Digital Bridge has asked for money for Underserved for the county that I
service, the whole county.
Questions:
1. Since I am the only WISP in the Rural areas of my county and my standard is
1024/256 with 2.4 and there is 50% of the clients that I cant get due to trees.
I assume that that
On Sep 15, 2009, at 2:20 PM, Steve Barnes wrote:
Digital Bridge has asked for money for Underserved for the county
that I service, the whole county.
Questions:
1. Since I am the only WISP in the Rural areas of my county and my
standard is 1024/256 with 2.4 and there is 50% of the
He isn't asking to block the competition, only the availability of
taxpayer $ being used to drive him out of business.
L. Aaron Kaplan wrote:
On Sep 15, 2009, at 2:20 PM, Steve Barnes wrote:
Digital Bridge has asked for money for Underserved for the county
that I service, the whole
Just a quit though - correct me if I am wrong, but...
Isnt blocking competition very un-American somehow?
Is blocking even possible?
Seriously? You would categorize government-subsidized broadband expansion
as capitalistic competition?
On Sep 15, 2009, at 3:07 PM, Brian Whigham wrote:
Just a quit though - correct me if I am wrong, but...
Isnt blocking competition very un-American somehow?
Is blocking even possible?
Seriously? You would categorize government-subsidized broadband
expansion
as capitalistic
Seriously? You would categorize government-subsidized broadband
expansion
as capitalistic competition?
I should have said - receiving some funds and thus increasing the
speed of biz expansion.
I see nothing un-capitalistic per se about receiving funds in order to
revive the economy.
That's the only way you can get it. It must be built by a MT
distributor, along with the FCC stickers put on it etc and sold as a
completed FCC Certified System. Can't build it yourself.
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf
While it holds true that you may not be able to get the stickers, this
statement is not true.
Regards,
Chuck Hogg
Shelby Broadband
502-722-9292
ch...@shelbybb.com
http://www.shelbybb.com
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of
Yeah, it amazes me how much greed was in the applcation. Some large
applicants, the wealthiest identified the top number and molded an
applcation to go for that dollar amount.
For example, Satelite providers approaching 1/2 billion dollars. Or a State
asking for 1/50th or more of funds,
Realistically, you can't block the application if you can reach less
than 50% of the households in an area. Plus they are probably applying
for funds to cover an area larger than (or at least not completely
coincident with) yours, which would likely make a successful challenge
improbable
Thanks for the link We just had a nice safety meeting prior to
sending everyone out!
Marco
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 12:36 AM, RickG rgunder...@gmail.com wrote:
Actual link is
http://www.wirelessestimator.com/t_content.cfm?pagename=Breaking%20News
Be safe and careful out there guys! -RickG
test
--
Marco C. Coelho
Argon Technologies Inc.
POB 875
Greenville, TX 75403-0875
903-455-5036
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
I'm sure this has been asked before but what are all your suggestions
for hotspot controllers? We will be running primarily Mikrotik hotspots
and we already have a RADIUS server in place. We'll be running about 30
locations from one central RADIUS server. It will also need to integrate
in with
pong
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however
improbable, must be the truth.
--- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Marco Coelho coelh...@gmail.com
Gatespot or WirelessOrbit
Not sure about your AD requirement though...
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however
improbable, must be the truth.
--- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
Can't the Mikrotik do LDAP auth? Haven't done it myself but seems like I
remember seeing that it can.
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 10:28 AM
To: WISPA General List
Aggregate Growth strategy for a public offering
What many think is the holy grail of the Broadband Wireless Internet
Business is reaching the 100,000 subscriber point then selling out.
There are a few companies taking the buy-out approach to reaching this
goal. They are offering between $100 to
As in AD will be the radius server? Or you need two radius server?
---
Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
WISPA Board Member - wispa.org
Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik WISP Support Services
WISPA Vendor Member
Office:
AD is active directory. Active directory is Microsoft's bastardization of
LDAP.
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however
improbable, must be the truth.
--- Sir Arthur Conan
AD doesn't have the ability to create usernames and passwords on its
own. We have a radius server that checks in with AD for current
customers. We want to be able to give current customers access through
all of our hotspots but people that aren't the ability to purchase time
when they're within
Anyone know the % Wirelessorbit takes in revenue per customer or is it a
monthly cost flat rate for their service?
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 11:28 AM
To: WISPA General
Correct me if I'm wrong but if your radius server already checks AD then
just have the MT look at your radius server.
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however
improbable,
That is true but there still isn't any account creation or billing
solutions but yes pointing the Mikrotiks would work if we were giving
away free wifi somewhere.
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent:
I wonder how they make any money giving it away for free. Maybe I need
to give them a call.
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 11:49 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re:
Turn on the MT hotspot and have it use radius authentication. The users
that work for the hotspot are in the ip hotspot users db and radius.
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
When you have eliminated the impossible, that which
It's like the free version of Dropbox. Works 100% just has a limitation
here or there to guilt you into paying them. Costs them little for every
subscriber.
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
When you have eliminated the impossible,
Are you saying you have a RADIUS server that can read AD's users or are
you using Microsoft's IAS as a RADIUS server? You could have Freeside
setup to do your new hotspot users, accounts setup automatically via the
Mikrotik interface.
Mark McElvy
AccuBak Data Systems, Inc.
-Original
It's really not that hard to code a web page that will allow someone to sign
up, get their CC info and process it, and then stick their username /
password into either your RADIUS server database or even create an AD user.
Mikrotik can host the page or I think you can have the 'tik forward out to
MS IAS.
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Mark McElvy
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 11:57 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Hotspot controller
Are you saying you have a RADIUS server that can read AD's
No % at all.
It is fixed and is not much. They tell about it at
http://www.wirelessorbit.com/
Ralph
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Andy Trimmell
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 11:48 AM
To: WISPA General List
2. is not actually correct.
They have a couple of levels of pay service, depending on number of actual
hotspot gateways (routers) you have. The monthly cost is very low.
Their service is great- we have used them since they began and I have
visited their office twice.
They process payments for
We use user manager without issues with Auth.net.
---
Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
WISPA Board Member - wispa.org
Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik WISP Support Services
WISPA Vendor Member
Office: 314-735-0270
Yes, It definateately IS appropriate to attempt to BLOCK bad applications.
The NTIA/RUS has no way to know if an applcation is innapproriate or in
conflict of interest if we dont tell them.
Quite honestly, the applicant may not know it is in conflict of interest
without telling them.
I
Its also feasible to protest a plan simply because its a poor plan. The
NTIA/RUS needs to approve grants for companies that use tax payer money
optimally wisely and benefit the public, and
adhere to the NOFA rules. If you think you can do a better plan, but didn;t
have time to submit it until
I found this page on the USDA web site with a database of Broadband projects
funded by the USDA. It looks like this will also be the site that ISPs can use
to find proposed BIP/BTOP projects in their area and file a challenge.
You can sign up to receive e-mail when a new Public Notice of
The problem is, it's a fair amount of effort to challenge since *you*
have to challenge it at the census block level, just as they had to
justify it at the census block level.
And if the area is as the poster describes, it's impossible to
challenge. He might have a very good reason why he
There is no provision in the rules to protest a plan because you don't
think it's a good plan.
In fact, there's an OMB circular (from July I believe) that explicitly
disallows ANY communication until the evaluation process is over about
individual applications with the grant reviewers OR
On Sep 15, 2009, at 12:55 PM, Chuck Bartosch wrote:
50% of the residents (that's what he said, I'll remind you) in his
Sorry, that sounded kind of snotty-didn't mean it that way. I meant
just that, I'm going by what he explicitly said and not making further
assumptions or guesses. The I'll
Any comments good bad or indifferent?
Looks like I can put together a dual band Mesh radio for about 250.00 plus
antennas.
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
Chuck,
and you will NOT be able to have a section cut
out of an otherwise qualifying target census set just because you do
cover it.
I agree that its not possible to protest it simply based on the protestor
covering part of it. Agreed, gerrymandering was incouraged, and I actually
agree it
I was in contact with a WISP in Destin, Florida that really liked them
in a condo/hotel environment. He praised them. Hope this helps.
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Jerry Richardson
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009
They went out of their way to encourage gerrymandering in
the applications, which included the ability to include covered
territory as long as the total number of already covered households
was under 50% (which it is in this case as it's been explained to us).
Or that there's a less than 40%
On Sep 15, 2009, at 1:48 PM, Tom DeReggi wrote:
Chuck,
and you will NOT be able to have a section cut
out of an otherwise qualifying target census set just because you do
cover it.
I agree that its not possible to protest it simply based on the
protestor
covering part of it. Agreed,
Chuck,
I'm reading from bottom up, and realize in this Email you made some good
points here that may adequately counter my thought from my last post.
This is all good information, to understand what is and isn't approrpiate
ways to protest, and when appropriate.
I agree that NTIA/RUS is bound
I'm including the 40% in the gerrymandering statement. In another
response I pointed out that you have to win on every argument the
applicant makes, not just on the arguments you want to make.
Chuck
On Sep 15, 2009, at 2:16 PM, Vickie Edwards wrote:
They went out of their way to encourage
I've never been a fan of selling out, no matter the terms ever for any
amount of money. That's probably because I'm young and hope to own an
evolution of my company 50 years from now.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
That link doesn't work for me.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
--
From: Matt Larsen - Lists li...@manageisp.com
Sent: Monday, September 14, 2009 7:41 PM
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org; motorola
When I search these websites for my county (Snohomish County, WA), I
come up with SEVERAL listings for CTURN Corporation out of Oregon
http://broadbandsearch.sc.egov.usda.gov/SearchResult_Company.aspx?CompanyId=1f78822b-3a4c-43a7-af4a-461b44b65a51.
They appear to have over 130 applications showing
On Sep 15, 2009, at 2:21 PM, Tom DeReggi wrote:
Chuck,
I'm reading from bottom up, and realize in this Email you made some
good
points here that may adequately counter my thought from my last post.
This is all good information, to understand what is and isn't
approrpiate
ways to
They are offering between $100 to $1200 per subscriber to the
owners that have built these businesses up through their hard work.
They seem to be concentrating on the companies with between 500 and
2000 subscribers.
Seems about even if you only look at today's dollar value - what about the
next 6
I'm also not in favor of any deal, that forces a participant into a destiny
they don't untimately ahve control of, or where they lose control of how
they evaluate their local value when they reach the exit stage. For example,
one subsidiary may easilly justify a return with a 1x sale, but
Please see within your mail:
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 2:01 PM, Tom DeReggi wirelessn...@rapiddsl.net wrote:
I'm also not in favor of any deal, that forces a participant into a destiny
they don't untimately ahve control of, or where they lose control of how
they evaluate their local value when
I also don't understand why people aggregate networks that aren't
contiguous. You lose a lot of the benefits vs. one you build from
contiguous networks.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
--
From: Marco
If you bundle enough networks together you get a very good coverage
map. The more you have, the closer they get to each other thereby
allowing you to add fiber here, licensed backhaul to there.
mc
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net wrote:
I also don't
Although steps in the right direction, a couple points
The way each ISP is being evaluated is based on a formula that take
subscriber numbers, income, and gross costs into account. This
flattens out the playing field between all players whether they bring
in 500 customers or 10K.
I guess it
Yes, but the largest cost benefit is reducing duplicate processes and
resources.
Integrating one tech support, one billing, one transit, one colo, etc, etc.
These require committed combining of companies, where there is no return
after words.
The companies that combine like that will see much
What grid type/vendors are most using here. Our installers are having
some issues with our Grid deployments. We've tried a few types of
Pac-Wireless's, some of them have had wildly fluctuating signal levels
they bounce 20db. Our Andrew grids seem to work fine, but we are looking
for a less
Excuse my ignorance but since the card is the only thing that
transmits why does the board and especially why does the enclosure
need to be certified? If one puts a two way radio in a car the radio
needs to be certified, not the whole car.
Greg
On Sep 14, 2009, at 8:30 PM, ralph wrote:
That's been the ongoing argument.
I use the analogy of a PCMCIA or USB card. that's the device that is FCC
certified - the computer (routerboard) just runs it.
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf
Of os10ru...@gmail.com
We have a very very good AAA/Advertising system in place and I am looking for
new ways to leverage it.
A few questions for those who are doing Hospitality WiFi:
- Did you sell the system to the hotel or provide all of the
equipment/installation on your dime?
- What is your revenue split?
- Does
The way I understand it, the routerboard don't matter, the antenna, and
radio matters, as its certified as a system, with xx gain of this type
of antenna. You also have to have the FCC information, etc, on the
outside that MT offers to only its distributors.
-Original Message-
From:
Most of the ISPs that we support who provide Hospitality WiFi put the
equipment in and charge the hotel on a per room basis. I believe that
most of the hotels simply provide the service free of charge.
-Layne
Layne Sisk
ServerPlus
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org
The way I understand it (and I was told this comes from an FCC field officer)
is that the FCC ID of the radio device (Ubie/MT/other card) needs to be visible
on the case (for the purposes of easy identification so they don't need to rip
it off the pole and open it up). The antenna used needs to
I have a problem with Mikrotik I have not been able to solve. Wondering if
anyone has any insight.
A summary config is
I have a 433AH setup as AP with 1 XR900 and 1 R5H (5.8Ghz). The Cat5
Ethernet port goes to a SMC VLAN switch, where the SMC tags and untags VLAN
ID, and continues to the
I have probably 100 or so PacWireless PA24-24 and I don't see that issue
on any of them. They have been solid for me.
Michael Baird wrote:
What grid type/vendors are most using here. Our installers are having
some issues with our Grid deployments. We've tried a few types of
Pac-Wireless's,
I am looking at using these grids/bullets as well,How much improvement do you
see over,say a nanostation2? Thanks,Jason
--- On Tue, 9/15/09, Scott Reed scottr...@onlyinternet.net wrote:
From: Scott Reed scottr...@onlyinternet.net
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 2.4 ghz 24db grids.
To: WISPA General List
Does the process explicitly say that an awarded company has to open their
network to competition? Or is this sort of a vague rule?
Scottie
-- Original Message --
From: Chuck Bartosch ch...@clarityconnect.com
Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
I've been installing pac grids with the 5ghz version of the new Bullet, the
5hp, and it's been darn stable. Could it be something in the Airmax or the
2ghz??? Dunno.
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Michael Baird
Anyone have a Rohn 25G tower jack they no longer need? Gotta take one down,
need a jack but would rather buy a used one from a member before shelling
out some jack to Champion radio.
Thanks!
Robert West
Just Micro Digital Services inc.
Sent from my PC cause I'm too poor for a Blackberry and
It's an requirement.
From the application:
B. Eligibility Factors
** Applicant understands and agrees to comply with the nondiscrimination and
interconnection obligations outlined in the NOFA.
** If applying for a last mile Broadband Infrastructure project, applicant
understands and agrees to
70 matches
Mail list logo
