[WISPA] A Privatized National Public Safety Network?
A Privatized National Public Safety Network? From Lasar’s Letter, December 26, 2006 By Matthew Lasar It will operate almost 250 video and broadband channels, and be allowed to access hundreds more under certain conditions. It will allow thousands public safety agencies to exchange data about weather emergencies and potential terrorist attacks. It will enable police agencies to exchange mug shots, fingerprints, and share real-time video monitoring of emergency or potentially criminal situations. And it will be run by a commercial entity that charges on a fee-for-service basis, even permitted to market spectrum to other companies “through leases or in the form of public/private partnerships.” On December 20th the Federal Communications Commission issued a Ninth Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on how to use the 700 MHz band for public safety purposes. “We believe that the time may have come for a significant departure from the typical public safety allocation model the Commission has used in the past,” the Notice argues. In fact, what the NPRM proposes could be described as radical—a highly centralized, privately run emergency communications system that the document claims will function as a non-profit, yet could be allowed to lease out spectrum using a model similar to that recently proposed by the Microsoft Corporation in a series of FCC filings. Here it is, the future of public safety communications as envisioned by Kevin Martin’s FCC: The search for seamlessness The Ninth Notice rejects what it calls the “typical public safety allocation model the Commission has used in the past.” In a nutshell, up until now the FCC let local law enforcement and safety agencies apply for communications channels—licenses to transmit voice and data. Many of these allocation decisions were made by regional public safety planning committees. But no more, the FCC proposes: “While this system has had significant benefits for public safety users, in terms of permitting them to deploy voice and narrowband facilities suitable for their needs, the system also has resulted in uneven build-out across the country in different bands, balkanization of spectrum between large numbers of incompatible systems, and interoperability difficulties if not inabilities.” Obviously the shadow of Hurricane Katrina and September 11th hangs over this discussion. The 9/11 Commission’s Final Report disclosed in painful detail in the difficulties New York City’s public safety communications system faced during the crisis, among them police and fire radio channels that could not be accessed by other agencies. Even worse, the FDNY’s point-to-point radios broadcast at such a weak signal that only personnel in the immediate area could access them, crippling the department’s ability to coordinate a city-wide rescue effort. And so, “in developing our proposal,” the FCC writes, “we are guided by the following objectives for public safety communications in the twenty-first century.” These include: * the use of the 700 MHz spectrum, made available by the transition from analog to digital television * a system of “nationwide interoperability” that will allow emergency personnel to communicate “seamlessly” * a system of “adequate funding” that better meets the needs of local services dependent on municipal and county allocations * robustness—communications networks that will run even when a disaster like Katrina knocks out local terrestrial systems, by relying on satellite technology and other national resources. To achieve these goals, the FCC’s Notice argues for what will be seen as a massive centralization and commercialization of the nation’s emergency communications system, its leasing to “a single, national public safety broadband licensee,” who would sell access to the network “on a fee-for-service basis.” How it would work As already noted, this national entity would charge local and regional emergency agencies for access to the national broadband system on the basis of volume of use. In addition, the entity could charge for what the FCC calls “unconditionally preemptible commercial use of the spectrum.” That is, the company could lease out channels for non-public safety use, as long as their customers understand that they might have to put up with signal interference and the immediate cancellation of service in case of emergencies. But the Notice also stipulates that the FCC would “leave significant discretion to the national licensee to carry out its responsibilities,” including the work of establishing leasing arrangements with commercial service providers. The ideal candidate for this job, the FCC says, will have to have three qualifications on its resume: experience with public safety management, an “ability to directly represent all public safety interests,” and not-for-profit status. “We also propose that no commercial interest may be held in the
[WISPA] Lawrenceburg tn
A while back I was contacted about a tower in Lawrenceburg, but I guess I lost the contact info. If the person who contacted me is still around, please email me. Thanks -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Report: Cities' communications still lacking
Report: Cities' communications still lacking Updated 1/2/2007 10:33 PM ET E-mail | Save | Print | Reprints Permissions | Subscribe to stories like this Subscribe to stories like this By Mimi Hall, USA TODAY WASHINGTON — Emergency responders in most cities don't have the equipment and skills needed to communicate with each other during a crisis, according to a report to be released today by the Homeland Security Department. Only six of the 75 cities and regions surveyed received top scores for interoperability, or the ability to reliably communicate by radio. They were Washington, D.C., and its suburbs; San Diego; Columbus, Ohio; Minneapolis-St. Paul; Sioux Falls, S.D.; and Laramie, Wyo. The report comes more than five years after the 9/11 attacks highlighted communications problems among fire, police and other emergency responders in New York City, at the Pentagon and at the crash site in Somerset County, Pa. The problems were especially acute at the World Trade Center, where firefighters couldn't hear police warnings to get out of the towers before they collapsed. One of the dramatic lessons of 9/11 was the cost in human life when we do not have at least command-level interoperability in cities and in regions, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said last month. Chertoff said the country has made a significant amount of progress toward better communication systems. But in regions where there are still gaps, he said, leaders of cities and towns with incompatible systems need to work to develop a better system that would help communication during a disaster. Since 2003, Homeland Security has handed out $2.9 billion in grants for interoperable communications systems, and Chertoff said his department's grant programs will be heavily focused on communications improvements over the next two years. The survey, he said, was designed to identify the gaps so they can be closed as quickly as possible. The lowest scores on the report went to Chicago; Cleveland; Baton Rouge; Mandan, N.D.; and American Samoa. New York City scored in the middle. Outgoing House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Pete King, R-N.Y., said communities immediately outside New York City have numerous communications systems that are incompatible with each other. That's also true in several other major urban areas, he said. A lot of progress has been made, King said. But the report shows how difficult an issue this is. Congressional Democrats, who assume leadership of Congress on Thursday, are expected to address the issue as part of a campaign promise to pass all the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. The commission in 2004 cited the urgent need for compatible and adequate communications among public safety organizations. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent
Looks like ShreveNet is switching to the NationWide Internet brand. And it looks like it is EVDO wireless: NationWide Connect powered by Sprint: http://www.shreve.net/residential/nationwide_connect.php USWO did buy a Fort Myers WISP who is now part of DHR: http://www.dhrtechnologies.com/ Regards, Peter Radizeski RAD-INFO, Inc. - NSP Strategist MarketingIDEAguy.com Brad Belton wrote: I don't consider FHSS broadband grin Allen quickly moved to broadband fixed wireless gear like Trango, WMUX among others. Yes, MobilePro bought ShreveNet along with Kite and a few others. MobilePro's first acquisition was NationWide Internet...primarily a conventional ISP with little wireless. We are very familiar with MobilePro. Best, Brad -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 6:41 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: RE: [WISPA] US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent Wrong Brad. Allen Marsalis was originally an Alvarion shop going back into the late 1990's (when were BreezeCOM). Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] BreezeACCESS VL for WiSP. Limitations and tips
I work for a value added distributor in Spain. We are having a great success in selling VL for WiSP here in Spain. We have a kind of COMNET program in our country with 2Mbps SU. They have the same features as the SU-3-1D but they are limited to 2048/512, one MAC and they are non-upgradable. In the first installations of our customers have detected some limitations, maybe due to our inexperience in the WiSP market (high number of CPE, third party traffic...). I would like to hear some feedback about this issues from you. This is the scenario: -Medium-noisy environment, 10MHz channels (which should work better than the 20MHz ones), 50 SU (mix of the special 2Mbps SU and the 3Mbps standard ones) and 4 of 6Mbps, 1200pps peaks and 4Mbps mean traffic with 6Mbps peacks. 70% of the customers were less than 4km away, the remainning ones were at 8km, except for one at 11km. In this conditions the AU seemed to get saturated. The customers complain about the conexion and we detect lost packets and higher, no more than 500kbps in the best case for one customer (within the 4Mbps mean traffic of the AU). They are using Allot as the traffic shapping and bandwidth controller. In this specific case they changed into 20MHz channel and even with the increase of noise they managed to get better results. Their traffic is mainly data, some VoIP and p2p limited by the Allot, the VL is AES encripted. The spanish regulation is limited to 1W EIRP in 5.4GHz band. My questions are: -do you have any results of the maximum number of CPE in a sector for WiSP purposes in several traffic scenarios?. In our case, the limit seems to be around 70 CPE. -do you have any recommendation about configuration tips to improve these results? Any feedback will be welcomed. Sorry for my crappy english and happy new year to all of you. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Canopy actual throughput
Hi, those of you who use Canopy 900: what is the actual throughput you've gotten to the CPE? 4Mbps or less? Has anyone run a bandwidth test while passing traffic simultaneously in both directions (such as with Qcheck)? Thanks a lot. Mario -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent
At the time of the sale, Sutioc and US Wireless were able to retire over $3.5 million in US Wireless' debt. Its always funny to see the spin. Retire the polite way of saying, My business model failed, we overspent, and we screwed our creditors out of their promised ROI/money. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Peter R. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 7:12 PM Subject: [WISPA] US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent Ownership Stake to Sutioc Enterprises Tuesday January 2, 2007 http://biz.yahoo.com/pz/070102/04.html Operational Management and Support Services to be Provided by IElement Corporation LOUISVILLE, Ky., Jan. 2, 2007 (PRIME NEWSWIRE) -- US Wireless Online, one of the nation's largest wireless broadband network operators, announced today that it has completed the sale of a 50.1% ownership stake to Sutioc Enterprises, Inc. In conjunction with the transaction, which closed on December 27, 2006, Sutioc has entered into an agreement with IElement Corporation, Inc. whereby IElement will provide certain management and support services to US Wireless. As part of the agreement, IElement will provide out sourced customer service, technical support, network management, accounting, billing and collection services as well as act as an advisor to US Wireless' current management team. IElement is a nationwide provider of advanced communication services and Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) solutions with a network presence in 18 major markets in the United States, including facilities in Los Angeles, Dallas and Chicago. At the time of the sale, Sutioc and US Wireless were able to retire over $3.5 million in US Wireless' debt. US Wireless also expects to quickly benefit from efficiencies resulting from the transactions including the ability to streamline its operations and reduce administrative and operational costs. In addition, US Wireless will soon be able to offer its current and new customers a complete suite of voice and data products and services through IElement's product offering. ``The combination of US Wireless' organization and network facilities with IElement's management experience, infrastructure, broad product range and service capability should significantly improve the Company's competitive position,'' commented Rick E. Hughes, CEO of US Wireless Online, Inc. ``We look forward to working with Sutioc and IElement. We anticipate leveraging their strengths and resources to resume the growth and expansion of our business in the near future.'' Additional announcements relating to the transaction, new product launches, Wi-Fi Pittsburgh and other evolving developments are expected in the near future. About IElement Corporation: IElement, based in Dallas, Texas, is a facilities-based nationwide communications service provider that offers state-of-the-art telecommunications services to small and medium sized businesses (``SMBs''). IElement provides broadband data, voice and wireless services by offering integrated T-1 lines as well as a Layer 2 Private Network and VOIP solutions. These solutions provide SMBs with dedicated internet access, customizable business solutions for voice, data, wireless, internet, and secure communications channels between the SMB offices, partners, vendors, customers and employees without the use of a firewall or encryption device. IElement has a network presence in 18 major markets in the United States, including facilities in Los Angeles, Dallas and Chicago. For more information on IElement, please visit http://www.ielement.com. About US Wireless Online: US Wireless Online owns and operates one of the nation's largest wireless Internet broadband networks with significant coverage areas in Alabama, Florida, Indiana, Kentucky, Mississippi and Pennsylvania. The Company provides commercial wireless Internet access and related applications and services in the rapidly growing wireless broadband industry. US Wireless Online is headquartered in Louisville, Kentucky. For more information on US Wireless Online, Inc. please visit http://www.uswo.net. -- Regards, Peter Radizeski RAD-INFO, Inc. - NSP Strategist We Help ISPs Connect Communicate 813.963.5884 http://www.marketingIDEAguy.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent
Yeah, that's about what I got out of this press release too. marlon - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 4:07 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent At the time of the sale, Sutioc and US Wireless were able to retire over $3.5 million in US Wireless' debt. Its always funny to see the spin. Retire the polite way of saying, My business model failed, we overspent, and we screwed our creditors out of their promised ROI/money. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Peter R. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 7:12 PM Subject: [WISPA] US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent US Wireless Online Sells 50.1 Percent Ownership Stake to Sutioc Enterprises Tuesday January 2, 2007 http://biz.yahoo.com/pz/070102/04.html Operational Management and Support Services to be Provided by IElement Corporation LOUISVILLE, Ky., Jan. 2, 2007 (PRIME NEWSWIRE) -- US Wireless Online, one of the nation's largest wireless broadband network operators, announced today that it has completed the sale of a 50.1% ownership stake to Sutioc Enterprises, Inc. In conjunction with the transaction, which closed on December 27, 2006, Sutioc has entered into an agreement with IElement Corporation, Inc. whereby IElement will provide certain management and support services to US Wireless. As part of the agreement, IElement will provide out sourced customer service, technical support, network management, accounting, billing and collection services as well as act as an advisor to US Wireless' current management team. IElement is a nationwide provider of advanced communication services and Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) solutions with a network presence in 18 major markets in the United States, including facilities in Los Angeles, Dallas and Chicago. At the time of the sale, Sutioc and US Wireless were able to retire over $3.5 million in US Wireless' debt. US Wireless also expects to quickly benefit from efficiencies resulting from the transactions including the ability to streamline its operations and reduce administrative and operational costs. In addition, US Wireless will soon be able to offer its current and new customers a complete suite of voice and data products and services through IElement's product offering. ``The combination of US Wireless' organization and network facilities with IElement's management experience, infrastructure, broad product range and service capability should significantly improve the Company's competitive position,'' commented Rick E. Hughes, CEO of US Wireless Online, Inc. ``We look forward to working with Sutioc and IElement. We anticipate leveraging their strengths and resources to resume the growth and expansion of our business in the near future.'' Additional announcements relating to the transaction, new product launches, Wi-Fi Pittsburgh and other evolving developments are expected in the near future. About IElement Corporation: IElement, based in Dallas, Texas, is a facilities-based nationwide communications service provider that offers state-of-the-art telecommunications services to small and medium sized businesses (``SMBs''). IElement provides broadband data, voice and wireless services by offering integrated T-1 lines as well as a Layer 2 Private Network and VOIP solutions. These solutions provide SMBs with dedicated internet access, customizable business solutions for voice, data, wireless, internet, and secure communications channels between the SMB offices, partners, vendors, customers and employees without the use of a firewall or encryption device. IElement has a network presence in 18 major markets in the United States, including facilities in Los Angeles, Dallas and Chicago. For more information on IElement, please visit http://www.ielement.com. About US Wireless Online: US Wireless Online owns and operates one of the nation's largest wireless Internet broadband networks with significant coverage areas in Alabama, Florida, Indiana, Kentucky, Mississippi and Pennsylvania. The Company provides commercial wireless Internet access and related applications and services in the rapidly growing wireless broadband industry. US Wireless Online is headquartered in Louisville, Kentucky. For more information on US Wireless Online, Inc. please visit http://www.uswo.net. -- Regards, Peter Radizeski RAD-INFO, Inc. - NSP Strategist We Help ISPs Connect Communicate 813.963.5884 http://www.marketingIDEAguy.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
[WISPA] Sample Lease Agreement for Roof Rights
John, I was looking across the net for sample roof rights leases and saw your comment from Feb 06. Are you still making it available to WISP members? If so, I'd be happy to submit a membership request. Thank you for your consideration. Kindly, Don -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Sample Lease Agreement for Roof Rights
I share my agreements to WISPA members. They are for placement on water towers, grain legs, etc. We also have a subscriber agreement that others have used as an example. I do not warranty them as being usable but you can use them as you see fit. We suggest you take any agreement to an attorney for consideration before using. You can register as a member by going to signup.wispa.org. Thank you, John Scrivner Digineer wrote: John, I was looking across the net for sample roof rights leases and saw your comment from Feb 06. Are you still making it available to WISP members? If so, I'd be happy to submit a membership request. Thank you for your consideration. Kindly, Don -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 5.3/5.8 GHz Antenna Suggestion
Ben, A) Will these fit the models that the resellers have in stock now? B) If so, can we order mounts separately? 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: Marketing [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 10:32 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] 5.3/5.8 GHz Antenna Suggestion Hello Tim, When purchasing the grids the next time, select the HDGD58-29 antennas. These come with a new L-Bracket that attaches to the reflector in 4 locations. The L-Bracket is also tapped for easy installation. This can be seen on page 2 of the spec sheet: http://pacwireless.com/products/GD58_Data_Sheet.pdf If needed, these new L-Brackets will accommodate a 4 U-Bolt (U-Bolts not provided). Drop me your address and we can send you a sample of the L-bracket. Let me know if you have any questions. Regards, Ben Moore Sales Manager Pacific Wireless [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim Kerns Sent: Saturday, December 30, 2006 6:48 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5.3/5.8 GHz Antenna Suggestion Mac, Have PacWireless made any changes to the mount on the 29db grids... I have 4 in use and the mount isn't very solid. The grid deflects a lot in the wind. I can watch the signal go up and down as it moves. Tim Kerns CV-Access, Inc. - Original Message - From: Mac Dearman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, December 30, 2006 12:53 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] 5.3/5.8 GHz Antenna Suggestion I do use their dishes where I have a large enough tower, water tower or a roof. I will tell ya though - - the 29dbi grids are mighty fine, much less expensive than a solid dish, wind load is no comparison as well as the ease of mounting. If you are leasing tower space - - the grid is a no brainer unless you have to have the extra db that comes with a dish. Mac Dearman -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Nash - Lists Sent: Saturday, December 30, 2006 2:28 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5.3/5.8 GHz Antenna Suggestion Are we preferring their grids to dishes? 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' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, December 30, 2006 12:18 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] 5.3/5.8 GHz Antenna Suggestion Mark, I have several 8 mile 5.3GHz links (YMMV) using PacWireless 26dbi grids, MT CM9's. IMHO you can't go wrong using the PacWireless antennas. I have built a wireless network that covers 12% of Louisiana utilizing their antennas exclusively for my BH. Well - I do have several of the Trango dual polarity ext's. Mac Dearman -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Nash - Lists Sent: Saturday, December 30, 2006 1:12 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] 5.3/5.8 GHz Antenna Suggestion I have usually used Trango backhauls, so I have not had to worry about 5 GHz antennas and what to choose. Now I'm going to try a MikroTik backhaul with a CM9. Currently, I've got two applications: 1. 2-mile link that I can perhaps use 5.3GHz over. 2. 8-mile link that I'll go 5.8GHz over. What antennas have you used to accomplish links such as these... Also, kI have heard that the output power of the CM9 in a MikroTik can be adjusted. Experience? Mark Nash Network Engineer UnwiredOnline.Net 350 Holly Street Junction City, OR 97448 http://www.uwol.net 541-998- 541-998-5599 fax -- 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 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:
[WISPA] sorry guys... don't respond, havin mail issues...
test... -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Sample Lease Agreement for Roof Rights
John, I'd be interested in seeing these too and I'm a member. On 1/3/07, John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I share my agreements to WISPA members. They are for placement on water towers, grain legs, etc. We also have a subscriber agreement that others have used as an example. I do not warranty them as being usable but you can use them as you see fit. We suggest you take any agreement to an attorney for consideration before using. You can register as a member by going to signup.wispa.org. Thank you, John Scrivner Digineer wrote: John, I was looking across the net for sample roof rights leases and saw your comment from Feb 06. Are you still making it available to WISP members? If so, I'd be happy to submit a membership request. Thank you for your consideration. Kindly, Don -- 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/
