RE: [WISPA] Multiple Radios on Single antenna
Radios are WRAP/CM9's with StarOS on RadioWaves SPD2-5.2NS. Is there anything special you do/use to get this to work? Only things I can see that would help are band pass filters. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bob Moldashel Sent: 15 January 2006 23:53 To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Multiple Radios on Single antenna I should revise that to say we do it on dual polarity antennas. Not 2 radios on one antenna -B- Bob Moldashel wrote: Paul, We do this all the time. Explain what model radios and how you are doing this?? I'll try to help. -B- Paul Hendry wrote: Has anyone successfully installed more than 1 radio on a single antenna with virtually no interference between links? We had originally planned to run 2 simultaneous links on dual polarized 5GHz RadioWaves parabolics however once installed we found that only 1 link could be used at any one time regardless of channel separation due to interference. Now the set-up is being used to provide redundancy but would much prefer double the capacity. If anyone has achieved a similar thing would they share how they achieved it? Hoping that some 5GHz band pass filters could be the answer but can only locate 2.4 variants at present L Cheers, P. -- Bob Moldashel Lakeland Communications, Inc. Broadband Deployment Group 1350 Lincoln Avenue Holbrook, New York 11741 USA 800-479-9195 Toll Free US Canada 631-585-5558 Fax 516-551-1131 Cell -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.17/229 - Release Date: 13/01/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.18/230 - Release Date: 14/01/2006 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Coverage in Southeast Missouri?
Any WISPs in Southeast Missouri? I was contacted by a nice Deputy Sherriff who had bought his own laptop for doing work in his patrol car and was hoping to find at least partial mobile Broadband coverage in his area (444 square miles, as he describes it.) If you provide service in Southeast Missouri, please contact me off list and I'll put you and the Deputy Sherriff in touch. Thanks, Steve --- Steve Stroh 425-939-0076 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.stevestroh.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Multiple Radios on Single antenna
Radios can't be on the same channels obviously. We have a link presently running with the same configuration 2 channels apart without issues. A dual polarity antenna is going to seperate the two by 15-25 dB. Make sure the tx power is equal on both radios and it should work without issue. Now if we could just get the freakin' routing to work correctly we would be fine. -B- Paul Hendry wrote: Radios are WRAP/CM9's with StarOS on RadioWaves SPD2-5.2NS. Is there anything special you do/use to get this to work? Only things I can see that would help are band pass filters. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bob Moldashel Sent: 15 January 2006 23:53 To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Multiple Radios on Single antenna I should revise that to say we do it on dual polarity antennas. Not 2 radios on one antenna -B- Bob Moldashel wrote: Paul, We do this all the time. Explain what model radios and how you are doing this?? I'll try to help. -B- Paul Hendry wrote: Has anyone successfully installed more than 1 radio on a single antenna with virtually no interference between links? We had originally planned to run 2 simultaneous links on dual polarized 5GHz RadioWaves parabolics however once installed we found that only 1 link could be used at any one time regardless of channel separation due to interference. Now the set-up is being used to provide redundancy but would much prefer double the capacity. If anyone has achieved a similar thing would they share how they achieved it? Hoping that some 5GHz band pass filters could be the answer but can only locate 2.4 variants at present L Cheers, P. -- Bob Moldashel Lakeland Communications, Inc. Broadband Deployment Group 1350 Lincoln Avenue Holbrook, New York 11741 USA 800-479-9195 Toll Free US Canada 631-585-5558 Fax 516-551-1131 Cell -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Coverage in Southeast Missouri?
Steve, I believe that would be Sir Butch Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] If he doesn't cover the area, he may know who does. Rick Harnish President OnlyInternet Broadband Wireless, Inc. 260-827-2482 Office 260-307-4000 Cell 260-918-4340 VoIP www.oibw.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Stroh Sent: Monday, January 16, 2006 9:26 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Coverage in Southeast Missouri? Any WISPs in Southeast Missouri? I was contacted by a nice Deputy Sherriff who had bought his own laptop for doing work in his patrol car and was hoping to find at least partial mobile Broadband coverage in his area (444 square miles, as he describes it.) If you provide service in Southeast Missouri, please contact me off list and I'll put you and the Deputy Sherriff in touch. Thanks, Steve --- Steve Stroh 425-939-0076 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.stevestroh.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Multiple Radios on Single antenna
Why would you use an isolator If we are talking possible adjacent channel interference then an isolator is not the cure, aditional filtering would be. But most equipment should be able to work in this environment without it. I have sites that have 4 WRAP boards with CM9's sitting right next to each other on the next adjacent channel with no issues. In addition, the loss of power is not acceptable (though it wouldn't be half power at 5GHz.). -B- Richard Goodin wrote: Go to some of the hard core LMR delers and ask for isolators, (They will cut your power in half). Your LMR dealer will need to know power, frequency, type of connectors. This may work, I do not know. - Original Message - *From:* Paul Hendry mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *To:* 'WISPA General List' mailto:wireless@wispa.org *Sent:* Monday, January 16, 2006 5:14 AM *Subject:* RE: [WISPA] Multiple Radios on Single antenna Radios are WRAP/CM9's with StarOS on RadioWaves SPD2-5.2NS. Is there anything special you do/use to get this to work? Only things I can see that would help are band pass filters. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bob Moldashel Sent: 15 January 2006 23:53 To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Multiple Radios on Single antenna I should revise that to say we do it on dual polarity antennas. Not 2 radios on one antenna -B- -- Bob Moldashel Lakeland Communications, Inc. Broadband Deployment Group 1350 Lincoln Avenue Holbrook, New York 11741 USA 800-479-9195 Toll Free US Canada 631-585-5558 Fax 516-551-1131 Cell -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Can you believe this?
January 16, 2006 Sharing Broadband to Increase Speed By JOHN MARKOFF SAN FRANCISCO, Jan. 15 - Two West Coast start-up companies have built new wireless technologies that take to heart Benjamin Franklin's exhortation to hang together rather than hang separately. Both Mushroom Networks, which was started at the University of California, San Diego, and WiBoost Inc., based in Seattle, have built prototypes of simple wireless systems that make it possible for groups of neighbors to share their D.S.L. or cable Internet connections. Both companies said that sharing high-speed lines might enable users in small neighborhood clusters to download files and Web pages up to 10 times faster. The two companies, which developed their technologies separately, are taking slightly different approaches. But in both cases, neighbors would be able to connect relatively standard wireless routers that would permit their computers to receive data in parallel from multiple D.S.L. or cable network connections. The idea is similar to adding lanes to a freeway to improve traffic flow. WiBoost, which is also the name of the company's technology system, now requires an antenna mounted outside the home. The company is exploring ways to license its technology to manufacturers and hopes to make WiBoost devices available for $200 to $300. In flat areas with minimal obstructions, the system might be able to link homes separated by several miles, with do-it-yourself installation. Mushroom Networks is conducting trials using a device called an access point aggregator that is similar to a conventional home Wi-Fi router. It is intended to be used to connect homes or businesses that are closer together. In principle, these technologies could work for a large group of neighbors, even with just a few Internet access points. That capacity - which could reduce the cost of Internet access considerably for its users - could, however, create substantial opposition from Internet service providers. Many of them are vigilant about restricting the sharing of individual network access points. Both companies said they were going to great lengths to assure service providers that they did not plan to become bandwidth Napsters, a reference to the music file-sharing company that raised havoc with the audio recording industry. The idea of linking several Internet data channels for greater speed is not a new one, but exploring a consumer application for the technology is a fresh notion, said Rene L. Cruz, a University of California computer scientist and founder of Mushroom Networks. "We're pretty excited about the concept," he said. "We're looking for validation and we're looking for market demand." The technology has merits, said George Henny, the president of Whidbey Telecom, an independent telecommunications firm based on Whidbey Island, Wash. "There is an interesting potential for this technology," he said, "and it would be fun to put it in place." The concept is related to the concept of wireless mesh networking, a technique that is used to extend Wi-Fi and related wireless networking standards over large areas by relaying Internet data among wireless receivers. In this use, the two firms are exploiting the fact that most computer networks are used in an irregular or "bursty" fashion. Even though large numbers of users download e-mail, Web pages or music and video files, most of the time the networks sit idle, waiting for a computer user to strike a key or issue a command. The capacity utilization rates of modern data networks have long been known to be remarkably low. "Our studies show that, averaged across all users, the utilization is less than 1 percent of the total capacity," said James Baker, president of WiBoost. Telephone companies may oversubscribe the capacity of their D.S.L. lines by an average of 14 to 20 times, said Mr. Cruz, and some researchers estimate that rate to be as high as 200 to 1. But because the networks are so underutilized, they can be used efficiently despite substantial oversubscription. Neither Mr. Cruz nor Mr. Baker is certain of receiving the blessing of Internet service providers, which often go to great lengths to prohibit their customers from sharing service with others. "We don't want freeloaders," said Mr. Baker. "We don't want the perception that it might be something that the I.S.P. might not like." Both companies have approached Internet providers to discuss their ideas, and they said they had received some indications of interest. One selling point stressed by both companies is that the technology is a simple way for D.S.L. providers to match the higher bandwidth offered by cable companies. Moreover, the technology could be used as a "viral" marketing technique by Internet service providers if existing customers persuaded neighbors to sign up for service to take advantage of the wireless accelerator. -- WISPA
RE: [WISPA] Can you believe this?
Well, Kurt, here's a piece of the "Terms of Agreement" that a RoadRunner subscriber contractually agrees to: "Subscriber will not resell the Service, or any portion thereof, or otherwise charge others to use the Service, or any portion thereof. The Service is for personal use only, and Subscriber agrees not to use the Service for operation as an Internet Service Provider, to host web sites for other parties or for any other business enterprise or to connect the cable modem to any server or to any computer outside the Subscriber's premises." . . . j o n a t h a n -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Kurt FankhauserSent: Monday, January 16, 2006 6:28 PMTo: 'WISPA General List'Subject: RE: [WISPA] Can you believe this? That doesnt sound like a good idea, if they even do get it to work they will have a hard time tracking down someone one that is spamming, making viruses, etc. Wonder what those guys were smoking when they thought of that over there in mushroom laboratories? Kurt Fankhauser WAVELINC 114 S. Walnut St. Bucyrus, OH 44820 419-562-6405 www.wavelinc.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jonathan SchmidtSent: Monday, January 16, 2006 11:16 AMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: [WISPA] Can you believe this? January 16, 2006 Sharing Broadband to Increase Speed By JOHN MARKOFF SAN FRANCISCO, Jan. 15 - Two West Coast start-up companies have built new wireless technologies that take to heart Benjamin Franklin's exhortation to hang together rather than hang separately. Both Mushroom Networks, which was started at the University of California, San Diego, and WiBoost Inc., based in Seattle, have built prototypes of simple wireless systems that make it possible for groups of neighbors to share their D.S.L. or cable Internet connections. Both companies said that sharing high-speed lines might enable users in small neighborhood clusters to download files and Web pages up to 10 times faster. The two companies, which developed their technologies separately, are taking slightly different approaches. But in both cases, neighbors would be able to connect relatively standard wireless routers that would permit their computers to receive data in parallel from multiple D.S.L. or cable network connections. The idea is similar to adding lanes to a freeway to improve traffic flow. WiBoost, which is also the name of the company's technology system, now requires an antenna mounted outside the home. The company is exploring ways to license its technology to manufacturers and hopes to make WiBoost devices available for $200 to $300. In flat areas with minimal obstructions, the system might be able to link homes separated by several miles, with do-it-yourself installation. Mushroom Networks is conducting trials using a device called an access point aggregator that is similar to a conventional home Wi-Fi router. It is intended to be used to connect homes or businesses that are closer together. In principle, these technologies could work for a large group of neighbors, even with just a few Internet access points. That capacity - which could reduce the cost of Internet access considerably for its users - could, however, create substantial opposition from Internet service providers. Many of them are vigilant about restricting the sharing of individual network access points. Both companies said they were going to great lengths to assure service providers that they did not plan to become bandwidth Napsters, a reference to the music file-sharing company that raised havoc with the audio recording industry. The idea of linking several Internet data channels for greater speed is not a new one, but exploring a consumer application for the technology is a fresh notion, said Rene L. Cruz, a University of California computer scientist and founder of Mushroom Networks. "We're pretty excited about the concept," he said. "We're looking for validation and we're looking for market demand." The technology has merits, said George Henny, the president of Whidbey Telecom, an independent telecommunications firm based on Whidbey Island, Wash. "There is an interesting potential for this technology," he said, "and it would be fun to put it in place." The concept is related to the concept of wireless mesh networking, a technique that is used to extend Wi-Fi and related wireless networking standards over large areas by relaying Internet data among wireless receivers. In this use, the two firms are exploiting the fact that most computer networks are used in an irregular or "bursty" fashion. Even
RE: [WISPA] Can you believe this?
So even if they did get it to work they cant use it without breaking their contract? Kurt Fankhauser WAVELINC 114 S. Walnut St. Bucyrus, OH 44820 419-562-6405 www.wavelinc.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jonathan Schmidt Sent: Monday, January 16, 2006 2:02 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: RE: [WISPA] Can you believe this? Well, Kurt, here's a piece of the Terms of Agreement that a RoadRunner subscriber contractually agrees to: Subscriber will not resell the Service, or any portion thereof, or otherwise charge others to use the Service, or any portion thereof. The Service is for personal use only, and Subscriber agrees not to use the Service for operation as an Internet Service Provider, to host web sites for other parties or for any other business enterprise or to connect the cable modem to any server or to any computer outside the Subscriber's premises. . . . j o n a t h a n -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Kurt Fankhauser Sent: Monday, January 16, 2006 6:28 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Can you believe this? That doesnt sound like a good idea, if they even do get it to work they will have a hard time tracking down someone one that is spamming, making viruses, etc. Wonder what those guys were smoking when they thought of that over there in mushroom laboratories? Kurt Fankhauser WAVELINC 114 S. Walnut St. Bucyrus, OH 44820 419-562-6405 www.wavelinc.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jonathan Schmidt Sent: Monday, January 16, 2006 11:16 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Can you believe this? January 16, 2006 Sharing Broadband to Increase Speed By JOHN MARKOFF SAN FRANCISCO, Jan. 15 - Two West Coast start-up companies have built new wireless technologies that take to heart Benjamin Franklin's exhortation to hang together rather than hang separately. Both Mushroom Networks, which was started at the University of California, San Diego, and WiBoost Inc., based in Seattle, have built prototypes of simple wireless systems that make it possible for groups of neighbors to share their D.S.L. or cable Internet connections. Both companies said that sharing high-speed lines might enable users in small neighborhood clusters to download files and Web pages up to 10 times faster. The two companies, which developed their technologies separately, are taking slightly different approaches. But in both cases, neighbors would be able to connect relatively standard wireless routers that would permit their computers to receive data in parallel from multiple D.S.L. or cable network connections. The idea is similar to adding lanes to a freeway to improve traffic flow. WiBoost, which is also the name of the company's technology system, now requires an antenna mounted outside the home. The company is exploring ways to license its technology to manufacturers and hopes to make WiBoost devices available for $200 to $300. In flat areas with minimal obstructions, the system might be able to link homes separated by several miles, with do-it-yourself installation. Mushroom Networks is conducting trials using a device called an access point aggregator that is similar to a conventional home Wi-Fi router. It is intended to be used to connect homes or businesses that are closer together. In principle, these technologies could work for a large group of neighbors, even with just a few Internet access points. That capacity - which could reduce the cost of Internet access considerably for its users - could, however, create substantial opposition from Internet service providers. Many of them are vigilant about restricting the sharing of individual network access points. Both companies said they were going to great lengths to assure service providers that they did not plan to become bandwidth Napsters, a reference to the music file-sharing company that raised havoc with the audio recording industry. The idea of linking several Internet data channels for greater speed is not a new one, but exploring a consumer application for the technology is a fresh notion, said Rene L. Cruz, a University of California computer scientist and founder of Mushroom Networks. We're pretty excited about the concept, he said. We're looking for validation and we're looking for market demand. The technology has merits, said George Henny, the president of Whidbey Telecom, an independent telecommunications firm based on Whidbey Island, Wash. There is an interesting potential for this technology, he said, and it would be fun to put it in place. The concept is related to the concept of wireless mesh networking, a technique that is used to extend Wi-Fi and related wireless networking standards over large areas by
RE: [WISPA] Coverage in Southeast Missouri?
Yes Sir! ;) Rick Harnish President OnlyInternet Broadband Wireless, Inc. 260-827-2482 Office 260-307-4000 Cell 260-918-4340 VoIP www.oibw.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Butch Evans Sent: Monday, January 16, 2006 6:35 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: RE: [WISPA] Coverage in Southeast Missouri? On Mon, 16 Jan 2006, Rick Harnish wrote: I believe that would be Sir Butch Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED] WOW! I got promoted to a Sir! ;-) -- Butch Evans BPS Networks http://www.bpsnetworks.com/ Bernie, MO Mikrotik Certified Consultant (http://www.mikrotik.com/consultants.html) -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Hello all
Hi, I am a new member. I involved in real estate, but dabble in wireless technology. I have a client who wants to become a strictly WISP. Any suggestions on hardware options especially antennas. Happy helpings -- JIMI ATOKI THE REAL ESTATE SOLUTIONS NETWORK LOAN OFFICER/REAL ESTATE CONSULTANT 866-937-4776 EXT 706 CELL (631)-664-3931 www.thersn.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Can you believe this?
Jonathan Schmidt wrote: But, yes, the Terms of Agreement for broadband contracts usually specify limiting access to the premises on the address of the contract. Otherwise, for $50 an apartment manager could get a router and hub and wire up the building and give free Internet access. It all depends on the ISP. One of my personal favorites is Speakeasy, who has a special program just for this. http://www.speakeasy.net/netshare/learnmore/ It's not quite the same, but close. Basically you set up an access point and secure it yourself, Speakeasy bills them, and give you 80% of whatever they're billed. The end-user/el-cheapo-WISP-op selects their own price, Speakeasy bills 'em and gives kickbacks. Basically what a lot of people are doing anyway, I'm sure, just with more paperwork and less TOS-violation. As an aside, Speakeasy's TOS say you can't resell their residential service plans, but there's no prohibition on this for business plans, which only average an extra twenty bucks or so per month. They also give out lots of static IPs on most of their plans, expressly permit end-users to run most servers, and generally do all sorts of wacky stuff. Despite working for a WISP, I can't get my company's service at my house. If it were available here, I'd be a Speakeasy customer in no time, because they're so friendly to the geek market. David Smith MVN.net -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] Can you believe this?
snip Despite working for a WISP, I can't get my company's service at my house. If it were available here, I'd be a Speakeasy customer in no time, because they're so friendly to the geek market. /snip Out of curiosity -- how does allowing connection sharing qualify as being friendly to the geek market? -Charles --- WiNOG Austin, TX March 13-15, 2006 http://www.winog.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Hello all
I have an overseas client who wants to start on WISP. He is targeting residential homes and small businesses. His budgeting a customer base of about five thousand and wants to cover a 30 mile radius starting off. I offered him a product that I am familiar with called the smartBridges airBridge which is a reciver placed in each clients home. AirPoint-PROx Outdoor Access Point which broadcasts the signals form the base station. Other Hardwares are gotten from the same company. They function on a different bandwidth which I also took into consideration. Any one familiar with these products or have any other suggestions I would appreciate input. Thanks On 1/16/06, Marlon K. Schafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For antenna stuff please read: http://www.odessaoffice.com/wireless/antenna/how_to_pick_the_right_antenna.htm As for the rest of your questions, please give us some more details. What will the customer base be like? How many do you expect? What ranges will you need to cover? What will you charge? And about a hundred more marlon - Original Message - From: Folajimi Atoki [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, January 16, 2006 5:45 PM Subject: [WISPA] Hello all Hi, I am a new member. I involved in real estate, but dabble in wireless technology. I have a client who wants to become a strictly WISP. Any suggestions on hardware options especially antennas. Happy helpings -- JIMI ATOKI THE REAL ESTATE SOLUTIONS NETWORK LOAN OFFICER/REAL ESTATE CONSULTANT 866-937-4776 EXT 706 CELL (631)-664-3931 www.thersn.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- JIMI ATOKI THE REAL ESTATE SOLUTIONS NETWORK LOAN OFFICER/REAL ESTATE CONSULTANT 866-937-4776 EXT 706 CELL (631)-664-3931 www.thersn.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
