Rick...
I'm not sure if its the server. I i'm not a IT expert but i think its
just the amount of data... no?
in any case... yes.. i'd love to see it run faster. i'm thinking about
pre filtering... so that all the points dont have to load for EVERY
visit to the site.
thoughts?
On 4/27/06, Rick
anybody know of a manufacturer currently SELLING WORKING wimax hardware?
--
Robert Q Kim, Wireless Internet Advisor
http://wireless-internet-coverage.blogspot.com
http://evdo-coverage.com
http://wimax-access.blogspot.com
2611 S. Pacific Coast Highway 101
Suite 203
Cardiff by the Sea, CA 92007
206
Lots of people. Some where's the WiMAX certified logo, some does not yet,
though it is a formality. Our BreezeMAX has been working in commercial
environments for two years.
But which WiMAX are you talking about? There are lots of versions and the
one version that no one has...and no one should be
Patrick Leary wrote:
But which WiMAX are you talking about? There are lots of versions and the
one version that no one has...and no one should be clamoring for just
yet...is unlicensed WiMAX.
I am certainly looking for WiMAX features such as spectral efficiency in
5 Ghz unlicensed gear righ
Patrick, You're in the family... so where can i find a product / pricelist,
2. is it simple enough for the end user to install?
3. range and fall-off curve?
4. legal to use in
a usa
b england
c canada?
On 5/5/06, Matt Liotta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Patrick Leary wrote:
>But which WiMAX are
Fair enough, and that's a different matter. I cannot speak for other brands,
but BreezeACCESS VL is about to get even more efficient, and dramatically so
in terms of packets per second and that is really where the rubber hits the
road. It looks like it may achieve as much as 50k pps. On top of that
I am sure a number of vendors have exciting things coming at some point
in the future. In the meantime, I am buying product now. So, from a
practical standpoint, does your future product have any impact on
current deployment decisions? For example, if we bought product today
that was software u
Title: WTB OC3 - 38 ghz link
Anyone have them available?
Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Ar
It is firmware Matt, so it is being applied to current hardware. Current
multipoint hardware with current firmware is already doing over 30Mbps NET
per sector or 15Mbps in the 10MHz channel version. So the data already rocks
and the voice is pretty good. When 4.0 is applied, data will still rock an
Aperto packetwave is your best bet then, contact me off list for details.
-
Jeff
On 5/5/06 8:10 AM, "Matt Liotta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Patrick Leary wrote:
>
>> But which WiMAX are you talking about? There are lots of versions and the
>> one version that no one has...and no one shoul
But what about oversubscription?
Transit costs aside, the cost of last-mile transport of even 1 Mbps of data
"pipe" is still far more than $20-30 / month
What happens when users actually start *using* the bandwidth they are
*promised*...
-Charles
---
CWLab
It is? IIRC, the tariff price of 1.5 meg DSL from BellSouth is $23.95.
-Matt
Charles Wu wrote:
But what about oversubscription?
Transit costs aside, the cost of last-mile transport of even 1 Mbps of data
"pipe" is still far more than $20-30 / month
What happens when users actually start *using
You can do a 5 MHz channel size on an Atheros chip (Off the top of my head,
Alvarion & Airaya have implemented it so far)
-Charles
---
CWLab
Technology Architects
http://www.cwlab.com
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PRO
But that's just the last mile local loop -- what about the ATM DS-3 circuit
coming back (and so forth)
Then there's servicing costs / etc
Keep in mind -- Bell copper has been amortized for quite a long time now --
and has been installed at almost a 100% penetration rate -- if you're
building your
Matt,
Sounds like legislators or reading maketing advertisements instead of
acceptable use policies and fine print of broadband contracts.
What makes you come to that conclusion?
Well... you can't make Net Neutrality Laws without considering how ISPs
would be capable of technically deliver
Charles Wu wrote:
But that's just the last mile local loop -- what about the ATM DS-3 circuit
coming back (and so forth)
Then there's servicing costs / etc
I was simply responding to your statement regarding just the last mile
transport. If you want to include other considerations in the di
Tom DeReggi wrote:
The difference here is that you currently appear to offer adequate QOS
on your network design to offer a better Quality service. Many WISPs
do NOT. Because they went after a different market that did not
require it. And many of them will likely not beable to upgrade their
Charles,
Many do indeed :)
- Peter
Charles Wu wrote:
But that's just the last mile local loop -- what about the ATM DS-3 circuit
coming back (and so forth)
Then there's servicing costs / etc
Keep in mind -- Bell copper has been amortized for quite a long time now --
and has been installed at
What tariff rate? DSL is unregulated and de-tariffed.
It is also subsidized by voice services, since it uses the same copper
pair.
Billing is miniscule (less than $1) because you already get a bill.
Their IP and ATM combined cost is less than $2 per subscriber.
The real overhead is tech support
The 1.5/256 DSL service is still offered under a tariff, which is why I
believe it is the only service you can order without a commercial
agreement with BellSouth.
-Matt
Peter R. wrote:
What tariff rate? DSL is unregulated and de-tariffed.
It is also subsidized by voice services, since it us
>I was simply responding to your statement regarding just the last mile
>transport. If you want to include other considerations in the discussion
>then I don't understand your earlier email.
When considering net neutrality and its implications (e.g., allowing the TV
company to stream video over
According to Eric Lee, most of the 500+ members of Congress don't
understand any of this stuff, but have to write a bill that does. Hence,
do you really think that Congress or the FCC takes in to account the
difference between fiber and wireless? How about the cable system and
the PSTN? How abo
Charles Wu wrote:
When considering net neutrality and its implications (e.g., allowing the TV
company to stream video over your network) -- I'm am trying to point out
that it's not simply a matter of bandwidth from the tower to the customer,
but also the tower backbone all the way to your NOC
Peter,
You made some good points.
Just for the record, I don't currently have the problem of not having enough
capacity to handle my customer's load for VOIP or any other application they
use other than IPTV. Many of my client even do streaming, and it does not
effect me because my network is
Hi folks,
Does anyone have any eperience using token-access polling software with
linux like wiccp or frottle? I'm specifically interested in wiccp and
how well it performs to solve the hidden node problem, and would like to
chat with someone who has real world experience using either of thes
Title: RE: [WISPA] Wimax Hardware for sale?
Absolutely right regarding non-WiMax solution -
Well worth a look at systems built using Mikrotik O/S, which supports 5, 10, 20 and 40MHz channels, and the latest atheros cards.
Very feature-rich and good hardware support from various vendors (inclu
I just heard about this on the Part 15 list.
I am sure many here knew Joe D'Andrea of West 21 out of Asbury Park, NJ.
He was definately one of the early starters in this industry. I was
lucky enough to know him, having built out his primary AP site and
dealing with the FCC when they came
I'm doing 5MHz as well as 10MHz with Star-OS and Atheros.
I just ran a throughput test on a 10MHz 5 gig link and the test came
back 2000+/- KB
George
Charles Wu wrote:
You can do a 5 MHz channel size on an Atheros chip (Off the top of my head,
Alvarion & Airaya have implemented it so far)
-C
28 matches
Mail list logo
