RE: [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions

[Rick Harnish]

Mike,

Jimmy P. has NO digestive tract?  I lived in the same house with him for 4
days when in Louisiana and I can swear that he has none. I think that is
where the term "CAMP SHAGNASTY" must have came from! ;)

Gotta love Jimmy though, he has a heart of gold!

Rick Harnish


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mike Delp
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2006 1:31 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions

Are you sure that isn't Jim Patients Digestive Tract??   ;-)

Mike

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt Larsen - Lists
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 2:54 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions

Better yet, use StarOS access points.  They work great with Tranzeos and 
will run like rice and beans through Mac's digestive tract.

Matt Larsen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Mac Dearman wrote:

> EVERY AP that we upgraded above 86r locks up every couple hours. 86r 
> is stable and has performed exceedingly well for months without a 
> single issue. If you downgrade to a lesser firmware - - - - be sure 
> that you are PHYSICALLY on site where the gear is!! It will loose its 
> config and go back to factory default AND it will have to be power 
> cycled! Please read this again carefully and understand !! :-) or 
> else!
>
> Mac Dearman
> Maximum Access, LLC.
> Authorized Barracuda Reseller
> MikroTik RouterOS Certified
> www.inetsouth.com
> www.mac-tel.us
> www.RadioResponse.org (Katrina Relief)
> Rayville, La.
> 318.728.8600 318.303.4227
> 318.303.4229
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Mark Nash wrote:
>
>> Mac, what are you seeing?  Have you used 89? 88 had issues (firmware 
>> units
>> were shipped with), I've upgraded to 89.  Not had any issues, but 
>> only in
>> production for about a week.
>>
>> Mark Nash
>> Network Engineer
>> UnwiredOnline.Net
>> 350 Holly Street
>> Junction City, OR 97448
>> http://www.uwol.net
>> 541-998-
>> 541-998-5599 fax
>>
>> - Original Message - From: "Mac Dearman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>> Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 11:51 AM
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions
>>
>>
>>  
>>
>>> ***WARNING  WILL ROBINSON 
>>>
>>> You better steer clear of any updates on those Tranzeo APs over build
>>> 86r
>>>
>>> WARNING YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED :-)
>>>
>>> Mac Dearman
>>> Maximum Access, LLC.
>>> Authorized Barracuda Reseller
>>> MikroTik RouterOS Certified
>>> www.inetsouth.com
>>> www.mac-tel.us
>>> www.RadioResponse.org (Katrina Relief)
>>> Rayville, La.
>>> 318.728.8600
>>> 318.303.4227
>>> 318.303.4229
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Mark Nash wrote:
>>>
>>>   
>>>
 I've been using them for about a month now for a couple of smaller
 sectors.  Had stability problems with the AP's that I was using (YDI
 AP-Plus w/Turbocell, operating as an 802.11b AP).  I then installed
 Tranzeo AP's.  I had issues with them not reconnecting to the AP when
 the AP was power-cycled.  Updated firmware on AP's & clients.  Been
 running stable for about a week.  Now I have purchased another 
 10-pack.

 The AP's web interface really cleaned up & gave me client names on the
 station list with the latest firmware.

 I can't give you long-term statistics, nor can I answer your huge
 PPPoE question.

 Mark Nash
 Network Engineer
 UnwiredOnline.Net
 350 Holly Street
 Junction City, OR 97448
 http://www.uwol.net
 541-998-
 541-998-5599 fax

- Original Message -
*From:* JohnnyO 
*To:* wireless@wispa.org 
*Sent:* Monday, February 13, 2006 9:52 AM
*Subject:* [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions

We will be doing a large deployment of CPEs in the next 60-90days.
I would like to hear all of the negatives or issues people are
seeing with the Tranzeo CPQ line.

A huge question I have is will it act as a PPPoE client ?

Any and all comments are helpful, Thanks !

JohnnyO

 
>>>
>>  

>>
>>  
>>
--WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org 
 

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

 
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>>   
>>
>>
>>
>>  
>>

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/

RE: [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions

[Mike Delp]

Are you sure that isn't Jim Patients Digestive Tract??   ;-)

Mike

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt Larsen - Lists
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 2:54 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions

Better yet, use StarOS access points.  They work great with Tranzeos and 
will run like rice and beans through Mac's digestive tract.

Matt Larsen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Mac Dearman wrote:

> EVERY AP that we upgraded above 86r locks up every couple hours. 86r 
> is stable and has performed exceedingly well for months without a 
> single issue. If you downgrade to a lesser firmware - - - - be sure 
> that you are PHYSICALLY on site where the gear is!! It will loose its 
> config and go back to factory default AND it will have to be power 
> cycled! Please read this again carefully and understand !! :-) or 
> else!
>
> Mac Dearman
> Maximum Access, LLC.
> Authorized Barracuda Reseller
> MikroTik RouterOS Certified
> www.inetsouth.com
> www.mac-tel.us
> www.RadioResponse.org (Katrina Relief)
> Rayville, La.
> 318.728.8600 318.303.4227
> 318.303.4229
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Mark Nash wrote:
>
>> Mac, what are you seeing?  Have you used 89? 88 had issues (firmware 
>> units
>> were shipped with), I've upgraded to 89.  Not had any issues, but 
>> only in
>> production for about a week.
>>
>> Mark Nash
>> Network Engineer
>> UnwiredOnline.Net
>> 350 Holly Street
>> Junction City, OR 97448
>> http://www.uwol.net
>> 541-998-
>> 541-998-5599 fax
>>
>> - Original Message - From: "Mac Dearman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>> Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 11:51 AM
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions
>>
>>
>>  
>>
>>> ***WARNING  WILL ROBINSON 
>>>
>>> You better steer clear of any updates on those Tranzeo APs over build
>>> 86r
>>>
>>> WARNING YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED :-)
>>>
>>> Mac Dearman
>>> Maximum Access, LLC.
>>> Authorized Barracuda Reseller
>>> MikroTik RouterOS Certified
>>> www.inetsouth.com
>>> www.mac-tel.us
>>> www.RadioResponse.org (Katrina Relief)
>>> Rayville, La.
>>> 318.728.8600
>>> 318.303.4227
>>> 318.303.4229
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Mark Nash wrote:
>>>
>>>   
>>>
 I've been using them for about a month now for a couple of smaller
 sectors.  Had stability problems with the AP's that I was using (YDI
 AP-Plus w/Turbocell, operating as an 802.11b AP).  I then installed
 Tranzeo AP's.  I had issues with them not reconnecting to the AP when
 the AP was power-cycled.  Updated firmware on AP's & clients.  Been
 running stable for about a week.  Now I have purchased another 
 10-pack.

 The AP's web interface really cleaned up & gave me client names on the
 station list with the latest firmware.

 I can't give you long-term statistics, nor can I answer your huge
 PPPoE question.

 Mark Nash
 Network Engineer
 UnwiredOnline.Net
 350 Holly Street
 Junction City, OR 97448
 http://www.uwol.net
 541-998-
 541-998-5599 fax

- Original Message -
*From:* JohnnyO 
*To:* wireless@wispa.org 
*Sent:* Monday, February 13, 2006 9:52 AM
*Subject:* [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions

We will be doing a large deployment of CPEs in the next 60-90days.
I would like to hear all of the negatives or issues people are
seeing with the Tranzeo CPQ line.

A huge question I have is will it act as a PPPoE client ?

Any and all comments are helpful, Thanks !

JohnnyO

 
>>>
>>  

>>
>>  
>>
--WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org 
 

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

 
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>>   
>>
>>
>>
>>  
>>

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 120* Sectors

[John Scrivner]

Your problem is likely peer to peer file sharing I bet. Do you have the 
ability to see what is actually being sent per IP address on your 
network? A flood from a peer to peer "attack" can bring your wireless 
network to its knees. One client with multiple sessions can do the 
damage all by themselves. Star OS and Mikrotik are two things that can 
be your friend here. Star OS has nice IP Traffic Analysis tools built 
in. I hear Mikrotik can isolate and throttle your peer to peer traffic 
to a low level to force some sanity on your network. Best to move this 
out to the edge as much as possible to limit the radio airtime from 
being flooded with traffic. I have provisions in my acceptable use 
policy which limit what a customer can do including no peer to peer use 
or allowance for termination if they cause problems on the network. The 
key is we shut them down if they break the rules. The network troubles 
go away then.

Good luck,
Scriv


Brian Rohrbacher wrote:


Here is what I use.
http://www.demarctech.com/products/reliawave-antennas/2_4Ghz/DT-AN-24-120H-135.html 



I have three mounted back to back on a pole.  It all worked fine until 
I hit a higher number of subscribers.  Maybe it's the interference 
from too many subs or maybe it's the fact that a majority of my subs 
are locked into 1M air rate, or maybe its because the subs are NLOS, 
or maybe because of the F/B or side to side isolation.  So what is my 
problems?  High pings and timeouts.  Only when traffic is high.  Or 
maybe my 600k upload is maxed out and everything is stacking up.  One 
thing I do know is I hooked up subs I shouldn't have.


I am looking for advice on antennas.  Check out the ones I am using 
ans point me to 3 sectors that will perform good back to back, NLOS, 
and maybe a higher gain to grab a little more signal to get the 1M 
subs up to 11M.


Thanks all.


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions

[Bo Hamilton]

Agreed!  CPQ's are a great CPE.
 
Bo 
On 2/14/06, Kurt Fankhauser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


JohnnyO,
 
The Tranzeo CPQ's are rock solid and you should install as many of them as you can.

 

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 JohnnyOSent: Monday, February 13, 2006 9:53 AMTo: 
wireless@wispa.orgSubject: [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions
 

We will be doing a large deployment of CPEs in the next 60-90days. I would like to hear all of the negatives or issues people are seeing with the Tranzeo CPQ line.
A huge question I have is will it act as a PPPoE client ?Any and all comments are helpful, Thanks ! JohnnyO --WISPA Wireless List: 
wireless@wispa.orgSubscribe/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] Ground wire

[Mark Koskenmaki]

You have said you don't.
 
 
 
 
North East Oregon Fastnet, LLC 509-593-4061personal correspondence 
to:  mark at neofast dot netsales inquiries to:  purchasing at 
neofast dot netFast Internet, NO 
WIRES!-

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Kurt 
  Fankhauser 
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; 'WISPA General 
  List' 
  Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 10:58 
  PM
  Subject: RE: [WISPA] Ground wire
  
  
  What makes you think 
  I don’t wear a harness when I climb?
   
  
  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 JohnnyOSent: Monday, February 13, 2006 6:11 
  PMTo: WISPA General 
  ListSubject: RE: [WISPA] 
  Ground wire
   
  You don't wear a harness when you climb 
  either - How do you expect anyone to take you seriously Kurtster ? JohnnyOOn Mon, 2006-02-13 at 
  19:34 -0800, Kurt Fankhauser wrote:  I don't ground client equipment. Kurt FankhauserWAVELINC114 S. Walnut St.Bucyrus, OH 44820419-562-6405www.wavelinc.com  -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] OnBehalf Of Larry A WeidigSent: Monday, February 13, 2006 8:06 AMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: [WISPA] Ground wire   I was just curious for residential installations what sizeground wire people are using?  We have been using all #8 but with thesky rocketing costs of this have been considering #10 instead.  This isused between our Polyphaser and the house ground system.   * Larry A. Weidig ([EMAIL PROTECTED])* Excel.Net,Inc. - http://www.excel.net/* (920) 452-0455 - Sheboygan/Plymouth area* (888) 489-9995 - Other areas, toll-free  -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/   -- No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG Free Edition.Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.6/258 - Release Date:2/13/2006  
  
  

  -- WISPA Wireless List: 
  wireless@wispa.orgSubscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wirelessArchives: 
  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] Ground wire

[Kurt Fankhauser]

What makes you think I don’t wear a
harness when I climb?

 



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 JohnnyO
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006
6:11 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Ground wire

 

You don't wear a harness when you climb either - How
do you expect anyone to take you seriously Kurtster ? 

JohnnyO

On Mon, 2006-02-13 at 19:34 -0800, Kurt Fankhauser wrote: 

 I don't ground client equipment. Kurt FankhauserWAVELINC114 S. Walnut St.Bucyrus, OH 44820419-562-6405www.wavelinc.com  -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] OnBehalf Of Larry A WeidigSent: Monday, February 13, 2006 8:06 AMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: [WISPA] Ground wire   I was just curious for residential installations what sizeground wire people are using?  We have been using all #8 but with thesky rocketing costs of this have been considering #10 instead.  This isused between our Polyphaser and the house ground system.   * Larry A. Weidig ([EMAIL PROTECTED])* Excel.Net,Inc. - http://www.excel.net/* (920) 452-0455 - Sheboygan/Plymouth area* (888) 489-9995 - Other areas, toll-free  -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/   -- No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG Free Edition.Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.6/258 - Release Date:2/13/2006  




-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions

[Kurt Fankhauser]

JohnnyO,

 

The Tranzeo CPQ’s are rock solid and you
should install as many of them as you can.

 



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 JohnnyO
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006
9:53 AM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ
Opinions

 

We will be doing a large deployment of CPEs in the
next 60-90days. I would like to hear all of the negatives or issues people are
seeing with the Tranzeo CPQ line.

A huge question I have is will it act as a PPPoE client ?

Any and all comments are helpful, Thanks ! 

JohnnyO 






-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Ground wire

[JohnnyO]

You don't wear a harness when you climb either - How do you expect anyone to take you seriously Kurtster ? 

JohnnyO

On Mon, 2006-02-13 at 19:34 -0800, Kurt Fankhauser wrote:


I don't ground client equipment.

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 Larry A Weidig
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 8:06 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Ground wire

	I was just curious for residential installations what size
ground wire people are using?  We have been using all #8 but with the
sky rocketing costs of this have been considering #10 instead.  This is
used between our Polyphaser and the house ground system.  

* Larry A. Weidig ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
* Excel.Net,Inc. - http://www.excel.net/
* (920) 452-0455 - Sheboygan/Plymouth area
* (888) 489-9995 - Other areas, toll-free  
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.6/258 - Release Date:
2/13/2006






-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Ground wire

[Rick Smith]

I don't either, unless it's a repeater setup or it's above the roofline.

Kurt Fankhauser wrote:


I don't ground client equipment.

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 Larry A Weidig
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 8:06 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Ground wire

I was just curious for residential installations what size
ground wire people are using?  We have been using all #8 but with the
sky rocketing costs of this have been considering #10 instead.  This is
used between our Polyphaser and the house ground system.  


* Larry A. Weidig ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
* Excel.Net,Inc. - http://www.excel.net/
* (920) 452-0455 - Sheboygan/Plymouth area
* (888) 489-9995 - Other areas, toll-free  
 


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] 900 client and omni antennas

[danlist]

What about the pacwireless grid’s?

 











From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006
2:11 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 900 client
and omni antennas



 



The best client antenna in 900 depends on the typical
weather / environment, not just specifically best antenna.





 





To combat heavy foliage in very Rural areas (dry summer
months), M2inc's - 17 dbi Yagis have been invaluable to gain maximum
RSSI, to penetrate the trees.  However, they become useless in Winter
weather, when they get ice buildup on them.





 





In a ice/snow heavy environment, panel antennas are MUCH
better, for example the built-in 10dbi antenna of Trango 900 radios, to get max
allowed RSSI in a weather resistent panel enclosure.  The F/B is poor
(only 12 db), but often the best choice for ease, cost, and Dual pol
flexibilty.





 





In high noise areas, such as Urban or colocated near paging
gear, a high quality antenna like MTI's 10 dbi panel, offers maximum F/B
ratio, to block out interference. Not much can out perform them, but
at a trade off of cost and flexibility of pol change on the fly.





 





When Yagi's can be mounted low for easy access, (within
Gorilla Ladder height (18 feet), and for residential where I can afford to take
the risk of not having pol change on the fly (usually consistent noise floor on
a polarity), I don't hesitate to install a Yagi as my first
choice.  Often Verticle is less desirable interference any way, based
on paging companies.  However, for critical links, installing the M2inc
yagis are risky. They mounting method is horrible. It allows a lot of play for
the Yagi to move in heavy winds.  If mounted high on a steep roof, I avoid
the Yagi unless they are absolutely necessary, because they need mcuh more
frequent attention. For example to wipe the snow off of them, or re-align.





 





There are someother Yagis that have more secure double point
mounts, around 12-15 dbi, if you can afford to give up the 2 db.





 





As for verticle Omni type client antennas, for example for
mobile apps, I have no advice.





   





Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband





 





 







- Original Message - 





From: Rick
Harnish 





To: 'WISPA General
List' 





Sent: Monday, February
13, 2006 1:11 PM





Subject: [WISPA] 900 client
and omni antennas





 



What are the 900 client antennas of choice as well as omni
directionals.  I would like a solution that can get 5-6 miles NLOS. 
We don’t have a lot of dense foliage that we have tried to penetrate up
until now but are looking for a solution for select cells.

 

Respectfully,

 

Rick
Harnish

President

OnlyInternet
Broadband & Wireless, Inc.

260-827-2482
Office

260-307-4000
Cell

260-918-4340
VoIP

www.oibw.net

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

  

 



 







-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/












--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.6/258 - Release Date: 02/13/2006
 

  

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.6/258 - Release Date: 02/13/2006
 


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions

[Mark Nash]

Every 2 hours since the beginning?  Haven't seen this yet, so I'll have to 
watch it.

Which AP did you have?
-Original Message-
From: Mac Dearman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 18:51:25 
To:WISPA General List 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions

Build 2.0.1 is the one that I was referring to!!!  get ready to boot and 
reboot!!

Mac Dearman
Maximum Access, LLC.
Authorized Barracuda Reseller
MikroTik RouterOS Certified
www.inetsouth.com
www.mac-tel.us
www.RadioResponse.org (Katrina Relief)
Rayville, La.
318.728.8600 
318.303.4227
318.303.4229







Anthony Morin wrote:

> Yeah, I got one back from RMA last week that had build 99 on it and it 
> wouldn't link for anything. Tech guy didn't even know 99 was out. I 
> held an 89r right next to it and it linked right up. I have to give 
> credit to them though they shipped me a new unit the next business day.
>  
> Thumbs up to Tranzeo though on the 2.0.1 build for the tr-6000's and 
> tr5-a's, big improvements.
>
> */Mac Dearman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>/* wrote:
>
> ***WARNING WILL ROBINSON 
>
> You better steer clear of any updates on those Tranzeo APs over build
> 86r
>
> WARNING YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED :-)
>
> Mac Dearman
> Maximum Access, LLC.
> Authorized Barracuda Reseller
> MikroTik RouterOS Certified
> www.inetsouth.com
> www.mac-tel.us
> www.RadioResponse.org (Katrina Relief)
> Rayville, La.
> 318.728.8600
> 318.303.4227
> 318.303.4229
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Mark Nash wrote:
>
> > I've been using them for about a month now for a couple of smaller
> > sectors. Had stability problems with the AP's that I was using (YDI
> > AP-Plus w/Turbocell, operating as an 802.11b AP). I then installed
> > Tranzeo AP's. I had issues with them not reconnecting to the AP
> when
> > the AP was power-cycled. Updated firmware on AP's & clients. Been
> > running stable for about a week. Now I have purchased another
> 10-pack.
> >
> > The AP's web interface really cleaned up & gave me client names
> on the
> > station list with the latest firmware.
> >
> > I can't give you long-term statistics, nor can I answer your huge
> > PPPoE question.
> >
> > Mark Nash
> > Network Engineer
> > UnwiredOnline.Net
> > 350 Holly Street
> > Junction City, OR 97448
> > http://www.uwol.net
> > 541-998-
> > 541-998-5599 fax
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > *From:* JohnnyO
> > *To:* wireless@wispa.org
> > *Sent:* Monday, February 13, 2006 9:52 AM
> > *Subject:* [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions
> >
> > We will be doing a large deployment of CPEs in the next 60-90days.
> > I would like to hear all of the negatives or issues people are
> > seeing with the Tranzeo CPQ line.
> >
> > A huge question I have is will it act as a PPPoE client ?
> >
> > Any and all comments are helpful, Thanks !
> >
> > JohnnyO
> >
> >
> 
> > --
> > 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/
> *
>
> *
>
>
> *
> **Velocity Wireless**
> *Anthony Morin*
> *208 East Elm Street*
> *Ambia, IN 47917*
> *(765) 869-5173*
>
> * *
>
> 
> *
> What are the most popular cars? Find out at Yahoo! Autos 
> 
>  
> *

-- 
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] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions

[Mac Dearman]

Build 2.0.1 is the one that I was referring to!!!  get ready to boot and 
reboot!!


Mac Dearman
Maximum Access, LLC.
Authorized Barracuda Reseller
MikroTik RouterOS Certified
www.inetsouth.com
www.mac-tel.us
www.RadioResponse.org (Katrina Relief)
Rayville, La.
318.728.8600 
318.303.4227

318.303.4229







Anthony Morin wrote:

Yeah, I got one back from RMA last week that had build 99 on it and it 
wouldn't link for anything. Tech guy didn't even know 99 was out. I 
held an 89r right next to it and it linked right up. I have to give 
credit to them though they shipped me a new unit the next business day.
 
Thumbs up to Tranzeo though on the 2.0.1 build for the tr-6000's and 
tr5-a's, big improvements.


*/Mac Dearman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>/* wrote:

***WARNING WILL ROBINSON 

You better steer clear of any updates on those Tranzeo APs over build
86r

WARNING YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED :-)

Mac Dearman
Maximum Access, LLC.
Authorized Barracuda Reseller
MikroTik RouterOS Certified
www.inetsouth.com
www.mac-tel.us
www.RadioResponse.org (Katrina Relief)
Rayville, La.
318.728.8600
318.303.4227
318.303.4229







Mark Nash wrote:

> I've been using them for about a month now for a couple of smaller
> sectors. Had stability problems with the AP's that I was using (YDI
> AP-Plus w/Turbocell, operating as an 802.11b AP). I then installed
> Tranzeo AP's. I had issues with them not reconnecting to the AP
when
> the AP was power-cycled. Updated firmware on AP's & clients. Been
> running stable for about a week. Now I have purchased another
10-pack.
>
> The AP's web interface really cleaned up & gave me client names
on the
> station list with the latest firmware.
>
> I can't give you long-term statistics, nor can I answer your huge
> PPPoE question.
>
> Mark Nash
> Network Engineer
> UnwiredOnline.Net
> 350 Holly Street
> Junction City, OR 97448
> http://www.uwol.net
> 541-998-
> 541-998-5599 fax
>
> - Original Message -
> *From:* JohnnyO
> *To:* wireless@wispa.org
> *Sent:* Monday, February 13, 2006 9:52 AM
> *Subject:* [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions
>
> We will be doing a large deployment of CPEs in the next 60-90days.
> I would like to hear all of the negatives or issues people are
> seeing with the Tranzeo CPQ line.
>
> A huge question I have is will it act as a PPPoE client ?
>
> Any and all comments are helpful, Thanks !
>
> JohnnyO
>
>

> --
> 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/
*

*


*
**Velocity Wireless**
*Anthony Morin*
*208 East Elm Street*
*Ambia, IN 47917*
*(765) 869-5173*

* *


*
What are the most popular cars? Find out at Yahoo! Autos 
 
*


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Advice on Legal Options for Competitor Interference

[warped.terranova.net]

Cloaking with StarOS V3 should solve your problem.

Todd Barber wrote:

I have had equipment deployed on a local water tank for about the last 
two years.  The setup has been sectorized and using 3 120 degree 2.4 GHz 
channels since we deployed.  I also have 4 5.8 GHz links running and one 
5.3 GHz.  Basically this site is vital to my network and I have used a 
large chunk of the unlicensed spectrum.


 

About a year ago another company deployed a 5.8 GHz backhaul link and a 
2.4 GHz omni on the residence that is approximately 100 yards away from 
the tank.  Their initial deployment created 2.4 GHz interference with my 
existing customers and I squeezed my existing sectorized channels 
together to get away from it.  I’ve been using 4, 7, and 11 while they 
have been deployed on 1.


 

In the past I have used a spectrum analyzer to evaluate the signals from 
both my site and theirs.  I believe all of my equipment is running right 
at 36 dB as allowed by law for point to multipoint.  When measured with 
the same antenna from the same distance, their signal is approximately 7 
dB higher than mine.  In addition to the excessive power it also appears 
the amp they are using is dirty and the channel width is wider than 
anything I am running.


 

Their initial deployment really upset me as their lack of engineering 
judgment or just plain stupidity created issues for my customers who had 
reliable links before.  I couldn’t believe that anyone would choose to 
deploy 2.4 GHz within a hundred yards of an existing installation that 
was already using the entire spectrum.  I have tolerated the situation 
and dealt with the interference on my lower channel by over engineering 
any links to that sector.  I have also had my backhaul link performance 
intermittently knocked off line after they changed channels on their 5.8 
GHz equipment. 

 

During the backhaul interference issue I contacted the company and give 
them credit for working with me to resolve the issue.  During that 
conversation they informed me they were more than willing to coordinate 
with me and would notify me if they were changing channels.


 

Over the last few weeks I have been fighting with numerous troublesome 
client connections on two different sectors that had been running 
without issue.  Today I went to the tank to upgrade the remaining 2 APPO 
units to a StarOS WRAP setup in an effort to improve performance. 

 

When I arrived I found that my competitor has now installed a 50 ft. 
pole and has deployed an additional 4 radios on it.  Needless to say I 
immediately understood why so many of my customers were experiencing 
issues.  I also see that the competitor was really sincere about 
contacting me around channel usage.

 

My questions are what are my legal options, has anyone dealt with this 
type of situation before (deployment within 100 yards), and what kind of 
lawyer should I contact (any referrals are welecome)?  With the current 
heavy usage of spectrum at this site I do not believe there is any 
option of let’s play nice and coordinate channels.  There aren’t any 
left to coordinate and they were all used before they deployed.  I don’t 
feel I have any option but legal action. 

 

 From past list discussions I am under the impression that there may be 
the non FCC involved option of filing “interfering with my ability to 
conduct business” suit.  Any comments on this would be greatly 
appreciated. 

 

I also believe I may have recourse with the FCC.  I am confident they 
are exceeding the legal EIRP on their amped omni as one issue.  I also 
question if their behavior could be construed as intentionally causing 
interference.  Knowingly deploying within 100 yards of an existing site 
that is already utilizing the spectrum seems to create a situation that 
can not avoid interference.  If they didn’t know at the time of their 
initial deployment they were made aware of exactly what spectrum was 
being used since via voice and email exchanges.  Even if they are not 
competent enough to use a spectrum analyzer they had been informed of 
both the existing and potential for further interference issues before 
the deployment of the new additional 4 radios I found today.  I’m not 
really sure I want to go down this path but again I don’t believe they 
have left me any other options.  How do I begin a conversation with the 
FCC related to this situation?


 

Any and all comments would be greatly appreciated.   

 


Todd Barber

Skylink Broadband Internet

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

970-454-9499

 


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions

[Anthony Morin]

Yeah, I got one back from RMA last week that had build 99 on it and it wouldn't link for anything. Tech guy didn't even know 99 was out. I held an 89r right next to it and it linked right up. I have to give credit to them though they shipped me a new unit the next business day.     Thumbs up to Tranzeo though on the 2.0.1 build for the tr-6000's and tr5-a's, big improvements.Mac Dearman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:  ***WARNING WILL ROBINSON You better steer clear of any updates on those Tranzeo APs over build 86r WARNING YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED :-)Mac DearmanMaximum Access, LLC.Authorized Barracuda ResellerMikroTik RouterOS Certifiedwww.inetsouth.comwww.mac-tel.uswww.RadioResponse.org (Katrina Relief)Rayville, La.318.728.8600
 318.303.4227318.303.4229Mark Nash wrote:> I've been using them for about a month now for a couple of smaller > sectors. Had stability problems with the AP's that I was using (YDI > AP-Plus w/Turbocell, operating as an 802.11b AP). I then installed > Tranzeo AP's. I had issues with them not reconnecting to the AP when > the AP was power-cycled. Updated firmware on AP's & clients. Been > running stable for about a week. Now I have purchased another 10-pack.> > The AP's web interface really cleaned up & gave me client names on the > station list with the latest firmware.> > I can't give you long-term statistics, nor can I answer your huge > PPPoE question.>> Mark Nash> Network Engineer> UnwiredOnline.Net> 350 Holly Street> Junction City, OR 97448> http://www.uwol.net> 541-998->
 541-998-5599 fax>> - Original Message -> *From:* JohnnyO > *To:* wireless@wispa.org > *Sent:* Monday, February 13, 2006 9:52 AM> *Subject:* [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions>> We will be doing a large deployment of CPEs in the next 60-90days.> I would like to hear all of the negatives or issues people are> seeing with the Tranzeo CPQ line.>> A huge question I have is will it act as a PPPoE client ?>> Any and all comments are helpful, Thanks !>> JohnnyO>> > -- > 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.orgSubscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wirelessArchives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/Velocity Wireless
Anthony Morin
208 East Elm Street
Ambia, IN 47917
(765) 869-5173
		  
What are the most popular cars? Find out at Yahoo! Autos 
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Ground wire

[Kurt Fankhauser]

I don't ground client equipment.

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 Larry A Weidig
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 8:06 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Ground wire

I was just curious for residential installations what size
ground wire people are using?  We have been using all #8 but with the
sky rocketing costs of this have been considering #10 instead.  This is
used between our Polyphaser and the house ground system.  

* Larry A. Weidig ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
* Excel.Net,Inc. - http://www.excel.net/
* (920) 452-0455 - Sheboygan/Plymouth area
* (888) 489-9995 - Other areas, toll-free  
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.6/258 - Release Date:
2/13/2006


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Advice on Legal Options for Competitor Interference

[Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181]

It doesn't seem to make much difference if it's 1 
mile away or 1' away :-).  We have a site that has 4 wifi systems on it and 
there are 3 other providers about a mile away.  From the cpe point of view, 
they are almost the same site 10+ miles out.
 
Having said that, most of the people up there work 
to see what channels are in use and then use something else.  We've had to 
put in VERY high end antennas and put much of our system on the same 
channel.  It's working ok, especially for one's on the opposite sides of 
the site.
 
If you have a water tower to work with, assuming 
you can get the tank between your antennas and theirs that should allow you to 
do a good job of reusing channels.
 
Use good antennas, be creative.  Also, start 
moving things to hpol as you can, that'll help trim off signal from the cpe 
pov.
 
As for the power thing.  The FCC does care 
about that.  They do NOT want a cb radio fiasco to happen again.  Sure 
others get to use the spectrum (when doing system design I always try to leave 
room for competitors to come in) but they have to do it right.
 
If those guys are interfering with you, you are 
interfering with them.  Probably even worse than they are doing to 
you.
 
Check out the cpe side and look for 
amps.
 
Use your SA and see if you can pick up on the dB 
levels again.
 
I agree with others, that if they are just a couple 
of dB over not much is likely to happen.  In any case it's not likely that 
the FCC will shut them down or fine them, but they will make them fix things and 
get back down to the proper power levels.
 
I had a very obnoxious competitor who was running 
15 dB omni antennas with 1 watt amps (at least that's what he was telling the 
tower owners).  He was a bit of a problem for me, but I knew that operators 
that do dumb things like that eventually run out of money so I left him alone 
after one failed attempt at working with them (they no-showed me at the meeting 
we'd set up).  I engineered around his systems and was running pretty 
well.  Even though I could point my customers several degrees away from his 
systems and still pick his stuff up at higher power levels than my 
stuff.
 
After a while I had a collection of 3 or 4 other 
wisps that were having trouble with the same guy.  We got together and 
built a case against the guy.  Pictures, equipment data when known 
etc.  I sent that to some of the FCC enforcement folks that I know and 
eventually I was contacted by a field rep.  I sent the data we had put 
together along with contact info for the wisps that were more affected by the 
first class prick than I was.  I never did hear back from the FCC but all 
amps are either gone or have been moved indoors.  All ssid's are now hidden 
(not that that matters to a $25,000 spectrum analyzer :-) etc.  I think 
he's running at better power levels but I've not taken the time to run a good 
check lately.
 
I did have a couple of customers get mad at me and 
move over to his system.  It took 3 months for the longest one to come 
back.  I guess even on our bad days we have better service than he does on 
the good days :-).
 
Feel free to drop me a line and we can see if we 
can figure out a way to get you up and running nicely again and a way to make 
him play nice.
 
laters,
Marlon
509.988.0260 cell(509) 
982-2181   
Equipment sales(408) 907-6910 
(Vonage)    
Consulting services42846865 
(icq)    
And I run my own wisp!64.146.146.12 (net meeting)www.odessaoffice.com/wirelesswww.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam
 
 

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Todd 
  Barber 
  To: 'WISPA General List' 
  Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 1:03 
  PM
  Subject: [WISPA] Advice on Legal Options 
  for Competitor Interference
  
  
  I have had equipment deployed on a 
  local water tank for about the last two years.  The setup has been 
  sectorized and using 3 120 degree 2.4 GHz channels since we deployed.  I 
  also have 4 5.8 GHz links running and one 5.3 GHz.  Basically this site 
  is vital to my network and I have used a large chunk of the unlicensed 
  spectrum.
   
  About a year ago another company 
  deployed a 5.8 GHz backhaul link and a 2.4 GHz omni on the residence that is 
  approximately 100 yards away from the tank.  Their initial deployment 
  created 2.4 GHz interference with my existing customers and I squeezed my 
  existing sectorized channels together to get away from it.  I’ve been 
  using 4, 7, and 11 while they have been deployed on 1.
   
  In the past I have used a spectrum 
  analyzer to evaluate the signals from both my site and theirs.  I believe 
  all of my equipment is running right at 36 dB as allowed by law for point to 
  multipoint.  When measured with the same antenna from the same distance, 
  their signal is approximately 7 dB higher than mine.  In addition to the 
  excessive power it also appears the amp they are using is dirty and the 
  channe

Re: [WISPA] Advice on Legal Options for Competitor Interference

[Blair Davis]

How do I begin a
conversation with the FCC related to this
situation?

Basically, you don't.

Unless you can PROVE that their ERIP is over 36dbi on their point to
multi-point omni or sectors you will not get anywhere with the FCC. 
They will take action on egregiously excessive power.  But if he
is running a 1W amp into a 12db omni, don't hold your breath waiting on
the FCC.  On the other hand, a 20W military amp into a 24db grid might
or might not get their attention.  (But I would not want to stand in
front of it to measure the output!!)

The current FCC policy on the ISM bands seems to be that almost
anything goes as long as you are not interfering with LICENSED
spectrums users in other bands.  This may change, but I doubt it.  With
the current budget crunch, there doesn't seem to be any money for
enforcement

As to if he is using non certified equipment, the enforcement guys can
do something about it, if they get interested.  But, they have a lot on
their plates and enforcement in the ISM bands is very low on their
priority list.

Been there, done that.  Got the T-shirt.


Todd Barber wrote:

  
  
  
  
  I have had equipment
deployed on a local water tank for
about the last two years.  The setup has been sectorized and using 3
120
degree 2.4 GHz channels since we deployed.  I also have 4 5.8 GHz links
running and one 5.3 GHz.  Basically this site is vital to my network
and I
have used a large chunk of the unlicensed spectrum.
   
  About a year ago another
company deployed a 5.8 GHz backhaul
link and a 2.4 GHz omni on the residence that is approximately 100
yards away
from the tank.  Their initial deployment created 2.4 GHz interference
with
my existing customers and I squeezed my existing sectorized channels
together
to get away from it.  I’ve been using 4, 7, and 11 while they have
been deployed on 1.
   
  In the past I have used a
spectrum analyzer to evaluate the
signals from both my site and theirs.  I believe all of my equipment is
running right at 36 dB as allowed by law for point to multipoint.  When
measured with the same antenna from the same distance, their signal is
approximately 7 dB higher than mine.  In addition to the excessive
power
it also appears the amp they are using is dirty and the channel width
is wider
than anything I am running. 
   
  Their initial deployment
really upset me as their lack of
engineering judgment or just plain stupidity created issues for my
customers
who had reliable links before.  I couldn’t believe that anyone would
choose to deploy 2.4 GHz within a hundred yards of an existing
installation
that was already using the entire spectrum.  I have tolerated the
situation and dealt with the interference on my lower channel by over
engineering any links to that sector.  I have also had my backhaul link
performance intermittently knocked off line after they changed channels
on
their 5.8 GHz equipment.  
   
  During the backhaul
interference issue I contacted the
company and give them credit for working with me to resolve the issue. 
During that conversation they informed me they were more than willing
to
coordinate with me and would notify me if they were changing channels.
   
  Over the last few weeks I
have been fighting with numerous
troublesome client connections on two different sectors that had been
running
without issue.  Today I went to the tank to upgrade the remaining 2
APPO
units to a StarOS WRAP setup in an effort to improve performance.  
   
  When I arrived I found
that my competitor has now installed
a 50 ft. pole and has deployed an additional 4 radios on it.  Needless
to
say I immediately understood why so many of my customers were
experiencing
issues.  I also see that the competitor was really sincere about
contacting me around channel usage.    
   
  My questions are what are
my legal options, has anyone dealt
with this type of situation before (deployment within 100 yards), and
what kind
of lawyer should I contact (any referrals are welecome)?  With the
current
heavy usage of spectrum at this site I do not believe there is any
option of
let’s play nice and coordinate channels.  There aren’t any left
to coordinate and they were all used before they deployed.  I don’t
feel I have any option but legal action.  
   
  From past list
discussions I am under the impression that
there may be the non FCC involved option of filing “interfering with my
ability to conduct business” suit.  Any comments on this would be
greatly appreciated.  
   
  I also believe I may have
recourse with the FCC.  I am
confident they are exceeding the legal EIRP on their amped omni as one
issue.  I also question if their behavior could be construed as
intentionally
causing interference.  Knowingly deploying within 100 yards of an
existing
site that is already utilizing the spectrum seems to create a situation
that
can not avoid interference.  If they didn’t know at the time of
their initial deployment they were made aware of exactly what spectrum
was
being used 

Re: [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions

[Julius Igugu]




TR CPQs won't act as PPPoE clients.

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  JohnnyO 
  To: wireless@wispa.org 
  Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 6:52 
  PM
  Subject: [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ 
  Opinions
  We will be doing a large deployment of CPEs in the next 
  60-90days. I would like to hear all of the negatives or issues people are 
  seeing with the Tranzeo CPQ line.A huge question I have is will it act 
  as a PPPoE client ?Any and all comments are helpful, Thanks ! 
  JohnnyO 
  
  

  -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.orgSubscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wirelessArchives: 
  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] Advice on Legal Options for Competitor Interference

[Matt Liotta]

Do you have anything in writing from them agreeing to frequency 
coordination? If you do and they violated that agreement then you may 
well have a case. I doubt you are going to have much luck pursuing them 
on the interference issue otherwise. Now if they have antennas and 
amplifiers with their Wi-Fi equipment it is very likely they aren't 
using FCC certified systems, which could allow the FCC to shut them down 
as well as fine them.


-Matt

Todd Barber wrote:

I have had equipment deployed on a local water tank for about the last 
two years. The setup has been sectorized and using 3 120 degree 2.4 
GHz channels since we deployed. I also have 4 5.8 GHz links running 
and one 5.3 GHz. Basically this site is vital to my network and I have 
used a large chunk of the unlicensed spectrum.


About a year ago another company deployed a 5.8 GHz backhaul link and 
a 2.4 GHz omni on the residence that is approximately 100 yards away 
from the tank. Their initial deployment created 2.4 GHz interference 
with my existing customers and I squeezed my existing sectorized 
channels together to get away from it. I’ve been using 4, 7, and 11 
while they have been deployed on 1.


In the past I have used a spectrum analyzer to evaluate the signals 
from both my site and theirs. I believe all of my equipment is running 
right at 36 dB as allowed by law for point to multipoint. When 
measured with the same antenna from the same distance, their signal is 
approximately 7 dB higher than mine. In addition to the excessive 
power it also appears the amp they are using is dirty and the channel 
width is wider than anything I am running.


Their initial deployment really upset me as their lack of engineering 
judgment or just plain stupidity created issues for my customers who 
had reliable links before. I couldn’t believe that anyone would choose 
to deploy 2.4 GHz within a hundred yards of an existing installation 
that was already using the entire spectrum. I have tolerated the 
situation and dealt with the interference on my lower channel by over 
engineering any links to that sector. I have also had my backhaul link 
performance intermittently knocked off line after they changed 
channels on their 5.8 GHz equipment.


During the backhaul interference issue I contacted the company and 
give them credit for working with me to resolve the issue. During that 
conversation they informed me they were more than willing to 
coordinate with me and would notify me if they were changing channels.


Over the last few weeks I have been fighting with numerous troublesome 
client connections on two different sectors that had been running 
without issue. Today I went to the tank to upgrade the remaining 2 
APPO units to a StarOS WRAP setup in an effort to improve performance.


When I arrived I found that my competitor has now installed a 50 ft. 
pole and has deployed an additional 4 radios on it. Needless to say I 
immediately understood why so many of my customers were experiencing 
issues. I also see that the competitor was really sincere about 
contacting me around channel usage.


My questions are what are my legal options, has anyone dealt with this 
type of situation before (deployment within 100 yards), and what kind 
of lawyer should I contact (any referrals are welecome)? With the 
current heavy usage of spectrum at this site I do not believe there is 
any option of let’s play nice and coordinate channels. There aren’t 
any left to coordinate and they were all used before they deployed. I 
don’t feel I have any option but legal action.


From past list discussions I am under the impression that there may be 
the non FCC involved option of filing “interfering with my ability to 
conduct business” suit. Any comments on this would be greatly 
appreciated.


I also believe I may have recourse with the FCC. I am confident they 
are exceeding the legal EIRP on their amped omni as one issue. I also 
question if their behavior could be construed as intentionally causing 
interference. Knowingly deploying within 100 yards of an existing site 
that is already utilizing the spectrum seems to create a situation 
that can not avoid interference. If they didn’t know at the time of 
their initial deployment they were made aware of exactly what spectrum 
was being used since via voice and email exchanges. Even if they are 
not competent enough to use a spectrum analyzer they had been informed 
of both the existing and potential for further interference issues 
before the deployment of the new additional 4 radios I found today. 
I’m not really sure I want to go down this path but again I don’t 
believe they have left me any other options. How do I begin a 
conversation with the FCC related to this situation?


Any and all comments would be greatly appreciated.

Todd Barber

Skylink Broadband Internet

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

970-454-9499



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wire

Re: [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions

[Mark Nash]

OK...I've got TR-601f AP's running 2.10 (TR6-2.0.1Rt) firmware.  The v89 
firmware I was referring to was at the client, not the AP.


Mark Nash
Network Engineer
UnwiredOnline.Net
325 Holly Street
Junction City, OR 97448
http://www.uwol.net
541-998-
541-998-5599 fax

- Original Message - 
From: "Mac Dearman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 12:25 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions


EVERY AP that we upgraded above 86r locks up every couple hours. 86r is 
stable and has performed exceedingly well for months without a single 
issue. If you downgrade to a lesser firmware - - - - be sure that you are 
PHYSICALLY on site where the gear is!! It will loose its config and go 
back to factory default AND it will have to be power cycled! Please 
read this again carefully and understand !! :-) or else!


Mac Dearman
Maximum Access, LLC.
Authorized Barracuda Reseller
MikroTik RouterOS Certified
www.inetsouth.com
www.mac-tel.us
www.RadioResponse.org (Katrina Relief)
Rayville, La.
318.728.8600 318.303.4227
318.303.4229







Mark Nash wrote:


Mac, what are you seeing?  Have you used 89? 88 had issues (firmware units
were shipped with), I've upgraded to 89.  Not had any issues, but only in
production for about a week.

Mark Nash
Network Engineer
UnwiredOnline.Net
350 Holly Street
Junction City, OR 97448
http://www.uwol.net
541-998-
541-998-5599 fax

- Original Message - 
From: "Mac Dearman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 11:51 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions




***WARNING  WILL ROBINSON 

You better steer clear of any updates on those Tranzeo APs over build
86r

WARNING YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED :-)

Mac Dearman
Maximum Access, LLC.
Authorized Barracuda Reseller
MikroTik RouterOS Certified
www.inetsouth.com
www.mac-tel.us
www.RadioResponse.org (Katrina Relief)
Rayville, La.
318.728.8600
318.303.4227
318.303.4229







Mark Nash wrote:



I've been using them for about a month now for a couple of smaller
sectors.  Had stability problems with the AP's that I was using (YDI
AP-Plus w/Turbocell, operating as an 802.11b AP).  I then installed
Tranzeo AP's.  I had issues with them not reconnecting to the AP when
the AP was power-cycled.  Updated firmware on AP's & clients.  Been
running stable for about a week.  Now I have purchased another 10-pack.

The AP's web interface really cleaned up & gave me client names on the
station list with the latest firmware.

I can't give you long-term statistics, nor can I answer your huge
PPPoE question.

Mark Nash
Network Engineer
UnwiredOnline.Net
350 Holly Street
Junction City, OR 97448
http://www.uwol.net
541-998-
541-998-5599 fax

   - Original Message -
   *From:* JohnnyO 
   *To:* wireless@wispa.org 
   *Sent:* Monday, February 13, 2006 9:52 AM
   *Subject:* [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions

   We will be doing a large deployment of CPEs in the next 60-90days.
   I would like to hear all of the negatives or issues people are
   seeing with the Tranzeo CPQ line.

   A huge question I have is will it act as a PPPoE client ?

   Any and all comments are helpful, Thanks !

   JohnnyO



 

   -- 
   WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org 


   Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
   http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

   Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/







--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

[WISPA] Advice on Legal Options for Competitor Interference

[Todd Barber]

I have had equipment deployed on a local water tank for
about the last two years.  The setup has been sectorized and using 3 120
degree 2.4 GHz channels since we deployed.  I also have 4 5.8 GHz links
running and one 5.3 GHz.  Basically this site is vital to my network and I
have used a large chunk of the unlicensed spectrum.

 

About a year ago another company deployed a 5.8 GHz backhaul
link and a 2.4 GHz omni on the residence that is approximately 100 yards away
from the tank.  Their initial deployment created 2.4 GHz interference with
my existing customers and I squeezed my existing sectorized channels together
to get away from it.  I’ve been using 4, 7, and 11 while they have
been deployed on 1.

 

In the past I have used a spectrum analyzer to evaluate the
signals from both my site and theirs.  I believe all of my equipment is
running right at 36 dB as allowed by law for point to multipoint.  When
measured with the same antenna from the same distance, their signal is
approximately 7 dB higher than mine.  In addition to the excessive power
it also appears the amp they are using is dirty and the channel width is wider
than anything I am running. 

 

Their initial deployment really upset me as their lack of
engineering judgment or just plain stupidity created issues for my customers
who had reliable links before.  I couldn’t believe that anyone would
choose to deploy 2.4 GHz within a hundred yards of an existing installation
that was already using the entire spectrum.  I have tolerated the
situation and dealt with the interference on my lower channel by over
engineering any links to that sector.  I have also had my backhaul link
performance intermittently knocked off line after they changed channels on
their 5.8 GHz equipment.  

 

During the backhaul interference issue I contacted the
company and give them credit for working with me to resolve the issue. 
During that conversation they informed me they were more than willing to
coordinate with me and would notify me if they were changing channels.

 

Over the last few weeks I have been fighting with numerous
troublesome client connections on two different sectors that had been running
without issue.  Today I went to the tank to upgrade the remaining 2 APPO
units to a StarOS WRAP setup in an effort to improve performance.  

 

When I arrived I found that my competitor has now installed
a 50 ft. pole and has deployed an additional 4 radios on it.  Needless to
say I immediately understood why so many of my customers were experiencing
issues.  I also see that the competitor was really sincere about
contacting me around channel usage.    

 

My questions are what are my legal options, has anyone dealt
with this type of situation before (deployment within 100 yards), and what kind
of lawyer should I contact (any referrals are welecome)?  With the current
heavy usage of spectrum at this site I do not believe there is any option of
let’s play nice and coordinate channels.  There aren’t any left
to coordinate and they were all used before they deployed.  I don’t
feel I have any option but legal action.  

 

From past list discussions I am under the impression that
there may be the non FCC involved option of filing “interfering with my
ability to conduct business” suit.  Any comments on this would be
greatly appreciated.  

 

I also believe I may have recourse with the FCC.  I am
confident they are exceeding the legal EIRP on their amped omni as one
issue.  I also question if their behavior could be construed as intentionally
causing interference.  Knowingly deploying within 100 yards of an existing
site that is already utilizing the spectrum seems to create a situation that
can not avoid interference.  If they didn’t know at the time of
their initial deployment they were made aware of exactly what spectrum was
being used since via voice and email exchanges.  Even if they are not
competent enough to use a spectrum analyzer they had been informed of both the
existing and potential for further interference issues before the deployment of
the new additional 4 radios I found today.  I’m not really sure I
want to go down this path but again I don’t believe they have left me any
other options.  How do I begin a conversation with the FCC related to this
situation?

 

Any and all comments would be greatly appreciated. 
 

 

Todd Barber

Skylink Broadband Internet

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

970-454-9499

 






-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions

[Matt Larsen - Lists]

Better yet, use StarOS access points.  They work great with Tranzeos and 
will run like rice and beans through Mac's digestive tract.


Matt Larsen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Mac Dearman wrote:

EVERY AP that we upgraded above 86r locks up every couple hours. 86r 
is stable and has performed exceedingly well for months without a 
single issue. If you downgrade to a lesser firmware - - - - be sure 
that you are PHYSICALLY on site where the gear is!! It will loose its 
config and go back to factory default AND it will have to be power 
cycled! Please read this again carefully and understand !! :-) or 
else!


Mac Dearman
Maximum Access, LLC.
Authorized Barracuda Reseller
MikroTik RouterOS Certified
www.inetsouth.com
www.mac-tel.us
www.RadioResponse.org (Katrina Relief)
Rayville, La.
318.728.8600 318.303.4227
318.303.4229







Mark Nash wrote:

Mac, what are you seeing?  Have you used 89? 88 had issues (firmware 
units
were shipped with), I've upgraded to 89.  Not had any issues, but 
only in

production for about a week.

Mark Nash
Network Engineer
UnwiredOnline.Net
350 Holly Street
Junction City, OR 97448
http://www.uwol.net
541-998-
541-998-5599 fax

- Original Message - From: "Mac Dearman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 11:51 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions


 


***WARNING  WILL ROBINSON 

You better steer clear of any updates on those Tranzeo APs over build
86r

WARNING YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED :-)

Mac Dearman
Maximum Access, LLC.
Authorized Barracuda Reseller
MikroTik RouterOS Certified
www.inetsouth.com
www.mac-tel.us
www.RadioResponse.org (Katrina Relief)
Rayville, La.
318.728.8600
318.303.4227
318.303.4229







Mark Nash wrote:

  


I've been using them for about a month now for a couple of smaller
sectors.  Had stability problems with the AP's that I was using (YDI
AP-Plus w/Turbocell, operating as an 802.11b AP).  I then installed
Tranzeo AP's.  I had issues with them not reconnecting to the AP when
the AP was power-cycled.  Updated firmware on AP's & clients.  Been
running stable for about a week.  Now I have purchased another 
10-pack.


The AP's web interface really cleaned up & gave me client names on the
station list with the latest firmware.

I can't give you long-term statistics, nor can I answer your huge
PPPoE question.

Mark Nash
Network Engineer
UnwiredOnline.Net
350 Holly Street
Junction City, OR 97448
http://www.uwol.net
541-998-
541-998-5599 fax

   - Original Message -
   *From:* JohnnyO 
   *To:* wireless@wispa.org 
   *Sent:* Monday, February 13, 2006 9:52 AM
   *Subject:* [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions

   We will be doing a large deployment of CPEs in the next 60-90days.
   I would like to hear all of the negatives or issues people are
   seeing with the Tranzeo CPQ line.

   A huge question I have is will it act as a PPPoE client ?

   Any and all comments are helpful, Thanks !

   JohnnyO




  

 

   --WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org 



   Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
   http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

   Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

  




 



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions

[Mac Dearman]

EVERY AP that we upgraded above 86r locks up every couple hours. 86r is 
stable and has performed exceedingly well for months without a single 
issue. If you downgrade to a lesser firmware - - - - be sure that you 
are PHYSICALLY on site where the gear is!! It will loose its config and 
go back to factory default AND it will have to be power cycled! 
Please read this again carefully and understand !! :-) or else!


Mac Dearman
Maximum Access, LLC.
Authorized Barracuda Reseller
MikroTik RouterOS Certified
www.inetsouth.com
www.mac-tel.us
www.RadioResponse.org (Katrina Relief)
Rayville, La.
318.728.8600 
318.303.4227

318.303.4229







Mark Nash wrote:


Mac, what are you seeing?  Have you used 89? 88 had issues (firmware units
were shipped with), I've upgraded to 89.  Not had any issues, but only in
production for about a week.

Mark Nash
Network Engineer
UnwiredOnline.Net
350 Holly Street
Junction City, OR 97448
http://www.uwol.net
541-998-
541-998-5599 fax

- Original Message - 
From: "Mac Dearman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 11:51 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions


 


***WARNING  WILL ROBINSON 

You better steer clear of any updates on those Tranzeo APs over build
86r

WARNING YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED :-)

Mac Dearman
Maximum Access, LLC.
Authorized Barracuda Reseller
MikroTik RouterOS Certified
www.inetsouth.com
www.mac-tel.us
www.RadioResponse.org (Katrina Relief)
Rayville, La.
318.728.8600
318.303.4227
318.303.4229







Mark Nash wrote:

   


I've been using them for about a month now for a couple of smaller
sectors.  Had stability problems with the AP's that I was using (YDI
AP-Plus w/Turbocell, operating as an 802.11b AP).  I then installed
Tranzeo AP's.  I had issues with them not reconnecting to the AP when
the AP was power-cycled.  Updated firmware on AP's & clients.  Been
running stable for about a week.  Now I have purchased another 10-pack.

The AP's web interface really cleaned up & gave me client names on the
station list with the latest firmware.

I can't give you long-term statistics, nor can I answer your huge
PPPoE question.

Mark Nash
Network Engineer
UnwiredOnline.Net
350 Holly Street
Junction City, OR 97448
http://www.uwol.net
541-998-
541-998-5599 fax

   - Original Message -
   *From:* JohnnyO 
   *To:* wireless@wispa.org 
   *Sent:* Monday, February 13, 2006 9:52 AM
   *Subject:* [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions

   We will be doing a large deployment of CPEs in the next 60-90days.
   I would like to hear all of the negatives or issues people are
   seeing with the Tranzeo CPQ line.

   A huge question I have is will it act as a PPPoE client ?

   Any and all comments are helpful, Thanks !

   JohnnyO

 


 
 

   -- 
   WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org 


   Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
   http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

   Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

 


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

   




 


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] ping utility - Trango

[Tom DeReggi]

Take note that when ever you reboot a Trango radio it sends out packets from 
the IP that it is configured on.
So if the Trango is connected to a Linux PC/Router, just run TCPDUMP, reboot 
the Radio, and watch for the IP.


If on Windows any packet sniffer will give that info. We use Etherreal.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Blair Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2006 4:10 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] ping utility



Try this.

http://www.angryziber.com/ipscan/

It works well for me and is free.

Brian Rohrbacher wrote:

Is there a program out there that will work on windows to ping addresses? 
I hung a Trango AP and don't know it's IP address.  Any way to get it?  I 
think I know what range it's on, but that is a lot of addresses to ping. 
Any program that will do this?




--
Blair Davis

AOL IM Screen Name --  Theory240

West Michigan Wireless ISP
269-686-8648

A division of:
Camp Communication Services, INC

--
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] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions

[Mark Nash]

Mac, what are you seeing?  Have you used 89? 88 had issues (firmware units
were shipped with), I've upgraded to 89.  Not had any issues, but only in
production for about a week.

Mark Nash
Network Engineer
UnwiredOnline.Net
350 Holly Street
Junction City, OR 97448
http://www.uwol.net
541-998-
541-998-5599 fax

- Original Message - 
From: "Mac Dearman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 11:51 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions


> ***WARNING  WILL ROBINSON 
>
> You better steer clear of any updates on those Tranzeo APs over build
> 86r
>
> WARNING YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED :-)
>
> Mac Dearman
> Maximum Access, LLC.
> Authorized Barracuda Reseller
> MikroTik RouterOS Certified
> www.inetsouth.com
> www.mac-tel.us
> www.RadioResponse.org (Katrina Relief)
> Rayville, La.
> 318.728.8600
> 318.303.4227
> 318.303.4229
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Mark Nash wrote:
>
> > I've been using them for about a month now for a couple of smaller
> > sectors.  Had stability problems with the AP's that I was using (YDI
> > AP-Plus w/Turbocell, operating as an 802.11b AP).  I then installed
> > Tranzeo AP's.  I had issues with them not reconnecting to the AP when
> > the AP was power-cycled.  Updated firmware on AP's & clients.  Been
> > running stable for about a week.  Now I have purchased another 10-pack.
> >
> > The AP's web interface really cleaned up & gave me client names on the
> > station list with the latest firmware.
> >
> > I can't give you long-term statistics, nor can I answer your huge
> > PPPoE question.
> >
> > Mark Nash
> > Network Engineer
> > UnwiredOnline.Net
> > 350 Holly Street
> > Junction City, OR 97448
> > http://www.uwol.net
> > 541-998-
> > 541-998-5599 fax
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > *From:* JohnnyO 
> > *To:* wireless@wispa.org 
> > *Sent:* Monday, February 13, 2006 9:52 AM
> > *Subject:* [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions
> >
> > We will be doing a large deployment of CPEs in the next 60-90days.
> > I would like to hear all of the negatives or issues people are
> > seeing with the Tranzeo CPQ line.
> >
> > A huge question I have is will it act as a PPPoE client ?
> >
> > Any and all comments are helpful, Thanks !
> >
> > JohnnyO
> >
>
  
> > -- 
> > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org 
> >
> > Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> >
> > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> >
> -- 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions

[Mac Dearman]

***WARNING  WILL ROBINSON 

You better steer clear of any updates on those Tranzeo APs over build 
86r   


WARNING YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED :-)

Mac Dearman
Maximum Access, LLC.
Authorized Barracuda Reseller
MikroTik RouterOS Certified
www.inetsouth.com
www.mac-tel.us
www.RadioResponse.org (Katrina Relief)
Rayville, La.
318.728.8600 
318.303.4227

318.303.4229







Mark Nash wrote:

I've been using them for about a month now for a couple of smaller 
sectors.  Had stability problems with the AP's that I was using (YDI 
AP-Plus w/Turbocell, operating as an 802.11b AP).  I then installed 
Tranzeo AP's.  I had issues with them not reconnecting to the AP when 
the AP was power-cycled.  Updated firmware on AP's & clients.  Been 
running stable for about a week.  Now I have purchased another 10-pack.
 
The AP's web interface really cleaned up & gave me client names on the 
station list with the latest firmware.
 
I can't give you long-term statistics, nor can I answer your huge 
PPPoE question.


Mark Nash
Network Engineer
UnwiredOnline.Net
350 Holly Street
Junction City, OR 97448
http://www.uwol.net
541-998-
541-998-5599 fax

- Original Message -
*From:* JohnnyO 
*To:* wireless@wispa.org 
*Sent:* Monday, February 13, 2006 9:52 AM
*Subject:* [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions

We will be doing a large deployment of CPEs in the next 60-90days.
I would like to hear all of the negatives or issues people are
seeing with the Tranzeo CPQ line.

A huge question I have is will it act as a PPPoE client ?

Any and all comments are helpful, Thanks !

JohnnyO


-- 
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] Ground wire

[Tom DeReggi]

You should consider how long the Ground wire run needs to be.
Longer runs are more important to be #6 and #8 gauge.
You could argue for the new low cost of residential equipment, is expensive 
ground wire needed?
You could gamble, so what if a radio here and there blew, if the small 
common surges were handled with the ground system.
It also depends on what you are grounding, the inside equipment POE, the 
outside equipment, the Coax/Cat5 shield or the main mast?


If grounding a mast, I'd never use anything less than #8 guage. If grounding 
at POE, (short run) #10 gauge would be fine.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Larry A Weidig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 11:06 AM
Subject: [WISPA] Ground wire


I was just curious for residential installations what size
ground wire people are using?  We have been using all #8 but with the
sky rocketing costs of this have been considering #10 instead.  This is
used between our Polyphaser and the house ground system.

* Larry A. Weidig ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
* Excel.Net,Inc. - http://www.excel.net/
* (920) 452-0455 - Sheboygan/Plymouth area
* (888) 489-9995 - Other areas, toll-free
--
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] 900 client and omni antennas

[Tom DeReggi]

The best client antenna in 900 depends on the 
typical weather / environment, not just specifically best antenna.
 
To combat heavy foliage in very Rural areas (dry 
summer months), M2inc's - 17 dbi Yagis have been invaluable to gain 
maximum RSSI, to penetrate the trees.  However, they become useless in Winter weather, when they get ice buildup 
on them.
 
In a ice/snow heavy environment, panel antennas are 
MUCH better, for example the built-in 10dbi antenna of Trango 900 radios, to get 
max allowed RSSI in a weather resistent panel enclosure.  The F/B is 
poor (only 12 db), but often the best choice for ease, cost, and Dual pol 
flexibilty.
 
In high noise areas, such as Urban or colocated 
near paging gear, a high quality antenna like MTI's 10 dbi panel, offers 
maximum F/B ratio, to block out interference. Not much can out perform 
them, but at a trade off of cost and flexibility of pol change on the 
fly.
 
When Yagi's can be mounted low for easy access, 
(within Gorilla Ladder height (18 feet), and for residential where I can afford 
to take the risk of not having pol change on the fly (usually consistent noise 
floor on a polarity), I don't hesitate to install a Yagi as my first 
choice.  Often Verticle is less desirable interference any way, based 
on paging companies.  However, for critical links, installing the M2inc 
yagis are risky. They mounting method is horrible. It allows a lot of play for 
the Yagi to move in heavy winds.  If mounted high on a steep roof, I avoid 
the Yagi unless they are absolutely necessary, because they need mcuh more 
frequent attention. For example to wipe the snow off of them, or 
re-align.
 
There are someother Yagis that have more secure 
double point mounts, around 12-15 dbi, if you can afford to give up the 2 
db.
 
As for verticle Omni type client antennas, for 
example for mobile apps, I have no advice.
   
Tom DeReggiRapidDSL & Wireless, IncIntAirNet- Fixed Wireless 
Broadband
 
 

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Rick Harnish 
  To: 'WISPA General List' 
  Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 1:11 
  PM
  Subject: [WISPA] 900 client and omni 
  antennas
  
  
  What are the 900 client antennas 
  of choice as well as omni directionals.  I would like a solution that can 
  get 5-6 miles NLOS.  We don’t have a lot of dense foliage that we have 
  tried to penetrate up until now but are looking for a solution for select 
  cells.
   
  Respectfully,
   
  Rick 
  Harnish
  President
  OnlyInternet 
  Broadband & Wireless, Inc.
  260-827-2482 
  Office
  260-307-4000 
  Cell
  260-918-4340 
  VoIP
  www.oibw.net
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   
    
  
   
  
   
  
  

  -- WISPA Wireless List: 
  wireless@wispa.orgSubscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wirelessArchives: 
  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] Lawerence KS

[William.L. Edwards]

Title: Message



Sorry 
for the post. It was an accident.
 
 
W.L. EdwardsCEORNet CommunicationsOffice 
765-342-3554Fax 765-349-4880"Destiny is not a matter of chance; it is a 
matter of choice. It is not a thing to be waited for; it is a thing to be 
achieved."

  
  -Original Message-From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
  William.L. EdwardsSent: Monday, February 13, 2006 2:03 
  PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'WISPA General 
  List'Subject: RE: [WISPA] Lawerence KS
  We 
  are doing MTU/MDU services over the midwest. I would be interested in this if 
  you could give me some details.
  Thank you in advance.
   
  W.L. EdwardsCEORNet CommunicationsOffice 
  765-342-3554Fax 765-349-4880"Destiny is not a matter of chance; it is 
  a matter of choice. It is not a thing to be waited for; it is a thing to be 
  achieved."
  

-Original Message-From: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf 
Of chris cooperSent: Monday, February 13, 2006 12:52 
PMTo: 'WISPA General List'Subject: [WISPA] Lawerence 
KS

 
 

  Anybody out 
  there providing MTU services in Lawerence 
  KS?  I have a 
  good lead for you.  Contact me off list if you’re 
  interested.
   
  Chris 
  Cooper
  Intelliwave, 
  LLC
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Lawerence KS

[William.L. Edwards]

Title: Message



We are 
doing MTU/MDU services over the midwest. I would be interested in this if you 
could give me some details.
Thank 
you in advance.
 
W.L. EdwardsCEORNet CommunicationsOffice 
765-342-3554Fax 765-349-4880"Destiny is not a matter of chance; it is a 
matter of choice. It is not a thing to be waited for; it is a thing to be 
achieved."

  
  -Original Message-From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
  chris cooperSent: Monday, February 13, 2006 12:52 
  PMTo: 'WISPA General List'Subject: [WISPA] Lawerence 
  KS
  
   
   
  
Anybody out there 
providing MTU services in Lawerence 
KS?  I have a 
good lead for you.  Contact me off list if you’re 
interested.
 
Chris 
Cooper
Intelliwave, 
LLC
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

[WISPA] 900 client and omni antennas

[Rick Harnish]

What are the 900 client antennas of choice as well as omni
directionals.  I would like a solution that can get 5-6 miles NLOS.  We don’t
have a lot of dense foliage that we have tried to penetrate up until now but
are looking for a solution for select cells.

 

Respectfully,

 

Rick
Harnish

President

OnlyInternet
Broadband & Wireless, Inc.

260-827-2482
Office

260-307-4000
Cell

260-918-4340
VoIP

www.oibw.net

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

  

 



 






-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions

[Mark Nash]




I've been using them for about a month now for a 
couple of smaller sectors.  Had stability problems with the AP's that I was 
using (YDI AP-Plus w/Turbocell, operating as an 802.11b AP).  I then 
installed Tranzeo AP's.  I had issues with them not reconnecting to the AP 
when the AP was power-cycled.  Updated firmware on AP's & 
clients.  Been running stable for about a week.  Now I have purchased 
another 10-pack.
 
The AP's web interface really cleaned up & gave 
me client names on the station list with the latest firmware.
 
I can't give you long-term statistics, nor can I 
answer your huge PPPoE question.
Mark NashNetwork EngineerUnwiredOnline.Net350 Holly 
StreetJunction City, OR 97448http://www.uwol.net541-998-541-998-5599 
fax

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  JohnnyO 
  To: wireless@wispa.org 
  Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 9:52 
  AM
  Subject: [WISPA] Tranzeo CPQ 
  Opinions
  We will be doing a large deployment of CPEs in the next 
  60-90days. I would like to hear all of the negatives or issues people are 
  seeing with the Tranzeo CPQ line.A huge question I have is will it act 
  as a PPPoE client ?Any and all comments are helpful, Thanks ! 
  JohnnyO 
  
  

  -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.orgSubscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wirelessArchives: 
  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] Tranzeo CPQ Opinions

[JohnnyO]

We will be doing a large deployment of CPEs in the next 60-90days. I would like to hear all of the negatives or issues people are seeing with the Tranzeo CPQ line.

A huge question I have is will it act as a PPPoE client ?

Any and all comments are helpful, Thanks ! 

JohnnyO


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

[WISPA] Lawerence KS

[chris cooper]

 

 



Anybody
out there providing MTU services in Lawerence KS?  I have a good lead for you.  Contact me off list if you’re
interested.

 

Chris
Cooper

Intelliwave,
LLC








-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 120* Sectors

[Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181]

What's with all the question marks on the spec sheet?

Brian, we see this more and more.  Low traffic sites will do many things 
well because there just isn't any RF when there aren't many customers.  So 
tests work very nicely


Antennas are a HUGE part of what makes your network tick.  Cheap ones will 
bite ya in the tail every time.  ESPECIALLY when there are many others 
around.


The rule of thumb is that you should keep your antennas at least 10' apart. 
Alvarion did a test a few years back.  On the same roof with the same ap's 
they used 3 or 4 different sectors.  With the high end ones (read $$) 
they could get as close as 6' before the radios started to take a lot of 
errors.  With the cheap ones they had to have 15 feet!  Antennas were the 
only things changed.  This test was done at a wisp but by the factory techs. 
I'll bet Patrick or Brad would remember more specifics.


If you aren't sure if that's the case you should just try moving one of the 
sectors as far away as you can get.  If that helps, you know you are onto 
something.


I've been pulling out my $120 Maxrad sectors and putting in the $400 Maxrad 
ones.  ALL 4 of the sites that have the cheaper ones do strange things. 
Reliability is way below my other sites.  Swapped the first one out the 
other day, we'll see how things go.  The worst part of it is that they seem 
to affect the systems around them in a bad way too.


As an FYI, I do NOT buy antennas, from anyone, that are hard to weather 
seal.  There's just no reason for those guys to give us anything that we 
have to fight with.


Going through trees etc. will cause all manner of strange things.  The only 
way to really know if that's your problem vs. the other one is to shut two 
sectors down and see if that makes the one sector work better.  If not, then 
you have an outside source of interference, too much nlos, too many 
customers for the system, bad antennas or something.  If shutting the others 
down works, then you can be pretty sure you need to redesign the tower or 
replace a bad antenna or three.


Hope this helps,
Marlon
(509) 982-2181   Equipment sales
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp!
64.146.146.12 (net meeting)
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



- Original Message - 
From: "Brian Rohrbacher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization" 
Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2006 10:22 AM
Subject: [WISPA] 120* Sectors



Here is what I use.
http://www.demarctech.com/products/reliawave-antennas/2_4Ghz/DT-AN-24-120H-135.html

I have three mounted back to back on a pole.  It all worked fine until I 
hit a higher number of subscribers.  Maybe it's the interference from too 
many subs or maybe it's the fact that a majority of my subs are locked 
into 1M air rate, or maybe its because the subs are NLOS, or maybe because 
of the F/B or side to side isolation.  So what is my problems?  High pings 
and timeouts.  Only when traffic is high.  Or maybe my 600k upload is 
maxed out and everything is stacking up.  One thing I do know is I hooked 
up subs I shouldn't have.


I am looking for advice on antennas.  Check out the ones I am using ans 
point me to 3 sectors that will perform good back to back, NLOS, and maybe 
a higher gain to grab a little more signal to get the 1M subs up to 11M.


Thanks all.

--
Brian Rohrbacher
Reliable Internet, LLC
www.reliableinter.net
Cell 269-838-8338

"Caught up in the Air" 1 Thess. 4:17

--
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] Ground wire

[Larry A Weidig]

I was just curious for residential installations what size
ground wire people are using?  We have been using all #8 but with the
sky rocketing costs of this have been considering #10 instead.  This is
used between our Polyphaser and the house ground system.  

* Larry A. Weidig ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
* Excel.Net,Inc. - http://www.excel.net/
* (920) 452-0455 - Sheboygan/Plymouth area
* (888) 489-9995 - Other areas, toll-free  
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] ping utility

[Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181]

I bought a copy of network spy.
http://www.topshareware.com/Network-Spy-download-1329.htm

Just hook your laptop up to the radio, power cycle the radio and this 
program will pick up the arp request or whatever happens.  VERY helpful 
software.


You can use it without paying but it's a bit limited.

Marlon
(509) 982-2181   Equipment sales
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp!
64.146.146.12 (net meeting)
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



- Original Message - 
From: "Brian Rohrbacher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization" 
Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2006 9:54 AM
Subject: [WISPA] ping utility


Is there a program out there that will work on windows to ping addresses? 
I hung a Trango AP and don't know it's IP address.  Any way to get it?  I 
think I know what range it's on, but that is a lot of addresses to ping. 
Any program that will do this?


--
Brian Rohrbacher
Reliable Internet, LLC
www.reliableinter.net
Cell 269-838-8338

"Caught up in the Air" 1 Thess. 4:17

--
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] 120* Sectors

[JohnnyO]

He is using channel 1 / 6 / 11 - there will be no f/b issues if he is using Non-Overlapping channels.

JohnnyO

On Mon, 2006-02-13 at 06:24 -0600, Pete Davis wrote:


"Back to backk on a pole" might be a problem. Are the antennas at least 
6' apart from each other? (horizontally or vertically?) Physical 
separation may not be an issue until the subscriber numbers go up, but 
it be a problem.

Pete Davis
NoDial.net

Brian Rohrbacher wrote:
> Here is what I use.
> http://www.demarctech.com/products/reliawave-antennas/2_4Ghz/DT-AN-24-120H-135.html 
>
>
> I have three mounted back to back on a pole.  It all worked fine until 
> I hit a higher number of subscribers.  Maybe it's the interference 
> from too many subs or maybe it's the fact that a majority of my subs 
> are locked into 1M air rate, or maybe its because the subs are NLOS, 
> or maybe because of the F/B or side to side isolation.  So what is my 
> problems?  High pings and timeouts.  Only when traffic is high.  Or 
> maybe my 600k upload is maxed out and everything is stacking up.  One 
> thing I do know is I hooked up subs I shouldn't have.
>
> I am looking for advice on antennas.  Check out the ones I am using 
> ans point me to 3 sectors that will perform good back to back, NLOS, 
> and maybe a higher gain to grab a little more signal to get the 1M 
> subs up to 11M.
>
> Thanks all.
>





-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 120* Sectors

[Pete Davis]

"Back to backk on a pole" might be a problem. Are the antennas at least 
6' apart from each other? (horizontally or vertically?) Physical 
separation may not be an issue until the subscriber numbers go up, but 
it be a problem.


Pete Davis
NoDial.net

Brian Rohrbacher wrote:

Here is what I use.
http://www.demarctech.com/products/reliawave-antennas/2_4Ghz/DT-AN-24-120H-135.html 



I have three mounted back to back on a pole.  It all worked fine until 
I hit a higher number of subscribers.  Maybe it's the interference 
from too many subs or maybe it's the fact that a majority of my subs 
are locked into 1M air rate, or maybe its because the subs are NLOS, 
or maybe because of the F/B or side to side isolation.  So what is my 
problems?  High pings and timeouts.  Only when traffic is high.  Or 
maybe my 600k upload is maxed out and everything is stacking up.  One 
thing I do know is I hooked up subs I shouldn't have.


I am looking for advice on antennas.  Check out the ones I am using 
ans point me to 3 sectors that will perform good back to back, NLOS, 
and maybe a higher gain to grab a little more signal to get the 1M 
subs up to 11M.


Thanks all.



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] ping utility

[Paul Hendry]

You could also try just pinging the broadcast address for the network. Most
network device will respond and show there IP address. Failing that "Super
Scan" is a great tool and is handy to see what ports you have open and
therefore help asses any security risks.

Cheers,

P.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Blair Davis
Sent: 11 February 2006 21:10
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] ping utility

Try this.

http://www.angryziber.com/ipscan/

It works well for me and is free.

Brian Rohrbacher wrote:

> Is there a program out there that will work on windows to ping 
> addresses?  I hung a Trango AP and don't know it's IP address.  Any 
> way to get it?  I think I know what range it's on, but that is a lot 
> of addresses to ping.  Any program that will do this?
>

-- 
Blair Davis

AOL IM Screen Name --  Theory240

West Michigan Wireless ISP
269-686-8648

A division of:
Camp Communication Services, INC

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.6/257 - Release Date: 10/02/2006
 

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.6/257 - Release Date: 10/02/2006
 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/