There was some big news out of today's Senate Commerce Committee oversight
hearing on the BIP/BTOP programs, which just ended. Copies of the prepared
testimony by the RUS, NTIA and OMB witnesses are attached but, as usual, the
best information came out in the oral testimony.
The big news
Peel back a few inches of jacket. Pull the drain wire back along the
wire. Install connector with drain wire coming out the back. Ground
the drain wire.
Kurt Fankhauser wrote:
Does anyone know how you use shielded cat 5 when the radio's are all Tranzeo
with their plastic Ethernet port???
From your RM picture, the building isn't the only issue. The link just
has Fresnel problems at the ATT Plaza end. Even with no builidings, I
wouldn't try using the link the way it looks.
Mike Hammett wrote:
I'm looking at a link that has a possible issue. I've linked pictures.
I have a 23 mile link completely over water that I cannot get stable.
One end is approx 200ft AGL, 220ft ASL, the other end is 50' AGL, 90'
ASL. Antennas are V-Pol 29dbi grids, radios are R5H cards. I have
tried the link at both 5.2, and 5.8, but it still fluctuates
dramatically. When the antennas
Your probably seeing tidal dropouts. We have that problem from time to
time and usually a larger antenna does the trick with a narrower beam.
I would go to 32 dbi dishes at HPOL (I think H-Pol works better over
water from experience)
I would probably look into use XR-5 cards for the extra
From my understanding from others doing that very thing h pol is far better
over water then v pol and I would agree that it would work better with the
wave going side to side instead of up and down (less chance of bounced
reflection on the water surface causing multipath issues).
/Eje
Sent
I'd be surprised if it were the building rather than the freeway causing
your problem here.
In the end, it doesn't really matter what the cause is (could be a power
line a few hundred yards away too).
Try moving one end up OR down by as little as 2 feet. It could take much
more, but
Is going to circular polarization an option?
Greg
On Oct 28, 2009, at 8:50 AM, Jeremy Parr wrote:
I have a 23 mile link completely over water that I cannot get stable.
One end is approx 200ft AGL, 220ft ASL, the other end is 50' AGL, 90'
ASL. Antennas are V-Pol 29dbi grids, radios are R5H
It's probably ducting. Where the conditions in the AIR literally bend the
signal over or under your receive antennas.
You'll likely have to put in a system designed with something called
antenna diversity. Basically two antennas for each link. One 10 to 20'
higher than the other one. Then
2009/10/28 Marlon K. Schafer o...@odessaoffice.com:
It's probably ducting. Where the conditions in the AIR literally bend the
signal over or under your receive antennas.
You'll likely have to put in a system designed with something called
antenna diversity. Basically two antennas for each
Have a look at our Radwin2000 MIMO radio- the diversity option is specifically
for these applications.
Matt Musial
Radwin USA
Sent via my BlackBerry
-Original Message-
From: Jeremy Parr jeremyp...@gmail.com
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 09:51:21
To: WISPA General Listwireless@wispa.org
Hmmm, hadn't thought of that solution. Good catch!
I try to keep my links to 15 miles or less so that I can have an AP at each
one and cover the area in between. That helps with a lot of strange
performance issues too.
Thanks for the tip, I might have to try some n radios after all :-).
I will have to second the ducting analysis. 23 miles is a long way
over a water path. You can use space diversity by using a pair of
antennas/radios at the same frequency, with 20 foot or more of
vertical separation. You could try frequency diversity also. Many
times a duct will affect
I ran into a problem with one of these yesterday that makes me leery of
using them again.
http://www.mouser.com/Search/ProductDetail.aspx?R=SD-25B-24virtualkey6343virtualkey709-SD25B-24
If the amperage goes over the rated max (1.1A) it appears the unit
continues to allow dc through, but
http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=3t=36191start=0
I'm pulling my hair out and wasting all kinds of money on voltage
regulators to make sure my solar and dc-powered sites don't cause
mikrotik routerboards to go into over-voltage protection when the
batteries get charged over 28v.
I'm
We run 12 volt converters to 18-20v with 24 volt battery systems. no
issues. :)
---
Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
WISPA Board Member - wispa.org
Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik WISP Support Services
WISPA Vendor
I am currently in development to make a install-less application that
will allow an end user to simply click check net, it will preform
several checks including pinging their gateway, your network edge, test
dns resolution, list their ip information (for clueless users), as well
as give them
A couple issues:
Wasted energy - these converters can go as low as 75% efficient
One more point of failure
Often the converters have their own low voltage disconnect - I went 24v
to give myself more battery headroom and time if we have problems with
the solar or wind
Often the converters will
never had a problem. soo. .lol. Maybge you are over engineering..
---
Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
WISPA Board Member - wispa.org
Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik WISP Support Services
WISPA Vendor Member
Office:
I'm just dreading more snowmobile trips in blizzards.
Randy
Dennis Burgess wrote:
never had a problem. soo. .lol. Maybge you are over engineering..
---
Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
WISPA Board Member -
I hear your frustration but I would not be yelling at MT. If I bought a
regulated power supply that didn't deliver the set voltage I would be
all over that manufacturer. Your RouterBoard worked to specification
and the power supply didn't. Who is at fault?Really surprises me
that it is
I use some Cincon Part EC4BW12, dc-dc convertors for anywhere I need to
power the sub 28v devices. It will take 18-72 v in and output 12 v. I've
had to install a lot of these as most of our sites were 48 v. When we
started replacing 532's with the 400 series, we had to put one in for
every
We are having a problem with certain sites that are rejecting our
customers because they say the IP address has sent too much traffic over
the last 24 hours. This is a problem, as 98% of our customers are
behind a single NATted IP address. I am just changing the IP address
of the NAT
Looks nice. How do you connect to that? The spec sheet isn't clear,
just says it has pins on it.
Randy
ccrum wrote:
I use some Cincon Part EC4BW12, dc-dc convertors for anywhere I need to
power the sub 28v devices. It will take 18-72 v in and output 12 v. I've
had to install a lot of
Yep,
I give up on chasing NAT issues. We just give everyone publics.
Jim
Matt Larsen - Lists wrote:
We are having a problem with certain sites that are rejecting our
customers because they say the IP address has sent too much traffic over
the last 24 hours. This is a problem, as 98% of
Don't NAT all of your customers. ;-)
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
--
From: Matt Larsen - Lists li...@manageisp.com
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 12:41 PM
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org;
Soldering iron. We just split the cat-5 appropriately, solder the wire
on and wrap them up in electrical tape with a Cat-5 jack on one end and
an RJ 45 on the other. This way we can just plug-em-in inside the
enclosure when we get to the top of the tower.
Cameron
Randy Cosby wrote:
Looks
Yep, we've seen this too. Ended up being a rogue user on the network that
we had to shutdown from sending spam. Fixed them and it cleared it up after
a little bit.
We are moving all users to their own publics as well as we migrate
everything to PPPoE.
-Original Message-
From:
Well, since it is not a NAT issue, there is probably a better solution.
sa...@jeffcosoho.com wrote:
Yep,
I give up on chasing NAT issues. We just give everyone publics.
Jim
Matt Larsen - Lists wrote:
We are having a problem with certain sites that are rejecting our
customers
RANT
So, as with so much that goes on the lists, not just this one, oh, you
aren't doing it my way so the fix is do it my way. What a bunch of
baloney!!
There are lots of ways to do almost everything we do as ISPs. What
really needs to happen is for people to read the post, think about what
Ahhh, a real answer for Matt.
Jason Hensley wrote:
Yep, we've seen this too. Ended up being a rogue user on the network that
we had to shutdown from sending spam. Fixed them and it cleared it up after
a little bit.
We are moving all users to their own publics as well as we migrate
It's a long term solution. Several short term solutions were also listed.
You either buy public IPs or buy time dealing with NAT.
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
I believe Matt has around 5k subs, maybe I'm wrong. At 5k subs, his cost
per year per IP address is $0.45. That's under $0.04/month. I'd consider
that a reasonable expense.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
REMINDER TO PROVIDE INPUT
WISPA is researching the possibility of putting on a Trade Show this spring.
We put up a survey last week for you to answer basic questions as to what you
would like to see in this show. As of Tuesday we had about 40 responses, far
below the 300+ members and many
oh sorry, that was on the moto list.
---
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 Website:
I want MikroTik to go back to 48VDC!
Randy Cosby wrote:
http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=3t=36191start=0
I'm pulling my hair out and wasting all kinds of money on voltage
regulators to make sure my solar and dc-powered sites don't cause
mikrotik routerboards to go into
I see the same issue. I'm on a satellite internet connection shared
with about 10 people. The satellite carrier does their own NAT and we
all appear as the same IP to the internet. The only fix for me is to
turn on my VPN.
It's not a NAT-failure or NAT mis-configuration issue, but it most
Matt,
Based on an e-mail you sent last month, you have 1,700 subscribers behind a
single IP address. That is excessive over-subscription of a single IP
address. I am surprised that it even works. I suggest that you create a pool
of IP addresses with many IP address - 50 to 200 IP addresses. I
I run NAT, and my answer is to put each tower, or sector in cases where
there is more than one radio on a tower, on it's own public NAT.
That way I only have 20 or so users behind one IP
It also makes it easier to track down DMCA take down notices.
Scott Reed wrote:
RANT
So, as with so
That is what I'm trying to do. Each sector has it's own public IP.
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
I believe that we have fixed this by using the StarOS policy routing to
split up some of our subnets to SourceNAT through a different IP address
on our NAT server.
If we are going to get into the public vs. privates discussion, well
I have used NAT for customer IP addresses from day 1. I
---BeginMessage---
We changed our policy routing statements so that now 8 subnets at a time
are going through a single IP address, and we added more IP addresses to
the public interface of the NAT server. My lead tech says that this
solved the problem.
Matt Larsen
vistabeam.com
Tim
Totally agree dude! Advantanges and disadvanges. Once you have a
large routed network with privates, it sux to convert.
---
Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
WISPA Board Member - wispa.org
Link Technologies, Inc --
That would mean increased cost on the units. People is more interested in
price and MT products not capable of 48VDC and the sale of them caused such
a dip in the 48V MT products that the 48VDC product line became too
expensive to produce due to lack of quantity so choice was either increase
price
Matt,
I find it incredably interesting and clever that you have managed to operate
your network on private IP addresses.
However, the problem you are running into now is one common reason others
have given in to using public IP addresses.
Having public IPs throughout your transport network is
I agree and disagree with you. NAT is good and works well for most home users. I
have issues with consoles and NAT, wherein I have many users who want to game
together, and xbox doesn't let that happen nicely. I hand out 1 public to those
who need it, more for those who want to pay. As for network
NAT is unfortunately not very scalable but also never told is the amount of
subs that are being natted and through how many ips. NAT _IS_ an issue. But
comes down to business model. Do you spend the time for tech support and
issues handling this on an ongoing basis or do you spend the money and
Its relevent to disclose the radio OS type using. (You stated using a R5H a
Mikrotik card, but weren't clear if using Mikrotik OS).
The symptom you are explaining sounds similar to how some of my Mikrotik OS
units had responsed to noise.
Basically they kept dropping speed until they
I took the survey, however it did not allow me to add in other comments. So:
The biggest problem I have with most of these Trade shows is that its a
bunch of sales/marketing guys who have no actual idea how the product
works and cannot answer in depth technical questions. I can get all of
the
AND we spells it gooad twooz!
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 5:39 PM, Tom DeReggi wirelessn...@rapiddsl.netwrote:
Matt,
I find it incredably interesting and clever that you have managed to
operate
your network on private IP addresses.
However, the problem you are running into now is one common
You mean like Image stream ?
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Matt Jenkins
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 4:29 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Time Running Out for Trade Show Survey
I took the survey,
I'd like to see a real good MPLS intro training session. (although not easy
to do in an hour).
That might be a good session to be demonstrated on a Mikrotik, considering
it is a unique feature Mikrotik is offering.
Not that I'm generally a fan to push MT or vendor specific content. There
are
2009/10/28 Tom DeReggi wirelessn...@rapiddsl.net:
Its relevent to disclose the radio OS type using. (You stated using a R5H a
Mikrotik card, but weren't clear if using Mikrotik OS).
The symptom you are explaining sounds similar to how some of my Mikrotik OS
units had responsed to noise.
I was not so happy either when I found out the newest line of MT boards
didn't work on my already functioning 24vdc system. I have however been
successful with a simple LM7818 regulator with a couple of tantalum
caps and a good heatsink to drop voltage from ~26v supply. They are 1
amp, and I am
I'm assuming this is hopeless, but somebody here can probably confirm:
Verizon has fiber running down the dirt road that passes by a grain
leg I'm using. (I'm told it was put in for 911 service to Bath, MI)
Is it possible to have them tap into it and sell bulk bandwidth to
me? For less
Dennis,
On a side note I'd mention that someone on-list had already created a really
neat one, a few years back.
It might make sense to look at that first. I got a copy somewhere. I'll go
look for it, after I finish my last hour of BTOP protests :-)
.
Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL Wireless, Inc
On Wed, 2009-10-28 at 22:08 -0400, Tom DeReggi wrote:
Not that I'm generally a fan to push MT or vendor specific content.
I disagree with your assessment here. More on that below.
There are many venues to get quality MT content for example, I'd rather
WISPA push content that WISPs cant
I was recently quoted $300,000 to break into a long-haul fiber route
(not Verizon), that was to cover the bulk of the equipment costs to
break in and then they could give me a good rate per megabyte.
-Kevin
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 8:50 PM, John Valenti vale...@lir.msu.edu wrote:
I'm assuming
At that rate you could run your own fiber, including license fees for the
poll's or underground.
Nick Olsen
Brevard Wireless
(321) 205-1100 x106
From: Kevin Neal ke...@safelink.net
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 11:12 PM
To: WISPA General
I was told that I needed to be in the $30k/month range before the
long-haul provider I was talking to would consider giving me a port
here So close, but yet so far.
John
Kevin Neal wrote:
I was recently quoted $300,000 to break into a long-haul fiber route
(not Verizon), that was to cover
Did I mention I'd have to run 30+ miles of fiber just to get to this
pop they'd put in?
-Kevin
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 9:14 PM, Nick Olsen n...@brevardwireless.com wrote:
At that rate you could run your own fiber, including license fees for the
poll's or underground.
Nick Olsen
John Vogel wrote:
I was told that I needed to be in the $30k/month range before the
long-haul provider I was talking to would consider giving me a port
here So close, but yet so far.
John
Note: I didn't ask, but I kind of assumed that meant a commit to 1GE @
$30/mbps... Do you suppose
I need a 5.8 Omni to feed some smaller sites via WDS, looking for some
recommendations was hoping for 16 db but can't seem to find any.
Regards
Michael Baird
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
At Digikey or Mouser you should be able to find something similar but
switching type that has a higher efficiency and current rating. I've
used some modules for other voltages and they work great.
Greg
On 10/28/09 10:18 PM, Steve wrote:
I was not so happy either when I found out the newest
Thanks for the comment but you are incorrect, there is a field for your
comments on many of the questions, specifically the one you talked about.
I took the survey, however it did not allow me to add in other comments. So:
The biggest problem I have with most of these Trade shows is that its
I found this interesting.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/10/28/fcc_mulls_tv_spectrum_auction_for_broadband/
The US Federal Communications Commission is considering a plan that
would reclaim some precious airwaves from the country's television
broadcasters and reinvent them as wireless
If I am thinking about the same thing you mention, try satellite accessory
distributors. DSI, Skywalker, and Dow Electronics are just a few that come to
mind.
Scottie
-- Original Message --
From: can...@believewireless.net p...@believewireless.net
I maybe late to chime in, but when I asked about something similar, I heard a
resounding problem with not communicating with the cell provider beforehand. It
seems that if you put a high-end(not a small one like you and I have) repeater
in before talking to the cell provider, you MAY be talking
68 matches
Mail list logo
