Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers
I have done that as well... then sold them a 't1 replacement' for $300/m... half the cost of a t1 out here... Kurt Fankhauser wrote: I told the guy if he wanted 1.5mbps round the clock that he needed to go buy a T1 line. Kurt Fankhauser WAVELINC P.O. Box 126 Bucyrus, OH 44820 419-562-6405 www.wavelinc.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of RickG Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2008 9:11 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers Kurt, I tell them that they need to consider a higher rate package with dedicated bandwidth rather than shared bandwidth. -RickG On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 11:59 AM, Kurt Fankhauser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Does anyone else here have customer/s that consume so much bandwidth that you have to throttle them down after say 5 minutes of downloading. And what do you tell them when they start complaining about the throttled down speed. (they don't know your throttling them though) Kurt Fankhauser WAVELINC P.O. Box 126 Bucyrus, OH 44820 419-562-6405 www.wavelinc.com 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] heavy usage customers
Naw, we'll just take it to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Not much canopy bashing there... - Original Message - From: "Butch Evans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 10:49 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers > On Sun, 2 Nov 2008, Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: > >>Can the 802.11 folks make that claim? > > Next comes the "Hitler"? Take it offlist, guys. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwins_law > > -- > > * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* > * http://www.butchevans.com/ * Network Engineering* > * http://www.wispa.org/ * WISPA Board Member* > * http://blog.butchevans.com/ * Wired or Wireless Networks* > > > > > 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] heavy usage customers
On Sun, 2 Nov 2008, Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: >Can the 802.11 folks make that claim? Next comes the "Hitler"? Take it offlist, guys. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwins_law -- * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* * http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering * * http://www.wispa.org/ * WISPA Board Member * * http://blog.butchevans.com/ * Wired or Wireless Networks * 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] heavy usage customers
Canopy is rolling out RADIUS for release 10. Can't get much more standard than that. We never get interference on Canopy. 5000+ units deployed. Hardly ever a problem. Can the 802.11 folks make that claim? We do have 3.65 but it is no panacea. I would rather have a canopy 430 or even 400 than the 3.65. - Original Message - From: "Matt Larsen - Lists" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 10:29 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers > I'm with Travis on this, with the exception of using StarOS instead of > Mikrotik. It is nice to have a set of standard, mature tools such as > radius, cbq/iptable rules and standard, non-vendor specific hardware to > work with instead of having to use a limited, proprietary system limited > to a single vendor. I've deployed/consulted on 802.11 a/b/g networks > representing 8000+ CPE units and it can be made to work just fine as > long as it is managed properly. Travis is a pro, and he has the > experience to design his network in such a way as to maximize the > performance of his equipment. There are many others out there having > the same success. > > FWIW, I believe the most logical next step is to start moving heavy > usage customers over to 3.65 WiMAX gear starting next spring. I think > we are near the threshold of what is going to be possible with > unlicensed equipment - barring some kind of amazing breakthrough. I > foresee a need to deploy smaller and smaller cells to maintain the > desired performance level. It helps to have 10mhz channel sizes > available to maximize the utilization of existing spectrum, but even > that is starting to get awfully crowded. Whitespaces sure would help. > > I spent the last two years putting up 802.11a based APs across my entire > service area and migrating customers from 2.4 to them to get the higher > ARPU from faster speeds and VOIP service. I foresee spending the next > two years deploying licensed backhauls and 3.65 APs starting with the > high traffic areas and working out to the fringes. Its the neverending > story. > > Matt Larsen > vistabeam.com > > > > Travis Johnson wrote: >> Hi, >> >> We don't use DHCP. Every single customer gets a real, static IP address. >> We also a assign a static IP address to every radio (for management). >> >> When I posted the question a month ago about how to force an SM to >> connect to a specific AP on a tower, the only answer was "color code". >> This isn't really an option, as that means the installer has to change >> the color code in the field. All of our current radios are setup and >> ready to connect to ANY tower and ANY AP on that tower without the >> installer doing anything in the field. >> >> And how does first level tech support even find the correct radio in the >> AP list for a customer on the phone? They have to scroll through 160 >> people to find them by MAC address? >> >> Yes, Canopy is a slower radio in today's world. 14Mbps of total >> throughput on a 20mhz channel is SLOW. Using Mikrotik I can get 30Mbps >> (double the speed) on the same channel size. Or I can use a 10mhz >> channel and get 15Mbps. And all these speeds can be delivered via upload >> or download or any combination, I don't have to set a specific >> percentage of up/down. >> >> And how do you guarantee 7ms latency? What happens if a customer gets >> 8ms? And how do they test that measurement? And what happens when a >> customer completely clobbers an AP and 160 customers are getting 20ms >> latency? Or you have interference from a new provider and all those >> people get 100ms latency? >> >> Travis >> Microserv >> >> >> Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: >> >>> All of the complaints are easily overcome with the proper management >>> software, DHCP reservations etc. You can easily force the SM to connect >>> to the exact AP you want a couple different ways. And there are several >>> non motorola software packages that do this kind of stuff. We have 5000 >>> subs on it and we don't break a sweat in managing any of this. >>> >>> We put 128-160 customers per AP and they all still get 10.2 Mbps burst. >>> Slower radio? That seems pretty fast to me. >>> And we guarantee latency to 7 mS. Hmmm, that is pretty hard to do with >>> anyone else. >>> - Original Message - >>> From: Travis Johnson >>> To: WISPA General List >>> Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 1:39 PM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers >>> >>> >>> We've tried Canopy... twice in fact... once about 3 years ago, and >>> once about a month ago. We just can't make it fit into our network >>> management (IP database, Call tracking, customer management, etc.) >>> system very well... having customer radios that change their LUID and IP >>> address every time they register, having to set the bandwidth on each SM >>> instead of the AP, having no security or ways to control which AP a >>> customer connects to without having to buy their software, etc
Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers
I'm with Travis on this, with the exception of using StarOS instead of Mikrotik. It is nice to have a set of standard, mature tools such as radius, cbq/iptable rules and standard, non-vendor specific hardware to work with instead of having to use a limited, proprietary system limited to a single vendor. I've deployed/consulted on 802.11 a/b/g networks representing 8000+ CPE units and it can be made to work just fine as long as it is managed properly. Travis is a pro, and he has the experience to design his network in such a way as to maximize the performance of his equipment. There are many others out there having the same success. FWIW, I believe the most logical next step is to start moving heavy usage customers over to 3.65 WiMAX gear starting next spring. I think we are near the threshold of what is going to be possible with unlicensed equipment - barring some kind of amazing breakthrough. I foresee a need to deploy smaller and smaller cells to maintain the desired performance level. It helps to have 10mhz channel sizes available to maximize the utilization of existing spectrum, but even that is starting to get awfully crowded. Whitespaces sure would help. I spent the last two years putting up 802.11a based APs across my entire service area and migrating customers from 2.4 to them to get the higher ARPU from faster speeds and VOIP service. I foresee spending the next two years deploying licensed backhauls and 3.65 APs starting with the high traffic areas and working out to the fringes. Its the neverending story. Matt Larsen vistabeam.com Travis Johnson wrote: > Hi, > > We don't use DHCP. Every single customer gets a real, static IP address. > We also a assign a static IP address to every radio (for management). > > When I posted the question a month ago about how to force an SM to > connect to a specific AP on a tower, the only answer was "color code". > This isn't really an option, as that means the installer has to change > the color code in the field. All of our current radios are setup and > ready to connect to ANY tower and ANY AP on that tower without the > installer doing anything in the field. > > And how does first level tech support even find the correct radio in the > AP list for a customer on the phone? They have to scroll through 160 > people to find them by MAC address? > > Yes, Canopy is a slower radio in today's world. 14Mbps of total > throughput on a 20mhz channel is SLOW. Using Mikrotik I can get 30Mbps > (double the speed) on the same channel size. Or I can use a 10mhz > channel and get 15Mbps. And all these speeds can be delivered via upload > or download or any combination, I don't have to set a specific > percentage of up/down. > > And how do you guarantee 7ms latency? What happens if a customer gets > 8ms? And how do they test that measurement? And what happens when a > customer completely clobbers an AP and 160 customers are getting 20ms > latency? Or you have interference from a new provider and all those > people get 100ms latency? > > Travis > Microserv > > > Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: > >> All of the complaints are easily overcome with the proper management >> software, DHCP reservations etc. You can easily force the SM to connect to >> the exact AP you want a couple different ways. And there are several non >> motorola software packages that do this kind of stuff. We have 5000 subs on >> it and we don't break a sweat in managing any of this. >> >> We put 128-160 customers per AP and they all still get 10.2 Mbps burst. >> Slower radio? That seems pretty fast to me. >> And we guarantee latency to 7 mS. Hmmm, that is pretty hard to do with >> anyone else. >> - Original Message - >> From: Travis Johnson >> To: WISPA General List >> Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 1:39 PM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers >> >> >> We've tried Canopy... twice in fact... once about 3 years ago, and once >> about a month ago. We just can't make it fit into our network management (IP >> database, Call tracking, customer management, etc.) system very well... >> having customer radios that change their LUID and IP address every time they >> register, having to set the bandwidth on each SM instead of the AP, having >> no security or ways to control which AP a customer connects to without >> having to buy their software, etc. >> >> All that, plus paying MORE for a slower radio than what we are using just >> didn't make sense. I can put up an AP (2.4ghz, 5.3ghz, 5.4ghz, or 5.8ghz) >> for less than >> $400 that will support 50 customers, using only 10mhz wide channels... and >> each CPE is less than $175 complete (including PoE, antenna). >> >> Canopy seems to work well for many people... but I've never been one to >> follow the "norm". And I get to put $50 in my pocket on every install, and >> $1,000 for every AP we put up. ;) >> >> Travis >> Microserv >> >> Chuck McCow
Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers
160 is an absolute upper max. Once they hit 128 we try to add an AP in that area. But they do work will with 128. Not sure what the settings are these days. I don't get into that detail like I once did. Perhaps Bryan will answer. - Original Message - From: "Jerry Richardson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 10:17 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers > 128-160/AP -= that's excellent. What are you setting sustained to? > > > > > __ > Jerry Richardson > airCloud Communications > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Chuck McCown - 3 > Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 8:29 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers > > All of the complaints are easily overcome with the proper management > software, DHCP reservations etc. You can easily force the SM to connect > to the exact AP you want a couple different ways. And there are several > non motorola software packages that do this kind of stuff. We have 5000 > subs on it and we don't break a sweat in managing any of this. > > We put 128-160 customers per AP and they all still get 10.2 Mbps burst. > Slower radio? That seems pretty fast to me. > And we guarantee latency to 7 mS. Hmmm, that is pretty hard to do with > anyone else. > - Original Message - > From: Travis Johnson > To: WISPA General List > Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 1:39 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers > > > We've tried Canopy... twice in fact... once about 3 years ago, and > once about a month ago. We just can't make it fit into our network > management (IP database, Call tracking, customer management, etc.) > system very well... having customer radios that change their LUID and IP > address every time they register, having to set the bandwidth on each SM > instead of the AP, having no security or ways to control which AP a > customer connects to without having to buy their software, etc. > > All that, plus paying MORE for a slower radio than what we are using > just didn't make sense. I can put up an AP (2.4ghz, 5.3ghz, 5.4ghz, or > 5.8ghz) for less than > $400 that will support 50 customers, using only 10mhz wide channels... > and each CPE is less than $175 complete (including PoE, antenna). > > Canopy seems to work well for many people... but I've never been one > to follow the "norm". And I get to put $50 in my pocket on every > install, and $1,000 for every AP we put up. ;) > > Travis > Microserv > > Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: > Well that is a testimony to your quality of service for sure. > Now, if you were using Canopy your customers would be even happier! > > - Original Message - > From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 11:07 AM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers > > > I have Qwest DSL, CableOne, another WISP (doing "up to 4meg" for > $29.95 > with Canopy), and a licensed WiMax (2.5ghz) provider (doing "up to > 2meg", mobile, for $29.95). I have a lot of competition... and yet we > have no sales people, no real advertising campaign, and more installs > than we can keep up with each month. > > Travis > Microserv > > Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: >You must not have competitors. I have both Qwest and Comcast giving > away > multi megabit starting at $15.95 > - Original Message - > From: Travis Johnson > To: WISPA General List > Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 10:53 AM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers > > > I guess that's my point... why offer more bandwidth than you have to? > Most people don't need more than 1meg, and that's our most popular > package for $39.95 per month (total, no modem rental fee, etc.). Why > give > away the farm if you don't have to? :) > > Travis > Microserv > > RickG wrote: > Wow, with all that bandwidth, I'm surprised you dont offer higher > speeds. > > Technically speaking, the download & upload price is the same. From a > cost standpoint, I allocate the download & upload separately because I > am "forced" to pay dearly ($1200/month) to AT&T for my dual T1's which > are required for "decent" upload speeds. Right now, my traffic is > split so all port 80 traffic flows though the 4Mbps x 2Mbps connection > through Time Warner which runs over $500/month. This works fairly well > for now since about half the traffic is web browsing. When I bought > this WISP there was no management, monitoring or reporting. I took > care of the management & monitoring and I'm working on the reporting. > The best thing I've done is replace the StarOS firewall with Mikrotik > and set up traffic priority. > Whew! Lots of work. At any rate, I'm working on my upstream connection > next. I really need to get the cost down. > > Thanks! -RickG > > On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Rick, > > Yes, all of our packages a
Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers
128-160/AP -= that's excellent. What are you setting sustained to? __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown - 3 Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 8:29 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers All of the complaints are easily overcome with the proper management software, DHCP reservations etc. You can easily force the SM to connect to the exact AP you want a couple different ways. And there are several non motorola software packages that do this kind of stuff. We have 5000 subs on it and we don't break a sweat in managing any of this. We put 128-160 customers per AP and they all still get 10.2 Mbps burst. Slower radio? That seems pretty fast to me. And we guarantee latency to 7 mS. Hmmm, that is pretty hard to do with anyone else. - Original Message - From: Travis Johnson To: WISPA General List Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 1:39 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers We've tried Canopy... twice in fact... once about 3 years ago, and once about a month ago. We just can't make it fit into our network management (IP database, Call tracking, customer management, etc.) system very well... having customer radios that change their LUID and IP address every time they register, having to set the bandwidth on each SM instead of the AP, having no security or ways to control which AP a customer connects to without having to buy their software, etc. All that, plus paying MORE for a slower radio than what we are using just didn't make sense. I can put up an AP (2.4ghz, 5.3ghz, 5.4ghz, or 5.8ghz) for less than $400 that will support 50 customers, using only 10mhz wide channels... and each CPE is less than $175 complete (including PoE, antenna). Canopy seems to work well for many people... but I've never been one to follow the "norm". And I get to put $50 in my pocket on every install, and $1,000 for every AP we put up. ;) Travis Microserv Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: Well that is a testimony to your quality of service for sure. Now, if you were using Canopy your customers would be even happier! - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 11:07 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers I have Qwest DSL, CableOne, another WISP (doing "up to 4meg" for $29.95 with Canopy), and a licensed WiMax (2.5ghz) provider (doing "up to 2meg", mobile, for $29.95). I have a lot of competition... and yet we have no sales people, no real advertising campaign, and more installs than we can keep up with each month. Travis Microserv Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: You must not have competitors. I have both Qwest and Comcast giving away multi megabit starting at $15.95 - Original Message - From: Travis Johnson To: WISPA General List Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 10:53 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers I guess that's my point... why offer more bandwidth than you have to? Most people don't need more than 1meg, and that's our most popular package for $39.95 per month (total, no modem rental fee, etc.). Why give away the farm if you don't have to? :) Travis Microserv RickG wrote: Wow, with all that bandwidth, I'm surprised you dont offer higher speeds. Technically speaking, the download & upload price is the same. From a cost standpoint, I allocate the download & upload separately because I am "forced" to pay dearly ($1200/month) to AT&T for my dual T1's which are required for "decent" upload speeds. Right now, my traffic is split so all port 80 traffic flows though the 4Mbps x 2Mbps connection through Time Warner which runs over $500/month. This works fairly well for now since about half the traffic is web browsing. When I bought this WISP there was no management, monitoring or reporting. I took care of the management & monitoring and I'm working on the reporting. The best thing I've done is replace the StarOS firewall with Mikrotik and set up traffic priority. Whew! Lots of work. At any rate, I'm working on my upstream connection next. I really need to get the cost down. Thanks! -RickG On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Rick, Yes, all of our packages are symmetrical speeds (same download and upload). So if they buy our 512k package, they get 512k down x 512k up all the time. They are not "dedicated" connections, but rather you get what you pay for connections. We still oversubscribe users on an AP, but only to the point where each AP is running around 60% capacity during peak times, thus leaving room for bursts, etc. We graph and monitor every single AP (over 200 of them) and every single user (bandwidth, packets, RSSI, etc.) so we always know what's happening on our network. We currently have three full OC-3 (155Mbps) dedicated connecti
Re: [WISPA] canopy speed
Both. We have a lot of upstream bandwidth of which half is used at it's peak. On 11/2/08, RickG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is that speed test "on net" or "off net"? > -RickG > > On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 9:05 PM, Josh Luthman > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> When a customer here gets installed we always do a speed test to show >> they're getting the connection they pay for as the tech leaves. >> >> They always get their peak every speed test. >> >> >> >> On 11/2/08, Mike Hammett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> That's why you join Peering Exchanges if you can. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Mike Hammett >>> Intelligent Computing Solutions >>> http://www.ics-il.com >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> From: "Chuck McCown - 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2008 4:30 PM >>> To: "WISPA General List" >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] canopy speed >>> And, as the Canopy 430 system gets rolled out, we will have 40 Mbps to deliver. We will probably give 30 down and 10 up. Statistically that gets folks on and off the system so quick there will be much more time for folks to spend in the wide open throttle mode. DSL will be left in our dust. DOCSIS and FIOS are approaching those speeds but they ain't playing in our sandbox... yet. If you have 30 Mbps burst download speeds, the bottleneck will not be in our system, it will be at the content provider end or in transiting the internet. - Original Message - From: "Chuck McCown - 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2008 4:12 PM Subject: [WISPA] canopy speed > Perception is reality. This is what you will see and this is accurate. > Some times you may have to click it 2 or 3 times to get over 10 but it > will > usually be between 5 and 10 on the first click. And people will click > and > click and click until they get the highest reading. If they see 10 the > are > satisfied. > Irrespective, when you are casually browsing and getting wide open > throttle > on a canopy system it is just as responsive as when I am at the office > where > I have GigE from my desk top to the world. > > > > > 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/ >>> >> >> >> -- >> Josh Luthman >> Office: 937-552-2340 >> Direct: 937-552-2343 >> 1100 Wayne St >> Suite 1337 >> Troy, OH 45373 >> >> Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly. >> --- Henry Spencer >> >> >> >> 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/ > -- Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly. --- Henry Spencer -
Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers
snmp is a wonderful thing... - Original Message - From: "Chuck McCown - 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 9:47 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers > Our front end tech support only needs the phone number or account number > to > instantly find and edit every detail about the customer. No scrolling, no > nothing. This includes AP, SM, IP, LUID etc. That is no problem at all. > You can manage SM/AP pairing with color codes or frequencies. Since this > is > not 802.11 latency is guaranteed by the protocol. > > And we have high priority BW on each AP for Voip. Voip on our system is > form fit and function equivalent to LEC POTS service. Quality, LNP, E-911 > etc. I have a hard time accepting that you can do that on 802.11 gear. > > - Original Message - > From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 9:39 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers > > >> Hi, >> >> We don't use DHCP. Every single customer gets a real, static IP address. >> We also a assign a static IP address to every radio (for management). >> >> When I posted the question a month ago about how to force an SM to >> connect to a specific AP on a tower, the only answer was "color code". >> This isn't really an option, as that means the installer has to change >> the color code in the field. All of our current radios are setup and >> ready to connect to ANY tower and ANY AP on that tower without the >> installer doing anything in the field. >> >> And how does first level tech support even find the correct radio in the >> AP list for a customer on the phone? They have to scroll through 160 >> people to find them by MAC address? >> >> Yes, Canopy is a slower radio in today's world. 14Mbps of total >> throughput on a 20mhz channel is SLOW. Using Mikrotik I can get 30Mbps >> (double the speed) on the same channel size. Or I can use a 10mhz >> channel and get 15Mbps. And all these speeds can be delivered via upload >> or download or any combination, I don't have to set a specific >> percentage of up/down. >> >> And how do you guarantee 7ms latency? What happens if a customer gets >> 8ms? And how do they test that measurement? And what happens when a >> customer completely clobbers an AP and 160 customers are getting 20ms >> latency? Or you have interference from a new provider and all those >> people get 100ms latency? >> >> Travis >> Microserv >> >> >> Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: >>> All of the complaints are easily overcome with the proper management >>> software, DHCP reservations etc. You can easily force the SM to connect >>> to the exact AP you want a couple different ways. And there are several >>> non motorola software packages that do this kind of stuff. We have 5000 >>> subs on it and we don't break a sweat in managing any of this. >>> >>> We put 128-160 customers per AP and they all still get 10.2 Mbps burst. >>> Slower radio? That seems pretty fast to me. >>> And we guarantee latency to 7 mS. Hmmm, that is pretty hard to do with >>> anyone else. >>> - Original Message - >>> From: Travis Johnson >>> To: WISPA General List >>> Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 1:39 PM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers >>> >>> >>> We've tried Canopy... twice in fact... once about 3 years ago, and >>> once >>> about a month ago. We just can't make it fit into our network management >>> (IP database, Call tracking, customer management, etc.) system very >>> well... having customer radios that change their LUID and IP address >>> every time they register, having to set the bandwidth on each SM instead >>> of the AP, having no security or ways to control which AP a customer >>> connects to without having to buy their software, etc. >>> >>> All that, plus paying MORE for a slower radio than what we are using >>> just didn't make sense. I can put up an AP (2.4ghz, 5.3ghz, 5.4ghz, or >>> 5.8ghz) for less than >>> $400 that will support 50 customers, using only 10mhz wide channels... >>> and each CPE is less than $175 complete (including PoE, antenna). >>> >>> Canopy seems to work well for many people... but I've never been one >>> to >>> follow the "norm". And I get to put $50 in my pocket on every install, >>> and $1,000 for every AP we put up. ;) >>> >>> Travis >>> Microserv >>> >>> Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: >>> Well that is a testimony to your quality of service for sure. >>> Now, if you were using Canopy your customers would be even happier! >>> >>> - Original Message - >>> From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "WISPA General List" >>> Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 11:07 AM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers >>> >>> >>> I have Qwest DSL, CableOne, another WISP (doing "up to 4meg" for >>> $29.95 >>> with Canopy), and a licensed WiMax (2.5ghz) provider (doing "up to >>> 2meg", mobile, for $29.95). I have a lot of competition... and ye
Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers
Our front end tech support only needs the phone number or account number to instantly find and edit every detail about the customer. No scrolling, no nothing. This includes AP, SM, IP, LUID etc. That is no problem at all. You can manage SM/AP pairing with color codes or frequencies. Since this is not 802.11 latency is guaranteed by the protocol. And we have high priority BW on each AP for Voip. Voip on our system is form fit and function equivalent to LEC POTS service. Quality, LNP, E-911 etc. I have a hard time accepting that you can do that on 802.11 gear. - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 9:39 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers > Hi, > > We don't use DHCP. Every single customer gets a real, static IP address. > We also a assign a static IP address to every radio (for management). > > When I posted the question a month ago about how to force an SM to > connect to a specific AP on a tower, the only answer was "color code". > This isn't really an option, as that means the installer has to change > the color code in the field. All of our current radios are setup and > ready to connect to ANY tower and ANY AP on that tower without the > installer doing anything in the field. > > And how does first level tech support even find the correct radio in the > AP list for a customer on the phone? They have to scroll through 160 > people to find them by MAC address? > > Yes, Canopy is a slower radio in today's world. 14Mbps of total > throughput on a 20mhz channel is SLOW. Using Mikrotik I can get 30Mbps > (double the speed) on the same channel size. Or I can use a 10mhz > channel and get 15Mbps. And all these speeds can be delivered via upload > or download or any combination, I don't have to set a specific > percentage of up/down. > > And how do you guarantee 7ms latency? What happens if a customer gets > 8ms? And how do they test that measurement? And what happens when a > customer completely clobbers an AP and 160 customers are getting 20ms > latency? Or you have interference from a new provider and all those > people get 100ms latency? > > Travis > Microserv > > > Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: >> All of the complaints are easily overcome with the proper management >> software, DHCP reservations etc. You can easily force the SM to connect >> to the exact AP you want a couple different ways. And there are several >> non motorola software packages that do this kind of stuff. We have 5000 >> subs on it and we don't break a sweat in managing any of this. >> >> We put 128-160 customers per AP and they all still get 10.2 Mbps burst. >> Slower radio? That seems pretty fast to me. >> And we guarantee latency to 7 mS. Hmmm, that is pretty hard to do with >> anyone else. >> - Original Message - >> From: Travis Johnson >> To: WISPA General List >> Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 1:39 PM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers >> >> >> We've tried Canopy... twice in fact... once about 3 years ago, and once >> about a month ago. We just can't make it fit into our network management >> (IP database, Call tracking, customer management, etc.) system very >> well... having customer radios that change their LUID and IP address >> every time they register, having to set the bandwidth on each SM instead >> of the AP, having no security or ways to control which AP a customer >> connects to without having to buy their software, etc. >> >> All that, plus paying MORE for a slower radio than what we are using >> just didn't make sense. I can put up an AP (2.4ghz, 5.3ghz, 5.4ghz, or >> 5.8ghz) for less than >> $400 that will support 50 customers, using only 10mhz wide channels... >> and each CPE is less than $175 complete (including PoE, antenna). >> >> Canopy seems to work well for many people... but I've never been one to >> follow the "norm". And I get to put $50 in my pocket on every install, >> and $1,000 for every AP we put up. ;) >> >> Travis >> Microserv >> >> Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: >> Well that is a testimony to your quality of service for sure. >> Now, if you were using Canopy your customers would be even happier! >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "WISPA General List" >> Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 11:07 AM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers >> >> >> I have Qwest DSL, CableOne, another WISP (doing "up to 4meg" for $29.95 >> with Canopy), and a licensed WiMax (2.5ghz) provider (doing "up to >> 2meg", mobile, for $29.95). I have a lot of competition... and yet we >> have no sales people, no real advertising campaign, and more installs >> than we can keep up with each month. >> >> Travis >> Microserv >> >> Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: >> You must not have competitors. I have both Qwest and Comcast giving >> away >> multi megabit starting at $15.95 >> - Original Message -
Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers OT: Windows updates
They need WSUS installed on their site http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/wsus/default.aspx John Thomas Scottie Arnett wrote: > ...and from many website's you will never get this. The traffic congestion on > a 100 meg link can choke it down to less than 10 meg, with huge sites such as > myspace, yahoo, and many others...not saying that it happens often. I host > about 50 websites on a 3 meg connection for myself and others, and in 8 years > have NEVER heard a single complaint from my webhosters. A 10 meg download > from Chuck's customer to my web server will NEVER be realized. As Chuck says, > the bandwidth test is on a server that the customer directly connects to > across their wireless link, which is a true bandwidth check to that point. > The truth is in the advertising...If he says you will get 10 meg to any place > at any time, he might get busted for false adv. Not sure how he does it, but > if it is worded right, he will get many more customers and no > complaints...just cause of burstiness of web surfing. > > On another note, is their a way to cache or get a server closer to you for > windows updates? I have a hospital on our network that has 60+ PC's on the > inside. They are killing us with windows updates at certain times...like > Service Pack 3...? > > Scott > > > > -- Original Message -- > From: "Chuck McCown - 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: WISPA General List > Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2008 16:06:15 -0600 > > >> Bigger number in the advertising and on your website gets the customer. >> We are truthful. The truth is, you will most likely see 10.2 Mbps any >> random time you choose to do a speed test. >> You will also get wide open throttle most of the time you are clicking >> around web sites and checking your email. >> DSL cannot do this. Most Comcast accounts cannot do this. Because we can >> do this, we get and keep customers. >> - Original Message - >> From: Travis Johnson >> To: WISPA General List >> Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2008 2:30 PM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers >> >> >> Again, I have to say, "up to 8Mbps" is completely different than selling a >> true "8Mbps". I can sell an "up to 8Mbps" service using 802.11b equipment >> too. >> >> Maybe I'll start selling an "up to 100Mbps" service for the same price as >> all my other packages... ;) >> >> Travis >> Microserv >> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> We sell up to 8Mbps on Canopy advantage without issues. Nearly all our >> customers are within a couple miles though and as long as they have less >> than a -76, they get full speed. Rarely do we have two customers doing full >> speed at the same time on the same sector. (Most we have on a sector is 50) >> Maybe we are luckier than most >> The main problem on Advantage (as well as other systems) is upload. >> However, Canopy QoS is good and even saturated links don't affect VoIP >> quality. We sell a small business 8/2 package and when you see one of them >> soaking upload for long periods and a couple customers running outbound P2P, >> you start to worry a little but we haven't had any complaints due to >> capacity. >> >> >> On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 4:13 PM, Tom DeReggi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: >> >> Chuck, >> >> Not to rain on your parade but... I'm a little confused on how 10.2 mbps is >> possible w/ Canopy. Advantage series peak capacity is just for short range >> customers, and a large percentage of the capacity can be voided by by the >> farther out slower non-advantage CPEs. When Up/down rate ratios have to be >> pre-fined (for syncing) that limits the radio from using the ful capacity >> of >> the Radio. Its one of the big reasons that we chose Trango 8 years ago >> originally, so that it was infact possible to get full radio speed in one >> direction when it was available in low usage time, so we could quote >> higher >> speeds to business symetrical customers. >> >> Sure, if we consider 14mb real world advantage best case for Advantage >> series, use all advantage series CPE, and do a 70 / 30 download to upload, >> sure 10mbps peak downloads are possible for a single client, in that >> scenario. Provided that the WISP was fine with all other customers being >> 100% STARVED at the time the one customer was monopolizing the peak >> capacity. >> We tried that once, and it was a big mistake because it caused latency to >> sky rocket for all the other customers when they first attempted to use >> capacity, and the feel of the circuit because very bursty feeling. The >> short >> pauses made it feel like something was wrong with the circuit. TCP could >> not >> deal with it properly, it needs time to tune. Because of TCP's reaction, >> it >> actually translated to a slower experience than if we just gave customers >> half the speed. So My Points is >> >> Your concept of bursting a HIGH capacity for short periods is a sound >> concept, provided that you never let o
Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers
Hi, We don't use DHCP. Every single customer gets a real, static IP address. We also a assign a static IP address to every radio (for management). When I posted the question a month ago about how to force an SM to connect to a specific AP on a tower, the only answer was "color code". This isn't really an option, as that means the installer has to change the color code in the field. All of our current radios are setup and ready to connect to ANY tower and ANY AP on that tower without the installer doing anything in the field. And how does first level tech support even find the correct radio in the AP list for a customer on the phone? They have to scroll through 160 people to find them by MAC address? Yes, Canopy is a slower radio in today's world. 14Mbps of total throughput on a 20mhz channel is SLOW. Using Mikrotik I can get 30Mbps (double the speed) on the same channel size. Or I can use a 10mhz channel and get 15Mbps. And all these speeds can be delivered via upload or download or any combination, I don't have to set a specific percentage of up/down. And how do you guarantee 7ms latency? What happens if a customer gets 8ms? And how do they test that measurement? And what happens when a customer completely clobbers an AP and 160 customers are getting 20ms latency? Or you have interference from a new provider and all those people get 100ms latency? Travis Microserv Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: > All of the complaints are easily overcome with the proper management > software, DHCP reservations etc. You can easily force the SM to connect to > the exact AP you want a couple different ways. And there are several non > motorola software packages that do this kind of stuff. We have 5000 subs on > it and we don't break a sweat in managing any of this. > > We put 128-160 customers per AP and they all still get 10.2 Mbps burst. > Slower radio? That seems pretty fast to me. > And we guarantee latency to 7 mS. Hmmm, that is pretty hard to do with > anyone else. > - Original Message - > From: Travis Johnson > To: WISPA General List > Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 1:39 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers > > > We've tried Canopy... twice in fact... once about 3 years ago, and once > about a month ago. We just can't make it fit into our network management (IP > database, Call tracking, customer management, etc.) system very well... > having customer radios that change their LUID and IP address every time they > register, having to set the bandwidth on each SM instead of the AP, having no > security or ways to control which AP a customer connects to without having to > buy their software, etc. > > All that, plus paying MORE for a slower radio than what we are using just > didn't make sense. I can put up an AP (2.4ghz, 5.3ghz, 5.4ghz, or 5.8ghz) for > less than > $400 that will support 50 customers, using only 10mhz wide channels... and > each CPE is less than $175 complete (including PoE, antenna). > > Canopy seems to work well for many people... but I've never been one to > follow the "norm". And I get to put $50 in my pocket on every install, and > $1,000 for every AP we put up. ;) > > Travis > Microserv > > Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: > Well that is a testimony to your quality of service for sure. > Now, if you were using Canopy your customers would be even happier! > > - Original Message - > From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 11:07 AM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers > > > I have Qwest DSL, CableOne, another WISP (doing "up to 4meg" for $29.95 > with Canopy), and a licensed WiMax (2.5ghz) provider (doing "up to > 2meg", mobile, for $29.95). I have a lot of competition... and yet we > have no sales people, no real advertising campaign, and more installs > than we can keep up with each month. > > Travis > Microserv > > Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: > You must not have competitors. I have both Qwest and Comcast giving away > multi megabit starting at $15.95 > - Original Message - > From: Travis Johnson > To: WISPA General List > Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 10:53 AM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers > > > I guess that's my point... why offer more bandwidth than you have to? > Most people don't need more than 1meg, and that's our most popular > package for $39.95 per month (total, no modem rental fee, etc.). Why give > away the farm if you don't have to? :) > > Travis > Microserv > > RickG wrote: > Wow, with all that bandwidth, I'm surprised you dont offer higher speeds. > > Technically speaking, the download & upload price is the same. From a > cost standpoint, I allocate the download & upload separately because I > am "forced" to pay dearly ($1200/month) to AT&T for my dual T1's which > are required for "decent" upload speeds. Right now, my traffic is > split so all port 80 traffic flows though t
Re: [WISPA] good multicast wi-fi mesh solution?
The Cisco 1500 series products can do multicast, but they are pricey... John Thomas Rogelio wrote: > I'm looking for wireless wi-fi mesh (preferably multiradio) solutions > that will support multicasting. > > I was looking for something along the lines of BelAir, but I'm told that > they have limited multicasting support. Now I have to find out whether > or not other radios I might want to use outweigh some of the advantages > I'd get with BelAir (ruggedness, mesh capacity, radio sensitivity, etc) > > Any suggestions here would be greatly appreciated! > > > > 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] heavy usage customers
All of the complaints are easily overcome with the proper management software, DHCP reservations etc. You can easily force the SM to connect to the exact AP you want a couple different ways. And there are several non motorola software packages that do this kind of stuff. We have 5000 subs on it and we don't break a sweat in managing any of this. We put 128-160 customers per AP and they all still get 10.2 Mbps burst. Slower radio? That seems pretty fast to me. And we guarantee latency to 7 mS. Hmmm, that is pretty hard to do with anyone else. - Original Message - From: Travis Johnson To: WISPA General List Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 1:39 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers We've tried Canopy... twice in fact... once about 3 years ago, and once about a month ago. We just can't make it fit into our network management (IP database, Call tracking, customer management, etc.) system very well... having customer radios that change their LUID and IP address every time they register, having to set the bandwidth on each SM instead of the AP, having no security or ways to control which AP a customer connects to without having to buy their software, etc. All that, plus paying MORE for a slower radio than what we are using just didn't make sense. I can put up an AP (2.4ghz, 5.3ghz, 5.4ghz, or 5.8ghz) for less than $400 that will support 50 customers, using only 10mhz wide channels... and each CPE is less than $175 complete (including PoE, antenna). Canopy seems to work well for many people... but I've never been one to follow the "norm". And I get to put $50 in my pocket on every install, and $1,000 for every AP we put up. ;) Travis Microserv Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: Well that is a testimony to your quality of service for sure. Now, if you were using Canopy your customers would be even happier! - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 11:07 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers I have Qwest DSL, CableOne, another WISP (doing "up to 4meg" for $29.95 with Canopy), and a licensed WiMax (2.5ghz) provider (doing "up to 2meg", mobile, for $29.95). I have a lot of competition... and yet we have no sales people, no real advertising campaign, and more installs than we can keep up with each month. Travis Microserv Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: You must not have competitors. I have both Qwest and Comcast giving away multi megabit starting at $15.95 - Original Message - From: Travis Johnson To: WISPA General List Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 10:53 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers I guess that's my point... why offer more bandwidth than you have to? Most people don't need more than 1meg, and that's our most popular package for $39.95 per month (total, no modem rental fee, etc.). Why give away the farm if you don't have to? :) Travis Microserv RickG wrote: Wow, with all that bandwidth, I'm surprised you dont offer higher speeds. Technically speaking, the download & upload price is the same. From a cost standpoint, I allocate the download & upload separately because I am "forced" to pay dearly ($1200/month) to AT&T for my dual T1's which are required for "decent" upload speeds. Right now, my traffic is split so all port 80 traffic flows though the 4Mbps x 2Mbps connection through Time Warner which runs over $500/month. This works fairly well for now since about half the traffic is web browsing. When I bought this WISP there was no management, monitoring or reporting. I took care of the management & monitoring and I'm working on the reporting. The best thing I've done is replace the StarOS firewall with Mikrotik and set up traffic priority. Whew! Lots of work. At any rate, I'm working on my upstream connection next. I really need to get the cost down. Thanks! -RickG On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Rick, Yes, all of our packages are symmetrical speeds (same download and upload). So if they buy our 512k package, they get 512k down x 512k up all the time. They are not "dedicated" connections, but rather you get what you pay for connections. We still oversubscribe users on an AP, but only to the point where each AP is running around 60% capacity during peak times, thus leaving room for bursts, etc. We graph and monitor every single AP (over 200 of them) and every single user (bandwidth, packets, RSSI, etc.) so we always know what's happening on our network. We currently have three full OC-3 (155Mbps) dedicated connections to the backbone. On average, we pay $40/meg for bandwidth. Why is your upload price different than your download price? Travis Microserv RickG wrote: Travis, Nice work! Therefore, you are selling dedicated bandwidth to all of your customers. In other words, if all your customers run speed test at the same time they will get what thei
Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers
I told the guy if he wanted 1.5mbps round the clock that he needed to go buy a T1 line. Kurt Fankhauser WAVELINC P.O. Box 126 Bucyrus, OH 44820 419-562-6405 www.wavelinc.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of RickG Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2008 9:11 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers Kurt, I tell them that they need to consider a higher rate package with dedicated bandwidth rather than shared bandwidth. -RickG On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 11:59 AM, Kurt Fankhauser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Does anyone else here have customer/s that consume so much bandwidth that > you have to throttle them down after say 5 minutes of downloading. And what > do you tell them when they start complaining about the throttled down speed. > (they don't know your throttling them though) > > > > Kurt Fankhauser > WAVELINC > P.O. Box 126 > Bucyrus, OH 44820 > 419-562-6405 > www.wavelinc.com > > > > > > > > > > > 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] WiMax (was heavy usage customers)
Yes, we have one of their radios at our office. We are 1.5 miles from their tower and we get 800k down and 300k up on their "up to 2meg" package. Travis Microserv RickG wrote: I've seen your website with the comparisons. Very nice. So, have you been able to test their WiMax yet? -RickG On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 1:07 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I have Qwest DSL, CableOne, another WISP (doing "up to 4meg" for $29.95 with Canopy), and a licensed WiMax (2.5ghz) provider (doing "up to 2meg", mobile, for $29.95). I have a lot of competition... and yet we have no sales people, no real advertising campaign, and more installs than we can keep up with each month. Travis Microserv Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: You must not have competitors. I have both Qwest and Comcast giving away multi megabit starting at $15.95 - Original Message - From: Travis Johnson To: WISPA General List Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 10:53 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers I guess that's my point... why offer more bandwidth than you have to? Most people don't need more than 1meg, and that's our most popular package for $39.95 per month (total, no modem rental fee, etc.). Why give away the farm if you don't have to? :) Travis Microserv RickG wrote: Wow, with all that bandwidth, I'm surprised you dont offer higher speeds. Technically speaking, the download & upload price is the same. From a cost standpoint, I allocate the download & upload separately because I am "forced" to pay dearly ($1200/month) to AT&T for my dual T1's which are required for "decent" upload speeds. Right now, my traffic is split so all port 80 traffic flows though the 4Mbps x 2Mbps connection through Time Warner which runs over $500/month. This works fairly well for now since about half the traffic is web browsing. When I bought this WISP there was no management, monitoring or reporting. I took care of the management & monitoring and I'm working on the reporting. The best thing I've done is replace the StarOS firewall with Mikrotik and set up traffic priority. Whew! Lots of work. At any rate, I'm working on my upstream connection next. I really need to get the cost down. Thanks! -RickG On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Rick, Yes, all of our packages are symmetrical speeds (same download and upload). So if they buy our 512k package, they get 512k down x 512k up all the time. They are not "dedicated" connections, but rather you get what you pay for connections. We still oversubscribe users on an AP, but only to the point where each AP is running around 60% capacity during peak times, thus leaving room for bursts, etc. We graph and monitor every single AP (over 200 of them) and every single user (bandwidth, packets, RSSI, etc.) so we always know what's happening on our network. We currently have three full OC-3 (155Mbps) dedicated connections to the backbone. On average, we pay $40/meg for bandwidth. Why is your upload price different than your download price? Travis Microserv RickG wrote: Travis, Nice work! Therefore, you are selling dedicated bandwidth to all of your customers. In other words, if all your customers run speed test at the same time they will get what their plan allows. If you dont mind, I have a few questions: Is the above scenario true for upload speed as well as download speed? What are you paying for your upstream connection? What type of upstream connection do you have? I'd like to be there and I keep hoping cheap bandwidth comes my way. When you are paying $150/meg for download and $400/meg for upload, the business model is tough. -RickG BTW: I'd take this offlist if you prefer but I think this is a problem that many us us small WISP's face. On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 9:30 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Every customer can get the speed they are paying for ANY time they run a speed test. We offer packages from 512k to 2.5meg for residential customers and they always get what they pay for (download AND upload, which is the same for all of our packages). Travis Microserv RickG wrote: Travis, If I understand this correctly, you have at least 1Mbps or higher of bandwidth for every customer? -RickG On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: We deliver what the customers pay for. If they purchase a 1Mbps package, they get 1Mbps 24x7 (with no monthly bit caps). Personally I have never liked the "up to" speed packages... it's like going to Walmart and buying milk. You can pay $3 for a full 1 gallon, or you can pay $2 for "up to" a gallon (without really knowing how much you are going to get, but it will be somewhere between nothing and a full gallon). Travis Microserv Kurt Fankhauser wrote: Does anyone else here have customer/s that consume so much bandwidth that you have to throttle them down after say 5 minutes of downloading. And what do you tell them when the
Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers
Wow... so let's run some numbers (just for fun)... 20,000 subs x $30 = $600k / month x 12 months = $7,200,000 per year revenue. Based on normal business finances, gross profit is probably around 30% ($2,160,000) per year (because they have investment money, they don't have to lease or buy CPE, backhaul, etc. and it's only operating costs). Now the question is, what are the terms of their funding? The customer base is really only worth about $10 million... and I doubt they have $40 million in equipment already installed... so they are already deep "in the hole"... and based on these numbers, I don't see how it will improve? This looks like many of the local "dot-bomb" companies in my area that rounded up lots of money and then just lived off the money until it was gone... and then so were they... Travis Microserv John McDowell wrote: I just read where they received there third round of financing. Something over ten million which puts them somewhere in the 50 million range as a guess. Last I spoke with their CEO they were pushing 2 customers with an arpu of around $30. Sent from my iPhone On Nov 2, 2008, at 2:50 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Yes... I think Bridgemaxx has some issues to work out (especially with the economy the way it is now) and here's why. Honestly, I'm not sure what "space" they are trying to compete. They are using Alvarion's mobile WiMax (2.5ghz) product. We have service at our office from it and it's horrible. We are only about 1.5 miles from one of their towers and the best speed we have seen is 800k down x 400k up. Latency is horrible as well (usually around 100ms). In our area (population 51,000) they installed base stations on four towers. They used 18ghz Ceragon radios and created a "ring" around the city. So just the cost on the backhauls and Base stations is probably over $300,000. Then every single CPE is over $400. We are starting to see a lot of their radios have to be "professionally" installed (meaning a truck roll). I thought the whole idea was no truck roll? Seems to remove the "mobile" part of the service. Then they are charging $29.95 per month for service plus $4 per month for the modem rental. I'm not sure how they ever plan to break-even on their investment when they had to spend MILLIONS to buy the 2.5ghz license from the previous company ($7 million is the rumor). Then, they aren't truly mobile. If you stay within each city, you can get service by just plugging in the modem... but you can't drive down the freeway and get anything... so they seem to be in the middle between fixed wireless (WISP) and truly mobile (cell providers). My emails about a year ago indicated I was pretty sure they were in it for the "short haul"... meaning they would build it up enough to get someone like Clearwire or Sprint to come buy it. Now with everything else going on (economy, stock market, politics, mergers, etc.) I don't see that happening any time soon... so they may be in serious trouble shortly. Just my $.02 worth. Travis Microserv Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: Found this letter about Bridgemaxx: Not that you care or this message will get to anyone with proper authority to do something ... Your service is getting overloaded and not usable at 224 West Central in Missoula Montana. It's not my set up because it is happening to everyone in the community. Your getting a bad name and your commercials are adding fuel to the fire. Last night the service was down and since I got a bill this morning I thought I would write and bitch about the terrible service. When there is a viable alternative in Missoula tons of customers will jump ship unless you do the right thing now. - Original Message - From: "Chuck McCown - 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 11:20 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers Well that is a testimony to your quality of service for sure. Now, if you were using Canopy your customers would be even happier! - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 11:07 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers I have Qwest DSL, CableOne, another WISP (doing "up to 4meg" for $29.95 with Canopy), and a licensed WiMax (2.5ghz) provider (doing "up to 2meg", mobile, for $29.95). I have a lot of competition... and yet we have no sales people, no real advertising campaign, and more installs than we can keep up with each month. Travis Microserv Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: You must not have competitors. I have both Qwest and Comcast giving away multi megabit starting at $15.95 - Original Message - From: Travis Johnson To: WISPA General List Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 10:53 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] h
Re: [WISPA] canopy speed
Is that speed test "on net" or "off net"? -RickG On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 9:05 PM, Josh Luthman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > When a customer here gets installed we always do a speed test to show > they're getting the connection they pay for as the tech leaves. > > They always get their peak every speed test. > > > > On 11/2/08, Mike Hammett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> That's why you join Peering Exchanges if you can. >> >> >> -- >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions >> http://www.ics-il.com >> >> >> >> -- >> From: "Chuck McCown - 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2008 4:30 PM >> To: "WISPA General List" >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] canopy speed >> >>> And, as the Canopy 430 system gets rolled out, we will have 40 Mbps to >>> deliver. We will probably give 30 down and 10 up. Statistically that >>> gets >>> folks on and off the system so quick there will be much more time for >>> folks >>> to spend in the wide open throttle mode. DSL will be left in our dust. >>> DOCSIS and FIOS are approaching those speeds but they ain't playing in our >>> sandbox... yet. If you have 30 Mbps burst download speeds, the bottleneck >>> will not be in our system, it will be at the content provider end or in >>> transiting the internet. >>> - Original Message - >>> From: "Chuck McCown - 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: >>> Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2008 4:12 PM >>> Subject: [WISPA] canopy speed >>> >>> Perception is reality. This is what you will see and this is accurate. Some times you may have to click it 2 or 3 times to get over 10 but it will usually be between 5 and 10 on the first click. And people will click and click and click until they get the highest reading. If they see 10 the are satisfied. Irrespective, when you are casually browsing and getting wide open throttle on a canopy system it is just as responsive as when I am at the office where I have GigE from my desk top to the world. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> 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/ >> > > > -- > Josh Luthman > Office: 937-552-2340 > Direct: 937-552-2343 > 1100 Wayne St > Suite 1337 > Troy, OH 45373 > > Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly. > --- Henry Spencer > > > > 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] WiMax (was heavy usage customers)
Disregard - I just sqw your other posts :) On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 10:20 PM, RickG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've seen your website with the comparisons. Very nice. So, have you > been able to test their WiMax yet? -RickG > > On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 1:07 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I have Qwest DSL, CableOne, another WISP (doing "up to 4meg" for $29.95 >> with Canopy), and a licensed WiMax (2.5ghz) provider (doing "up to >> 2meg", mobile, for $29.95). I have a lot of competition... and yet we >> have no sales people, no real advertising campaign, and more installs >> than we can keep up with each month. >> >> Travis >> Microserv >> >> Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: >>> You must not have competitors. I have both Qwest and Comcast giving away >>> multi megabit starting at $15.95 >>> - Original Message - >>> From: Travis Johnson >>> To: WISPA General List >>> Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 10:53 AM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers >>> >>> >>> I guess that's my point... why offer more bandwidth than you have to? >>> Most people don't need more than 1meg, and that's our most popular package >>> for $39.95 per month (total, no modem rental fee, etc.). Why give away the >>> farm if you don't have to? :) >>> >>> Travis >>> Microserv >>> >>> RickG wrote: >>> Wow, with all that bandwidth, I'm surprised you dont offer higher speeds. >>> >>> Technically speaking, the download & upload price is the same. From a >>> cost standpoint, I allocate the download & upload separately because I >>> am "forced" to pay dearly ($1200/month) to AT&T for my dual T1's which >>> are required for "decent" upload speeds. Right now, my traffic is >>> split so all port 80 traffic flows though the 4Mbps x 2Mbps connection >>> through Time Warner which runs over $500/month. This works fairly well >>> for now since about half the traffic is web browsing. When I bought >>> this WISP there was no management, monitoring or reporting. I took >>> care of the management & monitoring and I'm working on the reporting. >>> The best thing I've done is replace the StarOS firewall with Mikrotik >>> and set up traffic priority. >>> Whew! Lots of work. At any rate, I'm working on my upstream connection >>> next. I really need to get the cost down. >>> >>> Thanks! -RickG >>> >>> On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Rick, >>> >>> Yes, all of our packages are symmetrical speeds (same download and upload). >>> So if they buy our 512k package, they get 512k down x 512k up all the time. >>> They are not "dedicated" connections, but rather you get what you pay for >>> connections. We still oversubscribe users on an AP, but only to the point >>> where each AP is running around 60% capacity during peak times, thus leaving >>> room for bursts, etc. We graph and monitor every single AP (over 200 of >>> them) and every single user (bandwidth, packets, RSSI, etc.) so we always >>> know what's happening on our network. >>> >>> We currently have three full OC-3 (155Mbps) dedicated connections to the >>> backbone. On average, we pay $40/meg for bandwidth. Why is your upload price >>> different than your download price? >>> >>> Travis >>> Microserv >>> >>> RickG wrote: >>> >>> Travis, >>> >>> Nice work! Therefore, you are selling dedicated bandwidth to all of >>> your customers. In other words, if all your customers run speed test >>> at the same time they will get what their plan allows. If you dont >>> mind, I have a few questions: >>> Is the above scenario true for upload speed as well as download speed? >>> What are you paying for your upstream connection? >>> What type of upstream connection do you have? >>> >>> I'd like to be there and I keep hoping cheap bandwidth comes my way. >>> When you are paying $150/meg for download and $400/meg for upload, the >>> business model is tough. >>> >>> -RickG >>> >>> BTW: I'd take this offlist if you prefer but I think this is a problem >>> that many us us small WISP's face. >>> >>> On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 9:30 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Every customer can get the speed they are paying for ANY time they run a >>> speed test. We offer packages from 512k to 2.5meg for residential customers >>> and they always get what they pay for (download AND upload, which is the >>> same for all of our packages). >>> >>> Travis >>> Microserv >>> >>> RickG wrote: >>> >>> Travis, >>> >>> If I understand this correctly, you have at least 1Mbps or higher of >>> bandwidth for every customer? >>> >>> -RickG >>> >>> On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> We deliver what the customers pay for. If they purchase a 1Mbps package, >>> they get 1Mbps 24x7 (with no monthly bit caps). Personally I have never >>> liked the "up to" speed packages... it's like going to Walmart and >>> buying milk. You can pay $3 for a full 1 gallon, or you can pay $2 for >>> "up to" a gallon (without
Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers
Interesting subject - quality of service. I give 10 times better service than the cable and phone companys but this buys me nothing. People will leave you for as little as $5/month or a lousy $50 gift card. It kills me! -RickG On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 1:20 PM, Chuck McCown - 3 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well that is a testimony to your quality of service for sure. > Now, if you were using Canopy your customers would be even happier! > > - Original Message - > From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 11:07 AM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers > > >>I have Qwest DSL, CableOne, another WISP (doing "up to 4meg" for $29.95 >> with Canopy), and a licensed WiMax (2.5ghz) provider (doing "up to >> 2meg", mobile, for $29.95). I have a lot of competition... and yet we >> have no sales people, no real advertising campaign, and more installs >> than we can keep up with each month. >> >> Travis >> Microserv >> >> Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: >>> You must not have competitors. I have both Qwest and Comcast giving away >>> multi megabit starting at $15.95 >>> - Original Message - >>> From: Travis Johnson >>> To: WISPA General List >>> Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 10:53 AM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers >>> >>> >>> I guess that's my point... why offer more bandwidth than you have to? >>> Most people don't need more than 1meg, and that's our most popular >>> package for $39.95 per month (total, no modem rental fee, etc.). Why give >>> away the farm if you don't have to? :) >>> >>> Travis >>> Microserv >>> >>> RickG wrote: >>> Wow, with all that bandwidth, I'm surprised you dont offer higher speeds. >>> >>> Technically speaking, the download & upload price is the same. From a >>> cost standpoint, I allocate the download & upload separately because I >>> am "forced" to pay dearly ($1200/month) to AT&T for my dual T1's which >>> are required for "decent" upload speeds. Right now, my traffic is >>> split so all port 80 traffic flows though the 4Mbps x 2Mbps connection >>> through Time Warner which runs over $500/month. This works fairly well >>> for now since about half the traffic is web browsing. When I bought >>> this WISP there was no management, monitoring or reporting. I took >>> care of the management & monitoring and I'm working on the reporting. >>> The best thing I've done is replace the StarOS firewall with Mikrotik >>> and set up traffic priority. >>> Whew! Lots of work. At any rate, I'm working on my upstream connection >>> next. I really need to get the cost down. >>> >>> Thanks! -RickG >>> >>> On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Rick, >>> >>> Yes, all of our packages are symmetrical speeds (same download and >>> upload). >>> So if they buy our 512k package, they get 512k down x 512k up all the >>> time. >>> They are not "dedicated" connections, but rather you get what you pay for >>> connections. We still oversubscribe users on an AP, but only to the point >>> where each AP is running around 60% capacity during peak times, thus >>> leaving >>> room for bursts, etc. We graph and monitor every single AP (over 200 of >>> them) and every single user (bandwidth, packets, RSSI, etc.) so we always >>> know what's happening on our network. >>> >>> We currently have three full OC-3 (155Mbps) dedicated connections to the >>> backbone. On average, we pay $40/meg for bandwidth. Why is your upload >>> price >>> different than your download price? >>> >>> Travis >>> Microserv >>> >>> RickG wrote: >>> >>> Travis, >>> >>> Nice work! Therefore, you are selling dedicated bandwidth to all of >>> your customers. In other words, if all your customers run speed test >>> at the same time they will get what their plan allows. If you dont >>> mind, I have a few questions: >>> Is the above scenario true for upload speed as well as download speed? >>> What are you paying for your upstream connection? >>> What type of upstream connection do you have? >>> >>> I'd like to be there and I keep hoping cheap bandwidth comes my way. >>> When you are paying $150/meg for download and $400/meg for upload, the >>> business model is tough. >>> >>> -RickG >>> >>> BTW: I'd take this offlist if you prefer but I think this is a problem >>> that many us us small WISP's face. >>> >>> On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 9:30 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Every customer can get the speed they are paying for ANY time they run a >>> speed test. We offer packages from 512k to 2.5meg for residential >>> customers >>> and they always get what they pay for (download AND upload, which is the >>> same for all of our packages). >>> >>> Travis >>> Microserv >>> >>> RickG wrote: >>> >>> Travis, >>> >>> If I understand this correctly, you have at least 1Mbps or higher of >>> bandwidth for every customer? >>> >>> -RickG >>> >>> On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECT
Re: [WISPA] WiMax (was heavy usage customers)
I've seen your website with the comparisons. Very nice. So, have you been able to test their WiMax yet? -RickG On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 1:07 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have Qwest DSL, CableOne, another WISP (doing "up to 4meg" for $29.95 > with Canopy), and a licensed WiMax (2.5ghz) provider (doing "up to > 2meg", mobile, for $29.95). I have a lot of competition... and yet we > have no sales people, no real advertising campaign, and more installs > than we can keep up with each month. > > Travis > Microserv > > Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: >> You must not have competitors. I have both Qwest and Comcast giving away >> multi megabit starting at $15.95 >> - Original Message - >> From: Travis Johnson >> To: WISPA General List >> Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 10:53 AM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers >> >> >> I guess that's my point... why offer more bandwidth than you have to? Most >> people don't need more than 1meg, and that's our most popular package for >> $39.95 per month (total, no modem rental fee, etc.). Why give away the farm >> if you don't have to? :) >> >> Travis >> Microserv >> >> RickG wrote: >> Wow, with all that bandwidth, I'm surprised you dont offer higher speeds. >> >> Technically speaking, the download & upload price is the same. From a >> cost standpoint, I allocate the download & upload separately because I >> am "forced" to pay dearly ($1200/month) to AT&T for my dual T1's which >> are required for "decent" upload speeds. Right now, my traffic is >> split so all port 80 traffic flows though the 4Mbps x 2Mbps connection >> through Time Warner which runs over $500/month. This works fairly well >> for now since about half the traffic is web browsing. When I bought >> this WISP there was no management, monitoring or reporting. I took >> care of the management & monitoring and I'm working on the reporting. >> The best thing I've done is replace the StarOS firewall with Mikrotik >> and set up traffic priority. >> Whew! Lots of work. At any rate, I'm working on my upstream connection >> next. I really need to get the cost down. >> >> Thanks! -RickG >> >> On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Rick, >> >> Yes, all of our packages are symmetrical speeds (same download and upload). >> So if they buy our 512k package, they get 512k down x 512k up all the time. >> They are not "dedicated" connections, but rather you get what you pay for >> connections. We still oversubscribe users on an AP, but only to the point >> where each AP is running around 60% capacity during peak times, thus leaving >> room for bursts, etc. We graph and monitor every single AP (over 200 of >> them) and every single user (bandwidth, packets, RSSI, etc.) so we always >> know what's happening on our network. >> >> We currently have three full OC-3 (155Mbps) dedicated connections to the >> backbone. On average, we pay $40/meg for bandwidth. Why is your upload price >> different than your download price? >> >> Travis >> Microserv >> >> RickG wrote: >> >> Travis, >> >> Nice work! Therefore, you are selling dedicated bandwidth to all of >> your customers. In other words, if all your customers run speed test >> at the same time they will get what their plan allows. If you dont >> mind, I have a few questions: >> Is the above scenario true for upload speed as well as download speed? >> What are you paying for your upstream connection? >> What type of upstream connection do you have? >> >> I'd like to be there and I keep hoping cheap bandwidth comes my way. >> When you are paying $150/meg for download and $400/meg for upload, the >> business model is tough. >> >> -RickG >> >> BTW: I'd take this offlist if you prefer but I think this is a problem >> that many us us small WISP's face. >> >> On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 9:30 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> Every customer can get the speed they are paying for ANY time they run a >> speed test. We offer packages from 512k to 2.5meg for residential customers >> and they always get what they pay for (download AND upload, which is the >> same for all of our packages). >> >> Travis >> Microserv >> >> RickG wrote: >> >> Travis, >> >> If I understand this correctly, you have at least 1Mbps or higher of >> bandwidth for every customer? >> >> -RickG >> >> On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> We deliver what the customers pay for. If they purchase a 1Mbps package, >> they get 1Mbps 24x7 (with no monthly bit caps). Personally I have never >> liked the "up to" speed packages... it's like going to Walmart and >> buying milk. You can pay $3 for a full 1 gallon, or you can pay $2 for >> "up to" a gallon (without really knowing how much you are going to get, >> but it will be somewhere between nothing and a full gallon). >> >> Travis >> Microserv >> >> Kurt Fankhauser wrote: >> >> >> Does anyone else here have customer/s that consume so mu
Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers
I agree but I didnt select the speed and price plans, I bought the company with these already in place. BUT everyone is complaining that 3Mbps isnt enough and I'm not keeping up! All they see is cable & DSL commercials selling 10Mbps and 6Mbps respectively. Egads!!! -RickG On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 12:53 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I guess that's my point... why offer more bandwidth than you have to? Most > people don't need more than 1meg, and that's our most popular package for > $39.95 per month (total, no modem rental fee, etc.). Why give away the farm > if you don't have to? :) > > Travis > Microserv > > RickG wrote: > > Wow, with all that bandwidth, I'm surprised you dont offer higher speeds. > > Technically speaking, the download & upload price is the same. From a > cost standpoint, I allocate the download & upload separately because I > am "forced" to pay dearly ($1200/month) to AT&T for my dual T1's which > are required for "decent" upload speeds. Right now, my traffic is > split so all port 80 traffic flows though the 4Mbps x 2Mbps connection > through Time Warner which runs over $500/month. This works fairly well > for now since about half the traffic is web browsing. When I bought > this WISP there was no management, monitoring or reporting. I took > care of the management & monitoring and I'm working on the reporting. > The best thing I've done is replace the StarOS firewall with Mikrotik > and set up traffic priority. > Whew! Lots of work. At any rate, I'm working on my upstream connection > next. I really need to get the cost down. > > Thanks! -RickG > > On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Rick, > > Yes, all of our packages are symmetrical speeds (same download and upload). > So if they buy our 512k package, they get 512k down x 512k up all the time. > They are not "dedicated" connections, but rather you get what you pay for > connections. We still oversubscribe users on an AP, but only to the point > where each AP is running around 60% capacity during peak times, thus leaving > room for bursts, etc. We graph and monitor every single AP (over 200 of > them) and every single user (bandwidth, packets, RSSI, etc.) so we always > know what's happening on our network. > > We currently have three full OC-3 (155Mbps) dedicated connections to the > backbone. On average, we pay $40/meg for bandwidth. Why is your upload price > different than your download price? > > Travis > Microserv > > RickG wrote: > > Travis, > > Nice work! Therefore, you are selling dedicated bandwidth to all of > your customers. In other words, if all your customers run speed test > at the same time they will get what their plan allows. If you dont > mind, I have a few questions: > Is the above scenario true for upload speed as well as download speed? > What are you paying for your upstream connection? > What type of upstream connection do you have? > > I'd like to be there and I keep hoping cheap bandwidth comes my way. > When you are paying $150/meg for download and $400/meg for upload, the > business model is tough. > > -RickG > > BTW: I'd take this offlist if you prefer but I think this is a problem > that many us us small WISP's face. > > On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 9:30 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Every customer can get the speed they are paying for ANY time they run a > speed test. We offer packages from 512k to 2.5meg for residential customers > and they always get what they pay for (download AND upload, which is the > same for all of our packages). > > Travis > Microserv > > RickG wrote: > > Travis, > > If I understand this correctly, you have at least 1Mbps or higher of > bandwidth for every customer? > > -RickG > > On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > We deliver what the customers pay for. If they purchase a 1Mbps package, > they get 1Mbps 24x7 (with no monthly bit caps). Personally I have never > liked the "up to" speed packages... it's like going to Walmart and > buying milk. You can pay $3 for a full 1 gallon, or you can pay $2 for > "up to" a gallon (without really knowing how much you are going to get, > but it will be somewhere between nothing and a full gallon). > > Travis > Microserv > > Kurt Fankhauser wrote: > > > Does anyone else here have customer/s that consume so much bandwidth that > you have to throttle them down after say 5 minutes of downloading. And what > do you tell them when they start complaining about the throttled down speed. > (they don't know your throttling them though) > > > > Kurt Fankhauser > WAVELINC > P.O. Box 126 > Bucyrus, OH 44820 > 419-562-6405 > www.wavelinc.com > > > > > > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscr
Re: [WISPA] canopy speed
When a customer here gets installed we always do a speed test to show they're getting the connection they pay for as the tech leaves. They always get their peak every speed test. On 11/2/08, Mike Hammett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That's why you join Peering Exchanges if you can. > > > -- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > > -- > From: "Chuck McCown - 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2008 4:30 PM > To: "WISPA General List" > Subject: Re: [WISPA] canopy speed > >> And, as the Canopy 430 system gets rolled out, we will have 40 Mbps to >> deliver. We will probably give 30 down and 10 up. Statistically that >> gets >> folks on and off the system so quick there will be much more time for >> folks >> to spend in the wide open throttle mode. DSL will be left in our dust. >> DOCSIS and FIOS are approaching those speeds but they ain't playing in our >> sandbox... yet. If you have 30 Mbps burst download speeds, the bottleneck >> will not be in our system, it will be at the content provider end or in >> transiting the internet. >> - Original Message - >> From: "Chuck McCown - 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: >> Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2008 4:12 PM >> Subject: [WISPA] canopy speed >> >> >>> Perception is reality. This is what you will see and this is accurate. >>> Some times you may have to click it 2 or 3 times to get over 10 but it >>> will >>> usually be between 5 and 10 on the first click. And people will click >>> and >>> click and click until they get the highest reading. If they see 10 the >>> are >>> satisfied. >>> Irrespective, when you are casually browsing and getting wide open >>> throttle >>> on a canopy system it is just as responsive as when I am at the office >>> where >>> I have GigE from my desk top to the world. >>> >> >> >> >> >> >>> >>> >>> >>> 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/ > -- Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly. --- Henry Spencer 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] heavy usage customers OT: Windows updates
That hospital should be running WSUS to manage their updates. -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: "Scottie Arnett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2008 6:52 PM To: "WISPA General List" Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers OT: Windows updates > ...and from many website's you will never get this. The traffic congestion > on a 100 meg link can choke it down to less than 10 meg, with huge sites > such as myspace, yahoo, and many others...not saying that it happens > often. I host about 50 websites on a 3 meg connection for myself and > others, and in 8 years have NEVER heard a single complaint from my > webhosters. A 10 meg download from Chuck's customer to my web server will > NEVER be realized. As Chuck says, the bandwidth test is on a server that > the customer directly connects to across their wireless link, which is a > true bandwidth check to that point. The truth is in the advertising...If > he says you will get 10 meg to any place at any time, he might get busted > for false adv. Not sure how he does it, but if it is worded right, he will > get many more customers and no complaints...just cause of burstiness of > web surfing. > > On another note, is their a way to cache or get a server closer to you for > windows updates? I have a hospital on our network that has 60+ PC's on the > inside. They are killing us with windows updates at certain times...like > Service Pack 3...? > > Scott > > > > -- Original Message -- > From: "Chuck McCown - 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: WISPA General List > Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2008 16:06:15 -0600 > >>Bigger number in the advertising and on your website gets the customer. >>We are truthful. The truth is, you will most likely see 10.2 Mbps any >>random time you choose to do a speed test. >>You will also get wide open throttle most of the time you are clicking >>around web sites and checking your email. >>DSL cannot do this. Most Comcast accounts cannot do this. Because we can >>do this, we get and keep customers. >> - Original Message - >> From: Travis Johnson >> To: WISPA General List >> Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2008 2:30 PM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers >> >> >> Again, I have to say, "up to 8Mbps" is completely different than selling >> a true "8Mbps". I can sell an "up to 8Mbps" service using 802.11b >> equipment too. >> >> Maybe I'll start selling an "up to 100Mbps" service for the same price >> as all my other packages... ;) >> >> Travis >> Microserv >> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>We sell up to 8Mbps on Canopy advantage without issues. Nearly all our >>customers are within a couple miles though and as long as they have less >>than a -76, they get full speed. Rarely do we have two customers doing >>full >>speed at the same time on the same sector. (Most we have on a sector is >>50) >> Maybe we are luckier than most >>The main problem on Advantage (as well as other systems) is upload. >> However, Canopy QoS is good and even saturated links don't affect VoIP >>quality. We sell a small business 8/2 package and when you see one of >>them >>soaking upload for long periods and a couple customers running outbound >>P2P, >>you start to worry a little but we haven't had any complaints due to >>capacity. >> >> >>On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 4:13 PM, Tom DeReggi >><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: >> >> Chuck, >> >>Not to rain on your parade but... I'm a little confused on how 10.2 mbps >>is >>possible w/ Canopy. Advantage series peak capacity is just for short range >>customers, and a large percentage of the capacity can be voided by by the >>farther out slower non-advantage CPEs. When Up/down rate ratios have to be >>pre-fined (for syncing) that limits the radio from using the ful capacity >>of >>the Radio. Its one of the big reasons that we chose Trango 8 years ago >>originally, so that it was infact possible to get full radio speed in one >>direction when it was available in low usage time, so we could quote >>higher >>speeds to business symetrical customers. >> >>Sure, if we consider 14mb real world advantage best case for Advantage >>series, use all advantage series CPE, and do a 70 / 30 download to upload, >>sure 10mbps peak downloads are possible for a single client, in that >>scenario. Provided that the WISP was fine with all other customers being >>100% STARVED at the time the one customer was monopolizing the peak >>capacity. >>We tried that once, and it was a big mistake because it caused latency to >>sky rocket for all the other customers when they first attempted to use >>capacity, and the feel of the circuit because very bursty feeling. The >>short >>pauses made it feel like something was wrong with the circuit. TCP could >>not >>deal with it properly, it needs time to tune. Because of TCP's reaction, >>it >>actually translated to a
Re: [WISPA] canopy speed
That's why you join Peering Exchanges if you can. -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: "Chuck McCown - 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2008 4:30 PM To: "WISPA General List" Subject: Re: [WISPA] canopy speed > And, as the Canopy 430 system gets rolled out, we will have 40 Mbps to > deliver. We will probably give 30 down and 10 up. Statistically that > gets > folks on and off the system so quick there will be much more time for > folks > to spend in the wide open throttle mode. DSL will be left in our dust. > DOCSIS and FIOS are approaching those speeds but they ain't playing in our > sandbox... yet. If you have 30 Mbps burst download speeds, the bottleneck > will not be in our system, it will be at the content provider end or in > transiting the internet. > - Original Message - > From: "Chuck McCown - 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2008 4:12 PM > Subject: [WISPA] canopy speed > > >> Perception is reality. This is what you will see and this is accurate. >> Some times you may have to click it 2 or 3 times to get over 10 but it >> will >> usually be between 5 and 10 on the first click. And people will click >> and >> click and click until they get the highest reading. If they see 10 the >> are >> satisfied. >> Irrespective, when you are casually browsing and getting wide open >> throttle >> on a canopy system it is just as responsive as when I am at the office >> where >> I have GigE from my desk top to the world. >> > > > > > >> >> >> >> 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] heavy usage customers
I just read where they received there third round of financing. Something over ten million which puts them somewhere in the 50 million range as a guess. Last I spoke with their CEO they were pushing 2 customers with an arpu of around $30. Sent from my iPhone On Nov 2, 2008, at 2:50 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yes... I think Bridgemaxx has some issues to work out (especially > with the economy the way it is now) and here's why. Honestly, I'm > not sure what "space" they are trying to compete. They are using > Alvarion's mobile WiMax (2.5ghz) product. We have service at our > office from it and it's horrible. We are only about 1.5 miles from > one of their towers and the best speed we have seen is 800k down x > 400k up. Latency is horrible as well (usually around 100ms). > > In our area (population 51,000) they installed base stations on four > towers. They used 18ghz Ceragon radios and created a "ring" around > the city. So just the cost on the backhauls and Base stations is > probably over $300,000. Then every single CPE is over $400. We are > starting to see a lot of their radios have to be "professionally" > installed (meaning a truck roll). I thought the whole idea was no > truck roll? Seems to remove the "mobile" part of the service. Then > they are charging $29.95 per month for service plus $4 per month for > the modem rental. I'm not sure how they ever plan to break-even on > their investment when they had to spend MILLIONS to buy the 2.5ghz > license from the previous company ($7 million is the rumor). > > Then, they aren't truly mobile. If you stay within each city, you > can get service by just plugging in the modem... but you can't drive > down the freeway and get anything... so they seem to be in the > middle between fixed wireless (WISP) and truly mobile (cell > providers). > > My emails about a year ago indicated I was pretty sure they were in > it for the "short haul"... meaning they would build it up enough to > get someone like Clearwire or Sprint to come buy it. Now with > everything else going on (economy, stock market, politics, mergers, > etc.) I don't see that happening any time soon... so they may be in > serious trouble shortly. > > Just my $.02 worth. > > Travis > Microserv > > Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: >> >> Found this letter about Bridgemaxx: >> >> Not that you care or this message will get to anyone with proper >> authority >> to do something ... Your service is getting overloaded and not >> usable at 224 >> West Central in Missoula Montana. It's not my set up because it is >> happening >> to everyone in the community. Your getting a bad name and your >> commercials >> are adding fuel to the fire. Last night the service was down and >> since I >> got a bill this morning I thought I would write and bitch about the >> terrible >> service. When there is a viable alternative in Missoula tons of >> customers >> will jump ship unless you do the right thing now. >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "Chuck McCown - 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "WISPA General List" >> Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 11:20 AM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers >> >> >> >>> Well that is a testimony to your quality of service for sure. >>> Now, if you were using Canopy your customers would be even happier! >>> >>> - Original Message - >>> From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "WISPA General List" >>> Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 11:07 AM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers >>> >>> >>> I have Qwest DSL, CableOne, another WISP (doing "up to 4meg" for $29.95 with Canopy), and a licensed WiMax (2.5ghz) provider (doing "up to 2meg", mobile, for $29.95). I have a lot of competition... and yet we have no sales people, no real advertising campaign, and more installs than we can keep up with each month. Travis Microserv Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: > You must not have competitors. I have both Qwest and Comcast > giving > away > multi megabit starting at $15.95 > - Original Message - > From: Travis Johnson > To: WISPA General List > Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 10:53 AM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers > > > I guess that's my point... why offer more bandwidth than you > have to? > Most people don't need more than 1meg, and that's our most popular > package for $39.95 per month (total, no modem rental fee, etc.). > Why > give > away the farm if you don't have to? :) > > Travis > Microserv > > RickG wrote: > Wow, with all that bandwidth, I'm surprised you dont offer higher > speeds. > > Technically speaking, the download & upload price is the same. > From a > cost standpoint, I allocate the download & upload separately > because I >
Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers
Yes... I think Bridgemaxx has some issues to work out (especially with the economy the way it is now) and here's why. Honestly, I'm not sure what "space" they are trying to compete. They are using Alvarion's mobile WiMax (2.5ghz) product. We have service at our office from it and it's horrible. We are only about 1.5 miles from one of their towers and the best speed we have seen is 800k down x 400k up. Latency is horrible as well (usually around 100ms). In our area (population 51,000) they installed base stations on four towers. They used 18ghz Ceragon radios and created a "ring" around the city. So just the cost on the backhauls and Base stations is probably over $300,000. Then every single CPE is over $400. We are starting to see a lot of their radios have to be "professionally" installed (meaning a truck roll). I thought the whole idea was no truck roll? Seems to remove the "mobile" part of the service. Then they are charging $29.95 per month for service plus $4 per month for the modem rental. I'm not sure how they ever plan to break-even on their investment when they had to spend MILLIONS to buy the 2.5ghz license from the previous company ($7 million is the rumor). Then, they aren't truly mobile. If you stay within each city, you can get service by just plugging in the modem... but you can't drive down the freeway and get anything... so they seem to be in the middle between fixed wireless (WISP) and truly mobile (cell providers). My emails about a year ago indicated I was pretty sure they were in it for the "short haul"... meaning they would build it up enough to get someone like Clearwire or Sprint to come buy it. Now with everything else going on (economy, stock market, politics, mergers, etc.) I don't see that happening any time soon... so they may be in serious trouble shortly. Just my $.02 worth. Travis Microserv Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: Found this letter about Bridgemaxx: Not that you care or this message will get to anyone with proper authority to do something ... Your service is getting overloaded and not usable at 224 West Central in Missoula Montana. It's not my set up because it is happening to everyone in the community. Your getting a bad name and your commercials are adding fuel to the fire. Last night the service was down and since I got a bill this morning I thought I would write and bitch about the terrible service. When there is a viable alternative in Missoula tons of customers will jump ship unless you do the right thing now. - Original Message - From: "Chuck McCown - 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 11:20 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers Well that is a testimony to your quality of service for sure. Now, if you were using Canopy your customers would be even happier! - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 11:07 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers I have Qwest DSL, CableOne, another WISP (doing "up to 4meg" for $29.95 with Canopy), and a licensed WiMax (2.5ghz) provider (doing "up to 2meg", mobile, for $29.95). I have a lot of competition... and yet we have no sales people, no real advertising campaign, and more installs than we can keep up with each month. Travis Microserv Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: You must not have competitors. I have both Qwest and Comcast giving away multi megabit starting at $15.95 - Original Message - From: Travis Johnson To: WISPA General List Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 10:53 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers I guess that's my point... why offer more bandwidth than you have to? Most people don't need more than 1meg, and that's our most popular package for $39.95 per month (total, no modem rental fee, etc.). Why give away the farm if you don't have to? :) Travis Microserv RickG wrote: Wow, with all that bandwidth, I'm surprised you dont offer higher speeds. Technically speaking, the download & upload price is the same. From a cost standpoint, I allocate the download & upload separately because I am "forced" to pay dearly ($1200/month) to AT&T for my dual T1's which are required for "decent" upload speeds. Right now, my traffic is split so all port 80 traffic flows though the 4Mbps x 2Mbps connection through Time Warner which runs over $500/month. This works fairly well for now since about half the traffic is web browsing. When I bought this WISP there was no management, monitoring or reporting. I took care of the management & monitoring and I'm working on the reporting. The best thing I've done is replace the StarOS firewall with Mikrotik and set up traffic priority. Whew! Lots of work. At any rate, I'm working on my upstream connection next. I really need to get the cost down. Thanks! -RickG On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers
We've tried Canopy... twice in fact... once about 3 years ago, and once about a month ago. We just can't make it fit into our network management (IP database, Call tracking, customer management, etc.) system very well... having customer radios that change their LUID and IP address every time they register, having to set the bandwidth on each SM instead of the AP, having no security or ways to control which AP a customer connects to without having to buy their software, etc. All that, plus paying MORE for a slower radio than what we are using just didn't make sense. I can put up an AP (2.4ghz, 5.3ghz, 5.4ghz, or 5.8ghz) for less than $400 that will support 50 customers, using only 10mhz wide channels... and each CPE is less than $175 complete (including PoE, antenna). Canopy seems to work well for many people... but I've never been one to follow the "norm". And I get to put $50 in my pocket on every install, and $1,000 for every AP we put up. ;) Travis Microserv Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: Well that is a testimony to your quality of service for sure. Now, if you were using Canopy your customers would be even happier! - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 11:07 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers I have Qwest DSL, CableOne, another WISP (doing "up to 4meg" for $29.95 with Canopy), and a licensed WiMax (2.5ghz) provider (doing "up to 2meg", mobile, for $29.95). I have a lot of competition... and yet we have no sales people, no real advertising campaign, and more installs than we can keep up with each month. Travis Microserv Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: You must not have competitors. I have both Qwest and Comcast giving away multi megabit starting at $15.95 - Original Message - From: Travis Johnson To: WISPA General List Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 10:53 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers I guess that's my point... why offer more bandwidth than you have to? Most people don't need more than 1meg, and that's our most popular package for $39.95 per month (total, no modem rental fee, etc.). Why give away the farm if you don't have to? :) Travis Microserv RickG wrote: Wow, with all that bandwidth, I'm surprised you dont offer higher speeds. Technically speaking, the download & upload price is the same. From a cost standpoint, I allocate the download & upload separately because I am "forced" to pay dearly ($1200/month) to AT&T for my dual T1's which are required for "decent" upload speeds. Right now, my traffic is split so all port 80 traffic flows though the 4Mbps x 2Mbps connection through Time Warner which runs over $500/month. This works fairly well for now since about half the traffic is web browsing. When I bought this WISP there was no management, monitoring or reporting. I took care of the management & monitoring and I'm working on the reporting. The best thing I've done is replace the StarOS firewall with Mikrotik and set up traffic priority. Whew! Lots of work. At any rate, I'm working on my upstream connection next. I really need to get the cost down. Thanks! -RickG On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Rick, Yes, all of our packages are symmetrical speeds (same download and upload). So if they buy our 512k package, they get 512k down x 512k up all the time. They are not "dedicated" connections, but rather you get what you pay for connections. We still oversubscribe users on an AP, but only to the point where each AP is running around 60% capacity during peak times, thus leaving room for bursts, etc. We graph and monitor every single AP (over 200 of them) and every single user (bandwidth, packets, RSSI, etc.) so we always know what's happening on our network. We currently have three full OC-3 (155Mbps) dedicated connections to the backbone. On average, we pay $40/meg for bandwidth. Why is your upload price different than your download price? Travis Microserv RickG wrote: Travis, Nice work! Therefore, you are selling dedicated bandwidth to all of your customers. In other words, if all your customers run speed test at the same time they will get what their plan allows. If you dont mind, I have a few questions: Is the above scenario true for upload speed as well as download speed? What are you paying for your upstream connection? What type of upstream connection do you have? I'd like to be there and I keep hoping cheap bandwidth comes my way. When you are paying $150/meg for download and $400/meg for upload, the business model is tough. -RickG BTW: I'd take this offlist if you prefer but I think this is a problem that many us us small WISP's face. On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 9:30 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Every customer can get the speed they are paying for ANY time they run a speed test. We offer packages from 512k to 2.5meg for residential customers
Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers
Found this letter about Bridgemaxx: Not that you care or this message will get to anyone with proper authority to do something ... Your service is getting overloaded and not usable at 224 West Central in Missoula Montana. It's not my set up because it is happening to everyone in the community. Your getting a bad name and your commercials are adding fuel to the fire. Last night the service was down and since I got a bill this morning I thought I would write and bitch about the terrible service. When there is a viable alternative in Missoula tons of customers will jump ship unless you do the right thing now. - Original Message - From: "Chuck McCown - 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 11:20 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers > Well that is a testimony to your quality of service for sure. > Now, if you were using Canopy your customers would be even happier! > > - Original Message - > From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 11:07 AM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers > > >>I have Qwest DSL, CableOne, another WISP (doing "up to 4meg" for $29.95 >> with Canopy), and a licensed WiMax (2.5ghz) provider (doing "up to >> 2meg", mobile, for $29.95). I have a lot of competition... and yet we >> have no sales people, no real advertising campaign, and more installs >> than we can keep up with each month. >> >> Travis >> Microserv >> >> Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: >>> You must not have competitors. I have both Qwest and Comcast giving >>> away >>> multi megabit starting at $15.95 >>> - Original Message - >>> From: Travis Johnson >>> To: WISPA General List >>> Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 10:53 AM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers >>> >>> >>> I guess that's my point... why offer more bandwidth than you have to? >>> Most people don't need more than 1meg, and that's our most popular >>> package for $39.95 per month (total, no modem rental fee, etc.). Why >>> give >>> away the farm if you don't have to? :) >>> >>> Travis >>> Microserv >>> >>> RickG wrote: >>> Wow, with all that bandwidth, I'm surprised you dont offer higher >>> speeds. >>> >>> Technically speaking, the download & upload price is the same. From a >>> cost standpoint, I allocate the download & upload separately because I >>> am "forced" to pay dearly ($1200/month) to AT&T for my dual T1's which >>> are required for "decent" upload speeds. Right now, my traffic is >>> split so all port 80 traffic flows though the 4Mbps x 2Mbps connection >>> through Time Warner which runs over $500/month. This works fairly well >>> for now since about half the traffic is web browsing. When I bought >>> this WISP there was no management, monitoring or reporting. I took >>> care of the management & monitoring and I'm working on the reporting. >>> The best thing I've done is replace the StarOS firewall with Mikrotik >>> and set up traffic priority. >>> Whew! Lots of work. At any rate, I'm working on my upstream connection >>> next. I really need to get the cost down. >>> >>> Thanks! -RickG >>> >>> On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Rick, >>> >>> Yes, all of our packages are symmetrical speeds (same download and >>> upload). >>> So if they buy our 512k package, they get 512k down x 512k up all the >>> time. >>> They are not "dedicated" connections, but rather you get what you pay >>> for >>> connections. We still oversubscribe users on an AP, but only to the >>> point >>> where each AP is running around 60% capacity during peak times, thus >>> leaving >>> room for bursts, etc. We graph and monitor every single AP (over 200 of >>> them) and every single user (bandwidth, packets, RSSI, etc.) so we >>> always >>> know what's happening on our network. >>> >>> We currently have three full OC-3 (155Mbps) dedicated connections to the >>> backbone. On average, we pay $40/meg for bandwidth. Why is your upload >>> price >>> different than your download price? >>> >>> Travis >>> Microserv >>> >>> RickG wrote: >>> >>> Travis, >>> >>> Nice work! Therefore, you are selling dedicated bandwidth to all of >>> your customers. In other words, if all your customers run speed test >>> at the same time they will get what their plan allows. If you dont >>> mind, I have a few questions: >>> Is the above scenario true for upload speed as well as download speed? >>> What are you paying for your upstream connection? >>> What type of upstream connection do you have? >>> >>> I'd like to be there and I keep hoping cheap bandwidth comes my way. >>> When you are paying $150/meg for download and $400/meg for upload, the >>> business model is tough. >>> >>> -RickG >>> >>> BTW: I'd take this offlist if you prefer but I think this is a problem >>> that many us us small WISP's face. >>> >>> On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 9:30 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >
Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers
Well that is a testimony to your quality of service for sure. Now, if you were using Canopy your customers would be even happier! - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 11:07 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers >I have Qwest DSL, CableOne, another WISP (doing "up to 4meg" for $29.95 > with Canopy), and a licensed WiMax (2.5ghz) provider (doing "up to > 2meg", mobile, for $29.95). I have a lot of competition... and yet we > have no sales people, no real advertising campaign, and more installs > than we can keep up with each month. > > Travis > Microserv > > Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: >> You must not have competitors. I have both Qwest and Comcast giving away >> multi megabit starting at $15.95 >> - Original Message - >> From: Travis Johnson >> To: WISPA General List >> Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 10:53 AM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers >> >> >> I guess that's my point... why offer more bandwidth than you have to? >> Most people don't need more than 1meg, and that's our most popular >> package for $39.95 per month (total, no modem rental fee, etc.). Why give >> away the farm if you don't have to? :) >> >> Travis >> Microserv >> >> RickG wrote: >> Wow, with all that bandwidth, I'm surprised you dont offer higher speeds. >> >> Technically speaking, the download & upload price is the same. From a >> cost standpoint, I allocate the download & upload separately because I >> am "forced" to pay dearly ($1200/month) to AT&T for my dual T1's which >> are required for "decent" upload speeds. Right now, my traffic is >> split so all port 80 traffic flows though the 4Mbps x 2Mbps connection >> through Time Warner which runs over $500/month. This works fairly well >> for now since about half the traffic is web browsing. When I bought >> this WISP there was no management, monitoring or reporting. I took >> care of the management & monitoring and I'm working on the reporting. >> The best thing I've done is replace the StarOS firewall with Mikrotik >> and set up traffic priority. >> Whew! Lots of work. At any rate, I'm working on my upstream connection >> next. I really need to get the cost down. >> >> Thanks! -RickG >> >> On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Rick, >> >> Yes, all of our packages are symmetrical speeds (same download and >> upload). >> So if they buy our 512k package, they get 512k down x 512k up all the >> time. >> They are not "dedicated" connections, but rather you get what you pay for >> connections. We still oversubscribe users on an AP, but only to the point >> where each AP is running around 60% capacity during peak times, thus >> leaving >> room for bursts, etc. We graph and monitor every single AP (over 200 of >> them) and every single user (bandwidth, packets, RSSI, etc.) so we always >> know what's happening on our network. >> >> We currently have three full OC-3 (155Mbps) dedicated connections to the >> backbone. On average, we pay $40/meg for bandwidth. Why is your upload >> price >> different than your download price? >> >> Travis >> Microserv >> >> RickG wrote: >> >> Travis, >> >> Nice work! Therefore, you are selling dedicated bandwidth to all of >> your customers. In other words, if all your customers run speed test >> at the same time they will get what their plan allows. If you dont >> mind, I have a few questions: >> Is the above scenario true for upload speed as well as download speed? >> What are you paying for your upstream connection? >> What type of upstream connection do you have? >> >> I'd like to be there and I keep hoping cheap bandwidth comes my way. >> When you are paying $150/meg for download and $400/meg for upload, the >> business model is tough. >> >> -RickG >> >> BTW: I'd take this offlist if you prefer but I think this is a problem >> that many us us small WISP's face. >> >> On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 9:30 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> Every customer can get the speed they are paying for ANY time they run a >> speed test. We offer packages from 512k to 2.5meg for residential >> customers >> and they always get what they pay for (download AND upload, which is the >> same for all of our packages). >> >> Travis >> Microserv >> >> RickG wrote: >> >> Travis, >> >> If I understand this correctly, you have at least 1Mbps or higher of >> bandwidth for every customer? >> >> -RickG >> >> On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> We deliver what the customers pay for. If they purchase a 1Mbps package, >> they get 1Mbps 24x7 (with no monthly bit caps). Personally I have never >> liked the "up to" speed packages... it's like going to Walmart and >> buying milk. You can pay $3 for a full 1 gallon, or you can pay $2 for >> "up to" a gallon (without really knowing how much you are going to get, >> but it will be somewhere betwee
Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers
I have Qwest DSL, CableOne, another WISP (doing "up to 4meg" for $29.95 with Canopy), and a licensed WiMax (2.5ghz) provider (doing "up to 2meg", mobile, for $29.95). I have a lot of competition... and yet we have no sales people, no real advertising campaign, and more installs than we can keep up with each month. Travis Microserv Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: > You must not have competitors. I have both Qwest and Comcast giving away > multi megabit starting at $15.95 > - Original Message - > From: Travis Johnson > To: WISPA General List > Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 10:53 AM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers > > > I guess that's my point... why offer more bandwidth than you have to? Most > people don't need more than 1meg, and that's our most popular package for > $39.95 per month (total, no modem rental fee, etc.). Why give away the farm > if you don't have to? :) > > Travis > Microserv > > RickG wrote: > Wow, with all that bandwidth, I'm surprised you dont offer higher speeds. > > Technically speaking, the download & upload price is the same. From a > cost standpoint, I allocate the download & upload separately because I > am "forced" to pay dearly ($1200/month) to AT&T for my dual T1's which > are required for "decent" upload speeds. Right now, my traffic is > split so all port 80 traffic flows though the 4Mbps x 2Mbps connection > through Time Warner which runs over $500/month. This works fairly well > for now since about half the traffic is web browsing. When I bought > this WISP there was no management, monitoring or reporting. I took > care of the management & monitoring and I'm working on the reporting. > The best thing I've done is replace the StarOS firewall with Mikrotik > and set up traffic priority. > Whew! Lots of work. At any rate, I'm working on my upstream connection > next. I really need to get the cost down. > > Thanks! -RickG > > On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Rick, > > Yes, all of our packages are symmetrical speeds (same download and upload). > So if they buy our 512k package, they get 512k down x 512k up all the time. > They are not "dedicated" connections, but rather you get what you pay for > connections. We still oversubscribe users on an AP, but only to the point > where each AP is running around 60% capacity during peak times, thus leaving > room for bursts, etc. We graph and monitor every single AP (over 200 of > them) and every single user (bandwidth, packets, RSSI, etc.) so we always > know what's happening on our network. > > We currently have three full OC-3 (155Mbps) dedicated connections to the > backbone. On average, we pay $40/meg for bandwidth. Why is your upload price > different than your download price? > > Travis > Microserv > > RickG wrote: > > Travis, > > Nice work! Therefore, you are selling dedicated bandwidth to all of > your customers. In other words, if all your customers run speed test > at the same time they will get what their plan allows. If you dont > mind, I have a few questions: > Is the above scenario true for upload speed as well as download speed? > What are you paying for your upstream connection? > What type of upstream connection do you have? > > I'd like to be there and I keep hoping cheap bandwidth comes my way. > When you are paying $150/meg for download and $400/meg for upload, the > business model is tough. > > -RickG > > BTW: I'd take this offlist if you prefer but I think this is a problem > that many us us small WISP's face. > > On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 9:30 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Every customer can get the speed they are paying for ANY time they run a > speed test. We offer packages from 512k to 2.5meg for residential customers > and they always get what they pay for (download AND upload, which is the > same for all of our packages). > > Travis > Microserv > > RickG wrote: > > Travis, > > If I understand this correctly, you have at least 1Mbps or higher of > bandwidth for every customer? > > -RickG > > On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > We deliver what the customers pay for. If they purchase a 1Mbps package, > they get 1Mbps 24x7 (with no monthly bit caps). Personally I have never > liked the "up to" speed packages... it's like going to Walmart and > buying milk. You can pay $3 for a full 1 gallon, or you can pay $2 for > "up to" a gallon (without really knowing how much you are going to get, > but it will be somewhere between nothing and a full gallon). > > Travis > Microserv > > Kurt Fankhauser wrote: > > > Does anyone else here have customer/s that consume so much bandwidth that > you have to throttle them down after say 5 minutes of downloading. And what > do you tell them when they start complaining about the throttled down speed. > (they don't know your throttling them though) > > > > Kurt Fankhauser > WAVELINC > P.O. Box 126 > Bucyrus, OH 44820 > 419-562-6405 >
Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers
You must not have competitors. I have both Qwest and Comcast giving away multi megabit starting at $15.95 - Original Message - From: Travis Johnson To: WISPA General List Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2008 10:53 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers I guess that's my point... why offer more bandwidth than you have to? Most people don't need more than 1meg, and that's our most popular package for $39.95 per month (total, no modem rental fee, etc.). Why give away the farm if you don't have to? :) Travis Microserv RickG wrote: Wow, with all that bandwidth, I'm surprised you dont offer higher speeds. Technically speaking, the download & upload price is the same. From a cost standpoint, I allocate the download & upload separately because I am "forced" to pay dearly ($1200/month) to AT&T for my dual T1's which are required for "decent" upload speeds. Right now, my traffic is split so all port 80 traffic flows though the 4Mbps x 2Mbps connection through Time Warner which runs over $500/month. This works fairly well for now since about half the traffic is web browsing. When I bought this WISP there was no management, monitoring or reporting. I took care of the management & monitoring and I'm working on the reporting. The best thing I've done is replace the StarOS firewall with Mikrotik and set up traffic priority. Whew! Lots of work. At any rate, I'm working on my upstream connection next. I really need to get the cost down. Thanks! -RickG On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Rick, Yes, all of our packages are symmetrical speeds (same download and upload). So if they buy our 512k package, they get 512k down x 512k up all the time. They are not "dedicated" connections, but rather you get what you pay for connections. We still oversubscribe users on an AP, but only to the point where each AP is running around 60% capacity during peak times, thus leaving room for bursts, etc. We graph and monitor every single AP (over 200 of them) and every single user (bandwidth, packets, RSSI, etc.) so we always know what's happening on our network. We currently have three full OC-3 (155Mbps) dedicated connections to the backbone. On average, we pay $40/meg for bandwidth. Why is your upload price different than your download price? Travis Microserv RickG wrote: Travis, Nice work! Therefore, you are selling dedicated bandwidth to all of your customers. In other words, if all your customers run speed test at the same time they will get what their plan allows. If you dont mind, I have a few questions: Is the above scenario true for upload speed as well as download speed? What are you paying for your upstream connection? What type of upstream connection do you have? I'd like to be there and I keep hoping cheap bandwidth comes my way. When you are paying $150/meg for download and $400/meg for upload, the business model is tough. -RickG BTW: I'd take this offlist if you prefer but I think this is a problem that many us us small WISP's face. On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 9:30 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Every customer can get the speed they are paying for ANY time they run a speed test. We offer packages from 512k to 2.5meg for residential customers and they always get what they pay for (download AND upload, which is the same for all of our packages). Travis Microserv RickG wrote: Travis, If I understand this correctly, you have at least 1Mbps or higher of bandwidth for every customer? -RickG On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: We deliver what the customers pay for. If they purchase a 1Mbps package, they get 1Mbps 24x7 (with no monthly bit caps). Personally I have never liked the "up to" speed packages... it's like going to Walmart and buying milk. You can pay $3 for a full 1 gallon, or you can pay $2 for "up to" a gallon (without really knowing how much you are going to get, but it will be somewhere between nothing and a full gallon). Travis Microserv Kurt Fankhauser wrote: Does anyone else here have customer/s that consume so much bandwidth that you have to throttle them down after say 5 minutes of downloading. And what do you tell them when they start complaining about the throttled down speed. (they don't know your throttling them though) Kurt Fankhauser WAVELINC P.O. Box 126 Bucyrus, OH 44820 419-562-6405 www.wavelinc.com 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/ ---
Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers
I guess that's my point... why offer more bandwidth than you have to? Most people don't need more than 1meg, and that's our most popular package for $39.95 per month (total, no modem rental fee, etc.). Why give away the farm if you don't have to? :) Travis Microserv RickG wrote: Wow, with all that bandwidth, I'm surprised you dont offer higher speeds. Technically speaking, the download & upload price is the same. From a cost standpoint, I allocate the download & upload separately because I am "forced" to pay dearly ($1200/month) to AT&T for my dual T1's which are required for "decent" upload speeds. Right now, my traffic is split so all port 80 traffic flows though the 4Mbps x 2Mbps connection through Time Warner which runs over $500/month. This works fairly well for now since about half the traffic is web browsing. When I bought this WISP there was no management, monitoring or reporting. I took care of the management & monitoring and I'm working on the reporting. The best thing I've done is replace the StarOS firewall with Mikrotik and set up traffic priority. Whew! Lots of work. At any rate, I'm working on my upstream connection next. I really need to get the cost down. Thanks! -RickG On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Rick, Yes, all of our packages are symmetrical speeds (same download and upload). So if they buy our 512k package, they get 512k down x 512k up all the time. They are not "dedicated" connections, but rather you get what you pay for connections. We still oversubscribe users on an AP, but only to the point where each AP is running around 60% capacity during peak times, thus leaving room for bursts, etc. We graph and monitor every single AP (over 200 of them) and every single user (bandwidth, packets, RSSI, etc.) so we always know what's happening on our network. We currently have three full OC-3 (155Mbps) dedicated connections to the backbone. On average, we pay $40/meg for bandwidth. Why is your upload price different than your download price? Travis Microserv RickG wrote: Travis, Nice work! Therefore, you are selling dedicated bandwidth to all of your customers. In other words, if all your customers run speed test at the same time they will get what their plan allows. If you dont mind, I have a few questions: Is the above scenario true for upload speed as well as download speed? What are you paying for your upstream connection? What type of upstream connection do you have? I'd like to be there and I keep hoping cheap bandwidth comes my way. When you are paying $150/meg for download and $400/meg for upload, the business model is tough. -RickG BTW: I'd take this offlist if you prefer but I think this is a problem that many us us small WISP's face. On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 9:30 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Every customer can get the speed they are paying for ANY time they run a speed test. We offer packages from 512k to 2.5meg for residential customers and they always get what they pay for (download AND upload, which is the same for all of our packages). Travis Microserv RickG wrote: Travis, If I understand this correctly, you have at least 1Mbps or higher of bandwidth for every customer? -RickG On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: We deliver what the customers pay for. If they purchase a 1Mbps package, they get 1Mbps 24x7 (with no monthly bit caps). Personally I have never liked the "up to" speed packages... it's like going to Walmart and buying milk. You can pay $3 for a full 1 gallon, or you can pay $2 for "up to" a gallon (without really knowing how much you are going to get, but it will be somewhere between nothing and a full gallon). Travis Microserv Kurt Fankhauser wrote: Does anyone else here have customer/s that consume so much bandwidth that you have to throttle them down after say 5 minutes of downloading. And what do you tell them when they start complaining about the throttled down speed. (they don't know your throttling them though) Kurt Fankhauser WAVELINC P.O. Box 126 Bucyrus, OH 44820 419-562-6405 www.wavelinc.com 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] heavy usage customers
Wow, with all that bandwidth, I'm surprised you dont offer higher speeds. Technically speaking, the download & upload price is the same. From a cost standpoint, I allocate the download & upload separately because I am "forced" to pay dearly ($1200/month) to AT&T for my dual T1's which are required for "decent" upload speeds. Right now, my traffic is split so all port 80 traffic flows though the 4Mbps x 2Mbps connection through Time Warner which runs over $500/month. This works fairly well for now since about half the traffic is web browsing. When I bought this WISP there was no management, monitoring or reporting. I took care of the management & monitoring and I'm working on the reporting. The best thing I've done is replace the StarOS firewall with Mikrotik and set up traffic priority. Whew! Lots of work. At any rate, I'm working on my upstream connection next. I really need to get the cost down. Thanks! -RickG On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Rick, > > Yes, all of our packages are symmetrical speeds (same download and upload). > So if they buy our 512k package, they get 512k down x 512k up all the time. > They are not "dedicated" connections, but rather you get what you pay for > connections. We still oversubscribe users on an AP, but only to the point > where each AP is running around 60% capacity during peak times, thus leaving > room for bursts, etc. We graph and monitor every single AP (over 200 of > them) and every single user (bandwidth, packets, RSSI, etc.) so we always > know what's happening on our network. > > We currently have three full OC-3 (155Mbps) dedicated connections to the > backbone. On average, we pay $40/meg for bandwidth. Why is your upload price > different than your download price? > > Travis > Microserv > > RickG wrote: > > Travis, > > Nice work! Therefore, you are selling dedicated bandwidth to all of > your customers. In other words, if all your customers run speed test > at the same time they will get what their plan allows. If you dont > mind, I have a few questions: > Is the above scenario true for upload speed as well as download speed? > What are you paying for your upstream connection? > What type of upstream connection do you have? > > I'd like to be there and I keep hoping cheap bandwidth comes my way. > When you are paying $150/meg for download and $400/meg for upload, the > business model is tough. > > -RickG > > BTW: I'd take this offlist if you prefer but I think this is a problem > that many us us small WISP's face. > > On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 9:30 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Every customer can get the speed they are paying for ANY time they run a > speed test. We offer packages from 512k to 2.5meg for residential customers > and they always get what they pay for (download AND upload, which is the > same for all of our packages). > > Travis > Microserv > > RickG wrote: > > Travis, > > If I understand this correctly, you have at least 1Mbps or higher of > bandwidth for every customer? > > -RickG > > On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > We deliver what the customers pay for. If they purchase a 1Mbps package, > they get 1Mbps 24x7 (with no monthly bit caps). Personally I have never > liked the "up to" speed packages... it's like going to Walmart and > buying milk. You can pay $3 for a full 1 gallon, or you can pay $2 for > "up to" a gallon (without really knowing how much you are going to get, > but it will be somewhere between nothing and a full gallon). > > Travis > Microserv > > Kurt Fankhauser wrote: > > > Does anyone else here have customer/s that consume so much bandwidth that > you have to throttle them down after say 5 minutes of downloading. And what > do you tell them when they start complaining about the throttled down speed. > (they don't know your throttling them though) > > > > Kurt Fankhauser > WAVELINC > P.O. Box 126 > Bucyrus, OH 44820 > 419-562-6405 > www.wavelinc.com > > > > > > > > > > > > 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/ > --
Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers
Rick, Yes, all of our packages are symmetrical speeds (same download and upload). So if they buy our 512k package, they get 512k down x 512k up all the time. They are not "dedicated" connections, but rather you get what you pay for connections. We still oversubscribe users on an AP, but only to the point where each AP is running around 60% capacity during peak times, thus leaving room for bursts, etc. We graph and monitor every single AP (over 200 of them) and every single user (bandwidth, packets, RSSI, etc.) so we always know what's happening on our network. We currently have three full OC-3 (155Mbps) dedicated connections to the backbone. On average, we pay $40/meg for bandwidth. Why is your upload price different than your download price? Travis Microserv RickG wrote: Travis, Nice work! Therefore, you are selling dedicated bandwidth to all of your customers. In other words, if all your customers run speed test at the same time they will get what their plan allows. If you dont mind, I have a few questions: Is the above scenario true for upload speed as well as download speed? What are you paying for your upstream connection? What type of upstream connection do you have? I'd like to be there and I keep hoping cheap bandwidth comes my way. When you are paying $150/meg for download and $400/meg for upload, the business model is tough. -RickG BTW: I'd take this offlist if you prefer but I think this is a problem that many us us small WISP's face. On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 9:30 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Every customer can get the speed they are paying for ANY time they run a speed test. We offer packages from 512k to 2.5meg for residential customers and they always get what they pay for (download AND upload, which is the same for all of our packages). Travis Microserv RickG wrote: Travis, If I understand this correctly, you have at least 1Mbps or higher of bandwidth for every customer? -RickG On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: We deliver what the customers pay for. If they purchase a 1Mbps package, they get 1Mbps 24x7 (with no monthly bit caps). Personally I have never liked the "up to" speed packages... it's like going to Walmart and buying milk. You can pay $3 for a full 1 gallon, or you can pay $2 for "up to" a gallon (without really knowing how much you are going to get, but it will be somewhere between nothing and a full gallon). Travis Microserv Kurt Fankhauser wrote: Does anyone else here have customer/s that consume so much bandwidth that you have to throttle them down after say 5 minutes of downloading. And what do you tell them when they start complaining about the throttled down speed. (they don't know your throttling them though) Kurt Fankhauser WAVELINC P.O. Box 126 Bucyrus, OH 44820 419-562-6405 www.wavelinc.com 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/ 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/
Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers
Travis, Nice work! Therefore, you are selling dedicated bandwidth to all of your customers. In other words, if all your customers run speed test at the same time they will get what their plan allows. If you dont mind, I have a few questions: Is the above scenario true for upload speed as well as download speed? What are you paying for your upstream connection? What type of upstream connection do you have? I'd like to be there and I keep hoping cheap bandwidth comes my way. When you are paying $150/meg for download and $400/meg for upload, the business model is tough. -RickG BTW: I'd take this offlist if you prefer but I think this is a problem that many us us small WISP's face. On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 9:30 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Every customer can get the speed they are paying for ANY time they run a > speed test. We offer packages from 512k to 2.5meg for residential customers > and they always get what they pay for (download AND upload, which is the > same for all of our packages). > > Travis > Microserv > > RickG wrote: > > Travis, > > If I understand this correctly, you have at least 1Mbps or higher of > bandwidth for every customer? > > -RickG > > On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > We deliver what the customers pay for. If they purchase a 1Mbps package, > they get 1Mbps 24x7 (with no monthly bit caps). Personally I have never > liked the "up to" speed packages... it's like going to Walmart and > buying milk. You can pay $3 for a full 1 gallon, or you can pay $2 for > "up to" a gallon (without really knowing how much you are going to get, > but it will be somewhere between nothing and a full gallon). > > Travis > Microserv > > Kurt Fankhauser wrote: > > > Does anyone else here have customer/s that consume so much bandwidth that > you have to throttle them down after say 5 minutes of downloading. And what > do you tell them when they start complaining about the throttled down speed. > (they don't know your throttling them though) > > > > Kurt Fankhauser > WAVELINC > P.O. Box 126 > Bucyrus, OH 44820 > 419-562-6405 > www.wavelinc.com > > > > > > > > > > > > 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/ > 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] heavy usage customers
Yes. -RickG On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 8:42 PM, Josh Luthman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Rick, > > When you reference Trango are you referring to the Access 5800 series? > > > > > On 11/1/08, RickG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I agree with Tom. I tried Canopy but didnt like this aspect of it. So, >> I continued using Trango and love them! -RickG >> >> On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 4:13 PM, Tom DeReggi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >>> Chuck, >>> >>> Not to rain on your parade but... I'm a little confused on how 10.2 mbps >>> is >>> possible w/ Canopy. Advantage series peak capacity is just for short range >>> customers, and a large percentage of the capacity can be voided by by the >>> farther out slower non-advantage CPEs. When Up/down rate ratios have to be >>> pre-fined (for syncing) that limits the radio from using the ful capacity >>> of >>> the Radio. Its one of the big reasons that we chose Trango 8 years ago >>> originally, so that it was infact possible to get full radio speed in one >>> direction when it was available in low usage time, so we could quote >>> higher >>> speeds to business symetrical customers. >>> >>> Sure, if we consider 14mb real world advantage best case for Advantage >>> series, use all advantage series CPE, and do a 70 / 30 download to upload, >>> sure 10mbps peak downloads are possible for a single client, in that >>> scenario. Provided that the WISP was fine with all other customers being >>> 100% STARVED at the time the one customer was monopolizing the peak >>> capacity. >>> We tried that once, and it was a big mistake because it caused latency to >>> sky rocket for all the other customers when they first attempted to use >>> capacity, and the feel of the circuit because very bursty feeling. The >>> short >>> pauses made it feel like something was wrong with the circuit. TCP could >>> not >>> deal with it properly, it needs time to tune. Because of TCP's reaction, >>> it >>> actually translated to a slower experience than if we just gave customers >>> half the speed. So My Points is >>> >>> Your concept of bursting a HIGH capacity for short periods is a sound >>> concept, provided that you never let one cusomer have ALL your bandwdith. >>> Headroom is needed. We found that if we let our customers burst to half >>> the >>> radio full capacity, we could use the same technique sucessfully because >>> all >>> the other subs were NEVER starved from bandwidth. >>> >>> We tried pushing the limits, such as allowing 7-8mb out of the 10mb, but >>> it >>> was to risky to do that because there were times when the full 10mbps was >>> not achieve, such as when link quality degraded and retransmission occured >>> do to RF packetloss, or when small packets were being used instead of pull >>> packet size. Customers would suffer with the effects of non bandwdith >>> shaping. >>> There was also some issues with how well bandwdith shaping worked on Intel >>> systems at 10mbps, as 10mbps speeds is about the peak speed before it >>> exceed >>> Intel's interupt clock limits of 100 ticks per second, nor was common Fair >>> Weighted Queuing method able to be operation simultanoeus to trying to be >>> used with Burst bucket type queuing. (Unless you aren't using Intel) >>> >>> So if we have a 10mbps HDX radio, we would sell peak 5 mbps services, and >>> this would allow us to deliver good non-bursty performance without delays, >>> and let us acheive high over subscription rates. And if we had a FDX >>> imulated radio, that downloaded at 10mbps, again 5mbps would be the peak >>> speed we allowed in our bursting. >>> >>> To keep it Real, With Canopy Advantage series, I'd highly recommend to >>> WISPs >>> that they do not commit to offer peak speeds above 5mbps per customer. It >>> can result in severe degration at some customers sites that could be going >>> on, and the WISP never really know it if they weren't sitting in front of >>> the end user computers experiencing exactly what the end user was >>> experienceing. And if you don't believe me, and want to push the limits, >>> maybe 7mbps, but anything above that... its getting risky. >>> >>> That is provided that you'd be advertising Real Transfer Speed, instead of >>> gross over the air speed. There have been some WISP that have quoted >>> "11mbps" for 2.4Ghz DSSS wifi systems that could only pass 3mbps, because >>> they quoted Hardware gross specs and not real throughput. But in todays >>> world, that is gettign harder and harder to do, with the many online speed >>> test sites that are becoming common practice for end users to use to test >>> their speeds. Its darn near impossible to get a full 10mbps speed test >>> result from these test sites over a wireless nework, and much easier to >>> achieve a 5mbps test, do to the distance, windowsize, latency variables >>> that >>> can effect TCP's real world throughput. (For example, 64k windowsize at >>> 80ms, will only allow about a 3mbps transfer to occur). >>> >>> Don't misunderstand
