Re: [WISPA] Thoughts on 900MHz mesh networks

2007-09-12 Thread Tom DeReggi
Wow, what a pleasant surprise. Glad to hear from you! Thinkin of gettin back into WISP stuff... What are you crazy :-) Are you a glutton for punishment :-) No seriously, this is still an existing industry, just a lot of new competitions and stragegies necessary to survive. On the 900 Mesh...

[WISPA] FCC Service Code

2007-09-12 Thread Mike Hammett
What are the FCC service codes of other users of 900 MHz? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com ** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at ISPCON

Re: [WISPA] Alternate transport providers, Cogent

2007-09-12 Thread Matt Liotta
Matt wrote: Is anyone using Cogent as a bandwidth provider? Pros and cons? Cogent is awful and widely known for it. Nevertheless, the do have an important place in the industry. If you use them for an upstream make sure you have another one and understand enough about BGP to get around the

Re: [WISPA] Alternate transport providers, Cogent

2007-09-12 Thread Matt Liotta
Matt Liotta wrote: Cogent is awful and widely known for it. Nevertheless, the do have an important place in the industry. If you use them for an upstream make sure you have another one and understand enough about BGP to get around the traffic engineering they do. I should also add that there

Re: [WISPA] Alternate transport providers, Cogent

2007-09-12 Thread Mike Hammett
I have yet to see anyone go under $15 on 100 megs. That said, I haven't really been looking in a few months. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org

Re: [WISPA] Alternate transport providers, Cogent

2007-09-12 Thread Matt Liotta
Mike Hammett wrote: I have yet to see anyone go under $15 on 100 megs. That said, I haven't really been looking in a few months. Tier 1 is available for under $15. Of course the price per meg gets people all screwed up since most people don't want 100 megs. For example, let's say you are

[WISPA] route table growth

2007-09-12 Thread Matt Liotta
Since we were discussing bandwidth, I thought I would mention for anyone that is doing full tables on older equipment you may want to look at your TCAM size. It seems about 30% of currently in use Cisco gear can only old up to 244,000 routes. We currently have a little of 236,000 routes in our

Re: [WISPA] Alternate transport providers, Cogent

2007-09-12 Thread Mike Hammett
I do agree with what you say, but in the access business too much bandwidth is never enough. This kind of goes full circle to Rick's original post. People will be wanting more bandwidth. If you're using 20 megs now, expect to use 100 megs in a short couple of years. - Mike Hammett

Re: [WISPA] Alternate transport providers, Cogent

2007-09-12 Thread Matt Liotta
Mike Hammett wrote: I do agree with what you say, but in the access business too much bandwidth is never enough. This kind of goes full circle to Rick's original post. People will be wanting more bandwidth. If you're using 20 megs now, expect to use 100 megs in a short couple of years.

RE: [WISPA] Thoughts on 900MHz mesh networks

2007-09-12 Thread Ralph
Yes they have. Metricom-Ricochet. They failed. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Allen Marsalis Sent: Monday, September 10, 2007 12:54 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: RE: [WISPA] Thoughts on 900MHz mesh networks I take it that nobody has

RE: [WISPA] Thoughts on 900MHz mesh networks

2007-09-12 Thread Rick Harnish
Did they fail because of the immature technology or a failed business plan? Would the more mature technology available today have made an impact on Metricom-Ricochets ultimate success or failure? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ralph Sent:

Re: [WISPA] Thoughts on 900MHz mesh networks

2007-09-12 Thread Matt Liotta
Rick Harnish wrote: Did they fail because of the immature technology or a failed business plan? Would the more mature technology available today have made an impact on Metricom-Ricochets ultimate success or failure? I was a Ricochet user in the Bay Area and was quite happy with the service

Re: [WISPA] Alternate transport providers, Cogent

2007-09-12 Thread George Rogato
Widely known where Matt? I'd like to know how you guys get the pulse of what everyone is thinking. As for being the red headed step child nobody likes Mike, Do you think they actually like each other, especially one as aggressive as Cogent who is making the others drop their pricing?

RE: [WISPA] Alternate transport providers, Cogent

2007-09-12 Thread Rick Harnish
George, I have read this email three times and still can't determine whether you are sincerely asking a question(s) or whether you are stirring the pot here. Please clarify professionally. I actually have been enjoying Matt's posts this morning. I found them to be very informative. While we

Re: [WISPA] Alternate transport providers, Cogent

2007-09-12 Thread Mike Hammett
Everyone else mostly gets along together. Obviously no one likes their competition. Every few years one of Cogent's peers de-peers them, causing a big ruckus. You can see what's going on via NANOG and ISP-Bandwidth. Lately the opinion is that a few years ago Cogent wasn't worth their cheap

RE: [WISPA] Thoughts on 900MHz mesh networks

2007-09-12 Thread D. Ryan Spott
I think they failed via a strategic investment by some of the larger players. (ATT I think?). The investment was large and like a typical dot-com they spent and expanded far faster than they should have 'cause hey, there's a second round coming and when they went looking for that second round,

Re: [WISPA] Alternate transport providers, Cogent

2007-09-12 Thread George Rogato
I'm very serious. I've read it over and over again on the various list from those who resell other bandwidth bashing cogent. It's a stratergy, if you sell high, bash the low. makes sense. So if Matt says Cogent is the worse, I want him to back it up with facts. I can point to some facts that

Re: [WISPA] Alternate transport providers, Cogent

2007-09-12 Thread Mike Hammett
I'd say they were sincere... at least that's how I took it. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Rick Harnish [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 10:39 AM

Re: [WISPA] Alternate transport providers, Cogent

2007-09-12 Thread George Rogato
Mike, you've been listening to too many sales droids on the isp-bandwidth list and old time operators that would really like to charge us 250.00 per meg. George Mike Hammett wrote: Everyone else mostly gets along together. Obviously no one likes their competition. Every few years one of

Re: [WISPA] Alternate transport providers, Cogent

2007-09-12 Thread George Rogato
I am sincere, and I never intentionally stir the pot. But when facts are miscrewed, I prefer to point out what I perceive is a discrepancy. Mike Hammett wrote: I'd say they were sincere... at least that's how I took it. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions

RE: [WISPA] Alternate transport providers, Cogent

2007-09-12 Thread Rick Harnish
That clarifies it. I just wasn't following your line of questions as they seemed rather vague. However, as I said, I'm not very acquainted with Cogent. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Rogato Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007

Re: [WISPA] Alternate transport providers, Cogent

2007-09-12 Thread Matt Liotta
George Rogato wrote: I'm very serious. I've read it over and over again on the various list from those who resell other bandwidth bashing cogent. Understood, but we don't resell other bandwidth; we sell our own. We are not a tier 1, but we do operate a national backbone and believe there

Re: [WISPA] Alternate transport providers, Cogent

2007-09-12 Thread Jory Privett
If you sell a national backbone what do you have in North Texas? I need bandwidth desperately and cant find anything less than about $250/Meg. Jory Privett WCCS - Original Message - From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday,

Re: [WISPA] Alternate transport providers, Cogent

2007-09-12 Thread Jory Privett
Sorry was supposed to be off-list Doh... Jory - Original Message - From: Jory Privett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 11:44 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alternate transport providers, Cogent If you sell a national

Re: [WISPA] Alternate transport providers, Cogent

2007-09-12 Thread Mike Hammett
Good post, Matt. Usually if one's not for Cogent, they have nothing good to say about them. You were fair, however. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List

[WISPA] PowerCode

2007-09-12 Thread Mark Nash
Anyone use their billing BMU solutions? Good/bad/ugly? Thanks. Mark Nash UnwiredOnline.Net 350 Holly Street Junction City, OR 97448 http://www.uwol.net 541-998- 541-998-5599 fax ** Join us at the WISPA

Re: [WISPA] Alternate transport providers, Cogent

2007-09-12 Thread Matt Liotta
Jory Privett wrote: If you sell a national backbone what do you have in North Texas? I need bandwidth desperately and cant find anything less than about $250/Meg. I know you meant to send this offlist and ultimately, you did, but I figured I would respond onlist in case others have a

Re: [WISPA] Alternate transport providers, Cogent

2007-09-12 Thread Jory Privett
Yes Belwave is there and they come highly recommended. I have talked with them and they seem like good people. I will sign a contract with them this week I hope. I was just wanting to find a better price per meg but it does not look like it will happen. Jory Privett WCCS - Original

[WISPA] IP Assignments

2007-09-12 Thread Mike Hammett
I'm not sure when it was changed, but you need one less bit of address space to get your own, direct allocation. http://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#four222 You now only need two /24s to request your own /22 from Arin. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com

Re: [WISPA] IP Assignments

2007-09-12 Thread Matt Liotta
Mike Hammett wrote: I'm not sure when it was changed, but you need one less bit of address space to get your own, direct allocation. http://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#four222 You now only need two /24s to request your own /22 from Arin. If you are multi-homed you can request a /24

Re: [WISPA] IP Assignments

2007-09-12 Thread Mike Hammett
That was in the multi-homed section of the web site as I believe everyone s hould be multi-homed. Could you provide documentation that one can get a /24 immediately if multi-homed? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From:

Re: [WISPA] IP Assignments

2007-09-12 Thread Matt Liotta
Mike Hammett wrote: That was in the multi-homed section of the web site as I believe everyone s hould be multi-homed. Could you provide documentation that one can get a /24 immediately if multi-homed? NPRM 4.2.3.6 This policy allows a downstream customer's multihoming requirement to

Re: [WISPA] IP Assignments

2007-09-12 Thread Ryan Langseth
On Wed, 2007-09-12 at 15:27 -0400, Matt Liotta wrote: Mike Hammett wrote: I'm not sure when it was changed, but you need one less bit of address space to get your own, direct allocation. http://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#four222 You now only need two /24s to request your own /22

[WISPA] Legal Charges used in Malicious Interference Situations

2007-09-12 Thread Jack Unger
It's hard for me to accept that there are a few inconsiderate bullies out there who would intentionally and maliciously jam other WISPs in order to take over the customer base. I have recently seen probable evidence of just such behavior. Because the FCC has no law (that I know of) against

Re: [WISPA] IP Assignments

2007-09-12 Thread Allen Marsalis
At 02:24 PM 9/12/2007, Mike Hammett wrote: I'm not sure when it was changed, but you need one less bit of address space to get your own, direct allocation. http://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#four222 You now only need two /24s to request your own /22 from Arin. Yeah but will everyone

Re: [WISPA] Legal Charges used in Malicious Interference Situations

2007-09-12 Thread George Rogato
Onlist for my reply. It's also a good onlist discusion. I have always believed that there is some way to combat someone who intentionally causes interference with an existing network to cause harm to the business or operation and or for financial gain. I'm not a lawyer, so I can't even give

Re: [WISPA] IP Assignments

2007-09-12 Thread Matt Liotta
Allen Marsalis wrote: Yeah but will everyone route a /22?? I am no routing guru but in the old days, you had to have a /19 for sprint to route it for instance. I bought a /20 a couple of years later and had no problems out of Sprint or anyone. Perhaps today's routers have so much memory,

Re: [WISPA] IP Assignments

2007-09-12 Thread Mike Hammett
That's what's currently on their web site. I'd assume that if it wasn't current policy, it wouldn't be on their site. Are you saying you thought one needed to demonstrate a /22 to get your own assignment? That's what I was saying with that post, was that it has changed one bit and now you

Re: [WISPA] IP Assignments

2007-09-12 Thread Mike Hammett
I like the sounds of that. It would be nice to have a /24 instead of a block of IP addresses that isn't routable (provided to me in 10 address blocks). I could then do proper routing on my network. Being PA space would mean that it would have a higher chance of being routable instead of PI

Re: [WISPA] IP Assignments

2007-09-12 Thread Mike Hammett
I guess that's a good point. I may be able to get it, but will it be routable? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Allen Marsalis [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, September

Re: [WISPA] Legal Charges used in Malicious Interference Situations

2007-09-12 Thread Matt Liotta
No need to get into complicated legal territory. If you can prove to a jury that a company is not complying with FCC rules in a way that is interfering with your business then you can certainly win a tortuous interference suit against the company in question regardless of whether the FCC will

Re: [WISPA] Legal Charges used in Malicious Interference Situations

2007-09-12 Thread Graham McIntire
A neighboring WISP to me ran in to this last year when a new competitor moved in and placed towers (20' taller than the existing WISP) within 1/4 mile of all the existing WISPs towers. I ended up attempting to help the existing WISP but was unable to prove anything besides noisy 2.4 GHz. They

RE: [WISPA] Legal Charges used in Malicious Interference Situations

2007-09-12 Thread Larry Yunker
Your options for recourse are going to depend largely upon the state in which you operate. However, most states are now recognizing either in common law or via statute some of the following: Tortious Interference with Business Relations Tortious Interference with Contract Unfair Trade Practices

Re: [WISPA] IP Assignments

2007-09-12 Thread Clint Ricker
There is some theoretical problems; I've not seen it, though, and have had to announce /24's on a different provider for remote pops in the past. On 9/12/07, Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I guess that's a good point. I may be able to get it, but will it be routable? - Mike

Re: [WISPA] Legal Charges used in Malicious Interference Situations

2007-09-12 Thread Steve Stroh
Jack: If you can reasonably allege that what's going on IS in fact malicious interference, that IS actionable by the FCC. Even if the spectrum in question is license-exempt spectrum, malicious interference is specifically prohibited. Thanks, Steve On 9/12/07, Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [WISPA] Legal Charges used in Malicious Interference Situations

2007-09-12 Thread George Rogato
Issue is that if you are using legal 2.4 equipment and the new guy is using legal 2.4 equipment, the fcc is not going to get involved. or any unlicensed frequency Matt Liotta wrote: No need to get into complicated legal territory. If you can prove to a jury that a company is not complying

Re: [WISPA] Legal Charges used in Malicious Interference Situations

2007-09-12 Thread Mike Hammett
Isn't that only to licensed users? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Steve Stroh [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 3:37 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Legal

RE: [WISPA] Legal Charges used in Malicious Interference Situations

2007-09-12 Thread Mac Dearman
Jack, I don't think it would have to be anything illegal about the interference. If someone moves into an area established by you - where you have an ongoing business and (for instance) someone hangs some Canopy and creates the inability to recover from the noise - - that is a law suit in the

RE: [WISPA] Legal Charges used in Malicious Interference Situations

2007-09-12 Thread D. Ryan Spott
If you are a lawyer, or you can cite specific case law or examples. (URL is required) then continue this thread. If not.. Don't! :) ryan (usually a great producer of list noise, but not today!) ** Join us at the

Re: [WISPA] Legal Charges used in Malicious Interference Situations

2007-09-12 Thread Mike Hammett
The relation to the McDonalds question would be if they built their store in front of your door, preventing you from getting customers. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: David Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA

RE: [WISPA] Legal Charges used in Malicious Interference Situations

2007-09-12 Thread David Peterson
I would have to disagree with most of this thread. You have two things going against you in this. 1. A free market economy. 2. License Free spectrum. You can no more sue for someone putting up wireless in your area than you can if you owned a restaurant and McDonalds moved in next door.

Re: [WISPA] Legal Charges used in Malicious Interference Situations

2007-09-12 Thread lakeland
I believe that if someone wilfully interferes with your business you would have a case. Perfect example would be if your competition operated on the same non overlapping channell when other clear channels are available and you notified them that they were interfering with your system. Your

Re: [WISPA] Thoughts on 900MHz mesh networks

2007-09-12 Thread Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181
Hi Allen, From the conversations I've had with people trying to use, or just around, mesh gear, it doesn't usually work very well once the network starts to come alive. The old hub and spoke method works best. Some of the new mesh gear uses different channels for broadcast vs. backhaul.

RE: [WISPA] Thoughts on 900MHz mesh networks

2007-09-12 Thread Gino Villarini
Using dif radios for wifi and backhaul isn't mesh any more? How so? I was under the impression that mesh was the ability of the equipment to form a interconnection between the nodes with alternative paths to the Internet feed Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband

RE: [WISPA] Legal Charges used in Malicious Interference Situations

2007-09-12 Thread Mac Dearman
I disagree totally :) with all respect! I also think that Canopy ought to be illegal in the USA. They built something that is totally spectrally unfriendly - on purpose! The commercial that they use to air was the last man standing. I didn't say that Canopy didn't build some pretty good gear - I

Re: [WISPA] Legal Charges used in Malicious Interference Situations

2007-09-12 Thread Mike Hammett
Can-o-pee. (thanks Bill) I was given a Canopy 2.4 GHz starter kit... sold it. ;-) - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Mac Dearman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday,

[WISPA] Intrameta / BOSS

2007-09-12 Thread Zachery Wolfinger
Any here use the BOSS software from Intrameta to manage their customer / radio / other data? We are evaluating them and would appreciate experience from the field. Thank you, Zak Wolfinger IT Director CyberLink International Phone: 888-293-3693 Ext. 4357 Fax: 888-293-3995

[WISPA] The MOBL Sage (Warning: Long Post)

2007-09-12 Thread Allen Marsalis
Hello Allen, Good to see you back and doing well. Curious to hear your take on the MobilePro saga. On or off list is good with me. The Friends Quite a few people have asked me (A) what have I been doing lately? And (B) please tell me the MobilePro saga. It means a lot to me that

RE: [WISPA] Thoughts on 900MHz mesh networks

2007-09-12 Thread Allen Marsalis
At 06:35 PM 9/12/2007, Gino Villarini wrote: Using dif radios for wifi and backhaul isn't mesh any more? How so? I was under the impression that mesh was the ability of the equipment to form a interconnection between the nodes with alternative paths to the Internet feed I hate to be a

RE: [WISPA] Legal Charges used in Malicious Interference Situations

2007-09-12 Thread Faisal Imtiaz
.I would love to see their gear recalled and outlawed... Mac, That will happen when the 'cow jumps the moon'. Don't know if you all know the story of how Moto Canopy was developed ? It was developed for the military to begin with ...you take it from thereevery thing that you all

RE: [WISPA] Thoughts on 900MHz mesh networks

2007-09-12 Thread Allen Marsalis
At 10:44 AM 9/12/2007, D. Ryan Spott wrote: and like a typical dot-com they spent and expanded far faster than they should have 'cause hey, there's a second round coming and when they went looking for that second round, the large investor played their strategy and said no second round for

Re: [WISPA] Thoughts on 900MHz mesh networks

2007-09-12 Thread Allen Marsalis
At 06:11 PM 9/12/2007, Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: From the conversations I've had with people trying to use, or just around, mesh gear, it doesn't usually work very well once the network starts to come alive. The old hub and spoke method works best. But the entire Internet is a

RE: [WISPA] Legal Charges used in Malicious Interference Situations

2007-09-12 Thread Allen Marsalis
At 08:49 PM 9/12/2007, Mac Dearman wrote: We (all the WISP's) have a pact in N. Louisiana - - no one buys Canopy! Wrong!! See www.bluebirdwireless.com... NW is now polluted thanks to motos sales team infecting our 911 center and recruiting their employees to quit and join the

Re: [WISPA] Thoughts on 900MHz mesh networks

2007-09-12 Thread Travis Johnson
Hi, The biggest problem I see when looking at mesh is having access to all those locations... people's homes, light poles, telephone poles, whatever. You now have to install UPS systems, rebooters, have the equipment some-what secure, etc. Just the few repeaters we have at people's homes

Re: [WISPA] Thoughts on 900MHz mesh networks

2007-09-12 Thread Allen Marsalis
At 12:13 AM 9/13/2007, Travis Johnson wrote: Hi, The biggest problem I see when looking at mesh is having access to all those locations... people's homes, light poles, telephone poles, whatever. You now have to install UPS systems, rebooters, have the equipment some-what secure, etc.