[WISPA] Try it out vs. Cingular

2007-05-10 Thread Mike Hammett
I have a potential customer that wanted to try out my service.  He's got 
money, so I wasn't afraid he was looking to get something for nothing.  He has 
Cingular now and can only get 125 - 175 kbit out of it.  I clearly can provide 
a faster less latent service for a lower monthly cost (costs him $70/month).

Apparently he wasn't on the unlimited rate plan and got hit with a $1200 bill.  
He doesn't think he can get out of his Cingular.  *argh*

That said, can anyone think of a way to hookup a standalone fax machine with 
the Cingular card?  I can't contemplate anything at all.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.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] Try it out vs. Cingular

2007-05-10 Thread Scott Reed
Even if he can't get out of the Cingular contract, I would think paying 
you your normal rates would cost less than $1200 to Cingular.  Suggest 
that your unlimited service is still less expensive than overages.


Mike Hammett wrote:

I have a potential customer that wanted to try out my service.  He's got 
money, so I wasn't afraid he was looking to get something for nothing.  He has Cingular 
now and can only get 125 - 175 kbit out of it.  I clearly can provide a faster less 
latent service for a lower monthly cost (costs him $70/month).

Apparently he wasn't on the unlimited rate plan and got hit with a $1200 bill.  
He doesn't think he can get out of his Cingular.  *argh*

That said, can anyone think of a way to hookup a standalone fax machine with 
the Cingular card?  I can't contemplate anything at all.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com

  


--
Scott Reed
Owner
NewWays
Wireless Networking
Network Design, Installation and Administration
www.nwwnet.net

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Try it out vs. Cingular

2007-05-10 Thread Mike Hammett

oh, I'm most certainly under $1200, even for a whole year.  :-p

Anyone have experience getting out of a bad Cingular deal?


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


- Original Message - 
From: Scott Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 7:48 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Try it out vs. Cingular


Even if he can't get out of the Cingular contract, I would think paying 
you your normal rates would cost less than $1200 to Cingular.  Suggest 
that your unlimited service is still less expensive than overages.


Mike Hammett wrote:
I have a potential customer that wanted to try out my service.  He's 
got money, so I wasn't afraid he was looking to get something for 
nothing.  He has Cingular now and can only get 125 - 175 kbit out of it. 
I clearly can provide a faster less latent service for a lower monthly 
cost (costs him $70/month).


Apparently he wasn't on the unlimited rate plan and got hit with a $1200 
bill.  He doesn't think he can get out of his Cingular.  *argh*


That said, can anyone think of a way to hookup a standalone fax machine 
with the Cingular card?  I can't contemplate anything at all.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com




--
Scott Reed
Owner
NewWays
Wireless Networking
Network Design, Installation and Administration
www.nwwnet.net

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


[WISPA] CALEA FAQ Questions

2007-05-10 Thread Dawn DiPietro

Marlon,

I have been reading the WISPA CALEA FAQ and was a little concerned about 
question #10. If the LEA does not know who the suspect is using an open 
access point does this mean that everyone that has used that access 
point will have their data handed over to the LEA? It would seem that if 
the LEA is only allowed to receive the data requested in the subpoena 
this would be a violation.


As far as I can tell question #15 does not get answered in the paragraph 
following the question. It talks more about acceptable billing and the 
fact that WISPA might have a solution in the future.


One of the questions in section 23 asks Does the FBI speak for other 
LEA's?. Unless I am mistaken this question does not get answered.


Also the document says over and over again that the LEA's will work with 
WISP's, which sounds like there is no easy way this can always be done 
transparently with the current broadband equipment deployed by WISP's. 
So the workaround is the WISP should give them the all the data from the 
device in question and the LEA's will sort it out and separate it.


If I am out of line please let me know but if I have questions about the 
FAQ then I am guessing there are others that do too.


Regards,
Dawn DiPietro
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Try it out vs. Cingular

2007-05-10 Thread John Scrivner
Trying to help someone out of a contract is illegal (unless you are 
their legal counsel). Ask your attorney if you want confirmation of 
this. The better approach is to sell your service in addition to the 
existing service. Tell him this provides a backup service in case one or 
the other is down and it provides enough cost savings to pay for your 
service. If he wants to get out of his contract then let him do it himself.

Scriv


Mike Hammett wrote:


oh, I'm most certainly under $1200, even for a whole year.  :-p

Anyone have experience getting out of a bad Cingular deal?


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


- Original Message - From: Scott Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 7:48 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Try it out vs. Cingular


Even if he can't get out of the Cingular contract, I would think 
paying you your normal rates would cost less than $1200 to Cingular.  
Suggest that your unlimited service is still less expensive than 
overages.


Mike Hammett wrote:

I have a potential customer that wanted to try out my service.  
He's got money, so I wasn't afraid he was looking to get something 
for nothing.  He has Cingular now and can only get 125 - 175 kbit 
out of it. I clearly can provide a faster less latent service for a 
lower monthly cost (costs him $70/month).


Apparently he wasn't on the unlimited rate plan and got hit with a 
$1200 bill.  He doesn't think he can get out of his Cingular.  *argh*


That said, can anyone think of a way to hookup a standalone fax 
machine with the Cingular card?  I can't contemplate anything at all.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com




--
Scott Reed
Owner
NewWays
Wireless Networking
Network Design, Installation and Administration
www.nwwnet.net

--
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] Try it out vs. Cingular

2007-05-10 Thread David Peterson
Not all alternatives are costly (Lawyer) or illegal.  Although the third link 
does broach on some moral grey areas.

http://www.celltradeusa.com/
http://www.chipchick.com/2006/05/how_to_get_out_.html
http://www.wikihow.com/Get-out-of-a-Cellular-Service-Contract

David

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 10:05 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Try it out vs. Cingular

Trying to help someone out of a contract is illegal (unless you are 
their legal counsel). Ask your attorney if you want confirmation of 
this. The better approach is to sell your service in addition to the 
existing service. Tell him this provides a backup service in case one or 
the other is down and it provides enough cost savings to pay for your 
service. If he wants to get out of his contract then let him do it himself.
Scriv


Mike Hammett wrote:

 oh, I'm most certainly under $1200, even for a whole year.  :-p

 Anyone have experience getting out of a bad Cingular deal?


 -
 Mike Hammett
 Intelligent Computing Solutions
 http://www.ics-il.com


 - Original Message - From: Scott Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 7:48 AM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Try it out vs. Cingular


 Even if he can't get out of the Cingular contract, I would think 
 paying you your normal rates would cost less than $1200 to Cingular.  
 Suggest that your unlimited service is still less expensive than 
 overages.

 Mike Hammett wrote:

 I have a potential customer that wanted to try out my service.  
 He's got money, so I wasn't afraid he was looking to get something 
 for nothing.  He has Cingular now and can only get 125 - 175 kbit 
 out of it. I clearly can provide a faster less latent service for a 
 lower monthly cost (costs him $70/month).

 Apparently he wasn't on the unlimited rate plan and got hit with a 
 $1200 bill.  He doesn't think he can get out of his Cingular.  *argh*

 That said, can anyone think of a way to hookup a standalone fax 
 machine with the Cingular card?  I can't contemplate anything at all.


 -
 Mike Hammett
 Intelligent Computing Solutions
 http://www.ics-il.com



 -- 
 Scott Reed
 Owner
 NewWays
 Wireless Networking
 Network Design, Installation and Administration
 www.nwwnet.net

 -- 
 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/

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.6.6/795 - Release Date: 5/9/2007 3:07 PM
 

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.6.6/795 - Release Date: 5/9/2007 3:07 PM
 





CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail communication and any attachments may 
contain confidential and privileged information for 
the use of the designated recipients. If you are not the intended recipient, 
(or authorized to receive for the recipient) you are hereby 
notified that you have received this communication in error and that any 
review, disclosure, dissemination, distribution or copying of it 
or its contents is prohibited. If you have received this communication in 
error, please destroy all copies of this communication and any 
attachments and contact the sender by reply email or telephone (800) 945-3294. 

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] RE: Are you for sale?

2007-05-10 Thread Peter R.

Michael Erskine (804) 436-9428 wrote:


LOL.  I see I ruffled a few feathers.  Of course that works both ways.


You kind of like that.



I guess you didn't actually read the FAQ or you would understand how 
it was actually realized.  The last markup on the WISPA FAQ was done 
by the FBIs CALEA attorney.


Yes. I did. The version out at http://www.wispa.org/?page_id=22 is dated 
March 27. And no where in there does it say anything about written by 
the FBI. It says reviewed by numerous people.




Don't you suppose if we had any worries at this point that we would be 
in here telling you the sky was falling ourselves?  


Perhaps it is the carefree, don't worry about compliance attitude that 
makes me think that the grasp you have on the subject differs from the 
grasp other folks I have talked to (at the DOJ, at the FCC, with TTP's) 
have.


At least the TTP's will tell you that it's an experiment. We don't know 
for sure it will work. There are many working parts and no one covers 
all of them. The only one with a tested product is Solera who has 
real-world experience doing this at the Winter Olympics alongside the 
Feds. And even their box is just DPI. That's only 1/3 of the solution.  
(Plans  Process being another third; filtering and transfer to the LEA 
per the court order the final third).


And people want a solution. You say it would be $200, but you don't say 
how, why, what. Read the FAQ. Read the FAQ. It's easy.


I am still getting calls from people who are just finding out; have not 
filed any forms yet; and have no idea how to be compliant.  Am I selling 
a solution? No. In fact, I have spent hours researching CALEA so ISPs' 
that I deal with can be compliant and rest easy.


It is unlikely that a business only ISP will see a warrant, since most 
criminals sit at home. So Resi based WISP's will LIKELY see a warrant, 
because local, county and state police will have a new tool next week. 
(This from the DOJ, btw). And what is the majority of this list? Resi.  
So who will likely see a warrant? List members.


You try to get people to pay attention and follow the rules and move the 
industry forward and it's nothing but arguing, name calling, and other 
bull shit.


Good luck!

Regards,

Peter Radizeski
RAD-INFO, Inc. 



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Try it out vs. Cingular

2007-05-10 Thread Peter R.

The contract has the termination penalty written in it.

For cell phones it is usually $150-$300.
I don't know about data cards, but likely the same thing.


Mike Hammett wrote:


oh, I'm most certainly under $1200, even for a whole year.  :-p

Anyone have experience getting out of a bad Cingular deal?


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.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] Try it out vs. Cingular

2007-05-10 Thread Travis Johnson
Our current cell contract is 50% of the remaining contract price. So if 
you have a $50/month contract with 12 months left, you would owe $300 to 
get out.


Travis
Microserv

Peter R. wrote:

The contract has the termination penalty written in it.

For cell phones it is usually $150-$300.
I don't know about data cards, but likely the same thing.


Mike Hammett wrote:


oh, I'm most certainly under $1200, even for a whole year.  :-p

Anyone have experience getting out of a bad Cingular deal?


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.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] CALEA FAQ Questions

2007-05-10 Thread Ryan Langseth
On Thu, 2007-05-10 at 09:37 -0400, Dawn DiPietro wrote:
 Marlon,
 
 I have been reading the WISPA CALEA FAQ and was a little concerned about 
 question #10. If the LEA does not know who the suspect is using an open 
 access point does this mean that everyone that has used that access 
 point will have their data handed over to the LEA? It would seem that if 
 the LEA is only allowed to receive the data requested in the subpoena 
 this would be a violation.

I asked a similar question in the Bear Hill webinar.  I had asked about
private IPs and how the request would be made to us, would it be an IP
or name, unfortunately it can be either one.  We would most likely need
to provide the data from that IP if that is how the request was made.
Now with a tap of a external IP of a private IP range, you would have to
provide the data from the inside of the network, so that they could
analyze it and determine what internal IP is the suspect.

I have only been working in this industry for a little under a year and
I have been amazed at the use of private IPs for customers.  We have
them setup here, in my opinion it cause more trouble than its worth  I
hope to move away from private IPs over the next year.  They will still
exist in our network for networking devices, but ideally no more
customers would get them.
 
 
 As far as I can tell question #15 does not get answered in the paragraph 
 following the question. It talks more about acceptable billing and the 
 fact that WISPA might have a solution in the future.
 
 One of the questions in section 23 asks Does the FBI speak for other 
 LEA's?. Unless I am mistaken this question does not get answered.
 
 Also the document says over and over again that the LEA's will work with 
 WISP's, which sounds like there is no easy way this can always be done 
 transparently with the current broadband equipment deployed by WISP's. 
 So the workaround is the WISP should give them the all the data from the 
 device in question and the LEA's will sort it out and separate it.
 
 If I am out of line please let me know but if I have questions about the 
 FAQ then I am guessing there are others that do too.
 
 Regards,
 Dawn DiPietro

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


RE: [WISPA] RE: Are you for sale? THREAD CLOSED

2007-05-10 Thread Rick Harnish
This thread is closed!  There is absolutely no reason to continue this
bashing and bereavement on list.  I'm not going to put up with this
continued bickering match.  Take it off-list.

Rick Harnish
President
OnlyInternet Broadband  Wireless, Inc.
260-827-2482
Founding Member of WISPA

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Peter R.
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 10:21 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] RE: Are you for sale?

Michael Erskine (804) 436-9428 wrote:

 LOL.  I see I ruffled a few feathers.  Of course that works both ways.

You kind of like that.


 I guess you didn't actually read the FAQ or you would understand how 
 it was actually realized.  The last markup on the WISPA FAQ was done 
 by the FBIs CALEA attorney.

Yes. I did. The version out at http://www.wispa.org/?page_id=22 is dated 
March 27. And no where in there does it say anything about written by 
the FBI. It says reviewed by numerous people.


 Don't you suppose if we had any worries at this point that we would be 
 in here telling you the sky was falling ourselves?  

Perhaps it is the carefree, don't worry about compliance attitude that 
makes me think that the grasp you have on the subject differs from the 
grasp other folks I have talked to (at the DOJ, at the FCC, with TTP's) 
have.

At least the TTP's will tell you that it's an experiment. We don't know 
for sure it will work. There are many working parts and no one covers 
all of them. The only one with a tested product is Solera who has 
real-world experience doing this at the Winter Olympics alongside the 
Feds. And even their box is just DPI. That's only 1/3 of the solution.  
(Plans  Process being another third; filtering and transfer to the LEA 
per the court order the final third).

And people want a solution. You say it would be $200, but you don't say 
how, why, what. Read the FAQ. Read the FAQ. It's easy.

I am still getting calls from people who are just finding out; have not 
filed any forms yet; and have no idea how to be compliant.  Am I selling 
a solution? No. In fact, I have spent hours researching CALEA so ISPs' 
that I deal with can be compliant and rest easy.

It is unlikely that a business only ISP will see a warrant, since most 
criminals sit at home. So Resi based WISP's will LIKELY see a warrant, 
because local, county and state police will have a new tool next week. 
(This from the DOJ, btw). And what is the majority of this list? Resi.  
So who will likely see a warrant? List members.

You try to get people to pay attention and follow the rules and move the 
industry forward and it's nothing but arguing, name calling, and other 
bull shit.

Good luck!

Regards,

Peter Radizeski
RAD-INFO, Inc. 


-- 
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] CALEA FAQ Questions

2007-05-10 Thread Matt

I have been reading the WISPA CALEA FAQ and was a little concerned about
question #10. If the LEA does not know who the suspect is using an open
access point does this mean that everyone that has used that access
point will have their data handed over to the LEA? It would seem that if
the LEA is only allowed to receive the data requested in the subpoena
this would be a violation.


In the past WISP's have asked if there was anyway to keep users from
NATing and connecting more then 1 PC.  There is no way to block this
and no easy way to prevent or detect it.  From the ISP perspective
there is no way isolate single hotspot user since they all come in on
the same IP.  If the ISP has control and management of the hotspot
they may be able to isolate the traffic of a given mac but this would
not be reliable if they connect with a different laptop the next day.
Of course it depends what kind of hotspot and how its setup.

I would say your going to have to give the LEA all the traffic for the
hotspot and let them filter/figure out what they need.  Moral of the
story: open non-encrypted wireless routers are NOT secure to use.
Unless your a bad guy and just drive around tell you find one then do
your ill deeds there.

Just my opinion.

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

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Try it out vs. Cingular

2007-05-10 Thread George Rogato

It's hard for me to believe he can't get out of his contract.

A customer of ours told me a couple years ago that there is some laws, 
maybe just in Oregon, not sure, that eliminate the early termination fees.


I would dig deeper, there is no freaking way that you can be sold 
something like a cell phone service and have to pay if the service is 
sub standard.


I would especially want to attack the 1200 bill. If they can sell you 
1200 worth of service in one month, and the same amount of service for 
50 more than your base bill, then I think there is also a giant hole in 
the contract.

I bet there is a very easy unknown out for this and a refund as well.

I would start with the state public utilities commission.
Call the Governator, or your local senator or rep.

Don't swallow everything being shoved down your throats by a telco.




Mike Hammett wrote:

I have a potential customer that wanted to try out my service.  He's got 
money, so I wasn't afraid he was looking to get something for nothing.  He has Cingular 
now and can only get 125 - 175 kbit out of it.  I clearly can provide a faster less 
latent service for a lower monthly cost (costs him $70/month).

Apparently he wasn't on the unlimited rate plan and got hit with a $1200 bill.  
He doesn't think he can get out of his Cingular.  *argh*

That said, can anyone think of a way to hookup a standalone fax machine with 
the Cingular card?  I can't contemplate anything at all.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



--
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] Try it out vs. Cingular

2007-05-10 Thread Travis Johnson
Wow... I guess I'm more of a person of my word. If I sign a contract 
that says I'm going to be billed for overage, etc. and then I go over, I 
pay the bill. Apparently some people's signature (or handshake) isn't 
worth anything. :(


Travis
Microserv

George Rogato wrote:

It's hard for me to believe he can't get out of his contract.

A customer of ours told me a couple years ago that there is some laws, 
maybe just in Oregon, not sure, that eliminate the early termination 
fees.


I would dig deeper, there is no freaking way that you can be sold 
something like a cell phone service and have to pay if the service is 
sub standard.


I would especially want to attack the 1200 bill. If they can sell you 
1200 worth of service in one month, and the same amount of service for 
50 more than your base bill, then I think there is also a giant hole 
in the contract.

I bet there is a very easy unknown out for this and a refund as well.

I would start with the state public utilities commission.
Call the Governator, or your local senator or rep.

Don't swallow everything being shoved down your throats by a telco.




Mike Hammett wrote:
I have a potential customer that wanted to try out my service.  
He's got money, so I wasn't afraid he was looking to get something 
for nothing.  He has Cingular now and can only get 125 - 175 kbit out 
of it.  I clearly can provide a faster less latent service for a 
lower monthly cost (costs him $70/month).


Apparently he wasn't on the unlimited rate plan and got hit with a 
$1200 bill.  He doesn't think he can get out of his Cingular.  *argh*


That said, can anyone think of a way to hookup a standalone fax 
machine with the Cingular card?  I can't contemplate anything at all.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.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] CALEA FAQ Questions

2007-05-10 Thread Lonnie Nunweiler

Do they issue search warrants for a whole apartment building because
they suspect someone living there is doing something bad?  It was my
understanding that a bit more info is required and it has to actually
have a person or persons in mind.  Why would data taps be treated any
differently?

Lonnie

On 5/10/07, Matt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I have been reading the WISPA CALEA FAQ and was a little concerned about
 question #10. If the LEA does not know who the suspect is using an open
 access point does this mean that everyone that has used that access
 point will have their data handed over to the LEA? It would seem that if
 the LEA is only allowed to receive the data requested in the subpoena
 this would be a violation.

In the past WISP's have asked if there was anyway to keep users from
NATing and connecting more then 1 PC.  There is no way to block this
and no easy way to prevent or detect it.  From the ISP perspective
there is no way isolate single hotspot user since they all come in on
the same IP.  If the ISP has control and management of the hotspot
they may be able to isolate the traffic of a given mac but this would
not be reliable if they connect with a different laptop the next day.
Of course it depends what kind of hotspot and how its setup.

I would say your going to have to give the LEA all the traffic for the
hotspot and let them filter/figure out what they need.  Moral of the
story: open non-encrypted wireless routers are NOT secure to use.
Unless your a bad guy and just drive around tell you find one then do
your ill deeds there.

Just my opinion.

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

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

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




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

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

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


[WISPA] Suspension

2007-05-10 Thread Rick Harnish
Peter Radizeski has been suspended from WISPA mailing lists for violations
to the following list etiquette rules:

 

Rules and Penalties are as follows: 

 

1) Always be civil and professional. (Violations: One Warning then One Week
Suspension from All WISPA Lists)

2) No rude comments. (Violations: One Week Suspension from All WISPA Lists)

3) No cussing. (Violations: One Week Suspension from All WISPA Lists)

4) No personal attacks or complaining on the list. (Violations: One Week
Suspension from All WISPA Lists)

 

 

 

Respectfully,

 

 

Rick Harnish

President

OnlyInternet Broadband  Wireless, Inc.

260-827-2482

Founding Member of WISPA

 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Try it out vs. Cingular

2007-05-10 Thread Rich Comroe
What a rip!  Sprint told me it's only $300-400 to get out of a Sprint 
contract.  What's it cost to early terminate a Cingular contract?  Why 
doesn't he just terminate?  Getting a $1200 monthly bill is ridiculous! 
UNLIMITED data to a Sprint windows phone is only about $10/month, and 
there's no way to limit it to not operate tethered to a computer (other than 
unreasonably large download usage).  And it's EVDO, so it blows away that 
measley 125 - 175 kbit.  I really think those PCMCIA cards are a rip-off for 
service cost compared to just getting unlimited data service to your 
cellphone.  I love ppc6700 windows phones ... a lot lighter and smaller than 
a laptop yet nearly as capable.


Rich

- Original Message - 
From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 8:08 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Try it out vs. Cingular



oh, I'm most certainly under $1200, even for a whole year.  :-p

Anyone have experience getting out of a bad Cingular deal?


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


- Original Message - 
From: Scott Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 7:48 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Try it out vs. Cingular


Even if he can't get out of the Cingular contract, I would think paying 
you your normal rates would cost less than $1200 to Cingular.  Suggest 
that your unlimited service is still less expensive than overages.


Mike Hammett wrote:
I have a potential customer that wanted to try out my service.  He's 
got money, so I wasn't afraid he was looking to get something for 
nothing.  He has Cingular now and can only get 125 - 175 kbit out of it. 
I clearly can provide a faster less latent service for a lower monthly 
cost (costs him $70/month).


Apparently he wasn't on the unlimited rate plan and got hit with a $1200 
bill.  He doesn't think he can get out of his Cingular.  *argh*


That said, can anyone think of a way to hookup a standalone fax machine 
with the Cingular card?  I can't contemplate anything at all.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com




--
Scott Reed
Owner
NewWays
Wireless Networking
Network Design, Installation and Administration
www.nwwnet.net

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Try it out vs. Cingular

2007-05-10 Thread George Rogato
Words huh, thats the issue isn't it. You know how this stuff works, a 
customer calls cingular, sprint, verizon, and they get told barely the 
facts and then their bill comes in much higher with added costs.

The cell phone industry is ripe with bait and switch type offerings.
As a matter of fact this entire telephone business is full of misquoted 
and misrepresented facts.


Do I have to remind you of slamming as done by all the big phone 
companies?



I had a sub have me do a site survey last week. I Couldn't give him 
service and explained his options to him. Verizon told him that their 
cellular broadband was much much faster than qwest dsl and he could take 
it anywhere.


A blatant lie told to an unsuspecting customer.

Imagine if he signed up for their service and signed the contract?





Travis Johnson wrote:
Wow... I guess I'm more of a person of my word. If I sign a contract 
that says I'm going to be billed for overage, etc. and then I go over, I 
pay the bill. Apparently some people's signature (or handshake) isn't 
worth anything. :(


Travis
Microserv

George Rogato wrote:

It's hard for me to believe he can't get out of his contract.

A customer of ours told me a couple years ago that there is some laws, 
maybe just in Oregon, not sure, that eliminate the early termination 
fees.


I would dig deeper, there is no freaking way that you can be sold 
something like a cell phone service and have to pay if the service is 
sub standard.


I would especially want to attack the 1200 bill. If they can sell you 
1200 worth of service in one month, and the same amount of service for 
50 more than your base bill, then I think there is also a giant hole 
in the contract.

I bet there is a very easy unknown out for this and a refund as well.

I would start with the state public utilities commission.
Call the Governator, or your local senator or rep.

Don't swallow everything being shoved down your throats by a telco.




Mike Hammett wrote:
I have a potential customer that wanted to try out my service.  
He's got money, so I wasn't afraid he was looking to get something 
for nothing.  He has Cingular now and can only get 125 - 175 kbit out 
of it.  I clearly can provide a faster less latent service for a 
lower monthly cost (costs him $70/month).


Apparently he wasn't on the unlimited rate plan and got hit with a 
$1200 bill.  He doesn't think he can get out of his Cingular.  *argh*


That said, can anyone think of a way to hookup a standalone fax 
machine with the Cingular card?  I can't contemplate anything at all.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com





--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


[WISPA] Re: [Wisp] MikroTik as a vendor member?

2007-05-10 Thread Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181

Yeah, way cool.

We need to post that on the public list though!

Marlon
(509) 982-2181
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



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

To: Principal WISPA Member List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2007 6:41 PM
Subject: Re: [Wisp] MikroTik as a vendor member?


Did any of you guys get the notice that if you bought an ISPCON ticket 
Frank Muto buys you a years WISPA membership? Even if your paid up, it 
will pay for next years dues.


It's a pretty good deal and the ISPCON people have been very very good to 
WISPA.


George

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This must be why I all of a sudden began getting solicitations from them 
via Email as well. If they are indeed members, I’m hoping it will be a 
positive thing for us as well as them and they will begin to listen and 
act on some of the requests ( CALEA, Certification, etc).


 Ralph

 

*From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf 
Of *Mac Dearman

*Sent:* Tuesday, May 08, 2007 4:44 AM
*To:* 'Principal WISPA Member List'
*Subject:* RE: [Wisp] MikroTik as a vendor member?

 I didn’t ever see an announcement (can’t find my shoes either) that 
MikroTik was a paid vendor member, but I see their site is being 
displayed on our homepage!


 I am PROUD to see them here - -WELCOME MT!

 Mac Dearman




___
WISP mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wisp


--
George Rogato

Welcome to WISPA

www.wispa.org

http://signup.wispa.org/
___
WISP mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wisp



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Try it out vs. Cingular

2007-05-10 Thread David E. Smith
George Rogato wrote:

 Words huh, thats the issue isn't it. You know how this stuff works, a
 customer calls cingular, sprint, verizon, and they get told barely the
 facts and then their bill comes in much higher with added costs.

This only happens if you don't read the contract. (I feel that anyone
who signs up for this kind of service online or over the phone is nuts.
Go to the store - there's about five of them in every major shopping
mall in this country - and READ THE BLEEPING CONTRACT.)

I've bought a few cell phones and signed a few contracts in my day, and
as contracts go, the language is generally pretty clear. If something
doesn't make sense, it's in the salesperson's best interest to try to
explain it, clearly and accurately, so you don't return the phone or
data card. (Said contracts usually have an escape clause in the first
two to four weeks.)

 I had a sub have me do a site survey last week. I Couldn't give him
 service and explained his options to him. Verizon told him that their
 cellular broadband was much much faster than qwest dsl and he could take
 it anywhere.
 
 A blatant lie told to an unsuspecting customer.

This statement may be potentially misleading, but I don't see where it's
untrue. A wireless broadband card can be faster than a low-quality DSL
connection, and as long as you append anywhere you can receive cell
signal to the sentence, it's technically correct.

It's like saying how fast is a car? Is your car a shiny new Mustang or
a thirty-year-old rusty pickup? You can't compare wireless to DSL,
period. There's more to it than just a name.

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

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

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


Re: [WISPA] CALEA FAQ Questions

2007-05-10 Thread Martha Huizenga
This is not the sense that I get from the meeting we had with the FBI. 
They will know who the target is and be issuing an order for that 
person. However, if they happen to live with several people all on one 
wireless network, then the traffic is going to be mixed most likely. The 
best you can do is give them the traffic at that IP. According to the 
FBI, it's just like when they tap phones. The are to listen to only the 
target conversations and not the other people in the home.


Lonnie Nunweiler wrote:

Do they issue search warrants for a whole apartment building because
they suspect someone living there is doing something bad?  It was my
understanding that a bit more info is required and it has to actually
have a person or persons in mind.  Why would data taps be treated any
differently?

Lonnie

On 5/10/07, Matt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 I have been reading the WISPA CALEA FAQ and was a little concerned 
about
 question #10. If the LEA does not know who the suspect is using an 
open

 access point does this mean that everyone that has used that access
 point will have their data handed over to the LEA? It would seem 
that if

 the LEA is only allowed to receive the data requested in the subpoena
 this would be a violation.

In the past WISP's have asked if there was anyway to keep users from
NATing and connecting more then 1 PC.  There is no way to block this
and no easy way to prevent or detect it.  From the ISP perspective
there is no way isolate single hotspot user since they all come in on
the same IP.  If the ISP has control and management of the hotspot
they may be able to isolate the traffic of a given mac but this would
not be reliable if they connect with a different laptop the next day.
Of course it depends what kind of hotspot and how its setup.

I would say your going to have to give the LEA all the traffic for the
hotspot and let them filter/figure out what they need.  Moral of the
story: open non-encrypted wireless routers are NOT secure to use.
Unless your a bad guy and just drive around tell you find one then do
your ill deeds there.

Just my opinion.

Matt
--
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] Try it out vs. Cingular

2007-05-10 Thread Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181
I was able to get out of ours when I moved 6 phones to another company.  I 
had a whole host of reasons beyond what you have but one thing that the new 
company told me that's been helpful is to claim that there's another 
alternative that meets needs they can't.


tell them that you HAVE to have more that 200kbps.  When they can't do it, 
tell them that you've found a company that can give it to you and you need 
to move to the new company.


Naturally, they'll squawk.  Persistence and call escalation seems to help.

Marlon
(509) 982-2181
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



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

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 8:38 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Try it out vs. Cingular



It's hard for me to believe he can't get out of his contract.

A customer of ours told me a couple years ago that there is some laws, 
maybe just in Oregon, not sure, that eliminate the early termination fees.


I would dig deeper, there is no freaking way that you can be sold 
something like a cell phone service and have to pay if the service is sub 
standard.


I would especially want to attack the 1200 bill. If they can sell you 1200 
worth of service in one month, and the same amount of service for 50 more 
than your base bill, then I think there is also a giant hole in the 
contract.

I bet there is a very easy unknown out for this and a refund as well.

I would start with the state public utilities commission.
Call the Governator, or your local senator or rep.

Don't swallow everything being shoved down your throats by a telco.




Mike Hammett wrote:
I have a potential customer that wanted to try out my service.  He's 
got money, so I wasn't afraid he was looking to get something for 
nothing.  He has Cingular now and can only get 125 - 175 kbit out of it. 
I clearly can provide a faster less latent service for a lower monthly 
cost (costs him $70/month).


Apparently he wasn't on the unlimited rate plan and got hit with a $1200 
bill.  He doesn't think he can get out of his Cingular.  *argh*


That said, can anyone think of a way to hookup a standalone fax machine 
with the Cingular card?  I can't contemplate anything at all.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



--
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/



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Try it out vs. Cingular

2007-05-10 Thread Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181
That's likely not the issue Travis.  I think most here are.  Having just 
left Cingular, the name also applies to the benefits of the contracts. 
Cingularly on the side of the cell co.


I beat them up on their really crappy service levels and such lately.  If 
they want a contract that says I have to stay with them, they also have to 
provide the service I need.  Or at least something close to what they 
promised.


Marlon
(509) 982-2181
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



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

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 8:55 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Try it out vs. Cingular


Wow... I guess I'm more of a person of my word. If I sign a contract that 
says I'm going to be billed for overage, etc. and then I go over, I pay 
the bill. Apparently some people's signature (or handshake) isn't worth 
anything. :(


Travis
Microserv

George Rogato wrote:

It's hard for me to believe he can't get out of his contract.

A customer of ours told me a couple years ago that there is some laws, 
maybe just in Oregon, not sure, that eliminate the early termination 
fees.


I would dig deeper, there is no freaking way that you can be sold 
something like a cell phone service and have to pay if the service is sub 
standard.


I would especially want to attack the 1200 bill. If they can sell you 
1200 worth of service in one month, and the same amount of service for 50 
more than your base bill, then I think there is also a giant hole in the 
contract.

I bet there is a very easy unknown out for this and a refund as well.

I would start with the state public utilities commission.
Call the Governator, or your local senator or rep.

Don't swallow everything being shoved down your throats by a telco.




Mike Hammett wrote:
I have a potential customer that wanted to try out my service.  He's 
got money, so I wasn't afraid he was looking to get something for 
nothing.  He has Cingular now and can only get 125 - 175 kbit out of it. 
I clearly can provide a faster less latent service for a lower monthly 
cost (costs him $70/month).


Apparently he wasn't on the unlimited rate plan and got hit with a $1200 
bill.  He doesn't think he can get out of his Cingular.  *argh*


That said, can anyone think of a way to hookup a standalone fax machine 
with the Cingular card?  I can't contemplate anything at all.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.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] CALEA FAQ Questions

2007-05-10 Thread Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181

Hi Dawn,

Please let me preface this by saying that there are not always easy answers. 
And we can't always come up with a pre-made solution for every situation 
that may arise.  We've talked with the FBI about all of these issues.  We 
all know what the law says, and we all know what's actually possible.  They 
aren't always lined up in nice little rows with all of the i's dotted and 
t's crossed.


More below.
Marlon
(509) 982-2181
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



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

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 6:37 AM
Subject: [WISPA] CALEA FAQ Questions



Marlon,

I have been reading the WISPA CALEA FAQ and was a little concerned about 
question #10. If the LEA does not know who the suspect is using an open 
access point does this mean that everyone that has used that access point 
will have their data handed over to the LEA? It would seem that if the LEA 
is only allowed to receive the data requested in the subpoena this would 
be a violation.


We've talked about this a lot.  *I've* personally talked with the head of 
the FBI CALEA division about this issue both via email and phone.  It's one 
of the very first issues we talked about and why the WISPA standards effort 
is so important.  If we can clear it, things like this will fall under the 
safe harbor.


They (the FBI) know that some things just won't be possible/practical.  Lets 
use my office as an example (I've done this with them so don't go hollering 
from the mountains about how I'm being a fool, too late).  I have a FREE 
OPEN Linksys wireless router set up as a hotspot.  Anyone that comes to town 
can sit in my office, in their car out front, or soon on a picinic table 
that I'll provide, and get all the free internet that they need while they 
are in the area.  No charge.  No tracking, heck, I won't even know it's 
happened.


What happens when that IP addy shows up on a wire tap order?  I can't change 
the ap so that we can insert an MT unit or some other box that would allow 
an individual's tap.  Doing so would tip off the suspect.  There are only 
two ways to get the data.  One, tap the wireless transmissions and sort it 
all out on that side.  Not something I have the ability, expertise, tools 
etc. to do.  OR, we can just grab all of the data going to/from that device 
on the ethernet side.  The LEA will have to sort out the data streams on 
their own.  WE can't do it because we're not going to know exactly what data 
they are looking for.


It's not a perfect solution but it's all there is.  They'll have to do the 
same thing if the local Starbucks has a user that shows up somewhere.




As far as I can tell question #15 does not get answered in the paragraph 
following the question. It talks more about acceptable billing and the 
fact that WISPA might have a solution in the future.


The FAQ is only a starting point.  We took the major questions people had, 
condenced them and got the best answers we could.


We're also hanstrung a little bit because there are some things that we're 
not allowed to tell publicly.  Much more of that coming.  Might as well get 
ready to be even more frustrated by those of us on the committee telling you 
things that you can't verify other ways and we won't be able to tell you 
exactly what we're basing our statements on due to NDA's signed with the 
FBI.




One of the questions in section 23 asks Does the FBI speak for other 
LEA's?. Unless I am mistaken this question does not get answered.


They do and they don't.  They are the ones to approve a standard.  If they 
clear it, all other LEAs are bound by it.  But there may be things we are 
asked to do etc. that are not up to the FBI.




Also the document says over and over again that the LEA's will work with 
WISP's, which sounds like there is no easy way this can always be done 
transparently with the current broadband equipment deployed by WISP's. So 
the workaround is the WISP should give them the all the data from the 
device in question and the LEA's will sort it out and separate it.


There are likely going to be times when this is true.  The reason for CALEA 
is to make sure that the LEA can't get to things that they've not been 
specifically cleared to get.  I believe that sometimes they get things that 
they weren't looking for in physical searches too.  If they raid a house 
looking for stolen property and run into a meth lab, that doesn't mean that 
they shouldn't have gone into the house in the first place.  OR, if on their 
way to a bust they see a stolen car in your driveway, they just happened to 
be in the right place at the right time.


As I said before, we can all come up with more situations that don't fit the 
law than the law can possibly deal 

Re: [WISPA] Try it out vs. Cingular

2007-05-10 Thread George Rogato



David

It's widely known Qwest has 1.5 meg and 6 meg service here, 1.5 megs 
being the standard offering. Verizon has more dead spots than swiss cheese.


To tell a sub that it's faster than dsl and available everywhere is the 
biggest stretch I can think of.


Which is the point, if you make a contract that is based on assumptions, 
assumptions brought on by the seller, regardless of whether a customer 
is sophisticated enough to do proper due diligence in the truthfulness 
of the offering seller is claiming.


IE: it's faster than DSL = disclaimer: The slowest possible DSL, not the 
typical 1.5 meg and 6 meg DSL is being sold today.
IE: Our service is available everywhere = disclaimer: Everywhere where 
our wireless signals reach, not including where they don't reach which 
is maybe 10-20 percent of our coverage area.


So contracts can be broken without penalty, and without tarnishing a 
credit worthiness reputation Travis,  when the contract is based on 
misleading information.


The phone companies are full of misleading sales information. If they 
had to tell the truth it would be an entire different market.


And Travis, my word is good as well, but don't think I won't kick 
someone in the crotch if I finding them taking advantage of me, contract 
or not.


George





David E. Smith wrote:

George Rogato wrote:


Words huh, thats the issue isn't it. You know how this stuff works, a
customer calls cingular, sprint, verizon, and they get told barely the
facts and then their bill comes in much higher with added costs.


This only happens if you don't read the contract. (I feel that anyone
who signs up for this kind of service online or over the phone is nuts.
Go to the store - there's about five of them in every major shopping
mall in this country - and READ THE BLEEPING CONTRACT.)

I've bought a few cell phones and signed a few contracts in my day, and
as contracts go, the language is generally pretty clear. If something
doesn't make sense, it's in the salesperson's best interest to try to
explain it, clearly and accurately, so you don't return the phone or
data card. (Said contracts usually have an escape clause in the first
two to four weeks.)


I had a sub have me do a site survey last week. I Couldn't give him
service and explained his options to him. Verizon told him that their
cellular broadband was much much faster than qwest dsl and he could take
it anywhere.

A blatant lie told to an unsuspecting customer.


This statement may be potentially misleading, but I don't see where it's
untrue. A wireless broadband card can be faster than a low-quality DSL
connection, and as long as you append anywhere you can receive cell
signal to the sentence, it's technically correct.

It's like saying how fast is a car? Is your car a shiny new Mustang or
a thirty-year-old rusty pickup? You can't compare wireless to DSL,
period. There's more to it than just a name.

David Smith
MVN.net


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


[WISPA] The Next Big Thing in Wireless

2007-05-10 Thread michael mulcay
Guys,
 
As we wireless operators know, the costs of licensed networks
(equipment, antennas and licensing) makes providing services to the
majority of subscribers prohibitively expensive, and the cost at auction
for spectrum (for WiMax and 4G products) is beyond the reach of most of
us.
 
To overcome these problems, two years ago Wireless Strategies began
research into ways to use new technologies -- WiMAX and smart antennas
-- to reuse side lobe radiation around sites of point-to-point 4GHz and
6GHz microwave links under the present FCC rules and without causing
additional interference. 
 
Our finding is that networks can be designed to operate with smart
antennas with distributed radiators and that the new paths can be
concurrently coordinated, under existing FCC rules and without causing
additional interference.
 
 We believe that concurrent coordination will be The Next Big Thing in
Wireless, leveling the playing field by making it possible for WISPs to
obtain multipurpose licensed spectrum at pennies on the dollar compared
to obtaining it at auction. By making use of the formerly wasted side
lobe radiation of 4GHz and 6GHz paths, WISPs will be able to use IEEE
802.16-based (WiMAX) equipment with small antennas to provide licensed
broadband services to hundreds of additional subscribers at a
provisioning cost of only about $500 per link. We appreciate that some
members of the industry may initially perceive any change to the status
quo as a threat, but we believe that concurrent coordination will
provide extraordinary benefits to the entire industry, especially WISPs.
 
Due to the potential for unprecedented industry-wide changes from the
use of antennas with distributed radiators to provide multiple-path
low-cost broadband services under the existing FCC rules, Wireless
Strategies decided to remove any uncertainty for investors and service
providers by, on February 23, 2007, filing with the Federal
Communications Commission, a Request for a Declaratory Ruling on
Compliance of Fixed Microwave Antennas Having Distributed Radiating
Elements.
 
However, to date, the FCC has taken no action. We believe that emails of
support from the WISP community can help speed up the process, by
encouraging the FCC to either issue the requested declaratory ruling or
to issue a Public Notice for industry comment.
 
Therefore, if you would like a copy of our FCC filing and/or information
about the new concept of concurrent coordination, please contact me at
Wireless Strategies 831-659-5618 or [EMAIL PROTECTED] For
additional information you can also visit our web site at
www.wirelessstrategies.net. 
 
Thanks,
 
Mike
 
Michael Mulcay, CEO
Wireless Strategies, Inc.
 
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] The Next Big Thing in Wireless

2007-05-10 Thread Jory Privett
Sounds like a great idea.  I only have one issue from what I read here, $500 
per link seems high.  Most ISPs complain about the $250 they pay now for 
CPEs.


Jory Privett
WCCS

- Original Message - 
From: michael mulcay [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 4:23 PM
Subject: [WISPA] The Next Big Thing in Wireless



Guys,

As we wireless operators know, the costs of licensed networks
(equipment, antennas and licensing) makes providing services to the
majority of subscribers prohibitively expensive, and the cost at auction
for spectrum (for WiMax and 4G products) is beyond the reach of most of
us.

To overcome these problems, two years ago Wireless Strategies began
research into ways to use new technologies -- WiMAX and smart antennas
-- to reuse side lobe radiation around sites of point-to-point 4GHz and
6GHz microwave links under the present FCC rules and without causing
additional interference.

Our finding is that networks can be designed to operate with smart
antennas with distributed radiators and that the new paths can be
concurrently coordinated, under existing FCC rules and without causing
additional interference.

We believe that concurrent coordination will be The Next Big Thing in
Wireless, leveling the playing field by making it possible for WISPs to
obtain multipurpose licensed spectrum at pennies on the dollar compared
to obtaining it at auction. By making use of the formerly wasted side
lobe radiation of 4GHz and 6GHz paths, WISPs will be able to use IEEE
802.16-based (WiMAX) equipment with small antennas to provide licensed
broadband services to hundreds of additional subscribers at a
provisioning cost of only about $500 per link. We appreciate that some
members of the industry may initially perceive any change to the status
quo as a threat, but we believe that concurrent coordination will
provide extraordinary benefits to the entire industry, especially WISPs.

Due to the potential for unprecedented industry-wide changes from the
use of antennas with distributed radiators to provide multiple-path
low-cost broadband services under the existing FCC rules, Wireless
Strategies decided to remove any uncertainty for investors and service
providers by, on February 23, 2007, filing with the Federal
Communications Commission, a Request for a Declaratory Ruling on
Compliance of Fixed Microwave Antennas Having Distributed Radiating
Elements.

However, to date, the FCC has taken no action. We believe that emails of
support from the WISP community can help speed up the process, by
encouraging the FCC to either issue the requested declaratory ruling or
to issue a Public Notice for industry comment.

Therefore, if you would like a copy of our FCC filing and/or information
about the new concept of concurrent coordination, please contact me at
Wireless Strategies 831-659-5618 or [EMAIL PROTECTED] For
additional information you can also visit our web site at
www.wirelessstrategies.net.

Thanks,

Mike

Michael Mulcay, CEO
Wireless Strategies, Inc.

--
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] The Next Big Thing in Wireless

2007-05-10 Thread Dawn DiPietro

Sounds like an ad too. :-)


Jory Privett wrote:
Sounds like a great idea.  I only have one issue from what I read 
here, $500 per link seems high.  Most ISPs complain about the $250 
they pay now for CPEs.


Jory Privett
WCCS

- Original Message - From: michael mulcay 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 4:23 PM
Subject: [WISPA] The Next Big Thing in Wireless



Guys,

As we wireless operators know, the costs of licensed networks
(equipment, antennas and licensing) makes providing services to the
majority of subscribers prohibitively expensive, and the cost at auction
for spectrum (for WiMax and 4G products) is beyond the reach of most of
us.

To overcome these problems, two years ago Wireless Strategies began
research into ways to use new technologies -- WiMAX and smart antennas
-- to reuse side lobe radiation around sites of point-to-point 4GHz and
6GHz microwave links under the present FCC rules and without causing
additional interference.

Our finding is that networks can be designed to operate with smart
antennas with distributed radiators and that the new paths can be
concurrently coordinated, under existing FCC rules and without causing
additional interference.

We believe that concurrent coordination will be The Next Big Thing in
Wireless, leveling the playing field by making it possible for WISPs to
obtain multipurpose licensed spectrum at pennies on the dollar compared
to obtaining it at auction. By making use of the formerly wasted side
lobe radiation of 4GHz and 6GHz paths, WISPs will be able to use IEEE
802.16-based (WiMAX) equipment with small antennas to provide licensed
broadband services to hundreds of additional subscribers at a
provisioning cost of only about $500 per link. We appreciate that some
members of the industry may initially perceive any change to the status
quo as a threat, but we believe that concurrent coordination will
provide extraordinary benefits to the entire industry, especially WISPs.

Due to the potential for unprecedented industry-wide changes from the
use of antennas with distributed radiators to provide multiple-path
low-cost broadband services under the existing FCC rules, Wireless
Strategies decided to remove any uncertainty for investors and service
providers by, on February 23, 2007, filing with the Federal
Communications Commission, a Request for a Declaratory Ruling on
Compliance of Fixed Microwave Antennas Having Distributed Radiating
Elements.

However, to date, the FCC has taken no action. We believe that emails of
support from the WISP community can help speed up the process, by
encouraging the FCC to either issue the requested declaratory ruling or
to issue a Public Notice for industry comment.

Therefore, if you would like a copy of our FCC filing and/or information
about the new concept of concurrent coordination, please contact me at
Wireless Strategies 831-659-5618 or [EMAIL PROTECTED] For
additional information you can also visit our web site at
www.wirelessstrategies.net.

Thanks,

Mike

Michael Mulcay, CEO
Wireless Strategies, Inc.

--
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] The Next Big Thing in Wireless

2007-05-10 Thread George Rogato

For resi customers I can see the expense being an issue.

But for  wisps infrastructure, not so much of an issue if the bandwidth 
is high enough.


George

Jory Privet wrote:
Sounds like a great idea.  I only have one issue from what I read here, 
$500 per link seems high.  Most ISPs complain about the $250 they pay 
now for CPEs.


Jory Privett
WCCS

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] The Next Big Thing in Wireless

2007-05-10 Thread Lonnie Nunweiler

Maybe a little bit, but the guy was asking for our help to get the FCC
to look at something that might benefit the WISP Industry.


Lonnie

On 5/10/07, Dawn DiPietro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Sounds like an ad too. :-)


Jory Privett wrote:
 Sounds like a great idea.  I only have one issue from what I read
 here, $500 per link seems high.  Most ISPs complain about the $250
 they pay now for CPEs.

 Jory Privett
 WCCS

 - Original Message - From: michael mulcay
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 4:23 PM
 Subject: [WISPA] The Next Big Thing in Wireless


 Guys,

 As we wireless operators know, the costs of licensed networks
 (equipment, antennas and licensing) makes providing services to the
 majority of subscribers prohibitively expensive, and the cost at auction
 for spectrum (for WiMax and 4G products) is beyond the reach of most of
 us.

 To overcome these problems, two years ago Wireless Strategies began
 research into ways to use new technologies -- WiMAX and smart antennas
 -- to reuse side lobe radiation around sites of point-to-point 4GHz and
 6GHz microwave links under the present FCC rules and without causing
 additional interference.

 Our finding is that networks can be designed to operate with smart
 antennas with distributed radiators and that the new paths can be
 concurrently coordinated, under existing FCC rules and without causing
 additional interference.

 We believe that concurrent coordination will be The Next Big Thing in
 Wireless, leveling the playing field by making it possible for WISPs to
 obtain multipurpose licensed spectrum at pennies on the dollar compared
 to obtaining it at auction. By making use of the formerly wasted side
 lobe radiation of 4GHz and 6GHz paths, WISPs will be able to use IEEE
 802.16-based (WiMAX) equipment with small antennas to provide licensed
 broadband services to hundreds of additional subscribers at a
 provisioning cost of only about $500 per link. We appreciate that some
 members of the industry may initially perceive any change to the status
 quo as a threat, but we believe that concurrent coordination will
 provide extraordinary benefits to the entire industry, especially WISPs.

 Due to the potential for unprecedented industry-wide changes from the
 use of antennas with distributed radiators to provide multiple-path
 low-cost broadband services under the existing FCC rules, Wireless
 Strategies decided to remove any uncertainty for investors and service
 providers by, on February 23, 2007, filing with the Federal
 Communications Commission, a Request for a Declaratory Ruling on
 Compliance of Fixed Microwave Antennas Having Distributed Radiating
 Elements.

 However, to date, the FCC has taken no action. We believe that emails of
 support from the WISP community can help speed up the process, by
 encouraging the FCC to either issue the requested declaratory ruling or
 to issue a Public Notice for industry comment.

 Therefore, if you would like a copy of our FCC filing and/or information
 about the new concept of concurrent coordination, please contact me at
 Wireless Strategies 831-659-5618 or [EMAIL PROTECTED] For
 additional information you can also visit our web site at
 www.wirelessstrategies.net.

 Thanks,

 Mike

 Michael Mulcay, CEO
 Wireless Strategies, Inc.

 --
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




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

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

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


Re: [WISPA] The Next Big Thing in Wireless

2007-05-10 Thread John Scrivner
Thank you Mike. I met Mike at the last WCA show and was fascinated by 
his concept of turning spectrum which is normally relegated to only 
point to point use to be allowed for use as point to multi point WiMAX 
or similar use. This is an awesome opportunity for WISPs to gain access 
to spectrum licenses which can be used for delivering wireless broadband 
using WiMAX or similar gear. Please feel free to ask questions and start 
a dialog on this effort so we can look at possibly working with them to 
support this unique approach to licensed spectrum use.

John Scrivner


michael mulcay wrote:


Guys,

As we wireless operators know, the costs of licensed networks
(equipment, antennas and licensing) makes providing services to the
majority of subscribers prohibitively expensive, and the cost at auction
for spectrum (for WiMax and 4G products) is beyond the reach of most of
us.

To overcome these problems, two years ago Wireless Strategies began
research into ways to use new technologies -- WiMAX and smart antennas
-- to reuse side lobe radiation around sites of point-to-point 4GHz and
6GHz microwave links under the present FCC rules and without causing
additional interference. 


Our finding is that networks can be designed to operate with smart
antennas with distributed radiators and that the new paths can be
concurrently coordinated, under existing FCC rules and without causing
additional interference.

We believe that concurrent coordination will be The Next Big Thing in
Wireless, leveling the playing field by making it possible for WISPs to
obtain multipurpose licensed spectrum at pennies on the dollar compared
to obtaining it at auction. By making use of the formerly wasted side
lobe radiation of 4GHz and 6GHz paths, WISPs will be able to use IEEE
802.16-based (WiMAX) equipment with small antennas to provide licensed
broadband services to hundreds of additional subscribers at a
provisioning cost of only about $500 per link. We appreciate that some
members of the industry may initially perceive any change to the status
quo as a threat, but we believe that concurrent coordination will
provide extraordinary benefits to the entire industry, especially WISPs.

Due to the potential for unprecedented industry-wide changes from the
use of antennas with distributed radiators to provide multiple-path
low-cost broadband services under the existing FCC rules, Wireless
Strategies decided to remove any uncertainty for investors and service
providers by, on February 23, 2007, filing with the Federal
Communications Commission, a Request for a Declaratory Ruling on
Compliance of Fixed Microwave Antennas Having Distributed Radiating
Elements.

However, to date, the FCC has taken no action. We believe that emails of
support from the WISP community can help speed up the process, by
encouraging the FCC to either issue the requested declaratory ruling or
to issue a Public Notice for industry comment.

Therefore, if you would like a copy of our FCC filing and/or information
about the new concept of concurrent coordination, please contact me at
Wireless Strategies 831-659-5618 or [EMAIL PROTECTED] For
additional information you can also visit our web site at
www.wirelessstrategies.net. 


Thanks,

Mike

Michael Mulcay, CEO
Wireless Strategies, Inc.

 


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] The Next Big Thing in Wireless

2007-05-10 Thread John Scrivner
The $500 license gives you the ability to launch service over an entire 
large geography serving hundreds of clients. Right Mike?

Scriv


Jory Privett wrote:

Sounds like a great idea.  I only have one issue from what I read 
here, $500 per link seems high.  Most ISPs complain about the $250 
they pay now for CPEs.


Jory Privett
WCCS

- Original Message - From: michael mulcay 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 4:23 PM
Subject: [WISPA] The Next Big Thing in Wireless



Guys,

As we wireless operators know, the costs of licensed networks
(equipment, antennas and licensing) makes providing services to the
majority of subscribers prohibitively expensive, and the cost at auction
for spectrum (for WiMax and 4G products) is beyond the reach of most of
us.

To overcome these problems, two years ago Wireless Strategies began
research into ways to use new technologies -- WiMAX and smart antennas
-- to reuse side lobe radiation around sites of point-to-point 4GHz and
6GHz microwave links under the present FCC rules and without causing
additional interference.

Our finding is that networks can be designed to operate with smart
antennas with distributed radiators and that the new paths can be
concurrently coordinated, under existing FCC rules and without causing
additional interference.

We believe that concurrent coordination will be The Next Big Thing in
Wireless, leveling the playing field by making it possible for WISPs to
obtain multipurpose licensed spectrum at pennies on the dollar compared
to obtaining it at auction. By making use of the formerly wasted side
lobe radiation of 4GHz and 6GHz paths, WISPs will be able to use IEEE
802.16-based (WiMAX) equipment with small antennas to provide licensed
broadband services to hundreds of additional subscribers at a
provisioning cost of only about $500 per link. We appreciate that some
members of the industry may initially perceive any change to the status
quo as a threat, but we believe that concurrent coordination will
provide extraordinary benefits to the entire industry, especially WISPs.

Due to the potential for unprecedented industry-wide changes from the
use of antennas with distributed radiators to provide multiple-path
low-cost broadband services under the existing FCC rules, Wireless
Strategies decided to remove any uncertainty for investors and service
providers by, on February 23, 2007, filing with the Federal
Communications Commission, a Request for a Declaratory Ruling on
Compliance of Fixed Microwave Antennas Having Distributed Radiating
Elements.

However, to date, the FCC has taken no action. We believe that emails of
support from the WISP community can help speed up the process, by
encouraging the FCC to either issue the requested declaratory ruling or
to issue a Public Notice for industry comment.

Therefore, if you would like a copy of our FCC filing and/or information
about the new concept of concurrent coordination, please contact me at
Wireless Strategies 831-659-5618 or [EMAIL PROTECTED] For
additional information you can also visit our web site at
www.wirelessstrategies.net.

Thanks,

Mike

Michael Mulcay, CEO
Wireless Strategies, Inc.

--
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] The Next Big Thing in Wireless

2007-05-10 Thread John Scrivner
What do you mean? I have been talking to him for two months about this. 
Where did you get that this is an ad? I asked him to post this message 
to get a feel for how WISPs would respond. He even sent it to me for 
review prior to sending it out here. I guess I am having trouble 
understanding why this would be considered an ad. They are looking for 
support for a declaratory ruling from the FCC on this matter. Mike would 
like to see WISPA help him on this and I think we should at least 
consider this.

Scriv


Dawn DiPietro wrote:


Sounds like an ad too. :-)


Jory Privett wrote:

Sounds like a great idea.  I only have one issue from what I read 
here, $500 per link seems high.  Most ISPs complain about the $250 
they pay now for CPEs.


Jory Privett
WCCS

- Original Message - From: michael mulcay 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 4:23 PM
Subject: [WISPA] The Next Big Thing in Wireless



Guys,

As we wireless operators know, the costs of licensed networks
(equipment, antennas and licensing) makes providing services to the
majority of subscribers prohibitively expensive, and the cost at 
auction

for spectrum (for WiMax and 4G products) is beyond the reach of most of
us.

To overcome these problems, two years ago Wireless Strategies began
research into ways to use new technologies -- WiMAX and smart antennas
-- to reuse side lobe radiation around sites of point-to-point 4GHz and
6GHz microwave links under the present FCC rules and without causing
additional interference.

Our finding is that networks can be designed to operate with smart
antennas with distributed radiators and that the new paths can be
concurrently coordinated, under existing FCC rules and without causing
additional interference.

We believe that concurrent coordination will be The Next Big Thing in
Wireless, leveling the playing field by making it possible for 
WISPs to

obtain multipurpose licensed spectrum at pennies on the dollar compared
to obtaining it at auction. By making use of the formerly wasted side
lobe radiation of 4GHz and 6GHz paths, WISPs will be able to use IEEE
802.16-based (WiMAX) equipment with small antennas to provide licensed
broadband services to hundreds of additional subscribers at a
provisioning cost of only about $500 per link. We appreciate that some
members of the industry may initially perceive any change to the status
quo as a threat, but we believe that concurrent coordination will
provide extraordinary benefits to the entire industry, especially 
WISPs.


Due to the potential for unprecedented industry-wide changes from the
use of antennas with distributed radiators to provide multiple-path
low-cost broadband services under the existing FCC rules, Wireless
Strategies decided to remove any uncertainty for investors and service
providers by, on February 23, 2007, filing with the Federal
Communications Commission, a Request for a Declaratory Ruling on
Compliance of Fixed Microwave Antennas Having Distributed Radiating
Elements.

However, to date, the FCC has taken no action. We believe that 
emails of

support from the WISP community can help speed up the process, by
encouraging the FCC to either issue the requested declaratory ruling or
to issue a Public Notice for industry comment.

Therefore, if you would like a copy of our FCC filing and/or 
information

about the new concept of concurrent coordination, please contact me at
Wireless Strategies 831-659-5618 or [EMAIL PROTECTED] For
additional information you can also visit our web site at
www.wirelessstrategies.net.

Thanks,

Mike

Michael Mulcay, CEO
Wireless Strategies, Inc.

--
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] The Next Big Thing in Wireless

2007-05-10 Thread Dawn DiPietro

Scriv,

After rereading this I was mistaken. My apologies for my comment.


Regards,
Dawn DiPietro

John Scrivner wrote:
What do you mean? I have been talking to him for two months about 
this. Where did you get that this is an ad? I asked him to post this 
message to get a feel for how WISPs would respond. He even sent it to 
me for review prior to sending it out here. I guess I am having 
trouble understanding why this would be considered an ad. They are 
looking for support for a declaratory ruling from the FCC on this 
matter. Mike would like to see WISPA help him on this and I think we 
should at least consider this.

Scriv


Dawn DiPietro wrote:


Sounds like an ad too. :-)


Jory Privett wrote:

Sounds like a great idea.  I only have one issue from what I read 
here, $500 per link seems high.  Most ISPs complain about the $250 
they pay now for CPEs.


Jory Privett
WCCS

- Original Message - From: michael mulcay 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 4:23 PM
Subject: [WISPA] The Next Big Thing in Wireless



Guys,

As we wireless operators know, the costs of licensed networks
(equipment, antennas and licensing) makes providing services to the
majority of subscribers prohibitively expensive, and the cost at 
auction
for spectrum (for WiMax and 4G products) is beyond the reach of 
most of

us.

To overcome these problems, two years ago Wireless Strategies began
research into ways to use new technologies -- WiMAX and smart antennas
-- to reuse side lobe radiation around sites of point-to-point 4GHz 
and

6GHz microwave links under the present FCC rules and without causing
additional interference.

Our finding is that networks can be designed to operate with smart
antennas with distributed radiators and that the new paths can be
concurrently coordinated, under existing FCC rules and without causing
additional interference.

We believe that concurrent coordination will be The Next Big Thing in
Wireless, leveling the playing field by making it possible for 
WISPs to
obtain multipurpose licensed spectrum at pennies on the dollar 
compared

to obtaining it at auction. By making use of the formerly wasted side
lobe radiation of 4GHz and 6GHz paths, WISPs will be able to use IEEE
802.16-based (WiMAX) equipment with small antennas to provide licensed
broadband services to hundreds of additional subscribers at a
provisioning cost of only about $500 per link. We appreciate that some
members of the industry may initially perceive any change to the 
status

quo as a threat, but we believe that concurrent coordination will
provide extraordinary benefits to the entire industry, especially 
WISPs.


Due to the potential for unprecedented industry-wide changes from the
use of antennas with distributed radiators to provide multiple-path
low-cost broadband services under the existing FCC rules, Wireless
Strategies decided to remove any uncertainty for investors and service
providers by, on February 23, 2007, filing with the Federal
Communications Commission, a Request for a Declaratory Ruling on
Compliance of Fixed Microwave Antennas Having Distributed Radiating
Elements.

However, to date, the FCC has taken no action. We believe that 
emails of

support from the WISP community can help speed up the process, by
encouraging the FCC to either issue the requested declaratory 
ruling or

to issue a Public Notice for industry comment.

Therefore, if you would like a copy of our FCC filing and/or 
information

about the new concept of concurrent coordination, please contact me at
Wireless Strategies 831-659-5618 or [EMAIL PROTECTED] For
additional information you can also visit our web site at
www.wirelessstrategies.net.

Thanks,

Mike

Michael Mulcay, CEO
Wireless Strategies, Inc.

--
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] 5.4 Ghz

2007-05-10 Thread John Thomas

I couldn't find specific information on certification, but I found this

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1862691,00.asp

John


Gino Villarini wrote:

I saw some FCC certs for Cisco gear in 5.4 ghz, but I bet theyre for
indoor use.  Outdoor ptmp cert gear has yet to be seen

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 John Thomas
Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2007 12:49 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5.4 Ghz

Cisco AP1242's have been doing this for at least 6 months.

John


Mike Hammett wrote:
  

Redline has a certified product released.  Orthogon is about to have


theirs out.  Anyone else?
  

-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com

  



  


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


[WISPA] WISP Needed in Hamilton, OH

2007-05-10 Thread Rick Harnish
I have a client needing a broadband connection in Hamilton, OH.  Anyone out
there?  All my searches are coming up empty.

 

Respectfully,

 

Rick Harnish

President

OnlyInternet Broadband  Wireless, Inc.

260-827-2482

Founding Member of WISPA

 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


RE: [WISPA] The Next Big Thing in Wireless

2007-05-10 Thread Charles Wu
Interesting idea...

Question I would have is equipment costs...right now, FCC rules
pertaining to 6 GHz Part 101 equipment operations (barring the 6' dish
requirement) drastically increases gear pricing...I would think it to be
an extremely uphill battle to get these regulations relaxed

-Charles

---
WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.com 


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 6:52 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] The Next Big Thing in Wireless

The $500 license gives you the ability to launch service over an entire
large geography serving hundreds of clients. Right Mike?
Scriv


Jory Privett wrote:

 Sounds like a great idea.  I only have one issue from what I read 
 here, $500 per link seems high.  Most ISPs complain about the $250 
 they pay now for CPEs.

 Jory Privett
 WCCS

 - Original Message - From: michael mulcay 
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 4:23 PM
 Subject: [WISPA] The Next Big Thing in Wireless


 Guys,

 As we wireless operators know, the costs of licensed networks
 (equipment, antennas and licensing) makes providing services to the
 majority of subscribers prohibitively expensive, and the cost at
auction
 for spectrum (for WiMax and 4G products) is beyond the reach of most
of
 us.

 To overcome these problems, two years ago Wireless Strategies began
 research into ways to use new technologies -- WiMAX and smart
antennas
 -- to reuse side lobe radiation around sites of point-to-point 4GHz
and
 6GHz microwave links under the present FCC rules and without causing
 additional interference.

 Our finding is that networks can be designed to operate with smart
 antennas with distributed radiators and that the new paths can be
 concurrently coordinated, under existing FCC rules and without
causing
 additional interference.

 We believe that concurrent coordination will be The Next Big Thing
in
 Wireless, leveling the playing field by making it possible for WISPs
to
 obtain multipurpose licensed spectrum at pennies on the dollar
compared
 to obtaining it at auction. By making use of the formerly wasted side
 lobe radiation of 4GHz and 6GHz paths, WISPs will be able to use IEEE
 802.16-based (WiMAX) equipment with small antennas to provide
licensed
 broadband services to hundreds of additional subscribers at a
 provisioning cost of only about $500 per link. We appreciate that
some
 members of the industry may initially perceive any change to the
status
 quo as a threat, but we believe that concurrent coordination will
 provide extraordinary benefits to the entire industry, especially
WISPs.

 Due to the potential for unprecedented industry-wide changes from the
 use of antennas with distributed radiators to provide multiple-path
 low-cost broadband services under the existing FCC rules, Wireless
 Strategies decided to remove any uncertainty for investors and
service
 providers by, on February 23, 2007, filing with the Federal
 Communications Commission, a Request for a Declaratory Ruling on
 Compliance of Fixed Microwave Antennas Having Distributed Radiating
 Elements.

 However, to date, the FCC has taken no action. We believe that emails
of
 support from the WISP community can help speed up the process, by
 encouraging the FCC to either issue the requested declaratory ruling
or
 to issue a Public Notice for industry comment.

 Therefore, if you would like a copy of our FCC filing and/or
information
 about the new concept of concurrent coordination, please contact me
at
 Wireless Strategies 831-659-5618 or [EMAIL PROTECTED] For
 additional information you can also visit our web site at
 www.wirelessstrategies.net.

 Thanks,

 Mike

 Michael Mulcay, CEO
 Wireless Strategies, Inc.

 -- 
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] CALEA FAQ Questions

2007-05-10 Thread Sam Tetherow
This is one of the things that has always bothered me when it comes to 
wire tapping a data connection.  On a phone call it can be pretty easy 
to tell if your suspect is involved in the conversation, assuming they 
have not used a voice modulator.  But when it comes to a data 
connection, how do you know?


   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless

Martha Huizenga wrote:
This is not the sense that I get from the meeting we had with the FBI. 
They will know who the target is and be issuing an order for that 
person. However, if they happen to live with several people all on one 
wireless network, then the traffic is going to be mixed most likely. 
The best you can do is give them the traffic at that IP. According to 
the FBI, it's just like when they tap phones. The are to listen to 
only the target conversations and not the other people in the home.


Lonnie Nunweiler wrote:

Do they issue search warrants for a whole apartment building because
they suspect someone living there is doing something bad?  It was my
understanding that a bit more info is required and it has to actually
have a person or persons in mind.  Why would data taps be treated any
differently?

Lonnie

On 5/10/07, Matt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 I have been reading the WISPA CALEA FAQ and was a little concerned 
about
 question #10. If the LEA does not know who the suspect is using an 
open

 access point does this mean that everyone that has used that access
 point will have their data handed over to the LEA? It would seem 
that if

 the LEA is only allowed to receive the data requested in the subpoena
 this would be a violation.

In the past WISP's have asked if there was anyway to keep users from
NATing and connecting more then 1 PC.  There is no way to block this
and no easy way to prevent or detect it.  From the ISP perspective
there is no way isolate single hotspot user since they all come in on
the same IP.  If the ISP has control and management of the hotspot
they may be able to isolate the traffic of a given mac but this would
not be reliable if they connect with a different laptop the next day.
Of course it depends what kind of hotspot and how its setup.

I would say your going to have to give the LEA all the traffic for the
hotspot and let them filter/figure out what they need.  Moral of the
story: open non-encrypted wireless routers are NOT secure to use.
Unless your a bad guy and just drive around tell you find one then do
your ill deeds there.

Just my opinion.

Matt
--
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] CALEA FAQ Questions

2007-05-10 Thread John Scrivner

Sam,
The evidence that LEAs collect is just part of a case. If a suspect is 
doing bad things then data will be collected. Next steps would usually 
involve a warrant to get the computer and have it looked over. I have 
seen other tools used by LEAs to gather evidence. I am guessing that 
data-taps will rarely be the basis for an entire case. If it is then 
defense attorneys better call on us because I can tell them how easy it 
is to make data traffic appear to come from one person or another 
without the person's knowledge. That is Hacker 101 type stuff. People 
sneaking access on open APs is obviously going to lead to some false 
data tap information in many cases. Maybe people will start locking down 
their home APs after that happens a few times.

Scriv


Sam Tetherow wrote:

This is one of the things that has always bothered me when it comes to 
wire tapping a data connection.  On a phone call it can be pretty easy 
to tell if your suspect is involved in the conversation, assuming they 
have not used a voice modulator.  But when it comes to a data 
connection, how do you know?


   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless

Martha Huizenga wrote:

This is not the sense that I get from the meeting we had with the 
FBI. They will know who the target is and be issuing an order for 
that person. However, if they happen to live with several people all 
on one wireless network, then the traffic is going to be mixed most 
likely. The best you can do is give them the traffic at that IP. 
According to the FBI, it's just like when they tap phones. The are to 
listen to only the target conversations and not the other people in 
the home.


Lonnie Nunweiler wrote:


Do they issue search warrants for a whole apartment building because
they suspect someone living there is doing something bad?  It was my
understanding that a bit more info is required and it has to actually
have a person or persons in mind.  Why would data taps be treated any
differently?

Lonnie

On 5/10/07, Matt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I have been reading the WISPA CALEA FAQ and was a little 
concerned about
 question #10. If the LEA does not know who the suspect is using 
an open

 access point does this mean that everyone that has used that access
 point will have their data handed over to the LEA? It would seem 
that if
 the LEA is only allowed to receive the data requested in the 
subpoena

 this would be a violation.

In the past WISP's have asked if there was anyway to keep users from
NATing and connecting more then 1 PC.  There is no way to block this
and no easy way to prevent or detect it.  From the ISP perspective
there is no way isolate single hotspot user since they all come in on
the same IP.  If the ISP has control and management of the hotspot
they may be able to isolate the traffic of a given mac but this would
not be reliable if they connect with a different laptop the next day.
Of course it depends what kind of hotspot and how its setup.

I would say your going to have to give the LEA all the traffic for the
hotspot and let them filter/figure out what they need.  Moral of the
story: open non-encrypted wireless routers are NOT secure to use.
Unless your a bad guy and just drive around tell you find one then do
your ill deeds there.

Just my opinion.

Matt
--
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/