Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti ERLite-3 3-port Router

On 1/8/2013 6:23 PM, Andrew Jones wrote: I'm not so sure that MPLS support is being worked on. There is certainly no commitment to it from Ubiquiti's forum reps and based on the fact that there is no actively-maintained, feature-complete, freely-available MPLS implementation for Linux, I'm not

Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti ERLite-3 3-port Router

a degree of protection against interception, but no QoS and no protection against DDoS. And it's kind of ugly. Not that MPLS isn't ugly, but until RINA is ready it can sort of work. Have you ever tried to convince them there is a bug? On Jan 8, 2013, at 18:46, Fred Goldstein fgoldst

Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti ERLite-3 3-port Router

On 1/15/2013 2:39 PM, Simon Westlake wrote: For the moment, if you're doing enterprise managed services (the highest profit end of the ISP business, though a stretch for most WISPs), MPLS is the only game in town. You do it on a router that has it, or on a switch that has it. Enterprises

Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti ERLite-3 3-port Router

On 1/15/2013 8:29 PM, Jon Auer wrote: FWIW OpenBSD has L3 MPLS working with a LDP implementation and BGP. No VPLS yet but I think I saw something about starting to work on pseudowires last year. Good catch. You can see MPLS features improving release by release through the OpenBSD history.

Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti ERLite-3 3-port Router

On 1/15/2013 8:29 PM, Jon Auer wrote: FWIW OpenBSD has L3 MPLS working with a LDP implementation and BGP. No VPLS yet but I think I saw something about starting to work on pseudowires last year. Good catch. You can see MPLS features improving release by release through the OpenBSD history.

Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti airfiber on the same tower...

On 2/4/2013 8:48 AM, Paolo Di Francesco wrote: Hi All I was wondering what is your experience on Airfiber. In particular my question is if the following scenario could work or not work in your opinion/experience On tower at LocationA there are two Airfiber pointing at the same direction

Re: [WISPA] Router Question

On 2/13/2013 5:19 AM, Bret Clark wrote: Since their's no such thing as a 150Mbps LAN/WAN ports, you need to get one with gigabit ports. The Mikrotik RB751G-2HnD...has 5 Gig ports and any port can be configured for WAN and/or LAN setups. Includes 2.4GHz 30dBi/1000mW 802.11b/g/n wireless is you

Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti Rocket Titanium

On 4/6/2013 2:20 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: They should have always been 48v. I think the only reason they weren't always 48v was because the RB5xx boards had problems producing noise at 48v. The commercial wireless world (cell sites) is all 24 volt. The wireline world is 48 volt. So I can see

Re: [WISPA] Market data on growth of WISPs in the US ???

On 4/17/2013 11:56 AM, Brough Turner wrote: Hi, Does anyone know where I could get the data for a graph that shows, per year, the growth in the number of WISPs and the growth in the number of subscribers served by WISPs? Forward looking forecasts from market analyst firms would also be cool

Re: [WISPA] Dayton Hamvention- any other WISPs going?

On 5/15/2013 5:06 PM, Justin Wilson wrote: My partner Steve Narducci will be setup with his qtenna stuff. He does quads or something (not 100% sure what it is). http://www.qtenna.com Wow, cubical quad antennas! You don't see too many of them any more. Way back in my youth, when I was

Re: [WISPA] Fiber MUX

On 5/20/2013 11:12 AM, Matt Hoppes wrote: Hi All, Is anyone aware of a MUX that will let me MUX together T1s (needs to be transparent) and Ethernet? I need to MUX them together on one end, and then unMUX on the other end. Again... it all needs to be transparent. What is the underlying

Re: [WISPA] Strange problem with Canopy 9000APC

On 6/13/2013 7:43 AM, David Hannum wrote: We're having an issue with a 9000APC that is very strange. Here is the situation. We have a remote water tank (stand pipe 75' high) that has a few homes around it. So, we have a 9000APC and a connectorized 2450AP on the tower, both on Omni's. The

Re: [WISPA] VoIP Taxes, Fees, Insanity

On 7/28/2013 12:46 AM, Jeremy wrote: From what I read it seems like you can collect whatever you want directly from your customers but it may be considered as income and taxed as such. So you can't really pass it on as a direct fee and bypass your income tax liability for it. No. Federal

Re: [WISPA] VoIP Taxes, Fees, Insanity

. It is based on revenues, form 499. I'm not sure who is exempt, if anyone. Regards. Faisal Imtiaz *From: *Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com *To: *wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Sunday, July 28, 2013 11:42:04 AM *Subject: *Re

Re: [WISPA] VoIP Taxes, Fees, Insanity

, but they are a pain to administer. The FCC is terrible about writing clear rules. On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com mailto:fgoldst...@ionary.com wrote: On 7/28/2013 12:46 AM, Jeremy wrote: From what I read it seems like you can collect whatever

Re: [WISPA] VoIP Taxes, Fees, Insanity

that hasn't been granted. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com *To: *wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Sunday, July 28, 2013 6:06:13 PM *Subject: *Re

Re: [WISPA] Scam Warning!!!

On 8/17/2013 2:11 AM, Blair Davis wrote: Spell check wins again... $#$%@!! Eye sea yore miss steaks butt thee spill chequers eye halve en my pea sea dew knot. -- On 8/16/2013 6:18 PM, Matt Hoppes wrote: Revived or received. :). You may just have incriminated yourself. On Aug 16, 2013,

Re: [WISPA] Latest trend for heavy wooded areas

On 8/22/2013 10:14 AM, Mike Hammett wrote: Almost every time someone has detailed their installations to me, there just isn't enough signal to do anything. They're getting a -76 and wondering why it doesn't work. Increase that another 15 dB and try again. The Canopy will work a little better

Re: [WISPA] Latest trend for heavy wooded areas

On 8/22/2013 4:09 PM, Steve Barnes wrote: But Mike that is the Rub. All things are never the same. 900 is dirty and Susceptible to so much noise and reflection because the signal does not die as quick. I understand the Theory but still have a hard time understanding how a slower carrier

Re: [WISPA] packaging suggestions

On 9/25/2013 1:00 PM, heith petersen wrote: I just got off the phone with a customer. I made some adjustments to his SM the other day to make netflix work. He called back today to tell me it works good but his direct tv showtime package is OK but not great. I kind of wanted to ask him what the

Re: [WISPA] Siklu/Dragonwave 80 Ghz..

On 10/14/2013 7:33 PM, Bob Moldashel wrote: OK. So a customer pops up out of no where and says he is interested in one of these links. Does anyone have any positive/negative/neutral comments/experience? On or off list We have a few Dragonwaves going, 50 and 200 Mbps, some for a few miles

Re: [WISPA] Siklu/Dragonwave 80 Ghz..

are maybe half that strong. Three or four miles should be quite reliable; a 10-mile link might be workable if you have a fallback path, but we haven't done it. On 10/14/2013 07:47 PM, Fred Goldstein wrote: On 10/14/2013 7:33 PM, Bob Moldashel wrote: OK. So a customer pops up out of no where

Re: [WISPA] Windows XP

On 10/17/2013 10:08 PM, Clay Stewart wrote: Offer service to upgrade for $99... WIN7 plus labor? Remember, there is no upgrade from XP to Win7. It has to be a clean install, wiping out existing embedded software installation. (Now why embedded software even exists is a different story,

Re: [WISPA] Siklu/Dragonwave 80 Ghz..

are maybe half that strong. Three or four miles should be quite reliable; a 10-mile link might be workable if you have a fallback path, but we haven't done it. On 10/14/2013 07:47 PM, Fred Goldstein wrote: On 10/14/2013 7:33 PM, Bob Moldashel wrote: OK. So a customer pops up out of no where

Re: [WISPA] FW: FCC Adopts Order to Combat Rural Call Completion

On 10/28/2013 3:55 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: So not only are the rural telcos getting tens of thousands of dollars per line, but they can't properly complete a call? The problem is/was that they are perfectly capable of completing calls that reach them, but instead of sending calls to them

Re: [WISPA] FW: FCC Adopts Order to Combat Rural Call Completion

On 10/28/2013 4:33 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: So they just chose poor VoIP upstreams? Poor quality ones, yes. Under current rules, being VoIP doesn't waive switched access rates. Until the FCC ruled in late 2011 that VoIP termination was subject to interstate access (even on intrastate

Re: [WISPA] MDU wiring

On 10/29/2013 10:20 AM, Gino Villarini wrote: Then I have to add a switch and ups on each floor... I was thinking of home running all to the top floor... no? How big is each floor? This may be a case where exact mapping of the route matters. Cat5e at 100 Mbps is rated for 100 meters

Re: [WISPA] 5.8GHz all frequencies bad?

On 1/4/2014 2:20 PM, Adam Greene wrote: Hi, We have a small Alvarion VL 5.8GHz cell with two links of less than a mile. Generally they are beautiful. However, since Dec 23, we are getting lots of packet loss and high latency on almost all frequencies. Every day we have to go through all

Re: [WISPA] Advice Needed on 200 Mbps FDX Radios

On 1/7/2014 8:29 PM, Gino Villarini wrote: Its doable with the PTP650's, add 3' dishes for a nice rx gain I seem to recall a story several years ago, before Orthogon was bought by Moto, about a link somewhere in Central America (Nicaragua or Panama?) that used a pair of 5.8 GHz Orthogon

Re: [WISPA] Wireless Digest, Vol 24, Issue 16

to become more common. Does anyone know how often it uses 24 GHz? This might eventually impact urban paths or those that go over highways. Message: 1 Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2014 00:11:47 -0500 From: Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com mailto:fgoldst...@ionary.com Subject: Re: [WISPA

Re: [WISPA] Wireless Digest, Vol 24, Issue 16

On 1/8/2014 12:08 PM, Sean Heskett wrote: the part 15 PTP 24Ghz band is only from 24000-24200Mhz (200Mhz of spectrum) i would assume that the doppler radar for cars is in another slice of the 24Ghz spectrum. as far as i know 24000-24200Mhz is for part 15 PTP only. shouldn't be an issue.

Re: [WISPA] HAM colo costs

On 1/13/2014 11:28 AM, D. Ryan Spott wrote: For those of you that own towers or just know... What do HAM operators usually get charged for colocation? No personal experience doing this, but as an old ham, I would be surprised if many hams paid anything! One of the core skills of hamdom is

Re: [WISPA] IPhone email issues

On 1/13/2014 11:52 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller wrote: my problem with imap that i've seen is all the packrats in the world never ever want to delete their email. so then they have gigabytes of mail on the server dating back to 2004 I have gigabytes of mail on my own computers dating back farther

[WISPA] Motorola PTP radios killing switch ports

We've been seeing a strange problem on a network we operate that has a lot of (mostly old) Motorola PTP400 radios on it. These use the Motorola PIDU POE injector. They're connected to HP Procurve and Cisco 3550 switches. The problem is that some radios literally kill the switch ports.

Re: [WISPA] Motorola PTP radios killing switch ports

On 2/3/2014 6:30 PM, l...@mwtcorp.net wrote: On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 17:36:02 -0500 Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com wrote: We've been seeing a strange problem on a network we operate that has a lot of (mostly old) Motorola PTP400 radios on it. These use the Motorola PIDU POE injector

Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?

On 2/9/2014 9:42 AM, Gino Villarini wrote: The use of compliance test is one of the reasons the FCC is clamping down on 5 ghz... UBNT says that they got DFS2 working in 5.5.2, in 2012, so at least some radios, including the NSM5, are compliant. Aren't these officially approved yet for

Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?

Blair Davis wrote, I just went and read a bunch of the comments on the proceeding... I didn't read them all, but I didn't find one in favor of the lower antenna gain... Has anyone else? Motorola Solutions, makers of $6000 police walkie-talkies, explicitly supports the lower gain

Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?

don't know what companies are in the Alliance. Sent with AquaMail for Android http://www.aqua-mail.com On February 10, 2014 6:15:22 AM Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com wrote: Blair Davis wrote, I just went and read a bunch of the comments on the proceeding... I didn't read them all

Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?

On 2/10/2014 10:21 AM, Matt Hoppes wrote: So what about the cell companies that use 5GHz for a quick back haul while waiting for their license to come in? Not the ones commenting in favor of the proposal. I suppose the old Motorola might have understood that, but Cambium now owns the

Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?

On 2/11/2014 6:18 PM, Art Stephens wrote: 5265-5320 5500-5580 5660-5700 5735-5840 Are these not USA channels? If am wrong let me know and I will change them. Yes, if your radio is type-approved for 15.407 with DFS. Otherwise only the latter block, which can be type-approved under 15.247

Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?

On 2/12/2014 5:23 PM, Chuck Hogg wrote: Yea, but the power levels of some are not likely usable in an outdoor WISP environment. A good explanation is at Wikipedia strange enough... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-NII People running equipment in frequencies at a power level higher than

Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?

the radios), with the TX power set to +4 dBm. The PTPs were all upgraded to DFS. Longer paths tend to converge at lower speeds (QPSK). But path by path conditions vary. Sent from my iPad On Feb 12, 2014, at 17:56, Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com mailto:fgoldst...@ionary.com wrote: On 2/12

Re: [WISPA] OT computer issue

On 2/21/2014 1:53 PM, Heith Petersen wrote: I have a long standing customer that recently bought a PC from best buy. He kept telling me he would lose signal from his Air Router. So he came to my office and I set him up with a Pico station. Worked good at first then failure. So I talked with

Re: [WISPA] Fw: FW:

On 2/24/2014 6:03 PM, Marlon Schafer (509.982.2181) wrote: This is the only cantenna that I've ever heard of http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/how-to-make-a-wifi-antenna-out-of-a-pringles-can-nb/ marlon Well, among us real old timers, who remember Heathkits, they were probably the first to

Re: [WISPA] Tower Seminars?

On 2/27/2014 7:59 PM, Tommie Dodd wrote: Smoking those funny cigarettes! Their goal would cost trillions and still not be free. It would need maintenance. I am not shaking in my shoes just yet. Isaac's a good guy, and he's not trying to put you all out of business. His model is

Re: [WISPA] ePMP PTP Results

Very interesting, Chris, thanks If the latency is going up to 200-400 ms. and there are no other buffered network elements in the path, then it would seem to me that the ePMP has a very serious case of bufferbloat. This is sometimes done because it makes the radio seem to perform better on

Re: [WISPA] ePMP PTP Results

Mailbox https://www.dropbox.com/mailbox for iPhone On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 8:57 AM, Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com mailto:fgoldst...@ionary.com wrote: Very interesting, Chris, thanks If the latency is going up to 200-400 ms. and there are no other buffered network

Re: [WISPA] Do i have enough separation

On 3/14/2014 4:44 PM, heith petersen wrote: Yeah, its 2.4 omni. Yeah, I wouldn't have done it that way, I thought he used more of the real estate that we had available on the platform. But yeah, that was the cause, moved it away 10 foot and increased through put. Understandable problem. A

Re: [WISPA] VoIP reselling.

On 3/26/2014 12:53 PM, Randy Cosby wrote: Doesn't sound right to me, unless they are going to do all the billing and tax filing in your behalf. If they charge you USF on your wholesale rate, who pays on the difference between your wholesale rate and the customer's marked up rate? USF rules

Re: [WISPA] VoIP reselling.

, and essentially gives you a commission, but I'm really not sure about that -- then you still have to file Form 499-A (annual) and give the numbers. If you're above the limit, then you file Form 499-Q (quarterly) and give the numbers and remit the money. On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 12:14 PM, Fred Goldstein

Re: [WISPA] Number's that can't port to VOIP

On 3/27/2014 3:11 PM, Chris Fabien wrote: This is the adjacent rate center to one of our main service areas, it is a local call. Different telco though. As a general rule, any rate center's numbers can be made portable if they aren't already so. It can worst case take six moths to

Re: [WISPA] Number's that can't port to VOIP

; Sprint and MCC have West Concord numbers. On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com mailto:fgoldst...@ionary.com wrote: On 3/27/2014 3:11 PM, Chris Fabien wrote: This is the adjacent rate center to one of our main service areas, it is a local call

Re: [WISPA] OT Fax over Voip

On 3/31/2014 10:03 AM, wi...@mncomm.com wrote: I have a customer that we installed an IP phone system for. They moved their office to a new building where the telco couldn't or wouldn't bring service to. So I have the PBX at their old location where the COs come in and we go over a wireless

Re: [WISPA] OT Fax over Voip

On 4/2/2014 9:03 AM, wi...@mncomm.com wrote: OK, I will. Right now its on my remote techs bench with a Cat5e cable and a switch between the 2 devices. Where this will be going is a farmers elevator site 150 feet between the 2 buildings using UBNT NSM5 radios, excellent quality. Right now they

Re: [WISPA] OT Fax over Voip

On 4/2/2014 5:24 PM, Nathan Anderson wrote: On Wednesday, April 02, 2014 6:55 AM, Fred Goldstein wrote: But in addition to that, I STRONGLY recommend a separate VLAN for the voice-grade channels. With priority, or reserved bandwidth. TCP/IP in normal operation manages its flow rate

[WISPA] New FCC rules for 5 GHz bands

On Monday, the FCC formally adopted a First Report and Order (FCC 14-30) in ET Docket 13-49, revision of Part 15 U-NII rules. The actual RO text was released later in the week. For the most part, it came out well for WISPs. Some rules have been tightened to reduce the chance of interference

Re: [WISPA] CAF-USF-StateTax for WISPs?

On 4/15/2014 5:12 PM, Tom DeReggi wrote: Guys, I've been out of the loop for a couple years, regarding current status of CAF/USF/Tax requirements for WISPs. I was surprised when I recieved my first bill from my new upstream fiber provider. (they are a dark fiber provider, recently expanded to

Re: [WISPA] New FCC rules for 5 GHz bands

Message - From: Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, April 04, 2014 12:25 PM Subject: [Spam] [WISPA] New FCC rules for 5 GHz bands On Monday, the FCC formally adopted a First Report and Order (FCC 14-30) in ET Docket 13-49, revision

Re: [WISPA] New FCC rules for 5 GHz bands

” What is the assumed transmitter power? 30dBm? Yes (I didn't copy that sentence of the rule but that's what it says). On Apr 15, 2014, at 3:55 PM, Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com wrote: On 4/15/2014 5:13 PM, Tom DeReggi wrote: Excellent Summry. Can you clarify. In previous ISM/UNII

Re: [WISPA] [Spam] Re: New FCC rules for 5 GHz bands

- Original Message - From: Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com To: wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2014 5:55 PM Subject: [Spam] Re: [WISPA] New FCC rules for 5 GHz bands On 4/15/2014 5:13 PM, Tom DeReggi wrote: Excellent Summry. Can you clarify

Re: [WISPA] CAF-USF-StateTax for WISPs

On 4/16/2014 2:32 PM, Matt Hoppes wrote: OK... but why is there no USF on an INTRAstate circuit but there is on an INTERstate? Jurisdiction. The Federal USF is, by law, only applicable to interstate services. USF was created in 1996. Before then, rural telcos got all of their subsidies

Re: [WISPA] USAF Request - Read this is you want to keep using 5630-5800 Mhz

On 6/13/2014 2:42 AM, Blair Davis wrote: A question Part 15 vs ISM I thought there was NO protection within the ISM bands. No licensed operations there. Now, someone can get a license in the middle of an ISM and then force the others out? Don't sound kosher... But I want to know

Re: [WISPA] 38GHz Spectrum Usage

On 6/30/2014 10:24 AM, Jack Lehmann wrote: Outside of the distance sensitivities, is there a clear reason why one would or would not want to use this band? If it's readily available in my area, while the FCC bands are quite congested, would there be anything in particular to compel me to

Re: [WISPA] UBNT RocketAC spotted on FCC site

On 7/3/2014 9:33 AM, Ben Moore wrote: $135 MSRP for rocket-lite. That's excellent. One of the contractors working with us recently replaced a pair of old Motorola PTPs with NanoStation Ms. It's just a camera, so it doesn't need much speed, so when I found its wireless side converging at 270

Re: [WISPA] UBNT RocketAC spotted on FCC site

...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Fred Goldstein Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 1:03 PM To: wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT RocketAC spotted on FCC site On 7/3/2014 9:33 AM, Ben Moore wrote: $135 MSRP for rocket-lite. That's excellent. One

Re: [WISPA] Experimental Licenses? Public Service Commissions?

On 7/25/2014 12:29 PM, Sam wrote: Two questions for you guys... Have any of you ever heard of a requirement to obtain an Experimental License (via a Form 442) to start up or operate a WISP? I'm trying to find something online that states what sort of radio, frequency, activity, or anything

Re: [WISPA] Mimosa Networks New product released

On 8/5/2014 11:21 AM, Adair Winter wrote: I didn't want to be negative nelly this morning. But that was my thought also.. I'm moving as much as possible to licensed links because I can't hardly keep my 5Ghz PtP's running out of my data center. The 5 GHz band is getting quite crowded, but at

Re: [WISPA] Mimosa Networks New product released

On 8/5/2014 11:34 AM, Rick Harnish wrote: Jamie, First off, congratulations. I know it has been a long time coming. I see the product was certified under 15.407 rules. Could you post a spec sheet as if it were approved under the 15.247 rules, so everyone can see the impact the rule change

[WISPA] More FCC fun on 13-49

While we had submitted Comments already on the U-NII/ISM OOBE issue, I've also been looking at the first U-NII-1 outdoor type approvals coming down the line. These provide concrete evidence that the OOBE limits are severely restricting useful power. So I collected the actual numbers from the

Re: [WISPA] att-and-verizon-say-10mbps-is-too-fast-for-broadband-4mbps-is-enough

On 9/8/2014 5:28 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: http://arstechnica.com/business/2014/09/att-and-verizon-say-10mbps-is-too-fast-for-broadband-4mbps-is-enough/ Ironically, ISTM that would probably be good for WISPs. If the FCC decides that 10 Mbps is the baseline and areas that don't get it become

[WISPA] InterMapper probes for Ubiquiti in PTP mode

Do many people here use InterMapper? We use it as our NMS, monitoring a variety of switches and radios. Each monitored devices requires a probe, or else IM falls back to use standard SNMP variables or even just ping. The probes can be constructed fairly easily out of a MIB. Ubiquiti doesn't

Re: [WISPA] small 24GHz radio

On 10/23/2014 3:00 PM, Bryce Duchcherer wrote: Does anybody know of a 24GHz radio that is smaller than 1'? It doesn't have to go very far, but we are wanting 24GHz. It may be a problem because the FCC rules for that band are pretty strict. From 15.249: (3) Antenna gain must be at least

Re: [WISPA] small 24GHz radio

On 10/23/2014 6:36 PM, daniel.mul...@metrocom.ca wrote: Sure - http://www.commscope.com/catalog/wireless/2147485870/product_details.aspx?id=27271 I will sell it to you with a radio attached too! ;-) That's for the licensed 24.25-26.5 GHz band. Was the original poster referring to the

Re: [WISPA] small 24GHz radio

On 10/23/2014 6:36 PM, daniel.mul...@metrocom.ca wrote: Sure - http://www.commscope.com/catalog/wireless/2147485870/product_details.aspx?id=27271 I will sell it to you with a radio attached too! ;-) That's for the licensed 24.25-26.5 GHz band. Was the original poster referring to the

Re: [WISPA] [SPAM] FCC Confirms Delay of New Net Neutrality Rules Until 2015

On 11/12/2014 7:05 AM, Matt Hoppes wrote: Is there any more information on what exactly the FCC is proposing to propose? I know there was Title II thrown around There is no firm proposal. Last week Tom let out a trial baloon suggesting that he'd adopt something based on the Mozilla

Re: [WISPA] 2dbi vs 3dbi vs 5 dbi vs 100mw vs 400mw

On 11/13/2014 1:26 PM, Jason Bailey wrote: Higher gain,lower power works best,in almost any situation. But not necessarily in-home. Higher gain only comes from a more directive antenna. An omni gain antenna has a pancake pattern. If it's a one-story building, fine. But I ran into the

Re: [WISPA] Quick Question: Title II, for or against?

On 11/19/2014 8:49 AM, Drew Lentz wrote: I put up a quick poll, results will be shared and are anonymous. https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/3R6YTH9 I'm curious to see what the percentages are between those that support and those that don't support the Title II argument. I've been trying to

Re: [WISPA] Quick Question: Title II, for or against?

On 11/19/2014 4:22 PM, Sean Heskett wrote: also title II regulations are why an OC3 at 150Mbps costs 100 times as much as 150Mbps metro ethernet. Ethernet is unregulated, OC3 is part of the whole terrified crap left over from MaBell etc. So even though both services are delivered over the

Re: [WISPA] Quick Question: Title II, for or against?

Tykwinski TrueNet, Inc. P: 610-429-8300 F: 610-429-3222 On Nov 19, 2014, at 6:04 PM, Kevin Sullivan kevin.sulli...@alyrica.net wrote: Wow, that was well thought out. I'd say that's a pretty good assessment! Kevin - Original Message - From: Fred Goldstein f...@interisle.net

Re: [WISPA] Quick Question: Title II, for or against?

On 11/21/2014 5:47 PM, Drew Lentz wrote: So here's what sparked the question. I was trying to get some point-counterpoint going on with a friend of mine and found some pretty good arguments on each. This article made me think about it all a little differently:

Re: [WISPA] Quick Question: Title II, for or against?

it wouldn't stand up in court. -- On 11/21/2014 6:19 PM, Fred Goldstein wrote: On 11/21/2014 5:47 PM, Drew Lentz wrote: So here's what sparked the question. I was trying to get some point-counterpoint going on with a friend of mine and found some pretty good arguments on each. This article made

Re: [WISPA] Quick Question: Title II, for or against?

.) Now they're in the final stages of abandoning the undermaintained plant, using excuses like IP transition. It mostly means dumping on their last union employees by pushing more business onto non-union wireless subsidiaries. // On 11/22/2014 12:13 AM, Fred Goldstein wrote: On 11/21/2014 7:39

Re: [WISPA] Quickbooks hosts

On 11/25/2014 2:18 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: Who are you writing checks to and why aren't you doing something better? I haven't written a check in years. One of my Interisle partners is a financial-IT expert, and knows the banking system inside and out. He designed the network for Wall

Re: [WISPA] 5 ghz backhaul sanity check

On 11/30/2014 11:55 PM, Josh Luthman wrote: I have a link at 6.6 miles with a pair of Rocket M5. It's at 5765 and has worked beautifully for a couple of years now. It is -55 on each side with 2' dishes. I'm looking at doing another link that's almost identical (one similar tower) and my

Re: [WISPA] 5 ghz backhaul sanity check

the power on the AP side to +36 (the PtMP limit) on 5150-5250, but doesn't enforce the +36 cap on 5725+. I'm not 100% certain that the test lab was following the rules, though, as there is no band edge to protect at 5725. *From: *Fred Goldstein f...@interisle.net *To: *wireless@wispa.org

Re: [WISPA] Need UPS recommendations

On 12/1/2014 1:56 PM, Bryce Duchcherer wrote: We started using Alpha UPS' and we have been happy with them. You have to use your own batteries, but it's nice that you're not locked down to proprietary batteries like you are with the likes of APC and TrippLite. TrippLite also has SNMP cards

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik - MEF

On 12/30/2014 5:05 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: How many WISPs have heard of MEF or CE or even VPLS? So... have you asked for it yet? :-p supp...@mikrotik.com I may have once asked somebody from MT about it, maybe at a show, and they gave the predicted answer, that they're a *router*

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik - MEF

. I do hope we can get some RINA stuff into circulation though; fully baked (and this hasn't all been coded yet), it is a functional superset of both CE, MPLS, IP, and IPsec, among other things, with a much smaller footprint. On December 30, 2014 2:19:40 PM AKST, Fred Goldstein f

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik - MEF

On 12/31/2014 8:45 AM, Mike Hammett wrote: So then what do you guys think should be the desired functionality, standards, etc. we'd want out of MEF\CE in a WISP router? Interesting point Dan made about the price of certification. Not that it's outrageous as these things go, but it's a

Re: [WISPA] Baicells - who's deployed it?

Of > Matt Hoppes [mattli...@rivervalleyinternet.net] > Sent: Sunday, June 19, 2016 2:19 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Baicells - who's deployed it? > > I think Adair said he has? > > Who says the baicells isn't SDR? I don't know. -- Fred Goldstein

Re: [WISPA] Baicells - who's deployed it?

On 6/19/2016 10:09 PM, Nathan Anderson wrote: > I believe that Patrick has said as much (not SDR) on the ISP Radio interview > with him back in April. Would certainly go a ways to explaining how they > managed to offer it for basically 1/3rd the price of competing gear. I only know what's

Re: [WISPA] Static IP Pricing

On 2/2/2017 3:43 PM, redes wrote: We charge 8€/Mo/IP here in north of Spain... El Robert Dillon , 2 feb. 2017 4:42 p. m. escribió: We also charge $5/IP/Mo for residential customers and one free IP for business customers with $5/IP/Mo for additional IPs. For

Re: [WISPA] What my spies are talking about

On 1/25/2017 11:58 AM, Marco Coelho wrote: Some of my friends at Verizon are talking a major shift in their Fiber Deployment. They have decided Fiber to the Home is non practical. They have adopted a fiber to the pedestal scheme with the last part of the connectivity being wireless to the

[WISPA] Active Ethernet switches

For a small outdoor or semi-outdoor (not a/c) deployment of a couple of dozen ports or so, what's a good cheap Active Ethernet switch? This would be to supplement wireless and focus on business customers, so Active makes more sense. Thanks. -- Fred R. Goldstein k1iofred "at"

Re: [WISPA] Active Ethernet switches

kinda new so I don't know if anyone has it deployed yet. And I have no need for higher-layer features in a switch; I'd rather let a real router do that. On Mar 1, 2017 7:07 PM, "Fred Goldstein" <f...@interisle.net <mailto:f...@interisle.net>> wrote: For a smal

Re: [WISPA] Big Guns align behind 3.5 ghz CBRS LTE

We are involved in this band, at WinnForum. That's where the standards are being written. The FCC announced the rules last year and did a minor update of them earlier this year. Now we're working with WinnForum to fix an oversight that makes the band pretty much unusable by rural WISPs.

Re: [WISPA] Big Guns align behind 3.5 ghz CBRS LTE

coverage. AT holds a lot of the 2300 MHz WCS licenses. I think one of the Nextwaves held some and was leasing them to WISPs, but AT bought them. Verizon of course had bought a previous Nextwave. *From: *"Fred Goldstei

Re: [WISPA] Need a ~60ft pole to mount a 2ft dish on

On 9/7/2016 7:21 PM, Scott Carullo wrote: Whats the best option? One economical approach might be to get a 75' or 80' wood utility pole. An 80' pole can be set 15' deep (a bit deeper in soft soil, I'd guess) and thus provide 65' of space (maybe 60' if set deep). If it can hold a pole pig

Re: [WISPA] Need a ~60ft pole to mount a 2ft dish on

On 9/12/2016 2:38 PM, Nick Bright wrote: On 9/8/2016 10:16 AM, Dan Petermann wrote: http://www.commscope.com/catalog/wireless/product_details.aspx?id=49277 Any idea how much these usually cost? I looked to find it for sale. I found a shorter version of that (the Ballast Pole -- a monopole

Re: [WISPA] Intermapper Probes

On 9/12/2016 4:11 PM, Gino Villarini wrote: Looking to get some probes developed, Cambim 450 Epmp AF24 AF5x Mimosa We have AF24 and Mimosa probes (we designed our own). I suspect AF5x uses the same probe. We have Motorola PTP 400 and 600 probes but they're probably too old for the Cambium

<    1   2   3   4   5   >