Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
That may well be the case, but that doesn't mean anything I said was wrong. Whitespaces still won't go through the mountains. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: "Matt Jenkins" Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2010 2:52 PM To: "WISPA General List" Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC > You might have a lot of pigs, but I am guessing you haven't dealt with > forest. I have areas where it takes a 200ft tower to mostly beat the > foliage. And there are 150ft pine trees every 10-15ft everywhere. > Customers have anywhere from 20 to 100 acre properties. Most customers > cannot see their neighbors house. Also you can travel 1 mile in some > areas and the elevation can change over 1000ft. The next major ridgeline > or mountain is about every 4 miles. > > 900mhz with clean spectrum does not work in most of these areas at less > than 1 mile. Whitespace will make it so a lot of houses in the rural > areas around here (Northern California) can get Internet faster than > 28.8bps dialup. > > Mike Hammett wrote: >> On the contrary, with proper equipment availability, the band will be >> quite >> a benefit, but I suggest that we not underestimate the negatives and >> overestimate the positives. >> >> I would call myself rural, but not desolate. ;-) There's 2400 pigs on >> this >> property, no less than 100k pigs within a 1.5 mile radius, approximately >> 1M >> pigs in the county. >> >> Providing adequate current\next generation speeds to a 100 home >> subdivision >> or town is just as much of a pain due to foliage for me as it is for >> anyone >> else. I'd much rather point a TV sector from an existing tower or two >> than >> construct an 80' tower to overcome foliage before I can use equipment in >> legacy bands. This method reduce the points of failure and permits more >> sophisticated support systems (power backup, backhaul, security, etc.) >> than >> building little towers everywhere I want to serve a few houses. >> >> It also allows me to reach into new markets before I can justify the cost >> of >> setting up a full tower using legacy bands. >> >> >> - >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions >> http://www.ics-il.com >> >> >> >> -- >> From: "Ryan Spott" >> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 1:26 PM >> To: "WISPA General List" >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC >> >>> Mike, >>> >>> I would suggest that you not use this band if it does not meet your >>> needs. >>> I >>> tend to not use 5.8 in my area as 5.8 does not meet my needs. >>> >>> Your needs appear to be different from mine. >>> >>> ryan >>> >>> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Mike Hammett >>> wrote: >>> So we're regressing to a bunch of high powered omnis? Maybe I don't understand how much of a God-send sync is, but if it's that great, why is the default Canopy setup 6x 60* sectors instead of a single omni? (I'm not saying sync is bad, I wish everything had sync). I don't really give a hoot about the higher power. Regular power levels will give me the penetration I need. I'll run out of mbit/s long before I run out of dB. I am aware that more rural areas need the higher power. As many people are looking to penetrate the foliage domain of a populated town or subdivision as there are looking to traverse a sparse forest. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: "Ryan Spott" Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 1:02 PM To: "WISPA General List" Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC > At 20watts, you probably won't need a 15db antenna. :) > > With lightly licensed, you probably won't need a sector. (less > interference). > > With GPS timing (ala moto/cell gear) you will have less self-interference. > ryan > > On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 10:45 AM, Mike Hammett > wrote: > >> My experience is mostly limited to the WISP market (though I'm not >> completely ignorant of other markets). Innovation is always welcome, but >> any sector that delivers approximately 90 degrees and 15 dBi >> performance >> is >> going to be huge. >> >> >> - >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions >> http://www.ics-il.com >> >> >> >> -- >> From: "Mike" >> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 12:39 PM >> To: "'WISPA General List'" >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC >> >>> Have you ever taken a really good look at an FM broadcast antenna? >>> Most >>> are >>> circularly
Re: [WISPA] email issues
No much you can do for NDR backscatter, short of changing their address. I would suggest creating an SPF record for your domain. Frank Muto www.secureemailplus.com - Original Message - From: "RickG" To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2010 10:17 PM Subject: [SPAM][WISPA] email issues > I've got a client whose email (mkfa...@kywifi.com) appears to have > been hijacked for spamming purposes. I'm not sure what to do about it. > Sample email below. Any ideas? Thanks in advance! -RickG > > *** > > From: > To: > Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2010 8:50 PM > Subject: Delivery failure > > >> Message from yahoo.co.jp. >> Unable to deliver message to the following address(es). >> >> : >> Sorry your message to danjiri_girl_san...@yahoo.co.jp cannot be delivered. >> This account has been disabled or discontinued [#102]. >> >> : >> Sorry your message to ytktmm9...@yahoo.co.jp cannot be delivered. This >> account has been disabled or discontinued [#102]. >> >> : >> Sorry your message to yuffieg...@yahoo.co.jp cannot be delivered. This >> account has been disabled or discontinued [#102]. >> >> : >> This user doesn't have a yahoo.co.jp account (y...@yahoo.co.jp) [-5] >> >> : >> This user doesn't have a yahoo.co.jp account >> (yukideschene7...@yahoo.co.jp) [-101] >> >> : >> Sorry your message to yukiko_no...@yahoo.co.jp cannot be delivered. This >> account has been disabled or discontinued [#102]. >> >> : >> Sorry your message to yukimatsuok...@yahoo.co.jp cannot be delivered. This >> account has been disabled or discontinued [#102]. >> >> : >> Sorry your message to yukko_pudd...@yahoo.co.jp cannot be delivered. This >> account has been disabled or discontinued [#102]. >> >> : >> Sorry your message to yumis...@yahoo.co.jp cannot be delivered. This >> account has been disabled or discontinued [#102]. >> >> : >> Sorry your message to yuri...@yahoo.co.jp cannot be delivered. This >> account has been disabled or discontinued [#102]. 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] Stimulus waste
Way to go Matt! On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 9:58 PM, Matt Larsen - Lists wrote: > I filed 32 protests during the first round of the stimulus plan, and > none of them were funded. > > Protest long and protest often. From what I have seen so far, most of > the frivolous projects have been rejected handily. Don't get all > worked up about the "waste" until it finally comes to pass. It was > pretty clear from looking at the first round apps that there were a lot > of stupid, wasteful applications. > > Matt Larsen > vistabeam.com > > > On 4/7/2010 7:29 PM, Jeromie Reeves wrote: >> >> >> >> Thats 26 Y E A R S of my higher end tier of service, per customer. >> >> Why the #3!! do things not get BID out? "Who can do X users for the lowest $" >> I mean come on, that is just horrible. It doesnt even factor in what >> those new users >> will be paying for the service. I need to find out if they have >> applies for my area, I >> manage client networks with qwest dsl and they have been giving some BS about >> upgrading modems (for a /mo fee) when all the sites have adsl2+ modems. Not >> good >> >> >> On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 6:02 PM, Travis Johnson wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> So, as I said since the Broadband Stimulus act was passed, the money >>> will be wasted. Qwest just applied for $467 MILLION dollars to upgrade >>> their DSL infrastructure in my coverage areas. They want to expand and >>> "upgrade the slower 7meg connections" to go up to "12 to 40 megabytes >>> per second". >>> >>> The article says they will increase coverage to 29,922 new customers. >>> That's an average cost of $15,607 PER CUSTOMER. >>> >>> Many of the areas they list (Idaho Falls, Rexburg, Ammon, Blackfoot, >>> Rigby, Shelley, etc.) already have at least 3 providers and some have 4 >>> or 5 provider choices. >>> >>> Let the waste begin :( >>> >>> Travis >>> Microserv >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> 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] Stimulus waste
Do you have the link to do the protests? Travis Microserv Matt Larsen - Lists wrote: > I filed 32 protests during the first round of the stimulus plan, and > none of them were funded. > > Protest long and protest often. From what I have seen so far, most of > the frivolous projects have been rejected handily. Don't get all > worked up about the "waste" until it finally comes to pass. It was > pretty clear from looking at the first round apps that there were a lot > of stupid, wasteful applications. > > Matt Larsen > vistabeam.com > > > On 4/7/2010 7:29 PM, Jeromie Reeves wrote: > >> >> >> >> Thats 26 Y E A R S of my higher end tier of service, per customer. >> >> Why the #3!! do things not get BID out? "Who can do X users for the lowest $" >> I mean come on, that is just horrible. It doesnt even factor in what >> those new users >> will be paying for the service. I need to find out if they have >> applies for my area, I >> manage client networks with qwest dsl and they have been giving some BS about >> upgrading modems (for a /mo fee) when all the sites have adsl2+ modems. Not >> good >> >> >> On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 6:02 PM, Travis Johnson wrote: >> >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> So, as I said since the Broadband Stimulus act was passed, the money >>> will be wasted. Qwest just applied for $467 MILLION dollars to upgrade >>> their DSL infrastructure in my coverage areas. They want to expand and >>> "upgrade the slower 7meg connections" to go up to "12 to 40 megabytes >>> per second". >>> >>> The article says they will increase coverage to 29,922 new customers. >>> That's an average cost of $15,607 PER CUSTOMER. >>> >>> Many of the areas they list (Idaho Falls, Rexburg, Ammon, Blackfoot, >>> Rigby, Shelley, etc.) already have at least 3 providers and some have 4 >>> or 5 provider choices. >>> >>> Let the waste begin :( >>> >>> Travis >>> Microserv >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> 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] Stimulus waste
I filed 32 protests during the first round of the stimulus plan, and none of them were funded. Protest long and protest often. From what I have seen so far, most of the frivolous projects have been rejected handily. Don't get all worked up about the "waste" until it finally comes to pass. It was pretty clear from looking at the first round apps that there were a lot of stupid, wasteful applications. Matt Larsen vistabeam.com On 4/7/2010 7:29 PM, Jeromie Reeves wrote: > > > > Thats 26 Y E A R S of my higher end tier of service, per customer. > > Why the #3!! do things not get BID out? "Who can do X users for the lowest $" > I mean come on, that is just horrible. It doesnt even factor in what > those new users > will be paying for the service. I need to find out if they have > applies for my area, I > manage client networks with qwest dsl and they have been giving some BS about > upgrading modems (for a /mo fee) when all the sites have adsl2+ modems. Not > good > > > On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 6:02 PM, Travis Johnson wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> So, as I said since the Broadband Stimulus act was passed, the money >> will be wasted. Qwest just applied for $467 MILLION dollars to upgrade >> their DSL infrastructure in my coverage areas. They want to expand and >> "upgrade the slower 7meg connections" to go up to "12 to 40 megabytes >> per second". >> >> The article says they will increase coverage to 29,922 new customers. >> That's an average cost of $15,607 PER CUSTOMER. >> >> Many of the areas they list (Idaho Falls, Rexburg, Ammon, Blackfoot, >> Rigby, Shelley, etc.) already have at least 3 providers and some have 4 >> or 5 provider choices. >> >> Let the waste begin :( >> >> Travis >> Microserv >> >> >> >> >> >> 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] Stimulus waste
Thats 26 Y E A R S of my higher end tier of service, per customer. Why the #3!! do things not get BID out? "Who can do X users for the lowest $" I mean come on, that is just horrible. It doesnt even factor in what those new users will be paying for the service. I need to find out if they have applies for my area, I manage client networks with qwest dsl and they have been giving some BS about upgrading modems (for a /mo fee) when all the sites have adsl2+ modems. Not good On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 6:02 PM, Travis Johnson wrote: > Hi, > > So, as I said since the Broadband Stimulus act was passed, the money > will be wasted. Qwest just applied for $467 MILLION dollars to upgrade > their DSL infrastructure in my coverage areas. They want to expand and > "upgrade the slower 7meg connections" to go up to "12 to 40 megabytes > per second". > > The article says they will increase coverage to 29,922 new customers. > That's an average cost of $15,607 PER CUSTOMER. > > Many of the areas they list (Idaho Falls, Rexburg, Ammon, Blackfoot, > Rigby, Shelley, etc.) already have at least 3 providers and some have 4 > or 5 provider choices. > > Let the waste begin :( > > Travis > Microserv > > > > > > 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] Stimulus waste
Hi, So, as I said since the Broadband Stimulus act was passed, the money will be wasted. Qwest just applied for $467 MILLION dollars to upgrade their DSL infrastructure in my coverage areas. They want to expand and "upgrade the slower 7meg connections" to go up to "12 to 40 megabytes per second". The article says they will increase coverage to 29,922 new customers. That's an average cost of $15,607 PER CUSTOMER. Many of the areas they list (Idaho Falls, Rexburg, Ammon, Blackfoot, Rigby, Shelley, etc.) already have at least 3 providers and some have 4 or 5 provider choices. Let the waste begin :( Travis Microserv 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] Outsourced Tech support options?
GTC is the best I have ever talked to about this. Their contact details: Steve Batdorf Technical Sales Specialist sbatd...@ygtc.com 877-948-2266 x 242 www.ygtc.com Nick Olsen wrote: > We are looking for a tech support option for our hotspot users only. > Somewhere to send our hotspot tech support calls to after hours or when > were unavailable. This would be low volume. Any ideas? > > Nick Olsen > Network Engineer / Customer Support > (321) 205-1100 x106 > > > > > > 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] Vyatta?
It all depends on the card as to what a fair price is. We've been buying an Intel based NIC with SFP ports for our MikroTik routers. They come in either PCIx or PCIe form with 2, 4 or 6 port options. They work great. In fact if anyone is interested we currently have a few too many of the PCIe 6 port SFP version. These cost around $800 - $1200 and we can let them go for about half that. They are all new in box never used...just overstocked on them right now. I can also include Multi-Mode SFP fiber modules for a nominal additional charge. Best, Brad -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Justin Wilson Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2010 2:30 PM To: WISPA General List; Tom DeReggi Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vyatta? I just bought a 2 port GigE card for $800 to go in a machine. -- Justin Wilson http://www.mtin.net/blog Wisp Consulting Tower Climbing Network Support From: Tom DeReggi Reply-To: WISPA General List Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2010 15:19:44 -0400 To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vyatta? Well, for that many NIC included, you got a steal. A single 4port Intel oem Gig card PCI-e costs $430 new. (Actually that is probably not true, cause its probably an older model that doesn't have PCI-E nic cards.) Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Tom Sharples" To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 2:10 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vyatta? I picked up the Gateway model, equipped with nine 4-port ethernet expansion boards, for $625 on Ebay. Seems like a good deal altho I don't know what this model costs new with the added ports. Way more than we really need. I'm looking forward to trying it out tho. Tom S. - Original Message - From: "Josh Luthman" To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 9:57 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vyatta? Call support and they can fix your ImageStream issues. Need to push a little bit and use the phone. To this day I've not had a response to my emails without a phone call. On 4/6/10, Scott Lambert wrote: > On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 11:37:54PM -0400, Josh Luthman wrote: >> I really think you'll love ImageStream... > > I don't mind the three living ImageStream TransPort routers we > inherited. Once I changed the editor to default to vi, I was pretty > happy. > > I am not much of a fan of the interface configuration, though it is > currently more flexible and transparent than pfSense for multiple > subnets on the same interface. The shellcmd plugin lets me have a GUI > to get around the current inadaquacy of the interface configuration GUI > of pfSense 1.2.3. > > I do find that I will make a change to the default route on the > Interface Configuration file; it will reload sand; and I will have to > go to bash and route delete default, route add default gateway newip > manually. Or, I will put a new subnet on an interface and can't get > OSPFd to talk on that interface until I reboot the box. > > Just stopping and starting OSPFd didn't work. I don't know if that is > an indication that I have bad hardware or what. Using suspect gear for > your first experience with a platform is probably not the best situation > for figuring out what is what. The other 4 inherited TransPorts all > have one or more blown ethernet ports so I haven't been able to use > them. I can't point to anything on the other three that screams "I'm > busted." > > Having to reboot is really annoying. Having to use the shell to > manually apply desired configuration changes, annoying, but at least > they give me the tools to do it. :-) I like flexibility. > > The biggest problem I have with going whole hog for the ImageStreams is, > it would take me much longer to train guys to run the ImageStreams than > it will take to train them to run pfSense. The secondary problem is > cost : > > pfSense on Alix: $204 3 eth > pfSense on soekris: $275-350 4 eth > > ImageStream on TransPort: $900 new 4 eth > $600 e-bay. 3 eth > > We only do about 20 to 30 Mbps where I will have these deployed. More > horsepower would be wasted. The BGP running pfSense box is a bit > beefier than the Alix boxes, but didn't quite cost as much as a new > TransPort. > >> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 11:34 PM, Scott Lambert >> wrote: >> >> > On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 07:52:41PM -0400, Glenn Kelley wrote: >> > > Scott >> > > >> > > One limitation currently with BGP is you cannot have more than 1 >> > > peer. >> > > I am awaiting that fix myself. >> > >> > In the GUI anyway. >> > >> > 1. mount -u -w / >> > >> > 2. vi config file >> > >> > 3. Don't change the config in the gui again until it gets updated to >> > handle more peers. >> > >> > That's why I love pfSense, if the GUI doesn't support it, I can still >> > make it work. >> > >> > I only need one peer for now. The only reason it needs to speak BGP
Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
You might have a lot of pigs, but I am guessing you haven't dealt with forest. I have areas where it takes a 200ft tower to mostly beat the foliage. And there are 150ft pine trees every 10-15ft everywhere. Customers have anywhere from 20 to 100 acre properties. Most customers cannot see their neighbors house. Also you can travel 1 mile in some areas and the elevation can change over 1000ft. The next major ridgeline or mountain is about every 4 miles. 900mhz with clean spectrum does not work in most of these areas at less than 1 mile. Whitespace will make it so a lot of houses in the rural areas around here (Northern California) can get Internet faster than 28.8bps dialup. Mike Hammett wrote: > On the contrary, with proper equipment availability, the band will be quite > a benefit, but I suggest that we not underestimate the negatives and > overestimate the positives. > > I would call myself rural, but not desolate. ;-) There's 2400 pigs on this > property, no less than 100k pigs within a 1.5 mile radius, approximately 1M > pigs in the county. > > Providing adequate current\next generation speeds to a 100 home subdivision > or town is just as much of a pain due to foliage for me as it is for anyone > else. I'd much rather point a TV sector from an existing tower or two than > construct an 80' tower to overcome foliage before I can use equipment in > legacy bands. This method reduce the points of failure and permits more > sophisticated support systems (power backup, backhaul, security, etc.) than > building little towers everywhere I want to serve a few houses. > > It also allows me to reach into new markets before I can justify the cost of > setting up a full tower using legacy bands. > > > - > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > > -- > From: "Ryan Spott" > Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 1:26 PM > To: "WISPA General List" > Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC > >> Mike, >> >> I would suggest that you not use this band if it does not meet your needs. >> I >> tend to not use 5.8 in my area as 5.8 does not meet my needs. >> >> Your needs appear to be different from mine. >> >> ryan >> >> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Mike Hammett >> wrote: >> >>> So we're regressing to a bunch of high powered omnis? Maybe I don't >>> understand how much of a God-send sync is, but if it's that great, why is >>> the default Canopy setup 6x 60* sectors instead of a single omni? (I'm >>> not >>> saying sync is bad, I wish everything had sync). >>> >>> I don't really give a hoot about the higher power. Regular power levels >>> will give me the penetration I need. I'll run out of mbit/s long before >>> I >>> run out of dB. I am aware that more rural areas need the higher power. >>> As >>> many people are looking to penetrate the foliage domain of a populated >>> town >>> or subdivision as there are looking to traverse a sparse forest. >>> >>> >>> - >>> Mike Hammett >>> Intelligent Computing Solutions >>> http://www.ics-il.com >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> From: "Ryan Spott" >>> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 1:02 PM >>> To: "WISPA General List" >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC >>> At 20watts, you probably won't need a 15db antenna. :) With lightly licensed, you probably won't need a sector. (less interference). With GPS timing (ala moto/cell gear) you will have less >>> self-interference. ryan On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 10:45 AM, Mike Hammett wrote: > My experience is mostly limited to the WISP market (though I'm not > completely ignorant of other markets). Innovation is always welcome, >>> but > any sector that delivers approximately 90 degrees and 15 dBi > performance > is > going to be huge. > > > - > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > > -- > From: "Mike" > Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 12:39 PM > To: "'WISPA General List'" > Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC > >> Have you ever taken a really good look at an FM broadcast antenna? >> Most >> are >> circularly polarized so they can be received by both horizontal and >> vertical >> receive antennas. Even at 90 MHz they aren't that large either. My >> choice >> of sector would be something like that, and would be made of >> aluminum >> parts, >> not panels like we are used to using now. I predict circular >> polarity >> will >> be the norm. Why? Because theoretically, a receive antenna of >> opposite >> circular sense exhibits infinite loss. My experiments have shown >> that >> reality is less, but you C
Re: [WISPA] Vyatta?
I just bought a 2 port GigE card for $800 to go in a machine. -- Justin Wilson http://www.mtin.net/blog Wisp Consulting Tower Climbing Network Support From: Tom DeReggi Reply-To: WISPA General List Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2010 15:19:44 -0400 To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vyatta? Well, for that many NIC included, you got a steal. A single 4port Intel oem Gig card PCI-e costs $430 new. (Actually that is probably not true, cause its probably an older model that doesn't have PCI-E nic cards.) Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Tom Sharples" To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 2:10 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vyatta? I picked up the Gateway model, equipped with nine 4-port ethernet expansion boards, for $625 on Ebay. Seems like a good deal altho I don't know what this model costs new with the added ports. Way more than we really need. I'm looking forward to trying it out tho. Tom S. - Original Message - From: "Josh Luthman" To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 9:57 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vyatta? Call support and they can fix your ImageStream issues. Need to push a little bit and use the phone. To this day I've not had a response to my emails without a phone call. On 4/6/10, Scott Lambert wrote: > On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 11:37:54PM -0400, Josh Luthman wrote: >> I really think you'll love ImageStream... > > I don't mind the three living ImageStream TransPort routers we > inherited. Once I changed the editor to default to vi, I was pretty > happy. > > I am not much of a fan of the interface configuration, though it is > currently more flexible and transparent than pfSense for multiple > subnets on the same interface. The shellcmd plugin lets me have a GUI > to get around the current inadaquacy of the interface configuration GUI > of pfSense 1.2.3. > > I do find that I will make a change to the default route on the > Interface Configuration file; it will reload sand; and I will have to > go to bash and route delete default, route add default gateway newip > manually. Or, I will put a new subnet on an interface and can't get > OSPFd to talk on that interface until I reboot the box. > > Just stopping and starting OSPFd didn't work. I don't know if that is > an indication that I have bad hardware or what. Using suspect gear for > your first experience with a platform is probably not the best situation > for figuring out what is what. The other 4 inherited TransPorts all > have one or more blown ethernet ports so I haven't been able to use > them. I can't point to anything on the other three that screams "I'm > busted." > > Having to reboot is really annoying. Having to use the shell to > manually apply desired configuration changes, annoying, but at least > they give me the tools to do it. :-) I like flexibility. > > The biggest problem I have with going whole hog for the ImageStreams is, > it would take me much longer to train guys to run the ImageStreams than > it will take to train them to run pfSense. The secondary problem is > cost : > > pfSense on Alix: $204 3 eth > pfSense on soekris: $275-350 4 eth > > ImageStream on TransPort: $900 new 4 eth > $600 e-bay. 3 eth > > We only do about 20 to 30 Mbps where I will have these deployed. More > horsepower would be wasted. The BGP running pfSense box is a bit > beefier than the Alix boxes, but didn't quite cost as much as a new > TransPort. > >> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 11:34 PM, Scott Lambert >> wrote: >> >> > On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 07:52:41PM -0400, Glenn Kelley wrote: >> > > Scott >> > > >> > > One limitation currently with BGP is you cannot have more than 1 >> > > peer. >> > > I am awaiting that fix myself. >> > >> > In the GUI anyway. >> > >> > 1. mount -u -w / >> > >> > 2. vi config file >> > >> > 3. Don't change the config in the gui again until it gets updated to >> > handle more peers. >> > >> > That's why I love pfSense, if the GUI doesn't support it, I can still >> > make it work. >> > >> > I only need one peer for now. The only reason it needs to speak BGP is >> > so I can announce a subset of our ARIN space to the transit provider. >> > >> > I've been tempted to just pkg_add quagga. But my long term goal is to >> > not be the only guy here who can manage the network. >> > >> > > I love PFSENSE - Chris has done an awesome job on that project. >> > >> > Durn tootin'. Chris and that other Scott, and Ermal and . . . >> > >> > -- >> > Scott LambertKC5MLE Unix >> > SysAdmin >> > lamb...@lambertfam.org >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> > http://signup.wispa.org/ >> > >> > >> > >> > WISPA Wireless List: wireless
Re: [WISPA] Vyatta?
Well, for that many NIC included, you got a steal. A single 4port Intel oem Gig card PCI-e costs $430 new. (Actually that is probably not true, cause its probably an older model that doesn't have PCI-E nic cards.) Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Tom Sharples" To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 2:10 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vyatta? I picked up the Gateway model, equipped with nine 4-port ethernet expansion boards, for $625 on Ebay. Seems like a good deal altho I don't know what this model costs new with the added ports. Way more than we really need. I'm looking forward to trying it out tho. Tom S. - Original Message - From: "Josh Luthman" To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 9:57 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vyatta? Call support and they can fix your ImageStream issues. Need to push a little bit and use the phone. To this day I've not had a response to my emails without a phone call. On 4/6/10, Scott Lambert wrote: > On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 11:37:54PM -0400, Josh Luthman wrote: >> I really think you'll love ImageStream... > > I don't mind the three living ImageStream TransPort routers we > inherited. Once I changed the editor to default to vi, I was pretty > happy. > > I am not much of a fan of the interface configuration, though it is > currently more flexible and transparent than pfSense for multiple > subnets on the same interface. The shellcmd plugin lets me have a GUI > to get around the current inadaquacy of the interface configuration GUI > of pfSense 1.2.3. > > I do find that I will make a change to the default route on the > Interface Configuration file; it will reload sand; and I will have to > go to bash and route delete default, route add default gateway newip > manually. Or, I will put a new subnet on an interface and can't get > OSPFd to talk on that interface until I reboot the box. > > Just stopping and starting OSPFd didn't work. I don't know if that is > an indication that I have bad hardware or what. Using suspect gear for > your first experience with a platform is probably not the best situation > for figuring out what is what. The other 4 inherited TransPorts all > have one or more blown ethernet ports so I haven't been able to use > them. I can't point to anything on the other three that screams "I'm > busted." > > Having to reboot is really annoying. Having to use the shell to > manually apply desired configuration changes, annoying, but at least > they give me the tools to do it. :-) I like flexibility. > > The biggest problem I have with going whole hog for the ImageStreams is, > it would take me much longer to train guys to run the ImageStreams than > it will take to train them to run pfSense. The secondary problem is > cost : > > pfSense on Alix: $204 3 eth > pfSense on soekris: $275-350 4 eth > > ImageStream on TransPort: $900 new 4 eth > $600 e-bay. 3 eth > > We only do about 20 to 30 Mbps where I will have these deployed. More > horsepower would be wasted. The BGP running pfSense box is a bit > beefier than the Alix boxes, but didn't quite cost as much as a new > TransPort. > >> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 11:34 PM, Scott Lambert >> wrote: >> >> > On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 07:52:41PM -0400, Glenn Kelley wrote: >> > > Scott >> > > >> > > One limitation currently with BGP is you cannot have more than 1 >> > > peer. >> > > I am awaiting that fix myself. >> > >> > In the GUI anyway. >> > >> > 1. mount -u -w / >> > >> > 2. vi config file >> > >> > 3. Don't change the config in the gui again until it gets updated to >> > handle more peers. >> > >> > That's why I love pfSense, if the GUI doesn't support it, I can still >> > make it work. >> > >> > I only need one peer for now. The only reason it needs to speak BGP is >> > so I can announce a subset of our ARIN space to the transit provider. >> > >> > I've been tempted to just pkg_add quagga. But my long term goal is to >> > not be the only guy here who can manage the network. >> > >> > > I love PFSENSE - Chris has done an awesome job on that project. >> > >> > Durn tootin'. Chris and that other Scott, and Ermal and . . . >> > >> > -- >> > Scott LambertKC5MLE Unix >> > SysAdmin >> > lamb...@lambertfam.org >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > 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://s
Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
I probably wont get to it today, but I'll find the google earth overlay that I had that showed it, and post it to the list shortly. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Randy Cosby" To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 12:04 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC > Tom, > > Could you give us a hint how we would find this info? > > Randy > >> It might be a good idea for WISPs to look up their Whitechannel >> availabilty >> in their areas, and determine if VHF channels 1-7 are available in their >> territory or not. >> >> Tom DeReggi >> RapidDSL& Wireless, Inc >> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband >> >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "John Scrivner" >> To: "WISPA General List" >> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 10:16 AM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC >> >> >> >>> I am not sure where you get your assumptions but they are not correct. >>> Every >>> television channel has available 6 MHz of bandwidth and can be modulated >>> with the same amount of data regardless of where the channel resides in >>> the >>> VHF or UHF frequency bands. The limiting factor for these lowest VHF >>> channels is the overall higher noise level which is certainly an issue >>> but >>> not a deal killer for us. I am guessing that our use of the lowest VHF >>> channels would require more forward error correction to provide high >>> quality >>> service. In my opinion this is a minor annoyance to be able to have >>> coverage >>> to 100% of my potential customer base. >>> John Scrivner >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 8:55 AM, Steve Barnes wrote: >>> >>> Mike, though I agree that circular polarization could work. What channel width are you going to need to have a usable system. I mean in the VHF band of 54 Mhz to 88 Mhz the frequency is to slow to have any ability to clock the data through at any worth wile speed. We are supposed to be giving customers more bandwidth and faster service. Yes it would cut through trees and I would love it. But at 2-3X dialup speed? The upper bands are definitely better but then you lower your penetration (>800 Mhz). Someone enlighten me here. Steve Barnes RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 9:24 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC Awesome report! Thanks. Give me equipment capable of 20 watts, circularly polarized sectors, a turnstile antenna on the CPE, and it would be a perfect fit for THIS rural market. At that power level, and circular polarization, I could reuse any channel on the same tower using opposite circular sense. I know some of the discussion in the past on this list led some to believe an antenna would look like a big TV log periodic, but it just isn't so. A TV antenna is by necessity a broadband device, and as such is BIG to handle a RANGE of frequencies. A turnstile or other narrow band antenna could be built to blend with the aesthetics of a home or business. Heck, if this comes to pass, I may go into the antenna building business just for this usage. Friendly Regards, Mike Mike Gilchrist Disruptive Technologist Advanced Wireless Express P.O. Box 255 Toledo, IA 52342 239.770.6203 m...@aweiowa.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Steve Barnes Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 7:41 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC This is a great report good job guys and thank you. Next question. I don't know any of the team personally just from your posts. The picture in the report, can you give us a who's who left to right. Steve Barnes RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 7:17 PM To: memb...@wispa.org; WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC Last Wednesday, March 31, the WISPA FCC Committee assisted by the WISPA Promotions Committee met with top managers of the FCC Office of Engineering and Technology (OET) at FCC Headquarters in Washington D.C. to discuss the status of WISPA's TV Whitespaces filings. The following Members represented WISPA. Ryan Spott, Alex Phillips, Jo
Re: [WISPA] Speaking of Tranzeo......
Well, it's fixed. Turned out to be the Cat5 wire between the CPE and Radio. (The only part we didn't touch / install.) That part was "subbed" out to a local and very reputable cabling company. Never had a problem with their work, so we didn't question it. That, and it worked ok for hours at a time. Weird Now, back to our regularly scheduled emergencies. -Gary- 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] Obama Eyes New Taxes, Fees for National Broadband Network
Double-sigh! Not to feed the trolls but does anyone here think this is a good thing? -RickG On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 7:31 AM, Kurt Fankhauser wrote: > Sigh.. > > > > > > http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/06/obama-administration-targets-inte > rnet-taxation/?test=latestnews > > > > > > > > > > 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] UBNT PowerBridgeM5
Phil, The units we had would not boot unless they were powered using 48V. This also caused us some dramas since our sites had 12V supplies predominantly. The spec sheet of the radio lists a wide input voltage but acording to support our hardware required the 48. The radios were definitely branded Mikrotik from my memory. Pat Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 09:37:55AM -0500, Philip Dorr wrote: > Actually it is a Ubiquti radio and the power supply does not need to > be 48 volts, 9-48 works fine for the Gateworks board (Avila GW2348-2). > We had moisture get in the ethernet jack and burn the pins when it > was using 48 volts, so we switched to a Ubiquti 15 volt adapter and > have not had any problems yet. > > On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 9:07 AM, Patrick Cole wrote: > > I would steer well clear of that UBNT bridge for something as critical > > as you describe. At the price point it just screams disaster. > > > > I've not used the Ligowave MIMO radios however I have used the LigoPTP 5-N > > and I was a little disappointed. The lack of QoS is a definite negative. > > > > We had one of the endpoints on the link burn out and die within 2 months. > > > > I also had major problems with the encryption on them, which support > > never seemed to be able to resolve. When they try to link up, > > it could take like a minute and other times it might take 20 minutes > > before the link establishes with encryption on. Unacceptable in > > a carrier network. > > > > They do however perform at the advertised 70Mbps real world throughput > > in a 40MHz channel and the PPS performance is good. > > > > If you crack open the 5-N you actually see it has a Mikrotik badged > > radio in it. > > > > I have a pair of Proxim Tsunami QB-8100 bridges on the way for > > testing. I didn't get much feedback from the list about how these > > go, but having looked through the manual, they seem extremely > > configurable and excellent QoS features; they even have the ability > > to inspect the contents of PPPoE frames and match on the IP packet > > inside. I will let you know how they turn out. > > > > Pat > > > > Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 09:45:23AM -0400, Steve Barnes wrote: > > > > > >> OK I just got off the phone with a salesman that was discouraging me away > >> from UBNT rockets for this link. I will be running 4 towers through this > >> link with 270 clients. His concern was that they had learned of a 20,000 > >> packet per sec limit compared to Ligowave @ 75,000 packets. Now I am > >> looking at going to VOIP and the Packet count is going to be huge. Is > >> this a legit concern. How can you find Rocket Packet ability. > >> > >> Steve Barnes > >> RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> 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] UBNT PowerBridgeM5
Actually it is a Ubiquti radio and the power supply does not need to be 48 volts, 9-48 works fine for the Gateworks board (Avila GW2348-2). We had moisture get in the ethernet jack and burn the pins when it was using 48 volts, so we switched to a Ubiquti 15 volt adapter and have not had any problems yet. On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 9:07 AM, Patrick Cole wrote: > I would steer well clear of that UBNT bridge for something as critical > as you describe. At the price point it just screams disaster. > > I've not used the Ligowave MIMO radios however I have used the LigoPTP 5-N > and I was a little disappointed. The lack of QoS is a definite negative. > > We had one of the endpoints on the link burn out and die within 2 months. > > I also had major problems with the encryption on them, which support > never seemed to be able to resolve. When they try to link up, > it could take like a minute and other times it might take 20 minutes > before the link establishes with encryption on. Unacceptable in > a carrier network. > > They do however perform at the advertised 70Mbps real world throughput > in a 40MHz channel and the PPS performance is good. > > If you crack open the 5-N you actually see it has a Mikrotik badged > radio in it. > > I have a pair of Proxim Tsunami QB-8100 bridges on the way for > testing. I didn't get much feedback from the list about how these > go, but having looked through the manual, they seem extremely > configurable and excellent QoS features; they even have the ability > to inspect the contents of PPPoE frames and match on the IP packet > inside. I will let you know how they turn out. > > Pat > > Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 09:45:23AM -0400, Steve Barnes wrote: > > >> OK I just got off the phone with a salesman that was discouraging me away >> from UBNT rockets for this link. I will be running 4 towers through this >> link with 270 clients. His concern was that they had learned of a 20,000 >> packet per sec limit compared to Ligowave @ 75,000 packets. Now I am >> looking at going to VOIP and the Packet count is going to be huge. Is this >> a legit concern. How can you find Rocket Packet ability. >> >> Steve Barnes >> RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service >> >> >> >> >> 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] UBNT PowerBridgeM5
We tried using the Bullet5 in a pinch and it choked with about 150 users. I think there is a limitation on ARP entries but I did not have time to confirm. Replaced with Tranzeos and it's been solid since. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2010 7:24 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT PowerBridgeM5 270 customers will squash Ubiquiti if you put that kind of weight on its shoulders. I strongly advise against a "higher end" backhaul. I love MikroTik but at 270 customers, that is kind of iffy in my opinion. I'd probably do it based on the fact that they always work for me and their price point, though. I don't really know what the next step up is, though. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 "Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts." --- Winston Churchill On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 10:07 AM, Patrick Cole wrote: > I would steer well clear of that UBNT bridge for something as critical > as you describe. At the price point it just screams disaster. > > I've not used the Ligowave MIMO radios however I have used the LigoPTP 5-N > and I was a little disappointed. The lack of QoS is a definite negative. > > We had one of the endpoints on the link burn out and die within 2 months. > > I also had major problems with the encryption on them, which support > never seemed to be able to resolve.When they try to link up, > it could take like a minute and other times it might take 20 minutes > before the link establishes with encryption on. Unacceptable in > a carrier network. > > They do however perform at the advertised 70Mbps real world throughput > in a 40MHz channel and the PPS performance is good. > > If you crack open the 5-N you actually see it has a Mikrotik badged > radio in it. > > I have a pair of Proxim Tsunami QB-8100 bridges on the way for > testing. I didn't get much feedback from the list about how these > go, but having looked through the manual, they seem extremely > configurable and excellent QoS features; they even have the ability > to inspect the contents of PPPoE frames and match on the IP packet > inside. I will let you know how they turn out. > > Pat > > Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 09:45:23AM -0400, Steve Barnes wrote: > > > > OK I just got off the phone with a salesman that was discouraging me away > from UBNT rockets for this link. I will be running 4 towers through this > link with 270 clients. His concern was that they had learned of a 20,000 > packet per sec limit compared to Ligowave @ 75,000 packets. Now I am > looking at going to VOIP and the Packet count is going to be huge. Is this > a legit concern. How can you find Rocket Packet ability. > > > > Steve Barnes > > RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service > > > > > > > > > > > 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] UBNT PowerBridgeM5
270 customers will squash Ubiquiti if you put that kind of weight on its shoulders. I strongly advise against a "higher end" backhaul. I love MikroTik but at 270 customers, that is kind of iffy in my opinion. I'd probably do it based on the fact that they always work for me and their price point, though. I don't really know what the next step up is, though. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” --- Winston Churchill On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 10:07 AM, Patrick Cole wrote: > I would steer well clear of that UBNT bridge for something as critical > as you describe. At the price point it just screams disaster. > > I've not used the Ligowave MIMO radios however I have used the LigoPTP 5-N > and I was a little disappointed. The lack of QoS is a definite negative. > > We had one of the endpoints on the link burn out and die within 2 months. > > I also had major problems with the encryption on them, which support > never seemed to be able to resolve.When they try to link up, > it could take like a minute and other times it might take 20 minutes > before the link establishes with encryption on. Unacceptable in > a carrier network. > > They do however perform at the advertised 70Mbps real world throughput > in a 40MHz channel and the PPS performance is good. > > If you crack open the 5-N you actually see it has a Mikrotik badged > radio in it. > > I have a pair of Proxim Tsunami QB-8100 bridges on the way for > testing. I didn't get much feedback from the list about how these > go, but having looked through the manual, they seem extremely > configurable and excellent QoS features; they even have the ability > to inspect the contents of PPPoE frames and match on the IP packet > inside. I will let you know how they turn out. > > Pat > > Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 09:45:23AM -0400, Steve Barnes wrote: > > > > OK I just got off the phone with a salesman that was discouraging me away > from UBNT rockets for this link. I will be running 4 towers through this > link with 270 clients. His concern was that they had learned of a 20,000 > packet per sec limit compared to Ligowave @ 75,000 packets. Now I am > looking at going to VOIP and the Packet count is going to be huge. Is this > a legit concern. How can you find Rocket Packet ability. > > > > Steve Barnes > > RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service > > > > > > > > > > > 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] UBNT PowerBridgeM5
I would steer well clear of that UBNT bridge for something as critical as you describe. At the price point it just screams disaster. I've not used the Ligowave MIMO radios however I have used the LigoPTP 5-N and I was a little disappointed. The lack of QoS is a definite negative. We had one of the endpoints on the link burn out and die within 2 months. I also had major problems with the encryption on them, which support never seemed to be able to resolve.When they try to link up, it could take like a minute and other times it might take 20 minutes before the link establishes with encryption on. Unacceptable in a carrier network. They do however perform at the advertised 70Mbps real world throughput in a 40MHz channel and the PPS performance is good. If you crack open the 5-N you actually see it has a Mikrotik badged radio in it. I have a pair of Proxim Tsunami QB-8100 bridges on the way for testing. I didn't get much feedback from the list about how these go, but having looked through the manual, they seem extremely configurable and excellent QoS features; they even have the ability to inspect the contents of PPPoE frames and match on the IP packet inside. I will let you know how they turn out. Pat Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 09:45:23AM -0400, Steve Barnes wrote: > OK I just got off the phone with a salesman that was discouraging me away > from UBNT rockets for this link. I will be running 4 towers through this link > with 270 clients. His concern was that they had learned of a 20,000 packet > per sec limit compared to Ligowave @ 75,000 packets. Now I am looking at > going to VOIP and the Packet count is going to be huge. Is this a legit > concern. How can you find Rocket Packet ability. > > Steve Barnes > RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service > > > > > 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] UBNT PowerBridgeM5
OK I just got off the phone with a salesman that was discouraging me away from UBNT rockets for this link. I will be running 4 towers through this link with 270 clients. His concern was that they had learned of a 20,000 packet per sec limit compared to Ligowave @ 75,000 packets. Now I am looking at going to VOIP and the Packet count is going to be huge. Is this a legit concern. How can you find Rocket Packet ability. Steve Barnes RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service 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] Obama Eyes New Taxes, Fees for National Broadband Network
Sigh.. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/06/obama-administration-targets-inte rnet-taxation/?test=latestnews 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/
