Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces

2007-02-07 Thread Tim Wolfe
Hey Gang, After reading this thread for a few hours, I told myself I 
would shut up and just go away, but I must say, after pacing around the 
house for awhile and reviewing all of the things that I know in my 
mind?, I must say something?(Not that anyone gives a rats behind?). 
Look, what Patrick has posted to this list(As much as I hate to say it, 
and not because it's Patrick, its because of the actual subject?) is 
TRUE!. If You are looking to find some truth to his statements?, just 
wander over to DSL Reports WISP forum( 
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/wisp )  and review some of the posts 
that have been made there over the years?. At least every other day or 
so, someone posts a question about how far they can hook up a client 
using a 1 watt amp with a 15.5dBi omni. When I first started in this 
business, if the salesperson at Ecomm, Winncomm etc. didn't know You?, 
and You asked for a 1 watt amp?, they wouldn't sell it?, or at least You 
had to answer a LOT of questions as to what You were going to use it 
for?. Today, all someone has to do is go to ebay, or call any of the 
popular vendors and in most cases?, it is on a UPS truck in 24hrs headed 
for Your address. I am NOT blaming any vendor for this mess any more 
than I am blaming the FCC or our industry as a police force, it just 
needs to be said that it IS heading in the wrong direction quickly(I 
think Patrick's mention of the slippery slope is accurate?). To add to 
the mess is a list of consultants that have popped up as of late?. In 
2000, if You typed in WISP as a search word?, You got almost NO hits. 
Today, when You repeat this, the result is CRAZY! ( Results 1 - 10 of 
about 3,430,000 for WISP-From Google!) . The current trend in the WISP 
business is headed right towards the same debacle as the CB radio craze 
of the 70's? (I guess I am showing my age, LOL!). That problem ended 
because the spectrum was so wasted that You couldn't even talk to 
someone down the street, and cell phone and other communications 
technologies replaced the medium. While I do not know anyone in a high 
position in the FCC at the time, I am almost positive that more than one 
FCC meeting had people with their arms in the air going, OMG!, What are 
we going to do??. IMHO.ahh, You know what?, scratch my opinion, 
lets just say that in my experience, I know where this entire deal is 
headed unless something major happens?, it will be a wasteland that is 
sooo bad, You won't even have to put Your coffee in the microwave to 
heat it up, just open the protective steel front doors on Your house and 
set it outside for a few seconds and it is ready!( OK, a little 
overboard, but I think You all get my point?). I have been in this 
business since 2000. When I started lighting up PoP's in 2001, a site 
survey yielded nothing, nada, zip zilch zero as far as other AP's or 
competitors 802.11b AP's. Now, at those same PoP's, I can find on 
average at least 8 to 10 active AP's. I know all of You have seen this?. 
While some are just home user AP's, they are there non the less!. Heck, 
the other day an AP showed up with a -58!!!. I traced it down to a home 
user that had a 13.5dBi omni on his/her roof. While I have no idea why 
they did that?(My guess is to provide better coverage in their house and 
back yard or maybe share their cable connection?), it is insane that a 
consumer was allowed to purchase that stuff!. If any of You think that 
we do not have an issue with people violating FCC rules?, You had better 
think again!. It is not just WISP's but all types of people that include 
consumers, municipal, school and business IT depts. and a few 
consultants who yesterday where saying Wendys drive thru, can I take 
Your order please? and now today they are spouting out, I are a  wi-fi 
consultant. I just find it odd that the alarm bells are not ringing in 
more heads than just a few of us?.





Dennis Burgess - 2K Wireless wrote:

Interesting thread, very good points on all fronts.

I wanted to point out something, something that the guy who was talking
about consultants etc.  You are correct in that many people who are
consultants don't know the real world implications.  Us WISPs have first
hand knowledge of what these things will do, what the bands, hardware, etc
is capable of.  


A recent study was commissioned in St. Louis. This was a feasibility study
that netted some consultant over $90,000 bucks from the way I read it.
What was this for?  To see if the city of St. Louis can put in a wireless
network covering downtown.   H.  My first thought on this was

So the consultant needs to conduct a study on IF you can do this?   Does
he not know what he is doing? I can tell you I can do it, might take me a
bit to do the necessary research, but hell for that price, I will do the
research, finding bandwidth, contracts, and power/data agreements.  


This is the kind of thing that us, using license exempt bands nee to fight.
We need to make it public, 

RE: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces

2007-02-07 Thread Gino Villarini
Tim , Great post. I concur 100% with your statements, that's why I would
prefer, instead of more unlicensed space, a Wisp Only band with
coordination from a centralized organization and payable dues per
pop/channel or something similaronly for bona-fide wireless
operators

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tim Wolfe
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 10:01 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV
whitespaces

Hey Gang, After reading this thread for a few hours, I told myself I 
would shut up and just go away, but I must say, after pacing around the 
house for awhile and reviewing all of the things that I know in my 
mind?, I must say something?(Not that anyone gives a rats behind?). 
Look, what Patrick has posted to this list(As much as I hate to say it, 
and not because it's Patrick, its because of the actual subject?) is 
TRUE!. If You are looking to find some truth to his statements?, just 
wander over to DSL Reports WISP forum( 
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/wisp )  and review some of the posts 
that have been made there over the years?. At least every other day or 
so, someone posts a question about how far they can hook up a client 
using a 1 watt amp with a 15.5dBi omni. When I first started in this 
business, if the salesperson at Ecomm, Winncomm etc. didn't know You?, 
and You asked for a 1 watt amp?, they wouldn't sell it?, or at least You

had to answer a LOT of questions as to what You were going to use it 
for?. Today, all someone has to do is go to ebay, or call any of the 
popular vendors and in most cases?, it is on a UPS truck in 24hrs headed

for Your address. I am NOT blaming any vendor for this mess any more 
than I am blaming the FCC or our industry as a police force, it just 
needs to be said that it IS heading in the wrong direction quickly(I 
think Patrick's mention of the slippery slope is accurate?). To add to 
the mess is a list of consultants that have popped up as of late?. In 
2000, if You typed in WISP as a search word?, You got almost NO hits. 
Today, when You repeat this, the result is CRAZY! ( Results 1 - 10 of 
about 3,430,000 for WISP-From Google!) . The current trend in the WISP 
business is headed right towards the same debacle as the CB radio craze 
of the 70's? (I guess I am showing my age, LOL!). That problem ended 
because the spectrum was so wasted that You couldn't even talk to 
someone down the street, and cell phone and other communications 
technologies replaced the medium. While I do not know anyone in a high 
position in the FCC at the time, I am almost positive that more than one

FCC meeting had people with their arms in the air going, OMG!, What are

we going to do??. IMHO.ahh, You know what?, scratch my opinion, 
lets just say that in my experience, I know where this entire deal is 
headed unless something major happens?, it will be a wasteland that is 
sooo bad, You won't even have to put Your coffee in the microwave to

heat it up, just open the protective steel front doors on Your house and

set it outside for a few seconds and it is ready!( OK, a little 
overboard, but I think You all get my point?). I have been in this 
business since 2000. When I started lighting up PoP's in 2001, a site 
survey yielded nothing, nada, zip zilch zero as far as other AP's or 
competitors 802.11b AP's. Now, at those same PoP's, I can find on 
average at least 8 to 10 active AP's. I know all of You have seen this?.

While some are just home user AP's, they are there non the less!. Heck, 
the other day an AP showed up with a -58!!!. I traced it down to a home 
user that had a 13.5dBi omni on his/her roof. While I have no idea why 
they did that?(My guess is to provide better coverage in their house and

back yard or maybe share their cable connection?), it is insane that a 
consumer was allowed to purchase that stuff!. If any of You think that 
we do not have an issue with people violating FCC rules?, You had better

think again!. It is not just WISP's but all types of people that include

consumers, municipal, school and business IT depts. and a few 
consultants who yesterday where saying Wendys drive thru, can I take 
Your order please? and now today they are spouting out, I are a  wi-fi

consultant. I just find it odd that the alarm bells are not ringing in 
more heads than just a few of us?.




Dennis Burgess - 2K Wireless wrote:
 Interesting thread, very good points on all fronts.

 I wanted to point out something, something that the guy who was
talking
 about consultants etc.  You are correct in that many people who are
 consultants don't know the real world implications.  Us WISPs have
first
 hand knowledge of what these things will do, what the bands, hardware,
etc
 is capable of.  

 A recent study was commissioned in St. Louis. 

[WISPA] Consultants making too much?

2007-02-07 Thread Dawn DiPietro

Dennis,

Is this this the study you are speaking of? Below are quotes from the 
article that address some of your issues.
There are a few corrections I would like to point out. This is a County 
wide deployment not just downtown St. Louis

also the consulting firm was paid $67,000 not $90,000 as you suggested.

I have also provided a link to the consulting firm that was hired for 
this study.

http://www.fusiva.com/aboutus.htm

As quoted from the article;

The St. Louis Economic Development Collaborative, an arm of the 
county's economic development council, is working with a communications 
engineering firm to determine what would be needed — and how much it 
would cost — to offer Wi-Fi access across the county.


Also quoted from the same article;

The collaborative hired NetLabs of St. Louis to do the study, paying 
the firm $67,500. Leezer said the next step of the process — after 
determining what infrastructure is needed — would be to open the process 
to Internet providers to see who could best do the job.


Also quoted from the same article;

Leezer said it's too early to say how much any system would cost the 
county. But he did say that it would likely be a public-private 
partnership in which the vendor would incur most, if not all, costs.


We are not looking at having taxpayers fund this, he said.

Full article here;
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/stlouiscitycounty/story/AB4ECCB73F716FFD86257272000E7875?OpenDocument

Regards,
Dawn DiPietro

Dennis Burgess - 2K Wireless wrote:


Interesting thread, very good points on all fronts.

I wanted to point out something, something that the guy who was talking
about consultants etc.  You are correct in that many people who are
consultants don't know the real world implications.  Us WISPs have first
hand knowledge of what these things will do, what the bands, hardware, etc
is capable of.  


A recent study was commissioned in St. Louis. This was a feasibility study
that netted some consultant over $90,000 bucks from the way I read it.
What was this for?  To see if the city of St. Louis can put in a wireless
network covering downtown.   H.  My first thought on this was

So the consultant needs to conduct a study on IF you can do this?   Does
he not know what he is doing? I can tell you I can do it, might take me a
bit to do the necessary research, but hell for that price, I will do the
research, finding bandwidth, contracts, and power/data agreements.  


This is the kind of thing that us, using license exempt bands nee to fight.
We need to make it public, that this is a misuse of taxpayer's dollars.  We
need to ensure that this is shown to cut out the small business, in favor of
large, non-local companies doing the work.  


A few other things that would help us WISPs out, someone in the FCC ready to
listen to our findings of non-complaint gear/overpowered radios, someone
that can actually say, you get me these things, the proof to say, and then
we will do something with it.  Don't happen very often.  If someone calls
the FCC, how many times have you heard anything back on them?  I have heard
interference stories, even from cell companies, (recent on the lists).

The story about the IT Person telling the WISP to use 4.9, is a prime
example of something that the FCC should be ON THE BALL about.  And also
some clarification on band usages, power limits, etc, where several
questions and things are open to interpretation, not closed down enough to
be solid in court or anywhere.


Just a few thoughts.

Dennis




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 1:05 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV
whitespaces

George,

Thats a good point. WISPs are maturing and as they grow they start to demand

name brand type gear that will let them scale, which inadvertently is 
usually certified.
Thus larger providers using certified gear.  With no disrespect meant, I 
could argue that some of WISP's straying to non-certified gear, could be 
more of a science project, or trials to test the viabilty of that type 
product line, and as those trials become successful, they likely will 
certify gear or buy versions that are certified.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: George Rogato [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 10:54 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV 
whitespaces



 


Well this was an exiting day on the lists.

I would find it hard to believe that the wisp industry is in worse shape 
now than before concerning abuse.


5 years ago when most were new and choices were far and few between, there
   



 


was a lot of pringles type wisps. Hey, they were the inovators.

But it's hard to believe that with the advent of cheap 

[WISPA] Anyone have a clue as to who this may be??

2007-02-07 Thread Tim Wolfe
This a thread that is rolling over at the DSL Reports forum, and I must 
say, it is getting stranger by the moment?



http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,1391



  


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces

2007-02-07 Thread Tom DeReggi

I wouldn't bypass the feasibility study, just the $90,000 to perform it.
The feasibility study may also be to see who is already there and what 
impact it would have on existing providers.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Dennis Burgess - 2K Wireless [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 2:11 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV 
whitespaces




Interesting thread, very good points on all fronts.

I wanted to point out something, something that the guy who was talking
about consultants etc.  You are correct in that many people who are
consultants don't know the real world implications.  Us WISPs have first
hand knowledge of what these things will do, what the bands, hardware, etc
is capable of.

A recent study was commissioned in St. Louis. This was a feasibility 
study

that netted some consultant over $90,000 bucks from the way I read it.
What was this for?  To see if the city of St. Louis can put in a wireless
network covering downtown.   H.  My first thought on this was

So the consultant needs to conduct a study on IF you can do this?   Does
he not know what he is doing? I can tell you I can do it, might take me a
bit to do the necessary research, but hell for that price, I will do the
research, finding bandwidth, contracts, and power/data agreements.

This is the kind of thing that us, using license exempt bands nee to 
fight.
We need to make it public, that this is a misuse of taxpayer's dollars. 
We
need to ensure that this is shown to cut out the small business, in favor 
of

large, non-local companies doing the work.

A few other things that would help us WISPs out, someone in the FCC ready 
to

listen to our findings of non-complaint gear/overpowered radios, someone
that can actually say, you get me these things, the proof to say, and then
we will do something with it.  Don't happen very often.  If someone calls
the FCC, how many times have you heard anything back on them?  I have 
heard

interference stories, even from cell companies, (recent on the lists).

The story about the IT Person telling the WISP to use 4.9, is a prime
example of something that the FCC should be ON THE BALL about.  And also
some clarification on band usages, power limits, etc, where several
questions and things are open to interpretation, not closed down enough 
to

be solid in court or anywhere.


Just a few thoughts.

Dennis




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 1:05 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV
whitespaces

George,

Thats a good point. WISPs are maturing and as they grow they start to 
demand


name brand type gear that will let them scale, which inadvertently is
usually certified.
Thus larger providers using certified gear.  With no disrespect meant, I
could argue that some of WISP's straying to non-certified gear, could be
more of a science project, or trials to test the viabilty of that type
product line, and as those trials become successful, they likely will
certify gear or buy versions that are certified.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: George Rogato [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 10:54 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV
whitespaces



Well this was an exiting day on the lists.

I would find it hard to believe that the wisp industry is in worse shape
now than before concerning abuse.

5 years ago when most were new and choices were far and few between, 
there



was a lot of pringles type wisps. Hey, they were the inovators.

But it's hard to believe that with the advent of cheap gear from many new
players, I'd have ahard time believing that the vast majority of wisp 
gear



is an fcc certified system or kit type product, such as a star or mt.

I think we're building a mountain out of a mole hill in even suggesting
that this an issue that has to be delt with. The industry has matured in 
a



very positive way over the past few years.

George

This is NOT an official wispa stance or position, just my own.

Patrick Leary wrote:

Here are few raw comments that might fray some nerves:

1. The FCC is not a baby sitter. 2. Mature operators (and industries as 
a



whole) follow the rules as a
matter of course and expected cost of business.
3. You are not the public, you are commercial operators financially
benefiting off the public's free spectrum and you off all users should
thus be a responsible steward of that spectrum.
4. Those not following the rules have no ethical standing to complain
about other illegal use, predatory competitors, lack of spectrum, etc.

As someone who has argued for WISP 

RE: [WISPA] Anyone have a clue as to who this may be??

2007-02-07 Thread Gino Villarini
Jeje seems like the same fishy story from etherlinx ...

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tim Wolfe
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 11:31 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Anyone have a clue as to who this may be??

This a thread that is rolling over at the DSL Reports forum, and I must 
say, it is getting stranger by the moment?


http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,1391


   

-- 
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] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces

2007-02-07 Thread Tom DeReggi

What bothers me the most is the perception of many residential consumers.
I can;t count how many sales leads I'm getting now, where the prospect is 
calling asking to buy service that they can just connect to without an 
installtion.
And when I say its over $19 and has an Install fee, they immediately say, 
Oh, I'll just go back to using one of the unsecured access points, or Harry 
Homeowner HotSpots in the community.
And they actually can.  Maybe a large nu,mber of these are their neighrbor 
with a 100ms Linksys, but I'm guessing more and more are installing that 
Omni with AMP, because as a novice, it sounds like what they are supposed to 
do, without understanding the impact.  I think whats important to realize is 
that it does little good to complain about things we can;t control, but it 
does a lot of good to change the things that we can control.  Live by 
example.  (Thats sometimes hard to do, all things concidered).


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Tim Wolfe [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 8:56 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV 
whitespaces



Hey Gang, After reading this thread for a few hours, I told myself I would 
shut up and just go away, but I must say, after pacing around the house 
for awhile and reviewing all of the things that I know in my mind?, I must 
say something?(Not that anyone gives a rats behind?). Look, what Patrick 
has posted to this list(As much as I hate to say it, and not because it's 
Patrick, its because of the actual subject?) is TRUE!. If You are looking 
to find some truth to his statements?, just wander over to DSL Reports 
WISP forum( http://www.dslreports.com/forum/wisp )  and review some of the 
posts that have been made there over the years?. At least every other day 
or so, someone posts a question about how far they can hook up a client 
using a 1 watt amp with a 15.5dBi omni. When I first started in this 
business, if the salesperson at Ecomm, Winncomm etc. didn't know You?, and 
You asked for a 1 watt amp?, they wouldn't sell it?, or at least You had 
to answer a LOT of questions as to what You were going to use it for?. 
Today, all someone has to do is go to ebay, or call any of the popular 
vendors and in most cases?, it is on a UPS truck in 24hrs headed for Your 
address. I am NOT blaming any vendor for this mess any more than I am 
blaming the FCC or our industry as a police force, it just needs to be 
said that it IS heading in the wrong direction quickly(I think Patrick's 
mention of the slippery slope is accurate?). To add to the mess is a list 
of consultants that have popped up as of late?. In 2000, if You typed in 
WISP as a search word?, You got almost NO hits. Today, when You repeat 
this, the result is CRAZY! ( Results 1 - 10 of about 3,430,000 for 
WISP-From Google!) . The current trend in the WISP business is headed 
right towards the same debacle as the CB radio craze of the 70's? (I guess 
I am showing my age, LOL!). That problem ended because the spectrum was so 
wasted that You couldn't even talk to someone down the street, and cell 
phone and other communications technologies replaced the medium. While I 
do not know anyone in a high position in the FCC at the time, I am almost 
positive that more than one FCC meeting had people with their arms in the 
air going, OMG!, What are we going to do??. IMHO.ahh, You know 
what?, scratch my opinion, lets just say that in my experience, I know 
where this entire deal is headed unless something major happens?, it will 
be a wasteland that is sooo bad, You won't even have to put Your 
coffee in the microwave to heat it up, just open the protective steel 
front doors on Your house and set it outside for a few seconds and it is 
ready!( OK, a little overboard, but I think You all get my point?). I have 
been in this business since 2000. When I started lighting up PoP's in 
2001, a site survey yielded nothing, nada, zip zilch zero as far as other 
AP's or competitors 802.11b AP's. Now, at those same PoP's, I can find on 
average at least 8 to 10 active AP's. I know all of You have seen this?. 
While some are just home user AP's, they are there non the less!. Heck, 
the other day an AP showed up with a -58!!!. I traced it down to a home 
user that had a 13.5dBi omni on his/her roof. While I have no idea why 
they did that?(My guess is to provide better coverage in their house and 
back yard or maybe share their cable connection?), it is insane that a 
consumer was allowed to purchase that stuff!. If any of You think that we 
do not have an issue with people violating FCC rules?, You had better 
think again!. It is not just WISP's but all types of people that include 
consumers, municipal, school and business IT depts. and a few 
consultants who yesterday where saying Wendys drive thru, can I take 
Your order please? 

Re: [WISPA] Anyone have a clue as to who this may be??

2007-02-07 Thread Tim Wolfe
Thats what I thought?, but I wanted some more opinion as to what this 
person is up too?



Gino Villarini wrote:

Jeje seems like the same fishy story from etherlinx ...

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tim Wolfe
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 11:31 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Anyone have a clue as to who this may be??

This a thread that is rolling over at the DSL Reports forum, and I must 
say, it is getting stranger by the moment?



http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,1391
  
  



  


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Anyone have a clue as to who this may be??

2007-02-07 Thread Dylan Oliver

Let's leave the wild speculation over at DSL Reports, thanks. No need to
further muddy the waters in this river ..

Best,
--
Dylan Oliver
Primaverity, LLC
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Anyone have a clue as to who this may be??

2007-02-07 Thread Tim Wolfe
Hmmm..., I am sorry if I ruffled Your feathers Dylan?. I really didn't 
want to start a major debate, nor do You need to reply and defend Your 
position, as I understand it and respect it 100%.  I was simply looking 
to see if anyone had seen this sales pitch before?. I am thinking maybe 
an old CO is trying to come back under a different name or there is some 
other BS that I need to be aware of?.



Dylan Oliver wrote:

Let's leave the wild speculation over at DSL Reports, thanks. No need to
further muddy the waters in this river ..

Best,


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


[WISPA] Alvarion Breeze Access

2007-02-07 Thread Carl A jeptha

Hi,
Does the above equipment have some form of Spectrum Analyzer built 
in???
Reason more than a year of happy co-location, our Tranzeo equipment seem 
to be interfered with. Before I approached the other guys I wanted some 
more info, because maybe they don't even know that there is interference.
Alas I only have a 2.4 spectrum analyzer, but Tranzeo 5.8's seem to show 
interference.


--
You have a Good Day now,


Carl A Jeptha
http://www.airnet.ca
Office Phone: 905 349-2084
Office Hours: 9:00am - 5:00pm
skype cajeptha

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


[WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards.

2007-02-07 Thread Tom DeReggi
Can someone tell me how STAROS works in regards to setting power levels to 
cards that adapative modulate.

Specifically related to Cards with on board AMPs. To be more clear

A SR2 may be speced at 26db at 1-24 mbps, but 24db at 36mbps, and 22db at 
48-56mb.
My unconfirmed understanding is, that the SR2 adds about 8db via an onboard 
external amp beyond what the card is actually set to.
So if the card is set to 16db, it will have an output power of 24db in 
theory.  However, its not that simple because the output power will change 
based on modulation.
Does STAROS drivers set the power as the constant power regardless of what 
modulation? Or does it set the TOP power? Does the power on the card only 
change if modulation drops and the power is set higher than power it suppoed 
to drop to? The radio card has no knowledge of what DB antenna is connected 
to it. And are the onboard AMPs a set output or variable output AMP? The 
point that I'm making is, how can we set the card to near MAX levels, but 
guarantee that they will never transmit above the allowed EIRP? If I have 
the conclusive answer to that question, then I can reduce the power to the 
lowest level needed for a good link, with headroom capabilty if emergencies 
occur, but more importantly, I can document what the top allowable setting 
should be for that specific configuration of a radio, so when an emergencies 
occurs, my novice staff does not break the rules inadvertently.


It gets more confusing with multiple manufacturer AMPs. Because we need to 
have knowledge of what type of AMP is added to the card. (variable or not). 
And also what input power level its expecting to minimize internal 
distortion.  I can give an example of a test I ran yesterday using a SR2 
(400mw) and a Teletronic 22db (approx 150mw) High Power card.  I thought the 
chipsets were near the same.  I got really weird results. The AP had an SR2. 
THe radios were hard set at 24mbps for testing.  At the SU we tried using 
both a SR2 and Teletronics.  The SR2 had 10db lower signal at the AP than 
SU, unexplained.  The Teletronics had 5 db lower signal at the SU than AP. 
The SR2 had 15 db higher SU gain than the Teletronics SU, at MAX power 
setting. Now I'm assuming that the SR2 was heavilly being overpowered during 
the short brief test, and we set it down to 16db power in STAROS.  Why did 
this occured differently for the Teleronics Atheros? Is there onboard AMP a 
different type than the SR2? Or less filtering? Or worse sensitivity? The 
power levels also varied significantly based on what level cloaking used, so 
we were concerned on whether both cards, equaly cloaked. There was some talk 
in the past where some Atheros revs, only did 5Mhz transmits but still 
listened to 20Mhz during receives.


(We possibly needed significant power because we were blasting through some 
trees and it was high noise environment, and we were using 30deg  antennas. 
Before we get slammed for overpowering but within legal limits, Take note, 
that this is an experimental environment, to learn the product and the 
performance of high power cards. Its likely we could have done the link 
without high powered cards, but then we would not have been able to learn 
anything.  We are also proving the viabilty of whether it hurts to have a 
HighPower card by default, and if the card still performs optimally if the 
power is turned down.  Or if the AMP in line causes significant in-line 
distortion that is disadvantageous for low power operation.).


I know there are two easy solutions...
1) Use a CM9 without an AMP, and avoid the problem.
2) Use a High quality OFDM Radio Like an Alvarion (Which we do often)

But for the sake of this thread, please ignore those two Options, as the 
purpose of the thread is to understand the specifications of STAROS and 
HighPowered Cards.


I think these kinds of questions are impairative for us to conclusively have 
the answers to, and not just have a I think thats how it works. The 
question that I'm also posing is, can this gear be certifiable with the 
current StarOS feature set? Meaning, if there is no place to add the DBi of 
attached antenna, or the radio itself would not be able to auto-set these 
levels and left up to the engineer.


I'm going to Email Teletronics and Ubiquiti on the design specs of their 
cards, but I'm sure a lot of this depends on drivers as well.


Also as a disclaimer, we wanted to rule our power supplies and Mainboard 
hardware as causes.  At the CPE, we used both a WAR2 boards and a WRAP1E. 
With the WAR board we tried using a 18V 1amp Power Supply, a 24v unregulated 
power supply, and a regulated 24V 1amp power supply. With the WRAP we only 
tried using the 18V, so not to blow it up (21volt Max spec).  The only thing 
left that we have to do, is ro replace the CPE SR2 with a different SR2 to 
make sure it is function properly, to confirm that it is the RF environment 
causing the 10 db drop in signal in one directions.  However, 

[WISPA] SF WiFi: Google Earthlink contract Municipal Broadband Hearing Today: Wed 1/7 3pm PST GMT-8

2007-02-07 Thread Kimo Crossman

Live Webcast SFGTV
http://sfgov.org/site/sfgtv_index.asp?id=11463 

ACLU is planning to present privacy concerns as well

http://aclunc.org/issues/technology/bytes_and_pieces/asset_upload_file34_4522.pdf

Or

http://tinyurl.com/3de8hh

 
-Original Message-
From: Cassandra Costello [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 2007 February 02 10:04
To: Cassandra Costello
Subject: Municipal Broadband Hearing NEXT WEDNESDAY!


HEARINGS ON MUNICIPAL Wi-Fi Google/Earthlink Project

. Do you have questions about the Google/Earthlink Wi-Fi plan?
. Are you concerned about coverage in your neighborhood?  Will I get
reception?
. What about the extra costs of hardware or faster service?
. How fast is the free service?  Will I have consistent service?
. Who do I call if there is a problem?
. Is Digital Inclusion being addressed fully?
. Is the City giving away too much control like they did with cable TV
and electricity/natural gas?
. Who is the Budget Analyst anyway and what does he do?
. What kind of privacy can I expect from Google/Earthlink?
. What alternatives are there?

If these and other questions about the Google/Earthlink Wi-Fi project concern 
you, find out more and speak your mind at the first of a series of public 
hearings at City Hall.

WHEN: Wednesday, February 7th, 2007
TIME: 3:00pm (approximate start time)
WHERE: City Hall, Board Chamber, room 250, Budget and Finance Committee


Attached is a resolution that Supervisor McGoldrick has sponsored and a link to 
a report done by the San Francisco Budget Analyst tilted  Fiscal Feasibility 
Analysis of a Municipally-Owned Citywide Wireless Broadband Network.

(See attached file: WiFi Resolution.doc)


To view a copy of the Budget Analyst report, please visit:

http://www.sfgov.org/site/budanalyst_page.asp?id=53280


--
Cassandra Costello
Legislative Assistant
Supervisor Jake McGoldrick
San Francisco  District 1
415-554-7412
Fax 415-554-7415

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces

2007-02-07 Thread Carl A jeptha
Live by example, gee does that I mean I cannot have that beer now (it is 
still morning here) :-)


Serious,
I have no ant. pointing over the biggest town in our county, to much 
noise. Local grocery store chain in the summer time powers up their 
wireless cash register for the outside garden dept. Nothing wrong with 
using two omnis to make the connection is there 


You have a Good Day now,


Carl A Jeptha
http://www.airnet.ca
Office Phone: 905 349-2084
Office Hours: 9:00am - 5:00pm
skype cajeptha



Tom DeReggi wrote:

What bothers me the most is the perception of many residential consumers.
I can;t count how many sales leads I'm getting now, where the prospect 
is calling asking to buy service that they can just connect to without 
an installtion.
And when I say its over $19 and has an Install fee, they immediately 
say, Oh, I'll just go back to using one of the unsecured access 
points, or Harry Homeowner HotSpots in the community.
And they actually can.  Maybe a large nu,mber of these are their 
neighrbor with a 100ms Linksys, but I'm guessing more and more are 
installing that Omni with AMP, because as a novice, it sounds like 
what they are supposed to do, without understanding the impact.  I 
think whats important to realize is that it does little good to 
complain about things we can;t control, but it does a lot of good to 
change the things that we can control.  Live by example.  (Thats 
sometimes hard to do, all things concidered).


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - From: Tim Wolfe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 8:56 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV 
whitespaces



Hey Gang, After reading this thread for a few hours, I told myself I 
would shut up and just go away, but I must say, after pacing around 
the house for awhile and reviewing all of the things that I know in 
my mind?, I must say something?(Not that anyone gives a rats 
behind?). Look, what Patrick has posted to this list(As much as I 
hate to say it, and not because it's Patrick, its because of the 
actual subject?) is TRUE!. If You are looking to find some truth to 
his statements?, just wander over to DSL Reports WISP forum( 
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/wisp )  and review some of the posts 
that have been made there over the years?. At least every other day 
or so, someone posts a question about how far they can hook up a 
client using a 1 watt amp with a 15.5dBi omni. When I first started 
in this business, if the salesperson at Ecomm, Winncomm etc. didn't 
know You?, and You asked for a 1 watt amp?, they wouldn't sell it?, 
or at least You had to answer a LOT of questions as to what You were 
going to use it for?. Today, all someone has to do is go to ebay, or 
call any of the popular vendors and in most cases?, it is on a UPS 
truck in 24hrs headed for Your address. I am NOT blaming any vendor 
for this mess any more than I am blaming the FCC or our industry as a 
police force, it just needs to be said that it IS heading in the 
wrong direction quickly(I think Patrick's mention of the slippery 
slope is accurate?). To add to the mess is a list of consultants 
that have popped up as of late?. In 2000, if You typed in WISP as a 
search word?, You got almost NO hits. Today, when You repeat this, 
the result is CRAZY! ( Results 1 - 10 of about 3,430,000 for 
WISP-From Google!) . The current trend in the WISP business is headed 
right towards the same debacle as the CB radio craze of the 70's? (I 
guess I am showing my age, LOL!). That problem ended because the 
spectrum was so wasted that You couldn't even talk to someone down 
the street, and cell phone and other communications technologies 
replaced the medium. While I do not know anyone in a high position in 
the FCC at the time, I am almost positive that more than one FCC 
meeting had people with their arms in the air going, OMG!, What are 
we going to do??. IMHO.ahh, You know what?, scratch my opinion, 
lets just say that in my experience, I know where this entire deal is 
headed unless something major happens?, it will be a wasteland that 
is sooo bad, You won't even have to put Your coffee in the 
microwave to heat it up, just open the protective steel front doors 
on Your house and set it outside for a few seconds and it is ready!( 
OK, a little overboard, but I think You all get my point?). I have 
been in this business since 2000. When I started lighting up PoP's in 
2001, a site survey yielded nothing, nada, zip zilch zero as far as 
other AP's or competitors 802.11b AP's. Now, at those same PoP's, I 
can find on average at least 8 to 10 active AP's. I know all of You 
have seen this?. While some are just home user AP's, they are there 
non the less!. Heck, the other day an AP showed up with a -58!!!. I 
traced it down to a home user that had a 13.5dBi omni on his/her 
roof. While I 

Re: [WISPA] Alvarion Breeze Access

2007-02-07 Thread Tom DeReggi

Yes, the VL has a very good one.
Actually to be more specific, it isn't actually a Spectrum analyzer, but a 
site survey tool to detect noise on channels. It picks up most everything, 
(with the exception of some rare Telco type grear), not just other basic 
802.11 gear, which is the flaw of most low end Wifi Site Survey features.
This may or may not have always been the case, but I know its there in V3 
and V4.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Carl A jeptha [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 11:25 AM
Subject: [WISPA] Alvarion Breeze Access



Hi,
Does the above equipment have some form of Spectrum Analyzer built 
in???
Reason more than a year of happy co-location, our Tranzeo equipment seem 
to be interfered with. Before I approached the other guys I wanted some 
more info, because maybe they don't even know that there is interference.
Alas I only have a 2.4 spectrum analyzer, but Tranzeo 5.8's seem to show 
interference.


--
You have a Good Day now,


Carl A Jeptha
http://www.airnet.ca
Office Phone: 905 349-2084
Office Hours: 9:00am - 5:00pm
skype cajeptha

--
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] Anyone have a clue as to who this may be??

2007-02-07 Thread Jack Unger
The wireless expertise that is claimed in the DSL Reports post certainly 
does NOT match the information shown on their website.


At first glance, it looks pretty bogus. I agree with Dylan that there is 
no need to muddy these waters. Anyone who needs to thrash around on this 
is certainly free to thrash around over there.


jack


Tim Wolfe wrote:
Hmmm..., I am sorry if I ruffled Your feathers Dylan?. I really didn't 
want to start a major debate, nor do You need to reply and defend Your 
position, as I understand it and respect it 100%.  I was simply looking 
to see if anyone had seen this sales pitch before?. I am thinking maybe 
an old CO is trying to come back under a different name or there is some 
other BS that I need to be aware of?.



Dylan Oliver wrote:


Let's leave the wild speculation over at DSL Reports, thanks. No need to
further muddy the waters in this river ..

Best,





--
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
Newsletters Downloadable from http://ask-wi.com/newsletters.html
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] Funding fiber to the farm

2007-02-07 Thread George Rogato
I called the RUS guy for the Pac Northwest last fall inquiring about 
grant-loan funding for fiber.

He said none except to telco's replacing copper to their pedestals.
They did have money for wireless however.

I would think the government would do us all a big favor and fund fiber 
and not wireless. Just open it up to more than the telco.


I would like to see my town do fiber.

George

Peter R. wrote:

Funding fiber to the farm
By Joan Engebretson

Feb 5, 2007 12:00 PM

Like finding well-situated season tickets to your favorite sports team, 
it can be daunting to get a telecom grant or loan from the Rural 
Utilities Service. But once the task is accomplished, the payback can be 
enormous.


Start-up communications service provider Air Advantage, for example, was 
able to use RUS grants and low-interest loans to expand its high-speed 
wireless network to serve a sparsely populated area of Michigan that had 
no high-speed connectivity.


http://telephonyonline.com/mag/telecom_funding_fiber_farm/


--
George Rogato

Welcome to WISPA

www.wispa.org

http://signup.wispa.org/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces

2007-02-07 Thread Jack Unger

Tom,

I'm just wondering who should perform the necessary feasibility study 
for free?


jack


Tom DeReggi wrote:


I wouldn't bypass the feasibility study, just the $90,000 to perform it.
The feasibility study may also be to see who is already there and what 
impact it would have on existing providers.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - From: Dennis Burgess - 2K Wireless 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 2:11 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV 
whitespaces




Interesting thread, very good points on all fronts.

I wanted to point out something, something that the guy who was talking
about consultants etc.  You are correct in that many people who are
consultants don't know the real world implications.  Us WISPs have first
hand knowledge of what these things will do, what the bands, hardware, 
etc

is capable of.

A recent study was commissioned in St. Louis. This was a feasibility 
study

that netted some consultant over $90,000 bucks from the way I read it.
What was this for?  To see if the city of St. Louis can put in a wireless
network covering downtown.   H.  My first thought on this was

So the consultant needs to conduct a study on IF you can do this?   
Does

he not know what he is doing? I can tell you I can do it, might take me a
bit to do the necessary research, but hell for that price, I will do the
research, finding bandwidth, contracts, and power/data agreements.

This is the kind of thing that us, using license exempt bands nee to 
fight.
We need to make it public, that this is a misuse of taxpayer's 
dollars. We
need to ensure that this is shown to cut out the small business, in 
favor of

large, non-local companies doing the work.

A few other things that would help us WISPs out, someone in the FCC 
ready to

listen to our findings of non-complaint gear/overpowered radios, someone
that can actually say, you get me these things, the proof to say, and 
then

we will do something with it.  Don't happen very often.  If someone calls
the FCC, how many times have you heard anything back on them?  I have 
heard

interference stories, even from cell companies, (recent on the lists).

The story about the IT Person telling the WISP to use 4.9, is a prime
example of something that the FCC should be ON THE BALL about.  And also
some clarification on band usages, power limits, etc, where several
questions and things are open to interpretation, not closed down 
enough to

be solid in court or anywhere.


Just a few thoughts.

Dennis


earlier discussions pruned



--
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
Newsletters Downloadable from http://ask-wi.com/newsletters.html
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] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces

2007-02-07 Thread Tim Wolfe
There is one thing that I failed to mention, and I thought it very 
important to point it out?. While I do see all of this happening at some 
locations, I must say that it has not hampered my ability to deploy or 
to operate my business?.. There is a HUGE difference between a hack and 
a professional. There are hacks in any business and these people are 
never around for long, as there are no shortcuts in this business no 
matter who tells You otherwise. The ability to engineer around these 
obstacles is a known thing, and all of us professionals know this fact. 
I personally consider someone running outside the regulations to be a 
hack. Just like a cloud of gnats that are in Your face when working on a 
tower or an install, these gnats eventually die or get blown away by 
the winds of change, and they really are only a temporary annoyance?. I 
made my original post to point out some of the shortcomings in the 
current system. While these shortcomings are there?, they are no 
different than any other business that You run?. Lets face it, if we 
could all run and cry about things we didn't like to the Govt. agency 
responsible for our line of work and get them to make changes that only 
benefited our line of work?,  the stock and investment markets would be 
a perfect place?. The price of crude oil would be constant, all mutual 
funds would have a guaranteed rate of return and that entire business 
would be a utopia of sorts?. We all know that will never happen, and 
that industry itself has fallen once or twice (Think-Great Depression), 
but it is still here, as there are some really smart professionals out 
there that see all of the current setbacks and figure ways around them. 
Our business is no different. While it may seem as though I am trying to 
correct my first post?(I am man enough to pull my own foot out of my 
mouth), I am really not. I re-read what I sent out, and I just wanted to 
make sure that everyone who read it took it in the right context and did 
not interpret it as a doomsday message? (It really was not meant to be a 
Chicken Little The sky is falling type post but it sure did look like 
one?).  I am just trying to point out some of the things that are 
happening in our business, and those road blocks are happening in EVERY 
business. If it were so horrible, most of us smart guys would have 
sold out a long time ago while the going was good. The WISP business is 
here to stay and the things that I mentioned in my first post are real, 
but they are not insurmountable.




Tim Wolfe wrote:
Hey Gang, After reading this thread for a few hours, I told myself I 
would shut up and just go away, but I must say, after pacing around 
the house for awhile and reviewing all of the things that I know in my 
mind?, I must say something?(Not that anyone gives a rats behind?). 
Look, what Patrick has posted to this list(As much as I hate to say 
it, and not because it's Patrick, its because of the actual subject?) 
is TRUE!. If You are looking to find some truth to his statements?, 
just wander over to DSL Reports WISP forum( 
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/wisp )  and review some of the posts 
that have been made there over the years?. At least every other day or 
so, someone posts a question about how far they can hook up a client 
using a 1 watt amp with a 15.5dBi omni. When I first started in this 
business, if the salesperson at Ecomm, Winncomm etc. didn't know You?, 
and You asked for a 1 watt amp?, they wouldn't sell it?, or at least 
You had to answer a LOT of questions as to what You were going to use 
it for?. Today, all someone has to do is go to ebay, or call any of 
the popular vendors and in most cases?, it is on a UPS truck in 24hrs 
headed for Your address. I am NOT blaming any vendor for this mess any 
more than I am blaming the FCC or our industry as a police force, it 
just needs to be said that it IS heading in the wrong direction 
quickly(I think Patrick's mention of the slippery slope is accurate?). 
To add to the mess is a list of consultants that have popped up as 
of late?. In 2000, if You typed in WISP as a search word?, You got 
almost NO hits. Today, when You repeat this, the result is CRAZY! ( 
Results 1 - 10 of about 3,430,000 for WISP-From Google!) . The current 
trend in the WISP business is headed right towards the same debacle as 
the CB radio craze of the 70's? (I guess I am showing my age, LOL!). 
That problem ended because the spectrum was so wasted that You 
couldn't even talk to someone down the street, and cell phone and 
other communications technologies replaced the medium. While I do not 
know anyone in a high position in the FCC at the time, I am almost 
positive that more than one FCC meeting had people with their arms in 
the air going, OMG!, What are we going to do??. IMHO.ahh, You 
know what?, scratch my opinion, lets just say that in my experience, I 
know where this entire deal is headed unless something major happens?, 
it will be a wasteland 

RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces

2007-02-07 Thread Mike Delp
Chadd,

I did some checking, and I found I have eight towers within 10 miles of your
north tower at your house, and five towers within 10 miles of your Carlyle
pop.  You are at the edge of our coverage area, and I haven't had the
opportunity to meet with you yet.  I would be interested in finding more
about this illegal AP in our mutual area.  I run all of my pops at 40db or
less, so I know it is not one of mine.  I have had suspicions about some of
our competitors, but I am not aware of any of them being active on the
lists.

Maybe we should get together for lunch sometime.  Call me anytime.

Call me at 618-206-4190
Or skype mike.delp

Mike


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Chadd Thompson
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 5:50 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces

In our area So IL/metro St.Louis there are some large guys who are in no
way shape or form legal, over power limits and the whole 9 yards. I can see
other WISP Omni POP's with signal levels in the -70's from over 20 miles
away using a 9dBi on my end, figure up what the EIRP on that is. The one in
this case is a well know respected WISP that visits the popular lists, I
always hope that he doesn't know that is going on and one of his guys is
responsible but I have never taken the time to call them up and talk to them
about it either.

I don't know of any WISP's in this area about 10 that I know of including
myself who are 100% legal when it comes to using only certified equipment.
Most I think stay within power limits and equivalent antennas

The other issue I see in our area is all the new start up WISP's who know
nothing about the industry, the rules, networking, and don't know squat
about RF. These guys are going to be our Achilles heal IMHO. There are too
many vendors selling stuff and they are not concerned in the least bit
whether the guys they are selling to know anything about Part15 rules. When
I started four years ago it seemed like there were not near as many
uncertified options as there are today so I came into the industry using
certified equipment and knew what the rules were. It's too easy to buy
802.xx equipment throw it up on a pole and sell internet to a few users,
more than likely they are not going to be successful but it still hurts
everyone of us.

I admit I am a glass half empty kind of guy, but I don't think there we are
going to have any usable spectrum within the next one to two years because
of stuff like this.

Chadd


 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
 Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 5:16 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces
 
 I agree that MOST wisps are likely compliant.
 Unfortuneately, it won't stay that way, if we let the industry slowly
 deteriorate and slide.
 I think compliance is a message that continually needs to be revisited,
 sorta like speed bumps. Its easy to not realize you are speeding, yet we
 all
 know where the speedometer is located.
 
 Tom DeReggi
 RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
 IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
 
 

-- 
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 outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.29/673 - Release Date: 2/6/2007
5:52 PM
 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards.

2007-02-07 Thread Lonnie Nunweiler

Our driver sets the output power using an electronics volume control
that is in the Atheros power out section.  All drivers set the power
using that control.  The precise setting is in tables provided by
Atheros for the various air rates and as you note it goes down as the
rate goes up.  This is to keep the amplifier from being over driven by
the extra carriers that happen as a result of higher rates.

The high power cards that we have tested all have a power amplifier
after the Atheros power measurement sections, so the power setting
that the driver applies is further added to by the extra amplifier.
We have no knowledge about the specs of that extra amplifer except
that it supplies from 6 to 8 dB more power.

Lonnie



On 2/7/07, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Can someone tell me how STAROS works in regards to setting power levels to
cards that adapative modulate.
Specifically related to Cards with on board AMPs. To be more clear

A SR2 may be speced at 26db at 1-24 mbps, but 24db at 36mbps, and 22db at
48-56mb.
My unconfirmed understanding is, that the SR2 adds about 8db via an onboard
external amp beyond what the card is actually set to.
So if the card is set to 16db, it will have an output power of 24db in
theory.  However, its not that simple because the output power will change
based on modulation.
Does STAROS drivers set the power as the constant power regardless of what
modulation? Or does it set the TOP power? Does the power on the card only
change if modulation drops and the power is set higher than power it suppoed
to drop to? The radio card has no knowledge of what DB antenna is connected
to it. And are the onboard AMPs a set output or variable output AMP? The
point that I'm making is, how can we set the card to near MAX levels, but
guarantee that they will never transmit above the allowed EIRP? If I have
the conclusive answer to that question, then I can reduce the power to the
lowest level needed for a good link, with headroom capabilty if emergencies
occur, but more importantly, I can document what the top allowable setting
should be for that specific configuration of a radio, so when an emergencies
occurs, my novice staff does not break the rules inadvertently.

It gets more confusing with multiple manufacturer AMPs. Because we need to
have knowledge of what type of AMP is added to the card. (variable or not).
And also what input power level its expecting to minimize internal
distortion.  I can give an example of a test I ran yesterday using a SR2
(400mw) and a Teletronic 22db (approx 150mw) High Power card.  I thought the
chipsets were near the same.  I got really weird results. The AP had an SR2.
THe radios were hard set at 24mbps for testing.  At the SU we tried using
both a SR2 and Teletronics.  The SR2 had 10db lower signal at the AP than
SU, unexplained.  The Teletronics had 5 db lower signal at the SU than AP.
The SR2 had 15 db higher SU gain than the Teletronics SU, at MAX power
setting. Now I'm assuming that the SR2 was heavilly being overpowered during
the short brief test, and we set it down to 16db power in STAROS.  Why did
this occured differently for the Teleronics Atheros? Is there onboard AMP a
different type than the SR2? Or less filtering? Or worse sensitivity? The
power levels also varied significantly based on what level cloaking used, so
we were concerned on whether both cards, equaly cloaked. There was some talk
in the past where some Atheros revs, only did 5Mhz transmits but still
listened to 20Mhz during receives.

(We possibly needed significant power because we were blasting through some
trees and it was high noise environment, and we were using 30deg  antennas.
Before we get slammed for overpowering but within legal limits, Take note,
that this is an experimental environment, to learn the product and the
performance of high power cards. Its likely we could have done the link
without high powered cards, but then we would not have been able to learn
anything.  We are also proving the viabilty of whether it hurts to have a
HighPower card by default, and if the card still performs optimally if the
power is turned down.  Or if the AMP in line causes significant in-line
distortion that is disadvantageous for low power operation.).

I know there are two easy solutions...
1) Use a CM9 without an AMP, and avoid the problem.
2) Use a High quality OFDM Radio Like an Alvarion (Which we do often)

But for the sake of this thread, please ignore those two Options, as the
purpose of the thread is to understand the specifications of STAROS and
HighPowered Cards.

I think these kinds of questions are impairative for us to conclusively have
the answers to, and not just have a I think thats how it works. The
question that I'm also posing is, can this gear be certifiable with the
current StarOS feature set? Meaning, if there is no place to add the DBi of
attached antenna, or the radio itself would not be able to auto-set these
levels and left up to the engineer.

I'm 

RE: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards.

2007-02-07 Thread Russ Kreigh

I'd be interested in the conclusive answer as well, I've heard several
different theories.

-Russ



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 11:35 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards.

Can someone tell me how STAROS works in regards to setting power levels to 
cards that adapative modulate.
Specifically related to Cards with on board AMPs. To be more clear

A SR2 may be speced at 26db at 1-24 mbps, but 24db at 36mbps, and 22db at 
48-56mb.
My unconfirmed understanding is, that the SR2 adds about 8db via an onboard 
external amp beyond what the card is actually set to.
So if the card is set to 16db, it will have an output power of 24db in 
theory.  However, its not that simple because the output power will change 
based on modulation.
Does STAROS drivers set the power as the constant power regardless of what 
modulation? Or does it set the TOP power? Does the power on the card only 
change if modulation drops and the power is set higher than power it suppoed

to drop to? The radio card has no knowledge of what DB antenna is connected 
to it. And are the onboard AMPs a set output or variable output AMP? The 
point that I'm making is, how can we set the card to near MAX levels, but 
guarantee that they will never transmit above the allowed EIRP? If I have 
the conclusive answer to that question, then I can reduce the power to the 
lowest level needed for a good link, with headroom capabilty if emergencies 
occur, but more importantly, I can document what the top allowable setting 
should be for that specific configuration of a radio, so when an emergencies

occurs, my novice staff does not break the rules inadvertently.

It gets more confusing with multiple manufacturer AMPs. Because we need to 
have knowledge of what type of AMP is added to the card. (variable or not). 
And also what input power level its expecting to minimize internal 
distortion.  I can give an example of a test I ran yesterday using a SR2 
(400mw) and a Teletronic 22db (approx 150mw) High Power card.  I thought the

chipsets were near the same.  I got really weird results. The AP had an SR2.

THe radios were hard set at 24mbps for testing.  At the SU we tried using 
both a SR2 and Teletronics.  The SR2 had 10db lower signal at the AP than 
SU, unexplained.  The Teletronics had 5 db lower signal at the SU than AP. 
The SR2 had 15 db higher SU gain than the Teletronics SU, at MAX power 
setting. Now I'm assuming that the SR2 was heavilly being overpowered during

the short brief test, and we set it down to 16db power in STAROS.  Why did 
this occured differently for the Teleronics Atheros? Is there onboard AMP a 
different type than the SR2? Or less filtering? Or worse sensitivity? The 
power levels also varied significantly based on what level cloaking used, so

we were concerned on whether both cards, equaly cloaked. There was some talk

in the past where some Atheros revs, only did 5Mhz transmits but still 
listened to 20Mhz during receives.

(We possibly needed significant power because we were blasting through some 
trees and it was high noise environment, and we were using 30deg  antennas. 
Before we get slammed for overpowering but within legal limits, Take note, 
that this is an experimental environment, to learn the product and the 
performance of high power cards. Its likely we could have done the link 
without high powered cards, but then we would not have been able to learn 
anything.  We are also proving the viabilty of whether it hurts to have a 
HighPower card by default, and if the card still performs optimally if the 
power is turned down.  Or if the AMP in line causes significant in-line 
distortion that is disadvantageous for low power operation.).

I know there are two easy solutions...
1) Use a CM9 without an AMP, and avoid the problem.
2) Use a High quality OFDM Radio Like an Alvarion (Which we do often)

But for the sake of this thread, please ignore those two Options, as the 
purpose of the thread is to understand the specifications of STAROS and 
HighPowered Cards.

I think these kinds of questions are impairative for us to conclusively have

the answers to, and not just have a I think thats how it works. The 
question that I'm also posing is, can this gear be certifiable with the 
current StarOS feature set? Meaning, if there is no place to add the DBi of 
attached antenna, or the radio itself would not be able to auto-set these 
levels and left up to the engineer.

I'm going to Email Teletronics and Ubiquiti on the design specs of their 
cards, but I'm sure a lot of this depends on drivers as well.

Also as a disclaimer, we wanted to rule our power supplies and Mainboard 
hardware as causes.  At the CPE, we used both a WAR2 boards and a WRAP1E. 
With the WAR board we tried using a 18V 1amp Power Supply, a 24v unregulated

power supply, and a regulated 24V 1amp 

Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces

2007-02-07 Thread Dylan Oliver

Am I missing something, or is 36 dBm EIRP our limit?

On 2/7/07, Mike Delp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


Chadd,

I did some checking, and I found I have eight towers within 10 miles of
your
north tower at your house, and five towers within 10 miles of your Carlyle
pop.  You are at the edge of our coverage area, and I haven't had the
opportunity to meet with you yet.  I would be interested in finding more
about this illegal AP in our mutual area.  I run all of my pops at 40db
or
less, so I know it is not one of mine.  I have had suspicions about some
of
our competitors, but I am not aware of any of them being active on the
lists.

Maybe we should get together for lunch sometime.  Call me anytime.



--
Dylan Oliver
Primaverity, LLC
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces

2007-02-07 Thread Jack Unger

+ 36 dBm EIRP


Dylan Oliver wrote:

Am I missing something, or is 36 dBm EIRP our limit?

On 2/7/07, Mike Delp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



Chadd,

I did some checking, and I found I have eight towers within 10 miles of
your
north tower at your house, and five towers within 10 miles of your 
Carlyle

pop.  You are at the edge of our coverage area, and I haven't had the
opportunity to meet with you yet.  I would be interested in finding more
about this illegal AP in our mutual area.  I run all of my pops at 40db
or
less, so I know it is not one of mine.  I have had suspicions about some
of
our competitors, but I am not aware of any of them being active on the
lists.

Maybe we should get together for lunch sometime.  Call me anytime.





--
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
Newsletters Downloadable from http://ask-wi.com/newsletters.html
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] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards.

2007-02-07 Thread Marty Dougherty
Since we have been on the subject- do these all qualify as 'certified
FCC systems? I have often wondered how it's possible to build this all
yourself and stay legal...

Marty



__

Marty Dougherty

CEO

Roadstar Internet Inc

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

703-623-4542 (Cell)

703-554-6620 (office)


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Lonnie Nunweiler
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 12:49 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards.

Our driver sets the output power using an electronics volume control
that is in the Atheros power out section.  All drivers set the power
using that control.  The precise setting is in tables provided by
Atheros for the various air rates and as you note it goes down as the
rate goes up.  This is to keep the amplifier from being over driven by
the extra carriers that happen as a result of higher rates.

The high power cards that we have tested all have a power amplifier
after the Atheros power measurement sections, so the power setting
that the driver applies is further added to by the extra amplifier.
We have no knowledge about the specs of that extra amplifer except
that it supplies from 6 to 8 dB more power.

Lonnie



On 2/7/07, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Can someone tell me how STAROS works in regards to setting power
levels to
 cards that adapative modulate.
 Specifically related to Cards with on board AMPs. To be more clear

 A SR2 may be speced at 26db at 1-24 mbps, but 24db at 36mbps, and 22db
at
 48-56mb.
 My unconfirmed understanding is, that the SR2 adds about 8db via an
onboard
 external amp beyond what the card is actually set to.
 So if the card is set to 16db, it will have an output power of 24db in
 theory.  However, its not that simple because the output power will
change
 based on modulation.
 Does STAROS drivers set the power as the constant power regardless of
what
 modulation? Or does it set the TOP power? Does the power on the card
only
 change if modulation drops and the power is set higher than power it
suppoed
 to drop to? The radio card has no knowledge of what DB antenna is
connected
 to it. And are the onboard AMPs a set output or variable output AMP?
The
 point that I'm making is, how can we set the card to near MAX levels,
but
 guarantee that they will never transmit above the allowed EIRP? If I
have
 the conclusive answer to that question, then I can reduce the power to
the
 lowest level needed for a good link, with headroom capabilty if
emergencies
 occur, but more importantly, I can document what the top allowable
setting
 should be for that specific configuration of a radio, so when an
emergencies
 occurs, my novice staff does not break the rules inadvertently.

 It gets more confusing with multiple manufacturer AMPs. Because we
need to
 have knowledge of what type of AMP is added to the card. (variable or
not).
 And also what input power level its expecting to minimize internal
 distortion.  I can give an example of a test I ran yesterday using a
SR2
 (400mw) and a Teletronic 22db (approx 150mw) High Power card.  I
thought the
 chipsets were near the same.  I got really weird results. The AP had
an SR2.
 THe radios were hard set at 24mbps for testing.  At the SU we tried
using
 both a SR2 and Teletronics.  The SR2 had 10db lower signal at the AP
than
 SU, unexplained.  The Teletronics had 5 db lower signal at the SU than
AP.
 The SR2 had 15 db higher SU gain than the Teletronics SU, at MAX power
 setting. Now I'm assuming that the SR2 was heavilly being overpowered
during
 the short brief test, and we set it down to 16db power in STAROS.  Why
did
 this occured differently for the Teleronics Atheros? Is there onboard
AMP a
 different type than the SR2? Or less filtering? Or worse sensitivity?
The
 power levels also varied significantly based on what level cloaking
used, so
 we were concerned on whether both cards, equaly cloaked. There was
some talk
 in the past where some Atheros revs, only did 5Mhz transmits but still
 listened to 20Mhz during receives.

 (We possibly needed significant power because we were blasting through
some
 trees and it was high noise environment, and we were using 30deg
antennas.
 Before we get slammed for overpowering but within legal limits, Take
note,
 that this is an experimental environment, to learn the product and the
 performance of high power cards. Its likely we could have done the
link
 without high powered cards, but then we would not have been able to
learn
 anything.  We are also proving the viabilty of whether it hurts to
have a
 HighPower card by default, and if the card still performs optimally if
the
 power is turned down.  Or if the AMP in line causes significant
in-line
 distortion that is disadvantageous for low power operation.).

 I know there are two easy solutions...
 1) Use a CM9 without an AMP, and avoid the problem.
 2) Use a High quality OFDM 

Re: [WISPA] Boeing Fails to Learn from WISPs

2007-02-07 Thread Steve Stroh


Marlon:

I confess that my jaw dropped too, especially that the weight issue  
came out better for the wired system, but in fairness, read the story  
a bit more closely.


It's not just Internet access that the wireless system was handling -  
it was also the seatback video, etc.


Given that, it makes more sense to do wired, and if you're doing  
wired, just put in an Ethernet jack.


Of course, some sharpie is going to use the wired connection to  
provide Wi-FI to the rest of the plane. It's two clicks on my Mac  
laptop.



Thanks,

Steve


On Jan 27, 2007, at Jan 27  08:04 PM, Marlon K. Schafer wrote:


200 lbs of aps and antennas  How the hell is THAT possible?

I'll bet all of my gear weighs in less than that and I've got 6000  
square miles over coverage, not just one puny little airplane!


Steve, do your old bosses need help over there or what?  You need  
to go back to work for Boing!

marlon



---

Steve Stroh
425-939-0076 | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Writing about BWIA again! - www.bwianews.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] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces

2007-02-07 Thread Tom DeReggi

I didn't say free, I said Not $90,000.
What should it cost to do a feasibilty study for a city?
Why does every city need to start from Ground Zero?

I'd rather $10,000-$20,000 go into a study with a competent engineer like 
you, and the other $$70-80,000 go into actually paying an integrator to 
build the network.
Or better yet, keep the government out of it, and let the Local WISP that 
already knows the environment and how to do it, be on the top of the list to 
get the job.
My understanding is that Downtown St Louis aint that big (But haven't been 
there), whats there to study?


Here's a MESH budget for you
$10,000 to get an OEM StarOS system FCC certified.
$10,000 for a study
(Maybe use OSLR for the MESH).
$30,000 for 60 AP repeaters ($500 each w/ antennas, mounts, and CM9s).
(Remember the CM9s support 2.4G-6G on the fly, so the integrator would have 
the flexibilty to adjust as they identified the obstacles that needed 
consideration)
$40,000 to install and troubleshoot  (5 hours per Access Point @ $100 per 
hour, plus an extra $10,000 for the final over view and documenting of what 
was found)


If the network didn't work, you'd know exactly why, and you'd have only 
spent the $90,000 to get equivellent data as the Feasibilty study.

If the network did work, you'd be done.
If the network partially worked, you'd be half way there, and would have a 
clear picture on whta moneys was needed to finish the job.


I could replicate this model using Alvarion, with their new low cost Comnet 
program, in a PtP platform. (Although would be less flexible on which 
spectrum appropriate, so maybe would need an exchange program from a 
distributor if channels needed varying). And maybe the end project would 
cost a tad bit more, if more super cells were needed than expected intially.


The point is, to many people spend time trying to predict, rather than just 
going and finsing out what the situation really is. No better way to know 
for sure, than to put up gear and listen.


Now what about support Local WISP, already has paid executives and local 
isntallers. Local WISP already has support department. Sure local WISP will 
want grant to help increase his staff size to handle demand, but thats an 
understandable cost, and a shared cost. The biggest costs are the learning 
curve and the management costs, but none of that would need to be paid, as 
the WISP already has that knowledge and experience, and peices in place, so 
the local governement would only be paying for just the new working staff 
(The hands on the end of the arms).


Sure, I understand, my approach is not realistic based on the Politicaly 
correct proceedures a governement needs to follow in an award/bid situation 
using others(taxpayers) money. Sure you could argue that those that do not 
plan in advance pay for it later. But its likely a local WISP already did 
the bulk of the planning years ago.  I'm just saying that its IRONIC that a 
network can be built for near the price of a feasibilty study, if the 
politics was not involved.  The truth is, Muni Wireless is expensive to 
launch, because they generally duplicate the effort that is already 
available locally, select an out of state provider not familiar with the 
local land,  and they have unknowlegeable people needing to make decission 
on how to use knowledgeable industry bidders.



Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 12:16 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV 
whitespaces




Tom,

I'm just wondering who should perform the necessary feasibility study for 
free?


jack


Tom DeReggi wrote:


I wouldn't bypass the feasibility study, just the $90,000 to perform it.
The feasibility study may also be to see who is already there and what 
impact it would have on existing providers.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - From: Dennis Burgess - 2K Wireless 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 2:11 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV 
whitespaces




Interesting thread, very good points on all fronts.

I wanted to point out something, something that the guy who was talking
about consultants etc.  You are correct in that many people who are
consultants don't know the real world implications.  Us WISPs have first
hand knowledge of what these things will do, what the bands, hardware, 
etc

is capable of.

A recent study was commissioned in St. Louis. This was a feasibility 
study

that netted some consultant over $90,000 bucks from the way I read it.
What was this for?  To see if the city of St. Louis can put in a 
wireless

network covering downtown.   H.  My first thought on this was

So the consultant 

RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces

2007-02-07 Thread Chadd Thompson
Yes 36 dBm.

Thanks,
Chadd

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Dylan Oliver
 Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 12:00 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces
 
 Am I missing something, or is 36 dBm EIRP our limit?
 
 On 2/7/07, Mike Delp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  Chadd,
 
  I did some checking, and I found I have eight towers within 10 miles of
  your
  north tower at your house, and five towers within 10 miles of your
 Carlyle
  pop.  You are at the edge of our coverage area, and I haven't had the
  opportunity to meet with you yet.  I would be interested in finding more
  about this illegal AP in our mutual area.  I run all of my pops at
 40db
  or
  less, so I know it is not one of mine.  I have had suspicions about some
  of
  our competitors, but I am not aware of any of them being active on the
  lists.
 
  Maybe we should get together for lunch sometime.  Call me anytime.
 
 
 --
 Dylan Oliver
 Primaverity, LLC
 --
 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] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards.

2007-02-07 Thread Tom DeReggi

Thanks Lonnie, that was helpful.
Have you tested StarOS with the Teletronic's HighPower Card?
Actually, I just looked at the Teletronic cards... They are Z-Com xg-622H 
(G-only)


I was real surprise on the results that differed from SR2s.
I'd love to use the Teletronics, just because they are cheaper (like $75), 
and Teletronics is located 5 miles from our office, with tons of inventory!! 
:-)


I'm wondering if the SR2 is a bi-directional Amp, and the Z-Com one-way TX 
only?


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Lonnie Nunweiler [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 12:48 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards.


Our driver sets the output power using an electronics volume control
that is in the Atheros power out section.  All drivers set the power
using that control.  The precise setting is in tables provided by
Atheros for the various air rates and as you note it goes down as the
rate goes up.  This is to keep the amplifier from being over driven by
the extra carriers that happen as a result of higher rates.

The high power cards that we have tested all have a power amplifier
after the Atheros power measurement sections, so the power setting
that the driver applies is further added to by the extra amplifier.
We have no knowledge about the specs of that extra amplifer except
that it supplies from 6 to 8 dB more power.

Lonnie



On 2/7/07, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Can someone tell me how STAROS works in regards to setting power levels to
cards that adapative modulate.
Specifically related to Cards with on board AMPs. To be more clear

A SR2 may be speced at 26db at 1-24 mbps, but 24db at 36mbps, and 22db at
48-56mb.
My unconfirmed understanding is, that the SR2 adds about 8db via an 
onboard

external amp beyond what the card is actually set to.
So if the card is set to 16db, it will have an output power of 24db in
theory.  However, its not that simple because the output power will change
based on modulation.
Does STAROS drivers set the power as the constant power regardless of what
modulation? Or does it set the TOP power? Does the power on the card only
change if modulation drops and the power is set higher than power it 
suppoed
to drop to? The radio card has no knowledge of what DB antenna is 
connected

to it. And are the onboard AMPs a set output or variable output AMP? The
point that I'm making is, how can we set the card to near MAX levels, but
guarantee that they will never transmit above the allowed EIRP? If I have
the conclusive answer to that question, then I can reduce the power to the
lowest level needed for a good link, with headroom capabilty if 
emergencies

occur, but more importantly, I can document what the top allowable setting
should be for that specific configuration of a radio, so when an 
emergencies

occurs, my novice staff does not break the rules inadvertently.

It gets more confusing with multiple manufacturer AMPs. Because we need to
have knowledge of what type of AMP is added to the card. (variable or 
not).

And also what input power level its expecting to minimize internal
distortion.  I can give an example of a test I ran yesterday using a SR2
(400mw) and a Teletronic 22db (approx 150mw) High Power card.  I thought 
the
chipsets were near the same.  I got really weird results. The AP had an 
SR2.

THe radios were hard set at 24mbps for testing.  At the SU we tried using
both a SR2 and Teletronics.  The SR2 had 10db lower signal at the AP than
SU, unexplained.  The Teletronics had 5 db lower signal at the SU than AP.
The SR2 had 15 db higher SU gain than the Teletronics SU, at MAX power
setting. Now I'm assuming that the SR2 was heavilly being overpowered 
during

the short brief test, and we set it down to 16db power in STAROS.  Why did
this occured differently for the Teleronics Atheros? Is there onboard AMP 
a

different type than the SR2? Or less filtering? Or worse sensitivity? The
power levels also varied significantly based on what level cloaking used, 
so
we were concerned on whether both cards, equaly cloaked. There was some 
talk

in the past where some Atheros revs, only did 5Mhz transmits but still
listened to 20Mhz during receives.

(We possibly needed significant power because we were blasting through 
some
trees and it was high noise environment, and we were using 30deg 
antennas.

Before we get slammed for overpowering but within legal limits, Take note,
that this is an experimental environment, to learn the product and the
performance of high power cards. Its likely we could have done the link
without high powered cards, but then we would not have been able to learn
anything.  We are also proving the viabilty of whether it hurts to have a
HighPower card by default, and if the card still performs optimally if the
power is turned down.  Or if the AMP in line causes significant 

Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces

2007-02-07 Thread Tom DeReggi
Not sure what post referring to. Yes, 36 dbi is our limit for standard PtMP 
APs.

But CPEs, and PTP links can go much higher in 2.4G and 5.8G.
Mimo (smart antenna) Systems also now are allowed an additional 8db in AP TX 
power.


Unfortuneately, the FCC defines PtP as a link that has 2 endpoints only, and 
not reference to a specifc antenna beamwidth.
From what I understand, although not confirmed, and not likely advisable, a 
PTP link could result in a radio link with an OMNI on each end, if 
configured to only allow 1 association (the other radio).  Doesn't mean FCC 
would Give an equipment certification for that. Could a single person, who 
wanted to install a personal private individual Mobile link/network for 
himself, run under PTP rules and an Omni, at the expense of the rest of the 
world?


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Dylan Oliver [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 12:59 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces



Am I missing something, or is 36 dBm EIRP our limit?

On 2/7/07, Mike Delp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


Chadd,

I did some checking, and I found I have eight towers within 10 miles of
your
north tower at your house, and five towers within 10 miles of your 
Carlyle

pop.  You are at the edge of our coverage area, and I haven't had the
opportunity to meet with you yet.  I would be interested in finding more
about this illegal AP in our mutual area.  I run all of my pops at 40db
or
less, so I know it is not one of mine.  I have had suspicions about some
of
our competitors, but I am not aware of any of them being active on the
lists.

Maybe we should get together for lunch sometime.  Call me anytime.



--
Dylan Oliver
Primaverity, LLC
--
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] Alvarion Breeze Access

2007-02-07 Thread Patrick Leary
Carl,

All BreezeACCESS products from the 900 MHz, 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz versions
(VL) all have built in analyzers that can look at and record over time
the interference environment from both the CPE and AU sides.

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Carl A jeptha
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 8:25 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Alvarion Breeze Access

Hi,
 Does the above equipment have some form of Spectrum Analyzer built 
in???
Reason more than a year of happy co-location, our Tranzeo equipment seem

to be interfered with. Before I approached the other guys I wanted some 
more info, because maybe they don't even know that there is
interference.
Alas I only have a 2.4 spectrum analyzer, but Tranzeo 5.8's seem to show

interference.

-- 
You have a Good Day now,


Carl A Jeptha
http://www.airnet.ca
Office Phone: 905 349-2084
Office Hours: 9:00am - 5:00pm
skype cajeptha

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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





This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals 
computer viruses(190).







 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals 
computer viruses(42).











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




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces

2007-02-07 Thread Jack Unger
The guys in the St. Louis area can correct me if I'm wrong but if my 
memory is correct, St. Louis County does not include the City of St. 
Louis (yeah, I know it sounds funny). As I recall, the two governments 
are distinctly different. This proposal may apply only to the area in 
the County outside of the City boundaries and not the City itself. Can 
anyone local to the area clarify?


Thanks,
jack


Dawn DiPietro wrote:


St. Louis County champions regionwide wireless Internet
By Clay Barbour
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
01/29/2007
WiFi users

CLAYTON — Tired of its provincial reputation, and hoping to gain an edge 
in the marketplace, St. Louis County is seriously considering a plan 
that could bring wireless Internet to the entire region.


The St. Louis Economic Development Collaborative, an arm of the county's 
economic development council, is working with a communications 
engineering firm to determine what would be needed — and how much it 
would cost — to offer Wi-Fi access across the county.


Officials also have started talking to leaders in surrounding counties 
about the possibility of joining forces and offering such a service 
regionally.


Wi-Fi is the term used to describe the service that allows customers to 
connect to the Internet without plugging into the wall. Many St. Louis 
area businesses already offer the service to their customers and a Wi-Fi 
network already covers a 42-square-block area around Kiener Plaza in 
downtown St. Louis.


But the freedom of offering it everywhere within a region has become an 
increasingly popular idea. Cities such as Philadelphia and Portland, 
Ore., have Wi-Fi systems in place. And cities such as San Francisco and 
New York are considering it.


It's a tremendous economic development tool, one that becomes more and 
more important in this high-tech age, said David Leezer, collaborative 
vice president. Just think of the versatility of something like this. 
It could really set this area apart.


The collaborative hired NetLabs of St. Louis to do the study, paying the 
firm $67,500. Leezer said the next step of the process — after 
determining what infrastructure is needed — would be to open the process 
to Internet providers to see who could best do the job.


Google and EarthLink are two of the biggest companies in the field, 
providing Wi-Fi for several major cities. But Leezer said local 
providers such as Charter Communications and ATT also could compete for 
the job.


Should the plan prove successful, the St. Louis region would be the 
first in the country to offer Wi-Fi on such a wide scale. For example, 
Philadelphia's system covers 135 square miles. St. Louis County alone 
stretches about 524 square miles.


Leezer has had meetings with the Leadership Council of Southwest 
Illinois and the Economic Development Center of St. Charles County. Both 
like the idea of regional Wi-Fi.


We are certainly interested in cooperating with St. Louis on this, 
said Greg Prestemon, St. Charles County EDC president. Approaching it 
on such a wide scale gives you the potential to do some neat things.


Patrick McKeehan, executive director of the Leadership Council, said he 
is still looking into the issue and trying to gauge its importance to 
Madison and St. Clair counties.


I think it's exciting, though, he said. I see the long-term benefit, 
but we still need to explore it.


Leezer said he has not officially met with anyone from the city of St. 
Louis or Franklin and Jefferson counties yet.


We are going to walk, before we run, he said. We want to do this. If 
someone else wants to join us, they will be welcomed.


The city of St. Louis has been working for some months to set up a 
citywide network.


Ahead of the curve

The chance to be on the cutting edge of technology is something that 
appeals to St. Louis County Executive Charlie A. Dooley, who is pushing 
the proposal.


If you want to attract businesses, you need the right kind of 
infrastructure, Dooley said. This is the infrastructure of the future. 
We are going to need it one day, so why not be ahead of the curve.


The St. Louis area suffered the country's second-worst number of job 
losses for the year that ended in November, about 3,300 jobs. While some 
experts have challenged those numbers, many still worry about the 
region's perceived struggle to attract, and keep, businesses.


The county is considering a wireless system that would offer residents 
and businesses a tiered level of service. Customers could get a low-end 
service for a small fee and a faster, more expensive, service for a 
higher price. Dooley said he would like to have it in place within the 
next three years.


Installation of such a system can be pricey. Typically the hardware 
costs about $50,000 a square mile in low-density areas and $150,000 a 
square mile for urban areas.


Leezer said it's too early to say how much any system would cost the 
county. But he did say that it would likely be a public-private 

Re: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards.

2007-02-07 Thread Tom DeReggi

do these all qualify as 'certified
FCC systems?


Parts dont get certified, systems do.
They have the capabilty to be certified.
Depends if the integrator took the time and money to get them certified.
Depends if the WISP took the care to buy them from an integrator that 
certified them.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Marty Dougherty [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 1:14 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards.



Since we have been on the subject- do these all qualify as 'certified
FCC systems? I have often wondered how it's possible to build this all
yourself and stay legal...

Marty



__

Marty Dougherty

CEO

Roadstar Internet Inc

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

703-623-4542 (Cell)

703-554-6620 (office)


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Lonnie Nunweiler
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 12:49 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards.

Our driver sets the output power using an electronics volume control
that is in the Atheros power out section.  All drivers set the power
using that control.  The precise setting is in tables provided by
Atheros for the various air rates and as you note it goes down as the
rate goes up.  This is to keep the amplifier from being over driven by
the extra carriers that happen as a result of higher rates.

The high power cards that we have tested all have a power amplifier
after the Atheros power measurement sections, so the power setting
that the driver applies is further added to by the extra amplifier.
We have no knowledge about the specs of that extra amplifer except
that it supplies from 6 to 8 dB more power.

Lonnie



On 2/7/07, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Can someone tell me how STAROS works in regards to setting power

levels to

cards that adapative modulate.
Specifically related to Cards with on board AMPs. To be more clear

A SR2 may be speced at 26db at 1-24 mbps, but 24db at 36mbps, and 22db

at

48-56mb.
My unconfirmed understanding is, that the SR2 adds about 8db via an

onboard

external amp beyond what the card is actually set to.
So if the card is set to 16db, it will have an output power of 24db in
theory.  However, its not that simple because the output power will

change

based on modulation.
Does STAROS drivers set the power as the constant power regardless of

what

modulation? Or does it set the TOP power? Does the power on the card

only

change if modulation drops and the power is set higher than power it

suppoed

to drop to? The radio card has no knowledge of what DB antenna is

connected

to it. And are the onboard AMPs a set output or variable output AMP?

The

point that I'm making is, how can we set the card to near MAX levels,

but

guarantee that they will never transmit above the allowed EIRP? If I

have

the conclusive answer to that question, then I can reduce the power to

the

lowest level needed for a good link, with headroom capabilty if

emergencies

occur, but more importantly, I can document what the top allowable

setting

should be for that specific configuration of a radio, so when an

emergencies

occurs, my novice staff does not break the rules inadvertently.

It gets more confusing with multiple manufacturer AMPs. Because we

need to

have knowledge of what type of AMP is added to the card. (variable or

not).

And also what input power level its expecting to minimize internal
distortion.  I can give an example of a test I ran yesterday using a

SR2

(400mw) and a Teletronic 22db (approx 150mw) High Power card.  I

thought the

chipsets were near the same.  I got really weird results. The AP had

an SR2.

THe radios were hard set at 24mbps for testing.  At the SU we tried

using

both a SR2 and Teletronics.  The SR2 had 10db lower signal at the AP

than

SU, unexplained.  The Teletronics had 5 db lower signal at the SU than

AP.

The SR2 had 15 db higher SU gain than the Teletronics SU, at MAX power
setting. Now I'm assuming that the SR2 was heavilly being overpowered

during

the short brief test, and we set it down to 16db power in STAROS.  Why

did

this occured differently for the Teleronics Atheros? Is there onboard

AMP a

different type than the SR2? Or less filtering? Or worse sensitivity?

The

power levels also varied significantly based on what level cloaking

used, so

we were concerned on whether both cards, equaly cloaked. There was

some talk

in the past where some Atheros revs, only did 5Mhz transmits but still
listened to 20Mhz during receives.

(We possibly needed significant power because we were blasting through

some

trees and it was high noise environment, and we were using 30deg

antennas.

Before we get slammed for overpowering but within legal limits, Take

note,

that this is 

Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces

2007-02-07 Thread Dawn DiPietro

St. Louis County champions regionwide wireless Internet
By Clay Barbour
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
01/29/2007
WiFi users

CLAYTON — Tired of its provincial reputation, and hoping to gain an edge 
in the marketplace, St. Louis County is seriously considering a plan 
that could bring wireless Internet to the entire region.


The St. Louis Economic Development Collaborative, an arm of the county's 
economic development council, is working with a communications 
engineering firm to determine what would be needed — and how much it 
would cost — to offer Wi-Fi access across the county.


Officials also have started talking to leaders in surrounding counties 
about the possibility of joining forces and offering such a service 
regionally.


Wi-Fi is the term used to describe the service that allows customers to 
connect to the Internet without plugging into the wall. Many St. Louis 
area businesses already offer the service to their customers and a Wi-Fi 
network already covers a 42-square-block area around Kiener Plaza in 
downtown St. Louis.


But the freedom of offering it everywhere within a region has become an 
increasingly popular idea. Cities such as Philadelphia and Portland, 
Ore., have Wi-Fi systems in place. And cities such as San Francisco and 
New York are considering it.


It's a tremendous economic development tool, one that becomes more and 
more important in this high-tech age, said David Leezer, collaborative 
vice president. Just think of the versatility of something like this. 
It could really set this area apart.


The collaborative hired NetLabs of St. Louis to do the study, paying the 
firm $67,500. Leezer said the next step of the process — after 
determining what infrastructure is needed — would be to open the process 
to Internet providers to see who could best do the job.


Google and EarthLink are two of the biggest companies in the field, 
providing Wi-Fi for several major cities. But Leezer said local 
providers such as Charter Communications and ATT also could compete for 
the job.


Should the plan prove successful, the St. Louis region would be the 
first in the country to offer Wi-Fi on such a wide scale. For example, 
Philadelphia's system covers 135 square miles. St. Louis County alone 
stretches about 524 square miles.


Leezer has had meetings with the Leadership Council of Southwest 
Illinois and the Economic Development Center of St. Charles County. Both 
like the idea of regional Wi-Fi.


We are certainly interested in cooperating with St. Louis on this, 
said Greg Prestemon, St. Charles County EDC president. Approaching it 
on such a wide scale gives you the potential to do some neat things.


Patrick McKeehan, executive director of the Leadership Council, said he 
is still looking into the issue and trying to gauge its importance to 
Madison and St. Clair counties.


I think it's exciting, though, he said. I see the long-term benefit, 
but we still need to explore it.


Leezer said he has not officially met with anyone from the city of St. 
Louis or Franklin and Jefferson counties yet.


We are going to walk, before we run, he said. We want to do this. If 
someone else wants to join us, they will be welcomed.


The city of St. Louis has been working for some months to set up a 
citywide network.


Ahead of the curve

The chance to be on the cutting edge of technology is something that 
appeals to St. Louis County Executive Charlie A. Dooley, who is pushing 
the proposal.


If you want to attract businesses, you need the right kind of 
infrastructure, Dooley said. This is the infrastructure of the future. 
We are going to need it one day, so why not be ahead of the curve.


The St. Louis area suffered the country's second-worst number of job 
losses for the year that ended in November, about 3,300 jobs. While some 
experts have challenged those numbers, many still worry about the 
region's perceived struggle to attract, and keep, businesses.


The county is considering a wireless system that would offer residents 
and businesses a tiered level of service. Customers could get a low-end 
service for a small fee and a faster, more expensive, service for a 
higher price. Dooley said he would like to have it in place within the 
next three years.


Installation of such a system can be pricey. Typically the hardware 
costs about $50,000 a square mile in low-density areas and $150,000 a 
square mile for urban areas.


Leezer said it's too early to say how much any system would cost the 
county. But he did say that it would likely be a public-private 
partnership in which the vendor would incur most, if not all, costs.


We are not looking at having taxpayers fund this, he said.

Philadelphia used a similar system for its Wi-Fi. EarthLink paid the 
city for the right to build and maintain a citywide system, which 
included installing transmittal devices on about 4,000 of the city's 
street lamp pole arms and providing residents and visitors with 22 area 
hot spots.


EarthLink 

[WISPA] FCC BB Numbers and the GAO

2007-02-07 Thread Peter R.

http://techdirt.com/articles/20070205/165735.shtml

--


Regards,

Peter Radizeski
RAD-INFO, Inc. - NSP Strategist
We Help ISPs Connect  Communicate
813.963.5884 
http://www.marketingIDEAguy.com



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces

2007-02-07 Thread Tom DeReggi
Whats the prupose of the feasibilty study? Sounds like grant money. Would 
the Earthlink, Google, or ATT use their own feasibilty study?

Or is this a non-technical feasibity study?

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Dawn DiPietro [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 2:50 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV 
whitespaces




St. Louis County champions regionwide wireless Internet
By Clay Barbour
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
01/29/2007
WiFi users

CLAYTON — Tired of its provincial reputation, and hoping to gain an edge 
in the marketplace, St. Louis County is seriously considering a plan that 
could bring wireless Internet to the entire region.


The St. Louis Economic Development Collaborative, an arm of the county's 
economic development council, is working with a communications engineering 
firm to determine what would be needed — and how much it would cost — to 
offer Wi-Fi access across the county.


Officials also have started talking to leaders in surrounding counties 
about the possibility of joining forces and offering such a service 
regionally.


Wi-Fi is the term used to describe the service that allows customers to 
connect to the Internet without plugging into the wall. Many St. Louis 
area businesses already offer the service to their customers and a Wi-Fi 
network already covers a 42-square-block area around Kiener Plaza in 
downtown St. Louis.


But the freedom of offering it everywhere within a region has become an 
increasingly popular idea. Cities such as Philadelphia and Portland, Ore., 
have Wi-Fi systems in place. And cities such as San Francisco and New York 
are considering it.


It's a tremendous economic development tool, one that becomes more and 
more important in this high-tech age, said David Leezer, collaborative 
vice president. Just think of the versatility of something like this. It 
could really set this area apart.


The collaborative hired NetLabs of St. Louis to do the study, paying the 
firm $67,500. Leezer said the next step of the process — after determining 
what infrastructure is needed — would be to open the process to Internet 
providers to see who could best do the job.


Google and EarthLink are two of the biggest companies in the field, 
providing Wi-Fi for several major cities. But Leezer said local providers 
such as Charter Communications and ATT also could compete for the job.


Should the plan prove successful, the St. Louis region would be the first 
in the country to offer Wi-Fi on such a wide scale. For example, 
Philadelphia's system covers 135 square miles. St. Louis County alone 
stretches about 524 square miles.


Leezer has had meetings with the Leadership Council of Southwest Illinois 
and the Economic Development Center of St. Charles County. Both like the 
idea of regional Wi-Fi.


We are certainly interested in cooperating with St. Louis on this, said 
Greg Prestemon, St. Charles County EDC president. Approaching it on such 
a wide scale gives you the potential to do some neat things.


Patrick McKeehan, executive director of the Leadership Council, said he is 
still looking into the issue and trying to gauge its importance to Madison 
and St. Clair counties.


I think it's exciting, though, he said. I see the long-term benefit, 
but we still need to explore it.


Leezer said he has not officially met with anyone from the city of St. 
Louis or Franklin and Jefferson counties yet.


We are going to walk, before we run, he said. We want to do this. If 
someone else wants to join us, they will be welcomed.


The city of St. Louis has been working for some months to set up a 
citywide network.


Ahead of the curve

The chance to be on the cutting edge of technology is something that 
appeals to St. Louis County Executive Charlie A. Dooley, who is pushing 
the proposal.


If you want to attract businesses, you need the right kind of 
infrastructure, Dooley said. This is the infrastructure of the future. 
We are going to need it one day, so why not be ahead of the curve.


The St. Louis area suffered the country's second-worst number of job 
losses for the year that ended in November, about 3,300 jobs. While some 
experts have challenged those numbers, many still worry about the region's 
perceived struggle to attract, and keep, businesses.


The county is considering a wireless system that would offer residents and 
businesses a tiered level of service. Customers could get a low-end 
service for a small fee and a faster, more expensive, service for a higher 
price. Dooley said he would like to have it in place within the next three 
years.


Installation of such a system can be pricey. Typically the hardware costs 
about $50,000 a square mile in low-density areas and $150,000 a square 
mile for urban areas.


Leezer said it's too early to say how much any system would cost the 
county. 

RE: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards.

2007-02-07 Thread Marty Dougherty
I don't seem much discussions about integrators or wisps going to the
FCC to get these parts certified into a system. So, is it safe to safe
that most microtik installs are NOT certified and are therefore not
legal?

Seems to me like this would be a big issue for us all to address??

Marty

__

Marty Dougherty

CEO

Roadstar Internet Inc

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

703-623-4542 (Cell)

703-554-6620 (office)


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 3:21 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards.

do these all qualify as 'certified
 FCC systems?

Parts dont get certified, systems do.
They have the capabilty to be certified.
Depends if the integrator took the time and money to get them certified.
Depends if the WISP took the care to buy them from an integrator that 
certified them.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Marty Dougherty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 1:14 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards.


 Since we have been on the subject- do these all qualify as 'certified
 FCC systems? I have often wondered how it's possible to build this all
 yourself and stay legal...

 Marty



 __

 Marty Dougherty

 CEO

 Roadstar Internet Inc

 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 703-623-4542 (Cell)

 703-554-6620 (office)


 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
 Behalf Of Lonnie Nunweiler
 Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 12:49 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards.

 Our driver sets the output power using an electronics volume control
 that is in the Atheros power out section.  All drivers set the power
 using that control.  The precise setting is in tables provided by
 Atheros for the various air rates and as you note it goes down as the
 rate goes up.  This is to keep the amplifier from being over driven by
 the extra carriers that happen as a result of higher rates.

 The high power cards that we have tested all have a power amplifier
 after the Atheros power measurement sections, so the power setting
 that the driver applies is further added to by the extra amplifier.
 We have no knowledge about the specs of that extra amplifer except
 that it supplies from 6 to 8 dB more power.

 Lonnie



 On 2/7/07, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Can someone tell me how STAROS works in regards to setting power
 levels to
 cards that adapative modulate.
 Specifically related to Cards with on board AMPs. To be more
clear

 A SR2 may be speced at 26db at 1-24 mbps, but 24db at 36mbps, and
22db
 at
 48-56mb.
 My unconfirmed understanding is, that the SR2 adds about 8db via an
 onboard
 external amp beyond what the card is actually set to.
 So if the card is set to 16db, it will have an output power of 24db
in
 theory.  However, its not that simple because the output power will
 change
 based on modulation.
 Does STAROS drivers set the power as the constant power regardless of
 what
 modulation? Or does it set the TOP power? Does the power on the card
 only
 change if modulation drops and the power is set higher than power it
 suppoed
 to drop to? The radio card has no knowledge of what DB antenna is
 connected
 to it. And are the onboard AMPs a set output or variable output AMP?
 The
 point that I'm making is, how can we set the card to near MAX levels,
 but
 guarantee that they will never transmit above the allowed EIRP? If I
 have
 the conclusive answer to that question, then I can reduce the power
to
 the
 lowest level needed for a good link, with headroom capabilty if
 emergencies
 occur, but more importantly, I can document what the top allowable
 setting
 should be for that specific configuration of a radio, so when an
 emergencies
 occurs, my novice staff does not break the rules inadvertently.

 It gets more confusing with multiple manufacturer AMPs. Because we
 need to
 have knowledge of what type of AMP is added to the card. (variable or
 not).
 And also what input power level its expecting to minimize internal
 distortion.  I can give an example of a test I ran yesterday using a
 SR2
 (400mw) and a Teletronic 22db (approx 150mw) High Power card.  I
 thought the
 chipsets were near the same.  I got really weird results. The AP had
 an SR2.
 THe radios were hard set at 24mbps for testing.  At the SU we tried
 using
 both a SR2 and Teletronics.  The SR2 had 10db lower signal at the AP
 than
 SU, unexplained.  The Teletronics had 5 db lower signal at the SU
than
 AP.
 The SR2 had 15 db higher SU gain than the Teletronics SU, at MAX
power
 setting. Now I'm assuming that the SR2 was heavilly being overpowered
 during
 the short brief test, 

Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV whitespaces

2007-02-07 Thread Jack Unger

http://www.westendword.com/moxie/news/county-looks-at-implement.shtml

http://stlouis.bizjournals.com/stlouis/stories/2006/12/25/story13.html


Elected officeholders,their staff, and local business leaders are not 
normally technology experts. They need help to understand how to proceed 
to build and manage a wireless network. There are big bucks and big 
reputations at stake and they want as much assurance as possible that 
the network will actually work. If Earthlink, Google, and ATT did their 
own studies then somebody who is technically knowledgable (a 
consultant?) would have to evaluate the results (often comparing apples 
to oranges) and provide an analysis for the political and business 
leaders. Better to do one study up front and then have the vendors reply 
with their ability to meet the needs and requirements specified in the 
upfront study. The vendors WILL have to do their own research to 
supplement the study - at least they should if they want to understand 
what they will actually have to do to deliver the results outlined in 
the study.


jack


Tom DeReggi wrote:

Whats the prupose of the feasibilty study? Sounds like grant money. 
Would the Earthlink, Google, or ATT use their own feasibilty study?

Or is this a non-technical feasibity study?

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - From: Dawn DiPietro [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 2:50 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV 
whitespaces




St. Louis County champions regionwide wireless Internet
By Clay Barbour
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
01/29/2007
WiFi users

CLAYTON — Tired of its provincial reputation, and hoping to gain an 
edge in the marketplace, St. Louis County is seriously considering a 
plan that could bring wireless Internet to the entire region.


The St. Louis Economic Development Collaborative, an arm of the 
county's economic development council, is working with a 
communications engineering firm to determine what would be needed — 
and how much it would cost — to offer Wi-Fi access across the county.


Officials also have started talking to leaders in surrounding counties 
about the possibility of joining forces and offering such a service 
regionally.


Wi-Fi is the term used to describe the service that allows customers 
to connect to the Internet without plugging into the wall. Many St. 
Louis area businesses already offer the service to their customers and 
a Wi-Fi network already covers a 42-square-block area around Kiener 
Plaza in downtown St. Louis.


But the freedom of offering it everywhere within a region has become 
an increasingly popular idea. Cities such as Philadelphia and 
Portland, Ore., have Wi-Fi systems in place. And cities such as San 
Francisco and New York are considering it.


It's a tremendous economic development tool, one that becomes more 
and more important in this high-tech age, said David Leezer, 
collaborative vice president. Just think of the versatility of 
something like this. It could really set this area apart.


The collaborative hired NetLabs of St. Louis to do the study, paying 
the firm $67,500. Leezer said the next step of the process — after 
determining what infrastructure is needed — would be to open the 
process to Internet providers to see who could best do the job.


Google and EarthLink are two of the biggest companies in the field, 
providing Wi-Fi for several major cities. But Leezer said local 
providers such as Charter Communications and ATT also could compete 
for the job.


Should the plan prove successful, the St. Louis region would be the 
first in the country to offer Wi-Fi on such a wide scale. For example, 
Philadelphia's system covers 135 square miles. St. Louis County alone 
stretches about 524 square miles.


Leezer has had meetings with the Leadership Council of Southwest 
Illinois and the Economic Development Center of St. Charles County. 
Both like the idea of regional Wi-Fi.


We are certainly interested in cooperating with St. Louis on this, 
said Greg Prestemon, St. Charles County EDC president. Approaching it 
on such a wide scale gives you the potential to do some neat things.


Patrick McKeehan, executive director of the Leadership Council, said 
he is still looking into the issue and trying to gauge its importance 
to Madison and St. Clair counties.


I think it's exciting, though, he said. I see the long-term 
benefit, but we still need to explore it.


Leezer said he has not officially met with anyone from the city of St. 
Louis or Franklin and Jefferson counties yet.


We are going to walk, before we run, he said. We want to do this. 
If someone else wants to join us, they will be welcomed.


The city of St. Louis has been working for some months to set up a 
citywide network.


Ahead of the curve

The chance to be on the cutting edge of technology is something that 
appeals to St. Louis 

Re: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards.

2007-02-07 Thread Lonnie Nunweiler

We have not tested with very many high power cards.  Using the right
antenna we can go 52 miles with a CM9, so high power is not a hot
topic here.

Our approach to NLOS is more to use microcells to fill in areas that
cannot see the main towers.  Since we can do a repeater with 1 msec
ping times it is no big deal to hop through a few repeaters to hit an
area and the prices are way cheaper than the late '90's.

Lonnie



On 2/7/07, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Thanks Lonnie, that was helpful.
Have you tested StarOS with the Teletronic's HighPower Card?
Actually, I just looked at the Teletronic cards... They are Z-Com xg-622H
(G-only)

I was real surprise on the results that differed from SR2s.
I'd love to use the Teletronics, just because they are cheaper (like $75),
and Teletronics is located 5 miles from our office, with tons of inventory!!
:-)

I'm wondering if the SR2 is a bi-directional Amp, and the Z-Com one-way TX
only?

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message -
From: Lonnie Nunweiler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 12:48 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards.


Our driver sets the output power using an electronics volume control
that is in the Atheros power out section.  All drivers set the power
using that control.  The precise setting is in tables provided by
Atheros for the various air rates and as you note it goes down as the
rate goes up.  This is to keep the amplifier from being over driven by
the extra carriers that happen as a result of higher rates.

The high power cards that we have tested all have a power amplifier
after the Atheros power measurement sections, so the power setting
that the driver applies is further added to by the extra amplifier.
We have no knowledge about the specs of that extra amplifer except
that it supplies from 6 to 8 dB more power.

Lonnie



On 2/7/07, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Can someone tell me how STAROS works in regards to setting power levels to
 cards that adapative modulate.
 Specifically related to Cards with on board AMPs. To be more clear

 A SR2 may be speced at 26db at 1-24 mbps, but 24db at 36mbps, and 22db at
 48-56mb.
 My unconfirmed understanding is, that the SR2 adds about 8db via an
 onboard
 external amp beyond what the card is actually set to.
 So if the card is set to 16db, it will have an output power of 24db in
 theory.  However, its not that simple because the output power will change
 based on modulation.
 Does STAROS drivers set the power as the constant power regardless of what
 modulation? Or does it set the TOP power? Does the power on the card only
 change if modulation drops and the power is set higher than power it
 suppoed
 to drop to? The radio card has no knowledge of what DB antenna is
 connected
 to it. And are the onboard AMPs a set output or variable output AMP? The
 point that I'm making is, how can we set the card to near MAX levels, but
 guarantee that they will never transmit above the allowed EIRP? If I have
 the conclusive answer to that question, then I can reduce the power to the
 lowest level needed for a good link, with headroom capabilty if
 emergencies
 occur, but more importantly, I can document what the top allowable setting
 should be for that specific configuration of a radio, so when an
 emergencies
 occurs, my novice staff does not break the rules inadvertently.

 It gets more confusing with multiple manufacturer AMPs. Because we need to
 have knowledge of what type of AMP is added to the card. (variable or
 not).
 And also what input power level its expecting to minimize internal
 distortion.  I can give an example of a test I ran yesterday using a SR2
 (400mw) and a Teletronic 22db (approx 150mw) High Power card.  I thought
 the
 chipsets were near the same.  I got really weird results. The AP had an
 SR2.
 THe radios were hard set at 24mbps for testing.  At the SU we tried using
 both a SR2 and Teletronics.  The SR2 had 10db lower signal at the AP than
 SU, unexplained.  The Teletronics had 5 db lower signal at the SU than AP.
 The SR2 had 15 db higher SU gain than the Teletronics SU, at MAX power
 setting. Now I'm assuming that the SR2 was heavilly being overpowered
 during
 the short brief test, and we set it down to 16db power in STAROS.  Why did
 this occured differently for the Teleronics Atheros? Is there onboard AMP
 a
 different type than the SR2? Or less filtering? Or worse sensitivity? The
 power levels also varied significantly based on what level cloaking used,
 so
 we were concerned on whether both cards, equaly cloaked. There was some
 talk
 in the past where some Atheros revs, only did 5Mhz transmits but still
 listened to 20Mhz during receives.

 (We possibly needed significant power because we were blasting through
 some
 trees and it was high noise environment, and we were using 30deg
 antennas.
 Before we get 

[WISPA] BGP Question

2007-02-07 Thread Don Annas
When peering with multiple providers, is it a requirement that you pick a
primary to send and receive traffic or can you not prepend AS hops and allow
traffic to arrive to you via the 'best' BGP route.

As a VoIP provider, it is important that traffic enter and leave via the
same provider.  We currently have a primary provider picked and force
traffic in by incrementing the AS prepends on our other BGP peers.

There is still some traffic that enters our network via the other peers
regardless of the AS prepends and we are looking to either force all traffic
in and out one provider as long as that peer is up, or preferably, allow
traffic to enter whichever peer is the best route while forcing the return
traffic back out the connection that the traffic entered.

- Don Annas
Triad Telecom, Inc.
336.510.3800 x111
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.411 / Virus Database: 268.17.29/673 - Release Date: 2/6/2007
 


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] BGP Question

2007-02-07 Thread Matt Liotta
Prepending is not an effective way of forcing other providers to send 
their traffic through your preferred upstream. In fact, there is no good 
way to do it at all. It is far better to just have quality upstreams.


-Matt

Don Annas wrote:

When peering with multiple providers, is it a requirement that you pick a
primary to send and receive traffic or can you not prepend AS hops and allow
traffic to arrive to you via the 'best' BGP route.

As a VoIP provider, it is important that traffic enter and leave via the
same provider.  We currently have a primary provider picked and force
traffic in by incrementing the AS prepends on our other BGP peers.

There is still some traffic that enters our network via the other peers
regardless of the AS prepends and we are looking to either force all traffic
in and out one provider as long as that peer is up, or preferably, allow
traffic to enter whichever peer is the best route while forcing the return
traffic back out the connection that the traffic entered.

- Don Annas
Triad Telecom, Inc.
336.510.3800 x111
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

  


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


[WISPA] Routers

2007-02-07 Thread Ross Cornett
Hey guys, I hope some of you can enlighten me on what is the best line of 
router out there for home and small business.  We have used linksys and netgear 
and their broadband routers have not held up very well.   Anyone have any ideas 
as to what they are using and what works best?  I am tired of replacing these 
things and explaining to the customer their lack of quality.  Your feedback is 
very welcome.


Ross Cornett
VP 
217 342 6201 ex 7
HofNet Communications, Inc.
www.HofNet-Communications.com

HofNet-Communications.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] Routers

2007-02-07 Thread George Rogato

Ross Cornett wrote:

Hey guys, I hope some of you can enlighten me on what is the best line of 
router out there for home and small business.  We have used linksys and netgear 
and their broadband routers have not held up very well.   Anyone have any ideas 
as to what they are using and what works best?  I am tired of replacing these 
things and explaining to the customer their lack of quality.  Your feedback is 
very welcome.


Ross Cornett
VP 
217 342 6201 ex 7

HofNet Communications, Inc.
www.HofNet-Communications.com

HofNet-Communications.com


One more reason I use a cpe with built in router.

I know your pain.

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

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Routers

2007-02-07 Thread Ross Cornett
I too have that idea in action, but the port forwarding options are non 
existant... There has to be something out there that works...


Thanks for the feedback.

- Original Message - 
From: George Rogato [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 5:15 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routers



Ross Cornett wrote:
Hey guys, I hope some of you can enlighten me on what is the best line of 
router out there for home and small business.  We have used linksys and 
netgear and their broadband routers have not held up very well.   Anyone 
have any ideas as to what they are using and what works best?  I am tired 
of replacing these things and explaining to the customer their lack of 
quality.  Your feedback is very welcome.



Ross Cornett
VP 217 342 6201 ex 7
HofNet Communications, Inc.
www.HofNet-Communications.com

HofNet-Communications.com


One more reason I use a cpe with built in router.

I know your pain.

George
--
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] Routers

2007-02-07 Thread N.W.
When we used bridged CPEs, we installed TrendNet, Linksys, or Netgear 
routers. All of them have held up for about 4 years now. Several 
failures on the Netgears, which were the majority, but we also bought 
them in bulk and as refurbs. That's what is cheapest and appears to work 
well. We now install CPEs that are also routers, so at most the clients 
need a desktop AP or switch in their home/office.


-Nick


Ross Cornett wrote:

Hey guys, I hope some of you can enlighten me on what is the best line of 
router out there for home and small business.  We have used linksys and netgear 
and their broadband routers have not held up very well.   Anyone have any ideas 
as to what they are using and what works best?  I am tired of replacing these 
things and explaining to the customer their lack of quality.  Your feedback is 
very welcome.


Ross Cornett
VP 
217 342 6201 ex 7

HofNet Communications, Inc.
www.HofNet-Communications.com

HofNet-Communications.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] Routers

2007-02-07 Thread Tom DeReggi

Nothing. We have to deal with low quality in a commodity world.

However another way to approach it might be, who has the best RMA policy. 
Linksys's RMA policy is non-existent, and a provider needs to be prepared to 
eat any failures. That comment is based on, the many hoops linksys makes you 
go through before allowing a return, which cost way more to do than the cost 
to buy a new router.  This is the BIG reason, that we have converted 50% of 
all new installs to NON-Linksys routers.  Linksys makes my favorite, Home 
Router OS, but I can;t stomach giving all my money to those that don't honor 
their warrantees.  Belkin on the other hand has been fabulaous.  No 
questions asked, jsut send it back, and get a new one in a few days.  Belkin 
also has a nice Default portal page you can see before logining in to see 
private info.  Belkin comes with a bundled Content Control trial. Belkon can 
opperate as an AP (Bridge) or Nat Router, and I think also WDS.  The only 
reason we don't use Belkin for all our installs is that Linksys is what our 
local distributor carries, and because Belkin had some PPPOE bugs, which 
prevented it from Auto-reconnecting after a disconnect, unless you reboot 
it. So we still use Linksys for PPPOE clients.  However that PPOE bug was 
identified over a year ago, maybe its been fixed by now?


The Belkin has a higher price tag unfortuneately, but it is a N router, 
and I prefer to support the vendors that honor their warrantees.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Ross Cornett [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 5:57 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Routers


Hey guys, I hope some of you can enlighten me on what is the best line of 
router out there for home and small business.  We have used linksys and 
netgear and their broadband routers have not held up very well.   Anyone 
have any ideas as to what they are using and what works best?  I am tired of 
replacing these things and explaining to the customer their lack of quality. 
Your feedback is very welcome.



Ross Cornett
VP
217 342 6201 ex 7
HofNet Communications, Inc.
www.HofNet-Communications.com

HofNet-Communications.com
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Routers

2007-02-07 Thread cw
We use WAR boards but if it's resi wireless LAN needed, these work fine 
http://www.pcbay.net/wgnewirowisu.html. They have Atheros chipset and are 
$22 delivered. Throw them away when they die. All the consumer grade stuff 
lasts the same length of time.


Ross Cornett wrote:

Hey guys, I hope some of you can enlighten me on what is the best line of 
router out there for home and small business.  We have used linksys and netgear 
and their broadband routers have not held up very well.   Anyone have any ideas 
as to what they are using and what works best?  I am tired of replacing these 
things and explaining to the customer their lack of quality.  Your feedback is 
very welcome.


Ross Cornett
VP 
217 342 6201 ex 7

HofNet Communications, Inc.
www.HofNet-Communications.com

HofNet-Communications.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] Routers

2007-02-07 Thread Butch Evans

On Wed, 7 Feb 2007, Ross Cornett wrote:

Hey guys, I hope some of you can enlighten me on what is the best 
line of router out there for home and small business.  We have used 
linksys and netgear and their broadband routers have not held up 
very well.  Anyone have any ideas as to what they are using and 
what works best?  I am tired of replacing these things and 
explaining to the customer their lack of quality.  Your feedback is 
very welcome.


The answer to this question lies, at least in part, what you are 
wanting to accomplish.  Good low-end routers I've used include 
trendnet and Belkin.  I really like the Trendnet, as they are cheap 
and have been pretty reliable.  As someone else mentioned, the 
Belkin offers some nice features for the end user to see some data 
without having to divulge a password (so they can't mess up the 
config).  Also, the radio/router combo is very nice.  In fact, this 
is my preferred setup.  Deliberant has some good radios with built 
in router.  Wisp-router sells what I think they call CPE03 that has 
router functionality built in.


Beyond that, if you want higher end, Mikrotik now has a board (the 
RB150) that is a 5 Ethernet port board that runs about $70.  You 
would need to add about $20-30 for case and power supply, but for 
about $100, you'd have a VERY functional router.  Last I heard, the 
cases were scarce (or non-existent), however.


--
Butch Evans
Network Engineering and Security Consulting
573-276-2879
http://www.butchevans.com/
My calendar: http://tinyurl.com/y24ad6
Training Partners: http://tinyurl.com/smfkf
Mikrotik Certified Consultant
http://www.mikrotik.com/consultants.html
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] BGP Question

2007-02-07 Thread Butch Evans

On Wed, 7 Feb 2007, Don Annas wrote:

When peering with multiple providers, is it a requirement that you 
pick a primary to send and receive traffic or can you not prepend 
AS hops and allow traffic to arrive to you via the 'best' BGP 
route.


There is no way to insure that traffic will come back to you on 
any particular interface/connection.  Prepending is the best 
method to add to the probability that the other route will be 
used.  It should be noted that it is possible that a BGP Peer will 
remove your prepended hops, however.


--
Butch Evans
Network Engineering and Security Consulting
573-276-2879
http://www.butchevans.com/
My calendar: http://tinyurl.com/y24ad6
Training Partners: http://tinyurl.com/smfkf
Mikrotik Certified Consultant
http://www.mikrotik.com/consultants.html
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


[WISPA] Speedtest with BGP

2007-02-07 Thread Don Annas
OK.. So now that we are running BGP between multiple providers, we have
noticed that none of the Internet speedtest are measuring results anywhere
close.  One of our circuits are 100MB and the other is 45MB.  When running a
speed test, it typically shows less than 2MB up or down.  When I do a file
transfer to an outside host, I can tell that I am getting great speed beyond
what the speedtest will report

Could this be due to the fact that traffic may route out one provider and
back in the other?

- Don

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Butch Evans
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 9:12 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] BGP Question

On Wed, 7 Feb 2007, Don Annas wrote:

When peering with multiple providers, is it a requirement that you 
pick a primary to send and receive traffic or can you not prepend 
AS hops and allow traffic to arrive to you via the 'best' BGP 
route.

There is no way to insure that traffic will come back to you on 
any particular interface/connection.  Prepending is the best 
method to add to the probability that the other route will be 
used.  It should be noted that it is possible that a BGP Peer will 
remove your prepended hops, however.

-- 
Butch Evans
Network Engineering and Security Consulting
573-276-2879
http://www.butchevans.com/
My calendar: http://tinyurl.com/y24ad6
Training Partners: http://tinyurl.com/smfkf
Mikrotik Certified Consultant
http://www.mikrotik.com/consultants.html
-- 
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: 7.1.411 / Virus Database: 268.17.29/673 - Release Date: 2/6/2007
 

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.411 / Virus Database: 268.17.29/673 - Release Date: 2/6/2007
 


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


RE: SPAM ? RE: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards.

2007-02-07 Thread Mac Dearman
Oh my lord Marty!

I think you are trying to get Patrick back in high gear on his soap box!! 

:-)

SHAME SHAME!!



Mac Dearman
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Marty Dougherty
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 12:15 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: SPAM ? RE: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards.

Since we have been on the subject- do these all qualify as 'certified
FCC systems? I have often wondered how it's possible to build this all
yourself and stay legal...

Marty



__

Marty Dougherty

CEO

Roadstar Internet Inc

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

703-623-4542 (Cell)

703-554-6620 (office)


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Lonnie Nunweiler
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 12:49 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Understanding STAROS with High Power cards.

Our driver sets the output power using an electronics volume control
that is in the Atheros power out section.  All drivers set the power
using that control.  The precise setting is in tables provided by
Atheros for the various air rates and as you note it goes down as the
rate goes up.  This is to keep the amplifier from being over driven by
the extra carriers that happen as a result of higher rates.

The high power cards that we have tested all have a power amplifier
after the Atheros power measurement sections, so the power setting
that the driver applies is further added to by the extra amplifier.
We have no knowledge about the specs of that extra amplifer except
that it supplies from 6 to 8 dB more power.

Lonnie



On 2/7/07, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Can someone tell me how STAROS works in regards to setting power
levels to
 cards that adapative modulate.
 Specifically related to Cards with on board AMPs. To be more clear

 A SR2 may be speced at 26db at 1-24 mbps, but 24db at 36mbps, and 22db
at
 48-56mb.
 My unconfirmed understanding is, that the SR2 adds about 8db via an
onboard
 external amp beyond what the card is actually set to.
 So if the card is set to 16db, it will have an output power of 24db in
 theory.  However, its not that simple because the output power will
change
 based on modulation.
 Does STAROS drivers set the power as the constant power regardless of
what
 modulation? Or does it set the TOP power? Does the power on the card
only
 change if modulation drops and the power is set higher than power it
suppoed
 to drop to? The radio card has no knowledge of what DB antenna is
connected
 to it. And are the onboard AMPs a set output or variable output AMP?
The
 point that I'm making is, how can we set the card to near MAX levels,
but
 guarantee that they will never transmit above the allowed EIRP? If I
have
 the conclusive answer to that question, then I can reduce the power to
the
 lowest level needed for a good link, with headroom capabilty if
emergencies
 occur, but more importantly, I can document what the top allowable
setting
 should be for that specific configuration of a radio, so when an
emergencies
 occurs, my novice staff does not break the rules inadvertently.

 It gets more confusing with multiple manufacturer AMPs. Because we
need to
 have knowledge of what type of AMP is added to the card. (variable or
not).
 And also what input power level its expecting to minimize internal
 distortion.  I can give an example of a test I ran yesterday using a
SR2
 (400mw) and a Teletronic 22db (approx 150mw) High Power card.  I
thought the
 chipsets were near the same.  I got really weird results. The AP had
an SR2.
 THe radios were hard set at 24mbps for testing.  At the SU we tried
using
 both a SR2 and Teletronics.  The SR2 had 10db lower signal at the AP
than
 SU, unexplained.  The Teletronics had 5 db lower signal at the SU than
AP.
 The SR2 had 15 db higher SU gain than the Teletronics SU, at MAX power
 setting. Now I'm assuming that the SR2 was heavilly being overpowered
during
 the short brief test, and we set it down to 16db power in STAROS.  Why
did
 this occured differently for the Teleronics Atheros? Is there onboard
AMP a
 different type than the SR2? Or less filtering? Or worse sensitivity?
The
 power levels also varied significantly based on what level cloaking
used, so
 we were concerned on whether both cards, equaly cloaked. There was
some talk
 in the past where some Atheros revs, only did 5Mhz transmits but still
 listened to 20Mhz during receives.

 (We possibly needed significant power because we were blasting through
some
 trees and it was high noise environment, and we were using 30deg
antennas.
 Before we get slammed for overpowering but within legal limits, Take
note,
 that this is an experimental environment, to learn the product and the
 performance of high power cards. Its likely we could have done the
link
 without high powered cards, but then we would not have been able to
learn
 anything.  We are also proving 

[WISPA] MT hotspot

2007-02-07 Thread Travis Johnson




Hi, 

We have several free hotspots that we use Linksys firewall/access
points. The Linksys also serves the DHCP address and lease time, etc. 

Is there a way with a Mikrotik to have a simple splash screen appear
with each new MAC address that comes from the same IP address? Each
real IP on the Linksys has a default gateway of a MT router.

Travis
Microserv


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Routers

2007-02-07 Thread Travis Johnson

Hi,

Are you serious? You honestly expect a company to honor a warranty for a 
lifetime, especially on a $30 item? How do you expect them to stay in 
business?


Travis
Microserv

KyWiFi LLC wrote:

We use the Belkin F5D7230-4 wireless router exclusively and I'm
proud to report that both us and our subscribers have been VERY
pleased with them. We do, however, see a failure rate with them of
around 8% - 10% BUT, they have been good about replacing them
in a timely manner and have always honored their lifetime warranty.
We buy them for $30 - $40 and retail them for $100. Here's a link:
http://www.buy.com/prod/Belkin_F5D7230_4_Wireless_G_Router/q/loc/101/201978542.html

I'm on a mission right now to align our company with manufacturers,
vendors, etc. who offer and honor a lifetime warranty. If someone is
only willing to stand behind their product for a year or two, you should
question that, I know I do.


Shannon D. Denniston, Co-Founder
KyWiFi, LLC - Mt. Sterling, Kentucky
Your Hometown Broadband Provider
http://www.KyWiFi.com
Call Us Today: 859.274.4033
===
Yes, we are beta testing ISP Buddy!
http://www.ispbuddy.com
===


- Original Message - 
From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 6:58 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routers


Nothing. We have to deal with low quality in a commodity world.

However another way to approach it might be, who has the best RMA policy. 
Linksys's RMA policy is non-existent, and a provider needs to be prepared to 
eat any failures. That comment is based on, the many hoops linksys makes you 
go through before allowing a return, which cost way more to do than the cost 
to buy a new router.  This is the BIG reason, that we have converted 50% of 
all new installs to NON-Linksys routers.  Linksys makes my favorite, Home 
Router OS, but I can;t stomach giving all my money to those that don't honor 
their warrantees.  Belkin on the other hand has been fabulaous.  No 
questions asked, jsut send it back, and get a new one in a few days.  Belkin 
also has a nice Default portal page you can see before logining in to see 
private info.  Belkin comes with a bundled Content Control trial. Belkon can 
opperate as an AP (Bridge) or Nat Router, and I think also WDS.  The only 
reason we don't use Belkin for all our installs is that Linksys is what our 
local distributor carries, and because Belkin had some PPPOE bugs, which 
prevented it from Auto-reconnecting after a disconnect, unless you reboot 
it. So we still use Linksys for PPPOE clients.  However that PPOE bug was 
identified over a year ago, maybe its been fixed by now?


The Belkin has a higher price tag unfortuneately, but it is a N router, 
and I prefer to support the vendors that honor their warrantees.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Ross Cornett [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 5:57 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Routers


Hey guys, I hope some of you can enlighten me on what is the best line of 
router out there for home and small business.  We have used linksys and 
netgear and their broadband routers have not held up very well.   Anyone 
have any ideas as to what they are using and what works best?  I am tired of 
replacing these things and explaining to the customer their lack of quality. 
Your feedback is very welcome.



Ross Cornett
VP
217 342 6201 ex 7
HofNet Communications, Inc.
www.HofNet-Communications.com

HofNet-Communications.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] Routers

2007-02-07 Thread Marlon K. Schafer
Imagestream has a great one that's under $600.  Another $250 will get them 
to set it up for you as I understand it.


MT routers are also nice.  I just don't like the idea of using a PC out 
where I can't keep an eye on it.  Fans go out etc.


marlon

- Original Message - 
From: Ross Cornett [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 2:57 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Routers


Hey guys, I hope some of you can enlighten me on what is the best line of 
router out there for home and small business.  We have used linksys and 
netgear and their broadband routers have not held up very well.   Anyone 
have any ideas as to what they are using and what works best?  I am tired of 
replacing these things and explaining to the customer their lack of quality. 
Your feedback is very welcome.



Ross Cornett
VP
217 342 6201 ex 7
HofNet Communications, Inc.
www.HofNet-Communications.com

HofNet-Communications.com
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Routers

2007-02-07 Thread KyWiFi LLC
Yes, I'm serious. Lots of companies offer a lifetime warranty.
If they have a good product, they should stand behind it. If
their product is junk, then...


Shannon D. Denniston, Co-Founder
KyWiFi, LLC - Mt. Sterling, Kentucky
Your Hometown Broadband Provider
http://www.KyWiFi.com
Call Us Today: 859.274.4033
===
Yes, we are beta testing ISP Buddy!
http://www.ispbuddy.com
===


- Original Message - 
From: Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 11:19 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routers


Hi,

Are you serious? You honestly expect a company to honor a warranty for a 
lifetime, especially on a $30 item? How do you expect them to stay in 
business?

Travis
Microserv

KyWiFi LLC wrote:
 We use the Belkin F5D7230-4 wireless router exclusively and I'm
 proud to report that both us and our subscribers have been VERY
 pleased with them. We do, however, see a failure rate with them of
 around 8% - 10% BUT, they have been good about replacing them
 in a timely manner and have always honored their lifetime warranty.
 We buy them for $30 - $40 and retail them for $100. Here's a link:
 http://www.buy.com/prod/Belkin_F5D7230_4_Wireless_G_Router/q/loc/101/201978542.html

 I'm on a mission right now to align our company with manufacturers,
 vendors, etc. who offer and honor a lifetime warranty. If someone is
 only willing to stand behind their product for a year or two, you should
 question that, I know I do.


 Shannon D. Denniston, Co-Founder
 KyWiFi, LLC - Mt. Sterling, Kentucky
 Your Hometown Broadband Provider
 http://www.KyWiFi.com
 Call Us Today: 859.274.4033
 ===
 Yes, we are beta testing ISP Buddy!
 http://www.ispbuddy.com
 ===


 - Original Message - 
 From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 6:58 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Routers


 Nothing. We have to deal with low quality in a commodity world.

 However another way to approach it might be, who has the best RMA policy. 
 Linksys's RMA policy is non-existent, and a provider needs to be prepared to 
 eat any failures. That comment is based on, the many hoops linksys makes you 
 go through before allowing a return, which cost way more to do than the cost 
 to buy a new router.  This is the BIG reason, that we have converted 50% of 
 all new installs to NON-Linksys routers.  Linksys makes my favorite, Home 
 Router OS, but I can;t stomach giving all my money to those that don't honor 
 their warrantees.  Belkin on the other hand has been fabulaous.  No 
 questions asked, jsut send it back, and get a new one in a few days.  Belkin 
 also has a nice Default portal page you can see before logining in to see 
 private info.  Belkin comes with a bundled Content Control trial. Belkon can 
 opperate as an AP (Bridge) or Nat Router, and I think also WDS.  The only 
 reason we don't use Belkin for all our installs is that Linksys is what our 
 local distributor carries, and because Belkin had some PPPOE bugs, which 
 prevented it from Auto-reconnecting after a disconnect, unless you reboot 
 it. So we still use Linksys for PPPOE clients.  However that PPOE bug was 
 identified over a year ago, maybe its been fixed by now?

 The Belkin has a higher price tag unfortuneately, but it is a N router, 
 and I prefer to support the vendors that honor their warrantees.

 Tom DeReggi
 RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
 IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


 - Original Message - 
 From: Ross Cornett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 5:57 PM
 Subject: [WISPA] Routers


 Hey guys, I hope some of you can enlighten me on what is the best line of 
 router out there for home and small business.  We have used linksys and 
 netgear and their broadband routers have not held up very well.   Anyone 
 have any ideas as to what they are using and what works best?  I am tired of 
 replacing these things and explaining to the customer their lack of quality. 
 Your feedback is very welcome.


 Ross Cornett
 VP
 217 342 6201 ex 7
 HofNet Communications, Inc.
 www.HofNet-Communications.com

 HofNet-Communications.com
   
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV white spaces

2007-02-07 Thread John J. Thomas
inline...


-Original Message-
From: Patrick Leary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2007 10:52 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV white spaces

Here are few raw comments that might fray some nerves:

1. The FCC is not a baby sitter.
2. Mature operators (and industries as a whole) follow the rules as a
matter of course and expected cost of business.
3. You are not the public, you are commercial operators financially
benefiting off the public's free spectrum and you off all users should
thus be a responsible steward of that spectrum.
4. Those not following the rules have no ethical standing to complain
about other illegal use, predatory competitors, lack of spectrum, etc.

As someone who has argued for WISP compliance for years, I've certainly
been alarmed by what I see as a new level of non-compliance. WISPs are
now commonly assuming the FCC's lack of enforcement is tantamount to its
approval of abuse. The general attitude is now that there is but one
rule: Don't exceed the power limitations. Everything else has become
fair game.

Here is a list of things I see that lend anecdotal evidence, if not
actual, that abuse is reaching new levels:

- many WISPs now believe it is no big deal to use 4.9 GHz to carry some
commercial traffic (Hey, there's excess capacity so what's the big deal,
right?...)

 Many disagree with my view on things, but this is clearly wrong. 4.9 GHz is 
 a licensed band for PUBLIC SAFETY ONLY. If know somebody that is using it 
 illegally, they are a criminal. If you don't do something about it, you are 
 an accessory to the crime and just as guilty.


- use of STA's to commercially use spectrum is openly being advocated
(this is partially responsible for an over 6 month wait in STA filings)
- illegal vendors now operate in the clear with prominent U.S.
distribution (They must be legal if they have a store front and it only
hurts other vendors anyway...)
- build your own base station type Google ads are rampant

Call me an alarmist, but this accelerating trend is disturbing and such
attitudes easily even have the potential to infect safety issues (hey,
OSHA rules must not be that big a deal either).

We must all appreciate that many violating the rules do so out of
ignorance, but that as an excuse. Groups like WISPA should take firm
stands on subjects like this. You should strongly encourage compliance,
lead the way and educate. You should fight the ignorance that allows for
relativism and creative interpretation of the rules. You should also
not cave to the hard luck excuses that I'm a small guy and can't afford
to follow the rules. (Your response to such should be to point to
funding sources/advice or otherwise tell them that there is a minimum
cost to legally participate in this business and that following FCC
rules is a minimum expectation as responsible stewards of the public's
free spectrum.) And finally, WISPs should not treat knowingly illegal
operators as equals because in fact they are liabilities to you and the
industry at large.

And yes, of course I have skin in the game but that in no way alters
anything here or devalues my comments. If anything, as a legal vendor
with a long professional reputation of compliance and scores of legal
operator partners, and as an individual who has been beating this drum
for 7 years, it should only increase the weight of my comments.

Sincerely,

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dawn DiPietro
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 9:26 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces

All,

Remember, it only takes a few bad apples to make the whole industry look

bad.
Think about that the next time anyone wants to complain about the rules.

Regards,
Dawn DiPietro


Patrick Leary wrote:

I hope it does go UL, but I have also heard some recent rumblings that
the FCC is concerned with what seems like a widespread deterioration of
WISPs following the rules. The phrase I recall is something along the
lines of Damn it, these things are not guidelines.

From my view it is true. I see it in conversations that go beyond the
usual, if you just stay within the power no one cares to now where
people seem to via the STA process as a round-about tool to get access
to and use spectrum that does not commercially exist.

Letting loose the same level of abuse in the TV bands is something that
will cause real problems for the FCC should broadcasters be affected.

The WISP industry must do a better job of policing itself and
discouraging the slippery slope.

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Monday, February 05, 

RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces

2007-02-07 Thread Chadd Thompson
Sorry,

The signal was in the -70's not right at -70. It was mid to upper -70's from
what I figured up they were putting out around 43dBm EIRP. I could also see
the SSID of the AP so I know what town it was located in and it was/is a
sectorized POP that would be around 30dBm radio input to a 14-15dBi antenna
or a 26dBm radio input to a 17-18dBi antenna.

Thanks,
Chadd


 That's 4 watts.  At 39 dB you'd be at 8 watts.  At 40 it would be
 around 10
 watts.

 Are you SURE that the remote tower you're seeing at -70 is really
 20 miles
 out?  To pick that up with a -70 rssi from a 9 dB antenna would
 require an
 amazing amount of power.

 It was very common for a long time to see Hyperlink and a couple of other
 amp manufacturers sell 1 watt amps (30 dB) and 15 dB omni antennas.  Even
 with that config I show an rssi of -76.  I guess they could be
 running a 2
 watt amp and a 18 dB panel of some kind.  But I'd find that very unusual.

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces

2007-02-07 Thread Marlon K. Schafer
Well, either way, if it's an ap that talks to more than one client, it's max 
eirp is 4 watts.  36dB

laters,
marlon

- Original Message - 
From: Chadd Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 10:00 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces



Sorry,

The signal was in the -70's not right at -70. It was mid to upper -70's 
from
what I figured up they were putting out around 43dBm EIRP. I could also 
see

the SSID of the AP so I know what town it was located in and it was/is a
sectorized POP that would be around 30dBm radio input to a 14-15dBi 
antenna

or a 26dBm radio input to a 17-18dBi antenna.

Thanks,
Chadd



That's 4 watts.  At 39 dB you'd be at 8 watts.  At 40 it would be
around 10
watts.

Are you SURE that the remote tower you're seeing at -70 is really
20 miles
out?  To pick that up with a -70 rssi from a 9 dB antenna would
require an
amazing amount of power.

It was very common for a long time to see Hyperlink and a couple of other
amp manufacturers sell 1 watt amps (30 dB) and 15 dB omni antennas.  Even
with that config I show an rssi of -76.  I guess they could be
running a 2
watt amp and a 18 dB panel of some kind.  But I'd find that very unusual.


--
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/