of a typical 
IP65/NEMA4 box), I'd be very curious to see photos. Have seen some 
examples already on the WISP Pics facebook group, but curious what 
people are doing to customize them internally.


https://www.tractorsupply.com/tsc/product/tractor-supply-co-underbed-truck-box-24-in

https://www.tractorsupply.com/tsc/product/tractor-supply-co-underbed-truck-box-36-in-black?cm_vc=IOPDP1

Re: [AFMUG] Force110 vs Force200

[Josh Luthman]

For those barn to house PTP links we've been doing Nanostations.  We use a
different band than the rx radio for the Internet service (ie Force200 for
Internet, nsm2 ptp link).


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 5:32 PM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists 
wrote:

> What size channel?
>
> Jeff Broadwick
> ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
> 312-205-2519 <(312)%20205-2519> Office
> 574-220-7826 <(574)%20220-7826> Cell
> jbroadw...@converge-tech.com
>
> On Jun 28, 2017, at 3:51 PM, David Coudron 
> wrote:
>
> We have what I believe is a similar need.   We have a number of customers
> that have large farmyards and want coverage in outbuildings.   These are
> too far for ethernet runs, so we have been using Ubiquiti Nanostations as
> PTP links because they are cheap.   I see that the ePMPs get close to the
> same price point as the larger Nanostations and we are wondering if they
> are a better option.   Does anyone have experience with both and some
> perspective which is a better option for PTP links that are less than a
> mile and need 25 -50 Mbps?
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> *David Coudron*
>
> david.coud...@advantenon.com  |  *Mobile: *612-991-7474 <(612)%20991-7474>
>
>
>
> *Advantenon, Inc.  *   
>   
>   
>   
> 
>
> i...@advantenon.com  |  3500 Vicksburg Lane N, Suite 315, Plymouth, MN
> 55447  |  www.advantenon.com  |  *Phone:* 800-704-4720 <(800)%20704-4720>
>  |  *Local: *612-454-1545 <(612)%20454-1545>
>
>
>
> 
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
> Behalf Of *Jeff Broadwick - Lists
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 28, 2017 2:26 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Force110 vs Force200
>
>
>
> I'd use a couple of Force 200s in PTP mode.
>
> Jeff Broadwick
>
> ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
>
> 312-205-2519 <(312)%20205-2519> Office
>
> 574-220-7826 <(574)%20220-7826> Cell
>
> jbroadw...@converge-tech.com
>
>
> On Jun 28, 2017, at 3:07 PM, Lewis Bergman 
> wrote:
>
> I am looking for an inexpensive very low bandwidth replacement for a
> PTP400. I need less than a meg so throughput isn't an issue. I see they are
> both 5,10,20, and 40 MHz channel widths which is good. I can set it on 5MHz
> and get more than what I need and hopefully stay out of everyone else's way.
>
>
>
> Unless I am looking at the wrong SKU it looks like the 110 is almost twice
> as much. Maybe I am not looking at complete kits or something?
>
>
>
> From those that have used them, what do you think?
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] board repairs

[Josh Luthman]

SWG probably would.  Might be cheaper to buy replacements, though.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 4:15 PM, Dave  wrote:

> has anyone had a good company that can repair mikrotik cards like RB cards
> for netmetals ie RB922UAGS cards.
> Also, I am looking for a company that is willing to repair R201P cards.
> Most of this is lightning damaged gear so I dont expect a high return.
>
>
> --
>

Re: [AFMUG] Radwin 5000 Pro vs. Cambium 450m

[Josh Reynolds]

I don't think they have any desire to open up SNMP, it doesn't seem part of
their strategy.

They have yet another NMS, in UNMS, which seems to be supporting everything
from ptmp radios, to backhauls, switches, routers, gpon, and cpe devices.

They have radios with severe RF filtering, GPS sync, real-time spectrum
analysis, their own silicon... indoor radios with with MU-MIMO, 802.11r,
and beamforming... Their UniFi offering is actually pretty solid now,
though the router management needs real work still, but they are
progressing rapidly. DPI is nice. MPLS is good, but obviously needs
hardware acceleration.

Anyway, my point is that this in many ways is not the company of even just
a few years ago. They still have things to work on, as does any company,
but overall I think they offer incredible performance on top of reasonable
costs without license key hell.

FCC is posting new stuff from their various branches all the time, and LTU
might be very interesting.

It's a good time to be in this market as an end user... Better than in many
years.

- Josh

On Jun 28, 2017 7:20 PM, "Chris Wright"  wrote:

I’m going to infer you’d like to talk about Mimosa and Ubiquiti, both of
which are still wet behind their ears when it comes to providing a mature
platform for PTMP > 3 mile. They’re cheaper and underdeveloped. Case in
point: SNMPv3 has been defined for fifteen years now and UBNT still hasn’t
implemented it. Mimosa didn’t support SNMP *at all* in their A5 until the
latest firmware update this month. Not unlike Apple computers in the early
2000’s, they’re poised to make a significant impact on the market in the
future, but currently still pretty much a joke.



Chris Wright

Network Administrator



*From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Rory Conaway
*Sent:* Wednesday, June 28, 2017 4:15 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Radwin 5000 Pro vs. Cambium 450m



Are these the only 2 choices?



Rory



*From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On Behalf
Of *Eric Muehleisen
*Sent:* Wednesday, June 28, 2017 11:46 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* [AFMUG] Radwin 5000 Pro vs. Cambium 450m



Let's assume you have an unlimited budget. Which platform would you choose
and why?

Re: [AFMUG] Radwin 5000 Pro vs. Cambium 450m

[Mitch Koep]

We are doing the same here

Mitch


On 6/28/2017 7:44 PM, Jaime Solorza wrote:
When I was a WISP, 99 % of our gear was Ubiquiti...it worked 
well...still operationaland now most of the SCADA Networks we have 
done are using Ubiquiti...we have replaced MDS radios which are rock 
solid and expensive but can't carry video and data as easily as 
Ubiquiti.  Plus water districts love the 85 to 200 cost of radios 
versus 1300 per radio.


Jaime Solorza

On Jun 28, 2017 6:31 PM, "Rory Conaway" > wrote:


Not if ROI and profitability is taken into account.

Rory

*From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com
] *On Behalf Of *Chris Wright
*Sent:* Wednesday, June 28, 2017 5:21 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Radwin 5000 Pro vs. Cambium 450m

I’m going to infer you’d like to talk about Mimosa and Ubiquiti,
both of which are still wet behind their ears when it comes to
providing a mature platform for PTMP > 3 mile. They’re cheaper and
underdeveloped. Case in point: SNMPv3 has been defined for fifteen
years now and UBNT still hasn’t implemented it. Mimosa didn’t
support SNMP *at all* in their A5 until the latest firmware update
this month. Not unlike Apple computers in the early 2000’s,
they’re poised to make a significant impact on the market in the
future, but currently still pretty much a joke.

Chris Wright

Network Administrator

*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Rory Conaway
*Sent:* Wednesday, June 28, 2017 4:15 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Radwin 5000 Pro vs. Cambium 450m

Are these the only 2 choices?

Rory

*From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Eric
Muehleisen
*Sent:* Wednesday, June 28, 2017 11:46 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* [AFMUG] Radwin 5000 Pro vs. Cambium 450m

Let's assume you have an unlimited budget. Which platform would
you choose and why?

Re: [AFMUG] Radwin 5000 Pro vs. Cambium 450m

[Jaime Solorza]

When I was a WISP, 99 % of our gear was Ubiquiti...it worked well...still
operationaland now most of the SCADA Networks we have done are using
Ubiquiti...we have replaced MDS radios which are rock solid and expensive
but can't carry video and data as easily as Ubiquiti.  Plus water districts
love the 85 to 200 cost of radios versus 1300 per radio.

Jaime Solorza

On Jun 28, 2017 6:31 PM, "Rory Conaway"  wrote:

> Not if ROI and profitability is taken into account.
>
>
>
> Rory
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Chris Wright
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 28, 2017 5:21 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Radwin 5000 Pro vs. Cambium 450m
>
>
>
> I’m going to infer you’d like to talk about Mimosa and Ubiquiti, both of
> which are still wet behind their ears when it comes to providing a mature
> platform for PTMP > 3 mile. They’re cheaper and underdeveloped. Case in
> point: SNMPv3 has been defined for fifteen years now and UBNT still hasn’t
> implemented it. Mimosa didn’t support SNMP *at all* in their A5 until the
> latest firmware update this month. Not unlike Apple computers in the early
> 2000’s, they’re poised to make a significant impact on the market in the
> future, but currently still pretty much a joke.
>
>
>
> Chris Wright
>
> Network Administrator
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
> Behalf Of *Rory Conaway
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 28, 2017 4:15 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Radwin 5000 Pro vs. Cambium 450m
>
>
>
> Are these the only 2 choices?
>
>
>
> Rory
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] *On
> Behalf Of *Eric Muehleisen
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 28, 2017 11:46 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* [AFMUG] Radwin 5000 Pro vs. Cambium 450m
>
>
>
> Let's assume you have an unlimited budget. Which platform would you choose
> and why?
>

Re: [AFMUG] Radwin 5000 Pro vs. Cambium 450m

[Rory Conaway]

Not if ROI and profitability is taken into account.

Rory

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chris Wright
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 5:21 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Radwin 5000 Pro vs. Cambium 450m

I’m going to infer you’d like to talk about Mimosa and Ubiquiti, both of which 
are still wet behind their ears when it comes to providing a mature platform 
for PTMP > 3 mile. They’re cheaper and underdeveloped. Case in point: SNMPv3 
has been defined for fifteen years now and UBNT still hasn’t implemented it. 
Mimosa didn’t support SNMP at all in their A5 until the latest firmware update 
this month. Not unlike Apple computers in the early 2000’s, they’re poised to 
make a significant impact on the market in the future, but currently still 
pretty much a joke.

Chris Wright
Network Administrator

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Rory Conaway
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 4:15 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Radwin 5000 Pro vs. Cambium 450m

Are these the only 2 choices?

Rory

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Eric Muehleisen
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 11:46 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] Radwin 5000 Pro vs. Cambium 450m

Let's assume you have an unlimited budget. Which platform would you choose and 
why?

[AFMUG] Building a POP into an underbed truck box

[Eric Kuhnke]

If you've built a site into an underbed truck box (instead of a typical
IP65/NEMA4 box), I'd be very curious to see photos. Have seen some examples
already on the WISP Pics facebook group, but curious what people are doing
to customize them internally.

https://www.tractorsupply.com/tsc/product/tractor-supply-co-underbed-truck-box-24-in

https://www.tractorsupply.com/tsc/product/tractor-supply-co-underbed-truck-box-36-in-black?cm_vc=IOPDP1

Re: [AFMUG] Radwin 5000 Pro vs. Cambium 450m

[Chris Wright]

I’m going to infer you’d like to talk about Mimosa and Ubiquiti, both of which 
are still wet behind their ears when it comes to providing a mature platform 
for PTMP > 3 mile. They’re cheaper and underdeveloped. Case in point: SNMPv3 
has been defined for fifteen years now and UBNT still hasn’t implemented it. 
Mimosa didn’t support SNMP at all in their A5 until the latest firmware update 
this month. Not unlike Apple computers in the early 2000’s, they’re poised to 
make a significant impact on the market in the future, but currently still 
pretty much a joke.

 

Chris Wright

Network Administrator

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Rory Conaway
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 4:15 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Radwin 5000 Pro vs. Cambium 450m

 

Are these the only 2 choices?

 

Rory

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Eric Muehleisen
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 11:46 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] Radwin 5000 Pro vs. Cambium 450m

 

Let's assume you have an unlimited budget. Which platform would you choose and 
why?

Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 ~50mbps cap

[Ryan Ray]

That's about all I get on a 450 as well. I think it's CPU bound.

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 3:18 PM, Eric Muehleisen  wrote:

> See attached. This is a 20mb SM. Again, it will burst up to 52 mb
>
> ​
>
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 4:42 PM, Chris Wright  wrote:
>
>> What QoS settings in the SM?
>>
>>
>>
>> Chris Wright
>>
>> Network Administrator
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Eric Muehleisen
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 28, 2017 1:36 PM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 ~50mbps cap
>>
>>
>>
>> Yes. Just yesterday tested a 450i AP (40mhz) with a 20mb 450 SM.
>> Linktests showed 137 x 58 but most we could burst to was 52 x 45. Both AP
>> and SM are on 15.1.
>>
>>
>>
>> I currently have a support ticket open for this as well as increased DFS
>> issues.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 3:22 PM, Colin Stanners 
>> wrote:
>>
>> We setup a customer on a very lightly loaded 5ghz PMP450 AP and SM, 20mhz
>> channel, expecting them to burst up to 70mbit speeds for download; linktest
>> is reliably 85-90d and there's effectively no other usage. But we can't
>> seem to get over 50mbit speedtests. Has anyone else seen such issues?
>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Radwin 5000 Pro vs. Cambium 450m

[Rory Conaway]

Are these the only 2 choices?

Rory

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Eric Muehleisen
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 11:46 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] Radwin 5000 Pro vs. Cambium 450m

Let's assume you have an unlimited budget. Which platform would you choose and 
why?

Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 ~50mbps cap

[Eric Muehleisen]

See attached. This is a 20mb SM. Again, it will burst up to 52 mb

​

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 4:42 PM, Chris Wright  wrote:

> What QoS settings in the SM?
>
>
>
> Chris Wright
>
> Network Administrator
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Eric Muehleisen
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 28, 2017 1:36 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 ~50mbps cap
>
>
>
> Yes. Just yesterday tested a 450i AP (40mhz) with a 20mb 450 SM. Linktests
> showed 137 x 58 but most we could burst to was 52 x 45. Both AP and SM are
> on 15.1.
>
>
>
> I currently have a support ticket open for this as well as increased DFS
> issues.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 3:22 PM, Colin Stanners 
> wrote:
>
> We setup a customer on a very lightly loaded 5ghz PMP450 AP and SM, 20mhz
> channel, expecting them to burst up to 70mbit speeds for download; linktest
> is reliably 85-90d and there's effectively no other usage. But we can't
> seem to get over 50mbit speedtests. Has anyone else seen such issues?
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Dealing with a lease violation (5ghz)

[Dave]

Depends if hes from out of town :)


On 06/28/2017 02:45 PM, Chris Wright wrote:


All jokes aside, you do NOT want to get into a pissing match with 
another WISP. No one wins.


Chris Wright

Network Administrator

*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Steve Jones
*Sent:* Wednesday, June 28, 2017 12:30 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Dealing with a lease violation (5ghz)

ubnt in test mode

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Faisal Imtiaz 
> wrote:


Let's follow the logic...

Property Owner wants more $, as such has chosen to ignore the 
'exclusivity' right you may have listed in the contract.


You can exercise your right to complain

You can exercise your right to take your marbles and go play somewhere 
else.


Depending on who is paying more to the property owner, and who has a 
better relationship, you or the other guy can complaint on each 
other... but at the end of the day.. the property owner is going to 
ask you to just get along !


So the short answer is . NO, there is realistic recourse to what 
you have in mind..


You can always deploy Mimosa gear using 80mhz channels :)

:)

Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, FL 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 

Help-desk: (305)663-5518  Option 2 or Email: 
supp...@snappytelecom.net 




*From: *"Steve Jones" >
*To: *af@afmug.com 
*Sent: *Wednesday, June 28, 2017 3:10:52 PM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Dealing with a lease violation (5ghz)

is there realistically any recourse?

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Mitch Koep > wrote:

And your question is?




On 6/27/2017 11:05 PM, Steve Jones wrote:

I am not asking about any FCC Part X rules, I know this isn't
an FCC issue under any circumstances.

We have leases with all our POP landlords, in the lease we own
the site spectrum, with the exception of very few locations we
don't collocate, just not worth the hassle.

I come rolling up on a site today, 100 feet from our POP is a
new POP, not us, cause though I used to enjoy spooning some
powder with baking soda, I don't smoke crack, POP#2 isn't
ours, even though its on the same property, Id recall a full
EPMP and backhaul deployment.

I'm an honest operator, very honest, like the first time UBT
sent us new stickers for spectrum I made sure we actually put
them out (be honest, pretty much NOBODY did that) I turn down
power where we don't need it. I do my best to make sure we are
compliant. I fought bosses to remove non compliant stuff I put
up before I knew better. For the most part, I'm a good fucking
neighbor, ask anybody abutting me. (with the exception of one
location I collocate where I'm a dick, but a legal dick)

So you can understand my dismay, being the pillar of the
spectrum community Ive tried to be (also found out today I
inadvertently fucked a fellow wisp on a bad choice I made with
no follow up, I owned it with him and will be working on
fixing that as of tomorrow)

I approach everything with combat boots, assuming a battle.
I'm guessing when it gets in the database this backhaul is
going to be UBNT 11ghz, or some other nonsense (probably
affiliated with the over wind loaded tower 3/4 miles away with
3, yes 3, UBNT 5ghz peanut shaped airfibers within 8 feet of
one another (one link, one side points to the sky the other
side points to the dirt)

The question I have is about lease rules, and contract law,
which the bulk of you old timers has dealt with. If the other
operator (if its who I suspect it is, they use fuckery, like
the UBNT demo mode, or whatever its called and other such
garbage to even operate overpowered in DFS channels) doesn't
want to play ball, as in "shut that shit off" will we be able
to fight it?

I know what went down, and how it went down, and I suspect I
know who it is. The usual, guy approaches a site owner, offers
unrealistic unicorn farts, unicorn farts always win, spectrum
gets fucked.

We do 5 year auto renewing leases, with 2 year breakouts. (you
guys would likely cream your jeans seeing our lease, and
though Ive asked, no I cant share it publicly, and yes, it was
drawn up by an attorney) we get full control of the 5, 6, 11,
3, 2, 900mhz, etc spectrum (I don't have a lease handy to see
the specific wording) 

Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 ~50mbps cap

[Chris Wright]

What QoS settings in the SM?

 

Chris Wright

Network Administrator

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Eric Muehleisen
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 1:36 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 ~50mbps cap

 

Yes. Just yesterday tested a 450i AP (40mhz) with a 20mb 450 SM. Linktests 
showed 137 x 58 but most we could burst to was 52 x 45. Both AP and SM are on 
15.1. 

 

I currently have a support ticket open for this as well as increased DFS issues.

 

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 3:22 PM, Colin Stanners  wrote:

We setup a customer on a very lightly loaded 5ghz PMP450 AP and SM, 20mhz 
channel, expecting them to burst up to 70mbit speeds for download; linktest is 
reliably 85-90d and there's effectively no other usage. But we can't seem to 
get over 50mbit speedtests. Has anyone else seen such issues?

 

Re: [AFMUG] Force110 vs Force200

[Jeff Broadwick - Lists]

What size channel?

Jeff Broadwick
ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
312-205-2519 Office
574-220-7826 Cell
jbroadw...@converge-tech.com

> On Jun 28, 2017, at 3:51 PM, David Coudron  
> wrote:
> 
> We have what I believe is a similar need.   We have a number of customers 
> that have large farmyards and want coverage in outbuildings.   These are too 
> far for ethernet runs, so we have been using Ubiquiti Nanostations as PTP 
> links because they are cheap.   I see that the ePMPs get close to the same 
> price point as the larger Nanostations and we are wondering if they are a 
> better option.   Does anyone have experience with both and some perspective 
> which is a better option for PTP links that are less than a mile and need 25 
> -50 Mbps?
> 
> Thanks,
>  
> David Coudron
> david.coud...@advantenon.com  |  Mobile: 612-991-7474
>  
> Advantenon, Inc.   
> 
> i...@advantenon.com  |  3500 Vicksburg Lane N, Suite 315, Plymouth, MN 55447  
> |  www.advantenon.com  |  Phone: 800-704-4720  |  Local: 612-454-1545 
>  
> 
>  
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick - Lists
> Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 2:26 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Force110 vs Force200
>  
> I'd use a couple of Force 200s in PTP mode.
> 
> Jeff Broadwick
> ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
> 312-205-2519 Office
> 574-220-7826 Cell
> jbroadw...@converge-tech.com
> 
> On Jun 28, 2017, at 3:07 PM, Lewis Bergman  wrote:
> 
> I am looking for an inexpensive very low bandwidth replacement for a PTP400. 
> I need less than a meg so throughput isn't an issue. I see they are both 
> 5,10,20, and 40 MHz channel widths which is good. I can set it on 5MHz and 
> get more than what I need and hopefully stay out of everyone else's way.
>  
> Unless I am looking at the wrong SKU it looks like the 110 is almost twice as 
> much. Maybe I am not looking at complete kits or something?
>  
> From those that have used them, what do you think?

Re: [AFMUG] Force110 vs Force200

[Jeff Broadwick - Lists]

You can still get them...Lite ePMP 1000 AP and the dishes.  About $100 more for 
a 4 pack that way, but if you need GPS...

Jeff Broadwick
ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
312-205-2519 Office
574-220-7826 Cell
jbroadw...@converge-tech.com

> On Jun 28, 2017, at 4:01 PM, Mathew Howard  wrote:
> 
> The normal Force 110 is probably discontinued, but as far as I know the Force 
> 110 PTP is still being made. 
> 
> The only reason that I'd use a Force 110 PTP instead of a Force 200 would be 
> if I needed to use GPS sync... other than that, the Force 200 is going to be 
> better in pretty much every way.
> 
>> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 2:22 PM, Steve Jones  
>> wrote:
>> force 180 is the integrated little guy force 200 is the dished one, 110 I 
>> believe is DC. I use the 200 all the time for ptp, I love them, even though 
>> they add the latency
>> 
>>> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 2:07 PM, Lewis Bergman  
>>> wrote:
>>> I am looking for an inexpensive very low bandwidth replacement for a 
>>> PTP400. I need less than a meg so throughput isn't an issue. I see they are 
>>> both 5,10,20, and 40 MHz channel widths which is good. I can set it on 5MHz 
>>> and get more than what I need and hopefully stay out of everyone else's way.
>>> 
>>> Unless I am looking at the wrong SKU it looks like the 110 is almost twice 
>>> as much. Maybe I am not looking at complete kits or something?
>>> 
>>> From those that have used them, what do you think?
>> 
> 

Re: [AFMUG] Dealing with a lease violation (5ghz)

[Robert Andrews]

Hence, a contract is not the thing we depend upon for our business, but 
the honesty of the people we deal with.   We survive in a vulnerable 
context and have to be ten times cautious..   Know the people who know 
those you depend upon, their friends attest to their character and by 
association yours...




On 06/28/2017 12:36 PM, James Howard wrote:

Seems to me that the wording of the contract is the key to this.  What
does it define as the �site� that you have exclusive rights to.  I
believe our contract indicates either an address or a specific structure
on an address if we include exclusive rights (which we typically do).
IANAL but I would guess that if your contract doesn�t include specifics
to the amount of area that you have exclusive rights to that you would
not win.  The other WISP does not have any contract with you that they
are violating.  The landlord is the only violator.  The obvious problem
with that if it escalates you end up with a bad relationship with the
landlord and end up pretty much losing either way.



*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Steve Jones
*Sent:* Wednesday, June 28, 2017 2:21 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Dealing with a lease violation (5ghz)



that's what I'm wondering, I guess if we got a cease and desist it would
be against the landlord, who would have to stop the tenant?



On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Chris Fabien > wrote:

Your recourse would be with the landlord. Unfortunately this puts
them in a bad situation since they violated the terms of your lease
with them. I don't think you have any way to make a claim agianst
the other ISP unless you had some non-compete agreement with them or
something.



On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 3:10 PM, Steve Jones
> wrote:

is there realistically any recourse?



On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Mitch Koep > wrote:

And your question is?




On 6/27/2017 11:05 PM, Steve Jones wrote:

I am not asking about any FCC Part X rules, I know this
isn't an FCC issue under any circumstances.

We have leases with all our POP landlords, in the lease
we own the site spectrum, with the exception of very few
locations we don't collocate, just not worth the hassle.

I come rolling up on a site today, 100 feet from our POP
is a new POP, not us, cause though I used to enjoy
spooning some powder with baking soda, I don't smoke
crack, POP#2 isn't ours, even though its on the same
property, Id recall a full EPMP and backhaul deployment.

I'm an honest operator, very honest, like the first time
UBT sent us new stickers for spectrum I made sure we
actually put them out (be honest, pretty much NOBODY did
that) I turn down power where we don't need it. I do my
best to make sure we are compliant. I fought bosses to
remove non compliant stuff I put up before I knew
better. For the most part, I'm a good fucking neighbor,
ask anybody abutting me. (with the exception of one
location I collocate where I'm a dick, but a legal dick)

So you can understand my dismay, being the pillar of the
spectrum community Ive tried to be (also found out today
I inadvertently fucked a fellow wisp on a bad choice I
made with no follow up, I owned it with him and will be
working on fixing that as of tomorrow)

I approach everything with combat boots, assuming a
battle. I'm guessing when it gets in the database this
backhaul is going to be UBNT 11ghz, or some other
nonsense (probably affiliated with the over wind loaded
tower 3/4 miles away with 3, yes 3, UBNT 5ghz peanut
shaped airfibers within 8 feet of one another (one link,
one side points to the sky the other side points to the
dirt)

The question I have is about lease rules, and contract
law, which the bulk of you old timers has dealt with. If
the other operator (if its who I suspect it is, they use
fuckery, like the UBNT demo mode, or whatever its called
and other such garbage to even operate overpowered in
DFS channels) doesn't want to play ball, as in "shut
that shit off" will we be able to fight it?

I know what went down, and how it went down, and I
suspect I know who it is. The usual, guy approaches a
 

Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 ~50mbps cap

[Eric Muehleisen]

Yes. Just yesterday tested a 450i AP (40mhz) with a 20mb 450 SM. Linktests
showed 137 x 58 but most we could burst to was 52 x 45. Both AP and SM are
on 15.1.

I currently have a support ticket open for this as well as increased DFS
issues.

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 3:22 PM, Colin Stanners  wrote:

> We setup a customer on a very lightly loaded 5ghz PMP450 AP and SM, 20mhz
> channel, expecting them to burst up to 70mbit speeds for download; linktest
> is reliably 85-90d and there's effectively no other usage. But we can't
> seem to get over 50mbit speedtests. Has anyone else seen such issues?
>

Re: [AFMUG] Force110 vs Force200

[Mathew Howard]

Yeah, that's true... the 110PTP can do 48v.

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 3:20 PM, Josh Luthman 
wrote:

> That and power.  The 110ptp does 24-48 and I think 200 is 24 only.  Both
> do both polarities
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340 <(937)%20552-2340>
> Direct: 937-552-2343 <(937)%20552-2343>
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On Jun 28, 2017 4:01 PM, "Mathew Howard"  wrote:
>
>> The normal Force 110 is probably discontinued, but as far as I know the
>> Force 110 PTP is still being made.
>>
>> The only reason that I'd use a Force 110 PTP instead of a Force 200 would
>> be if I needed to use GPS sync... other than that, the Force 200 is going
>> to be better in pretty much every way.
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 2:22 PM, Steve Jones 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> force 180 is the integrated little guy force 200 is the dished one, 110
>>> I believe is DC. I use the 200 all the time for ptp, I love them, even
>>> though they add the latency
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 2:07 PM, Lewis Bergman 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 I am looking for an inexpensive very low bandwidth replacement for a
 PTP400. I need less than a meg so throughput isn't an issue. I see they are
 both 5,10,20, and 40 MHz channel widths which is good. I can set it on 5MHz
 and get more than what I need and hopefully stay out of everyone else's 
 way.

 Unless I am looking at the wrong SKU it looks like the 110 is almost
 twice as much. Maybe I am not looking at complete kits or something?

 From those that have used them, what do you think?

>>>
>>>
>>

[AFMUG] PMP450 ~50mbps cap

[Colin Stanners]

We setup a customer on a very lightly loaded 5ghz PMP450 AP and SM, 20mhz
channel, expecting them to burst up to 70mbit speeds for download; linktest
is reliably 85-90d and there's effectively no other usage. But we can't
seem to get over 50mbit speedtests. Has anyone else seen such issues?

Re: [AFMUG] Force110 vs Force200

[Josh Luthman]

That and power.  The 110ptp does 24-48 and I think 200 is 24 only.  Both do
both polarities

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

On Jun 28, 2017 4:01 PM, "Mathew Howard"  wrote:

> The normal Force 110 is probably discontinued, but as far as I know the
> Force 110 PTP is still being made.
>
> The only reason that I'd use a Force 110 PTP instead of a Force 200 would
> be if I needed to use GPS sync... other than that, the Force 200 is going
> to be better in pretty much every way.
>
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 2:22 PM, Steve Jones 
> wrote:
>
>> force 180 is the integrated little guy force 200 is the dished one, 110 I
>> believe is DC. I use the 200 all the time for ptp, I love them, even though
>> they add the latency
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 2:07 PM, Lewis Bergman 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I am looking for an inexpensive very low bandwidth replacement for a
>>> PTP400. I need less than a meg so throughput isn't an issue. I see they are
>>> both 5,10,20, and 40 MHz channel widths which is good. I can set it on 5MHz
>>> and get more than what I need and hopefully stay out of everyone else's way.
>>>
>>> Unless I am looking at the wrong SKU it looks like the 110 is almost
>>> twice as much. Maybe I am not looking at complete kits or something?
>>>
>>> From those that have used them, what do you think?
>>>
>>
>>
>

[AFMUG] board repairs

[Dave]

has anyone had a good company that can repair mikrotik cards like RB 
cards for netmetals ie RB922UAGS cards.

Also, I am looking for a company that is willing to repair R201P cards.
Most of this is lightning damaged gear so I dont expect a high return.


--

Re: [AFMUG] mikrotik CCR and copper SFP reseat

[Dave]

Sfp modules on those need to be set static no autoneg
That is the best way I get them to be stable.
Mikrotik has not perfected the sfp tech very well. Not sure if its a 
driver thing or hardware mismatches breaking stuff.

X86 sfp copper is just a crazy NO!
It works depending on a lot of variables in which I hate having 
variances on a physical network.



On 06/28/2017 02:51 PM, George Skorup wrote:
Is that the 1072? I believe those will only support 1G/10G. They say 
it "supports" the S-RJ01 and similar which is 10/100/1000. You should 
probably try forcing the advertisement to 1000 full only. Or replace 
the SFP to rule it out.


On 6/28/2017 11:29 AM, Steve Jones wrote:
we put in a CCR Saturday, we are using the copper SFP. Twice since 
then weve had to reseat the module. It shows as present in the 
winbox. but no connection. even a reboot of the CCR does not bring it 
back up, it has to be pulled and reseated. is this a known issue or 
should I contact mikrotik support (do they have support?)




--

Re: [AFMUG] Force110 vs Force200

[Mathew Howard]

The normal Force 110 is probably discontinued, but as far as I know the
Force 110 PTP is still being made.

The only reason that I'd use a Force 110 PTP instead of a Force 200 would
be if I needed to use GPS sync... other than that, the Force 200 is going
to be better in pretty much every way.

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 2:22 PM, Steve Jones 
wrote:

> force 180 is the integrated little guy force 200 is the dished one, 110 I
> believe is DC. I use the 200 all the time for ptp, I love them, even though
> they add the latency
>
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 2:07 PM, Lewis Bergman 
> wrote:
>
>> I am looking for an inexpensive very low bandwidth replacement for a
>> PTP400. I need less than a meg so throughput isn't an issue. I see they are
>> both 5,10,20, and 40 MHz channel widths which is good. I can set it on 5MHz
>> and get more than what I need and hopefully stay out of everyone else's way.
>>
>> Unless I am looking at the wrong SKU it looks like the 110 is almost
>> twice as much. Maybe I am not looking at complete kits or something?
>>
>> From those that have used them, what do you think?
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Force110 vs Force200

[David Coudron]

We have what I believe is a similar need.   We have a number of customers that 
have large farmyards and want coverage in outbuildings.   These are too far for 
ethernet runs, so we have been using Ubiquiti Nanostations as PTP links because 
they are cheap.   I see that the ePMPs get close to the same price point as the 
larger Nanostations and we are wondering if they are a better option.   Does 
anyone have experience with both and some perspective which is a better option 
for PTP links that are less than a mile and need 25 -50 Mbps?

Thanks,

David Coudron
david.coud...@advantenon.com  |  Mobile: 
612-991-7474

Advantenon, Inc. [cid:image001.png@01CEE562.60FF8FC0] 
   
[cid:image002.png@01CEE562.60FF8FC0]    
[cid:image003.png@01CEE562.60FF8FC0]    
[cid:image004.png@01CEE562.60FF8FC0] 
i...@advantenon.com  |  3500 Vicksburg Lane N, 
Suite 315, Plymouth, MN 55447  |  
www.advantenon.com  |  Phone: 800-704-4720  |  
Local: 612-454-1545

[cid:image005.jpg@01D2F01E.00C68120]

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick - Lists
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 2:26 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Force110 vs Force200

I'd use a couple of Force 200s in PTP mode.

Jeff Broadwick
ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
312-205-2519 Office
574-220-7826 Cell
jbroadw...@converge-tech.com

On Jun 28, 2017, at 3:07 PM, Lewis Bergman 
> wrote:
I am looking for an inexpensive very low bandwidth replacement for a PTP400. I 
need less than a meg so throughput isn't an issue. I see they are both 5,10,20, 
and 40 MHz channel widths which is good. I can set it on 5MHz and get more than 
what I need and hopefully stay out of everyone else's way.

Unless I am looking at the wrong SKU it looks like the 110 is almost twice as 
much. Maybe I am not looking at complete kits or something?

From those that have used them, what do you think?

Re: [AFMUG] mikrotik CCR and copper SFP reseat

[George Skorup]

Is that the 1072? I believe those will only support 1G/10G. They say it 
"supports" the S-RJ01 and similar which is 10/100/1000. You should 
probably try forcing the advertisement to 1000 full only. Or replace the 
SFP to rule it out.


On 6/28/2017 11:29 AM, Steve Jones wrote:
we put in a CCR Saturday, we are using the copper SFP. Twice since 
then weve had to reseat the module. It shows as present in the winbox. 
but no connection. even a reboot of the CCR does not bring it back up, 
it has to be pulled and reseated. is this a known issue or should I 
contact mikrotik support (do they have support?)

Re: [AFMUG] Dealing with a lease violation (5ghz)

[Chris Wright]

All jokes aside, you do NOT want to get into a pissing match with another WISP. 
No one wins.

 

Chris Wright

Network Administrator

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Steve Jones
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 12:30 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Dealing with a lease violation (5ghz)

 

ubnt in test mode

 

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Faisal Imtiaz  wrote:

Let's follow the logic...

 

Property Owner wants more $, as such has chosen to ignore the 'exclusivity' 
right you may have listed in the contract.

 

You can exercise your right to complain

You can exercise your right to take your marbles and go play somewhere else.

Depending on who is paying more to the property owner, and who has a better 
relationship, you or the other guy can complaint on each other... but at the 
end of the day.. the property owner is going to ask you to just get along !

 

So the short answer is . NO, there is realistic recourse to what you have 
in mind..

 

You can always deploy Mimosa gear using 80mhz channels :)

 

:)

 

 

 

Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, FL 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232  

Help-desk: (305)663-5518   Option 2 or Email: 
supp...@snappytelecom.net

 

  _  

From: "Steve Jones" 
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 3:10:52 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Dealing with a lease violation (5ghz)

is there realistically any recourse?

 

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Mitch Koep  wrote:

And your question is?




On 6/27/2017 11:05 PM, Steve Jones wrote:

I am not asking about any FCC Part X rules, I know this isn't an FCC issue 
under any circumstances.

We have leases with all our POP landlords, in the lease we own the site 
spectrum, with the exception of very few locations we don't collocate, just not 
worth the hassle.

I come rolling up on a site today, 100 feet from our POP is a new POP, not us, 
cause though I used to enjoy spooning some powder with baking soda, I don't 
smoke crack, POP#2 isn't ours, even though its on the same property, Id recall 
a full EPMP and backhaul deployment.

I'm an honest operator, very honest, like the first time UBT sent us new 
stickers for spectrum I made sure we actually put them out (be honest, pretty 
much NOBODY did that) I turn down power where we don't need it. I do my best to 
make sure we are compliant. I fought bosses to remove non compliant stuff I put 
up before I knew better. For the most part, I'm a good fucking neighbor, ask 
anybody abutting me. (with the exception of one location I collocate where I'm 
a dick, but a legal dick)

So you can understand my dismay, being the pillar of the spectrum community Ive 
tried to be (also found out today I inadvertently fucked a fellow wisp on a bad 
choice I made with no follow up, I owned it with him and will be working on 
fixing that as of tomorrow)

I approach everything with combat boots, assuming a battle. I'm guessing when 
it gets in the database this backhaul is going to be UBNT 11ghz, or some other 
nonsense (probably affiliated with the over wind loaded tower 3/4 miles away 
with 3, yes 3, UBNT 5ghz peanut shaped airfibers within 8 feet of one another 
(one link, one side points to the sky the other side points to the dirt)

The question I have is about lease rules, and contract law, which the bulk of 
you old timers has dealt with. If the other operator (if its who I suspect it 
is, they use fuckery, like the UBNT demo mode, or whatever its called and other 
such garbage to even operate overpowered in DFS channels) doesn't want to play 
ball, as in "shut that shit off" will we be able to fight it?

I know what went down, and how it went down, and I suspect I know who it is. 
The usual, guy approaches a site owner, offers unrealistic unicorn farts, 
unicorn farts always win, spectrum gets fucked.

We do 5 year auto renewing leases, with 2 year breakouts. (you guys would 
likely cream your jeans seeing our lease, and though Ive asked, no I cant share 
it publicly, and yes, it was drawn up by an attorney) we get full control of 
the 5, 6, 11, 3, 2, 900mhz, etc spectrum (I don't have a lease handy to see the 
specific wording) per the site.

I know we wouldn't have a horse in the race with the FCC, but with this boiling 
down to contract law, whats to stop us from A. willful interference (assuming 
out power doesn't get cut) and B. a cease and desist from a court for the other 
ISP, pending the 2 year termination?

I'm handing this to the boss to handle, because my communication will start 
with "listen here motherfucker" and I don't see that as conducive to a positive 
outcome. I had my boy with me when I came to the site today because I was just 
getting accurate AGLs for bringing in a licensed backhaul. If he hadn't been 
with me, I probably would have yanked their ghetto enclosure off the wall 

Re: [AFMUG] Dealing with a lease violation (5ghz)

[James Howard]

Seems to me that the wording of the contract is the key to this.  What does it 
define as the "site" that you have exclusive rights to.  I believe our contract 
indicates either an address or a specific structure on an address if we include 
exclusive rights (which we typically do).  IANAL but I would guess that if your 
contract doesn't include specifics to the amount of area that you have 
exclusive rights to that you would not win.  The other WISP does not have any 
contract with you that they are violating.  The landlord is the only violator.  
The obvious problem with that if it escalates you end up with a bad 
relationship with the landlord and end up pretty much losing either way.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Steve Jones
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 2:21 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Dealing with a lease violation (5ghz)

that's what I'm wondering, I guess if we got a cease and desist it would be 
against the landlord, who would have to stop the tenant?

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Chris Fabien 
> wrote:
Your recourse would be with the landlord. Unfortunately this puts them in a bad 
situation since they violated the terms of your lease with them. I don't think 
you have any way to make a claim agianst the other ISP unless you had some 
non-compete agreement with them or something.

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 3:10 PM, Steve Jones 
> wrote:
is there realistically any recourse?

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Mitch Koep 
> wrote:
And your question is?



On 6/27/2017 11:05 PM, Steve Jones wrote:
I am not asking about any FCC Part X rules, I know this isn't an FCC issue 
under any circumstances.

We have leases with all our POP landlords, in the lease we own the site 
spectrum, with the exception of very few locations we don't collocate, just not 
worth the hassle.

I come rolling up on a site today, 100 feet from our POP is a new POP, not us, 
cause though I used to enjoy spooning some powder with baking soda, I don't 
smoke crack, POP#2 isn't ours, even though its on the same property, Id recall 
a full EPMP and backhaul deployment.

I'm an honest operator, very honest, like the first time UBT sent us new 
stickers for spectrum I made sure we actually put them out (be honest, pretty 
much NOBODY did that) I turn down power where we don't need it. I do my best to 
make sure we are compliant. I fought bosses to remove non compliant stuff I put 
up before I knew better. For the most part, I'm a good fucking neighbor, ask 
anybody abutting me. (with the exception of one location I collocate where I'm 
a dick, but a legal dick)

So you can understand my dismay, being the pillar of the spectrum community Ive 
tried to be (also found out today I inadvertently fucked a fellow wisp on a bad 
choice I made with no follow up, I owned it with him and will be working on 
fixing that as of tomorrow)

I approach everything with combat boots, assuming a battle. I'm guessing when 
it gets in the database this backhaul is going to be UBNT 11ghz, or some other 
nonsense (probably affiliated with the over wind loaded tower 3/4 miles away 
with 3, yes 3, UBNT 5ghz peanut shaped airfibers within 8 feet of one another 
(one link, one side points to the sky the other side points to the dirt)

The question I have is about lease rules, and contract law, which the bulk of 
you old timers has dealt with. If the other operator (if its who I suspect it 
is, they use fuckery, like the UBNT demo mode, or whatever its called and other 
such garbage to even operate overpowered in DFS channels) doesn't want to play 
ball, as in "shut that shit off" will we be able to fight it?

I know what went down, and how it went down, and I suspect I know who it is. 
The usual, guy approaches a site owner, offers unrealistic unicorn farts, 
unicorn farts always win, spectrum gets fucked.

We do 5 year auto renewing leases, with 2 year breakouts. (you guys would 
likely cream your jeans seeing our lease, and though Ive asked, no I cant share 
it publicly, and yes, it was drawn up by an attorney) we get full control of 
the 5, 6, 11, 3, 2, 900mhz, etc spectrum (I don't have a lease handy to see the 
specific wording) per the site.

I know we wouldn't have a horse in the race with the FCC, but with this boiling 
down to contract law, whats to stop us from A. willful interference (assuming 
out power doesn't get cut) and B. a cease and desist from a court for the other 
ISP, pending the 2 year termination?

I'm handing this to the boss to handle, because my communication will start 
with "listen here motherfucker" and I don't see that as conducive to a positive 
outcome. I had my boy with me when I came to the site today because I was just 
getting accurate AGLs for bringing in a licensed backhaul. If he hadn't been 
with me, I probably would have yanked their 

Re: [AFMUG] Dealing with a lease violation (5ghz)

[Steve Jones]

ubnt in test mode

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Faisal Imtiaz 
wrote:

> Let's follow the logic...
>
> Property Owner wants more $, as such has chosen to ignore the
> 'exclusivity' right you may have listed in the contract.
>
> You can exercise your right to complain
> You can exercise your right to take your marbles and go play somewhere
> else.
> Depending on who is paying more to the property owner, and who has a
> better relationship, you or the other guy can complaint on each other...
> but at the end of the day.. the property owner is going to ask you to just
> get along !
>
> So the short answer is . NO, there is realistic recourse to what you
> have in mind..
>
> You can always deploy Mimosa gear using 80mhz channels :)
>
> :)
>
>
>
> Faisal Imtiaz
> Snappy Internet & Telecom
> 7266 SW 48 Street
> Miami, FL 33155
> Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 <(305)%20663-5518>
>
> Help-desk: (305)663-5518 <(305)%20663-5518> Option 2 or Email:
> supp...@snappytelecom.net
>
> --
>
> *From: *"Steve Jones" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Wednesday, June 28, 2017 3:10:52 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Dealing with a lease violation (5ghz)
>
> is there realistically any recourse?
>
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Mitch Koep  wrote:
>
>> And your question is?
>>
>>
>>
>> On 6/27/2017 11:05 PM, Steve Jones wrote:
>>
>>> I am not asking about any FCC Part X rules, I know this isn't an FCC
>>> issue under any circumstances.
>>>
>>> We have leases with all our POP landlords, in the lease we own the site
>>> spectrum, with the exception of very few locations we don't collocate, just
>>> not worth the hassle.
>>>
>>> I come rolling up on a site today, 100 feet from our POP is a new POP,
>>> not us, cause though I used to enjoy spooning some powder with baking soda,
>>> I don't smoke crack, POP#2 isn't ours, even though its on the same
>>> property, Id recall a full EPMP and backhaul deployment.
>>>
>>> I'm an honest operator, very honest, like the first time UBT sent us new
>>> stickers for spectrum I made sure we actually put them out (be honest,
>>> pretty much NOBODY did that) I turn down power where we don't need it. I do
>>> my best to make sure we are compliant. I fought bosses to remove non
>>> compliant stuff I put up before I knew better. For the most part, I'm a
>>> good fucking neighbor, ask anybody abutting me. (with the exception of one
>>> location I collocate where I'm a dick, but a legal dick)
>>>
>>> So you can understand my dismay, being the pillar of the spectrum
>>> community Ive tried to be (also found out today I inadvertently fucked a
>>> fellow wisp on a bad choice I made with no follow up, I owned it with him
>>> and will be working on fixing that as of tomorrow)
>>>
>>> I approach everything with combat boots, assuming a battle. I'm guessing
>>> when it gets in the database this backhaul is going to be UBNT 11ghz, or
>>> some other nonsense (probably affiliated with the over wind loaded tower
>>> 3/4 miles away with 3, yes 3, UBNT 5ghz peanut shaped airfibers within 8
>>> feet of one another (one link, one side points to the sky the other side
>>> points to the dirt)
>>>
>>> The question I have is about lease rules, and contract law, which the
>>> bulk of you old timers has dealt with. If the other operator (if its who I
>>> suspect it is, they use fuckery, like the UBNT demo mode, or whatever its
>>> called and other such garbage to even operate overpowered in DFS channels)
>>> doesn't want to play ball, as in "shut that shit off" will we be able to
>>> fight it?
>>>
>>> I know what went down, and how it went down, and I suspect I know who it
>>> is. The usual, guy approaches a site owner, offers unrealistic unicorn
>>> farts, unicorn farts always win, spectrum gets fucked.
>>>
>>> We do 5 year auto renewing leases, with 2 year breakouts. (you guys
>>> would likely cream your jeans seeing our lease, and though Ive asked, no I
>>> cant share it publicly, and yes, it was drawn up by an attorney) we get
>>> full control of the 5, 6, 11, 3, 2, 900mhz, etc spectrum (I don't have a
>>> lease handy to see the specific wording) per the site.
>>>
>>> I know we wouldn't have a horse in the race with the FCC, but with this
>>> boiling down to contract law, whats to stop us from A. willful interference
>>> (assuming out power doesn't get cut) and B. a cease and desist from a court
>>> for the other ISP, pending the 2 year termination?
>>>
>>> I'm handing this to the boss to handle, because my communication will
>>> start with "listen here motherfucker" and I don't see that as conducive to
>>> a positive outcome. I had my boy with me when I came to the site today
>>> because I was just getting accurate AGLs for bringing in a licensed
>>> backhaul. If he hadn't been with me, I probably would have yanked their
>>> ghetto enclosure off the wall and shot their antennas.
>>>
>>> Ill tell you what, I'm about to 

Re: [AFMUG] Force110 vs Force200

[Jeff Broadwick - Lists]

I'd use a couple of Force 200s in PTP mode.

Jeff Broadwick
ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
312-205-2519 Office
574-220-7826 Cell
jbroadw...@converge-tech.com

> On Jun 28, 2017, at 3:07 PM, Lewis Bergman  wrote:
> 
> I am looking for an inexpensive very low bandwidth replacement for a PTP400. 
> I need less than a meg so throughput isn't an issue. I see they are both 
> 5,10,20, and 40 MHz channel widths which is good. I can set it on 5MHz and 
> get more than what I need and hopefully stay out of everyone else's way.
> 
> Unless I am looking at the wrong SKU it looks like the 110 is almost twice as 
> much. Maybe I am not looking at complete kits or something?
> 
> From those that have used them, what do you think?

Re: [AFMUG] Force110 vs Force200

[Steve Jones]

force 180 is the integrated little guy force 200 is the dished one, 110 I
believe is DC. I use the 200 all the time for ptp, I love them, even though
they add the latency

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 2:07 PM, Lewis Bergman 
wrote:

> I am looking for an inexpensive very low bandwidth replacement for a
> PTP400. I need less than a meg so throughput isn't an issue. I see they are
> both 5,10,20, and 40 MHz channel widths which is good. I can set it on 5MHz
> and get more than what I need and hopefully stay out of everyone else's way.
>
> Unless I am looking at the wrong SKU it looks like the 110 is almost twice
> as much. Maybe I am not looking at complete kits or something?
>
> From those that have used them, what do you think?
>

Re: [AFMUG] Dealing with a lease violation (5ghz)

[Faisal Imtiaz]

Let's follow the logic... 

Property Owner wants more $, as such has chosen to ignore the 'exclusivity' 
right you may have listed in the contract. 

You can exercise your right to complain 
You can exercise your right to take your marbles and go play somewhere else. 
Depending on who is paying more to the property owner, and who has a better 
relationship, you or the other guy can complaint on each other... but at the 
end of the day.. the property owner is going to ask you to just get along ! 

So the short answer is . NO, there is realistic recourse to what you have 
in mind.. 

You can always deploy Mimosa gear using 80mhz channels :) 

:) 

Faisal Imtiaz 
Snappy Internet & Telecom 
7266 SW 48 Street 
Miami, FL 33155 
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 

Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net 

> From: "Steve Jones" 
> To: af@afmug.com
> Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 3:10:52 PM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Dealing with a lease violation (5ghz)

> is there realistically any recourse?

> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Mitch Koep < af...@abwisp.com > wrote:

>> And your question is?

>> On 6/27/2017 11:05 PM, Steve Jones wrote:

>>> I am not asking about any FCC Part X rules, I know this isn't an FCC issue 
>>> under
>>> any circumstances.

>>> We have leases with all our POP landlords, in the lease we own the site
>>> spectrum, with the exception of very few locations we don't collocate, just 
>>> not
>>> worth the hassle.

>>> I come rolling up on a site today, 100 feet from our POP is a new POP, not 
>>> us,
>>> cause though I used to enjoy spooning some powder with baking soda, I don't
>>> smoke crack, POP#2 isn't ours, even though its on the same property, Id 
>>> recall
>>> a full EPMP and backhaul deployment.

>>> I'm an honest operator, very honest, like the first time UBT sent us new
>>> stickers for spectrum I made sure we actually put them out (be honest, 
>>> pretty
>>> much NOBODY did that) I turn down power where we don't need it. I do my 
>>> best to
>>> make sure we are compliant. I fought bosses to remove non compliant stuff I 
>>> put
>>> up before I knew better. For the most part, I'm a good fucking neighbor, ask
>>> anybody abutting me. (with the exception of one location I collocate where 
>>> I'm
>>> a dick, but a legal dick)

>>> So you can understand my dismay, being the pillar of the spectrum community 
>>> Ive
>>> tried to be (also found out today I inadvertently fucked a fellow wisp on a 
>>> bad
>>> choice I made with no follow up, I owned it with him and will be working on
>>> fixing that as of tomorrow)

>>> I approach everything with combat boots, assuming a battle. I'm guessing 
>>> when it
>>> gets in the database this backhaul is going to be UBNT 11ghz, or some other
>>> nonsense (probably affiliated with the over wind loaded tower 3/4 miles away
>>> with 3, yes 3, UBNT 5ghz peanut shaped airfibers within 8 feet of one 
>>> another
>>> (one link, one side points to the sky the other side points to the dirt)

>>> The question I have is about lease rules, and contract law, which the bulk 
>>> of
>>> you old timers has dealt with. If the other operator (if its who I suspect 
>>> it
>>> is, they use fuckery, like the UBNT demo mode, or whatever its called and 
>>> other
>>> such garbage to even operate overpowered in DFS channels) doesn't want to 
>>> play
>>> ball, as in "shut that shit off" will we be able to fight it?

>>> I know what went down, and how it went down, and I suspect I know who it 
>>> is. The
>>> usual, guy approaches a site owner, offers unrealistic unicorn farts, 
>>> unicorn
>>> farts always win, spectrum gets fucked.

>>> We do 5 year auto renewing leases, with 2 year breakouts. (you guys would 
>>> likely
>>> cream your jeans seeing our lease, and though Ive asked, no I cant share it
>>> publicly, and yes, it was drawn up by an attorney) we get full control of 
>>> the
>>> 5, 6, 11, 3, 2, 900mhz, etc spectrum (I don't have a lease handy to see the
>>> specific wording) per the site.

>>> I know we wouldn't have a horse in the race with the FCC, but with this 
>>> boiling
>>> down to contract law, whats to stop us from A. willful interference 
>>> (assuming
>>> out power doesn't get cut) and B. a cease and desist from a court for the 
>>> other
>>> ISP, pending the 2 year termination?

>>> I'm handing this to the boss to handle, because my communication will start 
>>> with
>>> "listen here motherfucker" and I don't see that as conducive to a positive
>>> outcome. I had my boy with me when I came to the site today because I was 
>>> just
>>> getting accurate AGLs for bringing in a licensed backhaul. If he hadn't been
>>> with me, I probably would have yanked their ghetto enclosure off the wall 
>>> and
>>> shot their antennas.

>>> Ill tell you what, I'm about to start acting like a lot of these yahoos and
>>> saying fuck the FCC, fuck good stewardship of the spectrum, and fuck general
>>> good 

Re: [AFMUG] Dealing with a lease violation (5ghz)

[Steve Jones]

that's what I'm wondering, I guess if we got a cease and desist it would be
against the landlord, who would have to stop the tenant?

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Chris Fabien  wrote:

> Your recourse would be with the landlord. Unfortunately this puts them in
> a bad situation since they violated the terms of your lease with them. I
> don't think you have any way to make a claim agianst the other ISP unless
> you had some non-compete agreement with them or something.
>
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 3:10 PM, Steve Jones 
> wrote:
>
>> is there realistically any recourse?
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Mitch Koep  wrote:
>>
>>> And your question is?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 6/27/2017 11:05 PM, Steve Jones wrote:
>>>
 I am not asking about any FCC Part X rules, I know this isn't an FCC
 issue under any circumstances.

 We have leases with all our POP landlords, in the lease we own the site
 spectrum, with the exception of very few locations we don't collocate, just
 not worth the hassle.

 I come rolling up on a site today, 100 feet from our POP is a new POP,
 not us, cause though I used to enjoy spooning some powder with baking soda,
 I don't smoke crack, POP#2 isn't ours, even though its on the same
 property, Id recall a full EPMP and backhaul deployment.

 I'm an honest operator, very honest, like the first time UBT sent us
 new stickers for spectrum I made sure we actually put them out (be honest,
 pretty much NOBODY did that) I turn down power where we don't need it. I do
 my best to make sure we are compliant. I fought bosses to remove non
 compliant stuff I put up before I knew better. For the most part, I'm a
 good fucking neighbor, ask anybody abutting me. (with the exception of one
 location I collocate where I'm a dick, but a legal dick)

 So you can understand my dismay, being the pillar of the spectrum
 community Ive tried to be (also found out today I inadvertently fucked a
 fellow wisp on a bad choice I made with no follow up, I owned it with him
 and will be working on fixing that as of tomorrow)

 I approach everything with combat boots, assuming a battle. I'm
 guessing when it gets in the database this backhaul is going to be UBNT
 11ghz, or some other nonsense (probably affiliated with the over wind
 loaded tower 3/4 miles away with 3, yes 3, UBNT 5ghz peanut shaped
 airfibers within 8 feet of one another (one link, one side points to the
 sky the other side points to the dirt)

 The question I have is about lease rules, and contract law, which the
 bulk of you old timers has dealt with. If the other operator (if its who I
 suspect it is, they use fuckery, like the UBNT demo mode, or whatever its
 called and other such garbage to even operate overpowered in DFS channels)
 doesn't want to play ball, as in "shut that shit off" will we be able to
 fight it?

 I know what went down, and how it went down, and I suspect I know who
 it is. The usual, guy approaches a site owner, offers unrealistic unicorn
 farts, unicorn farts always win, spectrum gets fucked.

 We do 5 year auto renewing leases, with 2 year breakouts. (you guys
 would likely cream your jeans seeing our lease, and though Ive asked, no I
 cant share it publicly, and yes, it was drawn up by an attorney) we get
 full control of the 5, 6, 11, 3, 2, 900mhz, etc spectrum (I don't have a
 lease handy to see the specific wording) per the site.

 I know we wouldn't have a horse in the race with the FCC, but with this
 boiling down to contract law, whats to stop us from A. willful interference
 (assuming out power doesn't get cut) and B. a cease and desist from a court
 for the other ISP, pending the 2 year termination?

 I'm handing this to the boss to handle, because my communication will
 start with "listen here motherfucker" and I don't see that as conducive to
 a positive outcome. I had my boy with me when I came to the site today
 because I was just getting accurate AGLs for bringing in a licensed
 backhaul. If he hadn't been with me, I probably would have yanked their
 ghetto enclosure off the wall and shot their antennas.

 Ill tell you what, I'm about to start acting like a lot of these yahoos
 and saying fuck the FCC, fuck good stewardship of the spectrum, and fuck
 general good manners.

 TBH I'm not sure if I'm asking advice here or just venting. probably
 both. but FYI, I'm so pissed off right now, if you have an ex old lady who
 needs disappeared, I'm your freaking guy

>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Dealing with a lease violation (5ghz)

[Chris Fabien]

Your recourse would be with the landlord. Unfortunately this puts them in a
bad situation since they violated the terms of your lease with them. I
don't think you have any way to make a claim agianst the other ISP unless
you had some non-compete agreement with them or something.

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 3:10 PM, Steve Jones 
wrote:

> is there realistically any recourse?
>
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Mitch Koep  wrote:
>
>> And your question is?
>>
>>
>>
>> On 6/27/2017 11:05 PM, Steve Jones wrote:
>>
>>> I am not asking about any FCC Part X rules, I know this isn't an FCC
>>> issue under any circumstances.
>>>
>>> We have leases with all our POP landlords, in the lease we own the site
>>> spectrum, with the exception of very few locations we don't collocate, just
>>> not worth the hassle.
>>>
>>> I come rolling up on a site today, 100 feet from our POP is a new POP,
>>> not us, cause though I used to enjoy spooning some powder with baking soda,
>>> I don't smoke crack, POP#2 isn't ours, even though its on the same
>>> property, Id recall a full EPMP and backhaul deployment.
>>>
>>> I'm an honest operator, very honest, like the first time UBT sent us new
>>> stickers for spectrum I made sure we actually put them out (be honest,
>>> pretty much NOBODY did that) I turn down power where we don't need it. I do
>>> my best to make sure we are compliant. I fought bosses to remove non
>>> compliant stuff I put up before I knew better. For the most part, I'm a
>>> good fucking neighbor, ask anybody abutting me. (with the exception of one
>>> location I collocate where I'm a dick, but a legal dick)
>>>
>>> So you can understand my dismay, being the pillar of the spectrum
>>> community Ive tried to be (also found out today I inadvertently fucked a
>>> fellow wisp on a bad choice I made with no follow up, I owned it with him
>>> and will be working on fixing that as of tomorrow)
>>>
>>> I approach everything with combat boots, assuming a battle. I'm guessing
>>> when it gets in the database this backhaul is going to be UBNT 11ghz, or
>>> some other nonsense (probably affiliated with the over wind loaded tower
>>> 3/4 miles away with 3, yes 3, UBNT 5ghz peanut shaped airfibers within 8
>>> feet of one another (one link, one side points to the sky the other side
>>> points to the dirt)
>>>
>>> The question I have is about lease rules, and contract law, which the
>>> bulk of you old timers has dealt with. If the other operator (if its who I
>>> suspect it is, they use fuckery, like the UBNT demo mode, or whatever its
>>> called and other such garbage to even operate overpowered in DFS channels)
>>> doesn't want to play ball, as in "shut that shit off" will we be able to
>>> fight it?
>>>
>>> I know what went down, and how it went down, and I suspect I know who it
>>> is. The usual, guy approaches a site owner, offers unrealistic unicorn
>>> farts, unicorn farts always win, spectrum gets fucked.
>>>
>>> We do 5 year auto renewing leases, with 2 year breakouts. (you guys
>>> would likely cream your jeans seeing our lease, and though Ive asked, no I
>>> cant share it publicly, and yes, it was drawn up by an attorney) we get
>>> full control of the 5, 6, 11, 3, 2, 900mhz, etc spectrum (I don't have a
>>> lease handy to see the specific wording) per the site.
>>>
>>> I know we wouldn't have a horse in the race with the FCC, but with this
>>> boiling down to contract law, whats to stop us from A. willful interference
>>> (assuming out power doesn't get cut) and B. a cease and desist from a court
>>> for the other ISP, pending the 2 year termination?
>>>
>>> I'm handing this to the boss to handle, because my communication will
>>> start with "listen here motherfucker" and I don't see that as conducive to
>>> a positive outcome. I had my boy with me when I came to the site today
>>> because I was just getting accurate AGLs for bringing in a licensed
>>> backhaul. If he hadn't been with me, I probably would have yanked their
>>> ghetto enclosure off the wall and shot their antennas.
>>>
>>> Ill tell you what, I'm about to start acting like a lot of these yahoos
>>> and saying fuck the FCC, fuck good stewardship of the spectrum, and fuck
>>> general good manners.
>>>
>>> TBH I'm not sure if I'm asking advice here or just venting. probably
>>> both. but FYI, I'm so pissed off right now, if you have an ex old lady who
>>> needs disappeared, I'm your freaking guy
>>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Dealing with a lease violation (5ghz)

[Steve Jones]

is there realistically any recourse?

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Mitch Koep  wrote:

> And your question is?
>
>
>
> On 6/27/2017 11:05 PM, Steve Jones wrote:
>
>> I am not asking about any FCC Part X rules, I know this isn't an FCC
>> issue under any circumstances.
>>
>> We have leases with all our POP landlords, in the lease we own the site
>> spectrum, with the exception of very few locations we don't collocate, just
>> not worth the hassle.
>>
>> I come rolling up on a site today, 100 feet from our POP is a new POP,
>> not us, cause though I used to enjoy spooning some powder with baking soda,
>> I don't smoke crack, POP#2 isn't ours, even though its on the same
>> property, Id recall a full EPMP and backhaul deployment.
>>
>> I'm an honest operator, very honest, like the first time UBT sent us new
>> stickers for spectrum I made sure we actually put them out (be honest,
>> pretty much NOBODY did that) I turn down power where we don't need it. I do
>> my best to make sure we are compliant. I fought bosses to remove non
>> compliant stuff I put up before I knew better. For the most part, I'm a
>> good fucking neighbor, ask anybody abutting me. (with the exception of one
>> location I collocate where I'm a dick, but a legal dick)
>>
>> So you can understand my dismay, being the pillar of the spectrum
>> community Ive tried to be (also found out today I inadvertently fucked a
>> fellow wisp on a bad choice I made with no follow up, I owned it with him
>> and will be working on fixing that as of tomorrow)
>>
>> I approach everything with combat boots, assuming a battle. I'm guessing
>> when it gets in the database this backhaul is going to be UBNT 11ghz, or
>> some other nonsense (probably affiliated with the over wind loaded tower
>> 3/4 miles away with 3, yes 3, UBNT 5ghz peanut shaped airfibers within 8
>> feet of one another (one link, one side points to the sky the other side
>> points to the dirt)
>>
>> The question I have is about lease rules, and contract law, which the
>> bulk of you old timers has dealt with. If the other operator (if its who I
>> suspect it is, they use fuckery, like the UBNT demo mode, or whatever its
>> called and other such garbage to even operate overpowered in DFS channels)
>> doesn't want to play ball, as in "shut that shit off" will we be able to
>> fight it?
>>
>> I know what went down, and how it went down, and I suspect I know who it
>> is. The usual, guy approaches a site owner, offers unrealistic unicorn
>> farts, unicorn farts always win, spectrum gets fucked.
>>
>> We do 5 year auto renewing leases, with 2 year breakouts. (you guys would
>> likely cream your jeans seeing our lease, and though Ive asked, no I cant
>> share it publicly, and yes, it was drawn up by an attorney) we get full
>> control of the 5, 6, 11, 3, 2, 900mhz, etc spectrum (I don't have a lease
>> handy to see the specific wording) per the site.
>>
>> I know we wouldn't have a horse in the race with the FCC, but with this
>> boiling down to contract law, whats to stop us from A. willful interference
>> (assuming out power doesn't get cut) and B. a cease and desist from a court
>> for the other ISP, pending the 2 year termination?
>>
>> I'm handing this to the boss to handle, because my communication will
>> start with "listen here motherfucker" and I don't see that as conducive to
>> a positive outcome. I had my boy with me when I came to the site today
>> because I was just getting accurate AGLs for bringing in a licensed
>> backhaul. If he hadn't been with me, I probably would have yanked their
>> ghetto enclosure off the wall and shot their antennas.
>>
>> Ill tell you what, I'm about to start acting like a lot of these yahoos
>> and saying fuck the FCC, fuck good stewardship of the spectrum, and fuck
>> general good manners.
>>
>> TBH I'm not sure if I'm asking advice here or just venting. probably
>> both. but FYI, I'm so pissed off right now, if you have an ex old lady who
>> needs disappeared, I'm your freaking guy
>>
>
>

[AFMUG] Force110 vs Force200

[Lewis Bergman]

I am looking for an inexpensive very low bandwidth replacement for a
PTP400. I need less than a meg so throughput isn't an issue. I see they are
both 5,10,20, and 40 MHz channel widths which is good. I can set it on 5MHz
and get more than what I need and hopefully stay out of everyone else's way.

Unless I am looking at the wrong SKU it looks like the 110 is almost twice
as much. Maybe I am not looking at complete kits or something?

>From those that have used them, what do you think?

Re: [AFMUG] mikrotik CCR and copper SFP reseat

[Joe Novak]

I have no idea, to be honest I am not completely sure of the standard that
copper SFPs have to abide by in order to work. My CCR1036-12G-4S shows that
I can attempt to force halfs... but I don't know that it is supported. At
one point in time I believe it was recommended to statically assign 1000M
full to copper SFPs.

Are you running the latest bug fix firmware?

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 12:40 PM, Steve Jones 
wrote:

> this is odd, I went to the port to see about locking it, its only
> advertising 10 100 1000 full, not the halfs, is that a normal default for
> SFPs?
>
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 12:27 PM, Joe Novak  wrote:
>
>> Did you force 1G on the port for the copper SFP? I honestly have not done
>> it with a 1072. I use them a lot with the 1032s.
>>
>> You may be running into a issue with the 10G SFP+'s compatibility with
>> the S-RJ01s.. I hope not because I have a case coming up I may have to use
>> it this way as well.
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Steve Jones 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> yes S-RJ01 in CCR1072. We have two of the CCRs, this one has two modules
>>> in it, and the other has 3 modules. none of the othe other modules have
>>> given us fits. I do have an spare I can replace it with, maybe do an RMA or
>>> something, but I was wanting to know if this is a known thing first,
>>> besides, its like 25 bucks, I don't even know if that's worth an RMA
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 11:30 AM, Joe Novak  wrote:
>>>
 Which copper sfp? Mikrotiks?

 On Jun 28, 2017 11:29 AM, "Steve Jones" 
 wrote:

 we put in a CCR Saturday, we are using the copper SFP. Twice since then
 weve had to reseat the module. It shows as present in the winbox. but no
 connection. even a reboot of the CCR does not bring it back up, it has to
 be pulled and reseated. is this a known issue or should I contact mikrotik
 support (do they have support?)



>>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Dealing with a lease violation (5ghz)

[Mitch Koep]

And your question is?


On 6/27/2017 11:05 PM, Steve Jones wrote:
I am not asking about any FCC Part X rules, I know this isn't an FCC 
issue under any circumstances.


We have leases with all our POP landlords, in the lease we own the 
site spectrum, with the exception of very few locations we don't 
collocate, just not worth the hassle.


I come rolling up on a site today, 100 feet from our POP is a new POP, 
not us, cause though I used to enjoy spooning some powder with baking 
soda, I don't smoke crack, POP#2 isn't ours, even though its on the 
same property, Id recall a full EPMP and backhaul deployment.


I'm an honest operator, very honest, like the first time UBT sent us 
new stickers for spectrum I made sure we actually put them out (be 
honest, pretty much NOBODY did that) I turn down power where we don't 
need it. I do my best to make sure we are compliant. I fought bosses 
to remove non compliant stuff I put up before I knew better. For the 
most part, I'm a good fucking neighbor, ask anybody abutting me. (with 
the exception of one location I collocate where I'm a dick, but a 
legal dick)


So you can understand my dismay, being the pillar of the spectrum 
community Ive tried to be (also found out today I inadvertently fucked 
a fellow wisp on a bad choice I made with no follow up, I owned it 
with him and will be working on fixing that as of tomorrow)


I approach everything with combat boots, assuming a battle. I'm 
guessing when it gets in the database this backhaul is going to be 
UBNT 11ghz, or some other nonsense (probably affiliated with the over 
wind loaded tower 3/4 miles away with 3, yes 3, UBNT 5ghz peanut 
shaped airfibers within 8 feet of one another (one link, one side 
points to the sky the other side points to the dirt)


The question I have is about lease rules, and contract law, which the 
bulk of you old timers has dealt with. If the other operator (if its 
who I suspect it is, they use fuckery, like the UBNT demo mode, or 
whatever its called and other such garbage to even operate overpowered 
in DFS channels) doesn't want to play ball, as in "shut that shit off" 
will we be able to fight it?


I know what went down, and how it went down, and I suspect I know who 
it is. The usual, guy approaches a site owner, offers unrealistic 
unicorn farts, unicorn farts always win, spectrum gets fucked.


We do 5 year auto renewing leases, with 2 year breakouts. (you guys 
would likely cream your jeans seeing our lease, and though Ive asked, 
no I cant share it publicly, and yes, it was drawn up by an attorney) 
we get full control of the 5, 6, 11, 3, 2, 900mhz, etc spectrum (I 
don't have a lease handy to see the specific wording) per the site.


I know we wouldn't have a horse in the race with the FCC, but with 
this boiling down to contract law, whats to stop us from A. willful 
interference (assuming out power doesn't get cut) and B. a cease and 
desist from a court for the other ISP, pending the 2 year termination?


I'm handing this to the boss to handle, because my communication will 
start with "listen here motherfucker" and I don't see that as 
conducive to a positive outcome. I had my boy with me when I came to 
the site today because I was just getting accurate AGLs for bringing 
in a licensed backhaul. If he hadn't been with me, I probably would 
have yanked their ghetto enclosure off the wall and shot their antennas.


Ill tell you what, I'm about to start acting like a lot of these 
yahoos and saying fuck the FCC, fuck good stewardship of the spectrum, 
and fuck general good manners.


TBH I'm not sure if I'm asking advice here or just venting. probably 
both. but FYI, I'm so pissed off right now, if you have an ex old lady 
who needs disappeared, I'm your freaking guy

Re: [AFMUG] Radwin 5000 Pro vs. Cambium 450m

[Josh Heide]

it's easy. cambium 450m. the radwin is limited to 64 customers per access point 
and you will need 80mhz of spectrum to get the same speed as the cambium once 
cambium releases 40mhz channels :D. so you will save money and spectrum.

Josh

On 6/28/2017 11:46:20 AM, Eric Muehleisen  wrote:
Let's assume you have an unlimited budget. Which platform would you choose and 
why?

[AFMUG] Radwin 5000 Pro vs. Cambium 450m

[Eric Muehleisen]

Let's assume you have an unlimited budget. Which platform would you choose
and why?

Re: [AFMUG] Laptop for Installers

[Mitch Koep]

We use ASUS or Sony

Mitch


On 6/28/2017 12:25 PM, Matt wrote:

Looking for a good laptop for installers.  Prefer refurbished.  Any suggestions?

Re: [AFMUG] mikrotik CCR and copper SFP reseat

[Steve Jones]

this is odd, I went to the port to see about locking it, its only
advertising 10 100 1000 full, not the halfs, is that a normal default for
SFPs?

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 12:27 PM, Joe Novak  wrote:

> Did you force 1G on the port for the copper SFP? I honestly have not done
> it with a 1072. I use them a lot with the 1032s.
>
> You may be running into a issue with the 10G SFP+'s compatibility with the
> S-RJ01s.. I hope not because I have a case coming up I may have to use it
> this way as well.
>
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Steve Jones 
> wrote:
>
>> yes S-RJ01 in CCR1072. We have two of the CCRs, this one has two modules
>> in it, and the other has 3 modules. none of the othe other modules have
>> given us fits. I do have an spare I can replace it with, maybe do an RMA or
>> something, but I was wanting to know if this is a known thing first,
>> besides, its like 25 bucks, I don't even know if that's worth an RMA
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 11:30 AM, Joe Novak  wrote:
>>
>>> Which copper sfp? Mikrotiks?
>>>
>>> On Jun 28, 2017 11:29 AM, "Steve Jones" 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> we put in a CCR Saturday, we are using the copper SFP. Twice since then
>>> weve had to reseat the module. It shows as present in the winbox. but no
>>> connection. even a reboot of the CCR does not bring it back up, it has to
>>> be pulled and reseated. is this a known issue or should I contact mikrotik
>>> support (do they have support?)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Laptop for Installers

[Mathew Howard]

Toughbook CF-19. Refurbs can be found on ebay for reasonable prices.

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 12:29 PM, Joe Novak  wrote:

> Last time this was posted someone mentioned these: http://www.ebay.com/
> itm/Lenovo-ThinkPad-T420s-Laptop-14-i5-2-5GHz-8GB-128GB-
> SSD-DVDRW-Win7-Pro-Grade-A/382099725134?_trksid=p2045573.
> c100505.m3226&_trkparms=aid%3D555014%26algo%3DPL.DEFAULT%
> 26ao%3D1%26asc%3D41376%26meid%3Dbf28674209074ca58be79fbc5b11
> e99e%26pid%3D100505%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D1%26
>
>
> Varying price and grade, you should be able to fetch one with a SSD and 8G
> of ram for around that 200 dollar mark. Seem like solid laptops, battery
> life could be better but averages about 1 and a half hours with the ones we
> bought, have not even replaced the battery yet.
>
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Matt 
> wrote:
>
>> Looking for a good laptop for installers.  Prefer refurbished.  Any
>> suggestions?
>>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Laptop for Installers

[Jaime Solorza]

Panasonic Tough books are good ones...Condor Communications uses them on
towers and outdoors...rugged

Jaime Solorza

On Jun 28, 2017 11:25 AM, "Matt"  wrote:

Looking for a good laptop for installers.  Prefer refurbished.  Any
suggestions?

Re: [AFMUG] Laptop for Installers

[Joe Novak]

Last time this was posted someone mentioned these:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Lenovo-ThinkPad-T420s-Laptop-14-i5-2-5GHz-8GB-128GB-SSD-DVDRW-Win7-Pro-Grade-A/382099725134?_trksid=p2045573.c100505.m3226&_trkparms=aid%3D555014%26algo%3DPL.DEFAULT%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D41376%26meid%3Dbf28674209074ca58be79fbc5b11e99e%26pid%3D100505%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D1%26


Varying price and grade, you should be able to fetch one with a SSD and 8G
of ram for around that 200 dollar mark. Seem like solid laptops, battery
life could be better but averages about 1 and a half hours with the ones we
bought, have not even replaced the battery yet.

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Matt  wrote:

> Looking for a good laptop for installers.  Prefer refurbished.  Any
> suggestions?
>

Re: [AFMUG] mikrotik CCR and copper SFP reseat

[Joe Novak]

Did you force 1G on the port for the copper SFP? I honestly have not done
it with a 1072. I use them a lot with the 1032s.

You may be running into a issue with the 10G SFP+'s compatibility with the
S-RJ01s.. I hope not because I have a case coming up I may have to use it
this way as well.

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Steve Jones 
wrote:

> yes S-RJ01 in CCR1072. We have two of the CCRs, this one has two modules
> in it, and the other has 3 modules. none of the othe other modules have
> given us fits. I do have an spare I can replace it with, maybe do an RMA or
> something, but I was wanting to know if this is a known thing first,
> besides, its like 25 bucks, I don't even know if that's worth an RMA
>
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 11:30 AM, Joe Novak  wrote:
>
>> Which copper sfp? Mikrotiks?
>>
>> On Jun 28, 2017 11:29 AM, "Steve Jones" 
>> wrote:
>>
>> we put in a CCR Saturday, we are using the copper SFP. Twice since then
>> weve had to reseat the module. It shows as present in the winbox. but no
>> connection. even a reboot of the CCR does not bring it back up, it has to
>> be pulled and reseated. is this a known issue or should I contact mikrotik
>> support (do they have support?)
>>
>>
>>
>

[AFMUG] Laptop for Installers

[Matt]

Looking for a good laptop for installers.  Prefer refurbished.  Any suggestions?

Re: [AFMUG] mikrotik CCR and copper SFP reseat

[Steve Jones]

yes S-RJ01 in CCR1072. We have two of the CCRs, this one has two modules in
it, and the other has 3 modules. none of the othe other modules have given
us fits. I do have an spare I can replace it with, maybe do an RMA or
something, but I was wanting to know if this is a known thing first,
besides, its like 25 bucks, I don't even know if that's worth an RMA

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 11:30 AM, Joe Novak  wrote:

> Which copper sfp? Mikrotiks?
>
> On Jun 28, 2017 11:29 AM, "Steve Jones"  wrote:
>
> we put in a CCR Saturday, we are using the copper SFP. Twice since then
> weve had to reseat the module. It shows as present in the winbox. but no
> connection. even a reboot of the CCR does not bring it back up, it has to
> be pulled and reseated. is this a known issue or should I contact mikrotik
> support (do they have support?)
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] mikrotik CCR and copper SFP reseat

[Joe Novak]

Which copper sfp? Mikrotiks?

On Jun 28, 2017 11:29 AM, "Steve Jones"  wrote:

we put in a CCR Saturday, we are using the copper SFP. Twice since then
weve had to reseat the module. It shows as present in the winbox. but no
connection. even a reboot of the CCR does not bring it back up, it has to
be pulled and reseated. is this a known issue or should I contact mikrotik
support (do they have support?)

[AFMUG] mikrotik CCR and copper SFP reseat

[Steve Jones]

we put in a CCR Saturday, we are using the copper SFP. Twice since then
weve had to reseat the module. It shows as present in the winbox. but no
connection. even a reboot of the CCR does not bring it back up, it has to
be pulled and reseated. is this a known issue or should I contact mikrotik
support (do they have support?)

Re: [AFMUG] So Silicon Valley WISP startup gets $7M investment?

[Faisal Imtiaz]

Hm. Yes / Nosort of 

Things get interesting when you realize that 60ghz Band has been extended to 
include (57ghz to 71ghz) 
BTW.. the antenna gain (60ghz) is 42dBi on the 60-35 units. 

Right now the current chip set supports up to 64.8ghz .. which has a 
significantly less oxygen fade then 59/60ghz channel... 

Will we see a PTMP doing 1-3 miles ? not very likely 
Will we see a PTP doing 1-3miles ? Yes, very likely (there are folks who 
are running/testing 1mile links). 
Will it have rain fade ? Yes 

Hope that clarifies ! 

Regards 

Faisal Imtiaz 
Snappy Internet & Telecom 
7266 SW 48 Street 
Miami, FL 33155 
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 

Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net 

> From: "Eric Kuhnke" 
> To: af@afmug.com
> Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 10:08:49 PM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] So Silicon Valley WISP startup gets $7M investment?

> 60 GHz has very different atmospheric performance than 71-86 GHz FDD. 2 miles 
> at
> 80 GHz with 60cm/2' dishes is pretty normal now. The peak in this chart right
> at 60 GHz is one of the reasons why it's unlicensed.
> http://forum.flitetest.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=36164=1418680522=1

> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 7:06 PM, Jaime Solorza < losguyswirel...@gmail.com >
> wrote:

>> I have installed 2 mile 80GHz links at Fort Bliss several years ago..I am 
>> sure
>> newer technology will improve fade margin.

>> Jaime Solorza

>> On Jun 27, 2017 8:01 PM, "Eric Kuhnke" < eric.kuh...@gmail.com > wrote:

>>> 60 GHz PtMP at 1-3 miles? I want some of whatever you're smoking because it 
>>> must
>>> be some primo stuff. If you put up a few 500 to 800 meter distance 60 GHz 
>>> PTP
>>> links and monitor them over a multi month period, you'll see that you really
>>> don't want to go much longer than that. I can't imagine that the gain of the
>>> Ignitenet 60 GHz sector antenna is much better than a typical 25, 30 or 60cm
>>> parabolic antenna used for 60 GHz PTP stuff.
>>> If I had to guess the 60 GHz PtMP will be reliable at distance of more like
>>> 400-500 meters, tops, with properly aimed CPEs.

>>> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 6:52 PM, Adam Moffett < dmmoff...@gmail.com > wrote:

 What IgniteNet is selling is a 60ghz PTMP with a built in 5ghz backup 
 radio.
 It's understood that the 60ghz connection will go down due to rain fade, 
 but
 the built-in 5ghz backup should keep the customer trucking (with reduced
 capacity). I think you'd be installing at ranges of 1-3 miles for the 
 60ghz to
 run at decent MCS, and at that range I think you'll still get decent 
 capacity
 out of the 5ghz. You'll get a lower speed test, but I'd bet it's possible 
 to
 design so that Netflix keeps running.

 -- Original Message --
 From: "Chuck McCown" < ch...@wbmfg.com >
 To: af@afmug.com
 Sent: 6/27/2017 11:38:32 AM
 Subject: Re: [AFMUG] So Silicon Valley WISP startup gets $7M investment?

> 1. What is acceptable downtime on pure 60GHz. It is possible to 
> engineering it
> to practically no downtime although less economical.

>> Zero. If it goes down the phone will ring. With a well designed and 
>> installed
>> Canopy system there was no downtime.

> 2. What is the acceptable backup bandwidth? If there is at least SOME 
> internet
> available during 4-5" rains, is that acceptable?

>> If you are talking about something built in, then the acceptable backup 
>> is
>> whatever fools the customer into thinking that Netflix is not impacted.

[AFMUG] AT & Ericsson Stream 5G in Austin | Light Reading

[Jaime Solorza]

http://www.lightreading.com/mobile/5g/atandt-and-ericsson-stream-5g-in-austin/d/d-id/734081?f_src=lightreading_editorspicks_rss_latest_editors_picks=true
Jaime Solorza

Re: [AFMUG] Are Airrouter HP's discontinued?

[Josh Reynolds]

store.ubnt.com normally has a decent selection of the newer stuff, but as
far as I know they still make 2.4 bullets.

- Josh

On Jun 27, 2017 11:06 PM, "Steve Jones"  wrote:

> lol, does UBNT website actually reflect their product offerings, Ive come
> to just look at their website as more of their poster board of ideas
>
> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 11:04 PM, Rory Conaway 
> wrote:
>
>> Yea but they aren’t on the website any longer.
>>
>>
>>
>> Rory
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 27, 2017 6:11 PM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Are Airrouter HP's discontinued?
>>
>>
>>
>> 400 of them at Streakwave.  Make sure you're getting the US model?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340 <(937)%20552-2340>
>> Direct: 937-552-2343 <(937)%20552-2343>
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 7:43 PM, Rory Conaway 
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>