Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due
Then I guess you do not want to evolve into a public utility. Too bad, as the rest of the WISP industry is becoming defacto public utility. You really need to become familiar with the principle of common carriage. The legal doctrine can be traced clear back to the Roman Empire. Personally I want the sanction and protection of the king, but in exchange I must be a good steward and must comply with some regulation. So, I will be granted a fiefdom and rogues will be assimilated. Who else serves around Milton Freewater? - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, July 14, 2008 11:20 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due This is an excerpt from a comment filed by a state representative from Kansas: As a state policy-maker attempting to develop incentives that will induce broadband providers (particularly the larger DSL and cable companies) to use multiple technologies to reach beyond city limits, FCC data providing greater specificity about which potential customers are adversely impacted by the digital divide and left without a viable option for service would be invaluable. That ought to turn your stomach into knots. Let me interpret it... We want detailed data, so we can help,cajole, coerce, or bribe the big guys into universal coverage. This is not a question of the FCC determining how broadband is being deployed. This is a matter of us being required to provide the data so that public money can be used to benefit the politically connected. My comments to the FCC... As a small businessman, one of the ways that we exist, is by being flexible and by offering services in an ad-hoc basis that larger, inflexible entities don't. Often, small businesses are purely based upon market need. Individuals find a need and fill it. And we do so in our own town, or neighborhood, or in the areas near where we live. One of the most critical efforts that small business people undertake, is to determine if there's a large enough market for what they want to do. Often, little funding is available for this, and they substitute days, weeks, or even months of time and personal effort instead of hiring research companies or marketing consultants, or buying the data outright. In the case of a wireless ISP, for instance, one of the most critical elements for success, is to map out an area, and then begin building out a network. Many such WISP's are one or two man operations, and start with minimal capital, usually enough to get started and operate in a limited area for a short period of time. Then, funding from operations then provides capital for expansion and improvement of infrastructure. During this phase of the life of a WISP, the financial situation is generally very fragile, and a loss of markets to move into will generally cause business failure. If WISP's are required to do even MORE work, such as finding census borders and maintaining massive and detailed databases of location etc, and the purpose of that work is to give free assistance to competitors to show them where to take your markets away from you, this effort is 100% counterproductive. Not only do the results hurt you, but the time it takes away from a small businessman often comes at the expense of operations, expansion, or even quality of service. Perhaps people who sit behind desks in Washington DC don't care about anything but press releases where they get to praise themselves and get lauded on TV, but for those of us who risk our life's savings and often years of our lives building a business by bootstrap have a LOT more at stake than a transitory and soon forgotten political posture by some appointed or hired public employee. So, as a small businessman, I cannot state how incredibly wrong ALL of this is, and that IN NO WAY should the FCC be in the business of deliberating wasting the time, money, and resources of small business people solely for the purpose of harming their future. So, in closing, I state for the record, there is no good aspect the collection of detailed information. It is not and has never been the business of Congress or the FCC to provide broadband. That's being done by thousands of hard working people who have risked everything they have to try to make it happen. It seems worse than Machiavellian, then, for the FCC to demand that these people then waste thier time, money, and energy, in an effort where the only result possible, is to harm them. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, July 14, 2008 9:31 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due I'm going to ask that we oppose this in its entirety, due to it giving away information we really don't need given away. Whatever your
[WISPA] RedMax Timing Module
Hey guys, Last Mile Gear, How is the RedMax GPS timing module coming? Is anyone else using GPS for their RedMax deployments? Thanks! -- John M. McDowell Boonlink Communications 307 Grand Ave NW Fort Payne, AL 35967 256.844.9932 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.boonlink.com This message contains information which may be confidential and privileged. Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive for the addressee), you may not use, copy, re-transmit, or disclose to anyone the message or any information contained in the message. If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED], and delete the message. E-mail communication is highly susceptible to spoofing, spamming, and other tampering, some of which may be harmful to your computer. If you are concerned about the authenticity of the message or the source, please contact the sender directly. 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] [Motorola II] RedMax Timing Module
Are you setting up sectors in different parts of a town or is this for one site? There are 3 non-overlapping channels you can use, but adding a 4th sector may require timing unless you can get away with the proper channel arrangements and/or polarizations. -Eric John McDowell wrote: Hey guys, Last Mile Gear, How is the RedMax GPS timing module coming? Is anyone else using GPS for their RedMax deployments? Thanks! -- John M. McDowell Boonlink Communications 307 Grand Ave NW Fort Payne, AL 35967 256.844.9932 [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] www.boonlink.com http://www.boonlink.com This message contains information which may be confidential and privileged. Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive for the addressee), you may not use, copy, re-transmit, or disclose to anyone the message or any information contained in the message. If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED], and delete the message. E-mail communication is highly susceptible to spoofing, spamming, and other tampering, some of which may be harmful to your computer. If you are concerned about the authenticity of the message or the source, please contact the sender directly. 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] [Motorola II] RedMax Timing Module
Omni...9 miles away from 2 sectors. On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 3:03 PM, Eric Muehleisen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are you setting up sectors in different parts of a town or is this for one site? There are 3 non-overlapping channels you can use, but adding a 4th sector may require timing unless you can get away with the proper channel arrangements and/or polarizations. -Eric John McDowell wrote: Hey guys, Last Mile Gear, How is the RedMax GPS timing module coming? Is anyone else using GPS for their RedMax deployments? Thanks! -- John M. McDowell Boonlink Communications 307 Grand Ave NW Fort Payne, AL 35967 256.844.9932 [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] www.boonlink.com http://www.boonlink.com This message contains information which may be confidential and privileged. Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive for the addressee), you may not use, copy, re-transmit, or disclose to anyone the message or any information contained in the message. If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED], and delete the message. E-mail communication is highly susceptible to spoofing, spamming, and other tampering, some of which may be harmful to your computer. If you are concerned about the authenticity of the message or the source, please contact the sender directly. 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/ -- John M. McDowell Boonlink Communications 307 Grand Ave NW Fort Payne, AL 35967 256.844.9932 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.boonlink.com This message contains information which may be confidential and privileged. Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive for the addressee), you may not use, copy, re-transmit, or disclose to anyone the message or any information contained in the message. If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED], and delete the message. E-mail communication is highly susceptible to spoofing, spamming, and other tampering, some of which may be harmful to your computer. If you are concerned about the authenticity of the message or the source, please contact the sender directly. 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] [Motorola II] RedMax Timing Module
You can sync the two sectors together using a cable then use the other non-overlapping channel on the omni. Obviously, if you add another sector you'll need a timing device. -Eric John McDowell wrote: Omni...9 miles away from 2 sectors. On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 3:03 PM, Eric Muehleisen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are you setting up sectors in different parts of a town or is this for one site? There are 3 non-overlapping channels you can use, but adding a 4th sector may require timing unless you can get away with the proper channel arrangements and/or polarizations. -Eric John McDowell wrote: Hey guys, Last Mile Gear, How is the RedMax GPS timing module coming? Is anyone else using GPS for their RedMax deployments? Thanks! -- John M. McDowell Boonlink Communications 307 Grand Ave NW Fort Payne, AL 35967 256.844.9932 [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] www.boonlink.com http://www.boonlink.com This message contains information which may be confidential and privileged. Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive for the addressee), you may not use, copy, re-transmit, or disclose to anyone the message or any information contained in the message. If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED], and delete the message. E-mail communication is highly susceptible to spoofing, spamming, and other tampering, some of which may be harmful to your computer. If you are concerned about the authenticity of the message or the source, please contact the sender directly. 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] [Motorola II] RedMax Timing Module
Thats what I thought Eric, we're in need of the cables now. On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 3:15 PM, Eric Muehleisen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You can sync the two sectors together using a cable then use the other non-overlapping channel on the omni. Obviously, if you add another sector you'll need a timing device. -Eric John McDowell wrote: Omni...9 miles away from 2 sectors. On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 3:03 PM, Eric Muehleisen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are you setting up sectors in different parts of a town or is this for one site? There are 3 non-overlapping channels you can use, but adding a 4th sector may require timing unless you can get away with the proper channel arrangements and/or polarizations. -Eric John McDowell wrote: Hey guys, Last Mile Gear, How is the RedMax GPS timing module coming? Is anyone else using GPS for their RedMax deployments? Thanks! -- John M. McDowell Boonlink Communications 307 Grand Ave NW Fort Payne, AL 35967 256.844.9932 [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] www.boonlink.com http://www.boonlink.com This message contains information which may be confidential and privileged. Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive for the addressee), you may not use, copy, re-transmit, or disclose to anyone the message or any information contained in the message. If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED], and delete the message. E-mail communication is highly susceptible to spoofing, spamming, and other tampering, some of which may be harmful to your computer. If you are concerned about the authenticity of the message or the source, please contact the sender directly. 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/ -- John M. McDowell Boonlink Communications 307 Grand Ave NW Fort Payne, AL 35967 256.844.9932 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.boonlink.com This message contains information which may be confidential and privileged. Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive for the addressee), you may not use, copy, re-transmit, or disclose to anyone the message or any information contained in the message. If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED], and delete the message. E-mail communication is highly susceptible to spoofing, spamming, and other tampering, some of which may be harmful to your computer. If you are concerned about the authenticity of the message or the source, please contact the sender directly. 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] theoretical mesh limits?
I'm looking to compute the theoretical mesh limit throughput for dual radio layouts. Does this look right? Dual radio, egress at end of chain: 1-2-3-4-5e Sustained throughput (min): 35 mbps / 10 hops to end egress = 3-4 mbps Peak throughput (max): 35 mbps / 5 nodes to end egress = 7 mbps dual radio, with egress in middle unit: 1-2-3e-4-5 Sustained throughput (min): 35 mbps / 6 hops to mid egress = 6 mbps Peak throughput (max): 35 mbps / 3 nodes to mid egress = 13 mbps 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] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due
What Ironic about the State rep's comments was If they got the availabilty information from providers, why would it be invaluable, if the intent to use the data was to let providers know where areas are under served? THEY ALREADY HAVE THE DATA YOU COLLECTED IT FROM THEM!!! DUH!!! There is a flip side though. One of the most common occurances is, LECs and Cable Cos selectively picking when and where to serve someone or not, regardless of whether they could. If the LECs and CableCos, were required to report who they said qualified it is a mechanism to hold them accountable for when they do not. Whether from the perspective of False advertising, or not honoring their monopoly/franchise obligations to serve. The missing point is, SMALL PROVIDERS DONT HAVE THE INFORMATION. The prupose should be to gather the information from incumbents, and given to competitor providers so that they can go after these less advantageous areas that nobody else wants. What should be provided is that everytime a cable co or LECs gets a lead they can't serve, they should be required to report that they have declined to serve, and anytime a subscriber gets a response that they can't get served, there needs to be a place to record this information and make it known they desire to be served. This should be the mechanism to inform competition. And use the information to establish Grant programs for small Providers. The big mistake the government is making is they are trying to track where there IS broadband. What they should be trying to track is where there is NOT broadband. They should be tracking, anywhere (ZIP CODE), that there is recorded to be an underserved person, the area should be considered underserved. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 12:20 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due This is an excerpt from a comment filed by a state representative from Kansas: As a state policy-maker attempting to develop incentives that will induce broadband providers (particularly the larger DSL and cable companies) to use multiple technologies to reach beyond city limits, FCC data providing greater specificity about which potential customers are adversely impacted by the digital divide and left without a viable option for service would be invaluable. That ought to turn your stomach into knots. Let me interpret it... We want detailed data, so we can help,cajole, coerce, or bribe the big guys into universal coverage. This is not a question of the FCC determining how broadband is being deployed. This is a matter of us being required to provide the data so that public money can be used to benefit the politically connected. My comments to the FCC... As a small businessman, one of the ways that we exist, is by being flexible and by offering services in an ad-hoc basis that larger, inflexible entities don't. Often, small businesses are purely based upon market need. Individuals find a need and fill it. And we do so in our own town, or neighborhood, or in the areas near where we live. One of the most critical efforts that small business people undertake, is to determine if there's a large enough market for what they want to do. Often, little funding is available for this, and they substitute days, weeks, or even months of time and personal effort instead of hiring research companies or marketing consultants, or buying the data outright. In the case of a wireless ISP, for instance, one of the most critical elements for success, is to map out an area, and then begin building out a network. Many such WISP's are one or two man operations, and start with minimal capital, usually enough to get started and operate in a limited area for a short period of time. Then, funding from operations then provides capital for expansion and improvement of infrastructure. During this phase of the life of a WISP, the financial situation is generally very fragile, and a loss of markets to move into will generally cause business failure. If WISP's are required to do even MORE work, such as finding census borders and maintaining massive and detailed databases of location etc, and the purpose of that work is to give free assistance to competitors to show them where to take your markets away from you, this effort is 100% counterproductive. Not only do the results hurt you, but the time it takes away from a small businessman often comes at the expense of operations, expansion, or even quality of service. Perhaps people who sit behind desks in Washington DC don't care about anything but press releases where they get to praise themselves and get lauded on TV, but for those of us who risk our life's savings and often years of our lives building a business by bootstrap have
Re: [WISPA] RB532 and 40MBps
From our experience, we believe it is not possible. However, had a related question... We have found processing power to be a big issue to enable full throughput of APs My understanding is that the 532 is being replaced with the 600 series, that also supports the daughterboard.. (Disclaimer: rough estimates below, without specifying configurations, exact results on routerboard's website). 532a (266-400mhz MIPs)was quoted around 10-15,000 pps. 433AH (roughtly 700Mhz Atheros) around 30-40,000 pps. 600 series (200-400mhz PowerPC NetProc) was quoted around 50-60,000 pps. So its understandable the 433AH would outperform the 532. Question is Why does teh 600 series outperform them all, when it has the slowest processor in MHZ? Are Mikrotik's 532a speeds test at 266 or 400Mhz? And the 600 series at 200 or 400? They did specify on their report. Is the 600's Power PC's processor really that much better that it gets so much better speed at slower Mhz? Or is it just the design of the board that accommodates GB NICs and DDR RAM? I just wanted to get some feedback from people on whether the 600 series really are faster than the 433AH boards. The 600s do have other advantages jsutifying their higher price, but thats not related to my question. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Jason Hensley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 14, 2008 9:14 PM Subject: [WISPA] RB532 and 40MBps Hey all Mikrotik gurus. Is it possible to pull 40meg+ through an RB532 with NAT'ing (masquerade) turned on? Total of 3 in-house systems running through this one - not a lot going on with it - but I'm having trouble pulling much more than 10 through it. Have narrowed it down to the 532 I've got as my router. If it's not possible no problem - I have other options. If it is, then any suggestions as to what might be the problem? I've been through the duplexing / speed possibilities already and have tested in front of, and behind, the 532. Can pull what I've got (40meg give or take) without the Mik but again, can only get 10 through the 532. Thanks in advance! 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] RB532 and 40MBps
1. 40 meg out of a 532, maybe with no rules, etc. . But thats pushing it! 2. The PowerPC platform is suppose to the be the fastest, with the lower processor in terms of MHZ. However, there are plenty of other options, such as x86 solutions out there that will give you the speed plus the reliability. 3. The 433AH is another Atheros processor, and it has been giving quite a bit better throughput, this came out after the 600. 4. The replacement for the 532 is the 433, not the AH or the 600. The 600 cames out as a high-performance multiple AP device, or actually extreme performance AP in MTs words. The 433 comes just as close if not a bit better than the 532. The 433Ah is the one with the special processor that shoots the performance up. Basically MHZ don't show preformance. I remember when an AMD chip would preform just as good as a Intel chipt at much slower speeds, why they changed to Ahtlon 3800+ etc vs speed ratings.Same difference with these boards. Think of it like a celeron and a Pentium chip, the Celeron is cheap as heck, but I have never thought highly of them compared to the same speed Pentium chip. -- * Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik WISP Support Services* 314-735-0270 http://www.linktechs.net http://www.linktechs.net/ */ Link Technologies, Inc is offering LIVE Mikrotik On-Line Training http://www.linktechs.net/onlinetraining.asp/* Tom DeReggi wrote: From our experience, we believe it is not possible. However, had a related question... We have found processing power to be a big issue to enable full throughput of APs My understanding is that the 532 is being replaced with the 600 series, that also supports the daughterboard.. (Disclaimer: rough estimates below, without specifying configurations, exact results on routerboard's website). 532a (266-400mhz MIPs)was quoted around 10-15,000 pps. 433AH (roughtly 700Mhz Atheros) around 30-40,000 pps. 600 series (200-400mhz PowerPC NetProc) was quoted around 50-60,000 pps. So its understandable the 433AH would outperform the 532. Question is Why does teh 600 series outperform them all, when it has the slowest processor in MHZ? Are Mikrotik's 532a speeds test at 266 or 400Mhz? And the 600 series at 200 or 400? They did specify on their report. Is the 600's Power PC's processor really that much better that it gets so much better speed at slower Mhz? Or is it just the design of the board that accommodates GB NICs and DDR RAM? I just wanted to get some feedback from people on whether the 600 series really are faster than the 433AH boards. The 600s do have other advantages jsutifying their higher price, but thats not related to my question. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Jason Hensley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 14, 2008 9:14 PM Subject: [WISPA] RB532 and 40MBps Hey all Mikrotik gurus. Is it possible to pull 40meg+ through an RB532 with NAT'ing (masquerade) turned on? Total of 3 in-house systems running through this one - not a lot going on with it - but I'm having trouble pulling much more than 10 through it. Have narrowed it down to the 532 I've got as my router. If it's not possible no problem - I have other options. If it is, then any suggestions as to what might be the problem? I've been through the duplexing / speed possibilities already and have tested in front of, and behind, the 532. Can pull what I've got (40meg give or take) without the Mik but again, can only get 10 through the 532. Thanks in advance! 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] special certs for power plants mining areas?
Is anyone aware of any special certification (or equivalent) that is required if you put wi-fi wireless in a power plant or mining area? Someone said that some Cisco reps cautioned them about something special that needed to be attained for power plant areas, and since I've got other mining opportunities, I thought I'd inquire about it as well. 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] special certs for power plants mining areas?
I do know for you to work on an active mine site you need to go through MISHA training... but Mesa had equipment at a mine site and we did not need any special certs (at least we were never told we needed them). No clue on the power plants... Daniel White 3-dB Networks -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rogelio Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 5:56 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] special certs for power plants mining areas? Is anyone aware of any special certification (or equivalent) that is required if you put wi-fi wireless in a power plant or mining area? Someone said that some Cisco reps cautioned them about something special that needed to be attained for power plant areas, and since I've got other mining opportunities, I thought I'd inquire about it as well. 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] theoretical mesh limits?
When you say dual radio... are you saying two radios devoted to the mesh layer, or one radio devoted to meshing and one devoted to client access? We have found in our tests that when two radios are devoted to meshing the results are a little higher than your results below. One test reports: GW --- N1 --- N2 --- N3 --- laptop Throughput results: GW - N1 = 22,969 N1 - N2 = 23,936 N2 - N3 = 22,701 GW - laptop = 20,077 This is on a L2 mesh network with WPA2 enabled on all mesh links. Test is performed with TCP traffic. So as you can see, the throughput efficiency when using two radios devoted to mesh is pretty high. Of course this also depends on the mesh implementation. It might be a little less efficient if you're routing at each node. (this is layer2) -Matt On Tue, 2008-07-15 at 14:18 -0700, Rogelio wrote: I'm looking to compute the theoretical mesh limit throughput for dual radio layouts. Does this look right? Dual radio, egress at end of chain: 1-2-3-4-5e Sustained throughput (min): 35 mbps / 10 hops to end egress = 3-4 mbps Peak throughput (max):35 mbps / 5 nodes to end egress = 7 mbps dual radio, with egress in middle unit: 1-2-3e-4-5 Sustained throughput (min): 35 mbps / 6 hops to mid egress = 6 mbps Peak throughput (max):35 mbps / 3 nodes to mid egress = 13 mbps 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] special certs for power plants mining areas?
Entry into mines are covered under federal regulations and require training prior to entry. All equipment installed in a mine environment must be intrisically safe and certified by a third party lab (similar to Part 15 radios) Equipment bonding is extremely important. Installation within power plants are more straightforward except that personnel also need to be trained and certified ( usually by the power company) to enter areas containing primary power. One last thing...most mines and a lot of power companies are union and can put a damper on construction efforts and increase costs. Good luick Bob Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: Rogelio [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 16:55:36 To: WISPA General Listwireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] special certs for power plants mining areas? Is anyone aware of any special certification (or equivalent) that is required if you put wi-fi wireless in a power plant or mining area? Someone said that some Cisco reps cautioned them about something special that needed to be attained for power plant areas, and since I've got other mining opportunities, I thought I'd inquire about it as well. 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] special certs for power plants mining areas?
Someone else mentioned explosion proof being a requirement for some mining environments. Anyone know anything about this? And whether or not there are wifi units out there of being a fit? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Entry into mines are covered under federal regulations and require training prior to entry. All equipment installed in a mine environment must be intrisically safe and certified by a third party lab (similar to Part 15 radios) Equipment bonding is extremely important. Installation within power plants are more straightforward except that personnel also need to be trained and certified ( usually by the power company) to enter areas containing primary power. One last thing...most mines and a lot of power companies are union and can put a damper on construction efforts and increase costs. Good luick Bob Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: Rogelio [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 16:55:36 To: WISPA General Listwireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] special certs for power plants mining areas? Is anyone aware of any special certification (or equivalent) that is required if you put wi-fi wireless in a power plant or mining area? Someone said that some Cisco reps cautioned them about something special that needed to be attained for power plant areas, and since I've got other mining opportunities, I thought I'd inquire about it as well. 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] special certs for power plants mining areas?
3dp makes some special version of Moto gear that I know is used in mining operations... expect it to be very pricey though Daniel White 3-dB Networks -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rogelio Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 8:13 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] special certs for power plants mining areas? Someone else mentioned explosion proof being a requirement for some mining environments. Anyone know anything about this? And whether or not there are wifi units out there of being a fit? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Entry into mines are covered under federal regulations and require training prior to entry. All equipment installed in a mine environment must be intrisically safe and certified by a third party lab (similar to Part 15 radios) Equipment bonding is extremely important. Installation within power plants are more straightforward except that personnel also need to be trained and certified ( usually by the power company) to enter areas containing primary power. One last thing...most mines and a lot of power companies are union and can put a damper on construction efforts and increase costs. Good luick Bob Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: Rogelio [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 16:55:36 To: WISPA General Listwireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] special certs for power plants mining areas? Is anyone aware of any special certification (or equivalent) that is required if you put wi-fi wireless in a power plant or mining area? Someone said that some Cisco reps cautioned them about something special that needed to be attained for power plant areas, and since I've got other mining opportunities, I thought I'd inquire about it as well. 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] special certs for power plants mining areas?
Intrinsic rating covers the explosion issue amongs others Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: Rogelio [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 19:12:34 To: WISPA General Listwireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] special certs for power plants mining areas? Someone else mentioned explosion proof being a requirement for some mining environments. Anyone know anything about this? And whether or not there are wifi units out there of being a fit? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Entry into mines are covered under federal regulations and require training prior to entry. All equipment installed in a mine environment must be intrisically safe and certified by a third party lab (similar to Part 15 radios) Equipment bonding is extremely important. Installation within power plants are more straightforward except that personnel also need to be trained and certified ( usually by the power company) to enter areas containing primary power. One last thing...most mines and a lot of power companies are union and can put a damper on construction efforts and increase costs. Good luick Bob Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: Rogelio [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 16:55:36 To: WISPA General Listwireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] special certs for power plants mining areas? Is anyone aware of any special certification (or equivalent) that is required if you put wi-fi wireless in a power plant or mining area? Someone said that some Cisco reps cautioned them about something special that needed to be attained for power plant areas, and since I've got other mining opportunities, I thought I'd inquire about it as well. 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] RB532 and 40MBps
Question is Why does teh 600 series outperform them all, when it has the slowest processor in MHZ? Are Mikrotik's 532a speeds test at 266 or 400Mhz? And the 600 series at 200 or 400? They did specify on their report. Is the 600's Power PC's processor really that much better that it gets so much better speed at slower Mhz? While I can not speak of it in use between these two routers, there is a reason why it was logical to move to RISC. They are more efficient chips and tend to be even more so when they are used in specific environments. If anyone is a Mac head from way back, you might remember the raw numbers between the 40MHz 68030 and the 25MHz PowerPC when Apple first moved to them. inline: ctilogo200.jpg Bo Ring Account Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED] cell: 630-743-1162 • office: 312-205-2515 16W235 83rd Street, Suite A, Burr Ridge, IL 60527 • tel: 773.667.4585 fax: 773.326.4641 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] Dragonwave antenna pattern for RM
Even though I think you just made a typo, want to clarify so there's no misinformation 1. You don't need Class B for 18 GHz -- 2' dish is Class A 2. We're talking about 11 GHz - you can do 2.5' dish for Class A though -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 Chuck McCown Sent: Monday, July 14, 2008 4:00 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Dragonwave antenna pattern for RM Thanks. at 18 GHz, a Class B should be fine. - Original Message - From: Charles Wu [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, July 14, 2008 2:44 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Dragonwave antenna pattern for RM To summarize, it details to the amount of interference you are willing to accept on your system That said, for standard operations in Part 101, due to the fact that the rules were written back in the early 90s for analogue microwave systems, the interference threshold of a licensed system can be summarized as follows (keep in mind, you can easily poke holes into my response, so bear with this oversimplification) Part 101 Interference Threshold is ~40 dB BELOW the minimum threshold of your licensed modulation That said...say I have a radio that as a result of operating at 64 QAM, has a minimum receive threshold of -68 dBm Chances are, when I build the link, I will plan for some amount of fade margin (say 30 dB here), so my nominal receive threshold for the link is -38 dBi That said, when I'm talking about this 40 dB buffer, I'm talking 40 dB below the MINIMUM threshold, so if I were to license a system in the area on the same channel, the co-channel noise that I would be able to pick up from you must be 40 dB BELOW -68, or ~ -108 dBm In this particular situation, if you were running in 11 GHz, as a result of using a 2' dish, you may change the allowable interferable noise flow from -108 (40 dB below -68) ro -78 (40 dB below -38) Again, in the unlicensed world, 10-15 dB above the noise floor is considered to be pretty good -- anything above that with some level of protection is incredible, and in the lower bands (!1 6 GHz) where it may be hard to fit a system in a geographical area at a specific interference/noise level, taking in an extra 10-20 dB of noise (when I've got 60+ dB of fade margin) isn't too much of an issue -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 Chuck McCown - 3 Sent: Monday, July 14, 2008 1:18 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Dragonwave antenna pattern for RM Could you please elaborate about a Class B? This is new to me. - Original Message - From: Charles Wu [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, July 14, 2008 12:14 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Dragonwave antenna pattern for RM Actually...if you're willing to accept Class B status under Part 101, you can even get a 2' in 11 GHz NOTE: Class B is still MILES ahead of anything unlicensed -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 Mike Brownson Sent: Friday, July 11, 2008 12:31 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Dragonwave antenna pattern for RM Correct. Normally 4 ft is the standard. But in most areas of the country you can request an exception and go down to a 2.5 ft. It has something to do with locations near certain military installations. Mike B On 7/10/08 10:42 AM, 3-dB Networks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2.5' Minimum on 11GHz Daniel White -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brad Belton Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2008 10:35 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] Dragonwave antenna pattern for RM Doesn't 11Ghz have a 4' minimum or was that changed? Last rumor I heard was you might be able to get a 3' or possibly even a 2' approved for 11GHz, but if it becomes a problem then you'll be forced to change to an antenna that doesn't cause a problem with a tighter pattern...like 4'. Best, Brad -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2008 11:26 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Dragonwave antenna pattern for RM Regs are 6' minimum high performance dish at 6 GHz unless something changed recently. At 11 Ghz you should be able to get 99.99 and use the 5 Ghz to back it up Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message-
Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due
Tom, I agree with all your comments but this one: They should be tracking, anywhere (ZIP CODE), that there is recorded to be an underserved person, the area should be considered underserved. It needs to go beyond the zipcode(I understand the FCC wants this now, and will be heck for all of us)! In my area, I am seeing the local incumbent rural telco serve two or three people to satisfy a ZIPCODE is offered broadband service. AlthoughI know the new reporting requirements the FCC wants can be a PITA to me, it might actually help in my situation. Scott -- Original Message -- From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 16:54:04 -0500 What Ironic about the State rep's comments was If they got the availabilty information from providers, why would it be invaluable, if the intent to use the data was to let providers know where areas are under served? THEY ALREADY HAVE THE DATA YOU COLLECTED IT FROM THEM!!! DUH!!! There is a flip side though. One of the most common occurances is, LECs and Cable Cos selectively picking when and where to serve someone or not, regardless of whether they could. If the LECs and CableCos, were required to report who they said qualified it is a mechanism to hold them accountable for when they do not. Whether from the perspective of False advertising, or not honoring their monopoly/franchise obligations to serve. The missing point is, SMALL PROVIDERS DONT HAVE THE INFORMATION. The prupose should be to gather the information from incumbents, and given to competitor providers so that they can go after these less advantageous areas that nobody else wants. What should be provided is that everytime a cable co or LECs gets a lead they can't serve, they should be required to report that they have declined to serve, and anytime a subscriber gets a response that they can't get served, there needs to be a place to record this information and make it known they desire to be served. This should be the mechanism to inform competition. And use the information to establish Grant programs for small Providers. The big mistake the government is making is they are trying to track where there IS broadband. What they should be trying to track is where there is NOT broadband. They should be tracking, anywhere (ZIP CODE), that there is recorded to be an underserved person, the area should be considered underserved. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 12:20 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due This is an excerpt from a comment filed by a state representative from Kansas: As a state policy-maker attempting to develop incentives that will induce broadband providers (particularly the larger DSL and cable companies) to use multiple technologies to reach beyond city limits, FCC data providing greater specificity about which potential customers are adversely impacted by the digital divide and left without a viable option for service would be invaluable. That ought to turn your stomach into knots. Let me interpret it... We want detailed data, so we can help,cajole, coerce, or bribe the big guys into universal coverage. This is not a question of the FCC determining how broadband is being deployed. This is a matter of us being required to provide the data so that public money can be used to benefit the politically connected. My comments to the FCC... As a small businessman, one of the ways that we exist, is by being flexible and by offering services in an ad-hoc basis that larger, inflexible entities don't. Often, small businesses are purely based upon market need. Individuals find a need and fill it. And we do so in our own town, or neighborhood, or in the areas near where we live. One of the most critical efforts that small business people undertake, is to determine if there's a large enough market for what they want to do. Often, little funding is available for this, and they substitute days, weeks, or even months of time and personal effort instead of hiring research companies or marketing consultants, or buying the data outright. In the case of a wireless ISP, for instance, one of the most critical elements for success, is to map out an area, and then begin building out a network. Many such WISP's are one or two man operations, and start with minimal capital, usually enough to get started and operate in a limited area for a short period of time. Then, funding from operations then provides capital for expansion and improvement of infrastructure. During this phase of the life of a WISP, the financial situation is generally very fragile, and a loss of markets to move into will generally cause business failure. If
Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due
Why on earth would you want to be a public utility? There are no small businesses in the public utility sector. There are no small business entries into the public utility sector. There is no innovation in the public utility sector. Public utilities are the least competitive and efficient businesses and means of service delivery. Why do you want to be put out of business? If you become a regulated public utility, 99% of all WISP's will be GONE. What a way to promote industry health and speak for WISP's insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Chuck McCown - 3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 7:08 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due Then I guess you do not want to evolve into a public utility. 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] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due
Now I see the motivation. Money. Fast, easy, unearned, grant money from the taxpayers. I am disgusted to my core. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 2:54 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due This should be the mechanism to inform competition. And use the information to establish Grant programs for small Providers. 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] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due
You are sooo mis informed. There are thousands of small businesses, mom and pop telcos in this nation. Best business in the world. We do FTTH in the most rural areas of the nation. No innovation? You are an ignorant person. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 9:57 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due Why on earth would you want to be a public utility? There are no small businesses in the public utility sector. There are no small business entries into the public utility sector. There is no innovation in the public utility sector. Public utilities are the least competitive and efficient businesses and means of service delivery. Why do you want to be put out of business? If you become a regulated public utility, 99% of all WISP's will be GONE. What a way to promote industry health and speak for WISP's insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Chuck McCown - 3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 7:08 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due Then I guess you do not want to evolve into a public utility. 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] RB532 and 40MBps
400MHz on a 600? /system routerboard settings change-frequency frequency=533MHz Maybe this will help? Jim Scottie Arnett wrote: Not sure (I have not used anything but the 532a besides an Intel PC)...I am just quoting what I have heard. But it may be the 600 uses a PowerPC processor? In the past, they(PowerPC) have been known to work better with video, graphics, and about all speed related processor tasks comnapred to anything else. Remember the Alpha processors? They worked MAGIC on the Internet in their time! Scott -- Original Message -- From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 17:26:11 -0500 From our experience, we believe it is not possible. However, had a related question... We have found processing power to be a big issue to enable full throughput of APs My understanding is that the 532 is being replaced with the 600 series, that also supports the daughterboard.. (Disclaimer: rough estimates below, without specifying configurations, exact results on routerboard's website). 532a (266-400mhz MIPs)was quoted around 10-15,000 pps. 433AH (roughtly 700Mhz Atheros) around 30-40,000 pps. 600 series (200-400mhz PowerPC NetProc) was quoted around 50-60,000 pps. So its understandable the 433AH would outperform the 532. Question is Why does teh 600 series outperform them all, when it has the slowest processor in MHZ? Are Mikrotik's 532a speeds test at 266 or 400Mhz? And the 600 series at 200 or 400? They did specify on their report. Is the 600's Power PC's processor really that much better that it gets so much better speed at slower Mhz? Or is it just the design of the board that accommodates GB NICs and DDR RAM? I just wanted to get some feedback from people on whether the 600 series really are faster than the 433AH boards. The 600s do have other advantages jsutifying their higher price, but thats not related to my question. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Jason Hensley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 14, 2008 9:14 PM Subject: [WISPA] RB532 and 40MBps Hey all Mikrotik gurus. Is it possible to pull 40meg+ through an RB532 with NAT'ing (masquerade) turned on? Total of 3 in-house systems running through this one - not a lot going on with it - but I'm having trouble pulling much more than 10 through it. Have narrowed it down to the 532 I've got as my router. If it's not possible no problem - I have other options. If it is, then any suggestions as to what might be the problem? I've been through the duplexing / speed possibilities already and have tested in front of, and behind, the 532. Can pull what I've got (40meg give or take) without the Mik but again, can only get 10 through the 532. Thanks in advance! 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/ --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] Dial-Up Internet service from Info-Ed, Inc. as low as $9.99/mth. Check out www.info-ed.com for information. 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] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due
delete [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now I see the motivation. Money. Fast, easy, unearned, grant money from the taxpayers. I am disgusted to my core. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2008 2:54 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due This should be the mechanism to inform competition. And use the information to establish Grant programs for small Providers. 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] Form 477 NPRM Comments Due
On Jul 15, 2008, at 8:57 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why on earth would you want to be a public utility? Because I serve the public? Because that is how I was able to get my franchise with the gov't for right of way access. There are no small businesses in the public utility sector. I am in the public utility sector, am I too big? There are no small business entries into the public utility sector. My business is a small business. There is no innovation in the public utility sector. I think I am pretty innovative. Public utilities are the least competitive and efficient businesses and means of service delivery. What? Why do you want to be put out of business? I don't at this point, but maybe sometime in the future. If you become a regulated public utility, 99% of all WISP's will be GONE. I don't think I represent 99% of all WISPs. At this point I think we all need to just stop feeding the troll. FWIW, I am pretty much done responding to this troll. ryan 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] special certs for power plants mining areas?
I have many years experience in mines, chemical plants, oil refineries, steel mills, and foundry's. If you want to give me a call, I can go over some of this with you but I don't want to clog up the list with a post that should come in hard back. MSHA is much more restrictive than OSHA and electricians running wire or doing electrical work in a mine are supposed to have a green card. Many EEs can't pass the test to get one of these. The company will usually have one of their guys with your crew to get around this. Jim cell: 314-565-6863 Rogelio wrote: Is anyone aware of any special certification (or equivalent) that is required if you put wi-fi wireless in a power plant or mining area? Someone said that some Cisco reps cautioned them about something special that needed to be attained for power plant areas, and since I've got other mining opportunities, I thought I'd inquire about it as well. 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/
