Re: [WISPA] Re: CPE Cost Ideas Needed

2006-04-07 Thread Pete Davis

Joshua M. Andrews wrote:

Cliff:
 
Thank you for the information.  The areas of DSL are very spotty and 
cable is very inexpensive and unreliable.  Many people are upset at 
both situations.  DSL is offered for about $30 per month with purchase 
of a DSL modem at around $50 or so and a 1 year contract is 
required.  Cable service rents you the modem for $10 per month and 
charges $40 per month for service on top of that ($50 per month total 
for those of you out there in other posts that think half-duplex is as 
good a full-duplex).
 
I'm shooting at offering 1.5 Mbps service at around $24.95 and 
offering VOIP for another $24.95 if they so choose.  So the 
competition hasn't a chance against me if I can get around that $350 
CPE cost.
 
--


Pete:
 
Thank you for the detailed response.  I appreciate you taking the time 
to comment.  I don't want to be rude but I took a look at your website 
and it needs some work. :(
In any case, I think you have a point.  Could you elaborate more on 
what you meant by going with a 802.11b AP/CPE.  Do you mean you are 
shooting a signal out to an area using WaveRider and then distributing 
it via another 802.11b AP from there?  I think your right about 
contracts and install fees and it sounds like your saying that I'm 
just going to have to eat the cost and extend my ROI per user.  Thanks 
again.
  
900Mhz client to 802.11b AP to 802.11b client is one scenario, but I 
would also put 802.11b APs on the main tower. If you put up a $300 AP 
and 5 $150 CPE, you will be doing better ($220 average customer 
equipment cost) than a purely Waverider network. You should be able to 
do better than 5 clients per AP.


Yes my website needs work, but we always have more installs that we 
possibly have time to get to. When we get caught up on installs, we will 
revamp the website to bring more in.


I wouldn't count on giving 1.5M to every customer on your network over 
Waverider. I have played with every GOS setting I can come up with, and 
cannot MAINTAIN over 1Mbps connectivity to multiple clients.


I would also consider the thought that you don't have to be the cheapest 
ISP in town to be the busiest or the best.. Its gonna take a LOT more 
$25/mo clients to get traction than at $40 or $50/mo. I wouldn't install 
any customer who will take 12 months to get CFP (cash flow positive, 
paying for CPE and installation costs). Not starting out, anyway, unless 
I was DESPERATE to get market share. Desperation is almost never a good 
position to be in.
I get $39/mo for residential service and $59/$99 for business service. 
DSL is cheaper, and in one area, Cablemodem is cheaper. We still stay 
busy with new customers, and we don't put in a new tower until the last 
tower is CFP. More money coming in the door than going out is a big part 
(only part?) for successful business. ISP business is no exception. When 
you run out of money, you are out of business.

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


RE: [WISPA] Re: CPE Cost Ideas Needed

2006-04-07 Thread JohnnyO
 I'm shooting at offering 1.5 Mbps service at around $24.95 and
 offering VOIP for another $24.95 if they so choose.  So the 
 competition hasn't a chance against me if I can get around that $350 
 CPE cost.
  

IMNSHO - If you are trying to compete you will fall on your face in a
heartbeat. We charge more then the competition and we do so for a
reason. Our installs start at $250 for a 'basic' install. Our monthly
rates are atleast $10-$15/more then the DSL or Cable offerings in our
area. We avoid the bottom feeders this way. We could double or triple
our subscriber count within 12mos if we would drop down $15/mo for our
service but I refuse to do that. Volume of low end subscribers becomes
a very costly support decision.

I refuse to compete on pricing - we are local - we hire local people -
we donate and support the local sports teams / associations. We shake
our subscribers hands in the stores / at gas pumps / baseball games. We
pump $$ into the local business's for our supplies, materials. 

$24.95/mo - If I were you - I would SERIOUSLY rethink your business
model. Oh - we also don't have contracts - We do have a TOS, but have
found there is really no reason to get subscribers to committ. If we do
our job - they will stay - if we fail to support them as we've promised
- they will bail. Kinda helps keep us on our toes :)

JohnnyO

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Pete Davis
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 6:50 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Re: CPE Cost Ideas Needed


Joshua M. Andrews wrote:
 Cliff:
  
 Thank you for the information.  The areas of DSL are very spotty and
 cable is very inexpensive and unreliable.  Many people are upset at 
 both situations.  DSL is offered for about $30 per month with purchase

 of a DSL modem at around $50 or so and a 1 year contract is 
 required.  Cable service rents you the modem for $10 per month and 
 charges $40 per month for service on top of that ($50 per month total 
 for those of you out there in other posts that think half-duplex is as

 good a full-duplex).
  
 I'm shooting at offering 1.5 Mbps service at around $24.95 and
 offering VOIP for another $24.95 if they so choose.  So the 
 competition hasn't a chance against me if I can get around that $350 
 CPE cost.
  
 --

 Pete:
  
 Thank you for the detailed response.  I appreciate you taking the time
 to comment.  I don't want to be rude but I took a look at your website

 and it needs some work. :(
 In any case, I think you have a point.  Could you elaborate more on 
 what you meant by going with a 802.11b AP/CPE.  Do you mean you are 
 shooting a signal out to an area using WaveRider and then distributing

 it via another 802.11b AP from there?  I think your right about 
 contracts and install fees and it sounds like your saying that I'm 
 just going to have to eat the cost and extend my ROI per user.  Thanks

 again.
   
900Mhz client to 802.11b AP to 802.11b client is one scenario, but I 
would also put 802.11b APs on the main tower. If you put up a $300 AP 
and 5 $150 CPE, you will be doing better ($220 average customer 
equipment cost) than a purely Waverider network. You should be able to 
do better than 5 clients per AP.

Yes my website needs work, but we always have more installs that we 
possibly have time to get to. When we get caught up on installs, we will

revamp the website to bring more in.

I wouldn't count on giving 1.5M to every customer on your network over 
Waverider. I have played with every GOS setting I can come up with, and 
cannot MAINTAIN over 1Mbps connectivity to multiple clients.

I would also consider the thought that you don't have to be the cheapest

ISP in town to be the busiest or the best.. Its gonna take a LOT more 
$25/mo clients to get traction than at $40 or $50/mo. I wouldn't install

any customer who will take 12 months to get CFP (cash flow positive, 
paying for CPE and installation costs). Not starting out, anyway, unless

I was DESPERATE to get market share. Desperation is almost never a good 
position to be in.
I get $39/mo for residential service and $59/$99 for business service. 
DSL is cheaper, and in one area, Cablemodem is cheaper. We still stay 
busy with new customers, and we don't put in a new tower until the last 
tower is CFP. More money coming in the door than going out is a big part

(only part?) for successful business. ISP business is no exception. When

you run out of money, you are out of business.
-- 
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] DSL vs. Wireless Broadband

2006-04-07 Thread Matt Liotta
We haven't been in business for 3 years, but yes we have wireless links 
that have 100% uptime. How many years did this entire country depend on 
wireless links for long distance prior to fiber optics? The M in MCI 
isn't microwave for no reason.


-Matt

Travis Johnson wrote:


Hi,

I have point to point T1 lines from Qwest that have been up 100% for 
the last 3 years. That's 100.0% uptime. Do you have any wireless links 
that have that type of reliability?


I am probably one of the largest WISP operators on this and any 
wireless list. I built our entire wireless backbone from the ground up 
starting in 1997. I spent 3 hours on a tower this morning installing 
two new AP's. I understand where wireless fits and where it doesn't.


Travis
Microserv

Matt Liotta wrote:

I'll take a wireless link over a T1 any day if for no other reason 
then the wireless link will be more reliable. You're never going to 
suffer the loss of a link due to a backhoe or a drunk driver hitting 
a pole, which are the two most likely reasons for a T1 failure.


Personally, I believe that fixed wireless is truly better and I would 
argue someone has no business working for a fixed wireless company if 
they don't believe it too.


-Matt

Travis Johnson wrote:


Tom,

The original postition and question was are you comparing your 
wireless service to telco T1. After your posts, it's obvious that 
you are... and I would argue that a land-based line will ALWAYS be 
better than wireless, with all other factors being the same. Now, if 
you are able to save the customer $xx per month by using wireless, 
then there is an advantage. If you can provide other services, then 
there is an advantage. However, comparing a half-duplex system to a 
full-duplex system and saying they are the same is... not correct.


If you had the choice between running a full-duplex wireless system 
and half-duplex, which would you do? :)


If you could purchase a land-based connection to go from point A to 
point B for $500 per month, or rent roof-top space at point A and 
point B for $500 per month, which would you choose? ;)


Travis
Microserv

Tom DeReggi wrote:


Travis,

I'd love to perform your test.
Send me the CD.
Understanding that I will provision the customer at 3 mbps on our 
first hop router, using Trango 10mbps PtMP radio link, and that 
your CD test will generate 1500mbps of data transfer.


There are three seperate issues here. 1) One user's connection able 
to effect another user's connection, and 2) On one particular link, 
their upload traffic effecting their download traffic, under normal 
opperation within acceptable use policy, and 3) On one particular 
link, their upload traffic effecting their download traffic, under 
a Denial of Service situation.


With any type of broadband, if the capacity of a link is saturated, 
it results in packet loss and performance loss for the individual's 
connection. Its up to the end user to protect against violation of 
acceptable use policy like viruses that deliver abnormal PPS, or 
any queueing needed to allow fair priority of data type on the LAN 
side of the link. These problems can also all be solved with a 
feature rich client side router before plugging to our Broadband, 
regardless of the Duplex of our link.  In other words, The same 
performance problems will result on a full Duplex link, if one 
direction gets saturated, and that same direction traffic will 
result in packet loss, and all communication generally requires 
some communication in each of the direction for traffic to flow in 
one direction.  So where the problem may be worse with Half Duplex, 
the problem still exists in some capacity with Full Duplex. I'd 
argue that its possible to generate enough pps on a Full Duplex 
Link in one direction, that will overload the processing power of 
the radio CPU, and the other direction still getting horrible 
performance even with no traffic passing in that other direction 
even though Full Duplex, because no CPU time is available for it. 
Unless each direction has its own CPU, which is not likely.  This 
is an issue of whether the radio used can handle the number of PPS 
sent to it in high DOS situations.


I'd also argue under this situation 4000 pps 1500 mbps, that the 
customer's use of the circuit in any capacity when a DOS of that 
type was happening, would be not possible, and justify immediate 
tech action to resolve, regardless of whether one direction of 
traffic was usable.  I;ve never met a company where having one 
direction traffic only was acceptable or tolerable.


You did however hit on an important clarification. A half duplex 
link can not distinguish on its own wether upload or download 
traffic at a given moment is priority or more important to the 
subscriber. When there is a large demand for legitimate broadband, 
why would the data in one direction be any more priority than the 
other, when capacity is reached? Either way the customer is 
compromised in throughout 

Re: [WISPA] Re: CPE Cost Ideas Needed

2006-04-07 Thread Pete Davis

Well said. You don't need to be the cheapest to be profitable.

pd

JohnnyO wrote:

I'm shooting at offering 1.5 Mbps service at around $24.95 and
offering VOIP for another $24.95 if they so choose.  So the 
competition hasn't a chance against me if I can get around that $350 
CPE cost.
 



IMNSHO - If you are trying to compete you will fall on your face in a
heartbeat. We charge more then the competition and we do so for a
reason. Our installs start at $250 for a 'basic' install. Our monthly
rates are atleast $10-$15/more then the DSL or Cable offerings in our
area. We avoid the bottom feeders this way. We could double or triple
our subscriber count within 12mos if we would drop down $15/mo for our
service but I refuse to do that. Volume of low end subscribers becomes
a very costly support decision.

I refuse to compete on pricing - we are local - we hire local people -
we donate and support the local sports teams / associations. We shake
our subscribers hands in the stores / at gas pumps / baseball games. We
pump $$ into the local business's for our supplies, materials. 


$24.95/mo - If I were you - I would SERIOUSLY rethink your business
model. Oh - we also don't have contracts - We do have a TOS, but have
found there is really no reason to get subscribers to committ. If we do
our job - they will stay - if we fail to support them as we've promised
- they will bail. Kinda helps keep us on our toes :)

JohnnyO

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Pete Davis
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 6:50 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Re: CPE Cost Ideas Needed


Joshua M. Andrews wrote:
  

Cliff:
 
Thank you for the information.  The areas of DSL are very spotty and
cable is very inexpensive and unreliable.  Many people are upset at 
both situations.  DSL is offered for about $30 per month with purchase



  
of a DSL modem at around $50 or so and a 1 year contract is 
required.  Cable service rents you the modem for $10 per month and 
charges $40 per month for service on top of that ($50 per month total 
for those of you out there in other posts that think half-duplex is as



  

good a full-duplex).
 
I'm shooting at offering 1.5 Mbps service at around $24.95 and
offering VOIP for another $24.95 if they so choose.  So the 
competition hasn't a chance against me if I can get around that $350 
CPE cost.
 
--


Pete:
 
Thank you for the detailed response.  I appreciate you taking the time

to comment.  I don't want to be rude but I took a look at your website



  

and it needs some work. :(
In any case, I think you have a point.  Could you elaborate more on 
what you meant by going with a 802.11b AP/CPE.  Do you mean you are 
shooting a signal out to an area using WaveRider and then distributing



  
it via another 802.11b AP from there?  I think your right about 
contracts and install fees and it sounds like your saying that I'm 
just going to have to eat the cost and extend my ROI per user.  Thanks



  

again.
  

900Mhz client to 802.11b AP to 802.11b client is one scenario, but I 
would also put 802.11b APs on the main tower. If you put up a $300 AP 
and 5 $150 CPE, you will be doing better ($220 average customer 
equipment cost) than a purely Waverider network. You should be able to 
do better than 5 clients per AP.


Yes my website needs work, but we always have more installs that we 
possibly have time to get to. When we get caught up on installs, we will


revamp the website to bring more in.

I wouldn't count on giving 1.5M to every customer on your network over 
Waverider. I have played with every GOS setting I can come up with, and 
cannot MAINTAIN over 1Mbps connectivity to multiple clients.


I would also consider the thought that you don't have to be the cheapest

ISP in town to be the busiest or the best.. Its gonna take a LOT more 
$25/mo clients to get traction than at $40 or $50/mo. I wouldn't install


any customer who will take 12 months to get CFP (cash flow positive, 
paying for CPE and installation costs). Not starting out, anyway, unless


I was DESPERATE to get market share. Desperation is almost never a good 
position to be in.
I get $39/mo for residential service and $59/$99 for business service. 
DSL is cheaper, and in one area, Cablemodem is cheaper. We still stay 
busy with new customers, and we don't put in a new tower until the last 
tower is CFP. More money coming in the door than going out is a big part


(only part?) for successful business. ISP business is no exception. When

you run out of money, you are out of business.
  


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] phone-to-voip-to-ethernet conversion

2006-04-07 Thread Brian Whigham

Mario,
Let me preface my suggestion with the fact that you didn't specify how 
many extensions were at the remote office nor what brand of PBX you're 
using.


Since you suggested a one line Linksys device, I'll assume you're only 
dealing with a hand full of extensions, at most.  Otherwise, you might 
want to look into bridging a T1 signal with channel banks on each side; 
or better yet, you could pipe all PBX extensions (for the remote office) 
into a channel bank and convert to a T1 which feeds into an Asterisk 
server (with Digium T1 card).  I suspect that going into this would be 
overkill.


That said, I'd be weary of mixing VoIP and PBX.  I've had Digium 
equipment hooked to a Lucent Partner system fry (unable to handle 
extension signalling?).  And I suppose you might even fry ports on the 
PBX end (I believe I had that problem too).  I would generally stay away 
from mixing legacy PBX (fxo ports) and VoIP ATAs.  But, you'll save a 
ton by getting your proposed setup to work.  So, it's worth a shot.  
But, I wouldn't guarantee anything to my boss if I were you.


John's suggestion is the correct setup.  Not sure what hardware would be 
best; but you might try WRT54GL (with DD-WRT firmware) for AP and bridge 
solution and a Sipura 3000.  The sipura allows for incoming TDM calls 
(on FXO port) to route to VoIP port (rather than a simple FXS phone).  
You need this functionality in your situation.  Then use your preferred 
VoIP phone on the remote end.


Keep in mind that you will probably not be able to dial extensions from 
the remote end, though you theoretically should be able to have 
extension dialing from the main office to the remote end POTS phone.  I 
call the remote end  a POTS phone because POTS signalling is basically 
the only common denominator between the remote end and the main office.  
Typical VoIP ATAs don't understand (and can't generate) 
Samsung/Lucent/Other legacy, proprietary PBX signalling.  There are some 
VoIP devices out there that are made to integrate with legacy PBX 
systems.  I haven't tried them; and prepare to pay $.  If you could find 
one, that could get outbound extension dialing from the remote office.


Oh, and that solution is just for one phone.  You'd need multiple 
sipuras for multiple phones (or split it out with an ATA on the remote 
end to another PBX and have the main office dial extensions to get to 
someone at the remote office; this would be ugly).


Hope that helps,

Brian Whigham
Yonder Networks
www.yondernetworks.com

John J. Thomas wrote:


PBXFXOmoduleEthernetWirelessBridgeWirelessBridgeEthernetFXS module

Here is one example, Google will probably get you cheaper ones


John


 


-Original Message-
From: Mario Pommier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 6, 2006 10:57 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: [WISPA] phone-to-voip-to-ethernet conversion

I have an interesting application, that maybe someone has tried:

Customer is expanding to a remote office, across the street from the 
main office.

They need to connect voice and data between the two.
There's clear LOS, so a wireless link will work.
The telephone PBX is at the main office, of course.
I need to send avoice line across the wireless link from the main office 
to the remote one.

How do I add the voice?  Couldn't I simply do this?

PBX [telephone cord][Linksys VoIP phone]-[switch (which 
also has an uplink to the wired network)][wireless radio]


On the other side of the link, the telephone cord would go into a 
desktop phone terminal.


Thanks.

Mario
---
[This e-mail was scanned for viruses by our AntiVirus Protection System]

--
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] DSL vs. Wireless Broadband

2006-04-07 Thread Travis Johnson

Matt,

Now you are comparing $150,000 point to point licensed microwave links 
with $150 CPE point to multi-point links?


Travis
Microserv

Matt Liotta wrote:

We haven't been in business for 3 years, but yes we have wireless 
links that have 100% uptime. How many years did this entire country 
depend on wireless links for long distance prior to fiber optics? The 
M in MCI isn't microwave for no reason.


-Matt

Travis Johnson wrote:


Hi,

I have point to point T1 lines from Qwest that have been up 100% for 
the last 3 years. That's 100.0% uptime. Do you have any wireless 
links that have that type of reliability?


I am probably one of the largest WISP operators on this and any 
wireless list. I built our entire wireless backbone from the ground 
up starting in 1997. I spent 3 hours on a tower this morning 
installing two new AP's. I understand where wireless fits and where 
it doesn't.


Travis
Microserv

Matt Liotta wrote:

I'll take a wireless link over a T1 any day if for no other reason 
then the wireless link will be more reliable. You're never going to 
suffer the loss of a link due to a backhoe or a drunk driver hitting 
a pole, which are the two most likely reasons for a T1 failure.


Personally, I believe that fixed wireless is truly better and I 
would argue someone has no business working for a fixed wireless 
company if they don't believe it too.


-Matt

Travis Johnson wrote:


Tom,

The original postition and question was are you comparing your 
wireless service to telco T1. After your posts, it's obvious that 
you are... and I would argue that a land-based line will ALWAYS be 
better than wireless, with all other factors being the same. Now, 
if you are able to save the customer $xx per month by using 
wireless, then there is an advantage. If you can provide other 
services, then there is an advantage. However, comparing a 
half-duplex system to a full-duplex system and saying they are the 
same is... not correct.


If you had the choice between running a full-duplex wireless system 
and half-duplex, which would you do? :)


If you could purchase a land-based connection to go from point A to 
point B for $500 per month, or rent roof-top space at point A and 
point B for $500 per month, which would you choose? ;)


Travis
Microserv

Tom DeReggi wrote:


Travis,

I'd love to perform your test.
Send me the CD.
Understanding that I will provision the customer at 3 mbps on our 
first hop router, using Trango 10mbps PtMP radio link, and that 
your CD test will generate 1500mbps of data transfer.


There are three seperate issues here. 1) One user's connection 
able to effect another user's connection, and 2) On one particular 
link, their upload traffic effecting their download traffic, under 
normal opperation within acceptable use policy, and 3) On one 
particular link, their upload traffic effecting their download 
traffic, under a Denial of Service situation.


With any type of broadband, if the capacity of a link is 
saturated, it results in packet loss and performance loss for the 
individual's connection. Its up to the end user to protect against 
violation of acceptable use policy like viruses that deliver 
abnormal PPS, or any queueing needed to allow fair priority of 
data type on the LAN side of the link. These problems can also all 
be solved with a feature rich client side router before plugging 
to our Broadband, regardless of the Duplex of our link.  In other 
words, The same performance problems will result on a full Duplex 
link, if one direction gets saturated, and that same direction 
traffic will result in packet loss, and all communication 
generally requires some communication in each of the direction for 
traffic to flow in one direction.  So where the problem may be 
worse with Half Duplex, the problem still exists in some capacity 
with Full Duplex. I'd argue that its possible to generate enough 
pps on a Full Duplex Link in one direction, that will overload the 
processing power of the radio CPU, and the other direction still 
getting horrible performance even with no traffic passing in that 
other direction even though Full Duplex, because no CPU time is 
available for it. Unless each direction has its own CPU, which is 
not likely.  This is an issue of whether the radio used can handle 
the number of PPS sent to it in high DOS situations.


I'd also argue under this situation 4000 pps 1500 mbps, that the 
customer's use of the circuit in any capacity when a DOS of that 
type was happening, would be not possible, and justify immediate 
tech action to resolve, regardless of whether one direction of 
traffic was usable.  I;ve never met a company where having one 
direction traffic only was acceptable or tolerable.


You did however hit on an important clarification. A half duplex 
link can not distinguish on its own wether upload or download 
traffic at a given moment is priority or more important to the 
subscriber. When there is a large demand for legitimate 

Re: [WISPA] Is this real? More unlicensed bands?

2006-04-07 Thread Peter R.

hraunfoss.*fcc*.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-255351A1.pdf


In today’s 2nd Report and Order, the Commission amended its rules for 
general Part 15
unlicensed operations that use wide bandwidths but are not classified as 
UWB devices under its
rules. It increased the peak power limits and reduced the unwanted 
emission levels for 3
frequency bands that were already available for unlicensed operation: 
5925-7250 MHz, 16.2-
17.2 GHz, and 23.12-29 GHz, and indicated that higher peak power limits 
in these bands would
facilitate wideband operations such as short range communications, 
collision avoidance,
inventory control and tracking systems. The Commission also amended its 
measurement
procedures to permit frequency hopped, swept frequency, and gated 
systems operating within

these bands to be measured in their normal operating mode.

In light of these changes to the general Part 15 provisions, the 
Commission did not make
any major changes to the current UWB technical requirements, indicating 
that changes to these
rules at this early stage could be disruptive to current industry 
product development efforts. The
Commission made only a minor change to the measurement procedure applied 
to gated UWB

vehicular radar systems.

Action by the Commission December 15, 2004, by Second Report and Order 
and Second

Memorandum Opinion and Order in ET 98-153 (FCC 04-285). Chairman Powell,
Commissioners Abernathy, Copps, Martin and Adelstein.




From December 24, 2004:

* FCC Permits New Unlicensed UWB Devices *
* ** *The FCC adopted new rules to permit unlicensed wideband devices 
in the 6 GHz, 17 GHz and 24 GHz bands. Specifically, the FCC amended 
its rules for general Part 15 unlicensed operations that use wide 
bandwidths but are not classified as UWB devices under its rules. It 
increased the peak power limits and reduced the unwanted emission 
levels for 3 frequency bands that were already available for 
unlicensed operation: 5925-7250 MHz, 16.2-17.2 GHz, and 23.12-29 GHz, 
and indicated that higher peak power limits in these bands would 
facilitate wideband operations such as short range communications, 
collision avoidance, inventory control and tracking systems. The 
Commission also amended its measurement procedures to permit frequency 
hopped, swept frequency, and gated systems operating within these 
bands to be measured in their normal operating mode.



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] DSL vs. Wireless Broadband

2006-04-07 Thread Matt Liotta
Licensed microwave doesn't cost $150,000 and we don't use any gear that 
is any where near as cheap as $150. Maybe the reason your wireless links 
aren't reliable is because you aren't spending enough on them. Every 
wireless link that has failed in our history has been the result of 
human error on our part.


-Matt

Travis Johnson wrote:


Matt,

Now you are comparing $150,000 point to point licensed microwave links 
with $150 CPE point to multi-point links?


Travis
Microserv

Matt Liotta wrote:

We haven't been in business for 3 years, but yes we have wireless 
links that have 100% uptime. How many years did this entire country 
depend on wireless links for long distance prior to fiber optics? The 
M in MCI isn't microwave for no reason.


-Matt

Travis Johnson wrote:


Hi,

I have point to point T1 lines from Qwest that have been up 100% for 
the last 3 years. That's 100.0% uptime. Do you have any wireless 
links that have that type of reliability?


I am probably one of the largest WISP operators on this and any 
wireless list. I built our entire wireless backbone from the ground 
up starting in 1997. I spent 3 hours on a tower this morning 
installing two new AP's. I understand where wireless fits and where 
it doesn't.


Travis
Microserv

Matt Liotta wrote:

I'll take a wireless link over a T1 any day if for no other reason 
then the wireless link will be more reliable. You're never going to 
suffer the loss of a link due to a backhoe or a drunk driver 
hitting a pole, which are the two most likely reasons for a T1 
failure.


Personally, I believe that fixed wireless is truly better and I 
would argue someone has no business working for a fixed wireless 
company if they don't believe it too.


-Matt

Travis Johnson wrote:


Tom,

The original postition and question was are you comparing your 
wireless service to telco T1. After your posts, it's obvious that 
you are... and I would argue that a land-based line will ALWAYS be 
better than wireless, with all other factors being the same. Now, 
if you are able to save the customer $xx per month by using 
wireless, then there is an advantage. If you can provide other 
services, then there is an advantage. However, comparing a 
half-duplex system to a full-duplex system and saying they are the 
same is... not correct.


If you had the choice between running a full-duplex wireless 
system and half-duplex, which would you do? :)


If you could purchase a land-based connection to go from point A 
to point B for $500 per month, or rent roof-top space at point A 
and point B for $500 per month, which would you choose? ;)


Travis
Microserv

Tom DeReggi wrote:


Travis,

I'd love to perform your test.
Send me the CD.
Understanding that I will provision the customer at 3 mbps on our 
first hop router, using Trango 10mbps PtMP radio link, and that 
your CD test will generate 1500mbps of data transfer.


There are three seperate issues here. 1) One user's connection 
able to effect another user's connection, and 2) On one 
particular link, their upload traffic effecting their download 
traffic, under normal opperation within acceptable use policy, 
and 3) On one particular link, their upload traffic effecting 
their download traffic, under a Denial of Service situation.


With any type of broadband, if the capacity of a link is 
saturated, it results in packet loss and performance loss for the 
individual's connection. Its up to the end user to protect 
against violation of acceptable use policy like viruses that 
deliver abnormal PPS, or any queueing needed to allow fair 
priority of data type on the LAN side of the link. These problems 
can also all be solved with a feature rich client side router 
before plugging to our Broadband, regardless of the Duplex of our 
link.  In other words, The same performance problems will result 
on a full Duplex link, if one direction gets saturated, and that 
same direction traffic will result in packet loss, and all 
communication generally requires some communication in each of 
the direction for traffic to flow in one direction.  So where the 
problem may be worse with Half Duplex, the problem still exists 
in some capacity with Full Duplex. I'd argue that its possible to 
generate enough pps on a Full Duplex Link in one direction, that 
will overload the processing power of the radio CPU, and the 
other direction still getting horrible performance even with no 
traffic passing in that other direction even though Full Duplex, 
because no CPU time is available for it. Unless each direction 
has its own CPU, which is not likely.  This is an issue of 
whether the radio used can handle the number of PPS sent to it in 
high DOS situations.


I'd also argue under this situation 4000 pps 1500 mbps, that the 
customer's use of the circuit in any capacity when a DOS of that 
type was happening, would be not possible, and justify immediate 
tech action to resolve, regardless of whether one direction of 
traffic was usable.  I;ve 

engineering links (was Re: [WISPA] DSL vs. Wireless Broadband)

2006-04-07 Thread Matt Liotta
I know we keep working on our processes to improve the installation of 
our links. We still have a burn-in period after installations because 
our processes aren't yet 100%. I think it would be great if we could 
together work up a documented procedure to ensure better wireline 
reliability of wireless links.


-Matt

John Scrivner wrote:

Well engineered links with proper installation, lightning protection, 
battery backup and good gear will be just as reliable (if not more) as 
any land line system in my opinion. The rub is that many wireless 
links are poorly engineered, bad gear and not installed well. Garbage 
in...garbage out. I am just as guilty as anyone else. I am fixing that 
though. I have wireless links that are getting to be as reliable as 
wired ones. I will be better than wired reliably here in a year. The 
cost factor puts wireless well ahead of any risk/reward or value 
comparisons to other broadband platforms. Wireless will be the clear 
winner in the end if we all learn to do it right and buy good gear.

Scriv



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Re: CPE Cost Ideas Needed

2006-04-07 Thread Mark Nash
Doesn't it depend on your customer base?  Did we hear that this is a small
town?  Your way of doing things is like mine.  Show value and provide a good
service and you will have very little churn in your customers.  There are a
number of small towns (1k-4k population) that I service, but once we went
into the larger town (200k), we would have to give it away, longer ROI on
the CPE, lower margin, etc.  And the customers are more snobby when they are
used to being overserved by the larger companies (telco  cable).

Being a small company, I have found that our initial focus is the best for
us: small towns  rural area.  We have a nice valley that
(topographically-speaking) supports this well.  We are members of the
chambers of commerce, our kids have played sports together, see each other
in the grocery store, etc.  I have even gone so far as to work with the
local hardware store to carry most of the general items that I use such as
RJ45's, weatherproof tape, zip-ties, mounting screws  such.

We charge $44.95 for a residential/mom  pop-type business with a $199
installation.  We give a $25 credit to an existing customer who refers a new
customer to us, and that new customer gets $25 off of their installation fee
just for being referred.  Works great.  No contract...provide a good service
and don't give people a reason to think about changing if they have a
choice.

This works for a small-town environment, but as I said, it all changes if
you're going after a larger town/city/whatever.  Then it's harder to sell
your value at a higher price.  You can do it, it just takes more.

I believe that without a significant amount of funding available up front,
a WISP would be crazy to try to come in at $25 per month.  Consider that you
may get 1 to 2 customers per month in the beginning until your advertising 
word-of-mouth gets going (4-10 months depending on how much $$$ you sink
into it).  Then it will 'surge' to 4-6 customers per month.  What I'm saying
here is go conservative at first, make some $$$, then re-evaluate your
cost/revenue model.  If you overestimate, you'll be frustrated for a long,
long time with the lack of funding you will have to do things.

Now is a GREAT time to start a WISP.  The major factor in expansion has
always been CPE cost, CPE cost, CPE cost.  When we started in 2001, it was
like $600.  Things went very, very, slowly because noone was willing to pay
for the equipment.  So unless we wanted to go further into debt, we had to
grow at a snail's pace after we were covering our costs.

I'm sure there's a spreadsheet that has been generated here for costs vs.
revenue.  Consider potential vs. reality  play it safe and you may not be
disappointed.

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 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 5:34 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Re: CPE Cost Ideas Needed


  I'm shooting at offering 1.5 Mbps service at around $24.95 and
  offering VOIP for another $24.95 if they so choose.  So the
  competition hasn't a chance against me if I can get around that $350
  CPE cost.
 

 IMNSHO - If you are trying to compete you will fall on your face in a
 heartbeat. We charge more then the competition and we do so for a
 reason. Our installs start at $250 for a 'basic' install. Our monthly
 rates are atleast $10-$15/more then the DSL or Cable offerings in our
 area. We avoid the bottom feeders this way. We could double or triple
 our subscriber count within 12mos if we would drop down $15/mo for our
 service but I refuse to do that. Volume of low end subscribers becomes
 a very costly support decision.

 I refuse to compete on pricing - we are local - we hire local people -
 we donate and support the local sports teams / associations. We shake
 our subscribers hands in the stores / at gas pumps / baseball games. We
 pump $$ into the local business's for our supplies, materials.

 $24.95/mo - If I were you - I would SERIOUSLY rethink your business
 model. Oh - we also don't have contracts - We do have a TOS, but have
 found there is really no reason to get subscribers to committ. If we do
 our job - they will stay - if we fail to support them as we've promised
 - they will bail. Kinda helps keep us on our toes :)

 JohnnyO

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Pete Davis
 Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 6:50 AM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Re: CPE Cost Ideas Needed


 Joshua M. Andrews wrote:
  Cliff:
 
  Thank you for the information.  The areas of DSL are very spotty and
  cable is very inexpensive and unreliable.  Many people are upset at
  both situations.  DSL is offered for about $30 per month with purchase

  of a DSL modem at around $50 or so and a 1 year contract is
  required.  Cable service rents you the modem for $10 per 

Re: [WISPA] Re: CPE Cost Ideas Needed

2006-04-07 Thread Tom DeReggi

Johny made a great point.

In wireless you are going to need the margin to cover truck rolls, and 
support, equipment failure, and all that stuff.
What you will find is that wirelesss has less customer awareness and is 
harder to sell, and you are going to need mnore margin to pay you back for 
that effort.  Selling at a lower price just labels you as  a commodity 
provider, and takes away the benefit that most that would chose wireless 
would want. A choice of a local provider that offers better support. An item 
with a price tag of $20 is worth $20 in the consumers mind. A product with a 
price tag of $45 is worth $45 in the consumers mind. Not all will afford the 
$45 product, but you want the ones that can. They are also probably the ones 
not always looking for something for free, and willing to pay for add-on 
field service work, etc.




Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: JohnnyO [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 8:34 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Re: CPE Cost Ideas Needed



I'm shooting at offering 1.5 Mbps service at around $24.95 and
offering VOIP for another $24.95 if they so choose.  So the
competition hasn't a chance against me if I can get around that $350
CPE cost.



IMNSHO - If you are trying to compete you will fall on your face in a
heartbeat. We charge more then the competition and we do so for a
reason. Our installs start at $250 for a 'basic' install. Our monthly
rates are atleast $10-$15/more then the DSL or Cable offerings in our
area. We avoid the bottom feeders this way. We could double or triple
our subscriber count within 12mos if we would drop down $15/mo for our
service but I refuse to do that. Volume of low end subscribers becomes
a very costly support decision.

I refuse to compete on pricing - we are local - we hire local people -
we donate and support the local sports teams / associations. We shake
our subscribers hands in the stores / at gas pumps / baseball games. We
pump $$ into the local business's for our supplies, materials.

$24.95/mo - If I were you - I would SERIOUSLY rethink your business
model. Oh - we also don't have contracts - We do have a TOS, but have
found there is really no reason to get subscribers to committ. If we do
our job - they will stay - if we fail to support them as we've promised
- they will bail. Kinda helps keep us on our toes :)

JohnnyO

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Pete Davis
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 6:50 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Re: CPE Cost Ideas Needed


Joshua M. Andrews wrote:

Cliff:

Thank you for the information.  The areas of DSL are very spotty and
cable is very inexpensive and unreliable.  Many people are upset at
both situations.  DSL is offered for about $30 per month with purchase



of a DSL modem at around $50 or so and a 1 year contract is
required.  Cable service rents you the modem for $10 per month and
charges $40 per month for service on top of that ($50 per month total
for those of you out there in other posts that think half-duplex is as



good a full-duplex).

I'm shooting at offering 1.5 Mbps service at around $24.95 and
offering VOIP for another $24.95 if they so choose.  So the
competition hasn't a chance against me if I can get around that $350
CPE cost.

--

Pete:

Thank you for the detailed response.  I appreciate you taking the time
to comment.  I don't want to be rude but I took a look at your website



and it needs some work. :(
In any case, I think you have a point.  Could you elaborate more on
what you meant by going with a 802.11b AP/CPE.  Do you mean you are
shooting a signal out to an area using WaveRider and then distributing



it via another 802.11b AP from there?  I think your right about
contracts and install fees and it sounds like your saying that I'm
just going to have to eat the cost and extend my ROI per user.  Thanks



again.


900Mhz client to 802.11b AP to 802.11b client is one scenario, but I
would also put 802.11b APs on the main tower. If you put up a $300 AP
and 5 $150 CPE, you will be doing better ($220 average customer
equipment cost) than a purely Waverider network. You should be able to
do better than 5 clients per AP.

Yes my website needs work, but we always have more installs that we
possibly have time to get to. When we get caught up on installs, we will

revamp the website to bring more in.

I wouldn't count on giving 1.5M to every customer on your network over
Waverider. I have played with every GOS setting I can come up with, and
cannot MAINTAIN over 1Mbps connectivity to multiple clients.

I would also consider the thought that you don't have to be the cheapest

ISP in town to be the busiest or the best.. Its gonna take a LOT more
$25/mo clients to get traction than at $40 or $50/mo. I wouldn't install

any customer who will take 12 months to get CFP 

Re: engineering links (was Re: [WISPA] DSL vs. Wireless Broadband)

2006-04-07 Thread Jack Unger

Hey Matt,

Please excuse the following shameless self-promotion however, it's my 
mission to try to be helpful therefore I respectfully offer the 
following:


I think you'll find my book helpful:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/1587050692/ref=sib_dp_pt/103-8486677-9648632#reader-link

or my workshops:

http://www.ask-wi.com/2002workshops.html

or my telephone consulting or on-site consulting.

You're always welcome to phone or email me and if I can answer your 
questions in 15 or 20 (or even 23) minutes, there's no charge.


I'm sure you can also pick up some excellent ideas (and pick some very 
knowledgable brains) by attending a few carefully selected workshops at 
quality broadband shows like WISPNOG.


With a good grasp of how to calculate a link budget, how to interpret 
those sometimes incomplete vendor specifications, and how to avoid the 
common installation-process pitfalls, you'll be able to write up a 
design and installation procedure that should work pretty well for your 
company, going forward.

jack



Matt Liotta wrote:

I know we keep working on our processes to improve the installation of 
our links. We still have a burn-in period after installations because 
our processes aren't yet 100%. I think it would be great if we could 
together work up a documented procedure to ensure better wireline 
reliability of wireless links.


-Matt

John Scrivner wrote:

Well engineered links with proper installation, lightning protection, 
battery backup and good gear will be just as reliable (if not more) as 
any land line system in my opinion. The rub is that many wireless 
links are poorly engineered, bad gear and not installed well. Garbage 
in...garbage out. I am just as guilty as anyone else. I am fixing that 
though. I have wireless links that are getting to be as reliable as 
wired ones. I will be better than wired reliably here in a year. The 
cost factor puts wireless well ahead of any risk/reward or value 
comparisons to other broadband platforms. Wireless will be the clear 
winner in the end if we all learn to do it right and buy good gear.

Scriv





--
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
Our next WISP Workshops are April 12-13 and April 26-27
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/


Re: [WISPA] phone-to-voip-to-ethernet conversion

2006-04-07 Thread Mario Pommier

Thanks A LOT.
I'll let you know I end up trying.

Mario


Brian Whigham wrote:


Mario,
Let me preface my suggestion with the fact that you didn't specify how 
many extensions were at the remote office nor what brand of PBX you're 
using.


Since you suggested a one line Linksys device, I'll assume you're only 
dealing with a hand full of extensions, at most.  Otherwise, you might 
want to look into bridging a T1 signal with channel banks on each 
side; or better yet, you could pipe all PBX extensions (for the remote 
office) into a channel bank and convert to a T1 which feeds into an 
Asterisk server (with Digium T1 card).  I suspect that going into this 
would be overkill.


That said, I'd be weary of mixing VoIP and PBX.  I've had Digium 
equipment hooked to a Lucent Partner system fry (unable to handle 
extension signalling?).  And I suppose you might even fry ports on the 
PBX end (I believe I had that problem too).  I would generally stay 
away from mixing legacy PBX (fxo ports) and VoIP ATAs.  But, you'll 
save a ton by getting your proposed setup to work.  So, it's worth a 
shot.  But, I wouldn't guarantee anything to my boss if I were you.


John's suggestion is the correct setup.  Not sure what hardware would 
be best; but you might try WRT54GL (with DD-WRT firmware) for AP and 
bridge solution and a Sipura 3000.  The sipura allows for incoming TDM 
calls (on FXO port) to route to VoIP port (rather than a simple FXS 
phone).  You need this functionality in your situation.  Then use your 
preferred VoIP phone on the remote end.


Keep in mind that you will probably not be able to dial extensions 
from the remote end, though you theoretically should be able to have 
extension dialing from the main office to the remote end POTS phone.  
I call the remote end  a POTS phone because POTS signalling is 
basically the only common denominator between the remote end and the 
main office.  Typical VoIP ATAs don't understand (and can't generate) 
Samsung/Lucent/Other legacy, proprietary PBX signalling.  There are 
some VoIP devices out there that are made to integrate with legacy PBX 
systems.  I haven't tried them; and prepare to pay $.  If you could 
find one, that could get outbound extension dialing from the remote 
office.


Oh, and that solution is just for one phone.  You'd need multiple 
sipuras for multiple phones (or split it out with an ATA on the remote 
end to another PBX and have the main office dial extensions to get to 
someone at the remote office; this would be ugly).


Hope that helps,

Brian Whigham
Yonder Networks
www.yondernetworks.com

John J. Thomas wrote:


PBXFXOmoduleEthernetWirelessBridgeWirelessBridgeEthernetFXS module

Here is one example, Google will probably get you cheaper ones


John


 


-Original Message-
From: Mario Pommier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 6, 2006 10:57 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: [WISPA] phone-to-voip-to-ethernet conversion

I have an interesting application, that maybe someone has tried:

Customer is expanding to a remote office, across the street from the 
main office.

They need to connect voice and data between the two.
There's clear LOS, so a wireless link will work.
The telephone PBX is at the main office, of course.
I need to send avoice line across the wireless link from the main 
office to the remote one.

How do I add the voice?  Couldn't I simply do this?

PBX [telephone cord][Linksys VoIP phone]-[switch 
(which also has an uplink to the wired network)][wireless radio]


On the other side of the link, the telephone cord would go into a 
desktop phone terminal.


Thanks.

Mario
---
[This e-mail was scanned for viruses by our AntiVirus Protection 
System]


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

  




 


---
[This e-mail was scanned for viruses by our AntiVirus Protection System]

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] DSL vs. Wireless Broadband

2006-04-07 Thread Tom DeReggi

Travis does bring up an important issue regarding uptime.

It has been proven that Wireless can be a reliable technology, the flaw is 
not the RF.
Expecially PtP links engineered between two points on an ISPs network, 
controlled by an ISP.
The problem however come in on the other side of the link. Can we control 
the factors on the customer side, that can effect reliabilty? And is it cost 
effective to do so?


Some examples:
1. A landscaper cut the CAT5 cable on the side of the house.
2. Poor electrical causes frequent radio lockup or Linksys's to loose 
configs.
3. A cleaning crew, unplugs routers in MTU building electrical closet, so 
they can plug in their vacume.
4. A customer gets a Virus, and sends traffic patterns that manages to force 
lockups on AP regularly.
5. A roofer desides to setup a temp work center in front of our rooftop SU 
dish antenna. Packet loss every 3 minutes, when goes to grab another bunch 
of shingles or what ever.


Many of these problems are less prone to happen with T1 lines, but it has 
nothing to do with technology, it has to do with deployment trends and 
characteristics.  As a result, in some cases, short outages could occur more 
frequently. Thats why its so important that WISPs continue to push the many 
other valuable positives of Wireless that the technology uniquely gives, 
making it all worth it.



Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 9:13 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] DSL vs. Wireless Broadband



Matt,

Now you are comparing $150,000 point to point licensed microwave links 
with $150 CPE point to multi-point links?


Travis
Microserv

Matt Liotta wrote:

We haven't been in business for 3 years, but yes we have wireless links 
that have 100% uptime. How many years did this entire country depend on 
wireless links for long distance prior to fiber optics? The M in MCI 
isn't microwave for no reason.


-Matt

Travis Johnson wrote:


Hi,

I have point to point T1 lines from Qwest that have been up 100% for the 
last 3 years. That's 100.0% uptime. Do you have any wireless links that 
have that type of reliability?


I am probably one of the largest WISP operators on this and any wireless 
list. I built our entire wireless backbone from the ground up starting 
in 1997. I spent 3 hours on a tower this morning installing two new 
AP's. I understand where wireless fits and where it doesn't.


Travis
Microserv

Matt Liotta wrote:

I'll take a wireless link over a T1 any day if for no other reason then 
the wireless link will be more reliable. You're never going to suffer 
the loss of a link due to a backhoe or a drunk driver hitting a pole, 
which are the two most likely reasons for a T1 failure.


Personally, I believe that fixed wireless is truly better and I would 
argue someone has no business working for a fixed wireless company if 
they don't believe it too.


-Matt

Travis Johnson wrote:


Tom,

The original postition and question was are you comparing your 
wireless service to telco T1. After your posts, it's obvious that you 
are... and I would argue that a land-based line will ALWAYS be better 
than wireless, with all other factors being the same. Now, if you are 
able to save the customer $xx per month by using wireless, then there 
is an advantage. If you can provide other services, then there is an 
advantage. However, comparing a half-duplex system to a full-duplex 
system and saying they are the same is... not correct.


If you had the choice between running a full-duplex wireless system 
and half-duplex, which would you do? :)


If you could purchase a land-based connection to go from point A to 
point B for $500 per month, or rent roof-top space at point A and 
point B for $500 per month, which would you choose? ;)


Travis
Microserv

Tom DeReggi wrote:


Travis,

I'd love to perform your test.
Send me the CD.
Understanding that I will provision the customer at 3 mbps on our 
first hop router, using Trango 10mbps PtMP radio link, and that your 
CD test will generate 1500mbps of data transfer.


There are three seperate issues here. 1) One user's connection able 
to effect another user's connection, and 2) On one particular link, 
their upload traffic effecting their download traffic, under normal 
opperation within acceptable use policy, and 3) On one particular 
link, their upload traffic effecting their download traffic, under a 
Denial of Service situation.


With any type of broadband, if the capacity of a link is saturated, 
it results in packet loss and performance loss for the individual's 
connection. Its up to the end user to protect against violation of 
acceptable use policy like viruses that deliver abnormal PPS, or any 
queueing needed to allow fair priority of data type on the LAN side 
of the link. These problems can also all be solved with a feature 
rich client side 

RE: [WISPA] DSL vs. Wireless Broadband

2006-04-07 Thread danlist
All good points and I also think that in a urban/city environment were you have
more visible rooftops that redundancy from another PoP is the key and using a
routing protocol to fail over if the main link goes down


Dan Metcalf
Wireless Broadband Systems
www.wbisp.com
781-566-2053 ext 6201
1-888-wbsystem (888) 927-9783
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
support: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
 Of Tom DeReggi
 Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 1:47 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] DSL vs. Wireless Broadband
 
 Travis does bring up an important issue regarding uptime.
 
 It has been proven that Wireless can be a reliable technology, the flaw is
 not the RF.
 Expecially PtP links engineered between two points on an ISPs network,
 controlled by an ISP.
 The problem however come in on the other side of the link. Can we control
 the factors on the customer side, that can effect reliabilty? And is it cost
 effective to do so?
 
 Some examples:
 1. A landscaper cut the CAT5 cable on the side of the house.
 2. Poor electrical causes frequent radio lockup or Linksys's to loose
 configs.
 3. A cleaning crew, unplugs routers in MTU building electrical closet, so
 they can plug in their vacume.
 4. A customer gets a Virus, and sends traffic patterns that manages to force
 lockups on AP regularly.
 5. A roofer desides to setup a temp work center in front of our rooftop SU
 dish antenna. Packet loss every 3 minutes, when goes to grab another bunch
 of shingles or what ever.
 
 Many of these problems are less prone to happen with T1 lines, but it has
 nothing to do with technology, it has to do with deployment trends and
 characteristics.  As a result, in some cases, short outages could occur more
 frequently. Thats why its so important that WISPs continue to push the many
 other valuable positives of Wireless that the technology uniquely gives,
 making it all worth it.
 
 
 Tom DeReggi
 RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
 IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
 
 
 - Original Message -
 From: Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 9:13 AM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] DSL vs. Wireless Broadband
 
 
  Matt,
 
  Now you are comparing $150,000 point to point licensed microwave links
  with $150 CPE point to multi-point links?
 
  Travis
  Microserv
 
  Matt Liotta wrote:
 
  We haven't been in business for 3 years, but yes we have wireless links
  that have 100% uptime. How many years did this entire country depend on
  wireless links for long distance prior to fiber optics? The M in MCI
  isn't microwave for no reason.
 
  -Matt
 
  Travis Johnson wrote:
 
  Hi,
 
  I have point to point T1 lines from Qwest that have been up 100% for the
  last 3 years. That's 100.0% uptime. Do you have any wireless links that
  have that type of reliability?
 
  I am probably one of the largest WISP operators on this and any wireless
  list. I built our entire wireless backbone from the ground up starting
  in 1997. I spent 3 hours on a tower this morning installing two new
  AP's. I understand where wireless fits and where it doesn't.
 
  Travis
  Microserv
 
  Matt Liotta wrote:
 
  I'll take a wireless link over a T1 any day if for no other reason then
  the wireless link will be more reliable. You're never going to suffer
  the loss of a link due to a backhoe or a drunk driver hitting a pole,
  which are the two most likely reasons for a T1 failure.
 
  Personally, I believe that fixed wireless is truly better and I would
  argue someone has no business working for a fixed wireless company if
  they don't believe it too.
 
  -Matt
 
  Travis Johnson wrote:
 
  Tom,
 
  The original postition and question was are you comparing your
  wireless service to telco T1. After your posts, it's obvious that you
  are... and I would argue that a land-based line will ALWAYS be better
  than wireless, with all other factors being the same. Now, if you are
  able to save the customer $xx per month by using wireless, then there
  is an advantage. If you can provide other services, then there is an
  advantage. However, comparing a half-duplex system to a full-duplex
  system and saying they are the same is... not correct.
 
  If you had the choice between running a full-duplex wireless system
  and half-duplex, which would you do? :)
 
  If you could purchase a land-based connection to go from point A to
  point B for $500 per month, or rent roof-top space at point A and
  point B for $500 per month, which would you choose? ;)
 
  Travis
  Microserv
 
  Tom DeReggi wrote:
 
  Travis,
 
  I'd love to perform your test.
  Send me the CD.
  Understanding that I will provision the customer at 3 mbps on our
  first hop router, using Trango 10mbps PtMP radio link, and that your
  CD test will generate 1500mbps of data transfer.
 
  There are three seperate issues here. 1) One user's connection able
  to effect another user's 

Re: [WISPA] DSL vs. Wireless Broadband

2006-04-07 Thread Travis Johnson

Matt,

20 years ago before the fiber and MCI was using links, they cost more 
than $150k. Even our local cell phone provider has point to point links 
that are over $100k today.


I've been doing this for almost 10 years I have THOUSANDS of 
wireless customers. How many customers do you have? The total number of 
failures is relative to the number of CPE.


And if you are using CPE that is more than $150, maybe you should be 
looking at Trango. :)


Travis
Microserv

Matt Liotta wrote:

Licensed microwave doesn't cost $150,000 and we don't use any gear 
that is any where near as cheap as $150. Maybe the reason your 
wireless links aren't reliable is because you aren't spending enough 
on them. Every wireless link that has failed in our history has been 
the result of human error on our part.


-Matt

Travis Johnson wrote:


Matt,

Now you are comparing $150,000 point to point licensed microwave 
links with $150 CPE point to multi-point links?


Travis
Microserv

Matt Liotta wrote:

We haven't been in business for 3 years, but yes we have wireless 
links that have 100% uptime. How many years did this entire country 
depend on wireless links for long distance prior to fiber optics? 
The M in MCI isn't microwave for no reason.


-Matt

Travis Johnson wrote:


Hi,

I have point to point T1 lines from Qwest that have been up 100% 
for the last 3 years. That's 100.0% uptime. Do you have any 
wireless links that have that type of reliability?


I am probably one of the largest WISP operators on this and any 
wireless list. I built our entire wireless backbone from the ground 
up starting in 1997. I spent 3 hours on a tower this morning 
installing two new AP's. I understand where wireless fits and where 
it doesn't.


Travis
Microserv

Matt Liotta wrote:

I'll take a wireless link over a T1 any day if for no other reason 
then the wireless link will be more reliable. You're never going 
to suffer the loss of a link due to a backhoe or a drunk driver 
hitting a pole, which are the two most likely reasons for a T1 
failure.


Personally, I believe that fixed wireless is truly better and I 
would argue someone has no business working for a fixed wireless 
company if they don't believe it too.


-Matt

Travis Johnson wrote:


Tom,

The original postition and question was are you comparing your 
wireless service to telco T1. After your posts, it's obvious 
that you are... and I would argue that a land-based line will 
ALWAYS be better than wireless, with all other factors being the 
same. Now, if you are able to save the customer $xx per month by 
using wireless, then there is an advantage. If you can provide 
other services, then there is an advantage. However, comparing a 
half-duplex system to a full-duplex system and saying they are 
the same is... not correct.


If you had the choice between running a full-duplex wireless 
system and half-duplex, which would you do? :)


If you could purchase a land-based connection to go from point A 
to point B for $500 per month, or rent roof-top space at point A 
and point B for $500 per month, which would you choose? ;)


Travis
Microserv

Tom DeReggi wrote:


Travis,

I'd love to perform your test.
Send me the CD.
Understanding that I will provision the customer at 3 mbps on 
our first hop router, using Trango 10mbps PtMP radio link, and 
that your CD test will generate 1500mbps of data transfer.


There are three seperate issues here. 1) One user's connection 
able to effect another user's connection, and 2) On one 
particular link, their upload traffic effecting their download 
traffic, under normal opperation within acceptable use policy, 
and 3) On one particular link, their upload traffic effecting 
their download traffic, under a Denial of Service situation.


With any type of broadband, if the capacity of a link is 
saturated, it results in packet loss and performance loss for 
the individual's connection. Its up to the end user to protect 
against violation of acceptable use policy like viruses that 
deliver abnormal PPS, or any queueing needed to allow fair 
priority of data type on the LAN side of the link. These 
problems can also all be solved with a feature rich client side 
router before plugging to our Broadband, regardless of the 
Duplex of our link.  In other words, The same performance 
problems will result on a full Duplex link, if one direction 
gets saturated, and that same direction traffic will result in 
packet loss, and all communication generally requires some 
communication in each of the direction for traffic to flow in 
one direction.  So where the problem may be worse with Half 
Duplex, the problem still exists in some capacity with Full 
Duplex. I'd argue that its possible to generate enough pps on a 
Full Duplex Link in one direction, that will overload the 
processing power of the radio CPU, and the other direction still 
getting horrible performance even with no traffic passing in 
that other direction even though Full Duplex, because 

[WISPA] OT Backup Program

2006-04-07 Thread Brian Rohrbacher
I have a sub with an external hard drive but he needs a good backup 
program.  Anyone know of a good one you've had luck with? 


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

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

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


Re: [WISPA] OT Backup Program

2006-04-07 Thread Mark Nash
Veritas Backup Exec  Computer Associates ARCServe.  They're spendy, but you
did ask for a 'good' backup program.

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: Brian Rohrbacher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 11:20 AM
Subject: [WISPA] OT Backup Program


 I have a sub with an external hard drive but he needs a good backup
 program.  Anyone know of a good one you've had luck with?

 Brian
 -- 
 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] OT Backup Program

2006-04-07 Thread Brian Rohrbacher

http://www.directdeals.com/category-arcserve-backup.aspx?ovchn=OTHERovcpn=Froogleovcrn=ARCserve+Backupovtac=PPC

It looks like a little too much for me.  :)  


NEXT!

Mark Nash wrote:


Veritas Backup Exec  Computer Associates ARCServe.  They're spendy, but you
did ask for a 'good' backup program.

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: Brian Rohrbacher [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 11:20 AM
Subject: [WISPA] OT Backup Program


 


I have a sub with an external hard drive but he needs a good backup
program.  Anyone know of a good one you've had luck with?

Brian
--
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] OT Backup Program

2006-04-07 Thread fred
http://www.backupanswers.com/freewinbackup/ (just recently found this
one and am trying it out)

http://www.acronis.com/homecomputing/products/trueimage/ (this one
works well and I have used it)

On 4/7/06, Brian Rohrbacher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 http://www.directdeals.com/category-arcserve-backup.aspx?ovchn=OTHERovcpn=Froogleovcrn=ARCserve+Backupovtac=PPC

 It looks like a little too much for me.  :)

 NEXT!
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] DSL vs. Wireless Broadband

2006-04-07 Thread Matt Liotta

Travis Johnson wrote:

20 years ago before the fiber and MCI was using links, they cost 
more than $150k. Even our local cell phone provider has point to point 
links that are over $100k today.


That's nice, but they don't have to cost that much. I know one of the 
local metro counties here is using 7Ghz licensed for trunking their 911 
operations and each link cost under $50k. I am not privy to the uptime 
of these links, but I am guessing that they must be pretty reliable if 
they are used for 911 by a government entity.


I've been doing this for almost 10 years I have THOUSANDS of 
wireless customers. How many customers do you have? The total number 
of failures is relative to the number of CPE.


I don't really see how we can compare our businesses as we don't really 
do much multipoint. A customer that just buys a T1 replacement for a 
single location is the exception in our business. Most of our customers 
are buying a lot more bandwidth and/or have many locations. For example, 
one of our CLEC customers just placed an order for 14 new 3Mbps links. 
You think a CLEC is going to use us for last mile if we can't provide 
them with a 99.99%/50ms SLA?


And if you are using CPE that is more than $150, maybe you should be 
looking at Trango. :)


We evaluated Trango and even used them in a the field for a while. We 
don't use Trango anymore.


-Matt

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Re: CPE Cost Ideas Needed

2006-04-07 Thread Brian Rohrbacher

You stole my thoughts!?  ;)


JohnnyO wrote:


I'm shooting at offering 1.5 Mbps service at around $24.95 and
offering VOIP for another $24.95 if they so choose.  So the 
competition hasn't a chance against me if I can get around that $350 
CPE cost.


   



IMNSHO - If you are trying to compete you will fall on your face in a
heartbeat. We charge more then the competition and we do so for a
reason. Our installs start at $250 for a 'basic' install. Our monthly
rates are atleast $10-$15/more then the DSL or Cable offerings in our
area. We avoid the bottom feeders this way. We could double or triple
our subscriber count within 12mos if we would drop down $15/mo for our
service but I refuse to do that. Volume of low end subscribers becomes
a very costly support decision.

I refuse to compete on pricing - we are local - we hire local people -
we donate and support the local sports teams / associations. We shake
our subscribers hands in the stores / at gas pumps / baseball games. We
pump $$ into the local business's for our supplies, materials. 


$24.95/mo - If I were you - I would SERIOUSLY rethink your business
model. Oh - we also don't have contracts - We do have a TOS, but have
found there is really no reason to get subscribers to committ. If we do
our job - they will stay - if we fail to support them as we've promised
- they will bail. Kinda helps keep us on our toes :)

JohnnyO

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Pete Davis
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 6:50 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Re: CPE Cost Ideas Needed


Joshua M. Andrews wrote:
 


Cliff:

Thank you for the information.  The areas of DSL are very spotty and
cable is very inexpensive and unreliable.  Many people are upset at 
both situations.  DSL is offered for about $30 per month with purchase
   



 

of a DSL modem at around $50 or so and a 1 year contract is 
required.  Cable service rents you the modem for $10 per month and 
charges $40 per month for service on top of that ($50 per month total 
for those of you out there in other posts that think half-duplex is as
   



 


good a full-duplex).

I'm shooting at offering 1.5 Mbps service at around $24.95 and
offering VOIP for another $24.95 if they so choose.  So the 
competition hasn't a chance against me if I can get around that $350 
CPE cost.


--

Pete:

Thank you for the detailed response.  I appreciate you taking the time
to comment.  I don't want to be rude but I took a look at your website
   



 


and it needs some work. :(
In any case, I think you have a point.  Could you elaborate more on 
what you meant by going with a 802.11b AP/CPE.  Do you mean you are 
shooting a signal out to an area using WaveRider and then distributing
   



 

it via another 802.11b AP from there?  I think your right about 
contracts and install fees and it sounds like your saying that I'm 
just going to have to eat the cost and extend my ROI per user.  Thanks
   



 


again.
 
   

900Mhz client to 802.11b AP to 802.11b client is one scenario, but I 
would also put 802.11b APs on the main tower. If you put up a $300 AP 
and 5 $150 CPE, you will be doing better ($220 average customer 
equipment cost) than a purely Waverider network. You should be able to 
do better than 5 clients per AP.


Yes my website needs work, but we always have more installs that we 
possibly have time to get to. When we get caught up on installs, we will


revamp the website to bring more in.

I wouldn't count on giving 1.5M to every customer on your network over 
Waverider. I have played with every GOS setting I can come up with, and 
cannot MAINTAIN over 1Mbps connectivity to multiple clients.


I would also consider the thought that you don't have to be the cheapest

ISP in town to be the busiest or the best.. Its gonna take a LOT more 
$25/mo clients to get traction than at $40 or $50/mo. I wouldn't install


any customer who will take 12 months to get CFP (cash flow positive, 
paying for CPE and installation costs). Not starting out, anyway, unless


I was DESPERATE to get market share. Desperation is almost never a good 
position to be in.
I get $39/mo for residential service and $59/$99 for business service. 
DSL is cheaper, and in one area, Cablemodem is cheaper. We still stay 
busy with new customers, and we don't put in a new tower until the last 
tower is CFP. More money coming in the door than going out is a big part


(only part?) for successful business. ISP business is no exception. When

you run out of money, you are out of business.
 


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


RE: [WISPA] DSL vs. Wireless Broadband

2006-04-07 Thread danlist
Matt,

What hardware are you using?

Dan Metcalf
Wireless Broadband Systems
www.wbisp.com
781-566-2053 ext 6201
1-888-wbsystem (888) 927-9783
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
support: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
 Of Matt Liotta
 Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 2:40 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] DSL vs. Wireless Broadband
 
 Travis Johnson wrote:
 
  20 years ago before the fiber and MCI was using links, they cost
  more than $150k. Even our local cell phone provider has point to point
  links that are over $100k today.
 
 That's nice, but they don't have to cost that much. I know one of the
 local metro counties here is using 7Ghz licensed for trunking their 911
 operations and each link cost under $50k. I am not privy to the uptime
 of these links, but I am guessing that they must be pretty reliable if
 they are used for 911 by a government entity.
 
  I've been doing this for almost 10 years I have THOUSANDS of
  wireless customers. How many customers do you have? The total number
  of failures is relative to the number of CPE.
 
 I don't really see how we can compare our businesses as we don't really
 do much multipoint. A customer that just buys a T1 replacement for a
 single location is the exception in our business. Most of our customers
 are buying a lot more bandwidth and/or have many locations. For example,
 one of our CLEC customers just placed an order for 14 new 3Mbps links.
 You think a CLEC is going to use us for last mile if we can't provide
 them with a 99.99%/50ms SLA?
 
  And if you are using CPE that is more than $150, maybe you should be
  looking at Trango. :)
 
 We evaluated Trango and even used them in a the field for a while. We
 don't use Trango anymore.
 
 -Matt
 
 --
 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: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.5/303 - Release Date: 04/06/2006
 

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.5/303 - Release Date: 04/06/2006
 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] DSL vs. Wireless Broadband

2006-04-07 Thread Matt Liotta

Using for what? Motorola and Orthogon for our radio links.

-Matt

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


Matt,

What hardware are you using?

Dan Metcalf
Wireless Broadband Systems
www.wbisp.com
781-566-2053 ext 6201
1-888-wbsystem (888) 927-9783
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
support: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


 


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Matt Liotta
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 2:40 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] DSL vs. Wireless Broadband

Travis Johnson wrote:

   


20 years ago before the fiber and MCI was using links, they cost
more than $150k. Even our local cell phone provider has point to point
links that are over $100k today.

 


That's nice, but they don't have to cost that much. I know one of the
local metro counties here is using 7Ghz licensed for trunking their 911
operations and each link cost under $50k. I am not privy to the uptime
of these links, but I am guessing that they must be pretty reliable if
they are used for 911 by a government entity.

   


I've been doing this for almost 10 years I have THOUSANDS of
wireless customers. How many customers do you have? The total number
of failures is relative to the number of CPE.

 


I don't really see how we can compare our businesses as we don't really
do much multipoint. A customer that just buys a T1 replacement for a
single location is the exception in our business. Most of our customers
are buying a lot more bandwidth and/or have many locations. For example,
one of our CLEC customers just placed an order for 14 new 3Mbps links.
You think a CLEC is going to use us for last mile if we can't provide
them with a 99.99%/50ms SLA?

   


And if you are using CPE that is more than $150, maybe you should be
looking at Trango. :)

 


We evaluated Trango and even used them in a the field for a while. We
don't use Trango anymore.

-Matt

--
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: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.5/303 - Release Date: 04/06/2006

   



 



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] CPE's and the NEC

2006-04-07 Thread Brian Rohrbacher
My goal is to save my gear from static.  I don't really care about 
lightning because I believe it cannot be stopped, but I can bleed off a 
little static and keep my ethernet ports working.  (I hope)


chris cooper wrote:


On the surface it sounds like a good idea.  Im no electrician, nor do I play
one on television. Is it a good idea to have the ground in the same sheath
as the conductors?  Im thinking in a lightning strike- would it be better to
shunt the surge onto the tower and tower ground asap or run it all the way
down to the ground at the busbar?  Does having the ground in the same sheath
increase the likelihood of burning up the equipment in the
enclosure/house/radio shack?

Chris

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brian Rohrbacher
Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 6:52 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CPE's and the NEC

I am currently waiting on 2 distributors who I'm contacted about getting 
cat5 with a grounding wire (either #10,12, or 14).  They are getting a 
hold of the manufacturers and are going to see if they will make it and 
what the min commit it.  I will let everyone know.


Brian

Jason wrote:

 

How do all you guys in NEC enforcement areas handle the grounding 
issue?  Details please.  Currently I am not in an enforcement area, 
but that's about to change.


Scratching head,
Jason
   



 


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Re: CPE Cost Ideas Needed

2006-04-07 Thread Blair Davis




I have to agree with Mark here. We are using the same model he is and
we have more work than we know what to do with

$39.95 per month home, no contract / $59.95 per month small business,
no contract / Higher rates for special services and/or special QoS,
contract required

Installs start at $199 and range to $899 including a 70ft bracketed
tower. Special cases go higher One subdivision just approved $5500
for a freestanding tower to serve their 30 homes in a small valley. We
own all radio equipment.

We clear our equipment and supplies cost for any new install from the
install fee. Sometimes, when we 'recycle' a radio, we even make money
on an install, but we don't plan on it. The labor part of the install
is covered by the first month or so's fees.

We allow self install if the customer buys his own equipment. No setup
charges for self install but unit must be approved prior to install and
must meet our snr requirements.

We no longer try to compete head-to-head with the cable or telephone
companies. They can have the $15 per month bottom feeders. There is
way too much churn in those markets for us.

Another thing that helps us is that we are more than an ISP. We are a
full service computer shop as well. When our customer calls in with a
problem, and the radio gear checks out, we don't pass them off as a
problem in your computer, we hand the call to our computer tech who can
usually diagnose the problem over the phone. If we go out and the
problem is in the computer, not our radio equipment, we waive the
service call charge if the customer has our shop fix the computer, and
we will pick it up for free since we are there.

We credit a new customers first months service charge as a discount to
the referring customer. 

We started out getting 4-5 calls a month for new service. We now get
5-7 a WEEK. All word of mouth. Make friends with the real estate
agents. Give them flyers to give to their clients. Work hard to get
the local, small businesses as clients. They will give you all the
free, word of mouth advertising you can use. They will also let pass
out your flyers to their customers

It works for us We now offer service anywhere in our county. We
built our network with our own private funds. No government handouts.
We are profitable, and have less than $10K in debt. We will retire
that debt this year.






Mark Nash wrote:

  Doesn't it depend on your customer base?  Did we hear that this is a small
town?  Your way of doing things is like mine.  Show value and provide a good
service and you will have very little churn in your customers.  There are a
number of small towns (1k-4k population) that I service, but once we went
into the larger town (200k), we would have to give it away, longer ROI on
the CPE, lower margin, etc.  And the customers are more snobby when they are
used to being overserved by the larger companies (telco  cable).

Being a small company, I have found that our initial focus is the best for
us: small towns  rural area.  We have a nice valley that
(topographically-speaking) supports this well.  We are members of the
chambers of commerce, our kids have played sports together, see each other
in the grocery store, etc.  I have even gone so far as to work with the
local hardware store to carry most of the general items that I use such as
RJ45's, weatherproof tape, zip-ties, mounting screws  such.

We charge $44.95 for a residential/mom  pop-type business with a $199
installation.  We give a $25 credit to an existing customer who refers a new
customer to us, and that new customer gets $25 off of their installation fee
just for being referred.  Works great.  No contract...provide a good service
and don't give people a reason to think about changing if they have a
choice.

This works for a small-town environment, but as I said, it all changes if
you're going after a larger town/city/whatever.  Then it's harder to sell
your value at a higher price.  You can do it, it just takes more.

I believe that without a significant amount of funding available up front,
a WISP would be crazy to try to come in at $25 per month.  Consider that you
may get 1 to 2 customers per month in the beginning until your advertising 
word-of-mouth gets going (4-10 months depending on how much $$$ you sink
into it).  Then it will 'surge' to 4-6 customers per month.  What I'm saying
here is go conservative at first, make some $$$, then re-evaluate your
cost/revenue model.  If you overestimate, you'll be frustrated for a long,
long time with the lack of funding you will have to do things.

Now is a GREAT time to start a WISP.  The major factor in expansion has
always been CPE cost, CPE cost, CPE cost.  When we started in 2001, it was
like $600.  Things went very, very, slowly because noone was willing to pay
for the equipment.  So unless we wanted to go further into debt, we had to
grow at a snail's pace after we were covering our costs.

I'm sure there's a spreadsheet that has been generated here 

Re: [WISPA] OT Backup Program

2006-04-07 Thread Frank Muto
I have been using both NTI's Shadow ( 
http://www.ntius.com/default.asp?p=shadow/shadow_main) and Cobian Backup 7 
(http://www.cobian.se/) for our office computers using multiple NAS drives. 
I like Shadow for its real time and scheduled timed backups.The Cobian has 
FTP of which I use to archive files offsite.




Frank Muto
President/CEO
FSM Marketing Group, Inc








- Original Message - 
From: Brian Rohrbacher [EMAIL PROTECTED]



I have a sub with an external hard drive but he needs a good backup 
program.  Anyone know of a good one you've had luck with?

Brian
--
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] Strange problem after AP upgrade (at my wits end)

2006-04-07 Thread rabbtux rabbtux
Unfortunately, we have our own set of customized tools used to manage
the network and each AP, so the ability to switch OS will not
help. Someone has suggested a serial cable and logging the
console activity. still trying to figure out the logistics.On 4/6/06, John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Try different radios and/or system OS. You could run Mikrotik or Star OSon the board for little money. If it is not a motherboard issue then I
think there is something that the OS or radios do not like specific tothat location.Scrivrabbtux rabbtux wrote: All, we have a 50' tower that had a soekris4511 board running a modified
 version of pebble linux.The system worked great for nearly 2 years.We upgraded the system to a soekris 4521 and bridged both pcmcia interfaces to have a 2 sector site.The 2 sector system works
 great except for one problem:it randomly dies every 1-4 days and never comes back!(until a tech goes on site and recycles power) The lockup symptoms are as folows: 1) blinking link light at switch where eth0 is plugged in.
 2) No response from any interface - wired or wireless. 3) System log is set to issue a mark line every 10 minutes, but nothing is written during this lockup time. The system has a working  tested watchdog timer.
 What has been tried (not in this order): 1) cron job that pings wireless backhaul and does a reboot if no ping answer for 10 min. (didn't ever run) 2) Thinking it might be a power problem we replaced power supplies.
 3) Not trusting our POE ethernet cable, we used a second Cat5 cable for DC power only.4 wires were used for each line of the DC power, which was plugged directly into the motherboard.
 4) Added a ground rod  cable to improve tower grounding. (remember though, this single sector system worked fine without this added grounding) 5) swapped out the 4521 motherboard.
 6) created a bench test system.This was an exact duplicate of the tower system without external antennas, run on the bench. wireless LT - 2 sector system(backhaul link) -  wireless router -
 wired laptop In this test system our test AP runs without any wired connections, as it is in the field.We ran flat out repeated copy scripts for 3-4 days, and transferred approx 40G at about 3Mb/s (way more that actual
 field conditions!). Never saw test system lockup, its up time was always correct.This actual 4521 mother board is now on the tower, and we still see the problem. Any suggestions??
 Thank you kindly, Marshall--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] TEST, please ignore

2006-04-07 Thread David E. Smith
I just did a few minor updates to the wispa.org mail system, and just 
want to be sure nothing broke. Please ignore this message.


David Smith
MVN.net
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] DSL vs. Wireless Broadband

2006-04-07 Thread Blake Bowers

And now I can't sell those DS3 Digital microwave
radios from the MCI system for anything more than 
10 cents a pound.


Such a shame.

- Original Message - 
From: Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 1:03 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] DSL vs. Wireless Broadband



Matt,

20 years ago before the fiber and MCI was using links, they cost more 
than $150k. Even our local cell phone provider has point to point links 
that are over $100k today.



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Re: CPE Cost Ideas Needed

2006-04-07 Thread Tom DeReggi



$59.95 per month small business, no contrac

I'm not sure how that is a good thing. 
Riskwith no contract, and no margin to justify the 
risk.
If its a retail place with 1 or 2 computers we got 
a asyncronis plan for $99, but won't pick up the phone for less than 
$150.

$899 including a 70ft bracketed tower.

That I want to see. Whats the breakdown of your 
budget for it? And time for errection?


Tom DeReggiRapidDSL  Wireless, IncIntAirNet- Fixed Wireless 
Broadband



  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Blair Davis 

  To: WISPA General List 
  Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 3:20 
PM
  Subject: Re: [WISPA] Re: CPE Cost Ideas 
  Needed
  I have to agree with Mark here. We are using the same 
  model he is and we have more work than we know what to do 
  with$39.95 per month home, no contract / $59.95 per month 
  small business, no contract / Higher rates for special services and/or 
  special QoS, contract requiredInstalls start at $199 and range to $899 
  including a 70ft bracketed tower. Special cases go higher One 
  subdivision just approved $5500 for a freestanding tower to serve their 30 
  homes in a small valley. We own all radio equipment.We clear our 
  equipment and supplies cost for any new install from the install fee. 
  Sometimes, when we 'recycle' a radio, we even make money on an install, but we 
  don't plan on it. The labor part of the install is covered by the first 
  month or so's fees.We allow self install if the customer buys his own 
  equipment. No setup charges for self install but unit must be approved 
  prior to install and must meet our snr requirements.We no longer try 
  to compete head-to-head with the cable or telephone companies. They can 
  have the $15 per month bottom feeders. There is way too much churn in 
  those markets for us.Another thing that helps us is that we are more 
  than an ISP. We are a full service computer shop as well. When our 
  customer calls in with a problem, and the radio gear checks out, we don't pass 
  them off as a problem in your computer, we hand the call to our computer tech 
  who can usually diagnose the problem over the phone. If we go out and 
  the problem is in the computer, not our radio equipment, we waive the service 
  call charge if the customer has our shop fix the computer, and we will pick it 
  up for free since we are there.We credit a new customers first months 
  service charge as a discount to the referring customer. We 
  started out getting 4-5 calls a month for new service. We now get 5-7 a 
  WEEK. All word of mouth. Make friends with the real estate 
  agents. Give them flyers to give to their clients. Work hard to 
  get the local, small businesses as clients. They will give you all the 
  free, word of mouth advertising you can use. They will also let pass out 
  your flyers to their customersIt works for us We now 
  offer service anywhere in our county. We built our network with our own 
  private funds. No government handouts. We are profitable, and have 
  less than $10K in debt. We will retire that debt this 
  year.Mark Nash wrote:
  Doesn't it depend on your customer base?  Did we hear that this is a small
town?  Your way of doing things is like mine.  Show value and provide a good
service and you will have very little churn in your customers.  There are a
number of small towns (1k-4k population) that I service, but once we went
into the larger town (200k), we would have to give it away, longer ROI on
the CPE, lower margin, etc.  And the customers are more snobby when they are
used to being overserved by the larger companies (telco  cable).

Being a small company, I have found that our initial focus is the best for
us: small towns  rural area.  We have a nice valley that
(topographically-speaking) supports this well.  We are members of the
chambers of commerce, our kids have played sports together, see each other
in the grocery store, etc.  I have even gone so far as to work with the
local hardware store to carry most of the general items that I use such as
RJ45's, weatherproof tape, zip-ties, mounting screws  such.

We charge $44.95 for a residential/mom  pop-type business with a $199
installation.  We give a $25 credit to an existing customer who refers a new
customer to us, and that new customer gets $25 off of their installation fee
just for being referred.  Works great.  No contract...provide a good service
and don't give people a reason to think about changing if they have a
choice.

This works for a small-town environment, but as I said, it all changes if
you're going after a larger town/city/whatever.  Then it's harder to sell
your value at a higher price.  You can do it, it just takes more.

I believe that without a significant amount of funding available up front,
a WISP would be crazy to try to come in at $25 per month.  Consider that you
may get 1 to 2 customers per month in the beginning until your advertising 
word-of-mouth gets going (4-10 months depending 

Re: [WISPA] TV spectrum

2006-04-07 Thread Ron Wallace
I sent a similar message to Rep. Joe Schwarz of Michigan. The URL worked for me.-Original Message-From: John Scrivner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, April 6, 2006 11:09 AMTo: 'WISPA General List'Cc: 'Frannie Wellings'Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV spectrumHere is the text of the message I sent to Honorable John Shimkus of Illinois:The current House Spectrum Bill brought forth by Inslee and others to give us a single 6 MHz channel is far too little to help Americans gain access to broadband options and could even be regarded as a slap in the face if you have been starved for the quality spectrum needed to do the job as we all have for so long. This does not match the legislation being introduced by the Senate Commerce Committee at all and could lead to making this a dead issue instead of helping bring broadband to the masses as intended. It does not surprise me that the Telephone Industry Association has applauded this as it serves their purposes of holding our efforts back. They would prefer to either have only licensed spectrum which acts as a means of keeping multiple competitors out of the wireless space or as we see here they would like to see competing offers from the Senate and House so that the true opportunity as outlined in the FCC 04-186 is locked in debate and taken off the table to meet some compromise or worse yet the effort is killed from having too little common ground to pass a vote from both sides of Congress.This bill is like giving a spoonful of water to a man walking in the desert for days. The parched man will surely take it and wonder why you even bothered to mock him with such a paltry offer.The FCC has created the logical platform to move ahead in allowing the unlicensed use of unused television channels in its 04-186 rulemaking which it has allowed to leave in a limbo state and tasking the FCC with passing their own rulemaking is the logical way to move forward and help the broadband industry. Believing that one 6 MHz channel for broadband use is helpful is just plain laughable and shows a complete lack of understanding of our problems in helping deliver broadband to rural and under-served citizens who are begging for access to broadband and cannot receive it from any source. These unused television channels will give them broadband.A single 6 MHz channel as proposed in the House Spectrum Bill is not a true effort to help and is insulting to the public. Without several channels to allow for frequency reuse the single channel forces providers to either segment the single channel into minuscule sizes delivering substandard speeds or face almost certain interference as multiple attempts to use the same small 6 MHz channel space would interfere with adjacent efforts from other operators doing the same. In short this is not worthy of consideration and should be scrapped.The only logical step is for the House of Representatives to pass legislation which will task the FCC to pass its 04-186 rulemaking which will open unused television channels up for use as unlicensed carriage of broadband to Americans. This is not just important, it is mandatory if we are to truly close the "Digital Divide" which is now wider than ever due to a lack of quality spectrum able to do the job. The problem is not that rural Americans do not want broadband or that private enterprise has failed them in some way, the problem is that the thousands of Wireless Internet Service Providers who serve them lack the necessary spectrum to bring their citizens the broadband they are begging to receive.Honorable John Shimkus, as representative of our mainly rural district in Illinois, I am begging you to please consider drafting and submitting a competing bill to the House which will task the FCC with finishing what they started and passing the 04-186 rulemaking which is the path to universal access to low-cost broadband opportunity for all Americans.I will gladly buy a plane ticket and come to Washington to speak in person on this important issue if you so desire. Please act quickly so we may see the promise of broadband to all Americans soon. Tasking the FCC to pass 04-186 would do more to stimulate broadband availability than anything ever proposed by our legislature. Please take the lead in this important endeavor and let's give rural citizens equal access to the Digital American Dream. Say NO to the current House Spectrum Bill and submit a competing proposal that has a chance to do some good.Respectfully,John Scrivner-- 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] OT Backup Program

2006-04-07 Thread Steve Thomas
/lurk

 I have a sub with an external hard drive but he needs a good backup
 program.  Anyone know of a good one you've had luck with?

tar

(Sorry, couldn't resist...)

I've used NovaBackup, but not in a while and I don't know if it works with
hard drives (I used it with a tape). Worked well and didn't cost too much.

Of course, there's Veritas et al, but as previously mentioned, expensive.

Windows has it's own built-in backup program, too. It's basic, but it
works and is free. Again, don't know if it'll handle a hard drive as a
backup device.

-

Even further OT, but figured I'd throw it out there just in case.. Does
anyone know of an open-source package for doing backups via the net? I'm
looking to co-lo a box with a lot of disk space to be used specifically as
an off-site backup solution. Ideally, it would have all the features of
Enveloc, EVault, US Data Trust, etc., but without the price tag.

I'll probably end up using rsync, but I was hoping to find something that
has a web interface for clients to retrieve their own files, monitors
directories for changes in near real-time, etc. Ideally it would also be
platform independent, but I'll take what I can get..

Thx,
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] DSL vs. Wireless Broadband

2006-04-07 Thread Anthony Will
Im I wrong here because I believe a T1 line utilizes TDD (Time Division 
Duplexing)?  Thus it is a half duplex solution.  In reality it feels 
like a full duplex solution due to the timing. 


Anthony

Travis Johnson wrote:


Hi,

If someone wants to setup whatever wireless network they would like to 
test and then let me know, I'll gladly send you a CD you can pop in a 
laptop and connect at the CPE side. It will dish out 4,000pps and 
1.5Mbps of upload traffic. Then you can go ahead and try and download 
something at the same time across that same link using the same CPE 
connection.


If it were a telco-T1, the download would not even notice the upload. 
Wireless, being a half-duplex medium, does not compare to a 
full-duplex line. Licensed and true microwave systems are a different 
story.


Travis
Microserv

Tom DeReggi wrote:


Travis,

We do not see that on our network.
One provider's usage rarely has an effect on the others, that can be 
significantly noticed.
When bandwidth management is done at the first hop at every cell 
site, this does not happen.

I'm referring to using Trango 5830s.

You are however bringing up the difference between time syncronized 
circuit based apposed to Ethernet products.
With Ethernet, there is always a scale up and scale down of speed, 
based on the TCP protocol when limits are reached, but this has 
nothing to do with half or full duplex. The same degregation using 
Ethernet applies to traffic going in the same direction.
For Ethernet to be a viable repalcement for T1, it must be of greater 
capacity.


The second thing, distinguishing the difference between T1 and DSL 
classe, and which Wireless compares to, is more than just Speed and 
Duplex.


SLAs,  Repair Time, Network support, Peak Speed, etc.

the idea is that unused bandwdith can never be gone back to regain 
use of. So offering 3 mbps speed allows network usage to be delivered 
sooner, so bandwidth is free for upcomming traffic, therefore making 
more traffic available for that upcomming need. Higher capacity 
allows more efficient use of the bandwdith.  So we find that our 
customers tend to recognize a perception of much better speed on our 
wireless links than our T1 links, because they have fewer congestion 
times.


The secret is for the bandwdith management to be provided equally on 
a PRIORITY basis.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - From: Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 12:12 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] DSL vs. Wireless Broadband



Matt,

This is not true. With a telco T1, if someone starts a 1.5Mbps 
upload, it has no effect on the download (i.e. virus traffic, music 
sharing, worms, etc.). With a wireless connection, even at 3.0Mbps, 
a 1.5Mbps upload will bring it almost to a stop.


Travis
Microserv

Matt Liotta wrote:

3Mbps half-duplex delivered using 50% time division is equivalent 
to 1.5Mbps full-duplex. The fact that many TDD radios can have 
dynamic time division makes a 3Mbps half-duplex link superior IMHO.


-Matt

Travis Johnson wrote:


Tom,

Are you saying that you compare your wireless service to T1 telco 
service? How are you doing full-duplex with wireless?


Travis
Microserv

Tom DeReggi wrote:


Chris,

I agree with your finding.
But its possible your focus group did not get all the fact. (Or 
what was the finding?)
For example, its not only important to determine what terms the 
customer best recognizes and identify with, but also what meaning 
they have for those terms that they identify with.


For example, it does not surprise me a bit, that High Speed 
Internet was the term that the consumer best identified with.
However, most people identify High Speed Internet as much with 
DialUP service as they do with Broadband.
And if not identified with DialUP, its then identifies with DSL 
or Cable services.  Why do we want to create the image of 
offering commodity services, design for huge over subscription, 
low repair SLAs, and best effort?


Do you consider cable and DSL as a good or bad thing, as far as 
setting standards for quality?


We don't want to be identified as that.  We want to be something 
better.


Now if you are offering lower quality, best effort, Wifi services 
to your clients, and you are striving to be a competitor to Cable 
and DSL quality, sure Brand the product as DSL, and its a good 
thing.  And please do so, so your wireless is not identified with 
what we offer, branding high quality fiber extension and T1 
replacement services.


In your focus group did you get any results on their perception 
of quality that they associated with Cable and DSL or the term 
High Speed Internet?


Would you suggest branding your T1 or Fiber offerings as High 
Speed Internet, since customers best identify with that term?


Maybe we should be branding our service as Wi-Fiber. or Maybe 
Ethernet Internet Access  (of course like end 

[WISPA] Re: CPE Cost Ideas Needed

2006-04-07 Thread Joshua M. Andrews



Chris:

I've heard so much 
about Trango that I'm really intrigued! What is it that you use for 900 
MHz? Why would I choose Trango over WaveRider anyway? 
Thanks.

-


Pete:

Thank you very much 
for the detailed response. I wouldn't say I will be desperate as I'm doing 
it mostly as a benefit to the community and money is a side-note for me (I 
already have a great career so I'm really in it for the fun). Have you 
tried Trango's 900 MHz, and if so, did it compare well to WaveRider? 
Secondly, what equipment for the 802.11b have you had the success with? 
Thanks again!

--


JohnnyO:

It seems to be the 
consensus is not to have any contracts for the service. It also seems to 
be the consensus that other successful WISPs are having great success not 
charging rock bottom prices. I've heard great things about WaveRider in 
general and it seems virtually everyone also says that if I offer more than 1 
Mbps to customers then I'm pushing it with WaveRider. You're right about 
the local business comments.. I've seen it work very well in our "tight-nit" 
community. I probably should up the price a bit and rethink my WaveRider 
strategy. I HAVE to have 900 MHz.. other WISPs have seriously come and 
gone with their 2.4 GHz stuff due to the trees and so I'm stuck between a rock 
(WaveRider) and a hard place (Trango). Any ideas in this regard? 
Thank you kindly.

-


Mark:

Thank you very much 
for your comments. I'm planning on the snail pace to get started. 
:)





Brian:

I can probably help 
you with this. What OS is the sub using? What kind of backup do you 
want? Data only, Ghosting, Full backups with incremental, how often, 
etc? How many machines, is this server-based, or 
client-based?




Matt:

You stated that you 
"used trango in the past and don't use them anymore"... who do you use 
now? Thanks.




Blair:

I wanna be your 
friend. I need hand-holding and you sound like you were in the position 
I'm in today and can really help. What equipment are you using? 
Thanks.

Sincerely,

Joshua

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] OT Backup Program

2006-04-07 Thread Pete Davis

http://www.handybackup.com/

Cheap. $30 to $55 depending on plugins needed. Free trial available.
Easy to use. Drop/Drag/Schedule
Flexible. Will back up to CDRW, network shares, second hard drives, FTP 
shares, whatever.


Brian Rohrbacher wrote:
I have a sub with an external hard drive but he needs a good backup 
program.  Anyone know of a good one you've had luck with?

Brian


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] DSL vs. Wireless Broadband

2006-04-07 Thread David E. Smith
Blake Bowers wrote:
 And now I can't sell those DS3 Digital microwave
 radios from the MCI system for anything more than
 10 cents a pound.

Does that price include shipping? :D

David Smith
MVN.net
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] DSL vs. Wireless Broadband

2006-04-07 Thread Anthony Will

hhhmmm  should have started that with I MAYBE am wrong here

Anthony Will wrote:

Im I wrong here because I believe a T1 line utilizes TDD (Time 
Division Duplexing)?  Thus it is a half duplex solution.  In reality 
it feels like a full duplex solution due to the timing.

Anthony

Travis Johnson wrote:


Hi,

If someone wants to setup whatever wireless network they would like 
to test and then let me know, I'll gladly send you a CD you can pop 
in a laptop and connect at the CPE side. It will dish out 4,000pps 
and 1.5Mbps of upload traffic. Then you can go ahead and try and 
download something at the same time across that same link using the 
same CPE connection.


If it were a telco-T1, the download would not even notice the upload. 
Wireless, being a half-duplex medium, does not compare to a 
full-duplex line. Licensed and true microwave systems are a different 
story.


Travis
Microserv

Tom DeReggi wrote:


Travis,

We do not see that on our network.
One provider's usage rarely has an effect on the others, that can be 
significantly noticed.
When bandwidth management is done at the first hop at every cell 
site, this does not happen.

I'm referring to using Trango 5830s.

You are however bringing up the difference between time syncronized 
circuit based apposed to Ethernet products.
With Ethernet, there is always a scale up and scale down of speed, 
based on the TCP protocol when limits are reached, but this has 
nothing to do with half or full duplex. The same degregation using 
Ethernet applies to traffic going in the same direction.
For Ethernet to be a viable repalcement for T1, it must be of 
greater capacity.


The second thing, distinguishing the difference between T1 and DSL 
classe, and which Wireless compares to, is more than just Speed and 
Duplex.


SLAs,  Repair Time, Network support, Peak Speed, etc.

the idea is that unused bandwdith can never be gone back to regain 
use of. So offering 3 mbps speed allows network usage to be 
delivered sooner, so bandwidth is free for upcomming traffic, 
therefore making more traffic available for that upcomming need. 
Higher capacity allows more efficient use of the bandwdith.  So we 
find that our customers tend to recognize a perception of much 
better speed on our wireless links than our T1 links, because they 
have fewer congestion times.


The secret is for the bandwdith management to be provided equally on 
a PRIORITY basis.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - From: Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 12:12 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] DSL vs. Wireless Broadband



Matt,

This is not true. With a telco T1, if someone starts a 1.5Mbps 
upload, it has no effect on the download (i.e. virus traffic, music 
sharing, worms, etc.). With a wireless connection, even at 3.0Mbps, 
a 1.5Mbps upload will bring it almost to a stop.


Travis
Microserv

Matt Liotta wrote:

3Mbps half-duplex delivered using 50% time division is equivalent 
to 1.5Mbps full-duplex. The fact that many TDD radios can have 
dynamic time division makes a 3Mbps half-duplex link superior IMHO.


-Matt

Travis Johnson wrote:


Tom,

Are you saying that you compare your wireless service to T1 telco 
service? How are you doing full-duplex with wireless?


Travis
Microserv

Tom DeReggi wrote:


Chris,

I agree with your finding.
But its possible your focus group did not get all the fact. (Or 
what was the finding?)
For example, its not only important to determine what terms the 
customer best recognizes and identify with, but also what 
meaning they have for those terms that they identify with.


For example, it does not surprise me a bit, that High Speed 
Internet was the term that the consumer best identified with.
However, most people identify High Speed Internet as much with 
DialUP service as they do with Broadband.
And if not identified with DialUP, its then identifies with DSL 
or Cable services.  Why do we want to create the image of 
offering commodity services, design for huge over subscription, 
low repair SLAs, and best effort?


Do you consider cable and DSL as a good or bad thing, as far as 
setting standards for quality?


We don't want to be identified as that.  We want to be something 
better.


Now if you are offering lower quality, best effort, Wifi 
services to your clients, and you are striving to be a 
competitor to Cable and DSL quality, sure Brand the product as 
DSL, and its a good thing.  And please do so, so your wireless 
is not identified with what we offer, branding high quality 
fiber extension and T1 replacement services.


In your focus group did you get any results on their perception 
of quality that they associated with Cable and DSL or the term 
High Speed Internet?


Would you suggest branding your T1 or Fiber offerings as High 
Speed Internet, since customers best identify with that term?


Maybe we should be 

Re: [WISPA] Re: CPE Cost Ideas Needed

2006-04-07 Thread Carl A Jeptha

Also Gentlemen and Ladies,
Remember why these good folks live in the backwoods of Louisiana, etc. :-) 
They like the peace and quiet and are willing to pay a local person to 
supply service to them. They also know that they have to pay a little 
extra to have the services of the big cities delivered to them.
I charge $395.00CAN setup (using Tranzeo CPQ's now) and $55.00, $75.00 
and $95.00 per month. I own the equipment. And yes I have noticed in my 
5th year it has really picked up. Struggling to keep up, but happy.
If you tell me about the big guy's cheapest price, I am the first one to 
suggest that you go with them as they definitely fit your criteria, 
thank you for the call, bye.
My customers like the fact that they can call up the fool and shoot the 
fat with him and he actually remembers some stupid tidbit of their 
personal life. He is actually for real and is the first one to say he 
has screwed up. Good old fashion values.
Yes some people have met the other side of me, I send them packing no 
regrets. Never ever bring your big city attitude to me, I will call the 
courier to send it packing and I do have competition.


You have a Good Day now,


Carl A Jeptha
http://www.airnet.ca
office 905 349-2084
Emergency only Pager 905 377-6900
skype cajeptha



Tom DeReggi wrote:

Johny made a great point.

In wireless you are going to need the margin to cover truck rolls, and 
support, equipment failure, and all that stuff.
What you will find is that wirelesss has less customer awareness and 
is harder to sell, and you are going to need mnore margin to pay you 
back for that effort.  Selling at a lower price just labels you as  a 
commodity provider, and takes away the benefit that most that would 
chose wireless would want. A choice of a local provider that offers 
better support. An item with a price tag of $20 is worth $20 in the 
consumers mind. A product with a price tag of $45 is worth $45 in the 
consumers mind. Not all will afford the $45 product, but you want the 
ones that can. They are also probably the ones not always looking for 
something for free, and willing to pay for add-on field service work, 
etc.




Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - From: JohnnyO [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 8:34 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Re: CPE Cost Ideas Needed



I'm shooting at offering 1.5 Mbps service at around $24.95 and
offering VOIP for another $24.95 if they so choose.  So the
competition hasn't a chance against me if I can get around that $350
CPE cost.



IMNSHO - If you are trying to compete you will fall on your face in a
heartbeat. We charge more then the competition and we do so for a
reason. Our installs start at $250 for a 'basic' install. Our monthly
rates are atleast $10-$15/more then the DSL or Cable offerings in our
area. We avoid the bottom feeders this way. We could double or triple
our subscriber count within 12mos if we would drop down $15/mo for our
service but I refuse to do that. Volume of low end subscribers becomes
a very costly support decision.

I refuse to compete on pricing - we are local - we hire local people -
we donate and support the local sports teams / associations. We shake
our subscribers hands in the stores / at gas pumps / baseball games. We
pump $$ into the local business's for our supplies, materials.

$24.95/mo - If I were you - I would SERIOUSLY rethink your business
model. Oh - we also don't have contracts - We do have a TOS, but have
found there is really no reason to get subscribers to committ. If we do
our job - they will stay - if we fail to support them as we've promised
- they will bail. Kinda helps keep us on our toes :)

JohnnyO

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Pete Davis
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 6:50 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Re: CPE Cost Ideas Needed


Joshua M. Andrews wrote:

Cliff:

Thank you for the information.  The areas of DSL are very spotty and
cable is very inexpensive and unreliable.  Many people are upset at
both situations.  DSL is offered for about $30 per month with purchase



of a DSL modem at around $50 or so and a 1 year contract is
required.  Cable service rents you the modem for $10 per month and
charges $40 per month for service on top of that ($50 per month total
for those of you out there in other posts that think half-duplex is as



good a full-duplex).

I'm shooting at offering 1.5 Mbps service at around $24.95 and
offering VOIP for another $24.95 if they so choose.  So the
competition hasn't a chance against me if I can get around that $350
CPE cost.

--

Pete:

Thank you for the detailed response.  I appreciate you taking the time
to comment.  I don't want to be rude but I took a look at your website



and it needs some work. :(
In any case, I think you have a point.  Could you elaborate more on
what you 

[Fwd: RE: [WISPA] TV spectrum]

2006-04-07 Thread John Scrivner
We have a problem. It appears the press release we read earlier was 
wrong. Attached is the exact language of the bill. It is asking for ALL 
tv channels except for one small band. I do not know what is wrong with 
that one channel but this is actually a VERY GOOD bill. I am sorry for 
the mix up. I only acted on what I was told was the purpose of the bill. 
Had I read the ACTUAL bill this would not have happened. Dawn DiPietro, 
can you please send me contact information on the press outlet that sent 
out the previous information? It is time for us to SUPPORT this bill If 
you need help with language let me know but apparently I am not much 
help as I told you guys the wrong position on this one.. I learned a 
valuable lesson here gang. I will never again send out any notices to 
all of you for action prior to reading the ACTUAL bill and not just what 
he news tells us it is. I am very, very sorry for this terrible mix up. 
Please forgive me.

Scriv


IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Mr. INSLEE (for himself, Mrs. BLACKBURN, and Ms. BALDWIN) introduced

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on

*

A BILL

*

To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to promote and

expedite wireless broadband deployment in rural and

other areas, and for other purposes.

//

/Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa- /

//

/tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled/,

**

*SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. *

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘American Broadband

for Communities Act’’.

2

**

*SEC. 2. UNUSED TELEVISION SPECTRUM MADE AVAILABLE *

**

*FOR WIRELESS USE. *

Part I of title III of the Communications Act of 1934

(47 U.S.C. 301 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end

the following:

**

*‘‘SEC. 342. UNUSED BROADCAST TELEVISION SPECTRUM *

**

*MADE AVAILABLE FOR WIRELESS USE. *

‘‘Any unused broadcast television spectrum in the

band between 54 and 698 megaHertz, inclusive, other

than spectrum in the band between 608 and 614 mega-

Hertz, inclusive, may be used by unlicensed devices, in-

cluding wireless broadband devices.’’.

**

*SEC. 3. FCC TO FACILITATE USE. *

Within 180 days after the date of enactment of this

Act, the Federal Communications Commission shall—

(1) adopt minimal technical and device rules in

ET Docket Nos. 02–380 and 04–186 to facilitate

the robust and efficient use of the spectrum made

available under section 342 of the Communications

Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 342) by unlicensed devices,

including wireless broadband devices; and

(2) establish rules and procedures to—

(A) protect incumbent licensed services, in-

cluding broadcast television and public safety

equipment, operating pursuant to their licenses

3

from harmful interference from such unlicensed

devices;

(B) address complaints from licensed

broadcast stations that an unlicensed device

using such spectrum causes harmful inter-

ference that include verification, in the field, of

actual harmful interference;

(C) require manufacturers of unlicensed

devices designed to be operated in this spectrum

to submit a plan to the Commission to remedy

actual harmful interference to the extent that

harmful interference is found by the Commis-

sion which may include disabling or modifying

the unlicensed device remotely; and

(D) require certification of unlicensed de-

vices designed to be operated in that spectrum

to ensure that they meet the technical criteria

established under paragraph (1) and can per-

form the functions described in subparagraph

(C).

March 31, 2006 (3:22 PM)



*From:* John Scrivner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*Sent:* Fri 07/04/2006 15:07
*To:* Frannie Wellings
*Subject:* Re: [WISPA] TV spectrum

I need a copy of this bill right away.
Scriv


Frannie Wellings wrote:

 Hey John,

 The Inslee bill is a good bill - it doesn't do what you're saying
 here. I'm not sure what you've read, but it opens up spectrum between
 54-698 MHz (except 608-614) for unlicensed use just like one of the
 Senate bills. He's introduced it as a House companion bill. The only
 difference is a bit of additional language about protection from
 interference.

 This is legislation we need to support. Can you review the bill and
 get back to me? If you don't have the text I can send it over. I'm out
 of town, but could get a copy to send to you.

 Best, Frannie




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


[WISPA] Error in Press Release

2006-04-07 Thread John Scrivner

I read your press release titled:

TIA Applauds Introduction of Spectrum-Related Legislation by 
Representatives Inslee, Blackburn, Baldwin, Gillmor and Boucher


I read a line in the release below that is not true. It is this:

The Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA) praises the leadership 
of Representatives Jay Inslee (D-Wash.) and his co- sponsors ... for 
their introduction of legislation intended to allow the use of broadcast 
television spectrum in the band between 608 and 614 MHz by unlicensed 
devices, including wireless broadband services.


When I read that this bill was limited to allowing use between 608 and 
614 MHz as outlined above I was outraged. This is a mere 6 MHz of 
spectrum. I took that information and decided to rally WISP operators 
against this bill because it was against the language proposed by the 
Senate Commerce Committee bills allowing for all television unused 
channels.  Now we have several WISPs who have written their 
representatives OPPOSING this bill. I had someone finally send me the 
real language of the bill and found it actually says that the bill is 
asking for all unused television channel space with the exception of 
608 to 614 MHz. This is a COMPLETELY different meaning than what is 
portrayed in your press release and has caused a great deal of 
misinformation about this bill. PLEASE correct this so others do not 
make the same mistake.

With regrets,
John Scrivner


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Re: CPE Cost Ideas Needed

2006-04-07 Thread rabbtux rabbtux
Any idea how this might work in a market that has 50% part time
visitors? Many 2nd homes. We might starve during the
off-season.On 4/7/06, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:







$59.95 per month small business, no contrac

I'm not sure how that is a good thing. 
Riskwith no contract, and no margin to justify the 
risk.
If its a retail place with 1 or 2 computers we got 
a asyncronis plan for $99, but won't pick up the phone for less than 
$150.

$899 including a 70ft bracketed tower.

That I want to see. Whats the breakdown of your 
budget for it? And time for errection?


Tom DeReggiRapidDSL  Wireless, IncIntAirNet- Fixed Wireless 
Broadband




  - Original Message - 
  
From: 
  Blair Davis 

  To: 
WISPA General List 
  Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 3:20 
PM
  Subject: Re: [WISPA] Re: CPE Cost Ideas 
  Needed
  I have to agree with Mark here. We are using the same 
  model he is and we have more work than we know what to do 
  with$39.95 per month home, no contract / $59.95 per month 
  small business, no contract / Higher rates for special services and/or 
  special QoS, contract requiredInstalls start at $199 and range to $899 
  including a 70ft bracketed tower. Special cases go higher One 
  subdivision just approved $5500 for a freestanding tower to serve their 30 
  homes in a small valley. We own all radio equipment.We clear our 
  equipment and supplies cost for any new install from the install fee. 
  Sometimes, when we 'recycle' a radio, we even make money on an install, but we 
  don't plan on it. The labor part of the install is covered by the first 
  month or so's fees.We allow self install if the customer buys his own 
  equipment. No setup charges for self install but unit must be approved 
  prior to install and must meet our snr requirements.We no longer try 
  to compete head-to-head with the cable or telephone companies. They can 
  have the $15 per month bottom feeders. There is way too much churn in 
  those markets for us.Another thing that helps us is that we are more 
  than an ISP. We are a full service computer shop as well. When our 
  customer calls in with a problem, and the radio gear checks out, we don't pass 
  them off as a problem in your computer, we hand the call to our computer tech 
  who can usually diagnose the problem over the phone. If we go out and 
  the problem is in the computer, not our radio equipment, we waive the service 
  call charge if the customer has our shop fix the computer, and we will pick it 
  up for free since we are there.We credit a new customers first months 
  service charge as a discount to the referring customer. We 
  started out getting 4-5 calls a month for new service. We now get 5-7 a 
  WEEK. All word of mouth. Make friends with the real estate 
  agents. Give them flyers to give to their clients. Work hard to 
  get the local, small businesses as clients. They will give you all the 
  free, word of mouth advertising you can use. They will also let pass out 
  your flyers to their customersIt works for us We now 
  offer service anywhere in our county. We built our network with our own 
  private funds. No government handouts. We are profitable, and have 
  less than $10K in debt. We will retire that debt this 
  year.Mark Nash wrote:
  Doesn't it depend on your customer base?  Did we hear that this is a smalltown?  Your way of doing things is like mine.  Show value and provide a good
service and you will have very little churn in your customers.  There are anumber of small towns (1k-4k population) that I service, but once we wentinto the larger town (200k), we would have to give it away, longer ROI on
the CPE, lower margin, etc.  And the customers are more snobby when they areused to being overserved by the larger companies (telco  cable).Being a small company, I have found that our initial focus is the best for
us: small towns  rural area.  We have a nice valley that(topographically-speaking) supports this well.  We are members of thechambers of commerce, our kids have played sports together, see each otherin the grocery store, etc.  I have even gone so far as to work with the
local hardware store to carry most of the general items that I use such asRJ45's, weatherproof tape, zip-ties, mounting screws  such.We charge $44.95 for a residential/mom  pop-type business with a $199
installation.  We give a $25 credit to an existing customer who refers a newcustomer to us, and that new customer gets $25 off of their installation feejust for being referred.  Works great.  No contract...provide a good service
and don't give people a reason to think about changing if they have achoice.This works for a small-town environment, but as I said, it all changes ifyou're going after a larger town/city/whatever.  Then it's harder to sell
your value at a higher price.  You can do it, it just takes more.I believe that without a significant amount of funding available up front,a WISP would be crazy to try to come in 

[WISPA] Big trouble with my first AP...

2006-04-07 Thread Jason

Gents  ladies,

   I have a difficult question for the list.  I was testing my 1st 
routerboard/mikrotik ap this evening with terrible results.  Let me give 
you the rundown of what I have and what has happened.


Setup:
1 mikrotik routerboard 532 combo
3 cm9 minipci radios configured to 18 dbm via mikrotik
17.5 feet of lmr-400 from each radio to...
3 teletronics 19dbi horizontally polarized, 8 deg vertical beam width, 
120deg sector antennas

   See the antenna here: http://www.teletronics.com/tant24sector19dbi.html

My problem is that no where within 2 miles of the antennas can I get a 
signal better than -85 db.  A senao in a rootenna mounted 50 ' away 
through a steel roof and pointing the wrong direction gives me -70 db on 
my laptop card?!?  Is there something I'm missing. 

One other thing which might be the cause is that while I was setting up 
the mikrotik/routerboard I activated the 3 cm9 radios not realizing that 
they were set for the 5 Ghz band.  They were probably like that for an 
hour until I got to that part of the setup.  Perhaps something is wrong 
now or are the cm9's forgiving?


Another thought I has is that the teletronics antennas are just not very 
good.  Has anyone else tried them?  Results?


Is there a way to measure conducted output power at the antenna end of 
the coax?  I could verify the radio output that way.  Or a microwave 
field strength measurement I can do (spectrum analyzer?)?


Any ideas guys

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

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

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


Re: [Fwd: RE: [WISPA] TV spectrum]

2006-04-07 Thread Anthony Will
Well below is the copy of the apologies I sent to my congressman.  I'm 
posting it here to just give everyone some cut and paste materials NOT 
to admonish Mr. Scrivner.  You acted with best intentions at heart and 
are obviously passionate about this industry.  Thank you for your 
initiative because I likely would not have know about this legislation 
until it was to late if you would not have posted what you have.  Thanks 
again,  Anthony


Apology sent to congressman,

It seems a previous message I sent earlier this evening was not 
accurate.  After further investigation on the details of this bill I am 
in support of this legislation.  I was mistaken in the fact about it 
limiting frequency use to 6 MHz but in reality the bill opens up most 
spectrum other then those 6 MHz.  I apologize for the strong wording in 
the previous message.  As you likely can tell I am passionate about this 
issue for our rural communities and have spent the last 8 years trying 
to deliver them the much needed High speed Internet resources they need. 

Again I offer my apologizes and understanding of these issues if you 
would like to find out more about how this issue impacts farmers, other 
rural community members or more about how local small business in MN are 
approaching this issue please contact me.


Anthony Will
Broadband Solutions


John Scrivner wrote:

We have a problem. It appears the press release we read earlier was 
wrong. Attached is the exact language of the bill. It is asking for 
ALL tv channels except for one small band. I do not know what is wrong 
with that one channel but this is actually a VERY GOOD bill. I am 
sorry for the mix up. I only acted on what I was told was the purpose 
of the bill. Had I read the ACTUAL bill this would not have happened. 
Dawn DiPietro, can you please send me contact information on the press 
outlet that sent out the previous information? It is time for us to 
SUPPORT this bill If you need help with language let me know but 
apparently I am not much help as I told you guys the wrong position on 
this one.. I learned a valuable lesson here gang. I will never again 
send out any notices to all of you for action prior to reading the 
ACTUAL bill and not just what he news tells us it is. I am very, very 
sorry for this terrible mix up. Please forgive me.

Scriv


IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Mr. INSLEE (for himself, Mrs. BLACKBURN, and Ms. BALDWIN) introduced

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on

*

A BILL

*

To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to promote and

expedite wireless broadband deployment in rural and

other areas, and for other purposes.

//

/Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa- /

//

/tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled/,

**

*SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. *

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘American Broadband

for Communities Act’’.

2

**

*SEC. 2. UNUSED TELEVISION SPECTRUM MADE AVAILABLE *

**

*FOR WIRELESS USE. *

Part I of title III of the Communications Act of 1934

(47 U.S.C. 301 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end

the following:

**

*‘‘SEC. 342. UNUSED BROADCAST TELEVISION SPECTRUM *

**

*MADE AVAILABLE FOR WIRELESS USE. *

‘‘Any unused broadcast television spectrum in the

band between 54 and 698 megaHertz, inclusive, other

than spectrum in the band between 608 and 614 mega-

Hertz, inclusive, may be used by unlicensed devices, in-

cluding wireless broadband devices.’’.

**

*SEC. 3. FCC TO FACILITATE USE. *

Within 180 days after the date of enactment of this

Act, the Federal Communications Commission shall—

(1) adopt minimal technical and device rules in

ET Docket Nos. 02–380 and 04–186 to facilitate

the robust and efficient use of the spectrum made

available under section 342 of the Communications

Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 342) by unlicensed devices,

including wireless broadband devices; and

(2) establish rules and procedures to—

(A) protect incumbent licensed services, in-

cluding broadcast television and public safety

equipment, operating pursuant to their licenses

3

from harmful interference from such unlicensed

devices;

(B) address complaints from licensed

broadcast stations that an unlicensed device

using such spectrum causes harmful inter-

ference that include verification, in the field, of

actual harmful interference;

(C) require manufacturers of unlicensed

devices designed to be operated in this spectrum

to submit a plan to the Commission to remedy

actual harmful interference to the extent that

harmful interference is found by the Commis-

sion which may include disabling or modifying

the unlicensed device remotely; and

(D) require certification of unlicensed de-

vices designed to be operated in that spectrum

to ensure that they meet the technical criteria

established under paragraph (1) and can per-

form the functions described in subparagraph

(C).

March 31, 2006 (3:22 PM)