RE: [WISPA] Photo Cell power

[Brian Webster]

I think DefactoWireless has some, thought I saw something like that when I
looked at their site a while back.



Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com>
Free World Dialup #481416


-Original Message-
From: chris cooper [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 1:42 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: [WISPA] Photo Cell power




Does anyone know where I can lay my hands on some street light photocell
to POE power adapters?

Thanks,
Chris Cooper
Intelliwave

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment

[Brian Webster]

Quoting Tom:

"What often happens, is technical people
make these beautiful products from a technical point of view, but they are
worthless because they don't solve the problems that need to be solved for
its applications, which were the reasons for originally developing the
technology."

Man have you hot the nail on the head!  Motorola is a company that gets
caught in this all the time. I can't tell you how many times over the years
I went to product introduction seminars as a 2 way radio dealer and the lead
engineer would be touting all the cool wiz bang features of the new radio.
It would always happen where a dealer would stand up and ask "does the radio
still do XYZ?" They would get a glassy eyed stare and say "no, that is old
technology and we did not include it in this model" The follow up statement
from the dealer would be " do you realize that 80% of our customer base
still uses this technology, what do we tell them?" and the engineer would
say " They will need to upgrade to the new technology". My take on this was
that they spent so much time patting themselves on the back in the lab with
their new toys that they never researched what the customer wanted and
needed to solve their communication problem. Typical Motorola attitude, they
will tell the customer what they need or what they will be
getting...They still have not learned this lesson...which is too
bad because they do have the ability to make great products and great
radios.


Brian

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Basic Mesh Theory

[Brian Webster]

Jack,
Let me jump in with some more thoughts on wireless mesh:

I agree with you that RF engineering and RF limitations are not being 
fully
considered in most mesh deployments. Most mesh designs I have seen are
theory based and assume the full use of the unlicensed spectrum at hand.
This will never be the case and therefore limits the overall capacity. I saw
an RFP from the city of Miami Beach and they had done a pre-survey of the
city and found the noise floor at 2.4 GHz at -70 db in most areas. Now how
is one going to deploy a mesh network with the ability to overcome that?
Typical answer is build more nodes closer to each other so these PDAs and
laptops get enough signal. This ignores the fact that all of these close
spaced nodes then create more noise for each other because they are mounted
at a height where they hear each other. In high density nodes even having 2
hops will bring these networks to their knees. There is not enough spectrum
to make it work and be able to load the network up. An 802.11b based system
can not deal with the hidden node problem effectively enough. Even if you do
have all the internode traffic on other frequencies at the high density
placement required in most cities, the spectrum limits are still a big issue
to have the channels to link all the nodes. I would still like to hear of a
mesh network from any manufacturer that has been deployed and has a high
density of users that are the kids of today. I want to see what bit torrent,
VOIP and audio streaming do to a mesh in multiple hops. While we can make
the argument that those services can be limited, that is only a band-aid
approach as today's society is going to expect to be able to use these
services in one form or another, it may take a while but it will be
necessary. The cellular companies are already creating the expectation for
this kids to be able to audio stream on demand. If someone has knowledge of
a loaded mesh network please let me know. Don't get me wrong, I love the
idea of mesh and wish it could work and want to see it work. It's just that
I've been in ham radio since 1989 and was in to the packet radio technology,
we as hams built networks where we dealt with all of these issues (I know it
was only 1200 baud but the problems remain).  There are two major problems
in mesh from my viewpoint. One, if you have a carrier sense based collision
avoidance system, you always have limited capacity because only one radio
can talk at a time (part of the HDX problem). Two, if you do not have a
carrier sense based system then you can overcome noise with a stronger
signal. This causes cell site shrinkage or breathing and changes the
coverage area. Most people deal with this by building transmitters closer to
each other, problem is that there is limited unlicensed spectrum which is
not enough room for most systems to deal with this.
I really would like to see mesh work and hope to be proven wrong. There 
is
a lot of promise in mesh implementations out there but until I have seen
them under residential internet use loads I remain skeptical.



Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com>



-Original Message-
From: Jack Unger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 1:46 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Basic Mesh Theory


Jeromie,

You raise some good points... and here are some more differences between
Matt's fully-meshed WIRED network example and the real-world conditions
under which WIRELESS mesh networks are so often deployed today.

1) REROUTING - Only a node failure or a high peak traffic load would
normally force a routing path change on a fiber/copper network. On a
wireless mesh, routing path changes will also result from interference
caused by other same-network nodes, interference from other networks,
and interference from other wireless non-network sources. Routing path
changes will also be caused by the movement of obstructions and other
rf-reflective objects such as trees and vehicles.

2. CAPACITY - Fiber/copper networks typically start out with
high-capacity (compared to wireless) full-duplex links. Wireless mesh
networks start out with low-capacity half-duplex links.

3. CONNECTIVITY - Fiber/copper mesh network nodes have two or more paths
to other nodes. "Real-world" wireless mesh networks may contain nodes
that, in some cases (the traditional "mesh" definition not withstanding)
only have a path to one other node. For example, obstructions may block
paths to all but one (or even no) other nodes.

4. ENGINEERING - Fiber/copper mesh networks are typically properly
engineered for traffic-carrying capacity, QoS, latency, etc.
"Real-world" wireless mesh networks are typically deployed in near-total
ignorance of the Layer 1 (wireless layer) conditions. That's the great
attraction (IMHO) of  muni-mesh networking today. These networks are
thrown up in

RE: [WISPA] Basic Mesh Theory

[Brian Webster]

As I recall the 60 GHz band has the problem of major attenuation because the
oxygen molecules resonate at 60 GHz which means normal free space loss
linear calculations have an anomaly at that range (which is why there is so
much spectrum for unlicensed use). You make an excellent point about all the
other spectrum available. The problem is we also have to look at the
business case of these networks on these frequencies. Since you do not have
any chipsets being produced in the millions for these bands there will never
be an affordable solution here. Unfortunately (or fortunately) the only
reason our industry has been one that could remotely be profitable has been
because of the consumer devices that have been adapted due to the cost
factor. Traditionally microwave radio equipment has been expensive and
mostly due to the almost hand made process for each radio since demand is so
low. It's the whole job without experience argument...



Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com>



-Original Message-
From: Jeromie Reeves [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 3:04 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Basic Mesh Theory


So how much spectum is needed? 24ghz is fairly clean, 60 ~ 70 is very
clean. The problem is NOT the lack of spectrum. It
is the lack of gear for the spectrum that would do well for mesh. Low
range (oh noes low range!) high bandwidth and low noise.
The short range will help with self interferance a lot. The 7ghz (yes,
seven ghz of band space) is enough for 56 100mhz channels
that are non over lapping channels with a 12.5mhz upper/lower gard band,
then toss in cross pol. Ive seen some gear for this
band but it is to costly right now for what it does. We need a SoC with
2 or 4 radios, 50~100mhz per radiowith a 2nd seup with
2 ~4 radios ad 200~400mhz per radio.

Jeromie


Jack Unger wrote:

> Brian,
>
> Exactly. You hit the nail on the head. The high noise levels combined
> with not enough license-free frequency space combined with
> unrealistically high traffic-handling expectations is going to doom
> most  public Wi-Fi-based municipal networks to extinction while at the
> same time, polluting the license-free spectrum that a responsible,
> RF-smart, wireless ISP could have used to deliver reliable service to
> some subset (limited by the available license-free frequency space) of
> that city's citizens.
>
> Maybe the RF-smart WISPs will decide to reach out to their cities and
> make a case for working together to improve public wireless broadband
> access. If WISPs don't work with their city, then the city usually
> turns to a mesh vendor who will, in most cases, promise more than the
> technology (for the reasons you pointed out) can deliver. Even worse,
> large cities are turning to the Earthlinks and Googles of the world,
> as if the Earthlink or Google name is somehow going to bend physics
> and make these networks work. A big corporate name, as we all should
> know by now, does not change the way that RF propagates, or the way
> that interference and spectrum pollution slows down network performance.
>
> Thank you for sharing your thoughts,
>   jack
>
> Brian Webster wrote:
>
>> Jack,
>> Let me jump in with some more thoughts on wireless mesh:
>>
>> I agree with you that RF engineering and RF limitations are not
>> being fully
>> considered in most mesh deployments. Most mesh designs I have seen are
>> theory based and assume the full use of the unlicensed spectrum at hand.
>> This will never be the case and therefore limits the overall
>> capacity. I saw
>> an RFP from the city of Miami Beach and they had done a pre-survey of
>> the
>> city and found the noise floor at 2.4 GHz at -70 db in most areas.
>> Now how
>> is one going to deploy a mesh network with the ability to overcome that?
>> Typical answer is build more nodes closer to each other so these PDAs
>> and
>> laptops get enough signal. This ignores the fact that all of these close
>> spaced nodes then create more noise for each other because they are
>> mounted
>> at a height where they hear each other. In high density nodes even
>> having 2
>> hops will bring these networks to their knees. There is not enough
>> spectrum
>> to make it work and be able to load the network up. An 802.11b based
>> system
>> can not deal with the hidden node problem effectively enough. Even if
>> you do
>> have all the internode traffic on other frequencies at the high density
>> placement required in most cities, the spectrum limits are still a
>> big issue
>> to have the channels to link all the nodes. I would still like to
>> hear 

RE: [WISPA] Mikrotik MUM - whose going?

[Brian Webster]




It would be 
better if you could get him to do the presentation with a beer in his hand after 
he worked all day in the hot sun hanging radios in hurricane ravaged conditions. 
Then you'll get the real skinny on what you should be doing:-) And I'll bet 
you hear him say "and I'm gonna tell you somethin" at least once. Seriously his 
discussion will be a good one on this, for those of us that went down there it 
was a life altering experience. We all learned a lot and we learned that there 
still is good in our fellow man.
 
Thank You,
Brian Webster

 
 -Original Message-From: 
Carl A Jeptha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 
2006 9:41 PMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: Re: [WISPA] 
Mikrotik MUM - whose going?
That explains 
  everything?  :-D 
  You have a Good Day now,


Carl A Jeptha
http://www.airnet.ca
office 905 349-2084
Emergency only Pager 905 377-6900
skype cajeptha
Mac Dearman wrote: 
  



I forgot to mention that I will be giving a 30 minute 
presentation on the Katrina relief efforts that 5th at 1:30  - - - - - 
you better bring your pillow :-)
 
 
Mac DearmanMaximum Access, LLC.Authorized Barracuda 
ResellerMikroTik RouterOS Certifiedwww.inetsouth.comwww.mac-tel.uswww.RadioResponse.org (Katrina 
Relief)Rayville, La.318.728.8600 
318.303.4227318.303.4229
 
 
 
 

  - 
  Original Message - 
  From: 
  JohnnyO 
  To: 
  WISPA General 
  List 
  Sent: 
  Wednesday, March 01, 2006 12:51 PM
  Subject: 
  Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik MUM - whose going?
  oh jeez - there goes the neighborhood - Someone call ahead 
  to the Texas Rangers to let them know ! JohnnyOOn Wed, 
  2006-03-01 at 12:04 -0500, Carl A Jeptha wrote: 
  If none of your other deserving Katrina assistants wants one I'll take one.

You have a Good Day now,


Carl A Jeptha
http://www.airnet.ca
office 905 349-2084
Emergency only Pager 905 377-6900
skype cajeptha



Mac Dearman wrote:
> Mikrotik is holding their first ever U.S. MUM (MikroTik Users 
> Meeting)  in Dallas, TX, May 4-5th, 2006. There will also be a 
> training class scheduled for the three days prior to MUM.
>
>  I have a few free passes due to Katrina work  - -  any takers?
>
>
> More info here:
> http://mum.mikrotik.com/
>
>
> Mac Dearman
> Maximum Access, LLC.
> Authorized Barracuda Reseller
> MikroTik RouterOS Certified
> www.inetsouth.com
> www.mac-tel.us
> www.RadioResponse.org (Katrina Relief)
> Rayville, La.
> 318.728.8600
> 318.303.4227
> 318.303.4229
>
>
>
>
>
> - Original Message - From: "Mark Koskenmaki" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org>
> Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 5:08 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Sales & Marketing of Unlicensed Wireless Services 
> --SomeObservations
>
>
>> Quote:  "> IT'S OBVIOUSLY MORE THAN "JUST" TECHNOLOGY... "
>>
>> yes, it is.   More to the point, it's about meeting your customer's 
>> needs or
>> wants.
>>
>> Not shoving things at them they don't need or want, but genuinely
>> discovering what it is that sparks them to buy in the first place.
>>
>> I desperately need a GOOD VOIP wholesale deal, where I own the 
>> customer and
>> do frontline support, it's my own brand (if I brand it) and I merely  
>> bulk
>> buy minutes, numbers, and CPE.I can't sell my customers a 400 minute
>> account that costs me 25 bucks a month.  They can buy Packet8 for 
>> less than
>> most resell deals.
>>
>> I'd rather just bundle a VOIP service in a higher level tier (let's move
>> from 38 / mo to 55 or 60/mo ) of service, but needs to be affordable 
>> for me
>> to do.   Still, nobody's offering this kind of service, that I can find.
>> Either it is sold as raw products (requiring me to build a whole VOIP 
>> system
>> for my customers use) or as higher than retail priced "wholesale" 
>> programs.
>>
>> What I really need, then, is someone who does more of the backend stuff
>> (including providing e911)  but does so in mass quantity, and doesn't
>> "touch" my customer.
>>
>> I've also found that pc service can be a good side venture, but I'm not
>> convinced that we can actually compete on price with the computer 
>> store. If
>> we're busy, it's better value for our time to install and support our 
>> own
>> services.
>>
>> Just random thoughts on the topic...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> North East Oregon Fastnet

RE: [WISPA] VoIP/PBX Gateway appliance

[Brian Webster]

I might be inclined to say it may be a loser in the future. I just read an 
article in a Telco trade magazine that announced a software package that can 
sniff SIP packets and give real time information for billing based on an IBM 
server. In that same article they talked about how they could limit or stop any 
SIP traffic from any provider if they wanted, but the thing that caught my eye 
was how they mentioned they could tell things like termination points and 
delivery charges. This is just like the current Telco model. If they start 
pushing VOIP to a typical Telco model (and they should from their point of view 
to level the playing field and raise the cost of doing VOIP) then the 
regulatory and call delivery costs will go up and the cost benefit starts to go 
down. It is an interesting point of view and worth keeping an eye on. The way 
they were able to shove the 911 thing down the VOIP operators throats in such 
short order makes me wonder if they won't do the same thing with termination 
charges based on IP and packets like they do with copper now.



Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com> 



-Original Message-
From: Jason Hensley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 1:25 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] VoIP/PBX Gateway appliance


For someone like me who is currently looking at getting into the VoIP 
business, why is it that you feel VoIP will be a long-term loser?  I have 
just started my research into what it will take to provide this so I'm a 
little behind on it, but I'm definately interested in all opinions and 
options.

Thanks!



- Original Message - 
From: "Matt Liotta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 12:09 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] VoIP/PBX Gateway appliance


> Primus/Lingo is calling every WISP in the country trying to sign them up 
> for a very CommPartners like deal. All of these VoIP providers are using 
> the same shitty model that will be worthless in 2 years time. There is no 
> money to be made in VoIP short-term unless you operate your own equipment. 
> Long-term, there is no money to be made in VoIP at all. VoIP will soon be 
> a loss leader; plan for it or do get into the VoIP business.
>
> BTW, Primus makes all their money on international termination. The 
> domestic stuff is losing money hand over fist.
>
> -Matt
>
> John Scrivner wrote:
>
>> Primus tells me they are more than a VOIP company and that they do make 
>> money. They impressed me in my dealings with them. Can you share more 
>> about your information about Primus? I have a big interest in knowing 
>> anything I can about them right now.
>> Thanks,
>> Scriv
>>
>>
>> Peter R. wrote:
>>
>>> You haven't seen it yet, because Lingo is not profitable yet.
>>> Primus owns Lingo and Primus is basically an International VOIP company.
>>>
>>> Like so many VOIP Providers, they are still trying to figure out how to 
>>> make a profit.
>>>
>>> Delta3 (which is the backend for VZ's VoiceWing) made $9.1M in revenue 
>>> in 4Q05 and just $22k in income.
>>>
>>> Vonage has a customer acquisition cost that is 20 times their MRC.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Peter
>>>
>>>
>>> Jonathan Schmidt wrote:
>>>
>>>> I've been personally delighted with two years of Lingo giving me
>>>> unlimited USA/Canada/EUROPE calling on 7 lines each for $19.95/month
>>>> and an unusually rich set of features (like e-mailing me compressed WAV
>>>> files of all incoming voicemails, etc.).
>>>>  Now, that's retail w/box and support.
>>>>  I've taken the box on trips and routed it through my laptop Ethernet 
>>>> while
>>>> the laptop is on a V.32 dialup and it works but sounds kind of like a 
>>>> cell
>>>> phone but having my local number with me in Europe and having unlimited
>>>> free calls throughout Europe from Europe or Eastern Europe for ZERO
>>>> additional cost is kinda cool.
>>>>  It's SIP but they keep promising a soft phone for the line, like 
>>>> Vonaga, but
>>>> haven't seen it yet.
>>>>  . . . j o n a t h a n
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
> -- 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Motorola StarPoint 6000

[Brian Webster]




Johnny,
    Can you give me more details on what you have. Is this 2 GHz stuff 
(probably 1800-1900 MHz)? I have a local county here who uses what I think is 
Starpoint but not sure. They are running out of spare cards and such and might 
be interested. I think this was used a lot in older public safety networks and 
other microwave projects like utility companies. It was mostly for radio 
networks and remote control. There may be a need on the used 2 way radio market 
for these items. If you can pull a little more information on what you have, 
specifically models and cards in the racks it may be of some use for the 2 way 
shops who maintain older systems and are having a hard time getting spare 
parts.
 
Thank You,
Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

  -Original Message-From: JohnnyO 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 9:28 
  PMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: [WISPA] Motorola 
  StarPoint 6000I've aquired 24-26 full racks of Motorola 
  Starpoint equipment - Does anyone know of who may be using this. Someone 
  mentioned they are using this equipment in Africa ??Any 
  suggestions are welcome JohnnyO
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] YDI AP-Plus Power Supply

[Brian Webster]

As I recall 
that is correct if you are using the POE adapter. I just worked on a unipop with 
an AMP that had one.
 
Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com

  -Original Message-From: Mark Nash 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 1:45 
  PMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: [WISPA] YDI AP-Plus 
  Power Supply
  Anyone know what power supply specs I'd need for 
  a YDI AP-Plus (the older kind with the card slots)?  I'm removing it from 
  a WiPOP-In-A-Box which has built-in power supplies.  I think it's 
  48vdc.
   
  Thanks.
  Mark NashNetwork 
  EngineerUnwiredOnline.Net350 Holly StreetJunction City, OR 
  97448http://www.uwol.net541-998-541-998-5599 
  fax
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

[WISPA] Patrick Leary contact number

[Brian Webster]

Does anyone have Patrick's contact info, I lost it again.


Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] GPS Recievers

[Brian Webster]

Dan,
I like the Garmin product line. To get the best accuracy for a 
reasonable
price look for devices that have WAAS. This is a secondary differential
correction signal sent from Geostationary birds on each coast. It does not
always work but for the price it gets you real close. You should be able to
get accuracy to 20 feet or better in most situations.



Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com>



-Original Message-
From: Dan Petermann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2006 2:46 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] GPS Recievers


I'm looking for very good GPS receivers.

I've used Trimble in the past and found them to be very good, but
expensive. That was back in 1998 - 2001.

I'd like to get sub-meter accuracy if the price is right.  When
dealing with mountain tops and ridge lines,  100' off  can put you at
the bottom of a cliff.

Any recommendations?
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] FW: [TVWHITESPACE] This morning's senate hearing on the TV white spaces and the growing political importance of 802.22...

[Brian Webster]

Here is an 
idea to combat the interference worries. Why don't we suggest the use of the 
methods just approved for the 5.4 GHz band for avoiding the Radar 
operations. If this system is good enough to protect the federal government 
systems it should be good enough for all those people who still watch TV off the 
air (and I have to laugh about that one, those broadcasters don't rely on off 
the air signals to get the masses, it's cable TV)? Just a thought. Remember 
my offer to help this proposal with mapping support still 
stands.
 
Thank You,
Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

  -Original Message-From: Ron Wallace 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 5:15 
  PMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: Re: [WISPA] FW: 
  [TVWHITESPACE] This morning's senate hearing on the TV white spaces and the 
  growing political importance of 802.22...
  So Rick, Marlon & Scriv
  Where do we go from here?  Here is a copy of a letter I sent to Mich 
  Senators Levin & Stabenow, fyi.
  My name is Ron Wallace, I have been a long time supporter of 
Senator Levin and appreciate his good work in the 
  Senate.
  I am writing you today to ask for your support for the present 
legislation before the Senate regarding the unlicensed use of unused 
Broadcast Television frequency bandwidth by wireless internet service 
providers (WISPs).  I operate a WISP in Lenawee County Michigan.  
Providing adequate signal coverage to my rural service area is difficult at 
best using the existing unlicensed ISM, and UNII frequency bands (900 Mhz, 
2.45 Ghz & 5.2-5.8 Ghz).  These bands are severly attenuated by 
arboreal foliage (greatly decreased by trees & shrubbery), limiting our 
ability to reach rural subscribers.
  In these days of industrial contraction in Michigan, our small 
manufacturers that support the auto industry are being severely 
affected.  More people are beginning to work at home in these rural 
areas. Western Lenawee County is no exception.
  The bills are the Wireless Innovation Act of 2006 (WINN Act), S 
2327, introduced by Senators Allen (R-VA), Kerry (D-MA), Sununu (R-NH) and 
Boxer (D-CA) and the American Broadband for Communities Act (ABC Act), S 
2332, introduced by Commerce Committee Chairman Ted 
  Stevens.
  We need the Senators support of this critical legislation to 
ensure growth, and economic vitality in our County.  I look forward to 
your support and you may count on my continued support of the important work 
that Senator Levin continues to do in the US Senate.Ron WallaceHahnron, Inc.220 S. Jackson 
Dt.Addison, MI 49220Phone: (517)547-8410Mobile: 
(517)605-4542e-mail: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED]
  
according to Jim Snyder we need to "refute MSTV's detailed engineering 
attack on the white spaces proposals".  What do you all 
recommend?  
How may I assist?>-Original Message->From: 
Rick Harnish [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Sent: Tuesday, March 
14, 2006 02:40 PM>To: ''WISPA General List''>Subject: [WISPA] 
FW: [TVWHITESPACE] This morning's senate hearing on the TV white spaces and 
the growing political importance of 802.22...>>More 
FYI.>>Rick Harnish>President>OnlyInternet 
Broadband & Wireless, Inc.>260-827-2482 
Office>260-307-4000 Cell>260-918-4340 
VoIP>www.oibw.net>[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > 
>>>-Original Message->From: FCC NPRM for 
UHF TV Band Unlicensed Use On Behalf Of Jim Snider>Sent: Tuesday, 
March 14, 2006 2:10 PM>Subject: [TVWHITESPACE] This morning's senate 
hearing on the TV white spaces>and the growing political importance 
of 802.22...>>I attended this morning's senate hearing on 
wireless policy 
(see>http://commerce.senate.gov/hearings/witnesslist.cfm?id=1709) and 
thought>that Kevin Kahn's verbal statement in support of unlicensed 
use of the>TV white spaces was excellent. Here is a link to the 
written statement,>which I have not read: 
http://commerce.senate.gov/pdf/kahn-031406.pdf.>Jeannine Kenney from 
Consumers Union also provided a strong endorsement>of unlicensed use 
of the TV spaces. Even the GAO's representative,>JayEtta Hecker was 
quite supportive of the white spaces proposal. >>On the other 
hand, MSTV and PFF came out swinging against it. But it is>noteworthy 
that none of the senators badmouthed the white spaces>proposal and 
Senators Lautenberg, Allen, and Kerry gave it vigorous>endorsements, 
with even Committee Chair Stevens (who has one of the two>pro white 
spaces bills) speaking out in favor of it. The most 
eloquent>statement was by Lautenberg.>>As a practical 
matter, the biggest

RE: [WISPA] Adzilla & Revenue Streams -- Amen

[Brian Webster]

Amen Brother Tom! We'll get you to stand up with brother Matt Larsen at
the next tent revival. You had me in stitches on the floor about being the
one to be every other persons risk taker, been there done that. Keep your
course, it does get better. Just take a couple of nights and knock off
early, by 11 PM or so and your head will start to clear and feel better.
Great Rant.



Thank You,
Brian Webster

-Original Message-
From: Tom DeReggi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 8:16 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Adzilla & Revenue Streams


Peter,

No need to respond to most of your post, as your points were fair and made
sense to me. However a couple comments.

> if you have ever tried to hire sales people you know that it is
> challenging

I have, and failed miserably. I recognize its not easy. However, my weakness
shouldn't effect others from succeeding at it, that are better trained in
those skill sets.  Someone in the sales business needs to be good at it.

> Is it just me or are many of your posts written in outrage or disbelief?

Depends how you are directing that comment. On average I feel my on-list
comments are fair, objective, and realistic.
However, recently, I realize that I may have been a little easy to offend,
and a little quick to respond in outrage.
Recently, I've been under tremendous pressure, and have had little patience
because of it, and possibly taken my daily frustrations out on those around
me.
For that, I appologize, and ask for understanding.

However, if I stop for a second and analyze myself, and where the outrage
comes from... Its not that I'm an unreasonable person nor that the people
I'm conversing with are unreasonable.  I think it comes from the constant
reminder of several point of views that every one seems to think that
everyone should get paid except for me. That nobody should have to foot the
bill upfront, except me.  That they shouldn't have to take risk in their
business venture, but I should to be a part of it. That their part of the
partnership has more value than mine.  And that by being a small provider I
am in some way inadequate or less desirable to do business with than the
next guy.  And that as a Small guy I am a liabilty, not an asset.   It
doesn't matter what side of the fense I sit. If I'm the customer, the
provider doesn't want to take the risk, If I'm the provider, the customer
doesn't want to take the risk. Its always me that bends to make it all work.
I'm tired of bending, because I have recognized my worth, and no longer
should have to. If I have primarilly download data, they want to sell me
transit. If I primarilly have upload data they want to turn me into a peer
and charge me to send them traffic. Either way they want to get paid.  I
just get tired of hearing the message.  I need to establish business
ventures that guarantee that I get paid. Nobody has directly said these
things to me, but its inferred by their daily actions. And when I say "I", I
don't only mean "me", I mean small WISP. There is so much potential in the
small WISP market, if it was only recognized. The same arguement applies to
bankers and financers to. They are looking for the sure thing. Well business
isn't a sure thing.  Think about it for a second. Even our own government
shares this view. If there is any organization in the country that should be
investing and partnering in Wireless companies, its the federal governement,
or local governements for economic development. Even they are getting on the
bandwagon crying "No Tax Dollars Used", make the WISPs come up with the cash
to provide the FREE network to consumers.  What do you do when your own
governement says" Come Earthlink, Come AOL, Come Verizon, you are our only
hope, we need your money?"  Its not jeolousy, envy, or hatred of the big
guys, Its jsut the small guy get overlooked to easilly. I'm just tired of
hearing it.  Small business is an intricate part of American economy, and we
have an aweful lot to offer the world in value. Small Business is NOT a bad
word.  Small businesses should be helping small businesses succeed. I simply
believe that it is my job to stand up for what we WISPs have to offer. And
prove our value. I've taken the first step by investing everything I own in
being a small WISP, because I see the value.  I think the rest of the world
should also recognize the value. I don't want to appologize for WISPs
because most are still small. I want to demand that they are recognized for
full value.  You bring the arguement up, "its hard to hire sales people",
well I have the same problem, I have to find a way to do it to succeed.
Does that mean I turn away $50 residential subs when I'm searching for the
big $800 a month subs? I think WISPS need to start setting the presidence of
their valu

RE: [WISPA] Is this real? More unlicensed bands?

[Brian Webster]

John,
Just off the top of my head this may be for RFID type devices looking at
the description of the services that might use it. I think I recall some
activity a while ago trying to increase the power levels for RFID systems.
The collision avoidance systems they speak of may be back-up types for large
vehicles and or smart highway/car systems. Just a thought.



Thank You,
Brian Webster

-Original Message-
From: John Scrivner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2006 6:27 PM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] Is this real? More unlicensed bands?


I cannot believe I have never read about this before. Is it an April
Fool's joke? According to the sources I have seen this was released a
couple of years back. Can anyone confirm or deny the validity of this
information? Does anyone have a link that leads to a description of
exactly what can and cannot be done with these bands if it is real? I
know it is indicating UWB but this does not appear to be the only thing
it is limited to i I am reading this right.
Many thanks,
Scriv

 From December 24, 2004:

* FCC Permits New Unlicensed UWB Devices*
* ** *The FCC adopted new rules to permit unlicensed wideband devices in
the 6 GHz, 17 GHz and 24 GHz bands. Specifically, the FCC amended its
rules for general Part 15 unlicensed operations that use wide bandwidths
but are not classified as UWB devices under its rules. It increased the
peak power limits and reduced the unwanted emission levels for 3
frequency bands that were already available for unlicensed operation:
5925-7250 MHz, 16.2-17.2 GHz, and 23.12-29 GHz, and indicated that
higher peak power limits in these bands would facilitate wideband
operations such as short range communications, collision avoidance,
inventory control and tracking systems. The Commission also amended its
measurement procedures to permit frequency hopped, swept frequency, and
gated systems operating within these bands to be measured in their
normal operating mode.

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes

[Brian Webster]

Jack,
I hate to say it but didn't we say I told you so There is just 
not
enough spectrum to design networks like this to work with anything but
dedicated CPE devices with outdoor antennas. Simply flooding an area with
more signal to let laptops inside a house work will not solve the problem.
It just creates more noise on already maxed out spectrum. I really wish the
vendors and project stalwarts would admit this is a problem with these
networks and not gloss it over. Self interference and outside interference
are always going to be huge problems in these muni-networks. Everyone trying
to build on the fact that off the shelf consumer devices can access this
network will be the downfall. Wi-fi was never designed for a massive outdoor
deployment such as this and when you try to make up for the fact that you do
not have control over the CPE when it comes to proper RF planning you are
doomed to failure. Just my 2 cents.



Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com>


-Original Message-
From: Jack Unger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 10:29 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes


Unfortunately, this may be one of the first of many such muni problems
that I've been forcasting for years. Muni wireless can be done correctly
and WISPs (IMHO) should always try (when allowed) to play a positive
role in proper network design and operation however most muni networks
are incorrectly designed by people with limited wireless experience
(yes, that even includes some mesh network vendors) which will lead to
network failure, waste of taxpayer money, and possible loss of jobs on
the part of the city IT folks (not to mention the elected officials) who
backed the networks without first learning about how wireless technology
really works.
   jack

George wrote:
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060424/ap_on_hi_te/muni_wi_fi_hiccups
>
> I am not a fan of muni wireless.
>
> George

--
Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993
Author of the WISP Handbook - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs"
True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting
Our next WISP Workshops are April 12-13 and April 26-27
Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220  www.ask-wi.com



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes

[Brian Webster]

Amen brother Matt! Excellent points and most of the reality of the muni
systems.



Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com>


-Original Message-
From: Matt Larsen - Lists [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 12:17 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes


George,

Unfortunately, every time that the public hears about problems with a
wifi network (muni or otherwise) it is going to reflect badly on all of
us.  After reading the article, it is pretty clear that the writer
picked out one sorehead and blew his problems up into something big.
The Bells want the Muni-Broadband efforts to fail badly, and they have
the added side benefit of making WISPs look bad in the process.

After having an opportunity to visit with Esme Vos of muniwireless.org
and several other community wireless advocates at the Freedom to Connect
conference, it is pretty clear that we should be embracing
muniwireless.  They need us badly - specifically our real-world
experience and in the field capability.  Many of the munis are being fed
a long line of bs from vendors and stories like this one out of St.
Cloud are going to be trumpeted as examples of muniwireless failure -
when the real failure is that govt officials and the citizens were given
unrealistic expectations.

Here are some of my responses to the common criticisms of muniwireless

1)  FREE service in my city is going to put me out of business
Response:  Not true.  Most of the FREE services are very low speed
connections (sub 256K) or are filled with non-bypassable  advertising.
Plus, there is no quality of service guarantee for a free service and
nonexistent tech support.There is plenty of opportunity to offer a
higher quality service that people are willing to pay for.   Don't
forget that most of the people who go for the FREE service are folks
that wouldn't pay for service anyway.  If they become users and want a
better level of service, there is a good chance that they will become
paying customers at some point in the future.

2)  Government money should not be used to compete with private industry
Response:  In most applications, muniwireless efforts are being explored
by the governmental entity to SAVE money.  If a muni can put in a
network for a cost of $100,000, but will save $60,000/year through
reduced telephone/cellphone/leased line expenses, then that is a big
WIN/WIN situation for everyone involved except the telcos.  Local
government spending generates a huge amount of revenue for the phone
companies.  Doesn't it make more sense for the city to put in its own
infrastructure and manage it locally than to spend it with
telcos/cellcos?  Savings from telecom revenue are only one of the many
ways that muni networks can generate substantial savings.  Decreased
labor, increased operational efficiency and many other benefits come
from muni networks.

3)  Municipal wireless networks duplicate efforts made my local WISPs
Response:  After talking to a lot of muniwireless people, the issue is
that munis would PREFER to work with a local WISP or ISP operator to get
their network going, but WISPs do such a poor job of promoting
themselves that most munis have no idea that there is someone operating
in their area.   Introduce yourself to the IT person in every town where
you provide service - do not give them an excuse for ignorance.  We are
generally more local than any other company that they will deal with,
and we have tons of practical experience and the ability to demo our
capabilities.   We should be exploiting these advantages to the highest
possible degree.  It will require you to become a participant in your
local government, but that is the best way to get what you want.

Every WISPA member should be watching their area diligently for
muniwireless opportunities in their area, and working hard to get in on
the ground floor.  I have done cooperative projects in ten towns in my
service area and all have been WIN/WIN for me and for the cities.   At
last check, these cites combined are saving $4000 a month over what they
were paying the telcos for the same or inferior level of service.  My
goal is to be taking $30,000/month out of the pockets of the local
telcos (Qwest and Embarq) within the next two years.  Just imagine what
kind of an impact muni networks would have on the telcos if  1
communities pulled an average of $1000 a month out of telcos and put it
into local infrastructure?   That is $1 million a month out of telco
coffers and into local economies.  What if the average savings was $5000
a month and 2 communities developed their own networks?   Even the
telcos will notice $10 million a month in declining revenues.  More
importantly, the influx into the local economy of that money (instead of
having it sucked out by the telco vampire) will make a big difference at
the local level.

WISPs should be taking a proac

RE: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes

[Brian Webster]

HP likes to design these Tropos networks by never having more than 2 hops
before it gets put on some sort of backhaul. This in theory works well but
in reality, you still run out of 2.4 GHz channels to place the access nodes
on. Remember each radio/mesh unit is at the same height as every other one
thus firing their signal directly in to the antenna of all neighboring
nodes. The users may not see the noise but node to node traffic certainly
hears it. When the mesh radio is deaf because of noise, the network just
plain fails to work. End of story. Mesh will simply not work on a loaded
residential user based system without a lot more spectrum. People are trying
to fight the laws of physics. Ask any ham radio guy about this. When they
originally built packet radio networks back in the early 90's, they found
you needed separate channels to make it work (and that was only 1200 baud).
San Francisco, Philly and any other muni network are going to fail based on
this problem. The idea and premise of a muni network is solid based on the
points Matt Larsen brought up but as Jack and others have stated, they have
been sold on all of the positive benefits but never get told the
limitations. The typical IT mentality is that they can throw more money at
the problem to increase capacity. This is simply not true based on the
limited number of useable channels. Sad thing is there will be a lot of
taxpayer money wasted to prove this point.



Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com>


-Original Message-
From: Jack Unger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 1:22 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes


Dawn,

Thanks for posting the St. Cloud PepLink and HP info.

Using standard CPE (PePLink)is very good but using Tropos nodes is very,
very bad. Very bad because they only have one single 2.4 GHz radio so
after 2 or 3 hops, all the throughput capability is gone not to mention
that the interference level from having all the access and backhaul
packets colliding on 2.4 GHz (along with any WISP and other 2.4 GHz
network packets) will slow all the networks (muni and WISP) down
further. I hate to "finger" anyone but Tropos' stubborn refusal or
inability (anyone at Tropos listening???) to produce a 2-band mesh node
is going to doom them to failure along with any big city that deploys
their nodes without an extremely efficient point-to-multipoint backbone
design on 5 GHz.

jack


Dawn DiPietro wrote:

> http://www.peplink.com/060306.php
>
> Date: March 7, 2006*
> PePLink announces as the official Citywide Wireless CPE provider for
> City of St. Cloud in Florida  *
>
> *Hong Kong, Mar 7, 2006 - *PePLink, a leader in citywide WiFi wireless
> broadband devices today announced the City of St. Cloud, FL, a suburb of
> Orlando, has chosen PePLink to be the official wireless CPE provider for
> the Cyber Spot, the City's 100% free citywide high-speed wireless
> Internet service.
>
> With a reliable, secure, ease of use wireless CPE - PePLink Surf, every
> citizen or business in the city of St. Cloud can connect to the citywide
> wireless network at a high speed. The CPE greatly enhances the
> throughput and reliability of both up and down link compared with a
> wireless-enabled computer desktop or notebook computer.
>
> The simple true plug and play nature of the PePLink Surf helps the
> citizens in St. Cloud to bring the wireless signal indoors with ease. At
> the same time, the PePLink Surf units can be remotely managed, monitored
> and provisioned by PePLink's carrier-grade management and reporting
> solution, PCMS (or PePLink Centralized Management System). This can
> ensure a scalable and rapid rollout of the wireless systems within a
> short period of time. This eliminates an onsite installation charge.
>
> "Being chosen by City of St. Cloud has further endorsed our capability
> to offer reliable wireless solutions to municipal wireless networks
> built with mesh network technology," said Alex Chan, Managing Director
> of PePLink. "PePLink Surf together with PCMS is the complete solution
> specifically designed for today's citywide wireless networks."
>
> PePLink Surf series consists of Surf 200BG and Surf 400BG. For more
> information on PePLink Surf series, please visit http://www.peplink.com
> <http://www.peplink.com/>.
>
>
>
>
> Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote:
>
>> roflol
>>
>> The city is selling "signal boosters" (I read that as amps) to anyone
>> that wants them for $170?
>>
>> Oh man, this deployment is gonna come CRASHING down.  Hard.
>>
>> It's really too bad these people are too ignorant, stubborn or just
>> plain stupid to call any of us in to he

RE: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes

[Brian Webster]

Joe,
I agree with you there and for many people that would be just fine, but 
the
average consumer is going to expect these wi-fi muni networks to perform
like DSL and Cable broadband does. The municipalities are expecting the same
thing. You and I know they will never be able to achieve this.



Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com>


-Original Message-
From: Joe Laura [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 2:01 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes


So to sum it up IMO physics and limited spectrum makes a muni system
impossible to get the coverage they expect. Dont get me wrong, ups just
dropped off a mag mount friday to me that I am installing on the van
tomorrow. Even if I have to drive 3 blocks or so to connect and pull mail or
peek at my intermapper will be a plus. Joe
- Original Message -
From: "Brian Webster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 12:44 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes


> HP likes to design these Tropos networks by never having more than 2 hops
> before it gets put on some sort of backhaul. This in theory works well but
> in reality, you still run out of 2.4 GHz channels to place the access
nodes
> on. Remember each radio/mesh unit is at the same height as every other one
> thus firing their signal directly in to the antenna of all neighboring
> nodes. The users may not see the noise but node to node traffic certainly
> hears it. When the mesh radio is deaf because of noise, the network just
> plain fails to work. End of story. Mesh will simply not work on a loaded
> residential user based system without a lot more spectrum. People are
trying
> to fight the laws of physics. Ask any ham radio guy about this. When they
> originally built packet radio networks back in the early 90's, they found
> you needed separate channels to make it work (and that was only 1200
baud).
> San Francisco, Philly and any other muni network are going to fail based
on
> this problem. The idea and premise of a muni network is solid based on the
> points Matt Larsen brought up but as Jack and others have stated, they
have
> been sold on all of the positive benefits but never get told the
> limitations. The typical IT mentality is that they can throw more money at
> the problem to increase capacity. This is simply not true based on the
> limited number of useable channels. Sad thing is there will be a lot of
> taxpayer money wasted to prove this point.
>
>
>
> Thank You,
> Brian Webster
> www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Jack Unger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 1:22 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes
>
>
> Dawn,
>
> Thanks for posting the St. Cloud PepLink and HP info.
>
> Using standard CPE (PePLink)is very good but using Tropos nodes is very,
> very bad. Very bad because they only have one single 2.4 GHz radio so
> after 2 or 3 hops, all the throughput capability is gone not to mention
> that the interference level from having all the access and backhaul
> packets colliding on 2.4 GHz (along with any WISP and other 2.4 GHz
> network packets) will slow all the networks (muni and WISP) down
> further. I hate to "finger" anyone but Tropos' stubborn refusal or
> inability (anyone at Tropos listening???) to produce a 2-band mesh node
> is going to doom them to failure along with any big city that deploys
> their nodes without an extremely efficient point-to-multipoint backbone
> design on 5 GHz.
>
> jack
>
>
> Dawn DiPietro wrote:
>
> > http://www.peplink.com/060306.php
> >
> > Date: March 7, 2006*
> > PePLink announces as the official Citywide Wireless CPE provider for
> > City of St. Cloud in Florida  *
> >
> > *Hong Kong, Mar 7, 2006 - *PePLink, a leader in citywide WiFi wireless
> > broadband devices today announced the City of St. Cloud, FL, a suburb of
> > Orlando, has chosen PePLink to be the official wireless CPE provider for
> > the Cyber Spot, the City's 100% free citywide high-speed wireless
> > Internet service.
> >
> > With a reliable, secure, ease of use wireless CPE - PePLink Surf, every
> > citizen or business in the city of St. Cloud can connect to the citywide
> > wireless network at a high speed. The CPE greatly enhances the
> > throughput and reliability of both up and down link compared with a
> > wireless-enabled computer desktop or notebook computer.
> >
> > The simple true plu

RE: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes

[Brian Webster]

Matt,
I make that assumption based on the node density that some of these
networks are being designed for to accommodate the little or no gain
available on the antenna systems of the user unit laptops and PDA's. The
people who are trumping up these networks are trying to lull the people with
money in to thinking they can build a seamless network. To do this they spec
the systems for high node density to keep the signal level up down on the
ground for the users. When they locate them on light poles on the same
streets they certainly will have many situations where other nodes will have
a lot of strong signal visible to them from neighboring nodes. When you look
at a coverage footprint for a node when you have to assume the specs from a
laptop unit you clearly see that it does not cover much area, IT mentality
says, just put more nodes up then. Tropos nodes do have attenuation between
them but with each node using an antenna with gain they don't have the
attenuation "between nodes" that the network was designed for.



Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com>


-Original Message-
From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 1:58 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes


You make the assumption that the Tropos nodes have little to no
attenuation between them, which is a poor assumption. A useful exercise
is to drive around and make a list of Metrocom nodes. You'll find that a
very small percentage have LOS or even near-LOS to each other. Metrocom
certainly was able to provide ubiquitous coverage long before the muni
Wi-Fi was all the rage. Where was your physics then?

-Matt

Brian Webster wrote:

>HP likes to design these Tropos networks by never having more than 2 hops
>before it gets put on some sort of backhaul. This in theory works well but
>in reality, you still run out of 2.4 GHz channels to place the access nodes
>on. Remember each radio/mesh unit is at the same height as every other one
>thus firing their signal directly in to the antenna of all neighboring
>nodes. The users may not see the noise but node to node traffic certainly
>hears it. When the mesh radio is deaf because of noise, the network just
>plain fails to work. End of story. Mesh will simply not work on a loaded
>residential user based system without a lot more spectrum. People are
trying
>to fight the laws of physics. Ask any ham radio guy about this. When they
>originally built packet radio networks back in the early 90's, they found
>you needed separate channels to make it work (and that was only 1200 baud).
>San Francisco, Philly and any other muni network are going to fail based on
>this problem. The idea and premise of a muni network is solid based on the
>points Matt Larsen brought up but as Jack and others have stated, they have
>been sold on all of the positive benefits but never get told the
>limitations. The typical IT mentality is that they can throw more money at
>the problem to increase capacity. This is simply not true based on the
>limited number of useable channels. Sad thing is there will be a lot of
>taxpayer money wasted to prove this point.
>
>
>
>Thank You,
>Brian Webster
>www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com>
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Jack Unger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 1:22 PM
>To: WISPA General List
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes
>
>
>Dawn,
>
>Thanks for posting the St. Cloud PepLink and HP info.
>
>Using standard CPE (PePLink)is very good but using Tropos nodes is very,
>very bad. Very bad because they only have one single 2.4 GHz radio so
>after 2 or 3 hops, all the throughput capability is gone not to mention
>that the interference level from having all the access and backhaul
>packets colliding on 2.4 GHz (along with any WISP and other 2.4 GHz
>network packets) will slow all the networks (muni and WISP) down
>further. I hate to "finger" anyone but Tropos' stubborn refusal or
>inability (anyone at Tropos listening???) to produce a 2-band mesh node
>is going to doom them to failure along with any big city that deploys
>their nodes without an extremely efficient point-to-multipoint backbone
>design on 5 GHz.
>
>jack
>
>
>Dawn DiPietro wrote:
>
>
>
>>http://www.peplink.com/060306.php
>>
>>Date: March 7, 2006*
>>PePLink announces as the official Citywide Wireless CPE provider for
>>City of St. Cloud in Florida  *
>>
>>*Hong Kong, Mar 7, 2006 - *PePLink, a leader in citywide WiFi wireless
>>broadband devices today announced the City of St. Cloud, FL, a suburb of
>>Orlando, has chosen PePLink

RE: [WISPA] Navini Networks, was no subject

[Brian Webster]

Took the words right out of my mouth, great receiver specs do nothing in
high noise environments. The idea of indoor CPE devices is also a myth for
real world WISP deployments. How many times have you had to move around in a
building with a cell phone to get better coverage. Indoor CPE is the same
but most people won't understand that and won't want to move their computer.
Higher power is not the answer because you still need the balanced path in
both directions, the FCC will not let you put high power radios at the CPE
end when it is sitting right next to the users body.



Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com>


-Original Message-
From: Charles Wu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2006 4:55 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Navini Networks, was no subject


Systems work differently when operating under licensed vs. unlicensed bands

That said, no amount of "fancing beamforming" or signal processing or even
complex QAM modulation will bust through that -70ish noise floor

-Charles

---
CWLab
Technology Architects
http://www.cwlab.com



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of George Rogato
Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 10:45 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Navini Networks, was no subject


Hi Ron
I don't know much except what has come across these list since the stuff
came out.
I seem to recall a couple of wisps saying they've installed them and
being successful. I don't recall that they were very fast at all.

Some of the municipalities have deployed them, I think maybe Portland
Oregon and Seattle Washington have them.

And I think it was relatively expensive, Think I heard like 30-60k or
more per pop. Big wind loaded multiple panel antennas of size and
expensive omni's

George

Ron Wallace wrote:
> George,
>
> What do you know about them?
>
>  >-Original Message-
>  >From: George Rogato [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>  >Sent: Wednesday, May 3, 2006 11:29 PM
>  >To: 'WISPA General List'
>  >Subject: Re: [WISPA] (no subject)
>  >
>  >Ron Wallace wrote:
>  >> To All,
>  >>
>  >> Any one know anthing about Navini Networks and all their claims?
> sounds  >> too good to be true.  >>
>  >> Ron Wallace
>  >>
>  >
>  >I'd like to know as well how it performs and their success rate. It's
>  >been out awhile now.
>  >
>  >I do know that Navini and Vivato were supposed to be revolutionary
>  >products using smart antennas and direction beam forming techniques to
>  >overcome nlos and reach in deeper to the customer.
>  >They get to use more power than a normal PtMP unlicensed system.
>  >Vivato didn't make it: http://www.vivato.com/ VIVATO ANNOUNCES WIND DOWN
>  >PLANS.
>  >
>  >George
>  >
>  >
>  >--
>  >WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>  >
>  >Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>  >http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>  >
>  >Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>  >
>

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

[WISPA] AOL offering wireless internet over Clearwires network

[Brian Webster]

Well it's starting, and at $26 per month too. Let's hope this might actually
help the WISP industry by being able to partner as a Group with AOL and
offer the same wholesale deal in markets where Clearwire does not offer
service or may not have any license. But that would still require everyone
getting together as a whole (because AOL would not deal with each one
individually) and also developing a national database/mapping coverage
footprint. Just an idea, it appears they are going to do it without the WISP
industry anyway now. Sure would be nice to leverage a huge marketing engine
like AOL or MSN without having to bear the expense.

http://www.rcrnews.com/news.cms?newsId=26292


Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Spectrum Analyzer

[Brian Webster]

You can buy Canopy units and use the spectrum analyzer feature. That has the
drawback of the directivity of the antenna pattern but it's also able to be
run remotely. Install it with a TV antenna rotor and control all of it from
the ground from a laptop. For use in the unlicensed spectrum this is a cheap
way to have a spectrum analyzer that does what you need. I think you might
also be able to do the same thing with Trango gear.



Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com>


-Original Message-
From: Jory Privett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, May 07, 2006 3:00 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Spectrum Analyzer


Can someone recommend a fairly simple spectrum analyzer  that will do 2.4
and 5.8. I need something that is portable and not to complicated to use.

Jory Privett
WCCS


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Re: [TowerTalk] [WISPA FCC] OT??? High power 2.4 GHz ruleschange

[Brian Webster]

John,
I'm not sure if this guys comments were meant to be that of a 
threatening
nature. If someone is using the moon as a passive reflector, they may very
well be aiming at the horizon with a set of antennas using steerable
tracking gear for their antennas. The idea would be that you start using the
moon like you would a tracking system for a moving satellite. At moon rise
and set you would be aimed at or near the horizon with a lot of power. I'm
just pointing out the technical aspect of this, I'm not on the tower talk
list and did not see the whole thread to get the tone of the conversation.
This type of system is typical for hams who operate either satellite comms
or moon bounce. They do this to allow maximum time for communications. While
it would be possible to intentionally use this to harm WISP's it is also
possible that it could happen by chance.



Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com>


-Original Message-
From: John Scrivner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, May 21, 2006 1:11 PM
To: Dan Hammill
Cc: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] Re: [TowerTalk] [WISPA FCC] OT??? High power 2.4 GHz
ruleschange



Dan Hammill wrote:

>John,
>
>Thank you for your sentiments towards hams.
>
>
I meant what I said though I may have had it wrong after some of the
replies I am seeing from this group.

Dan  KB5MY said:

>if I run legal limit into my 24-foot
>dish, aim at the moon on the horizon, and some unlicensed ISP happens to
lie
>in-between, I guarantee that the ISP will lose, regardless of how much
power
>he/she may be running.
>
>
I have been using the list servers here as an opportunity to share my
thoughts on perspectives and see how best to proceed for everyone's best
interest. Marlon has done the same. Quite frankly I am surprised that
the bully tactics you describe would be even put into print. I have
always thought Hams were basically all above such thinking. I have no
intentions of turning this into a holy war. I know my place. Thank you
for pointing it out though with the end of your gun.
Good bye,
John Scrivner

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] merchant accounts/credit cards

[Brian Webster]

I use PayPal and am very happy. I do not have a terminal and do not need to
swipe cards from here. Their rates for non-eBay items seem to be in line
with others. I have full control over my account and even have a Master Card
debit card from them. Simple and painless and I don't have to maintain any
secure web sites to accept payment. Your needs may be different. Oh and by
the way people do not have to be PayPal members to post payments.



Thank You,
Brian Webster

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 3:40 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: [WISPA] merchant accounts/credit cards


Can anybody suggest any good vendors for a merchant account and card
processing
terminal?

Thanks


Dan Metcalf
Wireless Broadband Systems
www.wbisp.com
781-566-2053 ext 6201
1-888-wbsystem (888) 927-9783
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
support: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.0/352 - Release Date: 05/30/2006


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Join WISPA?

[Brian Webster]

Butch,
I was told as an associate member I could not be a member of the members
only list. Let me know if you hear different.



Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com>


-Original Message-
From: Butch Evans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 2:14 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Join WISPA?


On Mon, 5 Jun 2006, Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote:

>There is a members only list that is much more structured and isn't
>open to just anyone

Is that list open only to Principal members?  I am only an associate
member.  Do I qualify for that list?  Inquiring minds...

--
Butch Evans
Network Engineering and Security Consulting
http://www.butchevans.com/
Mikrotik Certified Consultant
(http://www.mikrotik.com/consultants.html)
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: More on Clearwire - Intel & Moto invest $900MillionRe: [WISPA]Clearwire is coming to my area. (eek?)

[Brian Webster]

Well said Tom,
Having watched the cellular and PCS industry grow over the years, vendor
financing/investing was the only way these networks could have been built
out as fast as they were. Being based on a technology that was not specific
to any one manufacturer was a key in those network build outs. WIMAX may be
able to offer those same benefits once it becomes available in the
unlicensed spectrum, although I would guess the manufacturers would be more
apt to do what you say once a more protected spectrum becomes available. I
also agree with your statement that when the manufacturer is the investor
all they want to do is sell equipment, not get you over a barrel and then
take your company away from you in the way most venture capital outfits
would. I can see you've been around that block once or twice :-)



Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com>


-Original Message-
From: Tom DeReggi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 07, 2006 11:11 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: More on Clearwire - Intel & Moto invest $900MillionRe:
[WISPA]Clearwire is coming to my area. (eek?)


I'm referring to I use Trango Broadband for 95% of my network.
I believe it is the best choice for long term survivabilty of an independant
WISP.
I stand behind that decission today as the best decission that I could have
made for my situation.

However, there were trade offs in making that decssion. One was it
illiminated every manufacturer other than Trango the from being a potential
manufacturer investor that would have senergy to invest in us. Wimax on the
other hand has 100s of manufacturers that potentially could be investors as
well as suppliers in early stage large scale projects, based on jump
starting and proving their early production runs or technkowlegy embeeded
with products used.  Historically, Manufacturers have been key investors.
For example Cisco in Cogent.  Or I can refer to an initiative a year or two
back where Redline's investors had been considering investment in WISP
providers that used Redline equipment.  Supporting one company (WISP) also
strengthens other investments (in manufacturer's product).  Motorola has
numerous attempts to partner with major initative, often in investment, as
lsited in the Clearwire press release.  Or a company like TelkoNet that
leases to WISPs to help financially and not only techknowlgy solutions.
WISPs that are serious about growing large, need to consider these things,
as they must have a finance strategy long term to handle their growth when
that time comes or the growth won't occur.

If I expand this conversation to my business specifically... There have been
many offers to just buy my company out and take over. But  I won't get the
ROI that I'm looking for if I were to do that, because my company is still
in an early investment stage. Instead what I want is someone to share the
investment burden, so I don't have to take it on all alone. For me
investment in my business is the lease risky thing I can do, I have control
and confindense in things that I can control. However, ISP investors or
consolidators (one of the typical investment sources) think differently.
They'd rather take over, so they have control and maximum return, than share
the burden of investment or compensate adequately for others investment.
Manufacturer investors are potentially good investment partners because they
are not providers and rarely have expertise to take over, and look to invest
in companies that already have successful strategies and staff in place to
succeed.

Clearwire is a much different thing where they can be publically traded,
apposed to small WISPs that are far from the large scale value that large
manufacturers look for before investing.  But companies grow, and sooner or
later many WISPs will reach the scale of the Nextweb and Clearwires to
attract major investors.

I'd argue that Wimax's biggest value is not technical, its strategic,
because the number of players that enter the game and have synergies to
partner with vastly grows, and financial/funding options vastly grow with
it.

If I were a WISP I would not be holding my breath for a manufactirer
investor to come, I'm jsut saying its one strategic option to consider that
could exist.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message -
From: "Peter R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Friday, July 07, 2006 12:00 AM
Subject: Re: More on Clearwire - Intel & Moto invest $900 MillionRe:
[WISPA]Clearwire is coming to my area. (eek?)


> What would be the Proprietary Platform?
>
> Tom DeReggi wrote:
>
>> I'll say thats one disadvantage of buying into a proprietary platform,
>> you loose out on investment funds from hardware manufacturers.
>>
>&

RE: [WISPA] DC Inverter help

[Brian Webster]

Mac,
Can you tap in to the battery lines on the UPS and add extra external
batteries to extend the run time? This would give you the advantage of
conditioned power and automatic switch over of the UPS, and you would still
have any other management features of the UPS still available to you. Just
an idea to consider.



Thank You,
Brian Webster

-Original Message-
From: Mac Dearman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 10:35 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] DC Inverter help



Can anyone give me a lead as to what I am looking for? I believe this
http://tinyurl.com/lje7s is what I need, but I don't think I need 400Watts
as all I will be pulling at several new tower sites are a few RB532's with
their radios. I think I ought to keep the RB532s powered at 48VDC as they
will be in excess of 200' up a tower. My intentions are to put a couple
Marine batteries in an enclosure for back up power and have the DC inverter
to keep them charged and have a seamless transfer if a power outage comes
along. I have been putting these big honking APC UPSs in all my enclosures,
but am trying to get something that will last longer in times of outages

Any help would surely be a appreciated.

Thanks folks,
Mac


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] DC Inverter help

[Brian Webster]

Mac,
Understood, volts is volts and need respect :-). Might think about 
doing it
with some sort of switches or fuses on the external lines to allow you to
change batteries safely and without having to take all of them off line at
any one time. With fuses at the right rating they would pop if there were a
short like you mention and maybe avoid problems, although that is just one
more thing for a service call too.



Brian


-Original Message-
From: Mac Dearman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 11:15 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] DC Inverter help


Brian,

  I guess I am an idiot because I hadn't thought of that! I don't have any
(hardly) of my APC UPS's overloaded and it would probably be pretty easy to
do that. I bought some rack mount Compaq 3000Watt UPS's for the NOC and tied
4 Gel Cell 100lb batteries to each of those Compaq's. That has been working
like a charm, but it scares the fire out of me to mess around them. While
connecting them I managed to arc the wires and that produced a ball of fire
that was bigger than I was! I later found out those 4 12VDC batteries in a
series (48VDC) produces more than enough DC voltage to knock your guts out
while it blows the bottom of your feet off.

 Sorry for that story - but it may keep some of us from "leaving here early"

Mac



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brian Webster
Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 10:00 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] DC Inverter help

Mac,
Can you tap in to the battery lines on the UPS and add extra
external
batteries to extend the run time? This would give you the advantage of
conditioned power and automatic switch over of the UPS, and you would still
have any other management features of the UPS still available to you. Just
an idea to consider.



Thank You,
Brian Webster

-Original Message-
From: Mac Dearman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 10:35 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] DC Inverter help



Can anyone give me a lead as to what I am looking for? I believe this
http://tinyurl.com/lje7s is what I need, but I don't think I need 400Watts
as all I will be pulling at several new tower sites are a few RB532's with
their radios. I think I ought to keep the RB532s powered at 48VDC as they
will be in excess of 200' up a tower. My intentions are to put a couple
Marine batteries in an enclosure for back up power and have the DC inverter
to keep them charged and have a seamless transfer if a power outage comes
along. I have been putting these big honking APC UPSs in all my enclosures,
but am trying to get something that will last longer in times of outages

Any help would surely be a appreciated.

Thanks folks,
Mac


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Web site update

[Brian Webster]

Matt,
Great job. Would it be a good idea to put WISPA's mission statement on 
the
site? I read what was up there but it does not clearly state for a
prospective new member what the missions and goals of the organization are
or will be.



Thank You,
Brian Webster

-Original Message-
From: George Rogato [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 4:48 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Web site update


Thank you Matt Larsen for your hard work.
http://www.wispa.org/

George

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] Tower contract / Revenue Share / Discounted Services

[Brian Webster]

Title: Tower contract / Revenue Share / Discounted Services



Johnny,
    If you can get away from the revenue share try to. If they want in 
on the action maybe set up a flat rate per customer added to that site. The 
reason for this would be that if you need to increase your ARPU you can raise 
the price and not have an increased expense for doing so, your expense to the 
tower owner stays the same. In my cellular days the carriers would never do 
a revenue share with landowners or tower owners. When it was a sticking point in 
the negotiations it could be overcome most times by finding some point (in this 
case per customer) to increase the payment on a more fixed rate. If you were to 
ever try and sell your business this puts you in a much more favorable position 
than having revenue sharing. Revenue sharing creates a situation where you might 
have to open your books to this landowner so he can audit to see if he is 
getting his proper payments, whereas all you need to do for a per customer rate 
is do a dump from something like your Radius server or the access point itself 
to have all the accounting information necessary. Just an idea and a useless one 
if you have already committed to this deal.
 
Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com

  -Original Message-From: JohnnyO 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 12:03 
  PMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: [WISPA] Tower contract 
  / Revenue Share / Discounted Services
  Have a company that is paying us to install a tower 
  at their location so we they can receive our internet services. What we 
  negotiated was - they pay for ALL costs including backhaul, 3 2.4ghz sectors, 
  tower costs / installation costs.
  We get exclusive rights to the tower. They get 20% 
  revenue share from any customers being served directly off of the tower, and 
  they receive 50% off of their monthly service fees.
  Does anyone have a contract that would cover part 
  or all of what was stated ? 
  Regards, 
  JohnnyO 
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] 900 mhz AMS system

[Brian Webster]

Chris,
    You might also consider band pass or notch filters on either your 
equipment or theirs or both. This usually can clean up any off channel 
interference but does come at a price in line losses. They are not cheap for 
good products either. Technically neither of you have protection against 
interference by the rules but obviously you are trying to do the smart thing and 
avoid problems. Try contacting the vendor of their equipment and preferably the 
ones who did their install and explain the situation. They may have run in to 
similar problems and have some options to try. Remember to smile to whole time 
and act friendly...:-)
 
Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com

  -Original Message-From: chris cooper 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 
  2:34 PMTo: 'WISPA General List'Subject: [WISPA] 900 mhz 
  AMS system
  
  A rural water district cuts 
  through the center of our network.  Their automatic meter reading system 
  operates on 916.5 at @ ½ db.  They are having problems reading meters 
  near one of our cells that sits 2 Mhz off them.  That was the only slot 
  available on that tower, so we cant really move without major 
  disruption.  Their system only works on 916.5  Has anyone had to 
  work through this?  If you have can you hit me offlist?  Im 
  interested in what compromise was worked out.
   
  Chris
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] 5 GHz attenuation

[Brian Webster]

Let me chime in here. It will also depend on the equipment you are using. I
can state that I have seen many instances of Canopy not working because of
trees yet Alvarion will work just fine at 5 GHz. The OFDM has proven to work
quite will through trees.



Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com>


-Original Message-
From: Mike Hammett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2007 1:30 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5 GHz attenuation


Kinds?  um...I know coniferous vs. deciduous and a couple different
kinds of deciduous, but that's about it...  Maple, crab apple, locust,
that's about it.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


- Original Message -
From: "CHUCK PROFITO" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2007 12:13 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] 5 GHz attenuation


No one talks of the type of trees. We've noticed getting through a line of
poplars, adjust antenna size, not much of a problem.  But one pine tree, or
a well placed ash, near impossible.  Maybe the pine needles attenuate more
because they are thin and in all directions thus absorbing all reflections
??  Anybody else see this.

Chuck Profito
209-988-7388
CV-ACCESS, INC
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Providing High Speed Broadband
to Rural Central California


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2007 9:57 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5 GHz attenuation


Could you provide some sort of numbers?  How much loss does that 1/4 mile of

water-retaining trees have?

The town is basically a square with the tower on the far west side in about
the center.  It is 1/2 mile to the extreme corners, so there are a lot of
people 1/4 mile and less.

Someone on another list mentioned water retention as a show-stopper, but my
limited experience had me thinking just about anything less than a 1/2 mile
would work.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


- Original Message -
From: "Graham McIntire" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2007 11:25 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5 GHz attenuation


>I have two towers running MT APs at 5.8 with CM9s and 16 dBi horiz
> sectors.  Using Osbridge 5GXi's as the CPE, I have clients a few miles
> out with non-LOS and the occasional treeline without any issues.
>
> I also have one house about 3/4 mile away from my tower that's going
> through nearly 1/4 mile of scattered trees.  It attenuates pretty
> badly during heavy rain until the leaves on the trees dry out, but
> stays connected.  It's my parents-in-law's house, so they're a little
> more forgiving if it happens to drop than a client would be ;)
>
> Half a mile with scattered trees shouldn't be a problem for you, even
> with snow/rain attenuation.
>
> Graham McIntire
> Verona Networks
>
>
> On 6/22/07, Mike Hammett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I have a 5 mile link where I'm not quite sure if the antenna is above the
>> trees or not as it is on top of a mast.  That link is on the better side
>> of -80 for almost 2 years.  Based on that I'd think I'd be okay at a half
>> mile or less.  I figured that with most of the town at better than -60
>> and a
>> lot better than -50, I could stand to go through a few meters of tree,
>> but
>> that's why I came here to ask.  ;-)
>>
>> Based on the numbers on the site I looked at, 10 db of attenuation is 27'

>> of
>> foliage.  That'd put 20 db at 55' of foliage.
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>> - Original Message -
>> From: "Jack Unger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>> Sent: Friday, June 22, 2007 10:22 AM
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5 GHz attenuation
>>
>>
>> > Mike,
>> >
>> > Good to go as long as the TV towers allow you to get the CPE antennas
>> > above the trees.
>> >
>> > jack
>> >
>> >
>> > Mike Hammett wrote:
>> >> Most of my coverage area is open fields, so there isn't much to making

>> >> a
>> >> link work.
>> >>
>> >> I have an increasing demand to install an AP in a small town (no point
>> >> within town is further than 1/2 mile away from the tower site).  I
>> >> prefer
>> >> to use 5 GHz due to the amount of spectrum available.  An article I
>> >>

RE: [WISPA] maybe this should be the WISPA shirt

[Brian Webster]

I just wouldn't wear something like this to a zoning hearing where people
are bringing up the concept of RF exposure.. I can see this really
freaking people out. It's a cool product if it is real, I love the comment
about the geeky chicks swooning..some people have a great sense of
humor... :-)



Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com>


-Original Message-
From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2007 11:25 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] maybe this should be the WISPA shirt


http://www.thinkgeek.com/tshirts/generic/991e/



** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at
ISPCON **
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **



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/



** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at ISPCON 
**
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at 
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **


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] Wireless System Valuation

[Brian Webster]

I would think that it might also be good to know the total number of
potential customers that the wireless network footprint covers. A system
that covers a potential of 100,000 customers/households would be worth a lot
more than one which might only have a maximum of 5,000 households able to be
reached.



Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com>


-Original Message-
From: David E. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 11:26 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Wireless System Valuation


Ron Wallace wrote:

> What is the best method for determining the value of a "Wireless Internet
System"???

According to my college microeconomics professor, it's worth exactly
what someone else pays for it. :)

Are you looking at just hardware (which is pretty easily quantified), or
at a "system" including active customers (and the obligation to continue
providing service to them)?

If you're buying a complete business (or at least a bunch of customers)
it's normally valued as some multiple of monthly revenue. Depending on
your local market conditions, I've heard WISPs valued anywhere from 5x
to 12x that number. What, exactly, the number should be depends on those
local conditions, what other competition is in the area, whether those
customers are under any long-term contracts, the business' established
reputation, and about a zillion other things.

Sorry to be so very vague.

David Smith
MVN.net



** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at
ISPCON **
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **



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/



** Join us at the WISPA Reception at 6:30 PM on October the 16th 2007 at ISPCON 
**
** ISPCON Fall 2007 - October 16-18 - San Jose, CA   www.ispcon.com **
** THE INTERNET INDUSTRY EVENT **
** FREE Exhibits and Events Pass available until August 31 **
** Use Customer Code WSEMF7 when you register online at 
http://www.ispcon.com/register.php **


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] Interesting observation on the $199 Wal-Mart PC

[Brian Webster]

I was just reading the on line reviews of the Wal-Mart $199 PC. It comes
with Linux and Open Office. While it does not come with a monitor, it seems
to be a nice value machine. If you go to the web site and read all of the
reviews, you will see that this might be a machine to recommend to customers
who do just basic computing and web browsing. The only reason that I mention
this, is that for may WISP operators who have a limited number of possible
customers, recommending a simple and easy to use computer on their network
might be of some use. I was particularly interested to see so many comments
by older users on how easy the system was to work with. Many had purchased
this machine for their older parents or clients and the response was very
positive.

I don't want to start on OS war or anything like that, just thought this
could be an interesting way to increase the customer base and simplify
customer support issues and cost for entry level clients. Just another tool
for the toolbox...


Thank You,
Brian Webster




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] Interesting observation on the $199 Wal-Mart PC

[Brian Webster]

There is the option to order it on line and have it shipped.



Thank You,
Brian Webster

-Original Message-
From: Sam Tetherow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 2:06 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Interesting observation on the $199 Wal-Mart PC


I have often thought of suggesting a linux box for people that have
problems with rampant viruses and/or malware, but I've always shied away
because I really don't want to have to do the support on it.  If it was
done well, this could be a great suggestion for those people.  Now all I
need is a Walmart closer than 120 miles away and it might be a real
viable solution.

Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless

Brian Webster wrote:
> I was just reading the on line reviews of the Wal-Mart $199 PC. It comes
> with Linux and Open Office. While it does not come with a monitor, it
seems
> to be a nice value machine. If you go to the web site and read all of the
> reviews, you will see that this might be a machine to recommend to
customers
> who do just basic computing and web browsing. The only reason that I
mention
> this, is that for may WISP operators who have a limited number of possible
> customers, recommending a simple and easy to use computer on their network
> might be of some use. I was particularly interested to see so many
comments
> by older users on how easy the system was to work with. Many had purchased
> this machine for their older parents or clients and the response was very
> positive.
>
> I don't want to start on OS war or anything like that, just thought this
> could be an interesting way to increase the customer base and simplify
> customer support issues and cost for entry level clients. Just another
tool
> for the toolbox...
>
>
> Thank You,
> Brian Webster
>
>
>
> --
--
> 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] Radio Mobile

[Brian Webster]

Radio Mobile is not doing a simple free space loss calculation. There will
be a fade margin factored in based on the numbers you use for mode of
variability. If you open the path profile window then do a "view" "details"
you will get a text window that shows all the calculation details the
program used to derive the numbers. That is the first place to start to look
for the difference. The other thing you may be seeing is that if you don't
have the antennas aimed directly at each other, in the calculation you will
be getting the gain from something other than the strongest point in the
pattern.



Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com>


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2008 12:03 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Radio Mobile


How do I figure out how Radio Mobile arrives at it's signal level?  On a 3
km link in 5 GHz, I'm off 15 - 20 db from Eje's power calculator.  What the
radio link window says is really close to the input numbers for Eje's
calculator.  Why they're different is that I actually used the right antenna
files and hard fixed the AP at N, S, E, and W.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.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] Radio Mobile

[Brian Webster]

Mike,
As mentioned by another, try adjusting the height of one end or the 
other
to increase signal level. As Mac will tell you, higher on a site is not
always better. If you can engineer a path to obstruct as much of even number
Fresnel zones as possible it will help your signal level. Even and odd
number Fresnel zones cancel each other out. Using an obstruction to cover up
as many even number zones as possible gives some gain. This is why you hear
people say that you want to design a microwave backhaul with a .6 Fresnel
zone clearance. The danger in doing that with Radio Mobile, is the level of
detail in your terrain files. Radio Mobile is capable of using 10 meter
resolution terrain data from the USGS Seamless data distribution site (the
default that the program downloads from the internet is 30 meter), or if you
want, Roger (the Radio Mobile author) can create the data in SRTM format to
use in Radio Mobile http://www.lurodata.com/. While this gives excellent
terrain data details, it still does not show your clutter (trees,
buildings). Take a look at this site to see the differences in terrain data
http://www.sector14.net/~curt/ned/

You can do some visualization of clutter data in Radio Mobile at 1
kilometer resolution for free. If you download this file
http://www.geog.umd.edu/landcover/1km-map/UMD1km_L.zip you will have the
world clutter data at 1 KM resolution. This file can then be overlaid in
Radio Mobile as a map layer. It will not let you use it as part of a
prediction, but you can get an idea of the type of land cover to expect for
any given area. You can also use this file in conjunction with the "RM Path"
program in Radio Mobile to insert the clutter in your path profile
inspections. To do this you must first edit the "landheight.dat" file (using
notepad) in your Radio Mobile main directory. The numbers in this file
correspond to the color coded legend on a land cover map layer merge. Each
value is in meters and would be changed to represent the average clutter
heights for each clutter class in your area. Once this is complete you would
then do a path profile in Radio Mobile. In that window do a file "export to
RMPath", chose the custom option and I like to use 1000 points in my export.
This will save a file (name it whatever you want or just overwrite the
default) and open the RM Path program window. In this path profile you will
see the terrain cross section with the clutter data layered on top. The
colors match what you would see as a merged layer on the map. At this point
you will NOT have a new signal level calculated based on clutter absorption,
but you will know what to expect for path blockages. You can also manually
edit the test file that was exported to insert any know obstructions in your
path. Keep in mind, this data is very general in that it paints a whole
square kilometer with the same class of clutter. Its not the best in the
world, but for free it gives you a lot more to look at before you do a truck
roll. This used in conjunction with Google Earth is just one more tool a
WISP can use.

I have been in the wireless industry for 18 years (including Senior RF
Engineering Manager at EarthLink). I currently have Planet, ICS Telecom by
ATDI and Radio Mobile as RF prediction tools. While Radio Mobile does not do
many of the advanced features I need to design PCS and Cellular networks, I
will attest that given the same data to start with, I can do predictions
that match or beat the expensive commercial tools when it comes to simple
field strength plots (which is what you want for coverage maps and path
studies). Where the commercial tools excel, is when I can get high
resolution clutter and building data. Radio Mobile simply does not have
these capabilities (although I work with the author on a regular basis to
improve Radio Mobile). I would highly recommend each WISP get one person on
their staff to become somewhat proficient in this software. It can save you
a lot of aggravation.



Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com>


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2008 5:15 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Radio Mobile


Right, the AP isn't directly at the client, but it says there's only 0.8 db
of loss due to that.  It says I lose 7.4 dB due to obstruction (when I have
a 1.4 Fresnel zone) and 6.6 due to statistics.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


----- Original Message -
From: "Brian Webster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2008 3:00 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Radio Mobile


> Radio Mobile is not doing a simple free space loss calculation. There will
> be a fade margin factored in based on the numbers you use for mode of
> variability. If you open 

RE: [WISPA] Radio Mobile

[Brian Webster]

Matt,
There are many things to consider with mapping data. SRTM and other 
terrain
files all have their native map projection and datum. It takes someone
strong in the GIS and mapping field to make sure these files get overlaid
and used properly without shifting any one of the layers out of alignment
with the other. I use various GIS tools to achieve these tasks. The USGS
does provide good quality clutter data for free but it does require someone
to find it and then get it in a format they can use and/or convert it to the
proper projection and datum to match their existing data. So to answer your
question, I prefer the free data the taxpayers paid for when available. I
have also paid for very high resolution clutter data (1 to 2 meter
resolution) but that gets expensive because that gets tediously created by
hand and someone has to pay for that. Vendor to vendor does not seem to
matter as much as converting it properly once obtained.



Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com>


-Original Message-
From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2008 9:39 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Radio Mobile


I have found most people don't purchase clutter data even when using the
commercial tools when used as part of a fixed wireless operation. They
generally just put in an average height to use. This is what we do as
well even though we purchased clutter data. Although, we aren't using
commercial software; our application was written in-house. We weren't
able to use the data because it didn't match up correctly with SRTM. The
data vendor suggested buying ground data to match the clutter data, but
we didn't want to pay for ground data when SRTM is free and good.

In your experience, have you been able to get clutter data to match up
with SRTM? If so, what resolution and what data vendor did you use?

-Matt

Brian Webster wrote:
> Mike,
>   As mentioned by another, try adjusting the height of one end or the 
> other
> to increase signal level. As Mac will tell you, higher on a site is not
> always better. If you can engineer a path to obstruct as much of even
number
> Fresnel zones as possible it will help your signal level. Even and odd
> number Fresnel zones cancel each other out. Using an obstruction to cover
up
> as many even number zones as possible gives some gain. This is why you
hear
> people say that you want to design a microwave backhaul with a .6 Fresnel
> zone clearance. The danger in doing that with Radio Mobile, is the level
of
> detail in your terrain files. Radio Mobile is capable of using 10 meter
> resolution terrain data from the USGS Seamless data distribution site (the
> default that the program downloads from the internet is 30 meter), or if
you
> want, Roger (the Radio Mobile author) can create the data in SRTM format
to
> use in Radio Mobile http://www.lurodata.com/. While this gives excellent
> terrain data details, it still does not show your clutter (trees,
> buildings). Take a look at this site to see the differences in terrain
data
> http://www.sector14.net/~curt/ned/
>
>   You can do some visualization of clutter data in Radio Mobile at 1
> kilometer resolution for free. If you download this file
> http://www.geog.umd.edu/landcover/1km-map/UMD1km_L.zip you will have the
> world clutter data at 1 KM resolution. This file can then be overlaid in
> Radio Mobile as a map layer. It will not let you use it as part of a
> prediction, but you can get an idea of the type of land cover to expect
for
> any given area. You can also use this file in conjunction with the "RM
Path"
> program in Radio Mobile to insert the clutter in your path profile
> inspections. To do this you must first edit the "landheight.dat" file
(using
> notepad) in your Radio Mobile main directory. The numbers in this file
> correspond to the color coded legend on a land cover map layer merge. Each
> value is in meters and would be changed to represent the average clutter
> heights for each clutter class in your area. Once this is complete you
would
> then do a path profile in Radio Mobile. In that window do a file "export
to
> RMPath", chose the custom option and I like to use 1000 points in my
export.
> This will save a file (name it whatever you want or just overwrite the
> default) and open the RM Path program window. In this path profile you
will
> see the terrain cross section with the clutter data layered on top. The
> colors match what you would see as a merged layer on the map. At this
point
> you will NOT have a new signal level calculated based on clutter
absorption,
> but you will know what to expect for path blockages. You can also manually
> edit the test file that was exported to insert any know obstructio

RE: [WISPA] Radio Mobile

[Brian Webster]

I would try to get between .6 and 1. If you expose the second zone then the
phase canceling starts and reduces your signal level.



Thank You,
Brian Webster

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 9:24 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Radio Mobile


So then should I be engineering my customer links to .6 Fresnel instead of
the > 1 that I've been trying to achieve?


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


- Original Message -
From: "Brian Webster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2008 8:26 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Radio Mobile


> Mike,
> As mentioned by another, try adjusting the height of one end or the other
> to increase signal level. As Mac will tell you, higher on a site is not
> always better. If you can engineer a path to obstruct as much of even
> number
> Fresnel zones as possible it will help your signal level. Even and odd
> number Fresnel zones cancel each other out. Using an obstruction to cover
> up
> as many even number zones as possible gives some gain. This is why you
> hear
> people say that you want to design a microwave backhaul with a .6 Fresnel
> zone clearance. The danger in doing that with Radio Mobile, is the level
> of
> detail in your terrain files. Radio Mobile is capable of using 10 meter
> resolution terrain data from the USGS Seamless data distribution site (the
> default that the program downloads from the internet is 30 meter), or if
> you
> want, Roger (the Radio Mobile author) can create the data in SRTM format
> to
> use in Radio Mobile http://www.lurodata.com/. While this gives excellent
> terrain data details, it still does not show your clutter (trees,
> buildings). Take a look at this site to see the differences in terrain
> data
> http://www.sector14.net/~curt/ned/
>
> You can do some visualization of clutter data in Radio Mobile at 1
> kilometer resolution for free. If you download this file
> http://www.geog.umd.edu/landcover/1km-map/UMD1km_L.zip you will have the
> world clutter data at 1 KM resolution. This file can then be overlaid in
> Radio Mobile as a map layer. It will not let you use it as part of a
> prediction, but you can get an idea of the type of land cover to expect
> for
> any given area. You can also use this file in conjunction with the "RM
> Path"
> program in Radio Mobile to insert the clutter in your path profile
> inspections. To do this you must first edit the "landheight.dat" file
> (using
> notepad) in your Radio Mobile main directory. The numbers in this file
> correspond to the color coded legend on a land cover map layer merge. Each
> value is in meters and would be changed to represent the average clutter
> heights for each clutter class in your area. Once this is complete you
> would
> then do a path profile in Radio Mobile. In that window do a file "export
> to
> RMPath", chose the custom option and I like to use 1000 points in my
> export.
> This will save a file (name it whatever you want or just overwrite the
> default) and open the RM Path program window. In this path profile you
> will
> see the terrain cross section with the clutter data layered on top. The
> colors match what you would see as a merged layer on the map. At this
> point
> you will NOT have a new signal level calculated based on clutter
> absorption,
> but you will know what to expect for path blockages. You can also manually
> edit the test file that was exported to insert any know obstructions in
> your
> path. Keep in mind, this data is very general in that it paints a whole
> square kilometer with the same class of clutter. Its not the best in the
> world, but for free it gives you a lot more to look at before you do a
> truck
> roll. This used in conjunction with Google Earth is just one more tool a
> WISP can use.
>
> I have been in the wireless industry for 18 years (including Senior RF
> Engineering Manager at EarthLink). I currently have Planet, ICS Telecom by
> ATDI and Radio Mobile as RF prediction tools. While Radio Mobile does not
> do
> many of the advanced features I need to design PCS and Cellular networks,
> I
> will attest that given the same data to start with, I can do predictions
> that match or beat the expensive commercial tools when it comes to simple
> field strength plots (which is what you want for coverage maps and path
> studies). Where the commercial tools excel, is when I can get high
> resolution clutter and building data. Radio Mobile simply does not have
> these capabilities (although I work with the author on a regular basis to
> improve Radio Mobile

Re: [WISPA] Brian's coverage map broken?

[Brian Webster]

It's an issue with the size of the file. Google Maps is only supposed to
support a file overlay size of up to 1 meg. This one is about 2.2 meg so
sometimes it does not act properly. And yes this file needs to be updated,
problem is it's going to make the file larger and probably break it.

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 10:34 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Brian's coverage map broken?

 

Working for me now.  Weird.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373



On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 10:17 PM, Jason Bailey  wrote:


Way out-dated..but it's good here too.

--- On Fri, 5/11/12, Chuck Hogg  wrote:


From: Chuck Hogg 


Subject: Re: [WISPA] Brian's coverage map broken?

To: "WISPA General List" 
Date: Friday, May 11, 2012, 10:02 PM

 

Works for me
Regards,
Chuck



On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 7:24 PM, Rick Harnish http://mc/compose?to=rharn...@wispa.org> > wrote:

Worked for me


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org
<http://mc/compose?to=wireless-boun...@wispa.org>
[mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org
<http://mc/compose?to=wireless-boun...@wispa.org> ] On
Behalf Of Sam Tetherow
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 6:55 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Brian's coverage map broken?

Yes.

On 05/11/2012 05:51 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
> Does this fail to load at all or completely for anyone else?
>
> http://www.wirelessmapping.com/Google%20Maps3.htm
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> ___
> Wireless mailing list
> Wireless@wispa.org <http://mc/compose?to=Wireless@wispa.org> 
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org <http://mc/compose?to=Wireless@wispa.org> 
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org <http://mc/compose?to=Wireless@wispa.org> 
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 

 

-Inline Attachment Follows-

 

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org <http://mc/compose?to=Wireless@wispa.org> 
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless


___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] [AFMUG] FCC broadband deployment report

[Brian Webster]

The FCC report is based on round 4 data which would have been current as of
June 2011. If you just submitted the last round they did not use that data
for this report. This is the first report on broadband the FCC has done that
does not use the 477 data.

Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com


-Original Message-
From: a...@afmug.com [mailto:a...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Sean Heskett
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 5:29 PM
To: wireless@wispa.org; a...@afmug.com; us...@wug.cc; color...@wispa.org
Subject: [AFMUG] FCC broadband deployment report

Hi all,

Sorry for all the cross posts on multiple lists but this seems troubling to
me.  We submitted our coverage data to the state of Colorado and they
submitted our data for the national map.  However, this FCC broadband
deployment report includes this map which doesn't show our coverage.

Report: http://www.fcc.gov/reports/eighth-broadband-progress-report
Map: http://www.fcc.gov/maps/section-706-fixed-broadband-deployment-map

What gives???  WISPA???

Is anyone else noticing their coverage area is not included?

Best regards,


Sean Heskett
ZIRKEL Wireless
High-speed Internet

www.zirkelwireless.com
970-871-8500

-
Animal Farm Microwave Users Group - www.afmug.com



___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] [AFMUG] RE: FCC broadband deployment report

[Brian Webster]

Rick,

Andrew is no longer with the NTIA. I took some time to
review this FCC report and can shed some light on what problems people are
seeing. First this data is compiled from round 4 which was current as of
June 2011. If anyone updated or provided data to their states this last
round, your data will not show in this report. Second, the data shown does
include fixed wireless service but not satellite or cellular. What they
appear to have done is create a merge of data. In the report they tried to
replicate the 4 meg down 1 meg up national broadband plan set as the
national goal. The national broadband map was created before the wonderful
people who wrote that report had the brilliant idea of defining something
that is not part of the map standards. Give that problem the FCC decided to
use the category of 3 meg or greater as the download speed and 768 or
greater as the upload speed. If any WISP has reported data in round 4 or
earlier that does not meet those speed tiers, it was not used in this
report.

As with any mapping and report it is very important to read
their methodology before throwing stones. I had to answer to some of our
research people in Illinois today because the FCC report says 6% unserved in
Illinois and my mapping data says 1%. Most of the difference is that we
calculated using just the download speed tier information and the FCC
further restricted areas they deemed served by adding in the 768 or greater
upload requirement. Some WISP's get bumped off the map because of the upload
requirements they used in their study.

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: a...@afmug.com [mailto:a...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Rick Harnish
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 6:19 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'; a...@afmug.com; us...@wug.cc; color...@wispa.org
Subject: [AFMUG] RE: [WISPA] FCC broadband deployment report

 

Andrew,  (Andrew MacRae from the NTIA is BCC'd)

 

There seems to be some discrepancy in the Colorado and Michigan Data.  Can
you assist as to why Wisp coverage is not represented?  Please read the
email below my signature line.  Also, here are some other comments from
other providers.

 

. Merrill, MI: Our coverage area is not displayed on that map. Is it
only including wireline providers?

 

. Jackson, MI:  My coverage update for the 2nd to last round is not
there, but the rest is. The map is for 3Meg svc. and up also.

 

. Steamboat Springs: If you hover over a county a popup chart on the
right shows up and displays the demographics for that county and % of
broadband that is Fiber, Cable, DSL, or fixed wireless.  both the counties
we serve show 0% fixed wireless.

 

. Yuma: wow, they have my area as covered as NON-Rural DSL and Cable
no wireless links at all..

I think someone "fixed" the books on this info. As its completely BS..

 

1. everything out here in our area is Rural..

2. No wireless listed at ALL ( there are 2 providers ourselves and the telco
to the south of us) 

3. The local cable company has only a handful of customers 

4. says that over 3500 folks in my county have NO internet.. Complete and
total BS.. This is farm country and I'd PAY to find more than 50 homes that
don't have internet.

 

Again.. the books have been cooked, thanks to either bad info or
competition.

 

 

Where there is a Wisp, there is a way!

 

Respectfully,

 

Rick Harnish

Executive Director

WISPA

260-307-4000 cell

866-317-2851 Option 2 WISPA Office

Skype: rick.harnish.

rharn...@wispa.org

adm...@wispa.org (Trina and Rick)

 

 

 

 

 

> -Original Message-

> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On

> Behalf Of Sean Heskett

> Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 5:29 PM

> To: wireless@wispa.org; a...@afmug.com; us...@wug.cc; color...@wispa.org

> Subject: [WISPA] FCC broadband deployment report

> 

> Hi all,

> 

> Sorry for all the cross posts on multiple lists but this seems troubling
to me.  We

> submitted our coverage data to the state of Colorado and they submitted
our

> data for the national map.  However, this FCC broadband deployment report

> includes this map which doesn't show our coverage.

> 

> Report:  <http://www.fcc.gov/reports/eighth-broadband-progress-report>
http://www.fcc.gov/reports/eighth-broadband-progress-report

> Map:  <http://www.fcc.gov/maps/section-706-fixed-broadband-deployment-map>
http://www.fcc.gov/maps/section-706-fixed-broadband-deployment-map

> 

> What gives???  WISPA???

> 

> Is anyone else noticing their coverage area is not included?

> 

> Best regards,

> 

> 

> Sean Heskett

> ZIRKEL Wireless

> High-speed Internet

> 

>  <http://www.zirkelwireless.com> www.zirkelwireless.com

> 970-871-8500

> ___

Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Baaaackkkk!

[Brian Webster]

Rick,
It is important to note that generating a coverage map(s) on
Towercoverage.com does not create a map that is easily acceptable to the
state mapping agencies and it certainly cannot just be uploaded to the
national broadband map. There is a great deal of post processing work to
make any of those usable for the National Broadband map. The site does
export a nice list of tower sites and other data that is part of the
required information to be submitted. Some states may still not accept the
data from this site depending on the skills of their GIS and mapping
contractors. We do not want to mislead WISP's in to thinking that if they
sign up with that site that would all they need to do to supply mapping data
and participating on that site does not guarantee that their mapping data
will be included either.

Thank you,
Brian Webster
Telecom Project Coordinator
Partnership for Connected Illinois
(217) 886-4228 Main Number
(217) 886-4229 Direct Line
(217) 718-4546 Fax
http://www.BroadbandIllinois.org

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Rick Harnish
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 5:45 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Bc!

Fred,

I assure you the WISPA FCC Committee is indeed on this.  You make great
points and we appreciate your review. You are definitely correct, that WISPs
NEED to get on the National Broadband Map NOW!  Those that don't will be
suffering from subsidized competition.  Anyone who does not know who to
contact, drop me a line.  I have contacts now for all states.  Maybe, I can
get that list up on the WISPA website under WISP Resources.  There is one
now, but it is not complete.  I now have 4-5 names per state I believe.

The guys at towercoverage.com are making it easy and inexpensive to make
your maps and get them uploaded to the National/State Maps as well.  

Where there is a Wisp, there is a way!

Respectfully,

Rick Harnish
Executive Director
WISPA
260-307-4000 cell
866-317-2851 Option 2 WISPA Office
Skype: rick.harnish.
rharn...@wispa.org
adm...@wispa.org (Trina and Rick)





> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] 
> On Behalf Of Fred Goldstein
> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 5:17 PM
> To: wireless@wispa.org
> Subject: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Bc!
> 
> The FCC's home page ( transition.fcc.gov ) has an item about Connect
America
> Fund, posted with no description.  This turns out to be a further NPRM
about
> Phase I funding.
> 
> As you may recall, CAF Phase I was the short-term (2012) step that 
> offered
> $775 per line to price-cap ILECs (the Bells and other big
> ones) to bring "broadband" to "unserved" areas that they otherwise
wouldn't. It
> was budgeted for $300M but only about $115M was claimed, mostly by 
> Frontier.  The Bells didn't take much.  CenturyLink however whined 
> that
the
> definition of "served" should be changed to specifically exclude areas
WISPs, so
> they could get subsidy money to overbuild existing WISPs.  The FCC 
> turned
that
> one down, though CenturyLink did take money for some other areas.
> 
> The new Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking:
>
http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2012/db1119/FCC-12-
> 138A1.pdf
> asks what to do about the remaining Phase I money.  While they could 
> of course just not spend it, lowering the USF tax (now around 17%!), 
> that's
not one
> of the two options they are proposing to select from.  One option is 
> to
simply
> add this funding to Phase II, which begins in 2013.  Phase II allows 
> for competition in the awarding of funds; there will be a reverse 
> auction, and
the
> bidder who asks for the least subsidy money gets it.
> 
> Most of the FNPRM, however, is devoted to the other option, 
> essentially a second round of Phase I.  They propose changing Phase I 
> rules to encourage
the
> ILECs to take more money.  There are a lot of questions about details, 
> but
the
> basic ideas are along these lines:
> 
> 1)  Redefine "unserved" to be anywhere that doesn't have 4/1 service, vs.
> 768k/200k in the first round.  This would be based on the National
Broadband
> Map, using 3M/768k as a surrogate for 4/1.  (The agencies apparently
hadn't
> agreed on speed tiers.)  So an area served by a WISP at 2M/500k, or by
Canopy
> 100s, would be deemed "unserved", since it's not 4/1.
> 
> 2)  Allow challenges to the national map.  So if an ILEC thinks an 
> area is unserved even if a WISP claims it's served, they can argue the 
> matter to
the
> FCC.  This works both ways, so I suppose an ISP could claim t

Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Baaaackkkk!

[Brian Webster]

The rule as it stands now is 3 meg down and 768 up. The 4 meg down and 1 meg
up was something put in the National Broadband Plan by the white house team.
Problem with that is the National Broadband Map (of which was already spec'd
out when they wrote that plan) uses download speed tier breakouts of 3 and 6
meg and 768 and 1.5 meg. There will be no way to actually compute the 4 meg
1 meg rule unless they change the national broadband map AND they get all
carriers to revise their reporting. The rule is not really 4 meg and 1 meg
either, it's an aggregate to 5 meg, you could be doing 3 meg down and 2 up
and meet the standard. Remember that is currently just your advertised
maximum download and upload speed. Not all of your customers have to
subscribe to that. A WISP even using 900 MHz could limit those plans to say
only 1 to 5% of the customers on an AP and technically still be within the
rules.

Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Fred Goldstein
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 11:59 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Bc!

At 11/30/2012 11:45 AM, Matt wrote:
> > approach is used, you could comment that raising it from 768/200 to 
> > 4/1 is excessive, and perhaps say a 1.5/384 standard is more 
> > appropriate.  Even Canopy 100 can probably claim that (if it's not
loaded), though YMMV.
>
>Are you saying no one is providing service past 1.5/384 with Canopy 100?

I'm referring to the 900 MHz version with a 4 Mbps one-way burst rate.  That
won't pass the 4/1 test.


  --
  Fred Goldsteink1io   fgoldstein "at" ionary.com
  ionary Consulting  http://www.ionary.com/
  +1 617 795 2701 

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Baaaackkkk!

[Brian Webster]

A WISP could also offer these speeds and raise the price for this plan to
account for the total number of regular speed clients they might lose due to
capacity issues with the higher speed plan. Nowhere do the rules state that
you have to offer those speeds at any given price.

Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Brian Webster
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 3:27 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Bc!

The rule as it stands now is 3 meg down and 768 up. The 4 meg down and 1 meg
up was something put in the National Broadband Plan by the white house team.
Problem with that is the National Broadband Map (of which was already spec'd
out when they wrote that plan) uses download speed tier breakouts of 3 and 6
meg and 768 and 1.5 meg. There will be no way to actually compute the 4 meg
1 meg rule unless they change the national broadband map AND they get all
carriers to revise their reporting. The rule is not really 4 meg and 1 meg
either, it's an aggregate to 5 meg, you could be doing 3 meg down and 2 up
and meet the standard. Remember that is currently just your advertised
maximum download and upload speed. Not all of your customers have to
subscribe to that. A WISP even using 900 MHz could limit those plans to say
only 1 to 5% of the customers on an AP and technically still be within the
rules.

Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Fred Goldstein
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 11:59 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Bc!

At 11/30/2012 11:45 AM, Matt wrote:
> > approach is used, you could comment that raising it from 768/200 to
> > 4/1 is excessive, and perhaps say a 1.5/384 standard is more 
> > appropriate.  Even Canopy 100 can probably claim that (if it's not
loaded), though YMMV.
>
>Are you saying no one is providing service past 1.5/384 with Canopy 100?

I'm referring to the 900 MHz version with a 4 Mbps one-way burst rate.  That
won't pass the 4/1 test.


  --
  Fred Goldsteink1io   fgoldstein "at" ionary.com
  ionary Consulting  http://www.ionary.com/
  +1 617 795 2701 

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] Fixed Wireless growing faster than Cable and DSL

[Brian Webster]

Remember when looking at stats like this that the cable and DSL industries
have been doing this a lot longer and have already built up a large number
of customers in a mature market. Say you have 8 thousand customers, to get a
7.2% increase you would have to add 576 customers. If you are a new fiber to
the home or wireless operator and have 500 customers, you only need to add
100 customers to get a 20% increase. A fixed wireless operator with 1000
customers would only have to add 120 new subscribers to get that 12%
increase.  If you look at the "year adds" column in this article, the DSL
industry had more than 4 million more new customers than cable but only
posted half the growth rate percentage and still had over 9 million more new
subscribers than fiber to the home.

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Gino Villarini
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 7:51 PM
To: WISPA General List (wireless@wispa.org)
Subject: [WISPA] Fixed Wireless growing faster than Cable and DSL

 

http://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2013/04/world-broadband-users-reach-643
-7-million-fuelled-by-fibre-optic-connectivity.html

 

Gino A. Villarini

g...@aeronetpr.com

Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.

787.273.4143

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] [AFMUG] NTIA reporting limit of 25Mbps for wireless networks

[Brian Webster]

He is incorrect. 

 

The error check tool we states have to run will throw an error and the state
has to make an exception record entry in to their submitted documentation
but it does not prohibit any state from submitting data for fixed wireless
carriers above 25 meg. I have done this for Illinois in the past. This is a
common argument I have with the NTIA as they do not seem to keep up with the
technology advancements in the fixed wireless world and thus their error
check tool always seems to lag based on speeds reported. They have been
limiting what MOBILE wireless carriers are allowed to report but that has
been based upon the massive difference in claims of speed vs. the speed test
data they have been gathering from their speed test app they give away for
smart phone users. I have reviewed the speed test data for Illinois, and
specifically the mobile data. The NTIA is correct in pushing the mobile
wireless carriers to report a lot less than their claims. Last year they had
a big meeting with the mobile wireless carriers where they hashed this issue
out. The 25 meg rule was part of the result of those meetings. States cannot
report mobile carriers at more than that but they most certainly can for
fixed wireless.

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: a...@afmug.com [mailto:a...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Sean Heskett
Sent: Monday, August 26, 2013 1:49 PM
To: a...@afmug.com; WISPA General List
Subject: [AFMUG] NTIA reporting limit of 25Mbps for wireless networks

 

I was just informed by Tom McKean of the State of Colorado broadband mapping
agency OIT  that the NTIA doesn't let them report
any wireless plans as being faster than 25Mbps.

 

We have deployed quite a bit of Canopy 450 this year and we have plans that
are 30Mbps down and 10Mbps up.

 

Are his statements correct?  Why does the NTIA have an arbitrary limit for
wireless networks?

 

inquiring minds want to know!

 

-sean

 

 

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] ConnectEd

[Brian Webster]

Right now the rule of thumb for adequate bandwidth to a school is 100k per 
student. Documenting what schools currently have is a hot topic for the 
national broadband map. We are diving deep on this topic in Illinois and it’s 
like herding cats. We did hear back from the Chicago City Schools and while we 
are trying to get a more definitive data set from them, they did state that the 
high school buildings typically have 50 meg and the elementary buildings 20 
meg. There are many more elementary school buildings than high school buildings 
in Chicago so the student population at each location is different and this the 
different bandwidth. 

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf 
Of Kevin Owen
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2013 3:50 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] ConnectEd

 

It will be an interesting discussion for sure.  We currently have service built 
to many schools, most with the capacity to provide 100 + megs.  Most schools 
are purchasing somewhere in the 5 – 20meg range as that is what they can 
afford, including their current subsidy from E-Rate.  We are providing service 
to rural schools and they just can’t afford more.  Not sure how the FCC feels 
these schools will be able to afford 100+ meg connections and beyond that, 
where does the money come from to continue to fund E-Rate with what are sure to 
be large increased demands on the funding to support these larger pipes.

 

Kevin

 

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf 
Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2013 12:35 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] ConnectEd

 

I think so. I asked the same question a few weeks ago and the response was 
something to the effect of, "Is this something WISPA members want to respond 
to?" The response seemed to be a resounding yes.

Now I just hope that it's something that we can get a piece of vs. telling them 
to not do it.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com

 

  _  

From: "Kevin Owen" 
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2013 1:42:13 PM
Subject: [WISPA] ConnectEd

Do we know if WISPA as an organization is currently reviewing or plans to 
review/make comments to the NPRM for the revisions to the E-Rate program.  Is 
WISPA following the discussions concerning the Federal ConnectED program that 
wants to see a minimum connection standard to all schools and libraries of 100 
megs with a 5 year goal of having access to 1 gig of available bandwidth for 
all schools and libraries?

thanks,

Kevin Owen

First Step Internet, LLC  


___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] WISPALOOZA Video?

[Brian Webster]

Rick,
I would highly recommend you purchase the new frames for the go
pros. They are not waterproof but allow you use the same mounting system yet
leave the camera so that you can plug in a USB power supply while the camera
is running, this will also expose the microphones for better audio
recordings.

http://gopro.com/camera-mounts/the-frame

Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Rick Harnish
Sent: Monday, September 30, 2013 7:39 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPALOOZA Video?

Matt,

I bought extended batteries for our GoPros to record the event without issue
this time.  They will be made available to WISPA Members.  It won't be right
away as it takes some time to process 50 or so 1 hour sessions.

Where there is a Wisp, there is a way!
Join Us at WISPAPALOOZA 2013 - Las Vegas, Oct 12-18

Respectfully,

Rick Harnish
Executive Director
WISPA
260-307-4000 cell
866-317-2851 Option 2 WISPA Office
Skype: rick.harnish.
rharn...@wispa.org
adm...@wispa.org (Trina and Rick)






> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
> On Behalf Of Matt
> Sent: Monday, September 30, 2013 5:43 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: [WISPA] WISPALOOZA Video?
> 
> Will there be any video/youtube recording of WISPALOOZA this year?  I 
> am pretty sure not all out key people cannot make the fiber weekend 
> and the conference.  Very interested in the fiber weekend.
> ___
> Wireless mailing list
> Wireless@wispa.org
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] Comcast asking FCC for more 5GHz spectrum.

[Brian Webster]

One good thing about the higher bands and the noise floor is that free space
loss works to your advantage. That being that a 5 GHz indoor Omni home AP
router signal will fall off as an interference source as a much shorter
distance than a 2.4 GHz device will. The laws of physics work in your favor.

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

 <http://www.wirelessmapping.com> www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Scott Carullo
Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2013 6:52 PM
To: Matt Hoppes; sc...@brevardwireless.com; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Comcast asking FCC for more 5GHz spectrum.

 

Hard to tell, noise floor is noise floor which keeps creeping up - we all
know things work better when its quiet.  This used to worry me a lot when I
saw it coming, but then I realized it was already there and I had no idea
until I just happened to scan on some radios (I don't usually install the
stuff).  I'm not worried any more, if its not one thing it will be another
any way.  Thats what gives us the edge every day, flexibility.  We will work
around it, we always do.

I figure a high gain antenna on a tower with a good directional CPE will
continue to work fine.  Their omni low gain antenna can't compete with a
20-30db directional one.  Still sucks though, you drive down the street and
see one after another running 5Ghz just knowing there probably isn't 3
connections in the whole city to them

Scott Carullo
Technical Operations
855-FLSPEED x102

  <http://www.flhsi.com/files/emaillogo.jpg> 

 

  _  

From: "Matt Hoppes" 
Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2013 6:43 PM
To: "sc...@brevardwireless.com" , "WISPA General
List" 
Cc: "WISPA General List" 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Comcast asking FCC for more 5GHz spectrum.

Are you seeing any impact from them?


On Nov 14, 2013, at 18:03, "Scott Carullo" 
wrote:

Yeah, won't matter either way with a 5Ghz AP on every street corner.
Already seeing that in our areas  do a wireless scan and you see 354
5Ghz APs now in addition to the 2Ghz ones (they run dual band APs now).

Scott Carullo
Technical Operations
855-FLSPEED x102

  <http://www.flhsi.com/files/emaillogo.jpg> 

 


  _  


From: "Bret Clark" 
Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2013 5:49 PM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Comcast asking FCC for more 5GHz spectrum.

What could go wrong with Comcast taking up yet more 5GHz of
spectrum...[/sarcasm off]

On 11/14/2013 01:40 PM, ralph wrote:

I hope the links at the bottom come through.

---

 

Comcast needs the FCC to open up the 5 GHz spectrum band to power
next-generation Wi-Fi services that could allow it to deliver wireless
broadband at speeds of up to 1 Gbps, SVP of Business Development Tom Nagel
testified at a House Energy and Commerce hearing on Wednesday. 

 

Nagel disclosed in his prepared testimony that Comcast has expanded the
number of Wi-Fi access points for Xfinity high-speed Internet customers to
350,000. The nation's largest cable MSO also began deploying wireless
gateways from Cisco earlier this year that Comcast has said may be able to
power millions of neighborhood hotspots.

 

While Comcast already is already using the 5 GHz band, Nagel said it needs
more of the unlicensed spectrum to meet demand from subscribers for Wi-Fi.
It faces potential opposition from Toyota and other automobile manufacturers
who want to use the 5 GHz band to deliver next-generation connected car
applications, including applications that would warn drivers of collision
threats.

 

Toyota principal researcher John Kenney raised concerns about possible
interference from Wi-Fi services at Wednesday's hearing.  "We have been
actively engaged with the Wi-Fi community and other stakeholders who are
exploring possible sharing solutions that will alleviate any risk of harmful
interference from unlicensed devices. But we're not there yet and it's going
to take a bit more time to see if we can get there," Kenney said in his
prepared testimony.

 

For more:
- see Nagel's prepared testimony
<http://links.mkt1985.com/ctt?kn=207&ms=NzE0MjgxOQS2&r=NDc2MTk4ODcyMzcS1&b=0
&j=MTc5NzA2OTg3S0&mt=2&rj=MTc5NzA2OTg3S0&rt=0>  (.pdf)
- see Kenney's prepared testimony
<http://links.mkt1985.com/ctt?kn=187&ms=NzE0MjgxOQS2&r=NDc2MTk4ODcyMzcS1&b=0
&j=MTc5NzA2OTg3S0&mt=2&rj=MTc5NzA2OTg3S0&rt=0>  (.pdf)
- see Comcast blog post
<http://links.mkt1985.com/ctt?kn=118&ms=NzE0MjgxOQS2&r=NDc2MTk4ODcyMzcS1&b=0
&j=MTc5NzA2OTg3S0&mt=2&rj=MTc5NzA2OTg3S0&rt=0> 
- Broadcasting & Cable has this story
<http://links.mkt1985.com/ctt?kn=190&ms=NzE0MjgxOQS2&r=NDc2MTk4ODcyMzcS1&b=0
&j=MTc5NzA2OTg3S0&a

Re: [WISPA] Comcast asking FCC for more 5GHz spectrum.

[Brian Webster]

I bid a lot of the RF work on these networks two years ago with another
company (they got greedy on the bid, didn't win). They are building these
networks to offer the fixed broadband customers a mobility component to help
reduce churn with the cord cutting mentality crowd. If the low bandwidth
users can do everything over their cell phone data plan, why would they need
the cable company and cable internet? Now if they have FREE mobile data
coverage in most of the places they go as part of their home broadband
connection, it offers some added benefit and helps reduce their churn, which
is part of the cost justification model for them. Given they don't have to
pay any backhaul or pole rental costs for these, they only have the
hardware, labor and power investment. They are using capital money they
received from selling spectrum to Verizon a couple of years ago (a group of
cable companies had a block of spectrum). 

These devices are clearly capable of multiple SSID's so another possible
revenue stream will be to go to the cellular companies and offer their own
SSID for cellular data network offload. Since these cable companies are
building a large footprint per carrier in the most dense cellular data
consumption markets, they have the best chance of making that type of
program work. They will have the critical mass of network coverage to get
the cell companies to want to pay for this offload rather than let the
customer worry about it.

Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Matt Hoppes
Sent: Friday, November 15, 2013 11:48 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Comcast asking FCC for more 5GHz spectrum.

We can only hope for A/C 80MHz channels to spread the signal way out 
but also pollute more.

The ridiculous thing is 5GHz doesn't go through buildings... what is Comcast
attempting to do here?


Matt Hoppes
Director of Information Technology
Indigo Wireless
+1 (570) 723-7312

On 11/15/13, 11:46 AM, Jerry Richardson (airCloud) wrote:
> Having had the privilege of living through PG&E's rollout of 900MHz
> smart meters we will be impacted, it's just hard to say how much.
>
> The PG&E smart meters were essentially unity gain at full power. When it
> got into the 10's of thousands the AP saw -60dB across the board at 10
> miles from the nearest smart meter. With 5GHz, we have a much higher FSL
> and there will not be nearly as many withing a given sector.
>
> Making a few assumptions here:
> Pole AP is 27dB into a 6dB omni at 30' off the ground
> WISP sector antenna is 17dB at 200' off the ground
> At 1 mile the WISP AP is going to see ~60dB.
>
> If comcast does succeed in getting more 5GHz spectrum, it will be good
> for us as well as it will spread the noise out a bit lowering overall
noise.
>
> Better come up with a plan now as we will be affected. Comcast, like
> PG&E is going to tell you they are in compliance and to call their lawyers
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 8:25 AM, Matt Hoppes  <mailto:mhop...@indigowireless.com>> wrote:
>
> Right... I as well.. that's why I don't know what the answer is.
> Everyone's in this game, but some just play (seemingly) unfair... for
> example, it doesn't help anyone when you just go throwing up APs on
> cable plants and blasting all over the town.
>
> On the other hand Comcast may say it doesn't make sence for you (the
> WISP) to go sticking these high gain antennas up on the tower and
> covering the town!
>
>
> Matt Hoppes
> Director of Information Technology
> Indigo Wireless
> +1 (570) 723-7312 
>
> On 11/15/13, 11:19 AM, Eric Flanery wrote:
>  > How would you 'legally' define a WISP?
>  >
>  > What would make Comcast 'not a WISP', if they are delivering
> Internet over Wireless?
>  >
>  > If it's that they also deliver Internet over another medium,
> would we (and many other providers) also be excluded because we also
> deliver Internet over cable and fiber?
>  >
>  > If it's that they also provide TV service, then what about those
> of us that also run transport, hosting, development, and
> infrastructure services (examples among doubtless myriad others).
>  >
>  > Not that I wouldn't love some protected spectrum, I'm just having
> a hard time imagining anything that would prevent Comcast and the
> like from using it, while not also excluding quite a few of us.
>  >
>  > --Eric
>  >
>  > -Original Message-
>  > From: wireless-b

Re: [WISPA] Who is using Towercoverage.com ?

[Brian Webster]

Matt,

Signals do change as you change height as you expose or conceal 
the even number Fresnel zones.

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf 
Of Matt Hoppes
Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2014 3:24 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Who is using Towercoverage.com ?

 

Signals don't change as you increment heights. You're asking for real time 
foliage mapping. Not going to find it. 


On Apr 9, 2014, at 3:18 PM, Josh Luthman  wrote:

I'm not talking about customers plotting where their address is.  What I'm 
getting at is if I have a customer called in, I'd like to just punch in the 
location and then see if they'll work at ground level or how high we need to 
get off the ground and see the signal change as I increment height.





Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

 

On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 3:16 PM, Clay Stewart 
 wrote:

Josh. You can. Just put the web snip on a website. If need help can walk u 
through later today. Our websire customer lookup... 
http://www.towercoverage.com/iframemc.asp?mcid=1223 
<http://www.towercoverage.com/iframemc.asp?mcid=1223&Acct=2910> &Acct=2910

On Apr 9, 2014 3:08 PM, "Josh Luthman"  wrote:

I'm having a hard time adjusting to this from Radio Mobile.  There's all the 
same "stupid" interface shortfalls, for example wanting to know what a 
customer's CPE would be without adding a site and putting them in the same 
list.  I feel with technology as it is, it shouldn't be so convoluted to simply 
put a dot on a map and see what the signal would be from a tower while being 
able to adjust the elevation on the fly.

 

I'm wondering if there's another list/forum for this service, too.  There's no 
way I'm going write a bible of questions for support, it doesn't make a whole 
lot of sense for either of us.



Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

 

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless


___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] Who is using Towercoverage.com ?

[Brian Webster]

Fresnel zones are 180 degrees out of phase with even and odd numbered zones
(1st, 2nd, 3rd and so on). When you design a path you strive for an exposed
Fresnel zone of between 1 and .6 of the first zone, meaning you use the
ground/trees/obstructions to block the second and higher numbered zones
(this is only partially blocking the zone at the bottom). This minimizes the
cancelling effect giving an apparent gain.

A good visual example of this is to take a Flashlight such as a Mag light
with an adjustable beam and shine it against the wall to see the circular
pattern. Carefully look at that pattern and you will see light and dark
rings, these are your Fresnel zones and the lighter ones are the odd
numbered zones. The idea is you keep the first bright zone and eliminate the
rest. This is why going higher is not always better on a PTP path to get
more signal once you have cleared obstructions, going higher can expose more
even numbered Fresnel zones with the phase cancelling and a reduction in
signal due to same.

Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com

-Original Message-
From: Matt Hoppes [mailto:mhop...@indigowireless.com] 
Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2014 9:07 AM
To: bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Who is using Towercoverage.com ?

Can you explain this more?  This isn't what I was getting at... but since
you brought it up and it's been brought up before it might be worth
explaining in more detail.  I'm familiar with the concept but still can't
grasp why it works.


Matt Hoppes
Director of Information Technology
Indigo Wireless
+1 (570) 723-7312

On 4/10/14, 9:04 AM, Brian Webster wrote:
> Matt,
> 
> Signals do change as you change height as you expose 
> or conceal the even number Fresnel zones.
> 
>  
> 
> Thank You,
> 
> Brian Webster
> 
> www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com>
> 
> www.Broadband-Mapping.com
> 
>  
> 
> *From:*wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
> *On Behalf Of *Matt Hoppes
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 09, 2014 3:24 PM
> *To:* WISPA General List
> *Subject:* Re: [WISPA] Who is using Towercoverage.com ?
> 
>  
> 
> Signals don't change as you increment heights. You're asking for real 
> time foliage mapping. Not going to find it.
> 
> 
> On Apr 9, 2014, at 3:18 PM, Josh Luthman  <mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
> 
> I'm not talking about customers plotting where their address is.
>  What I'm getting at is if I have a customer called in, I'd like to
> just punch in the location and then see if they'll work at ground
> level or how high we need to get off the ground and see the signal
> change as I increment height.
> 
> 
> 
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> 
>  
> 
> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 3:16 PM, Clay Stewart
>  <mailto:cstew...@stewartcomputerservices.com>> wrote:
> 
> Josh. You can. Just put the web snip on a website. If need help can
> walk u through later today. Our websire customer lookup...
> http://www.towercoverage.com/iframemc.asp?mcid=1223&Acct=2910
> 
> On Apr 9, 2014 3:08 PM, "Josh Luthman"  <mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
> 
> I'm having a hard time adjusting to this from Radio Mobile.
>  There's all the same "stupid" interface shortfalls, for example
> wanting to know what a customer's CPE would be without adding a
> site and putting them in the same list.  I feel with technology
> as it is, it shouldn't be so convoluted to simply put a dot on a
> map and see what the signal would be from a tower while being
> able to adjust the elevation on the fly.
> 
>  
> 
> I'm wondering if there's another list/forum for this service,
> too.  There's no way I'm going write a bible of questions for
> support, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense for either of us.
> 
> 
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340 
> Direct: 937-552-2343 
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> 
>  
> 
> ___
> Wireless mailing list
> Wireless@wispa.org <mailto:Wireless@wispa.org>
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> 
> ___
> Wireless mailing list
> Wireless@wispa.org <mailto:Wi

Re: [WISPA] Who is using Towercoverage.com ?

[Brian Webster]

Not really, Fresnel zone size is a function of frequency and distance between 
the two end points. The zone is football shaped with the widest part of the 
zone half way between the two end points. Antenna patterns have nothing to do 
with Fresnel zone size. 

 

Here is a Fresnel Zone size calculator with a good basic illustration:   
http://www.wirelessconnections.net/calcs/FresnelZone.asp

 

 

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: Clay Stewart [mailto:cstew...@stewartcomputerservices.com] 
Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2014 2:02 PM
To: Brian Webster; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Who is using Towercoverage.com ?

 

Yes, good way to look at it Brian, thanks.

 

So, is there a minimum height per frequency... say for 900Mhz "you should never 
shoot less then x feet', like less then 6'?

 

On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 10:14 AM, Brian Webster  
wrote:

Fresnel zones are 180 degrees out of phase with even and odd numbered zones
(1st, 2nd, 3rd and so on). When you design a path you strive for an exposed
Fresnel zone of between 1 and .6 of the first zone, meaning you use the
ground/trees/obstructions to block the second and higher numbered zones
(this is only partially blocking the zone at the bottom). This minimizes the
cancelling effect giving an apparent gain.

A good visual example of this is to take a Flashlight such as a Mag light
with an adjustable beam and shine it against the wall to see the circular
pattern. Carefully look at that pattern and you will see light and dark
rings, these are your Fresnel zones and the lighter ones are the odd
numbered zones. The idea is you keep the first bright zone and eliminate the
rest. This is why going higher is not always better on a PTP path to get
more signal once you have cleared obstructions, going higher can expose more
even numbered Fresnel zones with the phase cancelling and a reduction in
signal due to same.


Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com


-Original Message-
From: Matt Hoppes [mailto:mhop...@indigowireless.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2014 9:07 AM
To: bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Who is using Towercoverage.com ?

Can you explain this more?  This isn't what I was getting at... but since
you brought it up and it's been brought up before it might be worth
explaining in more detail.  I'm familiar with the concept but still can't
grasp why it works.


Matt Hoppes
Director of Information Technology
Indigo Wireless
+1 (570) 723-7312  

On 4/10/14, 9:04 AM, Brian Webster wrote:
> Matt,
>
> Signals do change as you change height as you expose
> or conceal the even number Fresnel zones.
>
>
>
> Thank You,
>
> Brian Webster
>
> www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com>
>
> www.Broadband-Mapping.com
>
>
>
> *From:*wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
> *On Behalf Of *Matt Hoppes
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 09, 2014 3:24 PM
> *To:* WISPA General List
> *Subject:* Re: [WISPA] Who is using Towercoverage.com ?
>
>
>
> Signals don't change as you increment heights. You're asking for real
> time foliage mapping. Not going to find it.
>
>
> On Apr 9, 2014, at 3:18 PM, Josh Luthman  <mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
>
> I'm not talking about customers plotting where their address is.
>  What I'm getting at is if I have a customer called in, I'd like to
> just punch in the location and then see if they'll work at ground
> level or how high we need to get off the ground and see the signal
> change as I increment height.
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 3:16 PM, Clay Stewart
>  <mailto:cstew...@stewartcomputerservices.com>> wrote:
>
> Josh. You can. Just put the web snip on a website. If need help can
> walk u through later today. Our websire customer lookup...
> http://www.towercoverage.com/iframemc.asp?mcid=1223 
> <http://www.towercoverage.com/iframemc.asp?mcid=1223&Acct=2910> &Acct=2910
>
> On Apr 9, 2014 3:08 PM, "Josh Luthman"  <mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
>
> I'm having a hard time adjusting to this from Radio Mobile.
>  There's all the same "stupid" interface shortfalls, for example
> wanting to know what a customer's CPE would be without adding a
> site and putting them in the same list.  I feel with technology
> as it is, it shouldn't be so convoluted to simply put a dot on 

Re: [WISPA] Google luring Business Market with Wifi gear?

[Brian Webster]

I have been a beta tester from the early days as well. Great product and it 
does roam on to the Verizon network when you don’t have Sprint coverage. The 
rest of my Verizon phones will be moving to Republic when the contracts are up.

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf 
Of Jason Bailey
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 8:19 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Google luring Business Market with Wifi gear?

 

I've had 2 lines with Republic since the early beta. Upgraded them to Moto-X's 
and couldn't be happier!

On Friday, May 23, 2014 7:16 AM, Mike Hammett  wrote:

 

They've been doing this for a couple years now.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com

 

  _  

From: "TJ Trout" 
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 12:58:49 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Google luring Business Market with Wifi gear?

I've been wonding when this would happen, hopefully this will go main stream, I 
don't know why it hasn't already. All networks are suffering and wifi offload 
seems like an answer. I want to be able to make calls like I'm on network but 
when I only have wifi coverage.

 

On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 7:57 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:

https://republicwireless.com/

Sprint MVNO with WiFi <-> cellular handoffs.

Also tried to resell\white-label and they weren't ready for that either.

 



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com <http://www.ics-il.com/> 

 

  _  

From: "Gino Villarini" 
To: "WISPA General List" 

Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 6:24:06 PM


Subject: Re: [WISPA] Google luring Business Market  with Wifi gear?

What bandwidth.com <http://bandwidth.com/>  do? I don’t seem to grasp the whole 
deal…

 

 

 

Gino A. Villarini

President

Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.

www.aeronetpr.com <http://www.aeronetpr.com/>

@aeronetpr

 

 

 

From: Mike Hammett 
Reply-To: WISPA General List 
Date: Thursday, May 22, 2014 at 6:46 PM
To: WISPA General List 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Google luring Business Market with Wifi gear?

 

*nods* I reached out to the guys that Bandwidth.com started up, but they said 
they were too early in the business to worry about stuff like that.

Hotspot 2.0 (according to the hype) could be nice for us - doing last mile to 
the WiFi networks.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com <http://www.ics-il.com/> 

 

  _  

From: "Gino Villarini" 
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 12:17:30 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Google luring Business Market  with Wifi gear?

I think this is something Wispa could/should manage as part of WISPA 
strategic/business development area

 

 

 

Gino A. Villarini

President

Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.

www.aeronetpr.com <http://www.aeronetpr.com/>

@aeronetpr

 

 

 

From: Steve Barnes 
Reply-To: WISPA General List 
Date: Thursday, May 22, 2014 at 12:29 PM
To: WISPA General List 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Google luring Business Market with Wifi gear?

 

The future is going to be interesting for sure.

 

A few questions come to mind. 

Is there a business model where WISP’s can partner with a Google or Microsoft 
to help advance our offerings or would you be just selling your soul to Satan.

How do you compete against that level of investment if they start putting up 
hotspots to offload from the LTE networks in your area since that will most 
likely destroy 2.4 and 5.7-8 bands.

 

Steve Barnes

General Manager

PCSWIN.com

Howard LLC.

 

From:wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf 
Of Gino Villarini
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 12:19 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Google luring Business Market with Wifi gear?

 

http://gigaom.com/2014/05/21/google-reportedly-plans-to-target-businesses-with-wi-fi/?

 

 

 

Gino A. Villarini

President

Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.

www.aeronetpr.com <http://www.aeronetpr.com/>

@aeronetpr

 

 


___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 


___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 


___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 


___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 

 

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] Google luring Business Market with Wifi gear?

[Brian Webster]

That is their drawback for some and the reason being they have to build a
custom ROM that has their Wi-Fi programming in it and then they have to get
Sprint to test and approve the phone for their network. The availability of
the Moto X and G phones along with the older DefyXT give a little more
choice than when they started service. My son just received his MotoG and
loves it. Doesn't do 4G data but Sprint has not upgraded their network here
anyway. My older kids will be getting Republic phones by the end of summer.
This will shave $150 a month from my cell phone costs and since we all have
Android phones now it's not a major change. I will just lose my slide out
keyboard. The big plus will be not having to worry about the kids going over
on the shared data plan. They are good about that now but it is one less
worry.

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Martha Huizenga
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 10:35 AM
To: Jason Bailey; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Google luring Business Market with Wifi gear?

 

the CEO of republic wireless spoke at the WIFI conference in DC a couple of
weeks ago. Seemed like a pretty amazing service. If I could use my existing
phone I would sign up!

Martha Huizenga
202-546-5898

DC Access, LLC <http://www.dcaccess.net/> 
Friendly, Local, Affordable, Internet!
Connecting the Capitol Hill Community
Join us on Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/DCAccess>  or follow us on
Twitter <http://twitter.com/dcaccess>  

Is your Message Lost in Cyberspace?
Promote your business locally with HillAds <http://www.hillads.com> 

On 5/23/2014 8:19 AM, Jason Bailey wrote:

I've had 2 lines with Republic since the early beta. Upgraded them to
Moto-X's and couldn't be happier!

On Friday, May 23, 2014 7:16 AM, Mike Hammett
<mailto:wispawirel...@ics-il.net>  wrote:

 

They've been doing this for a couple years now.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com

 


  _  


From: "TJ Trout"  <mailto:t...@pcguys.us> 
To: "WISPA General List"  <mailto:wireless@wispa.org> 
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 12:58:49 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Google luring Business Market with Wifi gear?

I've been wonding when this would happen, hopefully this will go main
stream, I don't know why it hasn't already. All networks are suffering and
wifi offload seems like an answer. I want to be able to make calls like I'm
on network but when I only have wifi coverage.

 

On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 7:57 PM, Mike Hammett 
wrote:



https://republicwireless.com/

Sprint MVNO with WiFi <-> cellular handoffs.

Also tried to resell\white-label and they weren't ready for that either. 

 



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com <http://www.ics-il.com/> 

 


  _  


From: "Gino Villarini" 
To: "WISPA General List" 

Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 6:24:06 PM 


Subject: Re: [WISPA] Google luring Business Market  with Wifi gear?

What bandwidth.com <http://bandwidth.com/>  do? I don't seem to grasp the
whole deal.

 

 

 

Gino A. Villarini

President

Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.

www.aeronetpr.com <http://www.aeronetpr.com/>

@aeronetpr

 

 

 

From: Mike Hammett 
Reply-To: WISPA General List 
Date: Thursday, May 22, 2014 at 6:46 PM
To: WISPA General List 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Google luring Business Market with Wifi gear?

 

*nods* I reached out to the guys that Bandwidth.com started up, but they
said they were too early in the business to worry about stuff like that.

Hotspot 2.0 (according to the hype) could be nice for us - doing last mile
to the WiFi networks.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com <http://www.ics-il.com/> 

 


  _  


From: "Gino Villarini" 
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 12:17:30 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Google luring Business Market  with Wifi gear?

I think this is something Wispa could/should manage as part of WISPA
strategic/business development area

 

 

 

Gino A. Villarini

President

Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.

www.aeronetpr.com <http://www.aeronetpr.com/>

@aeronetpr

 

 

 

From: Steve Barnes 
Reply-To: WISPA General List 
Date: Thursday, May 22, 2014 at 12:29 PM
To: WISPA General List 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Google luring Business Market with Wifi gear?

 

The future is going to be interesting for sure.

 

A few questions come to mind. 

Is there a business model where WISP's can partner with a Google or
Microsoft to help advance our offerings or would you be just selling your
soul to Satan.

How do you compete against that level of investment if they start putting up
hotspots to offload from the LTE networks 

Re: [WISPA] Wisp friendly Tower co's

[Brian Webster]

American Tower spoke at the Mid Atlantic WISA Conference last week. They did 
say that rents are going to be location based, meaning that areas where their 
tower may be the only game in town due to zoning restriction you will pay more. 
If the tower is very rural and they don’t have a lot or requests for space on 
it (and in some areas the towers are actually empty) they are much more willing 
to talk about lower rent. They did also mention something about any fees being 
able to be billed over 12 months. They also said that they have done deals 
where they do a graduated rent increase in the first couple of years to give 
the WISP a break until they get a revenue stream going on that site.

 

While there will be a lot of WISP’s who will say they can still build their own 
towers cheaper, being able to use a  major commercial tower company in a way 
that is at least in the ballpark for a WISP business model is a major leap in 
the right direction compared to years past.

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf 
Of CBB - Jay Fuller
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 11:15 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Wisp friendly Tower co's

 

 

For $750 / month and 4k startup i'll put up a tower and sell space on it.  Geez.

Can't even get rent here for that in some parts of town

- Original Message - 

From: Zach Underwood <mailto:z...@zachunderwood.me>  

To: WISPA General List <mailto:wireless@wispa.org>  

Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 10:07 AM

Subject: Re: [WISPA] Wisp friendly Tower co's

 

Example. I got pricing from ATC for 200 foot of 250 foot tower in a in a very 
well to do part of town for $750 mrc. Setup cost was $4k. 

 

On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Gino Villarini  wrote:

How pricing looked like?

 

 

 

Gino A. Villarini

President

Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.

www.aeronetpr.com   

@aeronetpr

 

 

 

From: Zach Underwood 
Reply-To: WISPA General List 
Date: Friday, May 23, 2014 at 10:50 AM
To: WISPA General List 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Wisp friendly Tower co's

 

http://www.americantower.com/corporateus/solutions/solutions-for-industries/wireless-internet-service-providers/index.htm

 

On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 10:44 AM, Adair Winter  
wrote:

American tower, yes

On May 23, 2014 9:42 AM, "Gino Villarini"  wrote:

Who has the Wisp friendly program? American Towers?

 

 

 

Gino A. Villarini

President

Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.

www.aeronetpr.com   

@aeronetpr

 

 


___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless


___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless





 

-- 

Zach Underwood  (RHCE,RHCSA,RHCT,UACA) 

cheapvpscloud.com <http://cheapvpscloud.com/link.php?id=1> 

My website <http://zachunderwood.me/> 


___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless





 

-- 

Zach Underwood  (RHCE,RHCSA,RHCT,UACA) 

cheapvpscloud.com <http://cheapvpscloud.com/link.php?id=1> 

My website <http://zachunderwood.me/> 

  _  

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] Wisp friendly Tower co's

[Brian Webster]

At their presentation they mentioned having lower rent the first year, then 
bumping it in years two and three up to the final rate. I do know they were 
mentioning rent rates much lower than the typical cellular rates quoted in 
years past. You need to get in touch with the WISP program director at American 
Tower thought as some of the regional market people may not be aware of the 
program for WISP’s. Rick would have that contact person, I can’t seem to find 
it.

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf 
Of Tim Reichhart
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 3:20 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Wisp friendly Tower co's

 

Brian 
when you say they " do graduated rent increase" what do you mean by that? 
because alot of times its cheaper to rent space from village on there water 
towers or build your own for that 600-1000 per month from American Tower Co.

Tim

  _  

-Original Message-----
From: "Brian Webster" 
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Date: 05/23/14 12:08 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Wisp friendly Tower co's

American Tower spoke at the Mid Atlantic WISA Conference last week. They did 
say that rents are going to be location based, meaning that areas where their 
tower may be the only game in town due to zoning restriction you will pay more. 
If the tower is very rural and they don't have a lot or requests for space on 
it (and in some areas the towers are actually empty) they are much more willing 
to talk about lower rent. They did also mention something about any fees being 
able to be billed over 12 months. They also said that they have done deals 
where they do a graduated rent increase in the first couple of years to give 
the WISP a break until they get a revenue stream going on that site.

 

While there will be a lot of WISP's who will say they can still build their own 
towers cheaper, being able to use a major commercial tower company in a way 
that is at least in the ballpark for a WISP business model is a major leap in 
the right direction compared to years past.

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From:wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf 
Of CBB - Jay Fuller 
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 11:15 AM 
To: WISPA General List 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Wisp friendly Tower co's

 

 

For $750 / month and 4k startup i'll put up a tower and sell space on it.  Geez.

Can't even get rent here for that in some parts of town

- Original Message -

From:Zach Underwood <mailto:z...@zachunderwood.me> 

To:WISPA General List <mailto:wireless@wispa.org> 

Sent:Friday, May 23, 2014 10:07 AM

Subject:Re: [WISPA] Wisp friendly Tower co's

 

Example. I got pricing from ATC for 200 foot of 250 foot tower in a in a very 
well to do part of town for $750 mrc. Setup cost was $4k. 

 

On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Gino Villarini < g...@aeronetpr.com> wrote:

How pricing looked like?

 

 

 

Gino A. Villarini

President

Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.

www.aeronetpr.com   

@aeronetpr

 

 

 

From:Zach Underwood < z...@zachunderwood.me> 
Reply-To: WISPA General List < wireless@wispa.org> 
Date: Friday, May 23, 2014 at 10:50 AM 
To: WISPA General List < wireless@wispa.org> 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Wisp friendly Tower co's

 

http://www.americantower.com/corporateus/solutions/solutions-for-industries/wireless-internet-service-providers/index.htm

 

On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 10:44 AM, Adair Winter < ada...@amarillowireless.net> 
wrote:

American tower, yes

On May 23, 2014 9:42 AM, "Gino Villarini" < g...@aeronetpr.com> wrote:

Who has the Wisp friendly program? American Towers?

 

 

 

Gino A. Villarini

President

Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.

www.aeronetpr.com   

@aeronetpr

 

 


___ 
Wireless mailing list 
Wireless@wispa.org 
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless


___ 
Wireless mailing list 
Wireless@wispa.org 
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless





 

--

Zach Underwood  (RHCE,RHCSA,RHCT,UACA)

cheapvpscloud.com <http://cheapvpscloud.com/link.php?id=1> 

My website <http://zachunderwood.me/> 


___ 
Wireless mailing list 
Wireless@wispa.org 
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless





 

--

Zach Underwood   (RHCE,RHCSA,RHCT,UACA)

cheapvpscloud.com <http://cheapvpscloud.com/link.php?id=1> 

My website <http://zachunderwood.me/> 

  _  

___ 
Wireless mailing list 
Wireless@wispa.org 
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

  _  

___
Wi

Re: [WISPA] Google luring Business Market with Wifi gear?

[Brian Webster]

I haven’t found an area on Verizon where it won’t roam yet. The sprint coverage 
around rural NY is spotty at best off the interstate corridors but Verizon 
Coverage is strong, roams just fine with both data and voice. If you search the 
republic blog on their site they actually go in to detail about how many of 
their customers do this and the minutes used over the whole, they say it still 
falls well within their business model.

 

The real neat thing about Republic is that the voice and texts also work over 
Wi-Fi, that means if you are in a no cell coverage area but can connect to 
Wi-Fi you now have cell coverage without having to use a FemToCell home base 
station connected to broadband.

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf 
Of TJ Trout
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 1:04 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Google luring Business Market with Wifi gear?

 

Ahh I did a search. You can roam onto verizon towers which sprint has roaming 
agreements on. This wouldn't be the entire network though. Probably just in 
small towns where verizon already has a network and sprint didn't think it was 
worth building in (low usage areas)

 

On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 9:56 AM, TJ Trout  wrote:

Roam onto verizon but your main network is sprint? Are you positive about that? 
Seems unlikely.

 

On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Brian Webster  wrote:

That is their drawback for some and the reason being they have to build a 
custom ROM that has their Wi-Fi programming in it and then they have to get 
Sprint to test and approve the phone for their network. The availability of the 
Moto X and G phones along with the older DefyXT give a little more choice than 
when they started service. My son just received his MotoG and loves it. Doesn’t 
do 4G data but Sprint has not upgraded their network here anyway. My older kids 
will be getting Republic phones by the end of summer. This will shave $150 a 
month from my cell phone costs and since we all have Android phones now it’s 
not a major change. I will just lose my slide out keyboard. The big plus will 
be not having to worry about the kids going over on the shared data plan. They 
are good about that now but it is one less worry.

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf 
Of Martha Huizenga
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 10:35 AM
To: Jason Bailey; WISPA General List


Subject: Re: [WISPA] Google luring Business Market with Wifi gear?

 

the CEO of republic wireless spoke at the WIFI conference in DC a couple of 
weeks ago. Seemed like a pretty amazing service. If I could use my existing 
phone I would sign up!

Martha Huizenga
202-546-5898

DC Access, LLC <http://www.dcaccess.net/> 
Friendly, Local, Affordable, Internet!
Connecting the Capitol Hill Community
Join us on Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/DCAccess>  or follow us on Twitter 
<http://twitter.com/dcaccess>  

Is your Message Lost in Cyberspace?
Promote your business locally with HillAds <http://www.hillads.com> 

On 5/23/2014 8:19 AM, Jason Bailey wrote:

I've had 2 lines with Republic since the early beta. Upgraded them to Moto-X's 
and couldn't be happier!

On Friday, May 23, 2014 7:16 AM, Mike Hammett  
<mailto:wispawirel...@ics-il.net>  wrote:

 

They've been doing this for a couple years now.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com

 


  _  


From: "TJ Trout"  <mailto:t...@pcguys.us> 
To: "WISPA General List"  <mailto:wireless@wispa.org> 
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 12:58:49 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Google luring Business Market with Wifi gear?

I've been wonding when this would happen, hopefully this will go main stream, I 
don't know why it hasn't already. All networks are suffering and wifi offload 
seems like an answer. I want to be able to make calls like I'm on network but 
when I only have wifi coverage.

 

On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 7:57 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:

https://republicwireless.com/

Sprint MVNO with WiFi <-> cellular handoffs.

Also tried to resell\white-label and they weren't ready for that either. 

 



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com <http://www.ics-il.com/> 

 


  _  


From: "Gino Villarini" 
To: "WISPA General List" 

Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2014 6:24:06 PM 


Subject: Re: [WISPA] Google luring Business Market  with Wifi gear?

What bandwidth.com <http://bandwidth.com/>  do? I don’t seem to grasp the whole 
deal…

 

 

 

Gino A. Villarini

President

Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.

www.aeronetpr.com <http://www.aeronetpr.com/>

@aeronetpr

 

 

 

From: Mike Hammett 
Reply-To: WI

Re: [WISPA] 11Ghz Licensing Warning Question

[Brian Webster]

The last two entries are relative to the FAA height restrictions for that
location based on a possible encroachment to an instrument approach of one
kind or another. If this link is going on an existing tower or structure,
make sure you have the proper mounting height and that it does not exceed
the existing structure height. If you took a guess at the mounting height,
this may be your problem and you requested a height taller than the existing
approved structure. If it is a new tower you are building, you will need to
go through the whole FAA study process and will likely have to light this
structure if you can even get the requested height approved. If this is
going on an existing structure that has lights, find out the current FAA
approval number for the study that was originally conducted and put that on
the application.

 



Thank You,

Brian Webster

 <http://www.wirelessmapping.com> www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Scott Carullo
Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2011 5:46 PM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] 11Ghz Licensing Warning Question

 

Comsearch has this to say on one of the sites in coordination, anyone know
what it is supposed to mean?  They are closed now, I'm not being patient sry
:)


Path Warnings Document


FCC Rule Part(s)


Description

Result / Action


N/A

site1 Radio Equipped with Adaptive Modulation.

Review Radio Parameters


N/A

site2 Radio Equipped with Adaptive Modulation.

Review Radio Parameters


101.31 (b) (1) (ii)

site1 - ASR may be required based on C/L Height.

Verify/Change Antenna Height or File with FAA


N/A

site1 Failed Glide Slope or Height requirement.

Verify/Change Antenna Height or File with FAA



Thanks

Scott Carullo
Technical Operations
855-FLSPEED x102

  <http://www.flhsi.com/files/emaillogo.jpg> 




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] Totally OT - USS Nimitz during bad weather- Flight ops on a pitching deck

[Brian Webster]

For those of you who think you have had bad days, watch this two part video. 
Carrier flight operations are hard enough in good conditions. It will make you 
appreciate your day to day life no matter how tough it gets. This is an 
excellent video from KPBS.

 

 



Why Naval Aviators are the best trained pilots in the world!

 

You can turn on your sound and go full screen. 

These videos show the difference between Naval Aviation and any other kind.  
The links below are two videos about F-18 carrier operations aboard the USS 
Nimitz during weather that causes a severely pitching deck, which you can see 
in the videos.  It's more dangerous than most combat missions and the tension 
in the pilots and crew is very apparent. 

Watch Part 1 first, then Part 2.  Great videos.

 

Part One

 

  
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=4gGMI8d3vLs

 

Part Two

 

  
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=S0yj70QbBzg

 

 

 




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] Meeting today with Connected Nation........

[Brian Webster]

So do tell, what did they have to say?

 



Thank You,

Brian Webster

214 Eggleston Hill Rd.

Cooperstown, NY 13326

(607) 643-4055 Office

(607) 435-3988 Mobile

(208) 692-1898 Fax
Skype: Radiowebst

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Robert West
Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2011 10:39 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Meeting today with Connected Nation

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6cvnhPh6jo

 

 

 

Robert West

Just Micro Digital Services Inc.

740-335-7020

Cell 937-903-1286

 



"Affordable Internet For Everyone!"

 



image001.png
Description: Binary data



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] Meeting today with Connected Nation........

[Brian Webster]

Whaaa whhhaat want wannnt waannnt waa

 



J

 

From: Robert West [mailto:robert.w...@just-micro.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2011 10:51 PM
To: bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com; 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Meeting today with Connected Nation

 

You remember the teacher in the Charlie Brown (Sponsored by Dolly Madison
Cakes) Specials?

 

It was kinda like that.

 

 

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Brian Webster
Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2011 10:48 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Meeting today with Connected Nation

 

So do tell, what did they have to say?

 



Thank You,

Brian Webster

214 Eggleston Hill Rd.

Cooperstown, NY 13326

(607) 643-4055 Office

(607) 435-3988 Mobile

(208) 692-1898 Fax
Skype: Radiowebst

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Robert West
Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2011 10:39 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Meeting today with Connected Nation

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6cvnhPh6jo

 

 

 

Robert West

Just Micro Digital Services Inc.

740-335-7020

Cell 937-903-1286

 



"Affordable Internet For Everyone!"

 



image001.png
Description: Binary data



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] Households and population passed by the WISP industry..... over 76 Million households

[Brian Webster]

Yes they do want it by tract. The best way to study this is down to the
census block. Census blocks are small geographic areas and in states like
California and Illinois there are about half a million blocks. WISPA and the
WISP industry has been asking for some way to quantify some sort of numbers
that they can quote when talking about the WISP industry as a whole.

 

I would LOVE to map exactly where EVERY WISP covers with their RF signal and
then do a household count at the census block level. That is the most
accurate. However, I don't have every WISP's RF footprint and I don't have
the volunteer time to do every state separately and then add up the nation
as a whole. You can't put the whole country together as one file of census
blocks, it's too much data. I could do this and I also have all of the
blocks covered by cable and DSL so I could tabulate the number of homes
WISP's cover that those industries don't. It all takes time and I can't do
that for free nor am I willing to give up the information about the cable
and DSL coverage since I paid a large sum of money for that data set.

 

The zip code method was something that I could do on a nationwide basis
without taking a huge amount of my time. It's a start. If the industry
really wants more accurate numbers I am available for hire. This is how I
make a living.

 



Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: David E. Smith [mailto:d...@mvn.net] 
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2011 10:40 AM
To: bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Households and population passed by the WISP
industry. over 76 Million households

 

 

On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 22:43, Brian Webster 
wrote:

A week or so ago, I ran a study of the population and households passed by
principal WISPA members. Tonight I ran the numbers based on the whole
national WISP coverage map you all contributed to over the last couple of
years. The method for the calculation is pretty basic. For every zip code
tabulation area there is a standard recognized centroid point. I took the
big yellow national WISP coverage blob
http://www.wirelessmapping.com/National-Coverage-Map-for-Fixed-Wireless-ISP%
27s.php and selected all of the zip code centroid points contained within
it. I found a database table of households and populations for these zip
code tabulation areas. The numbers are based on the 2000 census data so it's
a bit stale.

 

Isn't this exactly why the FCC now requests counts by census tract? ZIP
codes are awfully big in some places, and just because an ISP can service
one person in a ZIP, doesn't guarantee they can service everyone.

 

David Smith

MVN.net

 

 




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] Households and population passed by the WISP industry..... over 76 Million households

[Brian Webster]

Every WISP who participates in their state mapping efforts should be able to
get a copy of their network shape file that has been created. I have
received a couple of them from various WISP's. The problem is many WISP's
did not participate in their state broadband mapping efforts.

 



Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: Cameron Crum [mailto:cc...@wispmon.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2011 12:57 PM
To: bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Households and population passed by the WISP
industry. over 76 Million households

 

Plus you'd have to trust that all the coverage footprints are
correct...something that could be very subjective. An accurate study like
what you are suggesting would be a massive undertaking to do well. I don't
blame you at all for not wanting to give that away. I'm curious as to what
Connected Nation is doing with all that coverage data they are producing?
Shouldn't that be available since it is being funded with taxpayer money?

Regards,

Cameron 

On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Brian Webster
 wrote:

Yes they do want it by tract. The best way to study this is down to the
census block. Census blocks are small geographic areas and in states like
California and Illinois there are about half a million blocks. WISPA and the
WISP industry has been asking for some way to quantify some sort of numbers
that they can quote when talking about the WISP industry as a whole.

 

I would LOVE to map exactly where EVERY WISP covers with their RF signal and
then do a household count at the census block level. That is the most
accurate. However, I don't have every WISP's RF footprint and I don't have
the volunteer time to do every state separately and then add up the nation
as a whole. You can't put the whole country together as one file of census
blocks, it's too much data. I could do this and I also have all of the
blocks covered by cable and DSL so I could tabulate the number of homes
WISP's cover that those industries don't. It all takes time and I can't do
that for free nor am I willing to give up the information about the cable
and DSL coverage since I paid a large sum of money for that data set.

 

The zip code method was something that I could do on a nationwide basis
without taking a huge amount of my time. It's a start. If the industry
really wants more accurate numbers I am available for hire. This is how I
make a living.

 



Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: David E. Smith [mailto:d...@mvn.net] 
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2011 10:40 AM
To: bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Households and population passed by the WISP
industry..... over 76 Million households

 

 

On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 22:43, Brian Webster 
wrote:

A week or so ago, I ran a study of the population and households passed by
principal WISPA members. Tonight I ran the numbers based on the whole
national WISP coverage map you all contributed to over the last couple of
years. The method for the calculation is pretty basic. For every zip code
tabulation area there is a standard recognized centroid point. I took the
big yellow national WISP coverage blob
http://www.wirelessmapping.com/National-Coverage-Map-for-Fixed-Wireless-ISP%
27s.php and selected all of the zip code centroid points contained within
it. I found a database table of households and populations for these zip
code tabulation areas. The numbers are based on the 2000 census data so it's
a bit stale.

 

Isn't this exactly why the FCC now requests counts by census tract? ZIP
codes are awfully big in some places, and just because an ISP can service
one person in a ZIP, doesn't guarantee they can service everyone.

 

David Smith

MVN.net

 

 






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] 2.4 foliage propagation

[Brian Webster]

Have you done a spectrum study on the towers to see what the noise floor is
like? I have heard some say the Ubiquity MIMO stuff covers like 900 MHz in
areas with reasonable noise levels.



Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2011 8:15 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 2.4 foliage propagation

Well, no, the foliage doesn't make noise, but everything in Wal-Mart has 
a 2.4 Ghz transmitter in it now.

Those are antenna gains.  Radios would be up to 20 or so.

Tower most likely would be above the trees, but the CPE surely 
wouldn't.  If the CPE were above the trees, then I'd just use 5 gig and 
above the noise\limited spectrum.

I wouldn't imagine I'd have to go more than a half mile between the 
start of trees and the CPE.  It wouldn't be a half mile of forest, 
though.  Houses, roads,  yards, etc. in those trees.

-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



On 1/18/2011 6:55 PM, Jack Unger wrote:
> On 1/18/2011 4:46 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>> I know it sucks compared to lower frequencies.
> Yes
>> I know it typically has a high noise floor.
> Foliage doesn't create noise, only attenuates signal.
>> I've never used it outdoor for real world experience.
>>
>> I'm looking at some small towns and other groups of houses with no more
>> than 300 people or so (some much smaller).  They are old, so they have
>> adult trees.  Is it reasonable to expect to be able to service these
>> homes with 18 dBi at the CPE and 20 dB at the tower?
> ERP or transmit power? Plan to mount all your antennas (AP and CPE) above
the
> trees or else...




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] new list

[Brian Webster]

I think Alex Goldman is already doing that and posting on the WISPA page.



Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Ryan Goldberg
Sent: Monday, January 24, 2011 1:32 PM
To: 'spie...@avolve.net'; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] new list

So I follow like 13 lists/forums now (all the freakin wireless ones + nanog
+ c-nsp + j-nsp).  I'm going make a helpdesk dude summarize the signal and
ditch the noise, and do a one-page weekly writeup.  Then I'm going to
monetize the writeup.  

> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
> On Behalf Of Stuart Pierce
> Sent: Monday, January 24, 2011 12:26 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] new list
> 
> LOL, funny how my history teacher was right about his saying, "history
> repeats itself".
> 
> I remember being on the isp-wireless list and getting emailed about one
> sentence responses and emailed everyone I was done. So Mike started up
> the Part-15 lists.
> 
> Then it went from there to WISPA.
> 
> Then splintered to AFMUG and Butch's Mikrotik list.
> 
> Now we may be back to WISPA and the new wug.cc , although I do believe
> in neutrality, but no hard core bashing. Be a little mature ( although
it's hard
> to say what age this begins ) about posts and put some forethought in
> responses.
> 
> Oh I almost forgot wisp-equipment, Judd's list.
> 
> -- Original Message --
> From: support 
> Reply-To: WISPA General List 
> Date:  Mon, 24 Jan 2011 12:18:52 -0600
> 
> >I don't see the list as a replacement but 1 more good tool in the tool
box
> >think its more to replace AFMUG we are all getting sick of chuck getting
> >angry
> >
> >
> >
> >On 1/24/2011 12:11 PM, Charles N Wyble wrote:
> >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> >> Hash: SHA1
> >>
> >>
> >> Um people bash WISPA on this list occasionally. It's usually not
> >> warranted. There are a few trolls that like to make trouble. Why do you
> >> feel that we can't bash WISPA on this list? If there are legitimate
> >> concerns with the organization, and one feels they are a threat to the
> >> industry, then voice them.
> >>
> >> Also going on a list and complaining usually doesn't get anything done.
> >> It just wastes peoples time and bandwidth. If someone has constructive
> >> criticism, and a well reasoned argument/position, that will get
> >> something done.
> >>
> >> I've subscribed to the WUG list. Hopefully it will be interesting and
> >> not a waste of time, however I will probably start various new threads
> >> on the WISPA list, as it has served my and many others needs quite
well.
> >> I've been on the list since 2008 and been very happy with it. Numerous
> >> products/services/organizations have been praised when necessary, and
> >> called out when necessary. So I'm not quite sure the purpose of the WUG
> >> list.
> >>
> >> We will see what the WUG list does. My initial feelings, is that it
will
> >> be a fringe list that ends up doing a lot of harm to the industry.
> >> Journalists will see lots of trolling and pick that out as the face of
> >> the industry, because it makes better material for the sensationalist
> >> media.
> >>
> >> I realize that as business owners, we have very strong opinions and
> >> value our independence and rights. However we must also keep in mind
> >> that we as an industry are under attack on a continuous basis. WISPA
has
> >> provided a focal point for us to coalesce around as an industry. They
> >> have continuously shown a deep understanding of how to keep the
> industry
> >> growing. They have produced a number of products (3.65 regs,
> >> whitespaces, dfrs etc.) These end products take substantial amounts of
> >> time and effort to produce. They have seen how the sausage is made,
> and
> >> not been afraid to get their hands dirty.
> >>
> >> I hope to join WISPA in the near future and contribute my support. I've
> >> been slowly ramping up my WISP and preparing to roll out a broad beta.
> >>
> >> I should get back to that now, have a demo due by the end of the
week
> >>
> >> On 01/24/2011 09:29 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
> >>> To be entirely neutral.  We can't b

Re: [WISPA] Leasing towers to Cell Carriers

[Brian Webster]

That is exactly how it happens. Did it for years and I can tell you the lazy
site acquisition people will take the path of least resistance. Make their
life easy. You trying to call a carrier will probably not even get to the
right place. They make expansion plans at least a year in advance, they
won't change their build out plan for one tower site. If you happen to fall
in their plan you might be in luck. Your asking rent can make HUGE
difference in getting a carrier on your site. $25 a month difference in rent
catches a carrier's attention when you consider how many towers they have
nationwide, every dollar in rent saved adds up each month over all those
sites. 



Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Blake Bowers
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 1:22 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Leasing towers to Cell Carriers

I will say it again, but I of course have no experience with this so I am 
quite sure 9809895234345 people will correct me.

The best way to market your towers to cellular carriers.

1.  Hang a sign.  WIRELESS SPACE FOR LEASE.

2.  Do an FAA on your tower. 
https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/portal.jsp

3.  Do an FCC on your tower. 
http://wireless.fcc.gov/antenna/index.htm?job=home

4.  Sit back and wait to become a millionare.  Heck, my housekeeper has an 
Aunt that knows a woman at her granddaughters school whose son in law gets 
18k a month from his ground lease!

Almost every carrier uses a site acquisition contractor for their sites, and

the FAA and FCC are the first places they look.  Then they go and drive 
around.  If there are multiple towers in their search ring, they are going 
to look for the "friendly" tower companies, ie, ones they have done business

with before, or the ones that are inviting them to do business with them, ie

the sign.

AT&T Wireless probably uses 30 different contractors alone.


Don't take your organs to heaven,
heaven knows we need them down here!
Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today.

- Original Message - 
From: "Chuck Hogg" 
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2011 8:47 AM
Subject: [WISPA] Leasing towers to Cell Carriers


>I have a couple of Rohn SSV-MW 250' towers located in areas with spotty 
>cell
> service.  I wouldn't mind getting a few carriers on these towers.  I have
> been successful in finding contact information for ATT and T-Mobile, but
> nobody else.  Does anyone have any contact information for these guys?
>
> Regards,
>
> Chuck
>





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] WISP A Final Definition ...

[Brian Webster]

We need to take part 15 out of there. 3.65 is part 90 and those outside the
US do not abide by FCC rules. There are also WISP's who would operate on EBS
frequencies plus there is the whole part 101 thing.

 



Thank You,

Brian Webster

214 Eggleston Hill Rd.

Cooperstown, NY 13326

(607) 643-4055 Office

(607) 435-3988 Mobile

(208) 692-1898 Fax
Skype: Radiowebst

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of St. Louis Broadband
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2011 10:01 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: [WISPA] WISP A Final Defination ...

 

 

A WISP is a Community based, Wireless Internet Service Provider that
operates using terrestrial-based radio technology, primarily governed by FCC
Part 15 regulations; to transport and sell fixed wireless broadband access
or related Internet Protocol derived services to end users.

 

 

Victoria Proffer  - President/CEO 

StLouisBroadband.com <http://stlbroadband.com/>   

 <http://showmebroadband.com/> ShowMeBroadband.com 

 <http://www.farmingtonmo.us/blog> BLOG: FarmingtonMO.us

314.974.5600 * Fax 573.747.4756

Follow us on Twitter.com @stlbroadband

St. Louis WISP since 2003

SBA Certified WOSB 

 <http://stlbroadband.com/> STLBBLogo

WISPA Board of Directors 2010 - 2011

WISPA - Missouri State Coordinator

 <http://wispa.org/> Wispa_logo2008SM

 

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and
may be protected by legal privilege.  If you are not the intended recipient,
be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of this e-mail
or any attachment is prohibited.  If you have received this e-mail in error,
please notify us immediately by returning it to the sender and deleting or
destroying the e-mail and any attachments without retaining any copies.
Thank you for your cooperation.

 

 

 

 

 

<>
<>



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] [WISPA Members] Extending white spaces rules to other under-utilized spectrum

[Brian Webster]

Some of us noticed this which is part of the reason the pleading for the
voluntary registration in the TDWR database and the interest in the TVWS
database methods. TVWS is a test to see if people can behave enough to
extend the methodology to pretty much any spectrum that is not being
utilized in a given area at any given point and time. If people constantly
step outside the rules and do things like run too high a power or fiddle
with things that cause interference, expect that there will be no access to
other spectrum.

 



Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: members-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:members-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf
Of Brough Turner
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2011 10:53 AM
To: WISPA General List; memb...@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA Members] Extending white spaces rules to other
under-utilized spectrum

 

 
<http://blogs.broughturner.com/2011/02/extending-white-spaces-rules-to-other
-under-utilized-spectrum.html>
http://blogs.broughturner.com/2011/02/extending-white-spaces-rules-to-other-
under-utilized-spectrum.html

 

Few seem to have noticed, but the FCC has an open
<http://www.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2010/db1130/FCC-10-198A1.p
df> Notice of Inquiry in which, among other things, they say,

48.  ...  An alternative approach for enabling dynamic spectrum use is to
extend the concepts underlying the rules for Television Band Devices to
additional spectrum bands. ... Commenters should address whether they
believe this concept is practical for other bands. If so, they should
identify in which bands they believe such a system could work and provide
details on how it would work.

Wow! 

This is action on Recommendation 5.13 in
<http://www.broadband.gov/plan/5-spectrum/#s5-6> Section 5.6 of the FCC's
National Broadband Plan.  While I'm generally disappointed with the National
Broadband Plan, this is one place where there's a (perhaps remote)
possibility for real, long term progress.

As I've
<http://blogs.broughturner.com/2010/10/long-term-significance-of-tv-white-sp
aces.html> commented in the past, the largest value of the TV White Spaces
ruling is that it provides a path for opening up more of our incredibly
under-utilized spectrum.  This NOI is the first step.  Comments are due by
February 28, 2011 and reply comments by March 28, 2011.  Directions and
links are available on
<http://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2010/12/28/2010-32491/promoting-mor
e-efficient-use-of-spectrum-through-dynamic-spectrum-use-technologies> this
Federal Register page.

 
Thanks,
Brough
 
netBlazr - Free your broadband
http://netblazr.com
Mobile:  617-285-0433
Skype:  brough
 



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] FCC Favors Shifting Rural Subsidies To Broadband

[Brian Webster]

USF should not go to areas that meet criteria for an already demonstrated
ability to have private sector dollars profitably deploy broadband. Check
out my blog on the topic with a data chart for a few states as to the
household density of those areas with existing broadband and those without.
USF funds on a state by state basis should not be able to be used in areas
that fall within the numbers where it has been proven that broadband systems
have been deployed without USF assistance

http://wp.me/p1eoQy-f



Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Bret Clark
Sent: Monday, February 07, 2011 5:55 PM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] FCC Favors Shifting Rural Subsidies To Broadband

Ugh...not good. Last thing I need is to compete with the ILEC who is 
getting money from the Universal Slush Fund to provide government 
subsidized broadband in rural areas. And I can see every ILEC in America 
lobbing to ensure that the distribution of USF continues "as is" if the 
shift is made to broadband instead of telephone...basically filling the 
ILEC's coffers!  The FCC is looking for comments, so we all need to make 
it quite clear that the funds should be available for any and all 
broadband providers!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nf/20110207/tc_nf/77213

Bret

Bret Clark
Spectra Access
25 Lowell Street
Manchester, NH 03101
www.spectraaccess.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] [WISPA Members] Your input on 5 GHz rules changes needed

[Brian Webster]

One suggestion to get the word out about this problem would be to get press
releases and journalists from the IT magazine industries involved. IT types
who just throw up a link or two probably don't even know how to spell WISPA
or TDWR.



Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com


-Original Message-
From: members-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:members-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf
Of Jack Unger
Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2011 1:59 PM
To: WISPA General List; memb...@wispa.org
Subject: Re: [WISPA Members] [WISPA] Your input on 5 GHz rules changes
needed

On 2/9/2011 9:49 AM, Marlon K. Schafer wrote:
> The proper fix for this problem is a visit from the enforcement guys, and
a
> nasty fine for repeat offenders.
 Joint FAA/FCC Enforcement teams have been out for a long time but this
is 
a VERY costly solution and likely not sustainable in this era of shrinking 
budgets. That's why it's better to solve this problem before enforcement
becomes 
the option of (costly) last resort. WISPA has suggested to the FCC that they

better PUBLICIZE enforcement actions and they are considering that.
> After that, what would be so hard about using sensing and DFS (done right
> this time) to cause systems near the radars to notch out the 110mhz of
> spectrum while not bothering anyone else?
 This is much more difficult that it sounds. The wireless industry has
been 
working for over a year (manufacturers, chip makers, etc.) to do this and
has so 
far been unable to come up with an acceptable technical solution. The effort
is 
on hold at the moment.
> The radar systems are well known, should be an easy signal to detect.
 They are not so easy to detect. New radar waveforms come into use.
Radars 
go on and off-line. Wireless systems can't sit around all day just
listening; 
they have real world traffic to handle. Again, the best minds in the
industry 
have so far failed to figure out an acceptable solution.
> The radios already tend to send a LOT of data back and forth, radio name,
> signal levels, speed, language, channel used etc. etc. etc.  Certainly any
> radio that turns on could sense for 30 seconds, if it detects a TDWR
signal
> at a certain threshold, then report than back to the AP and the AP could
> then lock out the needed channels for that particular location.
 You are more than welcome to volunteer to join the wireless "Industry 
Group" engineering team that has been addressing this issue for the last
year. 
I'll be happy to introduce you to the team leader so you can sign up to 
contribute your engineering advice.
> This should be able to be done via a firmware upgrade to any legacy or new
> hardware out there.
 Well, the manufacturers are not stepping up to develop new firmware.
This 
is one of the frustrations that the FCC feels.
> Cheap, relatively easy, fixes the problem and does NOT take away 110mhz of
> newly acquired spectrum from the rest of the country.
I would welcome your help to reach out to and motivate the
manufacturers to 
do this. Let me know when you are ready to start your outreach program.
> A quick note on PR.  The operator(s) there has run foot loose and fancy
free
> with the rules for as long as I can remember.  Perhaps it's time to fine
> them at a high enough level that it puts them out of business?  Kind of a
3
> strikes your out thing.
 Yep. Sounds right.

jack

> marlon
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Jack Unger"
> To:; "WISPA General List"
> Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2011 1:47 PM
> Subject: [WISPA Members] Your input on 5 GHz rules changes needed
>
>
>
> In spite of the noteworthy efforts on the part of many WISP operators and
in
> spite of a temporary decrease in the levels of TDWR interference reported
to
> us
> by the FCC, the TDWR interference situation has unfortunately
deteriorated.
> The
> FCC now reports that some locations (New York, Chicago, Denver and Dallas)
> that
> were recently "cleared" of interference are once again experiencing
> significant
> interference problems. The TDWR interference in San Juan Puerto Rico is so
> bad
> that the TDWR system had to be shut off by the FAA. This is not good news
> because the FAA is pushing the FCC to solve these interference problems
once
> and
> for all.
>
> Voluntary database registration has unfortunately not proven to be
effective
> enough. There are still some operators who apparently have not heard about
> the
> TDWR interference problem and some who have simply failed to bring and
keep
> their systems in compliance. On the supply-chain side, there are several
> manufacturers and distributors who did take positive, affirmative and
> responsible action to help address the problem however they were they in
the
> minority. Most manufacturers and d

Re: [WISPA] [WISPA Members] Your input on 5 GHz rules changes needed

[Brian Webster]

The problem is all of the equipment that is already out in the supply
channels.



Thank You,
Brian Webster

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Fred Goldstein
Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2011 2:22 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] [WISPA Members] Your input on 5 GHz rules changes
needed

I notice that the FCC issued a $10,000 fine to Ayustar in San Juan 
about a year ago.  I hope they got the message.

It just might be that the FCC and NTIA were a little fast in making 
5600-5650 part of the Part 15 bands.  Sure, licensed equipment can be 
used without a license (vis. 3650) but that's a pretty 
straightforward violation.  On the other hand, it would be better to 
have access to that band, including the 30 MHz guard bands that the 
NTIA presentation shows as being needed, at least near the TDWRs.

And that's the rub:  There are 45 TDWRs, and a lot of places nowhere 
near them.  Sensing has not proven reliable.  But a GPS/database 
approach is costly.  Maybe the best compromise is to take 5570-5680 
and take it out of Part 15, or limit Part 15 use to indoor low power 
only (like 5150-5250).  Then the 110 MHz at risk can be made 
available under Part 90, as nonexclusive light licensing.  The 
license would have to specify its frqeuencies area of operation, and 
follow rules that avoid TDWR interference.  So if it's within say 10 
miles of a TDWR, it would need the 30 MHz spacing, and if within some 
larger radius, it would need less spacing, and if way far from one of 
them, it could operate within the TDWR band.  In exchange for this, 
we should ask for higher power limits, perhaps the same as on 
5725-5850 ISM, for places where it wouldn't interfere with TDWR (say 
if it's both >30 MHz and > 20 km away, or >100 km away).  This could 
be done with a map of both TDWR and any other protected radars.

At 2/9/2011 01:59 PM, Jack Unger wrote:
>On 2/9/2011 9:49 AM, Marlon K. Schafer wrote:
> > The proper fix for this problem is a visit from the enforcement guys,
and a
> > nasty fine for repeat offenders.
> Joint FAA/FCC Enforcement teams have been out for a long time 
>but this is
>a VERY costly solution and likely not sustainable in this era of shrinking
>budgets. That's why it's better to solve this problem before 
>enforcement becomes
>the option of (costly) last resort. WISPA has suggested to the FCC that
they
>better PUBLICIZE enforcement actions and they are considering that.
> > After that, what would be so hard about using sensing and DFS (done
right
> > this time) to cause systems near the radars to notch out the 110mhz of
> > spectrum while not bothering anyone else?
> This is much more difficult that it sounds. The wireless 
>industry has been
>working for over a year (manufacturers, chip makers, etc.) to do 
>this and has so
>far been unable to come up with an acceptable technical solution. 
>The effort is
>on hold at the moment.
> > The radar systems are well known, should be an easy signal to detect.
> They are not so easy to detect. New radar waveforms come into 
>use. Radars
>go on and off-line. Wireless systems can't sit around all day just
listening;
>they have real world traffic to handle. Again, the best minds in the
industry
>have so far failed to figure out an acceptable solution.
> > The radios already tend to send a LOT of data back and forth, radio
name,
> > signal levels, speed, language, channel used etc. etc. etc.  Certainly
any
> > radio that turns on could sense for 30 seconds, if it detects a TDWR
signal
> > at a certain threshold, then report than back to the AP and the AP could
> > then lock out the needed channels for that particular location.
> You are more than welcome to volunteer to join the wireless "Industry
>Group" engineering team that has been addressing this issue for the 
>last year.
>I'll be happy to introduce you to the team leader so you can sign up to
>contribute your engineering advice.
> > This should be able to be done via a firmware upgrade to any legacy or
new
> > hardware out there.
> Well, the manufacturers are not stepping up to develop new 
>firmware. This
>is one of the frustrations that the FCC feels.
> > Cheap, relatively easy, fixes the problem and does NOT take away 110mhz
of
> > newly acquired spectrum from the rest of the country.
>I would welcome your help to reach out to and motivate the 
>manufacturers to
>do this. Let me know when you are ready to start your outreach program.
> > A quick note on PR.  The operator(s) there has run foot loose and 
> fancy free
> > with the rules for as long as I can remember.  Perhaps it's time to fine
> > them at a 

Re: [WISPA] My friend's logic

[Brian Webster]

I agree with Fred. It's not about the number of clients that causes the
problem. The physical separation of the radios is probably the key factor in
the increased performance. Putting multiple radios with possibly leaky
pigtails inside the same enclosure can introduce opportunities for
self-interference by near field RF energies and mixing products. Unless an
enclosure have been specifically designed, tested and built for that
particular combination or radios and cable routing, there is no telling how
it may or may not perform. Adding more radios to the MT just compounds the
problem. Having the RF section outside the MT box is never a bad idea to
avoid this phenomenon. 

Thank You,
Brian Webster
Skype: Radiowebst
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Fred Goldstein
Sent: Monday, February 14, 2011 9:35 AM
To: wil...@optimumwireless.com; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] My friend's logic

At 2/14/2011 08:50 AM, OptimumWS wrote:
>Hello.
>
>Thought I share this with the list.
>
>I have a friend that is using MT as ap on one of his towers with his 
>radios in 10MHz and on another tower bullets with sector panels, 
>similar set up on both towers except for the radios. He was explaining 
>that he finds the bullets outperforms the ubiquiti radios on the MT by 
>far. His
>explanation:
>
>"The reason why bullets outperfoms the radios intalled on a router 
>board is because of the pigtail used from the radio to the antenna. 
>This pigtail works like a electricity cable in that the thicker the 
>cable the more current is able to pass through so, the mikrotik 
>pigtails are way too thin. When there is a certain number of clients 
>connected to that radio the pigtail saturates the radio traffic because 
>of the 'high traffic or current passing through the pigtail' and as a 
>result; links between clients and ap can be slow and performance 
>decreases. Now, the bullets do not have any pigtail or other connector 
>and thats a reason why links with bullets are more stable and performs 
>better than having a routerboard and radios with pigtails."
>
>What you guys think of his logic?
>
>Note:
>Posted this on dslreports wisp mainling list as well so, for those also 
>registered to that list: sorry for the double posts.

This was discussed on some vendor forums too, I think UBNTs.

Most pigtails shipped with radios are too cheap for their own good.  They
are not properly shielded.  Some WISPs have found that they can put more
radios on a tower if they use better pigtails, which they either make
themselves or hand-select (one person found that Laird pigtails were
sometimes good, but not all of them).

Pigtails can be lossy, reducing effective antenna gain, and can leak, which
makes it susceptible to local interference. This has nothing to do with the
number of clients, though.  That's just silly.


  --
  Fred Goldsteink1io   fgoldstein "at" ionary.com
  ionary Consulting  http://www.ionary.com/
  +1 617 795 2701 





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/


-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3443 - Release Date: 02/14/11




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] ASR Sign Requirements

[Brian Webster]

At minimum it needs to have the tower ASR registration number and emergency
contact phone number. It needs to be posted where it is visible at the point
where the public has the closest access. If there is a locked gate near the
road the sign needs to be there and not only at the tower. 

 

http://wireless.fcc.gov/antenna/index.htm?job=about_posting

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

214 Eggleston Hill Rd.

Cooperstown, NY 13326

(607) 643-4055 Office

(607) 435-3988 Mobile

(208) 692-1898 Fax
Skype: Radiowebst

 <http://www.wirelessmapping.com> www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2011 1:08 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] ASR Sign Requirements

 

I own a registered tower site that I bought from another ASR registrant. We
have made all needed changes to the ASR records online showing proper
ownership information. We still need to prepare the physical sign required
at the location. I cannot seem to find the page on the ASR site that
describes the requirements of the sign at the registered tower location. Can
anyone send me the link to this information or even forward a doc with this
data? Any help is greatly appreciated.

John Scrivner

 




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] Tom DeReggi's testimony is on the web with the WISP map

[Brian Webster]

Yesterday Tom DeReggi testified in front of the house subcommittee on
Communications and Technology regarding Net Neutrality. I had provided him
with a map and data that a WISPA team used the week before at meetings with
the FCC. Tom used this map and information in his submitted testimony and it
is now on the public record along with the Ex Parte filing from our FCC
visit. The interesting thing is that I picked this link up through a Google
Alert for Wirelessmapping.com today. That fact that the WISP industry can
reach over 75 million homes is becoming well known. 

 

http://republicans.energycommerce.house.gov/Media/file/Hearings/Telecom/0309
11/DeReggi.pdf

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

 <http://www.wirelessmapping.com> www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.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] Carlson TVWS Article in Urgent Communications Magazine today with Video Showing the WISPA Banner at the California WISP meeting

[Brian Webster]

http://urgentcomm.com/mobile_data/news/software-defined-radio-rural-broadban
d-20110323/#

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCUAuyGTK4k
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCUAuyGTK4k&feature=player_embedded#at=86>
&feature=player_embedded#at=86

 

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

 <http://www.wirelessmapping.com> www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.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/

Re: [WISPA] Verizon 4G LTE - WOW - update

[Brian Webster]

I have always said the cellular carriers have the over the air interface to
deliver good speeds for the most part. It's their backhaul network that
needs work and they are slowly and steadily upgrading that. While most are
bashing them, they eventually will have upgraded the sites to remain
competitive. They are far from perfect but once they finally have true
Ethernet transport to every site, their performance will improve a lot over
all digital modes they offer. They are and will continue to be a player in
the broadband world. Best for WISP's to keep an eye on what they are doing
and keep the pace with the overall broadband market changes. Fortunately it
seems that the fixed wireless technology has kept the pace and/or exceeded
other technologies. The WISP's themselves will need to keep business plans
that take advantage of emerging technologies and allow themselves to remain
continually competitive. This means factoring in an aggressive upgrade and
replacement path which will allow for market adaptability. This will also
need to include marketing methodologies to keep their image up and to show
that there is not stagnation with the company and its offerings.

Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Charles Wu
Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2011 7:37 AM
To: li...@stlbroadband.com; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Verizon 4G LTE - WOW - update

It's generally known that the 20 Mb "burst" given by cable companies is
throttled to sustained download speeds in the 1-3 Mb range

That said, the point I'm trying to make is that the technology has come so
far for mobile cellular data that we are now "unconsciously" comparing it
side-by-side to fixed terrestrial broadband technologies (think of it this
way, how many WISPs can deliver "up-to" speeds of 8-10 Mb to a low power
handset in the middle of a concrete building 3+ miles away from a tower)

-Charles

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of St. Louis Broadband
Sent: Monday, April 04, 2011 9:33 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Verizon 4G LTE - WOW - update

I just checked my Charter via Ookla and it said I was getting 20 Mbps down
and 1 Mbps up, horse pucky.
I only get that in speedtests and never when I have to upload or download a
big file via FTP or whatever.
It generally gets throttled to dial up speeds or worse.

~V~

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Charles Wu
Sent: Monday, April 04, 2011 9:21 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Verizon 4G LTE - WOW - update

Sitting in my living room at 8 pm3 bars, laptop connected to wireless
router on phone

http://www.speedtest.net/result/1236758959.png 

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Monday, April 04, 2011 6:39 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Verizon 4G LTE - WOW

Yeah, its nice when a product is brand new, and you get the whole sector all

to yourself.

I guess, its amazing that you are getting the speed to a handset, without
the big antenna outside.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message -
From: "Charles Wu" 
To: ; "WISPA GeneralList" 
Sent: Sunday, April 03, 2011 8:31 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Verizon 4G LTE - WOW


> It is my understanding that Verizon is deploying an FDD version of LTE
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
> Behalf Of Paolo Di Francesco
> Sent: Sunday, April 03, 2011 11:09 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Verizon 4G LTE - WOW
>
> most of the test are "half duplex" tests. In few words, they do one
> direction, then the other direction (e.g. first the customer download,
> then the customer upload).
>
> Suppose you have a 10Mb half duplex: the test will tell you that you
> have 10Mb in one direction and 10Mb in the other direction. Then you use
> the connection in 10Mb full duplex and you will discover the story is
> totally different ;)
>
> Also, yes it's interesting to see what is happening on the network
> interface when the test is running...
>
>> Do a real test and report back, like FTP. Ookla & Speedtest.net test are
>> bogus 99.9% percent of the time because it's based on screwy test
>> algorithms.
>>
>> On 04/01/2011 11:05 PM, Charles Wu wrote:
>>>
>>> Just got my HTC Thunderbolt, and Ookla tested 20 Mb down, 24 Mb u

[WISPA] Updated Google Maps Version of the WISP Footprint - WISPA principal members included

[Brian Webster]

I had a chance to update the Google Maps version of the WISP National
Footprint. This time I did a mashup of the WISPA principal members pushpins
that Rick had created. The map now shows WISP pushpins with the ability to
click on the pin and get a popup window with company name and contact
information along with web site links if they exist.

 

http://www.wirelessmapping.com/Google%20Maps3.htm

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

 <http://www.wirelessmapping.com> www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.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/

Re: [WISPA] Updated Google Maps Version of the WISP Footprint - WISPA principal members included

[Brian Webster]

These are a combination of various coverage maps plus the zip codes listed
by each WISP voluntarily in the WISP Directory site. If you have more zip
codes you service you should log in to your account and add then to the
directory. I get a zip code export from there when I do updates.

Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com


-Original Message-
From: Chuck Hogg [mailto:ch...@shelbybb.com] 
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2011 10:28 PM
To: bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Updated Google Maps Version of the WISP Footprint -
WISPA principal members included

Are these just zip code circles?  I've got a lot more zip codes to give you.

Regards,

Chuck



On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 9:47 PM, Brian Webster
 wrote:
> I had a chance to update the Google Maps version of the WISP National 
> Footprint. This time I did a mashup of the WISPA principal members 
> pushpins that Rick had created. The map now shows WISP pushpins with 
> the ability to click on the pin and get a popup window with company 
> name and contact information along with web site links if they exist.
>
>
>
> http://www.wirelessmapping.com/Google%20Maps3.htm
>
>
>
> Thank You,
>
> Brian Webster
>
> www.wirelessmapping.com
>
> www.Broadband-Mapping.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] [WISPA Members] Updated Google Maps Version of the WISP Footprint - WISPA principal members included

[Brian Webster]

I don’t have an easy way to plot circles around Canadian zip codes. What I
would need is some sort of coverage polygon. If you can create one in Google
Earth or is you have a shape file or other GIS formatted polygon I can use
those as well. I am more than happy to add the Canadian coverage’s.

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: Aaron Remer [mailto:aa...@acces.com] 
Sent: Friday, April 15, 2011 12:54 AM
To: bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com; memb...@wispa.org; 'WISPA General List';
motor...@afmug.com
Subject: RE: [WISPA Members] Updated Google Maps Version of the WISP
Footprint - WISPA principal members included

 

When are you going to show our footprints as well?

 

Let us know what to do

 

 

Aaron Remer

Directeur/Director


GROUPE-ACCES communications
300 Berge du Canal
Suite 316
Montréal, Québec
Canada H8R 1H3


Sans Frais/Toll-free: 1-877-777-3637 x 13
Tel: 514-762-4000 x 13
Fax: 514-762-0668
Cell: 514-386-1137


Courriel/Email:  <mailto:aa...@acces.com> aa...@acces.com

Sites Internet/Web sites:

 <http://www.acces.com> http://www.acces.com


GROUPE-ACCÈS communications est un fournisseur de présence Web qui fournit
aux petites et moyennes entreprises des solutions internet fiables et
sécuritaires axées sur les résultats. Nous fournissons également la
connectivite sans fil à bande large dans les communautés rurales et
difficiles  à atteindre.

GROUPE-ACCES communications, a Web Presence Provider company providing
reliable, secure and result-oriented Internet solutions to small and
medium-sized businesses. We also provide wireless broadband connectivity in
rural and hard to reach communities


Confidentiality Warning: This message and any attachments are intended only
for the use of the intended recipient(s), are confidential, and may be
privileged.  If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
that any review, retransmission, conversion to hard copy, copying,
circulation or other use of this message and any attachments is strictly
prohibited.  If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender
immediately by return e-mail, and delete this message and any attachments
from your system.  Thank you.

Information confidentielle: Le présent message, ainsi que tout fichier qui y
est joint, est envoyé à l'intention exclusive de son ou de ses
destinataires; il est de nature confidentielle et peut constituer une
information privilégiée.  Nous avertissons toute personne autre que le
destinataire prévu que tout examen, réacheminement, impression, copie,
distribution ou autre utilisation de ce message et de tout fichier qui y est
joint est strictement interdit.  Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire prévu,
veuillez en aviser immédiatement l'expéditeur par retour de courriel et
supprimer ce message et tout document joint de votre système.  Merci.

 

 

 

 

From: members-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:members-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf
Of Brian Webster
Sent: April-14-11 9:48 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'; memb...@wispa.org; motor...@afmug.com
Subject: [WISPA Members] Updated Google Maps Version of the WISP Footprint -
WISPA principal members included

 

I had a chance to update the Google Maps version of the WISP National
Footprint. This time I did a mashup of the WISPA principal members pushpins
that Rick had created. The map now shows WISP pushpins with the ability to
click on the pin and get a popup window with company name and contact
information along with web site links if they exist.

 

http://www.wirelessmapping.com/Google%20Maps3.htm

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.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/

Re: [WISPA] Updated Google Maps Version of the WISP Footprint -WISPA principal members included

[Brian Webster]

The pushpins are only WISPA principal members. This was something Rick
compiled a while ago. I do not have a full list of WISP's and their
addresses out of the directory site. Matt only provides me with a list of
zip codes.

Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com


-Original Message-
From: Dennis Burgess [mailto:dmburg...@linktechs.net] 
Sent: Friday, April 15, 2011 11:53 AM
To: bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com; WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Updated Google Maps Version of the WISP Footprint
-WISPA principal members included

Why is this not showing all WISPS that have put in zip codes?

---
Dennis Burgess, Mikrotik Certified Trainer Link Technologies, Inc --
Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
Office: 314-735-0270 Website: http://www.linktechs.net LIVE On-Line Mikrotik
Training - Author of "Learn RouterOS"


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Brian Webster
Sent: April 14, 2011 9:56 PM
To: 'Chuck Hogg'; 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Updated Google Maps Version of the WISP Footprint
-WISPA principal members included

These are a combination of various coverage maps plus the zip codes
listed by each WISP voluntarily in the WISP Directory site. If you have
more zip codes you service you should log in to your account and add
then to the directory. I get a zip code export from there when I do
updates.

Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com


-Original Message-
From: Chuck Hogg [mailto:ch...@shelbybb.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2011 10:28 PM
To: bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Updated Google Maps Version of the WISP Footprint -
WISPA principal members included

Are these just zip code circles?  I've got a lot more zip codes to give
you.

Regards,

Chuck



On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 9:47 PM, Brian Webster
 wrote:
> I had a chance to update the Google Maps version of the WISP National 
> Footprint. This time I did a mashup of the WISPA principal members 
> pushpins that Rick had created. The map now shows WISP pushpins with 
> the ability to click on the pin and get a popup window with company 
> name and contact information along with web site links if they exist.
>
>
>
> http://www.wirelessmapping.com/Google%20Maps3.htm
>
>
>
> Thank You,
>
> Brian Webster
>
> www.wirelessmapping.com
>
> www.Broadband-Mapping.com
>
>
>
>
> --
> --
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> --
> --
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Update - what Matt Liotta has been doing...

[Brian Webster]

I would guess that that level of yield increase is due to things like more
efficient growing due to accurate nutrient balance, the tiers he uses as
well as there or no weather elements to deal with which would give you a
consistent year round growing season. One acre of actual land has to deal
with mother nature and a shorter growing period. These pods can constantly
grow plants and stagger the age of the seedlings to give a consistent yield
on a daily or weekly basis thus giving you and constant availability of
product and not have to deal with the problem of in season or the massive
increase in shipping costs to bring product that is desired from areas that
do have an active growing season. I think this is a great concept. This is
not just for urban environments. Small acreage farmers could do wonders with
their productivity and be able to have a consistent revenue stream if they
keep their pods free of contaminants. There would no longer be bad years
because of frost or drought. Kudos to Matt!

Brian

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Saturday, April 16, 2011 9:57 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update - what Matt Liotta has been doing...

Matt, are you around?

This method of farming can certainly grow produce where it would otherwise
be impossible or impractical.  It also is more resource efficient.  However,
I am curious how Matt can get a 136x increase in yield vs. conventional
farming.

-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



On 4/16/2011 8:45 AM, Charles Wu wrote:
> > From WISP to high-tech farmer to being profiled on CNN; gotta give the
guy some credit...
>
> http://eatocracy.cnn.com/2011/04/16/podponics/
>
>
>
> --
> --
> 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] Update - what Matt Liotta has been doing...

[Brian Webster]

Your definition of small is huge by NY dairy farm standards. Most around
here have between 100 and 300 acres. These small farms could do well by
supplementing their dairy product with some of these produce pods. There is
a decent demand for specialty foods in relatively small quantities as
compared to what you are used to. I do not know how well it would scale for
the volume of what you are describing. I would imagine the biggest challenge
would be the harvesting process and how much labor it would involve as
compared to the mechanized methods in use today. The idea of producing a
significant portion of consumer foods at points near or nearer to the point
of consumption has merit, plus as well all know distributed production does
not leave one as vulnerable to shortages and/or price fixing.

Thank You,
Brian Webster
214 Eggleston Hill Rd.
Cooperstown, NY 13326
(607) 643-4055 Office
(607) 435-3988 Mobile
(208) 692-1898 Fax
Skype: Radiowebst
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Saturday, April 16, 2011 11:21 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update - what Matt Liotta has been doing...

*nods*  I come from a relatively small farm (2500 acres, 2400 pigs, 2 dozen
cattle).  Being a technologist I am always curious as to advancements in
production efficiency.

I do wonder about the cost effectiveness of this model and how well it can
scale (within a given crop and to other crops).  Can we get the almost 500k
bushels of corn and soybeans we get now from 18 containers?

-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



On 4/16/2011 10:07 AM, Brian Webster wrote:
> I would guess that that level of yield increase is due to things like 
> more efficient growing due to accurate nutrient balance, the tiers he 
> uses as well as there or no weather elements to deal with which would 
> give you a consistent year round growing season. One acre of actual 
> land has to deal with mother nature and a shorter growing period. 
> These pods can constantly grow plants and stagger the age of the 
> seedlings to give a consistent yield on a daily or weekly basis thus 
> giving you and constant availability of product and not have to deal 
> with the problem of in season or the massive increase in shipping 
> costs to bring product that is desired from areas that do have an 
> active growing season. I think this is a great concept. This is not 
> just for urban environments. Small acreage farmers could do wonders 
> with their productivity and be able to have a consistent revenue 
> stream if they keep their pods free of contaminants. There would no longer
be bad years because of frost or drought. Kudos to Matt!
>
> Brian
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] 
> On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
> Sent: Saturday, April 16, 2011 9:57 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update - what Matt Liotta has been doing...
>
> Matt, are you around?
>
> This method of farming can certainly grow produce where it would 
> otherwise be impossible or impractical.  It also is more resource 
> efficient.  However, I am curious how Matt can get a 136x increase in 
> yield vs. conventional farming.
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
> On 4/16/2011 8:45 AM, Charles Wu wrote:
>>>  From WISP to high-tech farmer to being profiled on CNN; gotta give 
>>> the
> guy some credit...
>> http://eatocracy.cnn.com/2011/04/16/podponics/
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> -
>> --
>> 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/
>
>
>
> --
> --
> W

Re: [WISPA] [WISPA Members] [Wisp] Thanks to those concerned

[Brian Webster]

Jay, John;

After having participated in the Katrina effort with WISPA I
would imagine that getting your networks up and running and then helping
people like FEMA and the Insurance companies will help a great deal in
assisting those who have lost everything in getting claims filed and paid to
start the recovery process. So much is done on line now that the internet
connectivity is very important even if it's in a tent full of computers like
we set up in Mississippi. I believe NetSapiens also offered to set up some
phone support. Depending on how long it takes to get phone and cell service
back up VOIP services can be the quickest way to set up phone service.

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: members-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:members-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf
Of CBB Jay Weekley
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2011 1:05 AM
To: Rick Harnish; WISPA General List; Principal WISPA Member List;
motor...@afmug.com
Cc: memb...@wispa.org; motor...@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [WISPA Members] [Wisp] [WISPA] Thanks to those concerned

 

 

Wow, John, I can't imagine.  I understand there is damage VERY SIMILAR to
that in Huntsville around our tower site up there but our net admin for
Huntsville (Alex Dumas) was inbetween the damage.  His house is fine, but
damage very close by going any direction.

Jerry Head (from Blount County, works with us and is my partner in
Huntsville) is a tower climber and Alex climbs too. Why am I talking about
tower climbing...I have no idea.  Your network sounds about as good as ours
(except we lost our main tower in the Cullman tornado).  I'm more concerned
about Marlon - what is his condition and his family's condition?

I think I was going to offer help to you once we got our stuff back up and
running - but you're in the same boat we are - debating about how important
it is to power up our sites when our customers have no power.  Hard to know
if anything else is problematic under these circimstances.  I

I talked to my grandparents this evening and heard their power actually went
out about 30 minutes after the Cullman tornado (they are on the north side
of the county, closer to a northern substation and should not have been
affected by the downtown cullman trauma in infrastructure) - i understand
their power went out (and thus the TVA outage affecting all of north
alabama) about 30 minutes after the tornado took us down downtown

Keep in touch ; it sounds like network damage on your end isn't near as
profound as the human damage.

Thanks and be well

-jay fuller

 

 


On Thu Apr 28 21:37 , 'Rick Harnish'  wrote:

John,

Thanks for the update. Good to hear your network is in good shape, but very
sad to hear your description of the deaths and destruction. Keep us posted.

Rick

> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org

[wireless-boun...@wispa.org 
','','','1')">wireless-boun...@wispa.org
 ] On
> Behalf Of John McDowell
> Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 9:33 PM
> To: Principal WISPA Member List; WISPA General List; motor...@afmug.com
 
> Subject: [WISPA] Thanks to those concerned
> 
> Our network admin's house, Marlon Williamson who is active on these
> lists, was completely demolished with him and his family inside. I went
> by there today and it looks like a war zone. Complete destruction a half
> mile in each direction with what was his house in the middle. Across the
> road some people were found dead lying in a church parking lot and
> nearby field. A Sara Lee truck pulled up today in a small town called
> Henagar at the 4 way stop, opened the 18 wheeler doors, and you would've
> thought it was a third world country watching the people rush to get
> bread.
> 
> Somehow our network was left unscathed. I drove to most of our sites
> today, all in tact. One water tank may have some lightning damage in the
> cabinet but not much it seems. We were truly blessed.
> 
> We've been without power for over 24 hours. All of N. Alabama is without
> power. People are lining up at gas stations thinking the power is going
> to come on but the TVA has given a best case scenario of 5 days. Judging
> from the damage I've seen, it will be more like 2 weeks. High Voltage
> lines have been twisted and blown over like pretzels all over the
> county.
> 
> Jay, I haven't had time to read any emails, but if I can be of
> assistance I will try. I am kind of a one man show at this point with
> all my employees tending to their families. Water has been cut off in
> most homes across the county. Its almost unbelievable what is
> transpiring. It could get ugly quick.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> John M. McDowell
> Boonlink Communications
> 307 Grand Ave NW
> Fort Payne, AL 35967
> 256.844.9932 Offi

Re: [WISPA] [Motorola II] Re: [Wisp] Thanks to those concerned

[Brian Webster]

Also keep in mind you may be able to help responding agencies with their own
radio connectivity. Many emergency responder agencies now have radio over IP
boxed systems they can use. Sometimes it's self-contained and sometimes they
use Ethernet connectivity to place multiple transmitters over larger
geographic areas. Once your network is functioning make contact with your
local emergency operations center and let them know you can provide
bandwidth.

 

John, as a ham I am sure you already have contacts with the proper people or
can get introduced quickly.

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: motor...@afmug.com [mailto:motor...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of CBB Jay
Weekley
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2011 1:05 AM
To: Rick Harnish; WISPA General List; Principal WISPA Member List;
motor...@afmug.com
Cc: motor...@afmug.com; memb...@wispa.org
Subject: [Motorola II] Re: [Wisp] [WISPA] Thanks to those concerned

 

 

Wow, John, I can't imagine.  I understand there is damage VERY SIMILAR to
that in Huntsville around our tower site up there but our net admin for
Huntsville (Alex Dumas) was inbetween the damage.  His house is fine, but
damage very close by going any direction.

Jerry Head (from Blount County, works with us and is my partner in
Huntsville) is a tower climber and Alex climbs too. Why am I talking about
tower climbing...I have no idea.  Your network sounds about as good as ours
(except we lost our main tower in the Cullman tornado).  I'm more concerned
about Marlon - what is his condition and his family's condition?

I think I was going to offer help to you once we got our stuff back up and
running - but you're in the same boat we are - debating about how important
it is to power up our sites when our customers have no power.  Hard to know
if anything else is problematic under these circimstances.  I

I talked to my grandparents this evening and heard their power actually went
out about 30 minutes after the Cullman tornado (they are on the north side
of the county, closer to a northern substation and should not have been
affected by the downtown cullman trauma in infrastructure) - i understand
their power went out (and thus the TVA outage affecting all of north
alabama) about 30 minutes after the tornado took us down downtown

Keep in touch ; it sounds like network damage on your end isn't near as
profound as the human damage.

Thanks and be well

-jay fuller

 

 


On Thu Apr 28 21:37 , 'Rick Harnish'  wrote:

John,

Thanks for the update. Good to hear your network is in good shape, but very
sad to hear your description of the deaths and destruction. Keep us posted.

Rick

> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org

[wireless-boun...@wispa.org 
','','','1')">wireless-boun...@wispa.org
 ] On
> Behalf Of John McDowell
> Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 9:33 PM
> To: Principal WISPA Member List; WISPA General List; motor...@afmug.com
 
> Subject: [WISPA] Thanks to those concerned
> 
> Our network admin's house, Marlon Williamson who is active on these
> lists, was completely demolished with him and his family inside. I went
> by there today and it looks like a war zone. Complete destruction a half
> mile in each direction with what was his house in the middle. Across the
> road some people were found dead lying in a church parking lot and
> nearby field. A Sara Lee truck pulled up today in a small town called
> Henagar at the 4 way stop, opened the 18 wheeler doors, and you would've
> thought it was a third world country watching the people rush to get
> bread.
> 
> Somehow our network was left unscathed. I drove to most of our sites
> today, all in tact. One water tank may have some lightning damage in the
> cabinet but not much it seems. We were truly blessed.
> 
> We've been without power for over 24 hours. All of N. Alabama is without
> power. People are lining up at gas stations thinking the power is going
> to come on but the TVA has given a best case scenario of 5 days. Judging
> from the damage I've seen, it will be more like 2 weeks. High Voltage
> lines have been twisted and blown over like pretzels all over the
> county.
> 
> Jay, I haven't had time to read any emails, but if I can be of
> assistance I will try. I am kind of a one man show at this point with
> all my employees tending to their families. Water has been cut off in
> most homes across the county. Its almost unbelievable what is
> transpiring. It could get ugly quick.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> John M. McDowell
> Boonlink Communications
> 307 Grand Ave NW
> Fort Payne, AL 35967
> 256.844.9932 Office
> j...@boonlink.com
 
> www.boonlink.com
> 
> 
> 
> This message contains information which may be confidential and
&g

[WISPA] Paetec drives Ethernet-over-copper to 100 Mb/s

[Brian Webster]

http://connectedplanetonline.com/business_services/news/paetec-drives-copper
-over-ethernet-to-100mbs-0503/

 

I wonder if this will help anyone with transport or backhaul costs.

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

 <http://www.wirelessmapping.com> www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.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/

Re: [WISPA] FCC477 fines?

[Brian Webster]

I believe it has been that way all along, they just never enforced it.

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

 <http://www.wirelessmapping.com> www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Cameron Crum
Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 12:57 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] FCC477 fines?

 

One of our customers got a call today from the FCC. The FCC representative
on the other end told him that he had missed the deadline for filing his 477
form and that this was a courtesy call. If he did not get his filing in
soon, he would be subject to a fine. Well it was easy enough to rectify with
our software for him, but I'm curious as to when this became a finable
offense. Does anyone know? We called and questioned the FCC rep who
threatened our customer and he told us it was the law, although he was
unable to tell us when the "law" went into effect, or which piece of
legislation made it law and a finable offense. Can you really be fined for
this now? Any of you lurking lawyers out there know? I'd be curious to know.

Regards,

Cameron




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] [WISPA Members] WISPA National Disaster Committee - Seeking Volunteers

[Brian Webster]

Victoria,

I have made this suggestion a couple of times to various
members of the board over the years and I will do it again. In the days
following hurricane Katrina members of WISPA discovered how difficult it is
to help in disasters when you are not part of a recognized group in the
emergency management system. Many WISP's are also Amateur Radio operators
(hams's). This group is recognized by both the FCC and emergency management
agencies as a participating agency and has memorandums of understanding in
place with non-governmental organizations (NGO's) such as the Salvation Army
and the Red Cross through their national organization call the American
Radio Relay League (ARRL www.arrl.org) . This group of people typically
belong to the Amateur Radio Emergency Services (ARES) and/or the Radio
Amateur Civil Emergency Service (RACES). They are trained in providing
disaster communications and are an integral part of the Incident Command
System. They have a national training program and a full-fledged field
organization nationwide. 

I would recommend that WISPA establish a memorandum of
understanding with the ARRL and do our best to integrate disaster efforts
outside of helping individual WISP companies. Being able to establish
internet and/or point to point Ethernet connectivity is very important after
a disaster. WISP's can quickly do this. Being part of a recognized
organization will help eliminate the problems associated with trying to do
so in a disaster area.

 

I will help with this committee, you should reach out to the
ham wisp list that was created to see who else from that group would like to
participate.

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: members-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:members-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf
Of Victoria Proffer
Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2011 9:05 AM
To: 'Principal WISPA Member List'; memb...@wispa.org; 'WISPA General List'
Subject: [WISPA Members] WISPA National Disaster Committee - Seeking
Volunteers

 

The mid-west and east coast have taken several tornado beatings over the
last few weeks, as well as we have seen extensive flooding in the mid-west.

I would say, it is just Spring, but I have never seen a Spring this
devastating.

 

A few weeks ago, at our in-person board meeting, we voted to form a National
Disaster Committee; which passed unanimously.  

 

During this last 'epidemic' storm, I contacted WISPA State Coordinators to
assist, if there was any significant damage in their areas.  

Fortunately, we are not hearing of any major damage from our members, with
the exception of Hudson Technology Solutions, that lost a tower in El Reno,
OK.

 

I was in touch with State Coordinators over the last few days, in the event
that more WISPA members could have  been affected.  

I was also in touch with the Missouri WISPA members regarding help for a
'downed' WISP in Joplin, MO.   

 

I was impressed with our WISPA members that volunteered to help in the event
of touchdowns in KS, MO and OK:

 

.Airlink Internet - OK

.BPS Telephone - MO

.Computers & Tele-Comm, Inc. -MO/KS

.Mark Twain Telephone - MO 

.Mercury Communications and Construction - MO

.WISPERS ISP - IL

 

The WISPA National Disaster Committee will create procedures of dealing with
disasters when they affect our members and associated areas.   

With the way that Spring of 2011 is lining up, I believe it is important to
establish this committee ASAP.

 

 

Please contact me to volunteer for this committee.

 

Thanks!

Victoria Proffer 

President/CEO

St. Louis Broadband, LLC <http://stlbroadband.com/> 

314-974-5600

 

 <http://wispa.org/> Wispa_logo+slogan2008SM 2010 - 2011 Board of
Directors

Committee Chairs - Bylaws | National Disaster | State Coordinators |Missouri
State Coordinator

 

<>


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] Old time technology for pulling fiber

[Brian Webster]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/28/us-vermont-internet-idUSTRE75R6Y72
0110628

 

This is a great idea!

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

 <http://www.wirelessmapping.com> www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.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/

Re: [WISPA] Providing data to NTIA for Broadband mapping?

[Brian Webster]

Brett,
I am the mapping data coordinator for the Illinois portion of the
National Map. They are asking for so many details in anticipation that they
need to conduct RF propagation studies. If you don't want to provide so many
details but still want to participate in the map you can provide them with a
coverage are map and tell them the maximum upload and download advertised
speeds for those areas and they should be happy with that. Matt Larsen and I
went through the process with Nebraska. Took a little convincing to get them
to accept it but they ultimately did.



Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Bret Clark
Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2011 9:54 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Providing data to NTIA for Broadband mapping?

So, like many of you, we're being asked to provide data to NTIA for 
broadband mapping, but as a private company I'm rather bothered by the 
confidential information they are asking for. They want to know such 
things as our spectrum use, antenna locations, antenna types, etc. so 
they can model our coverage area (something we already do with Radio 
Mobile). We tried for stimulas money, but got rejected so to be honest I 
have little interest in providing this information, not to mention 
having the data used by our competitors.

I'm wondering how others felt about providing this information?

Thanks
Bret

Spectra Access
25 Lowell Street,
Manchester, NH 03101
www.spectraaccess.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/
-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1390 / Virus Database: 1518/3807 - Release Date: 08/03/11




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] Providing data to NTIA for Broadband mapping?

[Brian Webster]

The states who have their own RF staff are generating RF plots and creating
a polygon shape file of the coverage area the same as the cellular industry
have provided.

 



Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: Greg Ihnen [mailto:os10ru...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2011 12:21 PM
To: bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Providing data to NTIA for Broadband mapping?

 

They're conducting RF propagation studies? Is that not already cut and
dried?

 

How will their findings be presented? Will they be published?

 

Greg

 

On Aug 3, 2011, at 10:37 AM, Brian Webster wrote:





Brett,
  I am the mapping data coordinator for the Illinois portion of the
National Map. They are asking for so many details in anticipation that they
need to conduct RF propagation studies. If you don't want to provide so many
details but still want to participate in the map you can provide them with a
coverage are map and tell them the maximum upload and download advertised
speeds for those areas and they should be happy with that. Matt Larsen and I
went through the process with Nebraska. Took a little convincing to get them
to accept it but they ultimately did.



Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com/> 
www.Broadband-Mapping.com <http://www.Broadband-Mapping.com/> 



 

  _  

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1390 / Virus Database: 1518/3807 - Release Date: 08/03/11




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] Providing data to NTIA for Broadband mapping?

[Brian Webster]

No they are producing RF engineering maps and studies using RF propagation
tools.

 



Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com  

 

From: Greg Ihnen [mailto:os10ru...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2011 7:18 PM
To: bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com
Cc: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Providing data to NTIA for Broadband mapping?

 

Brian,

 

That's interesting. So they're actually making field
measurements?

 

I suspect the state's RF staff is probably limited and stretched
thin in attempting to cover all the WISPs in the entire state. Their number
of measurements would have to be far below that of the WISP operator who has
rssi data from every CPE plus all of their pre-sales measurements. Added to
that how often could the state's RF staff be resampling? It seems like the
state would be much better served to accept the coverage data from the WISP
which would have to be more complete and up-to-date.

 

If what they really want is coverage then that's the shortest
route.

 

There's always a temptation in data collection to get everything
you can so you won't have to get more later if your focus changes and you
want to look at something else. That's what Google's Street View in trouble.

 

Greg

 

On Aug 3, 2011, at 5:41 PM, Brian Webster wrote:





The states who have their own RF staff are generating RF plots and creating
a polygon shape file of the coverage area the same as the cellular industry
have provided.

 



Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com  

 

From: Greg Ihnen [mailto:os10ru...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2011 12:21 PM
To: bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Providing data to NTIA for Broadband mapping?

 

They're conducting RF propagation studies? Is that not already cut and
dried?

 

How will their findings be presented? Will they be published?

 

Greg

 

On Aug 3, 2011, at 10:37 AM, Brian Webster wrote:






Brett,
  I am the mapping data coordinator for the Illinois portion of the
National Map. They are asking for so many details in anticipation that they
need to conduct RF propagation studies. If you don't want to provide so many
details but still want to participate in the map you can provide them with a
coverage are map and tell them the maximum upload and download advertised
speeds for those areas and they should be happy with that. Matt Larsen and I
went through the process with Nebraska. Took a little convincing to get them
to accept it but they ultimately did.



Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com/> 
www.Broadband-Mapping.com <http://www.Broadband-Mapping.com/> 




 

  _  

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1390 / Virus Database: 1518/3807 - Release Date: 08/03/11

 

  _  

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1390 / Virus Database: 1518/3807 - Release Date: 08/03/11




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] Providing data to NTIA for Broadband mapping?

[Brian Webster]

Not all of them are using Radio Mobile although many are. The basic Radio
Mobile plots are not the only tools they have to use. They also need
advanced GIS tools to convert the Radio Mobile plots to something in vector
file format. Radio Mobile plots are only images and do not scale when zoomed
in or out nor do they tell any other data attributes in a mapping database
such as the speed information or the carrier who offers the service there.

 

If WISP's would provide the data they most certainly use it. Most of these
mapping contractors are people who do not have any broadband experience.
They are tasked with asking for and gathering data. Some person made up the
data request for WISP's thinking that they need all this information so that
they will not constantly have to go back and forth once they sit down to do
the process on each carrier. Most of the RF engineering staff these states
have do not understand that WISP coverage can be generated in a much more
simple way than they are requesting. Ask the WISP's in Illinois who have
dealt with me. My way is much simpler for them to deal with.

 

Radio Mobile can and will generate very accurate maps in a skilled set of
hands. I have been using the program for 15 years now and helped in its
development with Roger. I have compared it to the various $50,000 and up
commercial RF tools I had at my disposal over the years. It's just as good
as what I have seen those tools kick out. The real world WISP experience is
also nice for additional input but not too many have taken the time to do
so. The semiannual map update process is a lot of work. The data that comes
in is usually a mess from almost all carriers and there is a huge amount of
post processing that needs to be done. Each state has to run the data sets
through a standardized error checking tool before submission to the NTA for
structure and uniformity. We are not allowed to send the data to them
without a clean error check tool. It can be a very daunting process.

 

WISP's are a very important element to showing how well a state is covered
yet most states don't yet realize it nor do they have an understanding of
the industry or the personalities of those who run those businesses. That is
not going to change any time in the near future so if the WISP industry
wants more respect it would be in their best interests to be as cooperative
and helpful in the mapping process as possible without giving up all their
personal business data. It can be done, I am doing it with the Illinois
WISP's and Matt Larsen has done it with my help in his states he covers.

 



Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: Greg Ihnen [mailto:os10ru...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 5:34 AM
To: WISPA General List
Cc: bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Providing data to NTIA for Broadband mapping?

 

To me that hardly seems like a "study" if all they're doing is making
predictions with the same tools the WISPs make their predictions with and
publish them. And for that they want all the intimate details of your
business? The WISPs have Radio Mobile as well as all the real world
experience with actual signal strength measurements and knowledge of where
there's signal but it's not useable due to interference or Fresnel zone
issues etc.

 

Greg

 

On Aug 3, 2011, at 10:45 PM, Cameron Crum wrote:





In TX I know they just used radio mobile. 

On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 9:13 PM, Brian Webster 
wrote:

No they are producing RF engineering maps and studies using RF propagation
tools.

 



Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com/> 

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: Greg Ihnen [mailto:os10ru...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2011 7:18 PM
To: bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com
Cc: 'WISPA General List'


Subject: Re: [WISPA] Providing data to NTIA for Broadband mapping?

 

 

Brian,

 

That's interesting. So they're actually making field
measurements?

 

I suspect the state's RF staff is probably limited and stretched
thin in attempting to cover all the WISPs in the entire state. Their number
of measurements would have to be far below that of the WISP operator who has
rssi data from every CPE plus all of their pre-sales measurements. Added to
that how often could the state's RF staff be resampling? It seems like the
state would be much better served to accept the coverage data from the WISP
which would have to be more complete and up-to-date.

 

If what they really want is coverage then that's the shortest
route.

 

There's always a temptation in data collection to get everything
you can so you won't have to get more later if your focus changes and you
want to look at something else. That's what Google's Street View in trouble.

 

Greg

 

On Aug 3,

Re: [WISPA] Providing data to NTIA for Broadband mapping?

[Brian Webster]

Let me state that Connected Nation does a great job of working to map fixed
wireless operators in the states they have contracts from what I have seen.
The work I am doing in Illinois is a handoff of the work Connected Nation
did prior to their contract expiring. I will state that their work was done
well and certainly a far cry from some of the other states that do not
contract with them. As Chip mentions, many states do not have the staff or
experience to deal with wireless very well. I was not singling out Connected
Nation.

 

My methodology is not meant to slight the work of connected nation, my
methodology is meant to reduce the amount of work required for a WISP to
have to do to participate in the national broadband map. While the data some
states like to collect is very detailed and does allow for the ability to do
very advanced studies with tools like EDX Signal Pro, the amount of
additional detail gained in coverage areas over my methodology has not been
enough that I feel the need to alienate WISP's based on a very intimidating
request for information. Most WISP's have also felt that the amount of work
they would have to do to compile that level of detail in data should be done
by the companies who received money to conduct the work in the first place.
While this is not always practical because the data still resides with the
WISP, I do not feel there needs to be as much minutia gathered which takes a
huge amount of time away from WISP operations that generate revenue. The
Illinois process also provides for direct feedback with the WISP's by
sending them a detailed fully interactive final version of their network
coverage map of which they can spot check and validate the propagation
results as well as make any annotations in the geographically proper place.
We also do other validation through data sets obtained outside of the
carrier supplied information. These are in the form of speed tests, user
surveys, and other crowd sourced data.

 

While it would be nice to do a lot more field verification, there are too
many factors to do a practical drive test or spectrum analysis of a WISP
network. Between the proprietary protocols, nature of high gain fixed
wireless CPE and their mounting heights, provisioning to gain access to the
network, other network settings such as bandwidth management and cloaking,
there are just too many factors that come in to play for an effective and
valid drive test effort. Drive testing and spectrum analysis does work well
for the likes of the cellular companies and Clearwire. For small WISP's the
challenges are too much.

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Spann, Chip
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 2:18 PM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] Providing data to NTIA for Broadband mapping?

 

Connected Nation employs actual wireless engineers, most of whom have 25+
years of experience in EBS, BRS, WCS, AWS, LMDS, PCS and unlicensed wireless
bands.  Most of us have also been WISPs ourselves and, to that end, we
understand your business quite well.  Radio Mobile is one of the propagation
modeling tools we use but we also have 5 licensed copies of EDX Signal and
Signal Pro.  We have tested and used MapInfo, CelPlan, Splat and more than a
dozen other wireless propagation modeling tools.

 

Mr. Webster states that his methodology is easy to use and understand.  Some
states have neither methodology nor staff for addressing fixed wireless.
Perhaps our methodology is more complex yet, at the end of the day, state
mapping agents are required to effectively deliver the same product to NTIA.
I head up the fixed wireless and mobile wireless user group at NTIA and have
a published white paper explaining our rather long, but exceptionally
detailed, methodology and would be happy to share it with this group upon
request.

 

Finally, some mapping agents (like our company) go beyond simply creating a
theoretical propagation model - we do conduct static field tests and compile
data at hundreds of points during drive tests.  Last year we drove over
100,000 miles last year, spectrum analyzer and CPE in hand, conducting tests
and using the data to refine our propagation models.

 

However, nothing is as important than the relationship between the mapping
agent and the WISP.  In the states where we are engaged, we spend a great
deal of time talking to and working with the WISPs so that we have a keen
understanding of their system BEFORE we create propagation models.

 

Charles "Chip" Spann

Director - Engineering & Technical Services

Connected Nation

(270) 799-0448

csp...@connectednation.org

 




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA

Re: [WISPA] Providing data to NTIA for Broadband mapping?

[Brian Webster]

Drew,

That statement was meant to state that many states (non
connected nation contracts mostly) have the bulk of their experience with
GIS and data companies, not people who have worked in the broadband
industry. When it comes to reviewing data and information collected by some
GIS companies, they typically do not have a good understanding of the value
of various data when looking at the broadband picture in a state. This is
not to say that they lack the skills to map what they have been given and
compile it in to the necessary formats for the NTIA, but what they do lack
is the ability to think outside the box, to work with carriers in a way to
minimize the carriers level of work they need to do to supply good data to
the mapping effort. I have seen many contractors that just can't deal with
anything outside their form and checkbox system (again, this are not
connected nation contracted states). 

 

If Connected Nation takes my comments personally please let me state that
this is not an attack on any of their work. These are my observations of
working with other states in conjunction with WISP's outside the states that
have a contract with Connected Nation. My statement was based on direct
interaction with the state contracts and the WISP's. In one case it took a
direct intervention from the NTIA to get it worked out with said state.

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

214 Eggleston Hill Rd.

Cooperstown, NY 13326

(607) 643-4055 Office

(607) 435-3988 Mobile

(208) 692-1898 Fax
Skype: Radiowebst

 <http://www.wirelessmapping.com> www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Drew Lentz
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 1:06 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Providing data to NTIA for Broadband mapping?

 

I disagree with this:

Most of these mapping contractors are people who do not have any broadband
experience.

 

Depending on the group that gets assigned the funding for the mapping
projects (and that is done per state), some of these guys are highly
proficient in doing the data collection. They have decades of experience and
most definitely know what they are doing. 

 

The only reason I mention this is because part of their toolset does include
pretty sophisticated software, that does in fact have a higher price tag
than RM. I love RM, always have, and have used it for years. But crunching
together WiMax, LTE, Wi-Fi, etc into it simultaneously can be kind of a
hassle; and exporting it and combining it with data from thousands of
locations, just as difficult.

 

One process that I am familiar with when it comes to this (at least here in
TX and what one of the WISPs I built went through) went like this:

 

1. Contacted by the mapping agency

2. The mapping agency asked for coverage maps, if they were available.

3. Info on tx and rx gear was obtained for signal modeling.

4. test points were assigned.

5. Test points were used to gather real-world signal levels.

6. Maps were created based on tx and rx gear and real-world signal levels.

7. each one of those newly found maps were sent upstream to state HQ where
they were combined with all the other state maps to create a pretty thorough
database / map

 

-d

 

On Aug 4, 2011, at 9:19 AM, Brian Webster wrote:





Most of these mapping contractors are people who do not have any broadband
experience.

 




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] Verizon wants a piece of our pie

[Brian Webster]

One major factor you have to consider for Verizon and FIOs is the union
problem. Verizon had established specialized teams to deploy fiber and were
moving along at or ahead of schedule and budgets. The teams would go to the
new areas and stay to get the work done. Then the union stepped up and filed
grievances stating it was taking work away from the local guys. Short story
is the union won out, now they have to deploy with people who have no
incentive to hurry up and get the work done so they can go back home to
their families. I think this is why you have seen them slow down. The union
is the most counterproductive aspect of Verizon, even the employees who are
non-union know this. The wireless division refuses to unionize, that should
tell you something.

Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Fred Goldstein
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 4:27 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Verizon wants a piece of our pie

At 10/27/2011 03:10 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>It makes it easier to increase your penetration percentage when you 
>sell off what you don't intend on putting fiber in.

Worse.  They sold off what they could of that plant where they didn't intend
to put in fiber.  But they couldn't sell it all.  So they're going to nurse
the old copper plant along for the foreseeable future.  In some areas it'll
be all they have; in other areas, where there is FiOS, its penetration isn't
all that high anyway.


  --
  Fred Goldsteink1io   fgoldstein "at" ionary.com
  ionary Consulting  http://www.ionary.com/
  +1 617 795 2701 





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] Verizon wants a piece of our pie

[Brian Webster]

But what did you know right Cameron? The arrogance and ignorance of carriers
still never ceases to amaze me. Most times it is due to the fact that the
person in that position of network design authority, who should already know
those answers, simply does not and feel like they need to draw the line in
the sand and make it seem like they know more than the consultant, otherwise
they fear their bosses will question their value to the organization...

 

Thank You,

Brian Webster

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Cameron Crum
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 5:46 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Verizon wants a piece of our pie

 

That's right Blake, and it was way before 4G that designing for capacity
came into play. Before I became a wisp in '03, I had designed and had a part
in building over 1000 cell sites for 4 different carriers in 3 different
countries. In the mid-90s companies were going for coverage only. They
quickly learned that once digital technologies came into play, coverage
meant squat in terms of how many subs you could pack on a network. Just like
with us, cell sites are limited in capacity and the noisier things get with
CDMA based systems, the quicker they go to crap. In urban, sub-urban
morphologies, capacity rules. In rural areas though, they don't anticipate
near the traffic levels, so they build taller sites that can cover more
area. Along highways, they may only build 2 sector sites, at least
initially, because the extra sector that doesn't carry any traffic is a
waste of money. If they really are going for fixed wireless as a major play,
then they may have to add sites in the rural areas. They may not realize it
yet. It was  tough sell to convince them the first time around. When Sprint
first deployed 1x, we, the consultants told them that designing for coverage
was a waste of time and money. They didn't believe us and ended up having to
add 25% more sites after turning the network up. 

 

Cameron

On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Blake Bowers  wrote:

Cellular systems in urban areas are built for capacity.  Thats why you have
so many low level sites, frequency reuse.  Capacity rules king.

In rural areas, coverage rules.  That is why they use a lot of
intellirepeater sites, that actually work off close existing sites, with
very minimal capacity.  Often limited to one outdoor cabinet and 3 panels.
(and in some cases a mag mount antenna on the cabinet for the donor site to
be able to talk to it)

Capacity of varying sites changes also on a network.  While one site may
have X capacity with X transcievers, the one 5 miles away, same network, may
have twice that number.   They may look alike from the outside, but the
equipment inside is different TOE.


Don't take your organs to heaven,
heaven knows we need them down here!
Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today.


- Original Message -
From: "Charles Wu" 
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 10:31 AM

Subject: Re: [WISPA] Verizon wants a piece of our pie



>I have a dissenting opinion...
>
>>It all comes down to a simple economics in the end.  Who can most cost
>>effectively provide broadband.
>
> A cellular network is built for coverage
>
> Additionally, large companies, from a scale and operations perspective,
> will tend to put the same equipment everywhere
>
> What that means is in order to offer the nationwide network, that the
> tower in the rural area that's required to cover that stretch of highway
> where there's only a town of 1,000 people will have the same equipment and
> capacity as the tower in downtown Chicago that has 1,000 simultaneous
> users
>
> So in rural areas, where the costs of the tower, backhaul and base station
> have already been amortized and paid for to fulfill their coverage
> requirements, but many of these towers are sitting at 5-10% capacity
>
> In their mind, to add another 100 or so fixed wireless users off an AP and
> putting them in a lower QoS bucket (so the primary mobile customers aren't
> affected when fixed customers start slamming Netflix) is "found money" --
> self installs are quite nice when putting out +60 dBi EIRP at the tower
> with 700 MHz on licensed spectrum with zero noise floor
>
> -Charles

/






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/

 




WISP

Re: [WISPA] Strategies For Finding Bandwidth

[Brian Webster]

You can also use the national broadband map and find out who offers service
there. They may not be able to give you 100 meg but I would bet they know
who can.

Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 12:17 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Strategies For Finding Bandwidth

Peruse the carrier maps and see what's in your area. I would love it if
someone asked me for 100 megs.

Check www.telecomramblings.com for links to maps.

-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



On 11/7/2011 10:22 AM, Andrew Niemantsverdriet wrote:
> How do I go about finding a bandwidth provider? I have been tasked to 
> find 100Megs of Internet and have exhausted all the options I know.
> What I have done so far is contact other ISP's in the area and asked 
> them if they can get me Internet. So far everybody has said no because 
> they can figure out a way to deliver it.
>
> So what I am asking what are some other avenues that I can explore to 
> get bandwidth to this location? Generic advise is fine as I may have 
> to do this once more for another site.
>
> I am purposely not saying the address on a public list but if that 
> will help I can let you know off list.
>
> Thanks,
>   _
> /-\ ndrew
>
>
> --
> --
> 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] Cordless Phone Ring Interference

[Brian Webster]

With the price of cordless phones now days and the cost of your customer
support time, I would just buy them a new phone. If you get a DECT 6.0
version you are certain not to have problems. Those are used exclusively in
the guard bands around the 1800 MHz PCS frequencies and are set aside
specifically for cordless phones only. It's also fairly cheap to get a multi
extension set.

Thank You,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
www.Broadband-Mapping.com


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Scott Reed
Sent: Monday, December 26, 2011 3:11 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Cordless Phone Ring Interference

I have a customer that has determined that every time the phone rings, the
Internet goes down.  Once the phone is answered, the Internet works.  We are
using 2.4GHz to the house, with an integrated Arc panel on the roof.
The customer has checked and the phone does not have a channel selection
button.
Anyone have suggestions as to how to get the phone to not kill the wireless
link?

--
Scott Reed
Owner
NewWays Networking, LLC
Wireless Networking
Network Design, Installation and Administration



Mikrotik Advanced Certified

www.nwwnet.net
(765) 855-1060
(765) 439-4253
(855) 231-6239






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/