Re: [WISPA] MDU Ethernet Switch
I have not used them, buthere is what you are asking about.. http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:CRS_features http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:CRS_examples specs on performance as a switch and or Router are listed on the bottom of the specs's page on the routerboard.com web site. https://routerboard.com/CRS112-8G-4S-IN Regards Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > From: "Colton Conor" <colton.co...@gmail.com> > To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> > Sent: Thursday, November 3, 2016 9:27:18 AM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] MDU Ethernet Switch > Dan and Faisal, > I am now looking at the CRS112-8G-4S-IN. Cost and port wise its seems to be a > great fit for this application. Looks like you can also power it by POE In > which is nice. > Can you help me understand how something like a CRS112-8G-4S-IN compares to a > tradition Mikrotik router that has a switch build in like the RB2011iLS-IN? > Does Mikrotik support the following features you would find in a typical > access > platform like: > Private VLAN (Protected port) > DHCP Snooping and DHCP Option 82 > port security > limit the number MACs per Port > Would features like these be done on the switch, or on the slow CPU causing it > to not be line rate? At this point, I don't understand what would be line rate > features, and what would be CPU slow features. My understanding is there is a > switch interface section? > For comparison, it looks like the Planet switch supports all of these features > http://www.planet.com.tw/en/product/product.php?id=48527#spec > On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 1:23 AM, Dan Harling < harl...@capeanncomm.com > wrote: >> RouterOS has a CLI in addition to the Winbox GUI, and you can connect >> via MAC (from the same subnet) as well as IP. It also has 'netwatch' >> and scripting, very configurable local & remote logging, traffic >> shaping, pretty much all you'd expect from a proper router. >> The devices I mentioned have switch chips that allow either some or >> all ports to operate at wire speed. But you'd also have the option of >> going to a routed topology, should that become desirable in the >> future. (If your design links pairs of these devices in addition to >> the home runs, for fail-over in case of a break, a routed network >> would let you make use of that capacity; whereas in a bridged network, >> STP would simply disable the extra link until it's needed.) >> On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Colton Conor < colton.co...@gmail.com > >> wrote: >> > Daniel, >> > What functions would I want in RouterOS that are no in SwOS for this >> > application? Can RouterOS devices be turned into a switch, and operate at >> > full line speed rates? 1 Gbps in and out? >> > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Dan Harling < harl...@capeanncomm.com > >> > wrote: >> >> On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Colton Conor < colton.co...@gmail.com > >> >> wrote: >> >> > - At Least 1 SFP fiber uplink port. 2 would be nice for daisy chaining, >> >> > but >> >> > not required. >> >> > - 4 to 8 Copper Gigabit Ports. I don't need POE output power on these >> >> > ports. >> >> > - SNMP For remote monitoring >> >> > - CLI or some sort of web based remote management >> >> > - Temperature Hardened or able to be in a hot attic >> >> > - Some sort of L2 port isolation or private vlans where other >> >> > subscribers >> >> > can see each other. All traffic goes in and out of uplink >> >> > - Rate limiting for each individual port >> >> > - Full duplex speed and wireline switching is preferred. >> >> > - We be nice to be remotely powered using PoE in, but not required. >> ... >> >> There have been several updates to SwOS over the past couple years >> >> (currently at 1.17), but I would recommend a 2011, 3011, or CRS--all >> >> of which run RouterOS--over a SwOS device. ROS has far, far more >> >> features that you would want to have in this situation. (I only use >> >> SwOS for passive PoE distribution: RB260GSP.) >> Daniel Harling <>< >> Engineering, Cape Ann Communications >> 183 Main Street, Gloucester, MA 01930 >> 978-879-7744 (cell) >> harl...@capeanncomm.com >> ___ >> 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] MDU Ethernet Switch
FYI, Mikrotik makes a whole line of actual switches called the CRS line... These are switches with a smaller/weaker RouterOS CPU/Processor... Perfectly good for line rate switching, and a small amount of Routing (management ? ) Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > From: "Colton Conor" <colton.co...@gmail.com> > To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> > Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2016 3:25:15 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] MDU Ethernet Switch > Daniel, > What functions would I want in RouterOS that are no in SwOS for this > application? Can RouterOS devices be turned into a switch, and operate at full > line speed rates? 1 Gbps in and out? > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Dan Harling < harl...@capeanncomm.com > wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Colton Conor < colton.co...@gmail.com > >> wrote: >> > - At Least 1 SFP fiber uplink port. 2 would be nice for daisy chaining, but >> > not required. >> > - 4 to 8 Copper Gigabit Ports. I don't need POE output power on these >> > ports. >> > - SNMP For remote monitoring >> > - CLI or some sort of web based remote management >> > - Temperature Hardened or able to be in a hot attic >> > - Some sort of L2 port isolation or private vlans where other subscribers >> > can see each other. All traffic goes in and out of uplink >> > - Rate limiting for each individual port >> > - Full duplex speed and wireline switching is preferred. >> > - We be nice to be remotely powered using PoE in, but not required. Might >> > be >> > hard however to get power to the attic or side of building. >> > So far, options that come to mind are: >> > https://routerboard.com/RB260GS for $36. Looks like a good option, but not >> > sure about SwitchOS. Worried Mikrotik won't continue to improve switchOS. >> > Feature set seems limited. Not sure about port isolation options? Says it >> > support Poe-In for power. Temp range looks good. No CLI. >> There have been several updates to SwOS over the past couple years >> (currently at 1.17), but I would recommend a 2011, 3011, or CRS--all >> of which run RouterOS--over a SwOS device. ROS has far, far more >> features that you would want to have in this situation. (I only use >> SwOS for passive PoE distribution: RB260GSP.) >> Daniel Harling <>< >> Engineering, Cape Ann Communications >> 183 Main Street, Gloucester, MA 01930 >> 978-879-7744 (cell) >> harl...@capeanncomm.com >> ___ >> 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] Prayers for Mac Dearman
Best wishes and prayers for a speedy full recovery . Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > From: "John Scrivner" <j...@mvn.net> > To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> > Sent: Monday, April 17, 2017 12:56:30 PM > Subject: [WISPA] Prayers for Mac Dearman > I am certain he does not want any big attention about this but I am posting it > anyway. Mac Dearman is having heart bypass surgery this morning. I know many > of > you know Mac on here so please say a prayer for an old friend to be healed. > Mac > was one of the founding members of WISPA and led the efforts to put > Mississippi > and Louisiana back together post-Katrina. He is still operating his WISP in > Rayville, LA and he is a dear friend to me and many others. > Thank you, > John Scrivner > ___ > 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] Maxxwave x86 router ethernet port problem
I have not seen this issue on any of our i7 x86 routers... A few questions:- What is connected to these Ethernet ports ? any surge protectors in the middle ? Disabling them and enabling them have any effect ? Doing a physical disconnect or reconnect have any affect ? When did the problem start ? This sounds like a hardware problem more than anything else (i.e. not a software issue). Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > From: "Chris Fabien" <ch...@lakenetmi.com> > To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> > Sent: Thursday, June 1, 2017 4:28:53 PM > Subject: [WISPA] Maxxwave x86 router ethernet port problem > We have a maxxwave i7 x86 router from Baltic Networks. What I'm seeing is a > problem where the ethernet ports stop working one at a time. The remote side > will still show a 1G link but the router either shows 10Meg or No Link and no > traffic will pass. > This happens to the ports one at a time maybe once a week or so, until several > are not working. Then I have to power cycle the router to get them all back > working again. > Running 6.32.3 > Is this just faulty hardware that I need to replace, or any other suggestions? > Thanks > Chris Fabien > LakeNet 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] Looking for opinions on a proposal for PTMP in 6Ghz Part 101 spectrum
This can be rather interesting My personal opinion is that the current part 101 is very 'wasteful' of spectrum, due to how the links are coordinated, while it is completely understandable that the part 101 rules favor the license holder in protecting their links. I would be very much interested in knowing the exact functioning on the mechanism to protect the current PTP license holder. The ability to use the rest of un-used spectrum for PTMP at such sites would be very much welcomed relief for severely disadvantaged areas such as South Florida, (no 3.65 due to earth stations, no extended 5x due to coastal radar etc etc).. Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > From: "Mark Radabaugh" <m...@amplex.net> > To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> > Sent: Friday, June 2, 2017 6:01:57 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Looking for opinions on a proposal for PTMP in 6Ghz Part > 101 spectrum > There is 1325 Mhz of spectrum potentially available between 5925 to 7250Mhz. > Existing 6GHz PTP links would need to be protected, as well as satellite > links, > and some federal users. > Mark >> On Jun 2, 2017, at 5:23 PM, Mike Hammett < wispawirel...@ics-il.net > wrote: >> I can't imagine there's enough spectrum to do this. >> - >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions >> Midwest Internet Exchange >> The Brothers WISP >> From: "Mark Radabaugh" < m...@amplex.net > >> To: "WISPA General List" < wireless@wispa.org > >> Sent: Friday, June 2, 2017 4:12:45 PM >> Subject: [WISPA] Looking for opinions on a proposal for PTMP in 6Ghz Part 101 >> spectrum >> WISPA has been asked to participate in a wireless industry push to explore >> unlicensed use in the current Part 101 6Ghz spectrum. The idea is to increase >> the current Part 15 allowed power limits and to bring in UNII rules, along >> with >> additional mitigations currently under study (e.g., sensing, database) to >> protect incumbents. As there are no federal users (other than PTP) this would >> not require the ESC system of CBRS and is potentially considerably simpler to >> implement. >> The upside is significantly more spectrum availability in a high >> power/capacity/range band. The downside is some potential loss of geographic >> exclusivity and availability of new 6GHz Part 101 PTP links in exchange for >> greater reliance on the use of spectrum sharing mechanisms over time. >> I’m interested in opinions on how important 6Ghz PTP links are to the >> membership >> and for those who use them if there would be significant opposition to using >> the spectrum for Point to Multipoint. >> Mark >> Mark Radabaugh >> WISPA FCC Committee Chair >> 419-261-5996 >> ___ >> 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] Looking for opinions on a proposal for PTMP in 6Ghz Part 101 spectrum
You have my vote of yes, proceed with cautious optimism Hopefully others will chime in with their thoughts as well. Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > From: "Mark Radabaugh" <m...@amplex.net> > To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> > Sent: Saturday, June 3, 2017 10:52:18 AM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Looking for opinions on a proposal for PTMP in 6Ghz Part > 101 spectrum > Faisel, > Thanks for the input. An industry group (who wishes to remain anonymous at > this > point) approached WISPA to see if we would be an opponent of this proposal > since we are essentially the incumbents in the 6Ghz Part 101 space, or a > supporter. > My thought is that we have far more to gain from supporting the (admittedly > incomplete) proposal by obtaining far more PTMP spectrum than we lose. I would > like to respond on behalf of WISPA with enthusiastic support for the idea but > I > want to get a feel from the membership before endorsing the concept. > Mark >> On Jun 3, 2017, at 5:19 AM, Faisal Imtiaz < fai...@snappytelecom.net > wrote: >> This can be rather interesting >> My personal opinion is that the current part 101 is very 'wasteful' of >> spectrum, >> due to how the links are coordinated, while it is completely understandable >> that the part 101 rules favor the license holder in protecting their links. >> I would be very much interested in knowing the exact functioning on the >> mechanism to protect the current PTP license holder. The ability to use the >> rest of un-used spectrum for PTMP at such sites would be very much welcomed >> relief for severely disadvantaged areas such as South Florida, (no 3.65 due >> to >> earth stations, no extended 5x due to coastal radar etc etc).. >> Regards. >> Faisal Imtiaz >> Snappy Internet & Telecom >> 7266 SW 48 Street >> Miami, FL 33155 >> Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 >> Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net >>> From: "Mark Radabaugh" < m...@amplex.net > >>> To: "WISPA General List" < wireless@wispa.org > >>> Sent: Friday, June 2, 2017 6:01:57 PM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Looking for opinions on a proposal for PTMP in 6Ghz >>> Part >>> 101 spectrum >>> There is 1325 Mhz of spectrum potentially available between 5925 to 7250Mhz. >>> Existing 6GHz PTP links would need to be protected, as well as satellite >>> links, >>> and some federal users. >>> Mark >>>> On Jun 2, 2017, at 5:23 PM, Mike Hammett < wispawirel...@ics-il.net > >>>> wrote: >>>> I can't imagine there's enough spectrum to do this. >>>> - >>>> Mike Hammett >>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions >>>> Midwest Internet Exchange >>>> The Brothers WISP >>>> From: "Mark Radabaugh" < m...@amplex.net > >>>> To: "WISPA General List" < wireless@wispa.org > >>>> Sent: Friday, June 2, 2017 4:12:45 PM >>>> Subject: [WISPA] Looking for opinions on a proposal for PTMP in 6Ghz Part >>>> 101 >>>> spectrum >>>> WISPA has been asked to participate in a wireless industry push to explore >>>> unlicensed use in the current Part 101 6Ghz spectrum. The idea is to >>>> increase >>>> the current Part 15 allowed power limits and to bring in UNII rules, along >>>> with >>>> additional mitigations currently under study (e.g., sensing, database) to >>>> protect incumbents. As there are no federal users (other than PTP) this >>>> would >>>> not require the ESC system of CBRS and is potentially considerably simpler >>>> to >>>> implement. >>>> The upside is significantly more spectrum availability in a high >>>> power/capacity/range band. The downside is some potential loss of >>>> geographic >>>> exclusivity and availability of new 6GHz Part 101 PTP links in exchange for >>>> greater reliance on the use of spectrum sharing mechanisms over time. >>>> I’m interested in opinions on how important 6Ghz PTP links are to the >>>> membership >>>> and for those who use them if there would be significant opposition to >>>> using >>>> the spectrum for Point to Multipoint. >>>> Mark >>>> Mark Radab
Re: [WISPA] Looking for opinions on a proposal for PTMP in 6Ghz Part 101 spectrum
Context context context ... do you know who much Freq is in 4.9 you are talking about ? :) Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - > From: "Keefe John" <keefe...@ethoplex.com> > To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> > Sent: Thursday, June 8, 2017 12:46:09 AM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Looking for opinions on a proposal for PTMP in 6Ghz Part > 101 spectrum > We should open up the 4.9 band. Hardly gov't agencies use it. > > Keefe > > > On 6/7/2017 4:34 PM, Mark Radabaugh wrote: >> For 6Ghz it would likely be a coordinated system similar to the SAS system >> planned for CBRS but without the ESC portion. The coordination from the SAS >> would protect existing users and links. I would expect to see a professional >> installer requirement similar to CBRS rules. Part 101 is a small part of >> the >> potentially available spectrum between 5900 and 7200. There are plenty of >> other users that would need to be protected as well. Whatever happens here >> isn't going to be true unlicensed spectrum. >> >> My question earlier was more general than just the 6Ghz space. There are >> other >> frequency bands can be looked at for PTMP that can make use of a SAS type of >> system to allow multiple uses of currently underutilized spectrum, but they >> all >> have some form of incumbent. The TV Whitespace rules are largely useless >> because the NAB tried so hard to protect its turf that the rules make it very >> difficult to use for PTMP.I don't believe we should be shutting down >> anything that can get us more PTMP space but should instead be supporting >> proposals that protect what we have while finding additional ways to reach >> customers. >> >> Mark Radabaugh >> Amplex >> 22690 Pemberville Rd >> Luckey, OH 43447 >> 419-261-5996 >> >>> On Jun 7, 2017, at 3:17 PM, Seth Mattinen <se...@rollernet.us> wrote: >>> >>>> On 6/7/17 11:44, David Jones wrote: >>>> If its to be part 15 how will the 6ghz be protected? don't we now have >>>> problems in the DFS from people who don't know or don't care? >>> >>> I still want to able to coordinate new part 101 6GHz links. That band >>> should not be removed from the box of tools WISPs have for licensed links. >>> >>> ~Seth >>> ___ >>> 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
[WISPA] Fwd: MetroLinq radios SNMP MIB's
It's amazing as to the possibilities by just asking TechSupport ! :) Here you go ! Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > From: "John Reiner" <tick...@ignitenet.uservoice.com> > To: "faisal" <fai...@snappytelecom.net> > Cc: "support" <supp...@ignitenet.com> > Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 10:23:57 AM > Subject: Re: Fwd: [WISPA] MetroLinq radios SNMP MIB's > Re: Fwd: [WISPA] MetroLinq radios SNMP MIB's > Hi Faisal, > The MIBs are here: > https://www.dropbox.com/sh/putfsmaxrrs40bi/AAB6_y7yswZ79_MnrNnYFKAUa?dl=0 > Best Regards, > Helpful? Click to give nino thanks! > On May 05, 2017 at 9:23 AM faisal < fai...@snappytelecom.net > wrote: >> Please see below :) >> Faisal Imtiaz >> Snappy Internet & Telecom >> 7266 SW 48 Street >> Miami, FL 33155 >> Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 >> Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net >> > From: "Eduardo" < eme...@webjogger.com > >> > To: "WISPA General List" < Wireless@wispa.org > >> > Sent: Thursday, May 4, 2017 4:17:48 PM >> > Subject: [WISPA] MetroLinq radios SNMP MIB's >> > Does anyone have these MIB’s that want to share? >> > I couldn’t find that in the Ignite support website. >> > Eduardo >> > ___ >> > Wireless mailing list >> > Wireless@wispa.org >> > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > Powered by UserVoice. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] PSA: BGP broke 650k routes
hmmm not a good ideal on setting up prefix limit on your Full Table IP Transit BGP Connections.. setting prefix limits on your Peering BGP connections is an excellent idea. Using ACL Filters to explicitly accept prefixes from your down-stream, and what you advertise to your upstream is best practices. Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > From: "Josh Luthman" <j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> > To: a...@afmug.com, "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> > Sent: Friday, September 8, 2017 7:26:00 AM > Subject: [WISPA] PSA: BGP broke 650k routes > I'm not sure where the 650k max-prefix-limit came from - consultant or I > thought > it was plentiful - but both of my peers just hit 650.6k and 651.2k routes > which > caused all kinds of fun this morning. > 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
Re: [WISPA] SIP Cordless phones
Cordless Dect phones (SIP/IP Phones) Have come long ways. Aastra Panasonic Yealink They all work fine, as advertised. :) Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom http://www.snappytelecom.net Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net - Original Message - > From: "Jeremy Austin" > To: "df...@globalvision.net" > Cc: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Friday, June 29, 2018 7:51:54 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] SIP Cordless phones > On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 3:47 PM David Funderburk > wrote: >> >> We have a small accounting firm that wants a mixture of desk phones and >> cordless phones. The older people are used to desk phones and want to keep it >> that way. The younger employees prefer cordless so they can move around the >> office while talking to clients. Both want to have features such as call >> transfer, park, etc on their phones. > > Got it. > > If you're using a SIP cordless, features will be activated via DTMF > (and out-of-band signaling). If you're using a PBX that calls cell #s, > or softphones... features will be activated via DTMF. > > If you want to go super fancy, there are DECT cell systems that allow > full roaming within the coverage area. I have run Aastra, haven't > tried Panasonic's system. We ran into weird issues like not being able > to dial zero, and phones that were many years behind state of the art. > > From the perspective of the younger employees, a SIP phone is just a > cell phone that's broken because it can't run apps. > > And if you want Bluetooth + mobile, be prepared to pay $300+ per handset. > >> >> >> David >> >> On 2018/06/29 17:09, Jeremy Austin wrote: >> >> By cellular I also include VoWifi. >> >> I'm having a hard time seeing the general use case for SIP rather than >> VoWifi. At present, largely what we get is presence notification — SIP >> busy status. >> On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 12:45 PM Grand Avenue Broadband >> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Jun 29, 2018, at 1:34 PM, Jeremy Austin wrote: >> >> What's the use case that you'd prefer SIP over cellular, FWIW? >> >> >> Coverage holes where you've done some work to feed signal in but the cell >> boys >> haven't... >> >> -- >> Grand Avenue Broadband -- Wireless Internet Service >> Circle City to Wickenburg and surrounding areas >> http://grandavebb.com >> >> ___ >> Wireless mailing list >> Wireless@wispa.org >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> > > > -- > Jeremy Austin > jhaus...@gmail.com > > (907) 895-2311 office > (907) 803-5422 cell > > Heritage NetWorks - Whitestone Power & Communications - Vertical Broadband, > 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] Fwd: MDU Ethernet over Coax recommendations
Have you considered doing G.Fast on the copper phone lines going to each unit ? That might be a better alternative. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom http://www.snappytelecom.net Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > From: "Dan Harling" <ad...@capeanncomm.com> > To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> > Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2018 9:50:05 PM > Subject: [WISPA] Fwd: MDU Ethernet over Coax recommendations > Hello, > We're setting up service in an MDU that has coax home-runs to each unit, but > no > Ethernet. Normally in such situations, we deliver internet access wirelessly > via access points in the hallways. Increasingly, however, interference and > bandwidth expectations are making this solution less effective. > So, we're looking for recommendations for an Ethernet-over-Coax solution. It > absolutely must inject onto a cable already carrying broadcast TV signals. > We'd > prefer a simple point-to-point solution, rather than a hub that simulates a > switch, so that security between subscribers isn't based on firmware that was > designed for (say) security cameras. > I see inexpensive devices along these lines that are designed for Cable or > Satellite TV signals, but no indication whether they would clobber broadcast > TV > signals. Any suggestions? > Daniel Harling <>< > Engineering, Cape Ann Communications > 183 Main Street, Gloucester, MA 01930 > harl...@capeanncomm.com > ___ > 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] 900MHz band
>>> Isn't the device FCC certified? That is no a valid 'defense' when it comes to tracking down the source of interference. It is a position that helps in deflecting potential liability, which the 2nd phase of the 'let's find who is messing with the spectrum process' . Regards. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom http://www.snappytelecom.net Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > From: "Josh Luthman" > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2018 3:59:25 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 900MHz band > Isn't the device FCC certified? > Josh Luthman > Office: 937-552-2340 > Direct: 937-552-2343 > 1100 Wayne St > Suite 1337 > Troy, OH 45373 > On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 3:57 PM, Steve Barnes < st...@pcswin.com > wrote: >> We had an issue this week where we had a Power company have a 50K licensed >> band >> at 901.152 Mhz for power meter reading. We have still a few older links that >> are 900MHz on Yagi’s to individuals in deep woods. I had to move channels all >> over the place as a 902-912MHz 10Mhz channel with UBNT does not have edge >> filters that don’t pollute down to 901MHz. So moving to the middle of the >> band >> cleaned up the noise on their license. >> Now they are claiming that 10MHz channel width in the 900MHz ISM band is >> Illegal. That the channel width is to be no larger than 8MHz. I have read all >> kinds of ISM docs from the FCC and I see no mention of max channel widths. >> They >> made mention of talking to the FCC if we didn’t fix the issue. >> Proof they are wrong any one? This is a national company with a $10K Anritsu >> analyzer they hired in to find the noise. >> Steve Barnes >> Wireless Operations Manager >> New Lisbon Broadband >> NLBC.COM >> PCSWIN.COM >> 765-584-2288 ext:1101 >> ___ >> 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] OFF LIST Predictive placement and heat mapping software OFF LIST
Freudian slip.! :) . I for one found it educational. Is there a place one can see these 5g maps easily for an area ? Thanks. Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom http://www.snappytelecom.net Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net > From: "Brian Webster" > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2018 10:44:33 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] OFF LIST Predictive placement and heat mapping software > OFF > LIST > Crap and you have to remember to change the address. Apologies to the list……. > Thank You, > Brian Webster > From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf > Of Brian Webster > Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2018 10:30 PM > To: 'WISPA General List' > Subject: Re: [WISPA] OFF LIST Predictive placement and heat mapping software > OFF > LIST > Bryan, > Since they get touchy if we self-promote our own solutions on the list I am > sending this to you off list. Here is a blog I published two weeks ago talking > about a solution I have developed that may addresses your question if you are > looking for placement based on need. For other RF predictions there are a few > solutions. 3D RF modeling cuts down your options, actual field survey data and > post modeling can also be done in quite a few ways but Ekahu seems to have a > popular solution for in building surveying and coverage mapping. Are you > looking for indoor or outdoor solutions? Feel free to call and discuss in > detail if you want. > https://brianwebsterconsulting.wordpress.com/2018/07/12/where-will-the-5g-networks-be-built-carriers-are-not-the-only-ones-who-know/ > 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 Bryan Brooks > Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2018 3:29 PM > To: wireless@wispa.org > Subject: [WISPA] Predictive placement and heat mapping software > What are folks using these days for predictive wifi heatmapping (preferably > 3D) > and post- install wifi heatmapping? > Regards, > Bryan > Bryan Brooks > Pavlov Media > 217-530-1946 > ___ > 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
