[WISPA] using street level and below tree canopy for unlicensed bands
I was talking to some people today who deploy wireless networks in very noise environments, and some of them were talking about deploying radios under the building or tree line in an attempt to get less nodes. One person said that this practice is common in places like NYC where the street level is relatively free on the 5GHz band. Anyone else do or heard of this? (just curious...) WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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] good multiradio wifi units for noise environments?
I am looking for multiradio wifi units that handle well in environments with high floor noise levels, particularly in city areas where the unlicensed band is very congested. Any suggestions? WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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] ip accounting solns
Anyone here use any IP accounting solutions? Say you have one IP hog. How do you find them and alert on that? (Yes, I know about tools like MRTG, but I'm wondering if others have any other more comprehensive solutions) WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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] ip accounting solns
Take a look at ntop (http://ntop.org). It will show you how much bandwidth each IP address is using, who they are talking to, and what protocols they are using. On 6/12/08, Rogelio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyone here use any IP accounting solutions? Say you have one IP hog. How do you find them and alert on that? (Yes, I know about tools like MRTG, but I'm wondering if others have any other more comprehensive solutions) WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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 Wants You! Join today! 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] ip accounting solns
Jonathan Auer wrote: Take a look at ntop (http://ntop.org). It will show you how much bandwidth each IP address is using, who they are talking to, and what protocols they are using. I've actually used that, and it's great. Good call! WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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] good multiradio wifi units for noise environments?
Noise is noise and will destroy performance on any radio. Rogelio wrote: I am looking for multiradio wifi units that handle well in environments with high floor noise levels, particularly in city areas where the unlicensed band is very congested. Any suggestions? WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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/ -- Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993 Cisco Press Author - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs Vendor-Neutral Wireless Design-Training-Troubleshooting-Consulting FCC License # PG-12-25133 Profile http://www.linkedin.com/in/jackunger Phone 818-227-4220 Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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] good multiradio wifi units for noise environments?
Jack Unger wrote: Noise is noise and will destroy performance on any radio. True. But aren't there some wifi units that get better radio sensitivity due to channel bandwidth and the noise figure of the radio? WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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] Voip over Wireless
What doesn't work with Vonage? Is it the quality of the call or the service itself? Probably call quality. Anecdotal evidence ahoy! One of my field techs, who has our wireless service at his home, tried Vonage for a few months, but the call quality was lousy. He later switched to Packet 8 and has been quite happy with it. We've also discovered that some brands work better when they're exposed (i.e. with a public IP address), and some are better behind a NATting router. Packet 8, for instance, seemed to work infinitely better behind a router than when the device had a public IP. The Vonage appliance, as I recall, was just the opposite. As I recall, Packet 8 was five bucks a month cheaper than Vonage too, but didn't have quite as good a selection of local numbers. (This is all second-hand -- I just use my cell phone for most things and a Skype account for the rare international call.) David Smith MVN.net WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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] using street level and below tree canopy for unlicensed bands
In my days at EarthLink we did discover that the noise levels in both the 2.4 and 5 GHz bands were much lower at street level than up on high buildings or towers. This was both good and bad. It was good in that we had a better signal to noise ratio. The reason being that in Philly the buildings in many cases were three stories and taller than the mounting points we were allowed to use on the poles. With buildings shadowing a node it was much quieter. This was also a big problem in the network design. Those same buildings and trees also kept the mesh nodes from being able to link anywhere but straight along the streets between the buildings and even that was a challenge with the trees. For those reasons Philadelphia ended up with a much higher transmitter count per square mile than originally anticipated ( a lot more). Now the idea of shooting signal under the tree canopy is a good one. One problem is that you need to ensure that you can actually mount the radio below the tree canopy. In most cities the lower part of the canopy will be 10 to 15 feet above the ground and pole mounting heights typically are 20 feet or higher. At 5 GHz on a mesh system if you have to go through any more than about 10 meters of tree, the attenuation is such that you can't hold a link (with or without noise). If you are designing a network to shoot under the trees, you better have someone out on the field visually verify every single link that you want to work is clear of obstructions end to end. The reason being that any slight change in ground elevation can easily block the path because you have obstructions to consider both above and below your RF path. RF tools can not account for this, even if you have high resolution tree clutter data. They will model the tree as solid all the way down to the ground. They can not show the clear path area on the underside of the canopy. If this were a small mesh deployment and you could verify links on the ground I would say it was possible. Thank You, Brian Webster www.wirelessmapping.com http://www.wirelessmapping.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Rogelio Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 2:02 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] using street level and below tree canopy for unlicensedbands I was talking to some people today who deploy wireless networks in very noise environments, and some of them were talking about deploying radios under the building or tree line in an attempt to get less nodes. One person said that this practice is common in places like NYC where the street level is relatively free on the 5GHz band. Anyone else do or heard of this? (just curious...) WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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 Wants You! Join today! 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] good multiradio wifi units for noise environments?
Jack Unger wrote: Noise is noise and will destroy performance on any radio. Might low noise amplifiers help in these situations? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-noise_amplifier WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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] good multiradio wifi units for noise environments?
On 12 Jun 2008, at 20:17, Rogelio wrote: Jack Unger wrote: Noise is noise and will destroy performance on any radio. True. But aren't there some wifi units that get better radio sensitivity due to channel bandwidth and the noise figure of the radio? With standard clients or proprietary? Max-Fi claims greater range/bandwidth from standard 802.11 radios by using a proprietary routing protocol among several access points. http://www.dailywireless.org/2008/05/27/7795/ In a sense, that's a system design that improves propagation and noise rejection, but the RF interface is standard. -- Nigel Bruin. WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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] Voip over Wireless
Another WISP told me Packet8 works better on a wireless network than Vonage. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David E. Smith Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 8:01 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Voip over Wireless What doesn't work with Vonage? Is it the quality of the call or the service itself? Probably call quality. Anecdotal evidence ahoy! One of my field techs, who has our wireless service at his home, tried Vonage for a few months, but the call quality was lousy. He later switched to Packet 8 and has been quite happy with it. We've also discovered that some brands work better when they're exposed (i.e. with a public IP address), and some are better behind a NATting router. Packet 8, for instance, seemed to work infinitely better behind a router than when the device had a public IP. The Vonage appliance, as I recall, was just the opposite. As I recall, Packet 8 was five bucks a month cheaper than Vonage too, but didn't have quite as good a selection of local numbers. (This is all second-hand -- I just use my cell phone for most things and a Skype account for the rare international call.) David Smith MVN.net WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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] Voip over Wireless
On Jun 12, 2008, at 7:49 AM, Wallace L. Walcher wrote: Another WISP told me Packet8 works better on a wireless network than Vonage. It comes down to codec being used and the jitter buffer. Packet 8 has a significant jitter buffer. There's a noticeable delay that's very awkward. Really bad when you add the latency of a cell phone. We've had no problems with Vonage on both G.711u and G.729 (or whatever the lower bitrate codec is that Vonage uses), as well as our own G.711 stuff (ours has much less delay than any third-party solution). We're also not running this on any 802.11-based gear. Some routers will prioritize the traffic, and some radios will do so also, ensuring that the VoIP packets make it to and from the site backhaul before anything else does. That makes a huge difference. -- Bryan WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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] good multiradio wifi units for noise environments?
C/I ratio is a good metric - Original Message - From: Rogelio [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 6:17 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] good multiradio wifi units for noise environments? Jack Unger wrote: Noise is noise and will destroy performance on any radio. True. But aren't there some wifi units that get better radio sensitivity due to channel bandwidth and the noise figure of the radio? WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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 Wants You! Join today! 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] good multiradio wifi units for noise environments?
The noise figure of the receiver front end or of a low noise amplifier will help you to pick out a weak signal in the absence of interference. But you are talking about an environment of interference. A low noise amplifier could actually hurt in this case depending on the third order intercept point of the unit. It all goes back to carrier to interference ratio and modulation methods. FSK is better than QAM in this respect. I would assume DSSS would be better but I don't know if any WISP manufacturer uses DSSS. OFDM should be really good. - Original Message - From: Rogelio [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 7:14 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] good multiradio wifi units for noise environments? Jack Unger wrote: Noise is noise and will destroy performance on any radio. Might low noise amplifiers help in these situations? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-noise_amplifier WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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 Wants You! Join today! 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] good multiradio wifi units for noise environments?
In high noise areas you'll be better off to use almost anything but WiFi. It's the least noise tolerant protocol that I know of. marlon - Original Message - From: Rogelio [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 11:07 PM Subject: [WISPA] good multiradio wifi units for noise environments? I am looking for multiradio wifi units that handle well in environments with high floor noise levels, particularly in city areas where the unlicensed band is very congested. Any suggestions? WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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 Wants You! Join today! 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] ip accounting solns
Brandon has the best solution out there. It's also cost effective. marlon - Original Message - From: Rogelio [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 11:28 PM Subject: [WISPA] ip accounting solns Anyone here use any IP accounting solutions? Say you have one IP hog. How do you find them and alert on that? (Yes, I know about tools like MRTG, but I'm wondering if others have any other more comprehensive solutions) WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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 Wants You! Join today! 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] good multiradio wifi units for noise environments?
Better sensitivity is a BAD thing in a high noise area. I do like the MT units that include what amounts to a squelch function. Won't help on a laptop though. Only if you use them as both ap and cpe. marlon - Original Message - From: Rogelio [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 5:17 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] good multiradio wifi units for noise environments? Jack Unger wrote: Noise is noise and will destroy performance on any radio. True. But aren't there some wifi units that get better radio sensitivity due to channel bandwidth and the noise figure of the radio? WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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 Wants You! Join today! 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] good multiradio wifi units for noise environments?
As a rule, no. Low noise vs. no noise. We're getting the same ranges with less than 4 watt systems and no amps as we did with 4 watt amped systems. The most amazing part of that Speeds nearly always double or more! marlon - Original Message - From: Rogelio [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 6:14 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] good multiradio wifi units for noise environments? Jack Unger wrote: Noise is noise and will destroy performance on any radio. Might low noise amplifiers help in these situations? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-noise_amplifier WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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 Wants You! Join today! 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] good multiradio wifi units for noise environments?
Actually, we need a little more information to answer this... Is this for a hot spot? Is this for fixed service? Is this for a mobile (clients in a park, for instance) service? Star-OS recently added an upper and lower limiter to radio sensitivity. In point to point links, you can bracket the RSSI and performance is dramatically improved where noise is the issue. However: If your noise and signal are the same level, nothing can 'really' help. I've found that the compex WLM54AGS23's are very good, as well as Wistron CM9's. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 9:58 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] good multiradio wifi units for noise environments? In high noise areas you'll be better off to use almost anything but WiFi. It's the least noise tolerant protocol that I know of. marlon - Original Message - From: Rogelio [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 11:07 PM Subject: [WISPA] good multiradio wifi units for noise environments? I am looking for multiradio wifi units that handle well in environments with high floor noise levels, particularly in city areas where the unlicensed band is very congested. Any suggestions? WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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 Wants You! Join today! 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 Wants You! Join today! 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] Voip over Wireless
I have not used it personally. I have had 3 customers try it and say it worked but many calls dropped and lots of echo. We may have just helped that a bunch in that we just reduced the number of hops to our network from 6 Wireless hops to 1 hop to fiber. I am just looking for a service that is a good fit for my wireless network that I can get a kick back but don't have to maintain allot. Steve Barnes Executive Manager PCS-WIN RCWiFi Wireless Internet Service (765)584-2288 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Rogato Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 11:05 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Voip over Wireless Steve What doesn't work with Vonage? Is it the quality of the call or the service itself? Maybe I can help abit. George Steve Barnes wrote: We are a small wisp and have been asked about VOIP and I am just starting to research it. Vonage has not worked on our network. What service is recommended by all of you that does not eat your networks alive with large packets and Keep alive. FYI, I am looking for a service not to build my own. Steve Barnes Executive Manager PCS-WIN RCWiFi Wireless Internet Service (765)584-2288 WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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 Wants You! Join today! 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 Wants You! Join today! 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] User check program
On Jun 12, 2008, at 4:08 PM, Larry Yunker wrote: (1) For purposes of Deployment, this program requires .Net 2.0. The install program will check for the existence of .Net 2.0 on the target machine and will attempt to install it if it is not already installed. Unfortunately, .Net 2.0 won't install on any machine older than Windows98 and won't install on WinXP machines until Service Pack 2.0 or newer is installed. So, the .Net requirement is somewhat of a pain. The Installation program will work easily on machines that already have .Net or on machines that don't have .Net but have all of the prerequisites for installing .Net. Hopefully that will be the majority of installs?!?@ It also means the program doesn't work with no Windows computers, which are increasingly gaining market share. But, in an ideal world, we'd like to avoid installing .Net, so the question is this: does anyone know how to compile and deploy a Visual Basic application without requiring .Net to be installed on the target machine? Or if that's not possible, does anyone have any suggestions as to other visual languages which DO NOT USE .NET and which might be used for future ports of this application. Java. (2) One of the features of this application is a speed test. As you might imagine, sometimes speed tests will fail to complete (due to congestion, poor connection, etc.). For this reason, it becomes imperative that I create some sort of timeout mechanism so that the attempted upload or download halts with no results if the test is taking too long. I'm using the webclient.uploadfile and webclient.downloadfile methods to accomplish these tests. Does anyone know whether there is a way to force this method to halt upon a preset timeout? If not, does anyone have a good example of code to place a process in background in Visual Basic? Generally speaking, webclient is not going to be ideal for speed testing. You are going to want to operate at a lower layer. I would suggest UDP or TCP. -Matt WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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] Voip over Wireless
I'm using a VoIP service that the customer fills out a request form including what number they want, I email to my VoIP guy. He will program and ship it to them. He sends me a bill for the ATA and Shipping of about $45.00. I send the customer a bill for $79.00 for the setup. My VoIP guy charges me $19.50 per month and I turn around and bill my wireless customer anything over that. Any tech support goes to him. And I do not even lay a finger on the equipment and get paid. My VoIP guy lives 3 miles from me and can support the lowwer 48 states. --- On Thu, 6/12/08, Steve Barnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Steve Barnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WISPA] Voip over Wireless To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Date: Thursday, June 12, 2008, 3:15 PM I have not used it personally. I have had 3 customers try it and say it worked but many calls dropped and lots of echo. We may have just helped that a bunch in that we just reduced the number of hops to our network from 6 Wireless hops to 1 hop to fiber. I am just looking for a service that is a good fit for my wireless network that I can get a kick back but don't have to maintain allot. Steve Barnes Executive Manager PCS-WIN RCWiFi Wireless Internet Service (765)584-2288 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Rogato Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 11:05 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Voip over Wireless Steve What doesn't work with Vonage? Is it the quality of the call or the service itself? Maybe I can help abit. George Steve Barnes wrote: We are a small wisp and have been asked about VOIP and I am just starting to research it. Vonage has not worked on our network. What service is recommended by all of you that does not eat your networks alive with large packets and Keep alive. FYI, I am looking for a service not to build my own. Steve Barnes Executive Manager PCS-WIN RCWiFi Wireless Internet Service (765)584-2288 WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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 Wants You! Join today! 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 Wants You! Join today! 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 Wants You! Join today! 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] User check program
On Jun 12, 2008, at 4:28 PM, Larry Yunker wrote: But JAVA requires that a Java VM be installed on the PC. The point is to avoid having to install a separate Framework. Ideally, I'd like a linker that would just compile in those components within .NET that I rely upon. The Java VM has a far greater market penetration than .NET. Back in my software days Java was over 95%. -Matt WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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] User check program
When it comes to cross platform support, I would agree that Java wins out. When it comes to end-user software in a Windows environment, I would have to disagree and state that almost all recent (last 2 to 3 years) development has turned to the .Net platform. Regardless, I am still seeking a 3rd option... I'm looking for a good development platform which can generate standalone exe's for Windows. - Larry -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 4:39 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] User check program On Jun 12, 2008, at 4:28 PM, Larry Yunker wrote: But JAVA requires that a Java VM be installed on the PC. The point is to avoid having to install a separate Framework. Ideally, I'd like a linker that would just compile in those components within .NET that I rely upon. The Java VM has a far greater market penetration than .NET. Back in my software days Java was over 95%. -Matt WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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 Wants You! Join today! 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] User check program
On Jun 12, 2008, at 4:47 PM, Larry Yunker wrote: When it comes to cross platform support, I would agree that Java wins out. When it comes to end-user software in a Windows environment, I would have to disagree and state that almost all recent (last 2 to 3 years) development has turned to the .Net platform. Doesn't matter what the development platform is; it matters whether the VM is installed on the desktop according to your original request. Even if every new piece of software is written in .NET it will still take time for the VM to surpass Java in terms of penetration. Apple doesn't support .NET, which is the elephant in the room you can't avoid. Regardless, I am still seeking a 3rd option... I'm looking for a good development platform which can generate standalone exe's for Windows. C++ is the only option there. Everything else is going to require a runtime. -Matt WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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] User check program
Very nice Larry. Let us all know what we can do to help. PC Blaze Broadband -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Larry Yunker Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 4:08 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] User check program Travis has been good enough to be the Alpha tester of the User check program over the past few days. BTW, I have generically named it Internet Monitor. I'm attaching two updated screenshots. I've added a few features since my last post. These features include: (1) ISP customization via a configuration file for the IP addresses for each of the test target locations. (2) ISP customization Threshold settings (3) ISP customization of Logo and contact information (4) Upload speed testing** Note you will need to add a php or asp file to your webserver to support upload testing. (5) I rearranged the order of the tests to more closely reflect nearest hop to furthest hop (6) The system now detects the user's local IP address, netmask, gateway, and DNS settings. (7) Timeouts and ping responses of less than 1ms are now properly reported. I've run into a few issues and I thought I'd see if anyone has a suggestions regarding these issues: (1) For purposes of Deployment, this program requires .Net 2.0. The install program will check for the existence of .Net 2.0 on the target machine and will attempt to install it if it is not already installed. Unfortunately, .Net 2.0 won't install on any machine older than Windows98 and won't install on WinXP machines until Service Pack 2.0 or newer is installed. So, the .Net requirement is somewhat of a pain. The Installation program will work easily on machines that already have .Net or on machines that don't have .Net but have all of the prerequisites for installing .Net. Hopefully that will be the majority of installs?!?@ But, in an ideal world, we'd like to avoid installing .Net, so the question is this: does anyone know how to compile and deploy a Visual Basic application without requiring .Net to be installed on the target machine? Or if that's not possible, does anyone have any suggestions as to other visual languages which DO NOT USE .NET and which might be used for future ports of this application. (2) One of the features of this application is a speed test. As you might imagine, sometimes speed tests will fail to complete (due to congestion, poor connection, etc.). For this reason, it becomes imperative that I create some sort of timeout mechanism so that the attempted upload or download halts with no results if the test is taking too long. I'm using the webclient.uploadfile and webclient.downloadfile methods to accomplish these tests. Does anyone know whether there is a way to force this method to halt upon a preset timeout? If not, does anyone have a good example of code to place a process in background in Visual Basic? Thanks, Larry WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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] star os config help- clarifying my message
I really don't get how V3 is difficult to figure out. Before I was doing this, I was dragging phone/data cables for the AF. Before that I ran a Husqvarna for a logging company. Before that, I worked on a small ranch. I'm a pretty common sence kind of guy and don't like things that don't work right or are setup wrong. I'm about the farthest thing from the typical Admin guy there is, but somehow through my country way of thinking I figured out V3. Then I figured out how to subnet and route. I got tossed into this wireless stuff with absolutely no idea of what I was doing, but I figured that out too. The interface is actually really nice. I have a customer right now that has a bad radio card. Their latency is about 300ms and about 40% packet loss. I can still log into their radio and fly through the settings just like nothing is wrong. Try that with a web based gui. The reason we got away from Tranzeo is because, they don't work well. In the face of interference, of any little bit, they folded like a lawn chair. Granted this was back in the TR-CPE days, not sure about the new stuff, and don't really care. But we were swapping them out left and right with any WAR board we could find and lovin' every minute of it. I remember my techs telling me how much better this new equipment was compared to the Tranzeos, and these guys were green horns not veterans. They didn't have a set way of thinking which made the transition really easy for them. You don't have to be a geek to figure out V3, just a little free time and internet access. On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 11:39 AM, Marlon K. Schafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: George Rogato [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 9:28 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] star os config help- clarifying my message You'll forget that you weren't familiar with it after you get used to them. It's just like getting a cisco router for your first time and then trying to figure out where to start. Grin. That's part of why I do NOT use Cisco anymore! Sort of like walking in a dark room blindfolded for the first time, where am I? Um, if it were *me*, I'd TURN ON THE LIGHT marlon WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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/ -- Chad Halsted The Computer Works Conway, AR www.tcworks.net WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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] multiple gateway question in mesh scenario
What do others here do in situations where a mesh has multiple gateways? Say you have a large mesh and each egrees is a satellite uplink to a different ISP provider. Would you just assign multiple gateways on the DHCP server? Or would you use something like RADIUS to assign different network parameters to different users? WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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] User check program
On 13 Jun 2008, at 04:28, Larry Yunker wrote: It also means the program doesn't work with no Windows computers, which are increasingly gaining market share. True... I don't have a Mac, so I can't building for that market. While I could and probably will build something for Linux eventually, it seems irrelevant. If your client has Linux, they probably know enough about routing so that this software is unnecessary. I've been watching this thread as the concept of a local Internet diagnostic is a compact form of a more generalised network monitor that I've been mulling over as a MacOS project. Judging by the response, there is at least some need for an ISP client tool with a simple, clear operation giving a Go/NoGo result in layman's terms. What interests me a bit more would be linking to a web service backend for ISP config and to aggregate client reports into an ISP admin interface, but that could come later. Or if that's not possible, does anyone have any suggestions as to other visual languages which DO NOT USE .NET and which might be used for future ports of this application. Java. But JAVA requires that a Java VM be installed on the PC. The point is to avoid having to install a separate Framework. Ideally, I'd like a linker that would just compile in those components within .NET that I rely upon. TBH, I think each platform needs a native app. I use Macs and the few Java, cross-platform applications I use (in lieu of a native Mac program, e.g. Mindmapping, MIB browser, mySQL browser, etc) are all poor in terms of look'n'feel, performance and native Mac interface gestures. Plus, the whole point of the diagnostic tool would be to provide the very best problem-solving advice on each platform so TCP/IP config, firewall settings, perhaps even uPnP would not be generic. The packaging of the application has to meet Mac user's expectations: single file (app bundle) with a nice icon, downloaded in a .dmg file that is dragged to the Applications folder. No installers; admin privileges not required. IMHO, you need a native Mac app, but I'd like to hear your reactions. -- Nigel Bruin. WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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] multiple gateway question in mesh scenario
If you don't need roaming capability treat each one as it's own network or you could create one centralized distribution facility. Dustin -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rogelio Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 6:01 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] multiple gateway question in mesh scenario What do others here do in situations where a mesh has multiple gateways? Say you have a large mesh and each egrees is a satellite uplink to a different ISP provider. Would you just assign multiple gateways on the DHCP server? Or would you use something like RADIUS to assign different network parameters to different users? WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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 Wants You! Join today! 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] User check program
Python is an excellent cross-platform language. Py2exe can generate .exe files from the scripts. So, you could pretty easily compile in your .ini files for each ISP. And Python is awful nice to write in. - Japhy On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 4:47 PM, Larry Yunker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When it comes to cross platform support, I would agree that Java wins out. When it comes to end-user software in a Windows environment, I would have to disagree and state that almost all recent (last 2 to 3 years) development has turned to the .Net platform. Regardless, I am still seeking a 3rd option... I'm looking for a good development platform which can generate standalone exe's for Windows. - Larry -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 4:39 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] User check program On Jun 12, 2008, at 4:28 PM, Larry Yunker wrote: But JAVA requires that a Java VM be installed on the PC. The point is to avoid having to install a separate Framework. Ideally, I'd like a linker that would just compile in those components within .NET that I rely upon. The Java VM has a far greater market penetration than .NET. Back in my software days Java was over 95%. -Matt WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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 Wants You! Join today! 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 Wants You! Join today! 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] multiple gateway question in mesh scenario
Dustin Jurman wrote: If you don't need roaming capability treat each one as it's own network or you could create one centralized distribution facility. I would like roaming, actually. Ideally, the entire mesh would be on the same LAN subnet and each user would be assigned the gateway that was the least congested. WISPA Wants You! Join today! 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/
