Re: [WISPA] FCC Form 477 Due March 1st

[JohnnyO]

I 2nd that one Bob ! - Noone likes a lil tattle tale - I think John Thomas just let his alligator mouth overload his mockinbird butt on this one. Definitely lost my respect.

JohnnyO

On Sat, 2006-02-25 at 18:49 -0500, Bob Moldashel wrote:


John J. Thomas wrote:

>There has been so much talk about this, I might be inclined to help the FCC find those WISPs that are snubbing their noses at the law. This is a professional list and those here should be abiding by the law. I wonder if it would be a good thing to "kick out" those that promote illegal activities?
>
>Whether you like it or not, WISPs will eventually be taxed- I guarantee the ILECs will see to that. If the FCC wants you, they will eventually find you.
>
>John Thomas
>
>
>  
>
Dude,

No one likes a snitch...

Your energy would be better spent working on your website...Don't cha' 
think

-B-

-- 
Bob Moldashel
Lakeland Communications, Inc.
Broadband Deployment Group
1350 Lincoln Avenue
Holbrook, New York 11741 USA
800-479-9195 Toll Free US & Canada
631-585-5558 Fax
516-551-1131 Cell





-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] FCC Form 477 Due March 1st

[JohnnyO]

Hey John Thomas -Were you the hall monitor in school ? Did you take names for the teacher when she walked out of the classroom ?

JohnnyO

On Sat, 2006-02-25 at 19:04 +, John J. Thomas wrote:


There has been so much talk about this, I might be inclined to help the FCC find those WISPs that are snubbing their noses at the law. This is a professional list and those here should be abiding by the law. I wonder if it would be a good thing to "kick out" those that promote illegal activities?

Whether you like it or not, WISPs will eventually be taxed- I guarantee the ILECs will see to that. If the FCC wants you, they will eventually find you.

John Thomas


>-Original Message-
>From: Frank Muto [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 06:20 PM
>To: 'WISPA General List'
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Form 477 Due March 1st
>
>http://www.fcc.gov/broadband/broadband_data_faq.pdf
>
>
>20. Are there penalties for not filing Form 477?
>
>Entities that are required to file Form 477 but fail to do so may be subject 
>to the
>
>enforcement provisions of the Communications Act and any other applicable 
>law. In
>
>particular, the Commission has authority pursuant to sections 502 and 503 of 
>the
>
>Communications Act to enforce compliance by fine or forfeiture.
>
>
>
>
>
>Frank Muto
>Co-founder -  Washington Bureau for ISP Advocacy - WBIA
>Telecom Summit Ad Hoc Committee
>http://gigabytemarch.blog.com/ www.wbia.us
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>- Original Message - 
>From: "Bob Moldashel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "WISPA General List" ; "Marlon Schafer 
>(509-982-2181)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 8:20 PM
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Form 477 Due March 1st
>
>
>> OK...OK.
>>
>> I agree that all should probably file.  I have several partners so I am 
>> not the only one to decide so I will leave it at that as it pertains to my 
>> WISP entity.
>>
>> BUT...What is the penalty for not filing  Does anyone know???  Can 
>> we get an official statement for this situation? Are there fines? 
>> Penalty's?? Do you get a nasty gram??  Do they not send me a xmas card 
>> next year??  What???
>>
>> It may help bring more compliance or it may result in less filings. 
>> Either way I think the membership should know.
>>
>> Marlon...How about asking some of your contacts.
>>
>> -B-
>>
>> -- 
>> Bob Moldashel
>> Lakeland Communications, Inc.
>> Broadband Deployment Group
>> 1350 Lincoln Avenue
>> Holbrook, New York 11741 USA
>> 800-479-9195 Toll Free US & Canada
>> 631-585-5558 Fax
>> 516-551-1131 Cell
>>
>> -- 
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>> 
>
>-- 
>WISPA 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] FCC Form 477 Due March 1st

[Chuck]

AMEN !

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Blair Davis
Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 1:39 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Form 477 Due March 1st

Do you report people to the authorities for not wearing their seat 
belts?  How about for speeding?

Both of those can result in direct harm to people.  Filing or not filing 
form 477 will not directly harm anyone.  It might result in the non 
filer getting in trouble.  But that is HIS or HER problem.  Not yours.

It is not your place to enforce this on others.

If this mailing list becomes an enforcement tool for the government, I'm 
out of here 

P.S.  I have and will continue to file the 477.  I just have no use for 
nark's.

--
Blair Davis
West Michigan Wireless ISP
269-686-8648




John J. Thomas wrote:

>There has been so much talk about this, I might be inclined to help the FCC
find those WISPs that are snubbing their noses at the law. This is a
professional list and those here should be abiding by the law. I wonder if
it would be a good thing to "kick out" those that promote illegal
activities?
>
>Whether you like it or not, WISPs will eventually be taxed- I guarantee the
ILECs will see to that. If the FCC wants you, they will eventually find you.
>
>John Thomas
>
>
>  
>
>>-Original Message-
>>From: Frank Muto [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 06:20 PM
>>To: 'WISPA General List'
>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Form 477 Due March 1st
>>
>>http://www.fcc.gov/broadband/broadband_data_faq.pdf
>>
>>
>>20. Are there penalties for not filing Form 477?
>>
>>Entities that are required to file Form 477 but fail to do so may be
subject 
>>to the
>>
>>enforcement provisions of the Communications Act and any other applicable 
>>law. In
>>
>>particular, the Commission has authority pursuant to sections 502 and 503
of 
>>the
>>
>>Communications Act to enforce compliance by fine or forfeiture.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Frank Muto
>>Co-founder -  Washington Bureau for ISP Advocacy - WBIA
>>Telecom Summit Ad Hoc Committee
>>http://gigabytemarch.blog.com/ www.wbia.us
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>- Original Message - 
>>From: "Bob Moldashel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>To: "WISPA General List" ; "Marlon Schafer 
>>(509-982-2181)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 8:20 PM
>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Form 477 Due March 1st
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>OK...OK.
>>>
>>>I agree that all should probably file.  I have several partners so I am 
>>>not the only one to decide so I will leave it at that as it pertains to
my 
>>>WISP entity.
>>>
>>>BUT...What is the penalty for not filing  Does anyone know???
Can 
>>>we get an official statement for this situation? Are there fines? 
>>>Penalty's?? Do you get a nasty gram??  Do they not send me a xmas card 
>>>next year??  What???
>>>
>>>It may help bring more compliance or it may result in less filings. 
>>>Either way I think the membership should know.
>>>
>>>Marlon...How about asking some of your contacts.
>>>
>>>-B-
>>>
>>>-- 
>>>Bob Moldashel
>>>Lakeland Communications, Inc.
>>>Broadband Deployment Group
>>>1350 Lincoln Avenue
>>>Holbrook, New York 11741 USA
>>>800-479-9195 Toll Free US & Canada
>>>631-585-5558 Fax
>>>516-551-1131 Cell
>>>
>>>-- 
>>>WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>>Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>>http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>>Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>>  
>>>
>>-- 
>>WISPA 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] FCC Form 477 Due March 1st

[Bob Moldashel]

John J. Thomas wrote:


There has been so much talk about this, I might be inclined to help the FCC find those 
WISPs that are snubbing their noses at the law. This is a professional list and those 
here should be abiding by the law. I wonder if it would be a good thing to "kick 
out" those that promote illegal activities?

Whether you like it or not, WISPs will eventually be taxed- I guarantee the 
ILECs will see to that. If the FCC wants you, they will eventually find you.

John Thomas


 


Dude,

No one likes a snitch...

Your energy would be better spent working on your website...Don't cha' 
think


-B-

--
Bob Moldashel
Lakeland Communications, Inc.
Broadband Deployment Group
1350 Lincoln Avenue
Holbrook, New York 11741 USA
800-479-9195 Toll Free US & Canada
631-585-5558 Fax
516-551-1131 Cell

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] FCC Form 477 Due March 1st

[Mark Koskenmaki]

- Original Message - 
From: "John J. Thomas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 11:04 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Form 477 Due March 1st


> There has been so much talk about this, I might be inclined to help the
FCC find those WISPs that are snubbing their noses at the law. This is a
professional list and those here should be abiding by the law. I wonder if
it would be a good thing to "kick out" those that promote illegal
activities?

Could you provide a list of "illegal activities" that have been promoted
here?I've been watching this list since the day it started, and aside
from some humorous comments, I have never seen anyone promoting "illegal
activities".I tried to get WISPA members interested in lobbying the FCC
to stop doing this, but it seems they want regulation and taxation... so...
So be it.

>
> Whether you like it or not, WISPs will eventually be taxed- I guarantee
the ILECs will see to that. If the FCC wants you, they will eventually find
you.

Why help them?


>
> John Thomas
>
>
> >-Original Message-
> >From: Frank Muto [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 06:20 PM
> >To: 'WISPA General List'
> >Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Form 477 Due March 1st
> >
> >http://www.fcc.gov/broadband/broadband_data_faq.pdf
> >
> >
> >20. Are there penalties for not filing Form 477?
> >
> >Entities that are required to file Form 477 but fail to do so may be
subject
> >to the
> >
> >enforcement provisions of the Communications Act and any other applicable
> >law. In
> >
> >particular, the Commission has authority pursuant to sections 502 and 503
of
> >the
> >
> >Communications Act to enforce compliance by fine or forfeiture.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Frank Muto
> >Co-founder -  Washington Bureau for ISP Advocacy - WBIA
> >Telecom Summit Ad Hoc Committee
> >http://gigabytemarch.blog.com/ www.wbia.us
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >- Original Message - 
> >From: "Bob Moldashel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: "WISPA General List" ; "Marlon Schafer
> >(509-982-2181)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 8:20 PM
> >Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Form 477 Due March 1st
> >
> >
> >> OK...OK.
> >>
> >> I agree that all should probably file.  I have several partners so I am
> >> not the only one to decide so I will leave it at that as it pertains to
my
> >> WISP entity.
> >>
> >> BUT...What is the penalty for not filing  Does anyone know???
Can
> >> we get an official statement for this situation? Are there fines?
> >> Penalty's?? Do you get a nasty gram??  Do they not send me a xmas card
> >> next year??  What???
> >>
> >> It may help bring more compliance or it may result in less filings.
> >> Either way I think the membership should know.
> >>
> >> Marlon...How about asking some of your contacts.
> >>
> >> -B-
> >>
> >> -- 
> >> Bob Moldashel
> >> Lakeland Communications, Inc.
> >> Broadband Deployment Group
> >> 1350 Lincoln Avenue
> >> Holbrook, New York 11741 USA
> >> 800-479-9195 Toll Free US & Canada
> >> 631-585-5558 Fax
> >> 516-551-1131 Cell
> >>
> >> -- 
> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> >>
> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> >>
> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> >>
> >
> >-- 
> >WISPA 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] FCC Form 477 Due March 1st

[Blair Davis]

Do you report people to the authorities for not wearing their seat 
belts?  How about for speeding?


Both of those can result in direct harm to people.  Filing or not filing 
form 477 will not directly harm anyone.  It might result in the non 
filer getting in trouble.  But that is HIS or HER problem.  Not yours.


It is not your place to enforce this on others.

If this mailing list becomes an enforcement tool for the government, I'm 
out of here 

P.S.  I have and will continue to file the 477.  I just have no use for 
nark's.


--
Blair Davis
West Michigan Wireless ISP
269-686-8648




John J. Thomas wrote:


There has been so much talk about this, I might be inclined to help the FCC find those 
WISPs that are snubbing their noses at the law. This is a professional list and those 
here should be abiding by the law. I wonder if it would be a good thing to "kick 
out" those that promote illegal activities?

Whether you like it or not, WISPs will eventually be taxed- I guarantee the 
ILECs will see to that. If the FCC wants you, they will eventually find you.

John Thomas


 


-Original Message-
From: Frank Muto [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 06:20 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Form 477 Due March 1st

http://www.fcc.gov/broadband/broadband_data_faq.pdf


20. Are there penalties for not filing Form 477?

Entities that are required to file Form 477 but fail to do so may be subject 
to the


enforcement provisions of the Communications Act and any other applicable 
law. In


particular, the Commission has authority pursuant to sections 502 and 503 of 
the


Communications Act to enforce compliance by fine or forfeiture.





Frank Muto
Co-founder -  Washington Bureau for ISP Advocacy - WBIA
Telecom Summit Ad Hoc Committee
http://gigabytemarch.blog.com/ www.wbia.us














- Original Message - 
From: "Bob Moldashel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" ; "Marlon Schafer 
(509-982-2181)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 8:20 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Form 477 Due March 1st


   


OK...OK.

I agree that all should probably file.  I have several partners so I am 
not the only one to decide so I will leave it at that as it pertains to my 
WISP entity.


BUT...What is the penalty for not filing  Does anyone know???  Can 
we get an official statement for this situation? Are there fines? 
Penalty's?? Do you get a nasty gram??  Do they not send me a xmas card 
next year??  What???


It may help bring more compliance or it may result in less filings. 
Either way I think the membership should know.


Marlon...How about asking some of your contacts.

-B-

--
Bob Moldashel
Lakeland Communications, Inc.
Broadband Deployment Group
1350 Lincoln Avenue
Holbrook, New York 11741 USA
800-479-9195 Toll Free US & Canada
631-585-5558 Fax
516-551-1131 Cell

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

 


--
WISPA 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] Switch recommendations

[John J. Thomas]

Where are these being used?  If it is at the customer edge, it will be 
different than if at your core. The Netgear FS726T runs between 100 and 200 
dollars and supports up to 8000 MAC adresses.

John


>-Original Message-


>From: Pete Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 07:05 AM
>To: 'WISPA General List'
>Subject: [WISPA] Switch recommendations
>
>I was wondering what switch has the largest mac address table. I don't 
>need more than 6 ports, but the $19.95 cheapy switches that my AP 
>Bridges all go into might be hurting my performance, I am thinking. If 
>shelling out $100 or so for a good switch makes sense, I am willing to 
>get one, but I don't want to spend money where its not needed.
>
>What does the "professional" ISP use?
>-- 
>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] FCC Form 477 Due March 1st

[A. Huppenthal]

I don't think WISPA should police WISPs. The organization does encourage 
conforming to FCC regs, and we've seen numerous postings from Marlon and 
others answering difficult rule interpretation. That's the best focus 
for our energies as a WISP organization - that is; making FCC links and 
docs available where needed, providing liaison between FCC and WISPs to 
accomodate WISPs customers needs... That's my stand.


John J. Thomas wrote:

There has been so much talk about this, I might be inclined to help the FCC find those 
WISPs that are snubbing their noses at the law. This is a professional list and those 
here should be abiding by the law. I wonder if it would be a good thing to "kick 
out" those that promote illegal activities?

Whether you like it or not, WISPs will eventually be taxed- I guarantee the 
ILECs will see to that. If the FCC wants you, they will eventually find you.

John Thomas


  

-Original Message-
From: Frank Muto [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 06:20 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Form 477 Due March 1st

http://www.fcc.gov/broadband/broadband_data_faq.pdf


20. Are there penalties for not filing Form 477?

Entities that are required to file Form 477 but fail to do so may be subject 
to the


enforcement provisions of the Communications Act and any other applicable 
law. In


particular, the Commission has authority pursuant to sections 502 and 503 of 
the


Communications Act to enforce compliance by fine or forfeiture.





Frank Muto
Co-founder -  Washington Bureau for ISP Advocacy - WBIA
Telecom Summit Ad Hoc Committee
http://gigabytemarch.blog.com/ www.wbia.us














- Original Message - 
From: "Bob Moldashel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" ; "Marlon Schafer 
(509-982-2181)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 8:20 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Form 477 Due March 1st




OK...OK.

I agree that all should probably file.  I have several partners so I am 
not the only one to decide so I will leave it at that as it pertains to my 
WISP entity.


BUT...What is the penalty for not filing  Does anyone know???  Can 
we get an official statement for this situation? Are there fines? 
Penalty's?? Do you get a nasty gram??  Do they not send me a xmas card 
next year??  What???


It may help bring more compliance or it may result in less filings. 
Either way I think the membership should know.


Marlon...How about asking some of your contacts.

-B-

--
Bob Moldashel
Lakeland Communications, Inc.
Broadband Deployment Group
1350 Lincoln Avenue
Holbrook, New York 11741 USA
800-479-9195 Toll Free US & Canada
631-585-5558 Fax
516-551-1131 Cell

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

  

--
WISPA 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] Mesh Equipment

[John J. Thomas]

Yes, unfortunately, the Cisco mesh is only using 5.8 for backhaul right now. 
Since they recommend 16-18 mesh boxes per square mile, 5.25 GHz and up would be 
a much better choice

John


>-Original Message-
>From: Jack Unger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 08:41 PM
>To: 'WISPA General List'
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
>
>Tom,
>
>You make a very good point that 5.3 GHz should be used wherever possible 
>while reserving 5.8 for longer-distance backhauling and supercell use. 
>We should all be thinking in terms of using 5.3 whenever we can and 
>reserving the higher-power 5.8 authorization for those situations where 
>we really, really need it.
>jack
>
>Tom DeReggi wrote:
>
>> Or realize that everyone in the world is using the precious 5.8Ghz 
>> spectrum already for long critical links, that are limited to 5.8Ghz for 
>> PtP rule higher SU antenna, or long distance.
>> 5.3Ghz is an ideal backhaul channel for MESH, up to 7 miles (with 2 ft 
>> dish), and avoid the interference headaches.  There is now a HUGE range 
>> of spectrum available at 1 watt, the 5.3G and 5.4Ghz newly allocated 
>> 255Mhzspectrum usable as if this past January.  Design mesh networks to 
>> utilize these many channel options, avoid interference, and don't 
>> destroy the industry by unnecessisarilly using the precious 5.8Ghz.  In 
>> a MESH design its rare to need to go distances longer than 2 miles, all 
>> within the realm of possibility with low power 5.3G and 5.4G and Omnis 
>> and relatively small panel antennas.
>> 
>> Likewise, reserve the precious 2.4Ghz for the link to consumer, the 
>> spectrum supported by their laptops.  I hope to see the industry smart 
>> enough to use the new 5.4Ghz for MESH type systems, which is one of the 
>> reasons it was allocated for.
>> 
>> One of the most important tasks for WISPs is to conserve the 5.8Ghz 
>> spectrum and only use it when needed.  It is in shortage most compared 
>> to the other ranges. I had hoped and lobbied hard that half of the 
>> 5.4Ghz range would be allowed for higher power and PtP rules, but it had 
>> not. Its still perfect for mesh and OFDM. Don;t be fooled into believing 
>> high power is the secret weapon for mesh, as it is not, LOW power is.  
>> Interference and noise is accumulative and travels for miles around 
>> corners and obstructions, unlike good RSSI and quality signal.  Get 
>> better RSSI in MESH, by Reducing self interference and noise, by using a 
>> wider range of channel selections and lower power.  5.3 and 5.4 gives 
>> you 350Mhz to select channels from, of equal specification/propertied 
>> RF.  Design it into your MESH design.  If you can't transport it in 
>> 1watt, redesign radio install locations and density.  Every single 
>> additional non-inteferring channel selection, drastically logrithmically 
>> increases the odds of getting a non-interfering channel selection.  5.4G 
>> is the best thinng that happened to MESH. Unfortuneately, worthless for 
>> super cell design.  But if MESH embrases 5.4 like it should, it leaves 
>> 5.8Ghz for Super cell.  Otherwise the MESH designer is destined to fail, 
>> because it will become a battle that the Super Cell guy won't be able to 
>> give up on until his death, as he has no other option but the range he 
>> is using.  The mesh provider has options.
>> 
>> Tom DeReggi
>> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
>> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>> 
>> - Original Message - From: "Jack Unger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 6:29 PM
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
>> 
>> 
>>> Unless you expect to handle only very low levels of traffic, avoid 
>>> mesh nodes with only one radio. Choose nodes that have one radio on 
>>> 2.4 GHz for customer connections and one radio on 5.8 GHz for 
>>> backhauling. In other words, separate the "access" traffic from the 
>>> "backhaul" traffic. Your overall throughput capability will be many 
>>> times greater.
>>>
>>> jack
>>>
>>>
>>> ISPlists wrote:
>>>
 Does anyone have a good recommendation on some Mesh equipment.  I 
 have a small town that wants to provide Internet access to the entire 
 town and I'm thinking of using mesh technology.  Any ideas would be 
 great.
  Thanks,
 Steve

>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
>>> Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993
>>> Author of the WISP Handbook - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs"
>>> True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting
>>> Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220  www.ask-wi.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 
>> 
>> 
>
>-- 
>Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
>Ser

Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment

[John J. Thomas]

We are still waiting to deply Cisco mesh, so I can't vouch for it *yet*. We 
will be installing for the City of Gilroy Ca. probably in the next 4 weeks. 
This is currently only a partial deployment, but they plan on lighting the 
whole city. I can tell you that the equipment is expensive -$3500 per mesh box 
but has fantastic specs. It uses a 5.7-8 GHz radio for backhaul and 2.4 GHz for 
access. As soon as I get the testing done, I promise to share numbers

John Thomas


>-Original Message-
>From: ISPlists [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 02:32 PM
>To: isp-wireless@isp-wireless.com, ''WISPA General List''
>Subject: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
>
>Does anyone have a good recommendation on some Mesh equipment.  I have a small 
>town that wants to provide Internet access to the entire town and I'm thinking 
>of using mesh technology.  Any ideas would be great.
>
>Thanks,
>Steve


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] FCC Form 477 Due March 1st

[John J. Thomas]

There has been so much talk about this, I might be inclined to help the FCC 
find those WISPs that are snubbing their noses at the law. This is a 
professional list and those here should be abiding by the law. I wonder if it 
would be a good thing to "kick out" those that promote illegal activities?

Whether you like it or not, WISPs will eventually be taxed- I guarantee the 
ILECs will see to that. If the FCC wants you, they will eventually find you.

John Thomas


>-Original Message-
>From: Frank Muto [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 06:20 PM
>To: 'WISPA General List'
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Form 477 Due March 1st
>
>http://www.fcc.gov/broadband/broadband_data_faq.pdf
>
>
>20. Are there penalties for not filing Form 477?
>
>Entities that are required to file Form 477 but fail to do so may be subject
>to the
>
>enforcement provisions of the Communications Act and any other applicable
>law. In
>
>particular, the Commission has authority pursuant to sections 502 and 503 of
>the
>
>Communications Act to enforce compliance by fine or forfeiture.
>
>
>
>
>
>Frank Muto
>Co-founder -  Washington Bureau for ISP Advocacy - WBIA
>Telecom Summit Ad Hoc Committee
>http://gigabytemarch.blog.com/ www.wbia.us
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>- Original Message -
>From: "Bob Moldashel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "WISPA General List" ; "Marlon Schafer
>(509-982-2181)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 8:20 PM
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Form 477 Due March 1st
>
>
>> OK...OK.
>>
>> I agree that all should probably file.  I have several partners so I am
>> not the only one to decide so I will leave it at that as it pertains to my
>> WISP entity.
>>
>> BUT...What is the penalty for not filing  Does anyone know???  Can
>> we get an official statement for this situation? Are there fines?
>> Penalty's?? Do you get a nasty gram??  Do they not send me a xmas card
>> next year??  What???
>>
>> It may help bring more compliance or it may result in less filings.
>> Either way I think the membership should know.
>>
>> Marlon...How about asking some of your contacts.
>>
>> -B-
>>
>> --
>> Bob Moldashel
>> Lakeland Communications, Inc.
>> Broadband Deployment Group
>> 1350 Lincoln Avenue
>> Holbrook, New York 11741 USA
>> 800-479-9195 Toll Free US & Canada
>> 631-585-5558 Fax
>> 516-551-1131 Cell
>>
>> --
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>
>--
>WISPA 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] staros vs mt routing

[Kurt Fankhauser]

Has anyone seen issues between the two? I have a situation
where I replaced a staros box with a MT box (I’m
running rip) and the routes are getting distributed, I can pass traffic on to
the internet, but I can’t do anything past the MT box in the direction
going away from the internet. Now on the otherside of
the MT box I can do anything, browse internet, ping anywhere, etc. But from the
otherside I can’t get past it.

 

Kurt Fankhauser

WAVELINC

114 S. Walnut St.

Bucyrus, OH 44820

419-562-6405

www.wavelinc.com

 






-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] MikroTik MUM - Dallas

[Mac Dearman]

I see MikroTik has their MUM (MikroTik Users Meeting) scheduled for Dallas, 
Texas May 4-5th as well as a


3 day training before that - - anyone here going to attend other than me? I 
aint bashful and would share a room


with someone :-) if they dont snore as loud as myself or BUTCH EVANS


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





- Original Message - 
From: "Mark Koskenmaki" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 11:18 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] VOIP



I'm just looking to offer customers an alternative to the phone line.

That is, I'd like to give them an excuse to drop the Qwest copper line, 
keep

phone service, and give me the money instead.

And for those who live outside any other broadband, I can make a package
deal that puts them right in there with what they'd get if the telco did
move in... in other words, NO REASON TO LEAVE IN THE FUTURE.




North East Oregon Fastnet, LLC 509-593-4061
personal correspondence to:  mark at neofast dot net
sales inquiries to:  purchasing at neofast dot net
Fast Internet, NO WIRES!

-
- Original Message - 
From: "Peter R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 8:28 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] VOIP



The margin in consumer VOIP is disappearing. The costs of the
infrastructure including DIDs and 911 implementation have slammed the
industry. Read Vonage's IPO to better understand the 911 liability and
cost.

In a couple of cases I have consulted on, the local CO was not
accessible by any CLEC, so no LNP, so no one to outsource the VOIP to.

BOCs have learned that most consumers switch to VOIP for cost savings,
so have lowered their costs. Plus cableco's have gotten into the game
(and can do 911) and bundle on one bill.

You can try to do it yourself (and Asterisk is a GREAT tool for this),
but if you aren't a CLEC, how do you handle 911 and LNP?

Now if you wanted to sell Hosted PBX to Businesses, that's valuable.

Regards,

Peter
RAD-INFO, Inc.

Mark Koskenmaki wrote:

>I don't understand your point about "selling on margins".
>
>I was merely asking for a "wholesale" product that was priced less than
>RETAIL.
>
>Nothing more, nothing less.
>
>I have yet to figure out how it is all the "wholesale" products are
>currently anywhere between 10 and 100% more than the current retail
>offerings.
>
>There's no "margin" in that, unless I'm supposed to subsidize VOIP

service

>with my WISP revenue, which is the reverse notion of more revenue per
>customer.
>
>I didn't say I wanted a "fat" margin.  I just said I wanted something I
>could bundle with my data service that didn't cost me more than retail 
>to
>get, which is why I'm a bit taken back at the notion that wholesale 
>costs

>more than retail.
>
>If that' whining, in your view, I'd say your view was a little strange.

As

>best I can tell, the biggest costs for VOIP are the infrastructure and
>customer service.I merely wanted to make the unusual split of 
>dealing

>with customer service myself, but farming out the infrastructure.

Nobody

>seems to be interested in doing that, and I'm not sure why. Lots of
>ISP's are outsourcing customer service, and seemingly it has advantages,

one
>would naturally assume this is true of the VOIP business, but, hey, 
>maybe
>not.   The infrastructure, as best I can tell, is the most cost 
>effective

to

>scale upwards, more so than customer service.
>
>
--
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] Switch recommendations

[Matt Liotta]

Dell seems to make switches that deliver good performance for the cheap 
price you pay. Whenever we don't need the capabilities of a Cisco 
switch, but want something managable that won't fall down we go with Dell.


-Matt

Pete Davis wrote:

I was wondering what switch has the largest mac address table. I don't 
need more than 6 ports, but the $19.95 cheapy switches that my AP 
Bridges all go into might be hurting my performance, I am thinking. If 
shelling out $100 or so for a good switch makes sense, I am willing to 
get one, but I don't want to spend money where its not needed.


What does the "professional" ISP use?



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

RE: [WISPA] Switch recommendations

[Mike Bushard, Jr]

We run Foundry FES2402-Premium's. Obviously more than $100, though.

Mike Bushard, Jr
Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC





-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Pete Davis
Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 9:05 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Switch recommendations

I was wondering what switch has the largest mac address table. I don't 
need more than 6 ports, but the $19.95 cheapy switches that my AP 
Bridges all go into might be hurting my performance, I am thinking. If 
shelling out $100 or so for a good switch makes sense, I am willing to 
get one, but I don't want to spend money where its not needed.

What does the "professional" ISP use?
-- 
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] Mesh Equipment

[Lonnie Nunweiler]

OLSR does put its handshaking on the sectors, but you are right, no
data traffic goes down that alternate until the primary fails.  The
changeover is typically within 15 to 30 seconds.

The other cool thing is being able to add ADSL backups into the
system, at various spots (could be T1, cable, etc), and by assigning
weights to them, you can have automatic gateway selection if your
primary goes down.

We have had these backups and alternate paths for years, but we
managed them manually.  It worked but what a pain it was, and things
were frantic while you tried to figure out what went down and then get
in and change routing by hand.  Once things restored we had to go back
in and roll the changes back.

It was cool to be able to do those things, but it is even cooler to
have those same capabilities but not to have to any of the manual
changing.  In this way I do say that smart engineers (OLSR developers)
have coded the thing to be better than a human network techie (me).  I
know networking better than a lot of you guys and I still make
mistakes.  OLSR does not seem to be fooled and I have no hesitation in
saying it is better than I am at routing decisions.

Is it perfect?  Is it the answer for all routing?  NO to both, but it
sure beats the way a lot of people are doing it.

Lonnie

On 2/25/06, Brad Larson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Or how about automatic sector failover that puts no traffic on the network
> when things are working correctly. Brad
>
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Lonnie Nunweiler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 12:02 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
>
>
> Tom, what if you could take the Cell/Sector system and add some
> routing that determined when a path had stopped and chose another one.
>
> You have controlled this by your choice of units to make those cross
> connections and really all that is happening is that the mesh routing
> is constantly testing to see if it needs to try another route.
>
> We used to do this manually and what a pain it was.  This new routing
> does what I used to do, except it does not sleep, have bathroom breaks
> or go out for lunch.  You can assign weights to connections and force
> your chosen route to get used, at least until it goes down, which
> hopefully never happens, but if and when it does you are covered with
> your alternate path.
>
> What is so terrible about that?
>
> Lonnie
>
> On 2/24/06, Tom DeReggi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Brad,
> >
> >  I agree. Our downtown Mesh versus Cell/Sector trials proved exactly that>
> Our tests showed that the cities like DC could be better served with
> > Cell/Sector models more effectively.
> > As a matter of fact, Alvarion product, appeared to be well equiped for
> that
> > task.
> > I think projects like Phili's will bring a rude awakening. I can't prove
> > that, but there is no reason for me to.
> > Thats the point of modelling. So you can pre-dict BEFORE you spend.
> > Its the Muni's budget to pay for, to find the true answer, not mine.
> >
> > Tom DeReggi
> > RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
> > IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
> >
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "Brad Larson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "'WISPA General List'" 
> > Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 2:49 PM
> > Subject: RE: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
> >
> >
> > > Tom, IMHO mesh is great for lighting up downtown and city parks etc. but
> > > it
> > > has yet to prove itself in a large deployment with 1,000's of customers
> or
> > > 1,000's of nodes deployed. I too have first hand experience backhauling
> > > several mesh projects and the mesh edge so far has not been easy at all>
> > Here in Northeast USA 15 mesh nodes per square miles doesn't even come
> > > close
> > > to what's needed. I've also found that implementing mesh in major metro
> > > areas, where there are already 1,000's of wifi access points, shrinks
> > > coverage models and can turn a well intentioned response to an RFP
> > > laughable. I believe Philadelphia projects 70k users in 5 years on 3900
> > > mesh
> > > nodes backhauled by Canopy. We'll see.
> > >
> > > I'd love to see a comparison of our BreezeAccess VL with one mile
> centers
> > > and our high powered DS11 on the edge in Anytown USA vs mesh. I'm
> working
> > > on
> > > a few of my guys to do such a test so stay tuned.
> > >
> > > What it comes down to is the fact that Matt may have just the right
> > > terrain
> > > and noise floor without the traffic that some of these larger projects
> > > will
> > > get hammered with so it works for his company. Mesh is a tool for a
> > > certain
> > > job just like other gear. But I don't believe mesh should be construed
> as
> > > broadband for the masses in any major metro area. Brad
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Tom DeReggi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 2:28 PM
> > > To: WISPA General List
> > > Subject: Re: [WISPA

RE: [WISPA] Switch recommendations

[Dylan Bouterse]

We use Cisco 3550. Not gonna fall into the $100 price range I'm afraid.



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Pete Davis
Sent: Sat 2/25/2006 10:05 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Switch recommendations



I was wondering what switch has the largest mac address table. I don't
need more than 6 ports, but the $19.95 cheapy switches that my AP
Bridges all go into might be hurting my performance, I am thinking. If
shelling out $100 or so for a good switch makes sense, I am willing to
get one, but I don't want to spend money where its not needed.

What does the "professional" ISP use?
--
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] Switch recommendations

[Pete Davis]

I was wondering what switch has the largest mac address table. I don't 
need more than 6 ports, but the $19.95 cheapy switches that my AP 
Bridges all go into might be hurting my performance, I am thinking. If 
shelling out $100 or so for a good switch makes sense, I am willing to 
get one, but I don't want to spend money where its not needed.


What does the "professional" ISP use?
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

RE: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment

[Brad Larson]

Or how about automatic sector failover that puts no traffic on the network
when things are working correctly. Brad





-Original Message-
From: Lonnie Nunweiler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 12:02 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment


Tom, what if you could take the Cell/Sector system and add some
routing that determined when a path had stopped and chose another one.

You have controlled this by your choice of units to make those cross
connections and really all that is happening is that the mesh routing
is constantly testing to see if it needs to try another route.

We used to do this manually and what a pain it was.  This new routing
does what I used to do, except it does not sleep, have bathroom breaks
or go out for lunch.  You can assign weights to connections and force
your chosen route to get used, at least until it goes down, which
hopefully never happens, but if and when it does you are covered with
your alternate path.

What is so terrible about that?

Lonnie

On 2/24/06, Tom DeReggi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Brad,
>
>  I agree. Our downtown Mesh versus Cell/Sector trials proved exactly that>
Our tests showed that the cities like DC could be better served with
> Cell/Sector models more effectively.
> As a matter of fact, Alvarion product, appeared to be well equiped for
that
> task.
> I think projects like Phili's will bring a rude awakening. I can't prove
> that, but there is no reason for me to.
> Thats the point of modelling. So you can pre-dict BEFORE you spend.
> Its the Muni's budget to pay for, to find the true answer, not mine.
>
> Tom DeReggi
> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Brad Larson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
> Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 2:49 PM
> Subject: RE: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
>
>
> > Tom, IMHO mesh is great for lighting up downtown and city parks etc. but
> > it
> > has yet to prove itself in a large deployment with 1,000's of customers
or
> > 1,000's of nodes deployed. I too have first hand experience backhauling
> > several mesh projects and the mesh edge so far has not been easy at all>
> Here in Northeast USA 15 mesh nodes per square miles doesn't even come
> > close
> > to what's needed. I've also found that implementing mesh in major metro
> > areas, where there are already 1,000's of wifi access points, shrinks
> > coverage models and can turn a well intentioned response to an RFP
> > laughable. I believe Philadelphia projects 70k users in 5 years on 3900
> > mesh
> > nodes backhauled by Canopy. We'll see.
> >
> > I'd love to see a comparison of our BreezeAccess VL with one mile
centers
> > and our high powered DS11 on the edge in Anytown USA vs mesh. I'm
working
> > on
> > a few of my guys to do such a test so stay tuned.
> >
> > What it comes down to is the fact that Matt may have just the right
> > terrain
> > and noise floor without the traffic that some of these larger projects
> > will
> > get hammered with so it works for his company. Mesh is a tool for a
> > certain
> > job just like other gear. But I don't believe mesh should be construed
as
> > broadband for the masses in any major metro area. Brad
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Tom DeReggi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 2:28 PM
> > To: WISPA General List
> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
> >
> >
> > Matt,
> >
> > I think you are misinterpretting my comments. Don't read more in to them
> > than are there.
> > I am in no way attacking the validity of your experience or comments.
I'm
> > simply asking for more detail, so that I can learn from your experience>
>
> > --
> > 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/
>


--
Lonnie Nunweiler
Valemount Networks Corporation
http://www.star-os.com/
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

 
 
This mail passed through mail.alvarion.com
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer
viruses.



 
This mail passed through mail.alvarion.com
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of