Re: [WISPA] 3.65

2008-11-04 Thread Marlon K. Schafer
Yeppers. Me too. Part of why I'm on these lists is for the knowledge to be gained. Good AND bad. thanks, marlon - Original Message - From: Jerry Richardson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 8:56 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65

Re: [WISPA] How NOT to take down your new used tower!

2008-11-04 Thread Chuck McCown - 3
Be nice to email the guy to tell him the dishes could be sold on ebay for more than the tower is worth. What a shame. - Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 7:33 AM Subject: [WISPA] How

Re: [WISPA] How NOT to take down your new used tower!

2008-11-04 Thread Marlon K. Schafer
roflol Yeah, I didn't think of that. too funny marlon - Original Message - From: Chuck McCown - 3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 7:05 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] How NOT to take down your new used tower! Be nice to email the

Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers

2008-11-04 Thread D. Ryan Spott
This is also available if you run Cacti. I added it to my standard CPE template a while back. ryan Pat O'Connor wrote: We're just starting to test this program. It's free so what the heck. http://oss.oetiker.ch/smokeping/ Tom DeReggi wrote: Guaranteeing latency One of the

Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers

2008-11-04 Thread Anthony Will
With Canopy, and a correctly configured polling AP there is no competition for time slices unless the AP is overloaded. This is how the latency is consistent. Canopy has what is called control slots. This is a predetermined time that the SM is allowed to ask for resources. Increasing

Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers

2008-11-04 Thread Tom DeReggi
Can you SNMP query the SU, to pull latency stats that might have been recorded at the SU from the SU side? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Chuck McCown - 3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org

Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers

2008-11-04 Thread Chuck McCown - 3
Not quite sure what all is in the MIB but Canopy has fixed AP/SM latency. It is always the same unless the AP is totally out of headroom. And that is easy to manage by not overloading the AP. Once you are in the 130-160 range of SMs on an AP it is time to add another AP. - Original

Re: [WISPA] How NOT to take down your new used tower!

2008-11-04 Thread Jerry Richardson
I can hear it now - Hey Ya'll - watch this __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 6:33 AM To: WISPA

Re: [WISPA] How NOT to take down your new used tower!

2008-11-04 Thread Blair Davis
idiots Marlon K. Schafer wrote: Yikes http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jiivRoXLkSMfeature=related Gotta be a better way to do this. marlon WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/

Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers

2008-11-04 Thread Matt
With Canopy, and a correctly configured polling AP there is no competition for time slices unless the AP is overloaded. This is how Won't be long and they will be overloaded. http://tinyurl.com/5tel8m As a rule of thumb we do not currently offer rate plans that are more then 33 percent

Re: [WISPA] How NOT to take down your new used tower!

2008-11-04 Thread Dennis Burgess - LinkTechs.net
looked like fun! :) -- * Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer WISPA Board Member - wispa.org http://www.wispa.org/ Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik WISP Support Services* *Office*: 314-735-0270 *Website*: http://www.linktechs.net

Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers

2008-11-04 Thread Matt
What we are also learnign is that we can only Guarantee what the customer's usage perception was, and we can go faster than teh weakest link. For example, From our NOC to the customer we can usually get less than 5ms to any/everywhere. 5ms to anywhere in your network? Wow. What are you

Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers

2008-11-04 Thread Chuck McCown
We generally use Dragonwave or fiber to the AP. So no latency to speak of there. From our Canopy sub to our NOC I would say 7 is what most get. - Original Message - From: Matt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 1:08 PM Subject:

[WISPA] SR5 vs. XR5

2008-11-04 Thread Travis Johnson
Hi, Can anyone provide any real-world experience where they replaced SR5 cards with XR5 cards on a point to point link? We have a 15 mile shot (using MT) that is just _barely_ line of site enough to establish a link. I am just wondering how much increase in signal we would see by switching

Re: [WISPA] SR5 vs. XR5

2008-11-04 Thread D. Ryan Spott
You could just toss the cards in there and do a quick configure. $216 for the parts should be easy to show on the books. :) ryan Travis Johnson wrote: Hi, Can anyone provide any real-world experience where they replaced SR5 cards with XR5 cards on a point to point link? We have a 15 mile

Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers

2008-11-04 Thread Matt
We generally use Dragonwave or fiber to the AP. So no latency to speak of there. From our Canopy sub to our NOC I would say 7 is what most get. Wish we could afford Dragonwave or fiber to each site. How much does that cost? Matt

Re: [WISPA] SR5 vs. XR5

2008-11-04 Thread Travis Johnson
Hi, It's a 2 hour drive (each way) and requires taking the link down (again). I have XR5 cards sitting on my desk... but if I'm only going to see 1db of improvement, it's not worth 5 hours of time. ;) Travis Microserv D. Ryan Spott wrote: You could just toss the cards in there and do a

Re: [WISPA] SR5 vs. XR5

2008-11-04 Thread Travis Johnson
There is a difference between u.fl and mmcx on signal levels? Blair Davis wrote: I-2db. Maybe more, but only if you are going from u.fl pigtails to mmcx pigtails... Travis Johnson wrote: Hi, It's a 2 hour drive (each way) and requires taking the link down (again). I

Re: [WISPA] SR5 vs. XR5

2008-11-04 Thread Jim Patient
I've seen about 2 dB difference from sr5 to xr5. Jim Travis Johnson wrote: Hi, Can anyone provide any real-world experience where they replaced SR5 cards with XR5 cards on a point to point link? We have a 15 mile shot (using MT) that is just _barely_ line of site enough to establish a

Re: [WISPA] SR5 vs. XR5

2008-11-04 Thread Scott Reed
What I have seen is not so much an improvement in the receive db reading as in the CCQ. I don't remember how much it changed, but I have a couple of links that were having issues with intermittent drops that went away with the XR5 cards. Travis Johnson wrote: Hi, It's a 2 hour drive (each

Re: [WISPA] SR5 vs. XR5

2008-11-04 Thread Mike Hammett
The XR radios listen better than the SR radios do. -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Scott Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 2:55 PM To: WISPA General List

Re: [WISPA] SR5 vs. XR5

2008-11-04 Thread Mike Hammett
MMCX cables typically use a larger cable, so less loss. -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com From: Travis Johnson Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 2:52 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] SR5 vs. XR5 There is a difference between u.fl

Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers

2008-11-04 Thread Tom DeReggi
Guaranteeing latency One of the things we learned is that the ISP can't measure the customer's experience of latency accurately. And if the can;t measure it, they cant guarantee it. When pings initiate from the AP side, they always send without delay. When pings initiate from the SU side,

[WISPA] How NOT to take down your new used tower!

2008-11-04 Thread Marlon K. Schafer
Yikes http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jiivRoXLkSMfeature=related Gotta be a better way to do this. marlon WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/

Re: [WISPA] SR5 vs. XR5

2008-11-04 Thread Blair Davis
I-2db. Maybe more, but only if you are going from u.fl pigtails to mmcx pigtails... Travis Johnson wrote: Hi, It's a 2 hour drive (each way) and requires taking the link down (again). I have XR5 cards sitting on my desk... but if I'm only going to see 1db of improvement, it's not

Re: [WISPA] SR5 vs. XR5

2008-11-04 Thread Mario Pommier
what is the output of those cards? the xr5 are 600mW aren't they? aren't the sr5 400mW? *600mW (28dBm) 400mW (26dBm)* the posted results seem accurate. Mario Mike Hammett wrote: The XR radios listen better than the SR radios do. -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions

Re: [WISPA] SR5 vs. XR5

2008-11-04 Thread Scott Reed
Yep. And I went from u.fl to mmcx pigtails, which as in the other messages, I think gives some improvement. Mike Hammett wrote: The XR radios listen better than the SR radios do. -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com

Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers

2008-11-04 Thread Tom DeReggi
It appears that Canopy has stepped up its game with their more recent models. Thats good to hear. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent:

Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers

2008-11-04 Thread Chuck McCown
Nothing, if you own the fiber. - Original Message - From: Matt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 1:34 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers We generally use Dragonwave or fiber to the AP. So no latency to speak of

Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers

2008-11-04 Thread Tom DeReggi
you can decide how much bandwidth you want to set aside for ARQ. Thats pretty cool. is that a new feature as of a specif fiormware, or has it been there all along? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Chuck McCown

Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers

2008-11-04 Thread Chuck McCown
Been there for quite some time. Not sure when it was added. - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 3:57 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers you can decide how much bandwidth you want

Re: [WISPA] heavy usage customers

2008-11-04 Thread Josh Luthman
I've heard lots of good things about Dragonwave I can speak for Redline an50s. My favorite toy ever. On 11/4/08, Chuck McCown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Been there for quite some time. Not sure when it was added. - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA

Re: [WISPA] SR5 vs. XR5

2008-11-04 Thread Blair Davis
Correct. Mario Pommier wrote: what is the output of those cards? the xr5 are 600mW aren't they? aren't the sr5 400mW? *600mW (28dBm) 400mW (26dBm)* the posted results seem accurate. Mario Mike Hammett wrote: The XR radios listen better than the SR radios do. --

[WISPA] Looks like we didn't win

2008-11-04 Thread Charles Wyble
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/110408-fcc-whilte-spaces.html :( WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA

[WISPA] [Board] FCC White Spaces Decision (fwd)

2008-11-04 Thread Butch Evans
-- * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* * http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering * * http://www.wispa.org/ * WISPA Board Member * *

Re: [WISPA] Looks like we didn't win

2008-11-04 Thread Butch Evans
On Tue, 4 Nov 2008, Charles Wyble wrote: http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/110408-fcc-whilte-spaces.html We didn't win everything, but we didn't lose, either. I sent a summary from the WISPA attorney representing us on this issue to this list. --

Re: [WISPA] SR5 vs. XR5

2008-11-04 Thread cw
It's not the output power that differentiates SR radios from XR radios. We got better quality links from 100mW CM9s than SR cards. The XR radios are finer grained and hear better. Mario Pommier wrote: what is the output of those cards? the xr5 are 600mW aren't they? aren't the sr5 400mW?

Re: [WISPA] Looks like we didn't win

2008-11-04 Thread Chuck McCown - 3
What exactly didn't we win? - Original Message - From: Charles Wyble [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 5:08 PM Subject: [WISPA] Looks like we didn't win http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/110408-fcc-whilte-spaces.html :(

Re: [WISPA] Looks like we didn't win

2008-11-04 Thread Marlon K. Schafer
Useful power levels in the whitespaces. B UT, we've not seen the actual rules from the FCC yet. It's entirely possible that the rules will be better than what's being reported so far. marlon - Original Message - From: Chuck McCown - 3 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List

Re: [WISPA] Looks like we didn't win

2008-11-04 Thread Chuck McCown - 3
I can make do with 4 watts EIRP if that is what we end up with. If the is the only thing we didn't get, I would say we pitched a shutout. - Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 7:13 PM

[WISPA] My favorite quotes from the FCC TVWS meeting today...

2008-11-04 Thread Butch Evans
Commissioner Adelstein has long been a pretty good friend of our industry. In truth, I have not always agreed with him, but in his comments today he made a couple of statements that were music to my ears. Then, the music turned to noise White spaces are the blank pages on which we will

Re: [WISPA] Looks like we didn't win

2008-11-04 Thread Jack Unger
I agree with you Marlon. We haven't seen the actual rules yet. The Network World article looks very poorly written. I would not start drawing win or lose conclusions based on that cheesy article. Once the actual rules are published, then we will know which points benefit us and which points

[WISPA] WISPA Website FCC Press Release and Commissioner Comments

2008-11-04 Thread Rick Harnish
http://www.wispa.org/?p=311 Respectfully, Rick Harnish General Manager - Midwest Region Great American Broadband 260-827-2482 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/

Re: [WISPA] Looks like we didn't win

2008-11-04 Thread Tom DeReggi
Yes, I agree 4 Watts would have been a huge victory, but we didn't get 4 watts. It appears that we got 100mw EIRP, which is worthless for anything other than short range personal portable devices. It appears that we got shut out. At 100mw, they might have well just auctioned it to the RBOCs,

Re: [WISPA] Looks like we didn't win

2008-11-04 Thread Chuck McCown - 3
I see. Yes, I agree. 100 mw EIRP is good for a wireless mic but not much else. - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 8:11 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Looks like we didn't win Yes, I agree 4

Re: [WISPA] My favorite quotes from the FCC TVWS meeting today...

2008-11-04 Thread Tom DeReggi
Butch, Then, the music turned to noise You hit the nail right on the head, with your comment. They talked up broadband, but then gave us Personal portable instead, and said, but we really need to consider PTP, CLECs and Carriers are also a very important part of broadband delivery.. The

[WISPA] My mistake- WE WON!!!!!

2008-11-04 Thread Tom DeReggi
Guys, I just got word that 100mw was only for personal portable. FCC proposed rules also includes a provision for 5 Watts Fixed deployment!! WooHoo Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL

Re: [WISPA] My favorite quotes from the FCC TVWS meeting today...

2008-11-04 Thread Travis Johnson
Tom, You act surprised and shocked that the FCC listened to the two biggest technology companies in the world, rather than a small group of WISP's. It's pretty much normal politics, even at the FCC. The person with the biggest checkbook always wins. ALWAYS. It would be nice to see things

Re: [WISPA] My mistake- WE WON!!!!!

2008-11-04 Thread Chuck McCown - 3
Can we hope that is 5 watts TX power with some gain on the antenna - Original Message - From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Cc: WISPA Board Members List [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 8:37 PM Subject:

Re: [WISPA] My mistake- WE WON!!!!!

2008-11-04 Thread Butch Evans
On Tue, 4 Nov 2008, Tom DeReggi wrote: I just got word that 100mw was only for personal portable. FCC proposed rules also includes a provision for 5 Watts Fixed deployment!! Where did you see/hear that? -- * Butch Evans

Re: [WISPA] Looks like we didn't win

2008-11-04 Thread Jack Unger
I agree we need to wait until the power details are published rather than get all spun up over one magazine article which appears to be poorly written. Tom DeReggi wrote: Yes, I agree 4 Watts would have been a huge victory, but we didn't get 4 watts. It appears that we got 100mw EIRP, which

Re: [WISPA] Looks like we didn't win

2008-11-04 Thread Jack Unger
I think it's too early to know what power levels were or were not authorized today. I listened to the actual meeting today and I never heard any mention of power levels. AFAIK the actual maximum power levels were not announced today - or did I miss something? Chuck McCown - 3 wrote: I see.

Re: [WISPA] Looks like we didn't win

2008-11-04 Thread Mike Hammett
Licensed Lite without unlicensed present Useful power levels We'll know for sure when the actual rules are published. -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Chuck McCown - 3 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [WISPA] p2p blocking, throttling, mikrotik

2008-11-04 Thread RickG
IMO, the best thing I've done to my network is switch to a Mikrotik firewall and prioritize traffic. I friend of mine offered a sample script whcih I have attached. Obviously, you need to tweak it to fit your needs. -RickG On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 10:24 AM, RC [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When I try