Re: [WISPA] per customer computer pricing - let's examine
Well your probably right, but a couple of things. Everyone pays up front an install and activation fee and the numbers I posted are approx. 2nd thing, how much is bandwidth cost? Most people look at their high bandwidth usage and say that is how much they are paying and that is how much it cost. But is that accurate? If you buy bandwidth, say 10 megs at 150.00 per meg. And you have a peak say at 10 megs during that 1 or 4 hours of peak time, how much did the bandwidth cost you at the off peak times thats not being used? maybe your bandwidth is actually costing you even more than is calculated because you have to consider your peak is only 5 or 10% of the time and the rest of the time when you are at say 5 megs it's actually costing you 300.00 per meg So on off peak time, you have ooogles of bandwidth that you are paying for, but not using, how much are you loosing for unused bandwidth? is it wiser to get something for unused over-priced bandwidth or is it better to say NO, I would rather let the bandwidth go unused and not collect any revenue? Now consider from a marketing point of view. Lets do the small town market where everyone is telling everyone their expert opinion and word spreads like wildfire. Word of mouth. And the advertising rates cost you just the same as a big city. Do you want your subs telling your other subs or potential subs that you are charging them more because they downloaded a movie and went over a bit cap of a couple gigs and then have to spend lots and lots of money to advertise to convince people to use your service, or would it be wiser to spend the advertising money with your subs by giving them some beni's like plenty of speed and good service without the extra charges? I think it's kinda complicated, but to me the common denominator in all this is to make the customer happy, and use them for woma. Not saying your wrong, but rather it's how you look at it. I look at it this way. George Peter R. wrote: George Rogato wrote: The very next day a sub called and complained that he was having issues downloading his news groups and was considering changing over to DSL. I've had this sub for 5 years and the original reason he bought broadband from me was because he came to his retirement home here on the coast on some weekends and wanted to be able to download some movies from newsgroups he subscribed to. 5 years = 60 months = $42 per month ($41.66 using the $2500) Does that include the 2 CPE and 2 installs? IN this past month he grabbed 40GB. How much do you pay for 40GB? At even Cogent's rate of $15 per MB + tower rental + overhead, what is the net profit? Does he pay by credit card? So lose 4% or $1.40). (I don't need to know, but you do.) My best advice is to find ways to increase ARPU from these customers. Whether that be affiliate income from shopping; partner income from other services sold that are outsourced; PC maintenece; virus insurance; back-up; etc. Just my 2 cents worth. Peter Radizeski RAD-INFO, Inc. www.marketingideaguy.com I've always tried to engineer my systems to be able to have the capacity to service this type of customer. I buy extra bandwidth, more than I need. and I try not to load up my ap's and make sure they have nice big fat feeds. We ended up swapping out his cpe and pointing him at a diferent ap. This was the day after Marlons thread. which was about feb 1st. here is his usage up till now: TX Data: 1,556,767,671 RX Data: 39,673,651,793 BYTES or 36.95 gigs to data downloaded and it's only day 17 out of 30. His usagge has not impacted my system and his usage is like once or twice a week. When I look at this guy, I see dollar signs. $2,500 for the money he has given me and I think even more he will give me in the future. I realize not everyone has this business plan, or can even afford the bandwidth, so I'm not implying anyone is doing it wrong, just that we can handle these types of subs and make a profit from it if we engineer our network to accomadate this type of user. George -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] per customer computer pricing - let's examine
Upsell, that is where I do not do as well. You are right on Peter. I also have a pc shop, and do fairly well at selling hardware, although that is not as profitable as I would like it to be. George Peter R. wrote: I was just asking you to examine what the true costs are of delivering service. You correct about the unused BW - and for most BW is a fixed monthly cost, same as rent, tower, payroll. All that needs to be considered when tackling pricing. Back in the T1 days, the over-subscription was usually 7 to1. The first 3 were expensive costs; the last 4 not so much. I also wanted to remind you to find ways to upsell :) - Peter @ RAD-INFO, Inc. George Rogato wrote: Well your probably right, but a couple of things. Everyone pays up front an install and activation fee and the numbers I posted are approx. 2nd thing, how much is bandwidth cost? Most people look at their high bandwidth usage and say that is how much they are paying and that is how much it cost. But is that accurate? If you buy bandwidth, say 10 megs at 150.00 per meg. And you have a peak say at 10 megs during that 1 or 4 hours of peak time, how much did the bandwidth cost you at the off peak times thats not being used? maybe your bandwidth is actually costing you even more than is calculated because you have to consider your peak is only 5 or 10% of the time and the rest of the time when you are at say 5 megs it's actually costing you 300.00 per meg So on off peak time, you have ooogles of bandwidth that you are paying for, but not using, how much are you loosing for unused bandwidth? is it wiser to get something for unused over-priced bandwidth or is it better to say NO, I would rather let the bandwidth go unused and not collect any revenue? Now consider from a marketing point of view. Lets do the small town market where everyone is telling everyone their expert opinion and word spreads like wildfire. Word of mouth. And the advertising rates cost you just the same as a big city. Do you want your subs telling your other subs or potential subs that you are charging them more because they downloaded a movie and went over a bit cap of a couple gigs and then have to spend lots and lots of money to advertise to convince people to use your service, or would it be wiser to spend the advertising money with your subs by giving them some beni's like plenty of speed and good service without the extra charges? I think it's kinda complicated, but to me the common denominator in all this is to make the customer happy, and use them for woma. Not saying your wrong, but rather it's how you look at it. I look at it this way. George -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] Following the FCC rules are now simply about being"stickerconscious" or not??
to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sam Tetherow Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 9:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] cost effective reliable 5.8G cpe suggestions? RB112+CM9+Rootenna if you are not sticker conscious. If you are sticker conscious I use the Tranzeo TR5a-24/20 with MT/CM9 setups and they work great. Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless rabbtux rabbtux wrote: Not to stir the "fcc sticker" debate, but what gear is out there today that is compatable with a MT/SR5 access point? Looking for lower cost CPEs for 1-5 mile deployments. Thanks -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] [Fwd: Re: [isp-wireless] My FCC visit]
Also something to think about. Moexxxus wrote: > Did you speak at all about CALEA? Original Message Subject: Re: [isp-wireless] My FCC visit Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 18:12:11 -0800 From: geowires <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> No, we were supposed to, but the weather canceled the FBI. We got some extra time to talk to the FCC and we spent a couple hours talking to the FTC. We stayed until 5.30 talking to them, so they were interested. The FTC has never met or talked to a wisp, ever. We were the first, we talked to their policy people, about nine or ten of them there. That was a most unfortunate fact that has not been discussed on the wispa list. They never met a wisp and they are setting policy for muni wifi Very scary. George -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] Following the FCC rules are now simplyabout being"stickerconscious" or not??
Aw come on now. Thats was just a not well thought out hip shot slur. Fact was you just said Tranzeo you admired. They were innovative. Been there for 5 years now. I used them when you were selling FHSS as the ultimate 2.4 solution. Here is you chance, list your companies innovations by chronological order starting the day you took the evangelist job up until now, and I will demonstrate to you, how the big manufacturers hold us up. Again, not a rub against Alvarion, I truly respect your company, but, I want to make a point here. George Patrick Leary wrote: George, ones person's "innovation" is something that might another person nothing but migraines. If you think you getting cutting edge innovation and state of the art technology from the uncertified manufacturers I don't know what to tell you except your technology exposure may be a bit narrow. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Rogato Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 5:55 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simplyabout being"stickerconscious" or not?? Ho ho ho Patrick, So, to add to the list of reasons why a lot of wisps use uncertified gear. One reason that was exposed, was that manufacturers were not keeping up with technology fast enough and the kit systems offered newer technology and allowed a wisp to be more "innovative" What say you Mr. Leary? Has Alvarion been keeping up fast enough? George (oh yeah, I also think there was a lot of crap slung as cpe's) Patrick Leary wrote: Mac, That's good news that some previously illegal gear is now undergoing FCC certification. It is good for everyone, regardless of what finally led them to earn it. As WISPs, you should use that cert as a minimum litmus test, because it will tell you much more than just the cert itself; it tells you that the vendor actual is concerned about YOUR business, not just the money that can made off you. You should say to any illegal vendor that you might use, "You know, I like your features and price, but before I undertake any more study about the possibility of buying your gear you need have your system FCC certified." Do that and those guys will change their habits in a hurry. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mac Dearman Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 10:17 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about being"stickerconscious" or not?? Hold your Horses there Sir Patrick! There was one comment that used that in their post - I don't think that "we" as an industry have evolved to that level of degradation in dealing with the laws of the land & air. There will always be renegades in every avenue of life, but "we" are not in that classification :-) and given a little time we will be someone to be reckoned with as the industry leader in wireless across this country. I must admit that I have learned a few things in the past week - or had some things clarified that were quite an awakening for me and a few others. I (for one) will not deploy even one more piece of hardware that is not FCC certified. I have in the last year deployed many unlicensed access points & back haul radios though. I made a terrible mistake in doing that, but I was under a false impression of what was "legal." The path we will follow from this point on is what is really going to count. I do happen to know of two manufacturers who have gear at FCC certification labs today undergoing their certifications for some specific pieces of their gear. This is something that should have taken place a couple years ago, but now is better than never. I realize that is not going to affect the gear I have in the air today from these guys as it can not be certified - ever - even if they happen to get the exact gear certified that I have on towers today. I think this last visit WISPA members (Thanks men) made to the FCC clarified several things that needed clarification: 1. FILLOUT THOSE FORMS! The FCC is not out to get us. They need the data that only we can supply them - like who we are, where we are (zip code), how many subs...Etc This is their way of helping us. With out this data they can only guess how many "we" are, how many we serve and the actual coverage area total. Guys - y'all please fill out the form 477 - - it's a good thing for us all. 2. WE ARE NOT LEGAL EVEN IF WE ARE NOT OVER POWERED OR OUT OF BAND. I am not going into any details here because th
Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simplyabout being"stickerconscious" or not??
And, just list the American UL stuff, skip the non American and licensed gear. George Rogato wrote: Aw come on now. Thats was just a not well thought out hip shot slur. Fact was you just said Tranzeo you admired. They were innovative. Been there for 5 years now. I used them when you were selling FHSS as the ultimate 2.4 solution. Here is you chance, list your companies innovations by chronological order starting the day you took the evangelist job up until now, and I will demonstrate to you, how the big manufacturers hold us up. Again, not a rub against Alvarion, I truly respect your company, but, I want to make a point here. George Patrick Leary wrote: George, ones person's "innovation" is something that might another person nothing but migraines. If you think you getting cutting edge innovation and state of the art technology from the uncertified manufacturers I don't know what to tell you except your technology exposure may be a bit narrow. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Rogato Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 5:55 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simplyabout being"stickerconscious" or not?? Ho ho ho Patrick, So, to add to the list of reasons why a lot of wisps use uncertified gear. One reason that was exposed, was that manufacturers were not keeping up with technology fast enough and the kit systems offered newer technology and allowed a wisp to be more "innovative" What say you Mr. Leary? Has Alvarion been keeping up fast enough? George (oh yeah, I also think there was a lot of crap slung as cpe's) Patrick Leary wrote: Mac, That's good news that some previously illegal gear is now undergoing FCC certification. It is good for everyone, regardless of what finally led them to earn it. As WISPs, you should use that cert as a minimum litmus test, because it will tell you much more than just the cert itself; it tells you that the vendor actual is concerned about YOUR business, not just the money that can made off you. You should say to any illegal vendor that you might use, "You know, I like your features and price, but before I undertake any more study about the possibility of buying your gear you need have your system FCC certified." Do that and those guys will change their habits in a hurry. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mac Dearman Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 10:17 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules are now simply about being"stickerconscious" or not?? Hold your Horses there Sir Patrick! There was one comment that used that in their post - I don't think that "we" as an industry have evolved to that level of degradation in dealing with the laws of the land & air. There will always be renegades in every avenue of life, but "we" are not in that classification :-) and given a little time we will be someone to be reckoned with as the industry leader in wireless across this country. I must admit that I have learned a few things in the past week - or had some things clarified that were quite an awakening for me and a few others. I (for one) will not deploy even one more piece of hardware that is not FCC certified. I have in the last year deployed many unlicensed access points & back haul radios though. I made a terrible mistake in doing that, but I was under a false impression of what was "legal." The path we will follow from this point on is what is really going to count. I do happen to know of two manufacturers who have gear at FCC certification labs today undergoing their certifications for some specific pieces of their gear. This is something that should have taken place a couple years ago, but now is better than never. I realize that is not going to affect the gear I have in the air today from these guys as it can not be certified - ever - even if they happen to get the exact gear certified that I have on towers today. I think this last visit WISPA members (Thanks men) made to the FCC clarified several things that needed clarification: 1. FILLOUT THOSE FORMS! The FCC is not out to get us. They need the data that only we can supply them - like who we are, where we are (zip code), how many subs...Etc This is their way of helping us. With out this data they can only guess how many "we" are, how many we serve and the actual coverage area total. Guys - y'all please fill out the form 477 - - it's a good thing for us all.
Re: [WISPA] Brief report from FCC visit
Sam Tetherow wrote: So are you saying that a PCMCIA card with software and internal antenna is not certified? No one has yet to answer this question for me. Is it legal for Best Buy to sell DLink/Linksys/Netgear/Belkin/... pcmcia cards for laptops? What about USB dongles? If they are legal how is they can certify a card and drivers, but we can't certify a minipci with software? If your talking boxed units like netgear, dlink, and linksys sell, Of course they are certified. Is the certification void if it was torn apart and had a bigger antenna and amplifier added, probably not, unless it is to their certified specs. -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] Brief report from FCC visit
First off Patrick, we will be going to the carpet in a few minutes when I get my thoughts collected. I just woke up an hour ago and am sometimes a little sluggish in the early hours. 2nd, Dlink, Linksys and Netgear all have antennas listed on their sites for use with their units. I may be wrong, but I would ass u me that they have been certified. But do your due diligense and check first to make sure. :) George Patrick Leary wrote: "If your talking boxed units like netgear, dlink, and linksys sell, Of course they are certified. Is the certification void if it was torn apart and had a bigger antenna and amplifier added, probably not, unless it is to their certified specs." That would be uncertified. This is not a debatable point. This would be taking a consumer device, which is built to permit "self-installation" into a device for which the FCC says there must be a "professional" installation. These are the most confusing parts of the rules for novices, but basically if you are installing for another end user, you are assumed to be "professional," which actually imposes certain liabilities and responsibilities on you. Further, this would void the certification EVEN if it still met the manufacturer specs because, for better of worse, only the OEM manufacturer can self-certify antenna changes. George, you were in the room at the FCC with me when they told us this so you know it. It is impossible to forget since Marlon pounded them about for most of the meeting but they would not budge that only a manufacturer can pick and chose additional antennas and then only antennas of equal or less power AND with similar specs (relative to emissions on sidelobs, etc.). Really all that was done in that ruling was to make the "permissive change" rules more simple. None of this was done for the protection of the manufacturers, but rather to make sure the FCC had one throat to choke. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Rogato Sent: Monday, February 19, 2007 8:24 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Brief report from FCC visit Sam Tetherow wrote: So are you saying that a PCMCIA card with software and internal antenna is not certified? No one has yet to answer this question for me. Is it legal for Best Buy to sell DLink/Linksys/Netgear/Belkin/... pcmcia cards for laptops? What about USB dongles? If they are legal how is they can certify a card and drivers, but we can't certify a minipci with software? If your talking boxed units like netgear, dlink, and linksys sell, Of course they are certified. Is the certification void if it was torn apart and had a bigger antenna and amplifier added, probably not, unless it is to their certified specs. -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] Brief report from FCC visit
No little kids here. Mine are all grown. One is the admin for OregonFAST.net and the other 2 are pc techs here as well. 2 of them are actually owners of this business. My wife mentioned having another but at 49, I'm thinking thats not a good thing. George Patrick Leary wrote: You must not have little kids like I do! They got me up nice and early at 6:30 AM today. I would not know recognize a weekend morning without Sagwa or Clifford the Big Red Dog. Patrick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Rogato Sent: Monday, February 19, 2007 8:49 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Brief report from FCC visit First off Patrick, we will be going to the carpet in a few minutes when I get my thoughts collected. I just woke up an hour ago and am sometimes a little sluggish in the early hours. 2nd, Dlink, Linksys and Netgear all have antennas listed on their sites for use with their units. I may be wrong, but I would ass u me that they have been certified. But do your due diligense and check first to make sure. :) George Patrick Leary wrote: "If your talking boxed units like netgear, dlink, and linksys sell, Of course they are certified. Is the certification void if it was torn apart and had a bigger antenna and amplifier added, probably not, unless it is to their certified specs." That would be uncertified. This is not a debatable point. This would be taking a consumer device, which is built to permit "self-installation" into a device for which the FCC says there must be a "professional" installation. These are the most confusing parts of the rules for novices, but basically if you are installing for another end user, you are assumed to be "professional," which actually imposes certain liabilities and responsibilities on you. Further, this would void the certification EVEN if it still met the manufacturer specs because, for better of worse, only the OEM manufacturer can self-certify antenna changes. George, you were in the room at the FCC with me when they told us this so you know it. It is impossible to forget since Marlon pounded them about for most of the meeting but they would not budge that only a manufacturer can pick and chose additional antennas and then only antennas of equal or less power AND with similar specs (relative to emissions on sidelobs, etc.). Really all that was done in that ruling was to make the "permissive change" rules more simple. None of this was done for the protection of the manufacturers, but rather to make sure the FCC had one throat to choke. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Rogato Sent: Monday, February 19, 2007 8:24 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Brief report from FCC visit Sam Tetherow wrote: So are you saying that a PCMCIA card with software and internal antenna is not certified? No one has yet to answer this question for me. Is it legal for Best Buy to sell DLink/Linksys/Netgear/Belkin/... pcmcia cards for laptops? What about USB dongles? If they are legal how is they can certify a card and drivers, but we can't certify a minipci with software? If your talking boxed units like netgear, dlink, and linksys sell, Of course they are certified. Is the certification void if it was torn apart and had a bigger antenna and amplifier added, probably not, unless it is to their certified specs. -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] Brief report from FCC visit
in 12 more months :) W.D.McKinney wrote: Hi George, 49 here also, when do you turn 50? -Dee Alaska Wireless Systems 1(907)240-2183 Cell 1(907)349-2226 Fax 1(907)349-4308 Office www.akwireless.net - Original Message - From: George Rogato [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 13:06:43 -0900 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Brief report from FCC visit No little kids here. Mine are all grown. One is the admin for OregonFAST.net and the other 2 are pc techs here as well. 2 of them are actually owners of this business. My wife mentioned having another but at 49, I'm thinking thats not a good thing. George Patrick Leary wrote: You must not have little kids like I do! They got me up nice and early at 6:30 AM today. I would not know recognize a weekend morning without Sagwa or Clifford the Big Red Dog. Patrick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Rogato Sent: Monday, February 19, 2007 8:49 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Brief report from FCC visit First off Patrick, we will be going to the carpet in a few minutes when I get my thoughts collected. I just woke up an hour ago and am sometimes a little sluggish in the early hours. 2nd, Dlink, Linksys and Netgear all have antennas listed on their sites for use with their units. I may be wrong, but I would ass u me that they have been certified. But do your due diligense and check first to make sure. :) George Patrick Leary wrote: "If your talking boxed units like netgear, dlink, and linksys sell, Of course they are certified. Is the certification void if it was torn apart and had a bigger antenna and amplifier added, probably not, unless it is to their certified specs." That would be uncertified. This is not a debatable point. This would be taking a consumer device, which is built to permit "self-installation" into a device for which the FCC says there must be a "professional" installation. These are the most confusing parts of the rules for novices, but basically if you are installing for another end user, you are assumed to be "professional," which actually imposes certain liabilities and responsibilities on you. Further, this would void the certification EVEN if it still met the manufacturer specs because, for better of worse, only the OEM manufacturer can self-certify antenna changes. George, you were in the room at the FCC with me when they told us this so you know it. It is impossible to forget since Marlon pounded them about for most of the meeting but they would not budge that only a manufacturer can pick and chose additional antennas and then only antennas of equal or less power AND with similar specs (relative to emissions on sidelobs, etc.). Really all that was done in that ruling was to make the "permissive change" rules more simple. None of this was done for the protection of the manufacturers, but rather to make sure the FCC had one throat to choke. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Rogato Sent: Monday, February 19, 2007 8:24 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Brief report from FCC visit Sam Tetherow wrote: So are you saying that a PCMCIA card with software and internal antenna is not certified? No one has yet to answer this question for me. Is it legal for Best Buy to sell DLink/Linksys/Netgear/Belkin/... pcmcia cards for laptops? What about USB dongles? If they are legal how is they can certify a card and drivers, but we can't certify a minipci with software? If your talking boxed units like netgear, dlink, and linksys sell, Of course they are certified. Is the certification void if it was torn apart and had a bigger antenna and amplifier added, probably not, unless it is to their certified specs. -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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/ -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] For those in business just about a year...
Rick Smith wrote: actually, I've been told the opposite. Buyers of your company want as close to zero liability as possible. Especially when they will probably come in and replace your gear with theirs. If the two seem to match, you only win bigger... Loans / Leases / Credit Lines are BAD in the eyes of a potential buyer. And, who ISN'T building to sell right now ? The ones building to own / operate are going to get run out in the next 3 yrs. We're building to sell. Major network - owning all pieces. Banks have allowed us up to 50% face value of the equipment to borrow against for 18 months on a relatively higher rate of interest (9 or >), but collateral nonetheless... Rick, you've been around the block, your a smart guy, don't think there is a whole lot your missing. The only advice I would give you, is if you do another partnership, clearly define your partners exit in agreeable terms before you enter into an agreement. Like you will be the owner and he will be leaving and here is what he is getting and how he is going to get it. Also watch that you don't make the next guy the major "stakeholder" if he decides to drag you into bankruptcy. George -- 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: Fw: [isp-wireless] FBI .......... Changed to CALEA and WISPs...
would require that you have a very indepth and revealing conversation >>> with them. >>> >>> The fines are mighty stiff and if your right, which I would hope you >>> are, I would want to be 100% right. >>> >>> I doubt I could afford a lawyer to get me out of this sort of mess with >>> a huge beaurocracy like the FBI-Justice Dept. >>> >>> Just trying to be carefull. >>> >>>> Yes, here is what happened. >>>> >>>> Prior I was told by Mr. McCain to file the forms on time because he >>>> didn't think he could get answers >>>> quick enough. >>>> >>>> Today I received a call from the FBI CALEA group in Arlington County, >>>> Virginia telling me I did not have >>>> to worry about being CALEA compliant for them because I was not a >>>> carrier. I did not provide VOIP, >>>> (Not the same as re-selling) If I was not the carrier of the VOIP I was >>>> not required to be CALEA compliant >>>> for the FBI. Even if I re-sold VOIP services, I was not required to be >>>> compliant for CALEA on the FBI side >>>> the actual carrier was. Vonage, Packet8 etc.. >>>> >>>> They did tell me they could not send me the letter that I was not >>>> required to be compliant, that the FCC still >>>> had to do their part of the CALEA. The FBI only receives a copy of the >>>> form, The FCC also has their part for >>>> the filing. It's a two agency FCC & FBI form share. I have to wait for >>>> them to send a note to the FCC they >>>> do not require me to be compliant and then the FCC should send me >>>> something. >>>> >>>> But as far as the FBI was concerned, I have nothing more to worry about >>>> for them. I filed the form even that >>>> I had nothing on the form but the business name and my contact number, >>>> I filed on time. That's all that was >>>> required. They can not fine you if you don't know how to fill out the >>>> form. It's up to them to decided if they >>>> want any more. The phone call lasted about 5 minutes, and that was it. >>>> They made a note of the phone call. >>>> >>>> One down and Two to go. >>>> >>>> Hope this helps a few. >>>> >>>> FLAGS (\Seen)) = -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] Fw: Fw: [isp-wireless] FBI .......... Changed to CALEAand WISPs...
How would anyone know who has who for a customer anyways? In past situations we've been in, it starts with a request for information. Who is this IP? If they asked my upstream, my upstream could ask me. Or they could ask me a particular persons ip, if they somehow knew the name to begin with. Not sure if it is viable, but it would be an easy solution for some small isp's. I just want to know how they going to figure out free open hotspots... George Marlon K. Schafer wrote: The upstream doesn't know what customer has what IP addy. I don't know how that would work George... marlon - Original Message - From: "George Rogato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 8:55 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Fw: Fw: [isp-wireless] FBI .. Changed to CALEAand WISPs... That was an excellent thing to do Marlon. Big pat on the back :) I would hate to be the person that believes they don't have to file because of a post on a list. The only way I would NOT file something is if my attorney who I knew had direct contact with their attorney(s) told me he received in writing an opinion that we did not have to file. if the attorney I used a couple months ago on a contract thing told me I didn't have to file, I wouldn't believe him. It's too serious and the fines are just too stiff. Very scary stuff. But I would like the group that goes to DC this next trip to specifically ask: If an ISP hands out static Public IP's to every customer and his upstream is calea compliant, is he covered, assuming no voip is involved. George Marlon K. Schafer wrote: Hi All, I hate confusion and unanswered questions. So I sent this thread (names removed) to the HEAD of the CALEA group at the FBI. I've already been talking to Maura so I thought this appropriate. Anyway, the word from the top is that if you are a facilities base provider you fall under CALEA just like you do the 477 and 445 at the FCC. I'll let folks know more when I know more. laters, marlon - Original Message - To: 'Marlon K . Schafer 982-2181' ; 509 Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 11:12 AM Subject: Re: Fw: [isp-wireless] FBI .. Changed to CALEA and WISPs... Hi Marlon, First, sorry I missed your folks last week. Unfortunately I was stuck in Albany, NY for several days because of a blizzard. Second, thanks for sending this email to me. I can see that there is some confusion about who must comply. It's hard for me to tell from the email trail what services the WISP member is providing. As we talked about before, if a provider is offering Broadband Internet Access or VoIP to the public then that provider must be CALEA compliant by May 14, 2007. I'd be happy to meet with folks from WISP in the next couple of weeks so we can talk through these issues. Thanks, Maura On Wed Feb 21 10:29 , "Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181" sent: Hi Maura, At the risk of seeming silly, and in the hopes that this gets no one in trouble, I thought that you should see this thread from a public mailing list. I'd like your comments on the accuracy of what we've been told here. The basic thrust of this is that we, as small rural wisps, won't have to be calea compliant for various reasons. I'd like to get our meeting with your team rescheduled as soon as it makes sense. A couple of weeks down the road should give me time to find people in the area that can attend. Assuming that something has been lost in the interpretation here, we really really need to get a wisp/small operator standard in place before the final deadline. Thanks! Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage) Consulting services 42846865 (icq) And I run my own wisp! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam > To: > Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 1:00 PM > Subject: Re: [isp-wireless] FBI .. Changed to CALEA and WISPs... > > >> Yes. I told them I had a T1 to my location and provided wireless >> broadband connections to customers. >> >> He told me the FBI side of CALEA was only interested in the VOIP >> carriers. He said he had many calls >> to make for the forms filed by those that didn't need to. >> >> He did say and I did mention, this call was only for the FBI side and >> that the FCC still has their side >> of this requirement and send a letter to me after if they are not >> interested in us. >> >> His phone number 703-632-6163, I don't remember his name, I was driving >> when he called. >> >> >> - Original Message - >> >> To: >> Sent: Tuesday, February 20,
Re: [WISPA] Following the FCC rules ?????
John J. Thomas wrote: Cisco AP 1242 Radios have 5.4 GHz as an option in the current flash. John When we were at the fcc talking with Julius Knapp, he said there was a couple manufacturers who have already certified 5.4 systems in the US. Not sure why we never thought about Cisco. George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] multi-radio Wi-Fi base stations
John, you must be in Qwest territory. We see the 2 wire essid's all over the place, they're replacing the older actiontec essid's. George John J. Thomas wrote: I have one in front of me, the FCC ID is PGR2W2700RD. From the 2Wire website Eliminate Coldspots with HyperG Technology 2Wire?s HyperG? high-powered wireless technology virtually eliminates wireless ?coldspots? in the home. HomePortal residential gateways provide up to seven times the true power of traditional access points and increase wireless bandwidth by using high power 400mW transmitters*. Most wireless access points provide less than 100mW *configurable power setting to comply with country specific power requirements John -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] tv whitespaces dates! WOW
Marlon K. Schafer wrote: H, We need to work on this. We want to oppose the personal portable devices at this time. We don't want to see a bunch of linksys type routers with 2 mile ranges Any ideas on how to go about it? marlon Marlon Can you explain the strategy of opposing personal portable devices? Are you saying that we should prefer going in the same direction as 3650? -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] STOOPID linksys / netgear / etc
Almost reminds me when we took over the original dial up isp, the previous guy used a computer shop to sell his service and turn on subs. usernames and passwords were the customers first name and last name. lame... Rick Smith wrote: happened to open my laptop in town to work on a hotspot of mine today. Say an interesting essid... f6a13. and it was locked down. Well, I noticed that it was 10 digits, and when I signed on to it and happened to type that into the WEP KEY area as well, it WAS THE WEP KEY to use to sign onto it. So, this is the way people are going to start sharing now ? Can't vendors make it so that whatever you use as the securing KEY can't be contained in the hostname, essid or anywhere else ? Common Sense... Argh. -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] Free advertizing
Got some free adverizing the other day out of nowhere: http://www.oregonfast.net/gofast/DuneCityPlug/ Just proves that if you work hard enough word of mouth advertizing works. -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] Form 477 Due Today
Don't think it made it to the isp-wireless list George Rick Harnish wrote: Kris Twomey wanted to remind everyone that FCC Form 477 is due today. Thanks. I know some of you have been spreading the word on the FCC Form 477. It's due tomorrow and all WISPs should be filing it. It'll only take 10 minutes to fill out but the info is vital for the FCC to know that the WISP industry is alive and growing. WISPs can't expect the FCC to create useful rules if they don't know how many WISPs there actually are. http://www.fcc.gov/broadband/data.html Kris __ Kristopher E. Twomey www.lokt.net -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] Free advertizing
I think your right. I know I work hard and spend a lot of money trying to get the good word out there. It sure beats having a customer call up saying wireless sucks. George Mark Nash wrote: I got a smile out of that one. The thing is that this kind of talk happens CONSTANTLY...We just don't know WHERE. If your service (bandwidth, billing, lack of/response to outages) is good, this conversation happens about your company at least weekly if not daily. Mark Nash Network Engineer UnwiredOnline.Net 350 Holly Street Junction City, OR 97448 http://www.uwol.net 541-998- 541-998-5599 fax - Original Message - From: "George Rogato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 11:57 PM Subject: [WISPA] Free advertizing Got some free adverizing the other day out of nowhere: http://www.oregonfast.net/gofast/DuneCityPlug/ Just proves that if you work hard enough word of mouth advertizing works. -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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 Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Form 477 Due Today
Forbes Mercy wrote: I'm in a rabble rousing mood today so I vote that if you don't fill out your Form 477 you are OUT of WISPA right after you got kicked out already for not have all stickers on your equipment. Stiring the Pot just for fun, Forbes Mercy President - Washington Broadband, Inc the hazard of having a sense of humor is not leaving space in your mind for those who don't Hey Mr Rabble Rouser, Stirring the pot is a good thing, makes us all think a little harder. But I would never vote for kicking out or denying membership to wisps or manufacturers because they don't comply. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] ALVARION VL 4.0 AP
One thing I am wondering about, and it's not an Alvarion specific question or concern is, isn't it true that when you use a subscriber unit as your backhaul on a PtMP set up like you are suggesting, that the through put is halved or somewhat diminished? Thought this was a long standing rule of thumb. George Mac Dearman wrote: Patrick, Thanks for that info - I appreciate it much. What I am trying to accomplish is (kill a bunch of birds with one stone) connect these 5 remote locations via wireless to the hospital (AU located here) and then use the 6th SU on my tower (1 mile LOS) to provide 10mbps of dedicated bandwidth to the hospital. Thanks, Mac Dearman -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 11:42 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: RE: [WISPA] ALVARION VL 4.0 AP Mac, I understand you spoke to Les today. Made me smile for sure. Thanks also for sharing the story about Michael Eck helping during Karina. He is a humble guy and I've never heard him mention it. The BreezeACCESS VL can certainly do what you want there. An AU, especially at those ranges should be able to provide the full capacity of just over 30mbps (net ftp). So you could provide 6 connections close range of 10mbps a piece with an oversubscription ratio of only about 2:1. Assume that a typical over subscription for high end commercial customers is about 4 or 5 to 1, you should be sitting pretty. I am not clear about your tower need. Are you asking if you can dedidcate 10mbps to a tower, which then would have that capacity used to feed in to 802.11 APs that feed other clients? 1. How far is that tower? 2. You should be able to dedicate 10mbps to the tower, leaving 20mbps to serve the 6 hospital customers with an oversubscription ratio that would still be nice and low. Do have Mike Cowan confirm, as John advises. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mac Dearman Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 8:58 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] ALVARION VL 4.0 AP Someone give me a hand here please. I have a contract to deliver 10Mbps dedicated bandwidth to a hospital as well as building them a leased wireless network for the hospital to 6 off site buildings. All of these buildings (but 1) are with in "rock throwing" distance of the Hospital. I am looking at the Alvarion VL 4.0 AP to do the wireless connections. Here is my dilemma since I am very limited in VL knowledge: 1. Will I be able to not only connect these 6 out lying buildings, but also place one of the SU's on my tower to provide them with the 10Mbps dedicated BW? Or will I need to do a PTP? 2. I believe the AP is only possible of 10Mbps total??? Thanks, Mac Dearman -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] ALVARION VL 4.0 AP
Right. Wonder if he realizes the hit he will take doing it this way. George Gino Villarini wrote: Exactly my point Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Rogato Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 9:31 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] ALVARION VL 4.0 AP One thing I am wondering about, and it's not an Alvarion specific question or concern is, isn't it true that when you use a subscriber unit as your backhaul on a PtMP set up like you are suggesting, that the through put is halved or somewhat diminished? Thought this was a long standing rule of thumb. George Mac Dearman wrote: Patrick, Thanks for that info - I appreciate it much. What I am trying to accomplish is (kill a bunch of birds with one stone) connect these 5 remote locations via wireless to the hospital (AU located here) and then use the 6th SU on my tower (1 mile LOS) to provide 10mbps of dedicated bandwidth to the hospital. Thanks, Mac Dearman -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 11:42 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: RE: [WISPA] ALVARION VL 4.0 AP Mac, I understand you spoke to Les today. Made me smile for sure. Thanks also for sharing the story about Michael Eck helping during Karina. He is a humble guy and I've never heard him mention it. The BreezeACCESS VL can certainly do what you want there. An AU, especially at those ranges should be able to provide the full capacity of just over 30mbps (net ftp). So you could provide 6 connections close range of 10mbps a piece with an oversubscription ratio of only about 2:1. Assume that a typical over subscription for high end commercial customers is about 4 or 5 to 1, you should be sitting pretty. I am not clear about your tower need. Are you asking if you can dedidcate 10mbps to a tower, which then would have that capacity used to feed in to 802.11 APs that feed other clients? 1. How far is that tower? 2. You should be able to dedicate 10mbps to the tower, leaving 20mbps to serve the 6 hospital customers with an oversubscription ratio that would still be nice and low. Do have Mike Cowan confirm, as John advises. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mac Dearman Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 8:58 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] ALVARION VL 4.0 AP Someone give me a hand here please. I have a contract to deliver 10Mbps dedicated bandwidth to a hospital as well as building them a leased wireless network for the hospital to 6 off site buildings. All of these buildings (but 1) are with in "rock throwing" distance of the Hospital. I am looking at the Alvarion VL 4.0 AP to do the wireless connections. Here is my dilemma since I am very limited in VL knowledge: 1. Will I be able to not only connect these 6 out lying buildings, but also place one of the SU's on my tower to provide them with the 10Mbps dedicated BW? Or will I need to do a PTP? 2. I believe the AP is only possible of 10Mbps total??? Thanks, Mac Dearman -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] ALVARION VL 4.0 AP
It's not true 54 megs. Its 30 megs. George Mac Dearman wrote: It's really not as big a hit as you would think. It is a 54mbps AU and the SU's are only 6mbps. The dedicated BW is 10mbps. Mac Dearman -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Rogato Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 8:16 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] ALVARION VL 4.0 AP Right. Wonder if he realizes the hit he will take doing it this way. George Gino Villarini wrote: Exactly my point Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Rogato Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 9:31 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] ALVARION VL 4.0 AP One thing I am wondering about, and it's not an Alvarion specific question or concern is, isn't it true that when you use a subscriber unit as your backhaul on a PtMP set up like you are suggesting, that the through put is halved or somewhat diminished? Thought this was a long standing rule of thumb. George Mac Dearman wrote: Patrick, Thanks for that info - I appreciate it much. What I am trying to accomplish is (kill a bunch of birds with one stone) connect these 5 remote locations via wireless to the hospital (AU located here) and then use the 6th SU on my tower (1 mile LOS) to provide 10mbps of dedicated bandwidth to the hospital. Thanks, Mac Dearman -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 11:42 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: RE: [WISPA] ALVARION VL 4.0 AP Mac, I understand you spoke to Les today. Made me smile for sure. Thanks also for sharing the story about Michael Eck helping during Karina. He is a humble guy and I've never heard him mention it. The BreezeACCESS VL can certainly do what you want there. An AU, especially at those ranges should be able to provide the full capacity of just over 30mbps (net ftp). So you could provide 6 connections close range of 10mbps a piece with an oversubscription ratio of only about 2:1. Assume that a typical over subscription for high end commercial customers is about 4 or 5 to 1, you should be sitting pretty. I am not clear about your tower need. Are you asking if you can dedidcate 10mbps to a tower, which then would have that capacity used to feed in to 802.11 APs that feed other clients? 1. How far is that tower? 2. You should be able to dedicate 10mbps to the tower, leaving 20mbps to serve the 6 hospital customers with an oversubscription ratio that would still be nice and low. Do have Mike Cowan confirm, as John advises. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mac Dearman Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 8:58 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] ALVARION VL 4.0 AP Someone give me a hand here please. I have a contract to deliver 10Mbps dedicated bandwidth to a hospital as well as building them a leased wireless network for the hospital to 6 off site buildings. All of these buildings (but 1) are with in "rock throwing" distance of the Hospital. I am looking at the Alvarion VL 4.0 AP to do the wireless connections. Here is my dilemma since I am very limited in VL knowledge: 1. Will I be able to not only connect these 6 out lying buildings, but also place one of the SU's on my tower to provide them with the 10Mbps dedicated BW? Or will I need to do a PTP? 2. I believe the AP is only possible of 10Mbps total??? Thanks, Mac Dearman -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] CALEA opinion... it's nice to know
Not to change the subject, but on that page, I fund this a lot more disturbing.. http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2006/03/vonage_fire.html wispa wrote: That at least SOME people agree with me. http://blogs.globalcrossing.com/regulatory?from=50 The second entry on that page is very interesting. While this entry is a bit out of date, he makes a very interesting point... That the feds are trying to figure out how to mandate the costs of whatever they want on industry... Very much akin to requiring every home to be built with peepholes, and platforms at our windows, so they look in on us without difficulty. Maybe even requiring remote control drapes? Yeah, yeah, I know, you have to be a political radical to NOT want that built into all our homes... but, he has a point. Mark Koskenmaki <> Neofast, Inc Broadband for the Walla Walla Valley and Blue Mountains 541-969-8200 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] ALVARION VL 4.0 AP
Is the ALVARION VL 4.0 AP a polling radio system? -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Light hearted Friday
Wel it's raining so hard here, it makes me think I'm stuck in a Ray Bradbury short story. "The Long Rain" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Long_Rain So here is something to lighten the day: http://youtube.com/watch?v=0sNE9k8mZ1w -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Some "unlicensed" history....
Rich, That was an excellent explanation. And now I understand why my cell phone service is poor and not likely to get better any time soon. George Rich Comroe wrote: We don't have to agree. I certainly respect differing opinions as long as their from people that seem to know the field. I thought the switch to 2nd gen "put up whatever you want" was a departure from earlier FCC stand ... when all 1st gen cellular systems would follow the TIA approved AMPS standard. Why do I think the change was not for our best? Because the US manufacturers went from world domination of cellular (you could take your amps phone anywhere in the world), to last place (almost the entire world adopted the GSM standard in the face of the US meltdown in digital cellular standards). You can dislike GSM, but it became the defacto world standard and you can take your GSM phone anywhere. US cellular manufacturers world market share plumeted, and manufacturers that built to the USDC (TIA IS54) and CDMA (TIA IS95) found very few foreign markets that would accept product. The US became one of the very few nations on the planet where a carrier could deploy anything they wanted. The NexTel system, likewise, can be found almost nowhere except US / Canada. Pick any 2 people in the US with cellphones, and it's more likely than not they are incompatible & not able to receive service from the same tower. Technically it provides everyone in the entire United States with inferior coverage (considering the number of total towers providing service), more expensive phones (multi-mode), inferior voice quality (extra voice decoding / recoding becuase they all have incompatible voice codecs), and additional voice latency. Eventually European GSM became yet another US deployed technology adding to the mish-mosh. US Standards participants coined the phrase "if one standard is good, multiple standards are better." This is non-sense. If there's not a single standard you have no standard. A single standards does not inhibit technology, because standards continuously evolve and eventually extend to new technologies in a compatible, planned way. Just look at 802.11 ... it's a classic example of an "evolving" standard. Standards do inhibit something ... but it's not technology ... its the choice to deploy whatever you want. It imposes a certain discipline for the general public ... which I think is a good thing. It's disheartening as all hell to look at a field near me with 4 antenna towers (3 of them 500ft) and a different wisp providing service from each (from an interference standpoint). There's roughly 30 different 5.7GHz transmitters all within 1000ft and LOS of each other. There's so many examples like this which simply scream at you that the wisps would collectively have benefitted were some minimum media access procedures common across all these devices. Anyways, I appreciate your thoughts and enjoy comparing differing opinions. peace, Rich -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] ALVARION VL 4.0 AP
Ok, After some thought I have a suggestion for you Mac. 1st, your dealing with a hospital and I'm assuming your connecting their buildings together to connect their lans from each building and tying them all together. Under that assumption, I wouldn't think a PtMP solution is really the solution. Hospitals have losts of money or at least spend lots of money, why would a few radios be any diferent? 2nd they have some bandwidth usage that can be taxing. An example such as MRI's and CAT scans. Not sure if you know what MRI files are like, but generally their mega size files, gigs of pictures of peoples brains\bodies sliced into thin slivers with lots of slices at very high resolution. When hospitals need a radiologist to give them a quick assesment of a patients condition in life threatening situations, they use the network to get the radiologist the files so he can tell thm how to proceed quickly. They do NOT want to wait. Time is of the essence. Around here they call the radiologist at home if he's home and they don't want to wait a half an hour for him to get into the hospital. So I have some experience here because the radiologist is my customer and I've seen him in action. The MRI and Radiologist is just one example of heavy usage. I'm sure there are others. Now your connecting the buildings together. Do you want a slow connection connecting each building together using PtMP where the AP can be bogged down because it's now the center hub of the network connecting all the buildings tohether? Preferably not. What you should be doing is using a multiple ap's and su's or multiple PtP's with each ap providing a seperate connection for each building. This way you've increased the capacity of the network connectivity, added increased performance and eliminated an ap from becoming the hub of their network. You could use 10MHz channel widths if you need to be conservative in spectrum. What I wouldn't want to do to a hospital is be cheap out the get go. Generally the hospitals networks admins are the types of admins that think they are network gods. So you don't want to start out with a typical low cost broadband delivery offering and ley them pick you apart if it's not up to snuff for them. You should give them choices and allow them to make the decision. I would offer them a package using indivisdual PtP links and a cheaper package using PtMP and let them choose based on what they feel they will need. You may be surprised that they will choose to spend a few extra thousand dollars to do the job right. I'm also thinking that an su that can only deliver 6 megs is really NOT something I'd be offering anyone in these situations. I mean why wire a network with 10/100/1000 and then have a 6 meg choke??? What we do as a wisp delivering broadband is not the same thing as a hospitals network, or anyone elses network. Anyways, food for thought. I'd hate to see you go in with just one idea that may make you not look as good as you are. George Patrick Leary wrote: We do not poll, deliberately. Polling has lots of overhead, especially as users are aggregated since all users are being polled whether they have something to "say" or not. We don't use pure scheduling or pure CSMA/CA either. We do implement various ways of concatenation (packet aggregation) and some other tricks to reduce multipoint overhead as much as possible. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Rogato Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 11:08 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] ALVARION VL 4.0 AP Is the ALVARION VL 4.0 AP a polling radio system? -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] Some "unlicensed" history....
wispa wrote: So, who set the "standard" for toilet paper roll size? Actually Mark, as far as I can tell there is a standard for toilet paper rolls Same for paper towel rolls and even paper 8.5 x 11 Kind of makes it easy to use in printers from all manufacturers. You asked :) -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] Net Neutrality - a somewhat different take
hether the users of Qwest or Charter, or Neofast, Inc, have a REAL "right" to every site, service, or use possible, that should depend on the agreement I make with my customers, should it not? I've been tempted to offer a "web only" service, appropriately priced, that blocks EVERYTHING but http and dns. Would that be legal under NN laws? If the answer is "No", then perhaps we should rethink what we really want. I say that a lack of neutrality by other providers is opportunity for me, not a negative. And that as much as a subscription to your local newspaper doesn't give you the right have every news story, columnist, and cartoon delivered to your door, nor does subscribing to a tiered internet service. What do you think? Mark Koskenmaki <> Neofast, Inc Broadband for the Walla Walla Valley and Blue Mountains 541-969-8200 -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] Net Neutrality - a somewhat different take
Panel 3 might get to the point quicker. It's titled: "Discrimination, Blockage, and Vertical Integration" George Rogato wrote: http://ftc.gov/opp/workshops/broadband/index.html If anyone is really interested in what the big boys have to say and how each side looks at things. I watched this last weekend, was interesting. George John Scrivner wrote: Mark your calendars folks, me and Mark K are in agreement for once. Those who support Net Neutrality without exception have never had to track, isolate and repair infected PCs spewing out spam or replicative exploits to the masses. We "should" have a right to decide what we allow on our networks and to implement controls ourselves if needed in order to make sure our networks function optimally. Regulators forcing us to offer an open road to all data traffic is not a good thing for a provider of broadband networking services who is also trying to offer a good value for the money and manage network resources for optimal performance. But hey, if the world wants blind NN then so be it, give us all $300 per month per connection in Universal Service fees and we can offer a "no limits" connection to every person who connects. Let all the bits roll huh? I have previously tried to push for a re-definition of the issue. Forcing "Net Neutrality" is something almost nobody can benefit from in all instances. I believe a better approach is for the broadband industry to agree to a "First do no harm" mission statement. What this would mean is that we all agree on our honor that we will not do things to data traffic which limit competition, reduce legitimate services to customers, remove open access to thoughts, ideas, political voices, etc., or otherwise force people to pay more for anything that should be easily accessible with minimal network loading in an open access network connection. In its most basic application the "First do no harm" mission could be illustrated in this example involving VOIP: If I offer VOIP to my customers as a service that I manage and sell through my company and I want optimum quality of service for this then I can prioritize my VOIP service packets to a higher level than average traffic but I cannot set a competitor's VOIP packets to run at a lower QoS level than average traffic nor can I block competitors VOIP traffic. In short I should be able to optimize my network to allow my services to run optimally or to sell the rights for others to optimize their traffic to run at a higher priority but I cannot set traffic patterns to harm another provider's packets to run at a lower than average priority or to be blocked from passing at all. Here is another example of "First do no harm" If a customer PC is infected with a virus and is generating spam and sending viruses to other PCs then we should be able to remove this computer from network service or filter this traffic at our discretion. This goes against Net Neutrality but fits easily into the "First do no harm" mission. I would be glad to debate why a "First do no harm" mission would be a better direction than Net Neutrality for broadband policy directives. This might be a good way to head off the Net Neutrality issue from being used against us in regulatory issues. If broadband providers as a whole would adopt a directive which would eliminate any Net Neutrality concerns then it would be more difficult for those pushing for Net Neutrality to argue their stance. Scriv wispa wrote: On Sun, 04 Mar 2007 10:52:54 -0500, Tim Wolfe wrote After reading this, it becomes very obvious this person does not have a clue? (Or should I say, he is owned by the telcos?) Now, let's not fall into this trap, of saying that everyone who doesn't advocate NN in any and every form is "owned by the telcos". That's a complete disservice to the debate and to yourself. He's right in this regard... IT IS NOT PRESENTLY A PROBLEM. Nobody that I know of right now is pre-censoring sites (unless the customer wants it done), or content. Some providers don't offer VOIP support. I don't particularly, either, as my network isn't optimized by any QOS implementation. However, what he's warning us about, is that in the political world of DC, he thinks that the people in charge will use NN laws as a way to manage political speech. Free speech advocates are already quite upset about the FEC's demands that sites censor forums and articles during election season to avoid compaign reform law entanglements. In today's political climate, and the naked untruths that flow routinely out of swamp on the Potomac, I, too, don't have any trust in regulators to not encroach on our most fundamental freedoms. If, tomorrow, Qwest or Charter decided to definitely become non-neutral in regards
Re: [WISPA] 3650, ok, so what's current status?
So what your saying Patrick is, It's ok, we should go and buy some of these things and do some testing, right? :) George -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3650, ok, so what's current status?
Patrick Leary wrote: You are trying to wind me up aren't you George? :) :) Well maybe a bit, but some of us have our 3650 aps in. Just figuring your a wealth of information and I knew you would expand upon this. George -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Why the STA George?
First, lets clear things up. I already know that we are not supposed to use it as part of our network, regardless of what others might think. We have already heard someone else say other wise on a different list as part of a different organization. So, for me, it's to experiment with and to see what kinds of results I can get. I am going to use it personally in a variety of different fashions. We hired Kris months ago and we've paid him to handle our application. I'm sure we will have to alter our application now that these guys have George Patrick Leary wrote: George, why do you have an STA application pending? What are your plans for the gear? What is the experiment you will be performing? Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Rogato Sent: Monday, March 05, 2007 12:55 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650, ok, so what's current status? Patrick Leary wrote: You are trying to wind me up aren't you George? :) :) Well maybe a bit, but some of us have our 3650 aps in. Just figuring your a wealth of information and I knew you would expand upon this. George -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Why the STA George?
It's actually a very good thread. Just think of those who heard some one else last year say they were using their for backhaul... Now they know better. These new cards, which have actually been talked about for quite some time, will help some of the guys (the RF Gearheads) to do more experimenting because they cost less than a redline, etc. Lets hope this time, the manufacturer acts responsibly and doesn't just sell them to just anyone with a cc. George Patrick Leary wrote: George, to the extent that this thread contributes to myth quashing (a never ending task in this business), it is "all good," as the colloquialism goes. Be careful though. STA's are not designed for every WISP out there to discover the same thing and the body of knowledge about how 3.65 propagates is well understood. For sure in the end it is the FCC itself that issues the STA, and they choose to accept or not and Kris certainly knows what he is doing. We'll all be better off when the limbo that is this band is finally decided upon. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. Well maybe a bit, but some of us have our 3650 aps in. Just figuring your a wealth of information and I knew you would expand upon this. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Why the STA George?
Patrick Leary wrote: "... Now they know better." Alas, we can, and I always do, hope that people learn. That is the whole point of these lists. To educate and help wisps understand better. What good is a dormant list? Some may think that a lot of these posts are just talk and hopefully many will see the value of the information buried in here. George -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3650, ok, so what's current status?
Part-15 org people selling a "help get licensed on 3650 manual" -- their webpage doesn't indicate to me that it is still experimental. http://www.part-15.org/sales/3650manual.asp Catch this from that page: Training Manual Have you looked into using 3650MHz for the security of Interference Free Wireless Backhauls? Are you bewildered by all the FCC issues currently going on with the band? Can you obtain a 3650MHz license? How much does the license and equipment cost? -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] test
Test received... Patrick Leary wrote: Last post I received until the below was John's post entering this thread just over one hour ago. Did the list go down? Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Place to purchase routers in quanity
I'm pretty sure they do. It's been a while since I looked at that, and my customers are all behind NAT, so I can't reach the routers. Yeah you can, you just have to set up all your routers right. I'd help you, but I'm not the one to do a good job explaining this. Maybe Butch or some one else can explain it. George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] news
Funny, I was just checking out the news according to Yahoo Financial for ticker ALVR to see whats going on. You guys at Alvarion are tearing up the overseas WiMax markets. George Patrick Leary wrote: Here are some further details. http://biz.yahoo.com/bizwk/070309/mar2007pi20070308789499.html?.v=1 One of the problems with this though is that his network is not WiMAX, no even upgradeable to WiMAX. The NextNet gear used here is entirely proprietary and has poorer functionality and performance than WiMAX. I just hope his current network does not give WiMAX an unearned black eye. I suppose now that Clearwire's visibility is super high, the press may dig into the service details, trot out unhappy customers (any network with that many users has plenty of happy and unhappy customers, no matter how good or bad). The press loves to try to kick the knees out from under folks when they are riding high. Patrick -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] news
Marlon is missing the advertizing dollars. Eve I am getting money from google through their adsense. Not a lot, but it's a check. George Patrick Leary wrote: ? Marlon, income is never recorded with "investor monies" except to the extent corporate investments generate returns (or losses) that must be recorded. Google makes nearly everyone money, including you and me, explained in the simplest terms to be by creating amazing efficiencies that were not there prior. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 10:17 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] news I guess when I said that I phrased it wrong. I still don't get Google's product model. What do they have that makes anyone else any money? Also, when I think of a company making money I want to know what the income is WITHOUT the investor monies. I'd be making tons of money if I got to count loans as income (and investor is just a banker at the end of the day). Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: "Patrick Leary" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 9:56 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] news Google is not losing money. It is profitable and has been for sometime. In just the past four quarters, in fact, it reported upside surprises in terms of EPS in each quarter. It also has a war chest of billions. In 2006 it generated about $10.6 billion in revenues...all with under 11,000 full time employees. In other words, they are generating about $1 million in revenue for every full time employee. Google is a cash-generating machine Marlon. Not sure where you get your data. I get mine from its Annual Report filed with the SEC. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 9:39 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] news Too bad some many customers say that the service sucks. I have a customer that moved. Loved our wireless so much she went with another wireless provider in the new local. Clearwire. I'm told there was no comparison. Oh well, with so much money to play with Wonder if they'll ever actually earn real money? This stock market thing amazes me. Google's loosing money and sitll gets investors. Vonage looses money and still gets investors. We MAKE money and can't get growth funds. sigh Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: "Patrick Leary" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 9:04 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] news Yes, it is good. So good that they were able to let loose with a reserve of an additional 4 million shares, with all shares entering the market at the high end of their anticipated offer price range. Remember, they also received $900M last year in what was the largest venture deal in the U.S. to date. That came from Intel with participation from Motorola. The details were not fully made public, but as part Motorola agreed to buy their NextNet business. We also know that Intel owns like 33% of the business. McCaw owns the same, though he retains 49% voting rights. All this combined gives Clearwire a rough market cap of $3B dollars now, which grows McCaw's personal net worth from about $2B to $3B. So, if anyone though Clearwire was already aggressively trying to access local BRS and EBS spectrum, you ain't seen nothing yet. Must be nice. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 8:34 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] news Is $600m good? I thought they owed that much in bank loans already. Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.co
Re: [WISPA] news
I understand how you wouldn't be familiar with web sites and e commerce. If you want to be at the top of a search result, you pay. At the very top #1 you pay the most and as you go down the list you pay less. I believe it's also done on a bid ask type auction type system , or so I've been told. Now with that tidbit of information, you can figure out how they are getting paid and can assume how those who direct people to google or yahoo get reffereal commissions. George Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: Yeah, that's the part I don't get. Who's buying things from those that pay into adsence? I never have and don't know anyone that has! Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: "George Rogato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 10:35 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] news Marlon is missing the advertizing dollars. Eve I am getting money from google through their adsense. Not a lot, but it's a check. George Patrick Leary wrote: ? Marlon, income is never recorded with "investor monies" except to the extent corporate investments generate returns (or losses) that must be recorded. Google makes nearly everyone money, including you and me, explained in the simplest terms to be by creating amazing efficiencies that were not there prior. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 10:17 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] news I guess when I said that I phrased it wrong. I still don't get Google's product model. What do they have that makes anyone else any money? Also, when I think of a company making money I want to know what the income is WITHOUT the investor monies. I'd be making tons of money if I got to count loans as income (and investor is just a banker at the end of the day). Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: "Patrick Leary" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 9:56 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] news Google is not losing money. It is profitable and has been for sometime. In just the past four quarters, in fact, it reported upside surprises in terms of EPS in each quarter. It also has a war chest of billions. In 2006 it generated about $10.6 billion in revenues...all with under 11,000 full time employees. In other words, they are generating about $1 million in revenue for every full time employee. Google is a cash-generating machine Marlon. Not sure where you get your data. I get mine from its Annual Report filed with the SEC. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 9:39 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] news Too bad some many customers say that the service sucks. I have a customer that moved. Loved our wireless so much she went with another wireless provider in the new local. Clearwire. I'm told there was no comparison. Oh well, with so much money to play with Wonder if they'll ever actually earn real money? This stock market thing amazes me. Google's loosing money and sitll gets investors. Vonage looses money and still gets investors. We MAKE money and can't get growth funds. sigh Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: "Patrick Leary" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 9:04 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] news Yes, it is good. So good that they were able to let loose with a reserve of an additional 4 million shares, with all shares entering the market at the high end of their anticipated offer price range. Remember, they also received $900M last year in what was the l
Re: [WISPA] news
Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: Point well taken. Marlon <--- slinks back into the wireless underground where he's more up to speed. And underfunded I have a sub who does signs and printing etc with his computerized stuff. Kids only about 25, he made a skin for the Wii that got very popular. He just hits the print button and out pops as many skins as he needs. Lots of profit for him. He LOVES GOOGLE and WANTS them to help him sell his .20 skins for 5.00 See how we are burdened with heavy infrastructure costs and debt and a kid with a good idea and a nice printer can use google to make a lot of money... -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] news
Wednesday was the day according to: http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070308/clearwire_ipo.html?.v=13 Craig McCaw's latest venture landed with a thud on Wall Street Thursday after critics said his underwriters sold too many shares at too high a price. Clearwire Corp., a wireless Internet service provider based in Kirkland, Wash., raised $600 million in an initial public offering Wednesday night. Shares fell 38 cents, or 1.5 percent, in their first day of trading to close at $24.62 on the Nasdaq Stock Market. -- This is what we all should be doing. Forbes Mercy wrote: When did ClearWire do an IPO? They were private from the beginning then they were about to do an IPO and Intel and Motorola bailed them out with the cash they needed. If they went public it's news to me. Forbes Mercy President - Washington Broadband, Inc -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] ot, linux for home users
I think Carl is from South Africa originally. :) W.D.McKinney wrote: Alaska Wireless Systems 1(907)240-2183 Cell 1(907)349-2226 Fax 1(907)349-4308 Office www.akwireless.net - Original Message - From: Carl A jeptha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Fri, 09 Mar 2007 16:34:32 -0900 Subject: Re: [WISPA] ot, linux for home users And you do know Ubuntu is from The Republic of South Africa right??? You have a Good Day now, Do you you any problems with the Republic of South Africa? Ubuntu has developers in other countries also. A very nice distribution for both servers and workstations. -Dee Butch Evans wrote: On Fri, 9 Mar 2007, Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: With all the uproar I'm reading about the computing disaster known as Vista I wonder about setting up Linux machines for folks. Especially those that just want to do email and surf the net. Probably (as mentioned) Ubuntu is a good distro. Fedora Core is another good one that is easy to use, and still offers good options for geeks (or geek wannabes). Another "up and coming" offering is PCLinuxOS. That one is at http://www.pclinuxos.com/news.php You can download a bootable ISO image of the pclinux and it will be your install disk as well. Very nice option, IMO. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] tower climbing
Looks like you go up one more level and come back down. Travis Johnson wrote: Hi, I am looking for some advice on the proper climbing technique for a new tower we just installed on. Over the past 10 years, I have climbed hundreds of towers including free standing, guyed, 40ft to 120ft without any problems or fears. However this new tower is much more difficult. I believe it's a Rohn 200ft free standing tower with 3 legs. The issue is there are only foot pegs on one leg up to the 80ft level... then the pegs start on another leg and go up from 80ft to the top. Getting from one leg to another at the 80ft level is the challenge. As you can see from the picture, the gap from the top brace to the bottom brace is almost 10feet in the center (I am 6'1"). http://www.ida.net/users/tlj/teton.JPG Anyone have any suggestions on a better way to accomplish the leg to leg movements across the braces? Thanks, Travis Microserv -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] walmart rfid
lled it .I called the company which is adt security and they refuse to do anything unless walmart request it.walmart home office will not return my calls and the regional manager actually hung up on me and will not take calls from us now.We have been very polite with them upto this point and gave them no reason to act like jerks.Does anyone have any suggestions on how to resolve this problem? Thanks Ray Hill surfmore. net -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] Walmart
When we were in DC a couple years ago they told us that rfid was going 900 so beware. You've just re - emphasized that fact. S0 now we know, 900 is even worse for us to use than we previously realized. Ray & Jean wrote: Hey All We really appreciate you taking the time to offer your ideas on how to resolve our problem.We have decided that switching to Hpol and sectors will be our fastest and cheapest way to resolve the issue which in the long run is probally a good idea to avoid future problems.We may try some of the legal and publicity suggestions that were mentioned,but in the short term it looks like walmart wins.By the way we are located approx 2000 ft LOS from their docks.again thanks for all the advice. Ray Hill surfmore.net -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] Walmart
Thats why we need some outdoor only frequency. The semi licensed makes more sense all the time. Rick Smith wrote: yeah? Wait'll 700 mhz is unlicensed. Talk about the perfect rfid spectrum. fUn -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Rogato Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2007 9:22 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Walmart When we were in DC a couple years ago they told us that rfid was going 900 so beware. You've just re - emphasized that fact. S0 now we know, 900 is even worse for us to use than we previously realized. Ray & Jean wrote: Hey All We really appreciate you taking the time to offer your ideas on how to resolve our problem.We have decided that switching to Hpol and sectors will be our fastest and cheapest way to resolve the issue which in the long run is probally a good idea to avoid future problems.We may try some of the legal and publicity suggestions that were mentioned,but in the short term it looks like walmart wins.By the way we are located approx 2000 ft LOS from their docks.again thanks for all the advice. Ray Hill surfmore.net -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] Walmart
So is rfid going all 900 or is there other frequencies as well? I'm not up to speed on rfid W.D.McKinney wrote: That would be a losing battle, as we have RFID deployed all over the ship yards, the railroad and soon airport cargo facilities. The large enterprise lobby will no doubt chime in. -Dee -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Calea - what will we need to provide ?
Peter R. wrote: You guys do complain loudly but do very little action. It is left to the few to fight for the many. It's very lonely out here, wish more wisps would get past the 250.00 and join wispa so that we can make things happen. -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] Calea - what will we need to provide ?
Also what wispa really needs is some wisps that want to be active in wispa and set some programs up that would serve them and the industry. One such program that we tried to get going was a promotional committee that would promote wisps in their market place. Sounds good? Only two wisps bothered to participate, myself and Tom DeReggi, but yet there was 3 non wisps who wanted to do something to help. Peter R. who is like a gold mine when it comes to that stuff was the most giving. and he's not a wisp. Dawn and probably Ken were contributers, as well as Brian Webster the mapping guy who's now working with Earthlink to try to find a way to benefit wisps. So please, consider all that us few have done to date while we try to run our own companies and make wispa into something good for you. Time is all it really costs, just a few hours a month is whats needed to be active in wispa. Thanks George George Rogato wrote: Peter R. wrote: You guys do complain loudly but do very little action. It is left to the few to fight for the many. It's very lonely out here, wish more wisps would get past the 250.00 and join wispa so that we can make things happen. -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] Calea - what will we need to provide ?
As a matter of fact, to give Peter R. some pay back for helping us. Do you guys know that he is " the man" to get you great pricing on bandwidth, just about anyplace in the country. So there is a plug for Peter R. and his ability to help you buy better. George George Rogato wrote: Also what wispa really needs is some wisps that want to be active in wispa and set some programs up that would serve them and the industry. One such program that we tried to get going was a promotional committee that would promote wisps in their market place. Sounds good? Only two wisps bothered to participate, myself and Tom DeReggi, but yet there was 3 non wisps who wanted to do something to help. Peter R. who is like a gold mine when it comes to that stuff was the most giving. and he's not a wisp. Dawn and probably Ken were contributers, as well as Brian Webster the mapping guy who's now working with Earthlink to try to find a way to benefit wisps. So please, consider all that us few have done to date while we try to run our own companies and make wispa into something good for you. Time is all it really costs, just a few hours a month is whats needed to be active in wispa. Thanks George George Rogato wrote: Peter R. wrote: You guys do complain loudly but do very little action. It is left to the few to fight for the many. It's very lonely out here, wish more wisps would get past the 250.00 and join wispa so that we can make things happen. -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] Fw: [WISP] Sort of OT: Long list of answers...
ind out. Obviously not like a packet shaper though. Is the throughput at the SM level effected by the RSSI value? This is true of all wireless products - it is not a brand question and the answer is "Yes." Is the throughput at the SM level effected by distance? Same as above. Yea, that's it for now! (: Whew, that took a while. But it was a good exercise for me anyway. I'm happy to say I could answer most without looking at the manual. Not bad for a non-tech. Regards, Patrick *** * This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses(190). *** * *** * This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses(42). *** * *** * This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses(84). *** * *** * This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses. *** * -- 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/ -- Lonnie Nunweiler Valemount Networks Corporation http://www.star-os.com/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] NWR:rules for building your own computer
Why not have the students build them as part of a computer class? I bet there are kids there that can run circles around some computer people and it would be a great lesson for students who hope to take the technology road in their career. George [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone know what the rules/hoops to get FCC approval to build your own computers? I am on our local High School Board and prices we are getting for 200 computers is a lot higher than the parts to build them and the committee discussed doing it in house. We think it is a simple form listing all the parts, but do not know for sure. Any help/information would be appreciated. Thanks! Walter W. Stumpf Jr. Xanadu Group Inc. Cognigen Founders' Club member 179 Statesville Quarry Road Lafayette NJ 07848-3128 USA 973-702-3899 fax 775-667-1995 WISPA member http://ld.net/?wstumpf ** AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.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] Unlimited bandwidth does not mean "unlimited"
Can you elaborate Travis. What do you mean by unlimited? If a sub downloads say 50 gigs in a month, do you not bother them unless they are impacting an ap, or do you let them keep on going? George Travis Johnson wrote: The unlimited model seems to be working for us for almost 10 years now (with high-speed wireless service). We have some customers that we have to call and explain how it works to them, but for the most part it runs great. They get what they pay for, 24x7. :) Travis Microserv Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: HAAA I was right again! The all you can eat idea is gonna HAVE to go out the window. If Comcast can't support the model neither can any of the rest of us. We now give people 6 gigs per month. No cut offs for going over, but there is additional billing... Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: "Dennis Burgess - 2K Wireless" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2007 10:13 AM Subject: [WISPA] Unlimited bandwidth does not mean "unlimited" http://www.boston.com/business/personaltech/articles/2007/03/12/not_so_fast_ broadband_providers_tell_big_users/ Per some of the discussions that we have had on here, here is something that came across my desktop today. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] Unlimited bandwidth does not mean "unlimited"
Thats the way I do it as well. Travis Johnson wrote: Unless they are causing a problem with other customers, we just let them go. 99% of the time the issue is an upload running (p2p, virus, etc.) but if they are just downloading, it's fine with me. Travis George Rogato wrote: Can you elaborate Travis. What do you mean by unlimited? If a sub downloads say 50 gigs in a month, do you not bother them unless they are impacting an ap, or do you let them keep on going? George Travis Johnson wrote: The unlimited model seems to be working for us for almost 10 years now (with high-speed wireless service). We have some customers that we have to call and explain how it works to them, but for the most part it runs great. They get what they pay for, 24x7. :) Travis Microserv Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: HAAA I was right again! The all you can eat idea is gonna HAVE to go out the window. If Comcast can't support the model neither can any of the rest of us. We now give people 6 gigs per month. No cut offs for going over, but there is additional billing... Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: "Dennis Burgess - 2K Wireless" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2007 10:13 AM Subject: [WISPA] Unlimited bandwidth does not mean "unlimited" http://www.boston.com/business/personaltech/articles/2007/03/12/not_so_fast_ broadband_providers_tell_big_users/ Per some of the discussions that we have had on here, here is something that came across my desktop today. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] Clearwire stock dropping
Market forces dictate that Tom. Sure there are lots of companies that don't make a profit and have some relatively high stock prices. But the market forces are that if a company is not a viable eventual profit maker, then people sell those shares and the price goes down. If the price goes down the next time the company goes to sell shares to raise capital or wants to use its stock as collateral it's pickings are pretty slim. Most of the equity a major shareholder has, is in stock, if the price goes down the major shareholder takes a hit. So the short story is, a company can not expect to survive based on stock price alone, they have to perform , either turn a profit, or lower losses and get closer to an eventual profit. Tom DeReggi wrote: Who says they ever have to make money, for their stock to hold or increase its value? And who says a profit needs to be made for a company to survive long term, when they are kept alive by the stock market? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Brad Belton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 11:55 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] Clearwire stock dropping Correct and that I believe is what Matt's point is. Too early to kick CLWR to the curb for at least two reasons: (1) short term market downturn (2) additional 4M shares issued Both of these items can and often will soften a stock value. All that said I think $20 - $24 a share is ridiculous for CLWR. I expect CLWR will bump back up maybe even beyond the IPO price once the market bounces back. The smart money will jump ship saving their skin and the stock will turn downward from that point on. "Clearwire has lost more than $460 million during its four-year existence. The company generates about $100 million in annual sales..." Certainly McCaw can afford this type of bleeding, but for how long and more importantly how long will Wall Street wait to see the light at the end of the tunnel? Will CLWR ever bask in the sunshine? Long term I only see a decline in value unless they start producing profits real quick! CLWR isn't making any money and doesn't have a bright future of EVER making any money. Hope I'm wrong because a CLWR failure is a failure for fixed wireless as a whole. Best, Brad -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter R. Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 9:37 AM To: Matt Liotta Cc: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Clearwire stock dropping Matt Liotta wrote: It seems premature to suggest that Clearwire is tanking. When you consider that an additional 4 million shares were issued and that the overall market is currently down, I think their stock has move as expected. I bought in at $20.68 and am quite happy with my position. -Matt Issuing the extra 4 million shares actually diluted the value of the stock. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Clearwire stock dropping
wispa wrote: It depends on who provides you the figures... People go to jail when those figures are wrong. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Clearwire stock dropping
Peter R. wrote: Not to compare it to a skunk, but look at Vonage stock. Tanked quick despite their accounting methods. (Sure some of that was from the patent lawsuit, but it was fading before that). - Peter Yeah, but Vonage also shot itself in the foot on IPO "We will offer refunds if our stock goes down" Was the stupidest thing for a company to ever say, was unheard of, especially when they renegeed and said they changed their mind and was not going to give a refund That stink will be with them for awhile. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] clock
Thats funny, didn't notice my clock off till just now. Is there something wrong with xp's clock? Tom DeReggi wrote: Yeah its really wierd, I changed my clock 4 times today to reflect the right time, and it keeps jumping back to the old time. I just unchecked the "adjust for daylight savings" button, to see if it helps. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Peter R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 3:05 PM Subject: [WISPA] clock Tom, I think your PC or laptop clock is off. Did you ever reset or patch for Daylight Savings time this past Sunday AM? BTW, did anyone notice that recurring outlook appointments were messed up with the new DST? - Peter -- 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] clock
oh yeah, time.gov usually has the right time :) George Rogato wrote: Thats funny, didn't notice my clock off till just now. Is there something wrong with xp's clock? Tom DeReggi wrote: Yeah its really wierd, I changed my clock 4 times today to reflect the right time, and it keeps jumping back to the old time. I just unchecked the "adjust for daylight savings" button, to see if it helps. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Peter R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 3:05 PM Subject: [WISPA] clock Tom, I think your PC or laptop clock is off. Did you ever reset or patch for Daylight Savings time this past Sunday AM? BTW, did anyone notice that recurring outlook appointments were messed up with the new DST? - Peter -- 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] Towerstream Miami
What frequency is their wimax? Peter R. wrote: Towerstream launched its wireless broadband service in Miami metropolitan area. This is company's its eighth fixed WiMAX network in the U.S. - previous cities include New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Seattle Boston, San Francisco and Providence/Newport. A map of the regions covered by Towerstream's service is here. http://gigaom.com/2007/03/13/towerstream-wimax-now-in-miami/ Thank you. Regards, Peter Radizeski RAD-INFO, Inc. - NSP Strategist We Help ISPs Connect & Communicate 813.963.5884 efax 530-323-7025 http://4isps.com -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] PtP pricing
I need a couple very short range PtP links. A few hundred feet at most for each one. Something that did close to 50 or even 100 megs duplex would be good Has anyone worked with Free Space Optics and can advice? Also looking to be frugal. But don't want 5 gig. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] PtP pricing
Non set budget. Marlon K. Schafer wrote: what's the budget? - Original Message - From: "George Rogato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 3:02 PM Subject: [WISPA] PtP pricing I need a couple very short range PtP links. A few hundred feet at most for each one. Something that did close to 50 or even 100 megs duplex would be good Has anyone worked with Free Space Optics and can advice? Also looking to be frugal. But don't want 5 gig. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] PtP pricing
Whats the reliability factor? I've been thinking of adding fso for a couple links now for a couple years. Now I could put 100megs duplex to use rather than waste the spectrum. But how well does this stuff stand up? Haven't heard much about anyones experiences good or bad. is it 6 9's? does the power supplies burn out or the units need to be repaired often? Or are they switch em on and walk a way for a few years? George Marlon K. Schafer wrote: Hard to beat orthogon! And for a link that short I'd look REALLY hard at fso gear. http://www.plaintree.com/ Plaintree has some cool infrared systems. They handle dust and such better than lasers. If you want laser systems, EC has some that are pretty cool too. Not too expensive either. marlon - Original Message - From: "George Rogato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 9:13 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] PtP pricing Non set budget. Marlon K. Schafer wrote: what's the budget? - Original Message - From: "George Rogato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 3:02 PM Subject: [WISPA] PtP pricing I need a couple very short range PtP links. A few hundred feet at most for each one. Something that did close to 50 or even 100 megs duplex would be good Has anyone worked with Free Space Optics and can advice? Also looking to be frugal. But don't want 5 gig. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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/ -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] Moisture Ingress
Any particular type of antenna this is happening to? John Scrivner wrote: Thanks Rick. I will pass this along to our techs so they can start implementing this. I know they seal the heck out of things and it is really bizarre to me how any water is getting in there but it is. If they have questions about your process they may be contacting you directly. Many thanks, Scriv Rick Smith wrote: Scotch Super 33 tape over the connectors, right close as you can get to the antenna, all the way down the lmr past where the "rubber joint" is - then mastic over that - then 33 again over the mastic. This is called a courtesy wrap, cause if you ever have to open it back up, you slice down to the tape inside, and it peels right off quickly without fighting the mastic. Since I started doin this, I've NEVER had a moisture problem. Also, wrap it when it's dry outside so you don't lock humidity into it... temperature changes will then just wreak havoc on you. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Scrivner Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 10:29 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Moisture Ingress I would like a bit of feedback from those of you who have been installing outdoor antennas for a while. I have a problem that I would like to see fixed. It seems that after every long rain we see problems with the occasional connection outside at the antenna getting water into it. We use the Scotch seal mastic tape to seal the connections. The guys do not like having to climb and they work hard to try to make sure we do not get these problems and yet they come back. I would like to hear what you veterans out there are doing to make sure the water stays out. Thanks, Scriv -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] PtP pricing
I wonder how much a set of Plaintree WBLS100 are? 100megs full duplex would do the trick for me. I'm only going across the street 100 yards or so. Twice. I need two sets of PtP links. George Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: As far as I know, both are very good units. I know that some of the older plaintree gear had flaky tx/rx units that weren't aligned right at the factory. But I've sold a little bit of their stuff over the years and I don't remember any complaints. Other than the sheer size of the units, fso is usually bigger than we're used to dealing with. In the case of plaintree, that size is also part of what keeps the units from needing such exact aiming. I've cc'd a couple of the plaintree folks here. That'll help you contact them. The EC number is 800-525-0173 Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam ----- Original Message - From: "George Rogato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 1:05 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] PtP pricing Whats the reliability factor? I've been thinking of adding fso for a couple links now for a couple years. Now I could put 100megs duplex to use rather than waste the spectrum. But how well does this stuff stand up? Haven't heard much about anyones experiences good or bad. is it 6 9's? does the power supplies burn out or the units need to be repaired often? Or are they switch em on and walk a way for a few years? George Marlon K. Schafer wrote: Hard to beat orthogon! And for a link that short I'd look REALLY hard at fso gear. http://www.plaintree.com/ Plaintree has some cool infrared systems. They handle dust and such better than lasers. If you want laser systems, EC has some that are pretty cool too. Not too expensive either. marlon - Original Message - From: "George Rogato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 9:13 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] PtP pricing Non set budget. Marlon K. Schafer wrote: what's the budget? - Original Message - From: "George Rogato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 3:02 PM Subject: [WISPA] PtP pricing I need a couple very short range PtP links. A few hundred feet at most for each one. Something that did close to 50 or even 100 megs duplex would be good Has anyone worked with Free Space Optics and can advice? Also looking to be frugal. But don't want 5 gig. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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/ -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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/ -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] anyone see this?
See now that is the issue around here. If we want true redundancy we need to ride two different fibers out of town. One is the fiber we are already on, and the other is the expensive guys Qwest. We hate to give Qwest a dime. Matt Liotta wrote: Sure it is more costly than being single-homed, but being multi-homed is pretty important. If your single provider goes down what do you tell your customers? -Matt John Scrivner wrote: Maybe it is very costly to do? Charter Pipeline service in my market is not multi-homed either. Neither am I at this point. I used to be multi-homed in the days when 2 T1s did the job. It is not easy to swing redundant fiber runs in a town that is 75 miles from the nearest telco-hotel. When I get multi-homed fibers here then I will probably do that through a mini-telco-hotel facility here and make that place a new business opportunity in itself. Scriv Matt Liotta wrote: It does make you wonder why the ISP in question wasn't multi-homed. -Matt Tim Wolfe wrote: Thank The good Lord above that I never signed the TelCove contract for bandwidth last year!. I mean, you really have no idea what the local provider was doing wrong, but to turn off a school district and fire CO on that system, COME ON!. You can bet the lawsuits from the school district alone will make Level 3 think twice about doing this again?. If you have an offending server, the stupid thing has an IP address, Block it!. I would hope that Level 3 has enough smarts to do this?. Even a little guy like me knows how to block an offending IP address, and I am stupid, LOL! Matt Liotta wrote: http://gigaom.com/2007/03/14/why-did-level-3-turn-off-a-rural-isp/ -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] anyone see this?
Unfortunatly not. There are mountains and 60 miles between us and them and it's Qwest territory anyways. Jeff Broadwick wrote: Can you do a microwave shot from another town/provider? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Rogato Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 12:06 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] anyone see this? See now that is the issue around here. If we want true redundancy we need to ride two different fibers out of town. One is the fiber we are already on, and the other is the expensive guys Qwest. We hate to give Qwest a dime. Matt Liotta wrote: Sure it is more costly than being single-homed, but being multi-homed is pretty important. If your single provider goes down what do you tell your customers? -Matt John Scrivner wrote: Maybe it is very costly to do? Charter Pipeline service in my market is not multi-homed either. Neither am I at this point. I used to be multi-homed in the days when 2 T1s did the job. It is not easy to swing redundant fiber runs in a town that is 75 miles from the nearest telco-hotel. When I get multi-homed fibers here then I will probably do that through a mini-telco-hotel facility here and make that place a new business opportunity in itself. Scriv Matt Liotta wrote: It does make you wonder why the ISP in question wasn't multi-homed. -Matt Tim Wolfe wrote: Thank The good Lord above that I never signed the TelCove contract for bandwidth last year!. I mean, you really have no idea what the local provider was doing wrong, but to turn off a school district and fire CO on that system, COME ON!. You can bet the lawsuits from the school district alone will make Level 3 think twice about doing this again?. If you have an offending server, the stupid thing has an IP address, Block it!. I would hope that Level 3 has enough smarts to do this?. Even a little guy like me knows how to block an offending IP address, and I am stupid, LOL! Matt Liotta wrote: http://gigaom.com/2007/03/14/why-did-level-3-turn-off-a-rural-isp/ -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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 Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] anyone see this?
You know, this really is the answer. Two different isp's I've had the customers over the years, that want 10- 9's because their business depends upon the internet, but then they don't want to pay an extra 30 - 40.00 per month to get it. John Scrivner wrote: I tell them the fiber is down. I guess I could go broke trying to be more fault tolerant. Please understand I appreciate your feedback but understand that my service area does not have a single fault tolerant broadband solution. If people want fault tolerance here then the option is to buy two broadband connections from two providers and have an auto-fail over router. I promote this to people who want fault tolerant connectivity. If/when we roll out our 12 county AWS based broadband / cell network we will be multi-homed. Until then the economics of this would make us broke. I am not exaggerating. Scriv Matt Liotta wrote: Sure it is more costly than being single-homed, but being multi-homed is pretty important. If your single provider goes down what do you tell your customers? -Matt John Scrivner wrote: Maybe it is very costly to do? Charter Pipeline service in my market is not multi-homed either. Neither am I at this point. I used to be multi-homed in the days when 2 T1s did the job. It is not easy to swing redundant fiber runs in a town that is 75 miles from the nearest telco-hotel. When I get multi-homed fibers here then I will probably do that through a mini-telco-hotel facility here and make that place a new business opportunity in itself. Scriv Matt Liotta wrote: It does make you wonder why the ISP in question wasn't multi-homed. -Matt Tim Wolfe wrote: Thank The good Lord above that I never signed the TelCove contract for bandwidth last year!. I mean, you really have no idea what the local provider was doing wrong, but to turn off a school district and fire CO on that system, COME ON!. You can bet the lawsuits from the school district alone will make Level 3 think twice about doing this again?. If you have an offending server, the stupid thing has an IP address, Block it!. I would hope that Level 3 has enough smarts to do this?. Even a little guy like me knows how to block an offending IP address, and I am stupid, LOL! Matt Liotta wrote: http://gigaom.com/2007/03/14/why-did-level-3-turn-off-a-rural-isp/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] anyone see this?
Matt Liotta wrote: George Rogato wrote: You know, this really is the answer. Two different isp's I've had the customers over the years, that want 10- 9's because their business depends upon the internet, but then they don't want to pay an extra 30 - 40.00 per month to get it. So you would recommend to your customer to have two different ISPs, but for your business, which is an ISP... you don't think you should be multi-homed? -Matt Of course I should be multi homed. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] anyone see this?
Peter R. wrote: Two, I am pretty sure that there is more to this story than what was written. And if Said Inc. was talking to L3 Security as often as implied, it would seem they had some issues that they did not want to own up to. - Peter Me too, I caught the , web hosting, adult sites, and spam. Soo, I'm sure they were probably overzealous in their attempt to attract hosting customers and it came back to bite them in the butt. My take. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] anyone see this?
Makes me happy to live in the USA Jeff Broadwick wrote: I suppose it could be worse...this was a customer that we know from Honduras: http://www.bayislandsvoice.com/issue-v5-2.htm At least Level3 didn't come in with guns... Jeff -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of George Rogato Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 12:06 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] anyone see this? See now that is the issue around here. If we want true redundancy we need to ride two different fibers out of town. One is the fiber we are already on, and the other is the expensive guys Qwest. We hate to give Qwest a dime. Matt Liotta wrote: Sure it is more costly than being single-homed, but being multi-homed is pretty important. If your single provider goes down what do you tell your customers? -Matt John Scrivner wrote: Maybe it is very costly to do? Charter Pipeline service in my market is not multi-homed either. Neither am I at this point. I used to be multi-homed in the days when 2 T1s did the job. It is not easy to swing redundant fiber runs in a town that is 75 miles from the nearest telco-hotel. When I get multi-homed fibers here then I will probably do that through a mini-telco-hotel facility here and make that place a new business opportunity in itself. Scriv Matt Liotta wrote: It does make you wonder why the ISP in question wasn't multi-homed. -Matt Tim Wolfe wrote: Thank The good Lord above that I never signed the TelCove contract for bandwidth last year!. I mean, you really have no idea what the local provider was doing wrong, but to turn off a school district and fire CO on that system, COME ON!. You can bet the lawsuits from the school district alone will make Level 3 think twice about doing this again?. If you have an offending server, the stupid thing has an IP address, Block it!. I would hope that Level 3 has enough smarts to do this?. Even a little guy like me knows how to block an offending IP address, and I am stupid, LOL! Matt Liotta wrote: http://gigaom.com/2007/03/14/why-did-level-3-turn-off-a-rural-isp/ -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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 Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] LMR600, LMR900, Heliax
Scott Reed wrote: Who supplies pre-terminated (N connectors) cables in the 70 to 150' range using LMR 600, LMR900 and/or Heliax? Looking to move radios to the bottom of towers. You can buy them preterminated from electro-comm.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] LiteStation5
Got a url? Andrew Niemantsverdriet wrote: Has anybody used these? Do they work well? Are they stable? Can they do 5.3GHz or just 5.8GHz? Just wondering how they work. Thanks Andrew -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] LMR600, LMR900, Heliax
What about 5 gig Are you doing long runs and amps at 5gig? Blair Davis wrote: We use both methods, depending on how hard the location is to climb For locations that are easy to climb, we put the radio at the top. We've made our radios easy to feild swap on the tower. Four nuts, one N-connector and an outdoor cat5. This swaps everything except the antenna and coax. Static protection, grounding, electronics all swap out as a unit. For locations that are hard to climb, I use radio at bottom, amp and antenna at top. Started out using HyperLink amps, now use RF Linx. Over 7 years, I've had 2 amps fail, and 1 antenna and amp destroyed by a direct strike. In the direct strike, the amp saved the coax down the tower and all the radio gear below... And RF Linx replaced the amp under warranty. There is room for both methods and a wise engineer picks the appropriate one for the location. JohnnyO wrote: Jeez Ralph - your post is misleading to EVERYONE that is reading this. Do you know what loss per 100ft is on 7/8inch heliax on 2.4ghz which can be had for $1.50/ft What is your loss at 900mhz on 7/8thinch heliax ? How about lost per 100ft at 5.8ghz on 1 1/4inch heliax ? Scott - here is the following specs for your loss you'll expect... By all means - if you can afford to leave your radios at the bottom of the tower - DO SO ! and ignore posts like Ralphs which are nothing but BS Loss on 7/8th Heliax per 100ft 2.4ghz = 2dB 900mhz = 1.1dB Loss on 1 1/4 Heliax per 100ft 5.8ghz = 2.2dB loss 2.4ghz = 1.5dB loss 900mhz = .8dB loss You'll need to add .5dB of loss per connector. Putting your radios at the bottom and using some 250mw Teletronics AMPS will give you a much better system then if you were to leave your radios at the top because your AP will also see a 17dB gain on the receive side. You will not be creating "noise, interference" if you use the proper AMP ! Scott - contact me offlist if you need some help deciding what cable / amp combos to go with. The nice thing about running cable up your towers is - once you weatherproof your antenna and install the proper grounding straps along the run, you will more then likely never have to climb that tower again ! Ralph - please enlighten us with the reasons you've stated EVERYTHING you did Opinions are one thing, but false information is completely different and the only reason JohnnyO decided to take on this mule headed post :) JohnnyO -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ralph Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2007 8:38 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] LMR600, LMR900, Heliax You can buy them at Tessco, I'm pretty sure. Stick with Heliax (r) type cables (hard line) for those distances, and use 1 5/8 minimum. The loss is amazing at anything above 450 MHz. Look at any cell tower and you will see what you need to use, then count on twice the loss if you use 2.4 or many more times that at 5.2 or 5.8 Look at a price range of tens of $ a foot, once installed properly. This brings you to the next obvious issue. Now for the lesson in RADIO. You have degraded your system so much by adding loss, you can figure that your antenna just magically became 0 dB gain instead of what it was. You may even totally offset the antenna gain and be upside down (as they say at the car dealer down the street). So go buy the best antenna you can, with the most gain possible. Of course now that moves us to the next step. Can't get a high gain antenna because now the tower company wants more rent, or the wind load is too high, or the pattern is too narrow. On to the next step- More APs so you can cover the areas that your new high-gain antennas leave out. Then, more hard line, then more $$$ etc. Or you can take the illegal, easy way out. Buy Amp. Create noise, Violate Part 15 and your radio's certification. Leave yourself open for a fine. Sounds to me that you are better off doing what most discovered the hard way: Leave the radios up top, do a great installation job, weatherproof, lightning protect, and enjoy the power you paid so dearly per milliwatt for in the first place! Ralph -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scott Reed Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 6:05 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] LMR600, LMR900, Heliax Who supplies pre-terminated (N connectors) cables in the 70 to 150' range using LMR 600, LMR900 and/or Heliax? Looking to move radios to the bottom of towers. -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] Youtube
Can youtube be cached? -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] P2P Apps Going Legit?
MDU Multiple Dwelling Unit Matt wrote: The first fly in the ointment I see with the prevailing response from many WISPs (tell the 'hogs' to go elsewhere) is MDUs. Telling individual customers within an MDU to take a hike (even if you say it nicely) if you have an agreement with the MDU owner, could be a recipe for losing the MDU contract. Maybe that's necessary in some cases, but it'd sure be better to find a way to address the issues through technology rather than getting rid of customers. Perhaps I am missing something somewhere in this post but what is a MDU? Also, we have nearly a 1000 CPE out and have been in the wisp business since 2000 and have yet too tell a user to take a hike. A few I would have liked to though. Regretfully the vast majority of our users are 900Mhz now. There is a bottleneck right there bandwidth wise that will be very difficult to work around. Matt -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Youtube
I was thinking on a caching server at the noc for my customers to have better response download time. Youtube, because it's so popular and there is so much there. I'm blown away to find just about any music there. It could be a great way to mass distribute free video content. Figured if I could cache youtube, I'd be ahead of the game. David E. Smith wrote: George Rogato wrote: Can youtube be cached? Theoretically, it probably could. There are sites like keepvid.com where you can enter the URL of a video on YouTube (or Google Video, or a bunch of others), they dig through the HTML and the embedded Flash goo, and give you a link to download the .flv file. (Then you can go download a specialized FLV player, and watch your YouTube clips at your convenience.) Ultimately, it's just another file you download from a Web server; YouTube's Flash player is just smart enough to start playing the file before it's completely downloaded. Of course, those .flv files are about 2MB per minute of video, give or take a bit. If you're using something like Squid, or the implementation of Squid built into Mikrotik RouterOS, files that large probably aren't cached by default, mostly because for smaller sites the odds of multiple users downloading the same really big file at the same time are usually fairly small. David Smith MVN.net -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Using DECT phones to avoid interference issues.
Are they legal to use unlicensed in the US, and ...do you have a URL? :) Thanks George Dawn DiPietro wrote: All, I am sure some of you have already thought of this but I would suggest a great alternative to avoid interference with the most common frequencies used to deploy wireless networks would be to use DECT cordless phones in the house. They use the 1.9Ghz frequency and are relatively inexpensive. We use a DECT phone system here with all the features we could ever ask for and we got them for a song after the rebate. Just a thought. Regards, Dawn DiPietro -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] Attenuators
I have or at least had an attenuator that I got from YDI a few years ago. It has a bunch of bat switches that you can adjust the loss in steps. Jack Unger wrote: Blair, You can find the attenuators here: http://www.jfwindustries.com/fixed.html You should be able to get the T's at the same place you get your N connectors. jack Blair Davis wrote: I'm looking for some fixed value attenuators for doing some equipment testing. Say 30-40db, N-connectors. I'm also looking for a couple N-connector T's. Anyone know where I can find these? -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] New Certification list
Hey everyone, Jack Unger and myself have started this group to create a process of getting uncertified systems certified. The reason for the certification is to help bring wisps into compliance and legitimize their operation. Recently a wisp reported that he had an FCC inspector do an inspection at his site. He said that competitor wanted to shake him of his exclusive site contract with allegations he was operating uncertified equipment, voiding his contract. His competitor was trying to shut him down, move in on his turf. The FCC inspector inspected his system and found it to be 100% certified. His competitor was trying to "throw the uncertified wisp off the roof!" Fortunately for that wisp, he had 100% certified system in place. With brand names and the right antennas. He wasn't "thrown off the roof". Many wisps have been building out with componentized systems, those systems we buy and add custom features or components that are not certified by a manufacturer. But can be. Reason they are not certified, is because to certify a system, the manufacture has to build the exact same system spec'd in the certs and deliver a finished assembled product to the customer. The certification holds the manufacturer responsible rather than the wisp. No system that is built today by a wisp that he bought the parts for and assembled is certified. But, we believe a wisp can get his system certified. And that is what this group is about. Certifying your componentized systems. We don't know any reason why a wisp can't manufacture his own system. And with the commonly used components that are out there, have many wisps certifying the same exact system over and over. The issues here are the cost and the process to get a system certified. Most wisps don't know how and the cost can be prohibitive if done blindly. We have started the new group ONLY for wisps who have uncertified systems that they want to get certified and realize they have to pay. there is no free ride here, if Joe gets his system certified and Jack wants to get the same exact system certified, he HAS to pay as well. So expect that this process is not free and going to cost money. How much money? We do not know any money details yet. We do know that there is discounts with quantity and once one system is certified copies can be cheaper with co-operation. I would expect, with a lot of wisps participating, the costs can be driven down to a fraction of the costs. At this time only Principle members are invited to take part in this process. Join the certification list here: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/certification Thanks George -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
[WISPA] Anyone service Reno Nevada
I have a resi sub moving to: 8310 opal ranch way reno 89506 They are looking for a wisp that I recommend. -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] Vonage
What patents did Vonage infringe upon. What does Verizon have a patter on concerning voip and how does that effect the future? -- 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 requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz
Not familiar with 11 GHz, but what speeds and distances are available with 11 GHz and is the license leasable in different areas? Dylan Oliver wrote: The statements by Adelstein (*http://tinyurl.com/2jyhdg) *and McDowell (* http://tinyurl.com/2jg3sx) *make it clear that FiberTower's petition is to allow 2' dishes. I'm unclear on "minimum dish size", having heard 4' from this list, including a post by Charles Wu. But I just found a 2005 press release (*http://tinyurl.com/274wmy) *by RFS on the availability of a 3' dish meeting the FCC's standards for 10.7-11.7 GHz antennas. The only standard I've seen so far - Part 101 Sec. 101.115 "Directional antennas" (*http://tinyurl.com/37ummg*) - only specifies maximum beamwidth and minimum gain. If Part 101 talks about dish sizes elsewhere, please let me know. If Part 101 does not state dish size, then the petition boils down to a relaxation of beamwidth / gain concomitant to the characteristics of a 2' dish. Best, -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] Ericsson quits WiMax
Well I seen those 3g 100meg transfer rates in test results over in Asia a couple months ago and was wondering why wimax would over take 3g by the cell industry. Peter R. wrote: Ericsson Deals Blow to WiMAX First major telecoms equipment maker to quit WiMAX in favor of 3G mobile data. http://www.redherring.com/Article.aspx?a=21764&hed=Ericsson+Deals+Blow+to+WiMAX -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] one-third of U.S. households have no Internet...and do not plan to get it
MOUNTAIN VIEW, California (Reuters) - A little under one-third of U.S. households have no Internet access and do not plan to get it, with most of the holdouts seeing little use for it in their lives, according to a survey released on Friday. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070326/od_nm/internet_holdouts_odd_dc;_ylt=Ajd_D_JeLhjUgI3IVOtLYJntiBIF -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] IPTV
stream is necessary for one stream. If we move into the realm of high definition we are now looking at a rate of 14Mbps (uncompressed) with perhaps a chance of delivering reasonable quality using a 4Mbps sustained stream - per video is use. That does not take into account any bandwidth for telephone or Internet access, should these services be required. What we can see is that any network that is only capable of delivering sub 1Mbps speeds (as measured in real throughput) is now obsolete - we simply refuse to admit it yet. Of course, we can still continue to bury our heads in the sand and wait for the inevitable crisis. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] IPTV
It wouldn't happen to be this one: http://www.samsung.com/Products/ProAV/Plasmas/PPM50M5HBXXAA.asp?page=Specifications I was thinking of buying this last year. Held off looking for lower pricing, so I can buy 2. George Rich Comroe wrote: I myself don't want to watch a movie on my pc monitor. I like the comfort of a big picture in my easy chair. When I can do that with internet tv, it will be a lot more popular. Yeah, but ... My living room big picture that I watch from my easy chair happens to be my PC video server, not a TV. It's been over a year since I used a "TV" (which I define as a display box with a TV tuner built in). The living room PC has a couple TV tuner cards, Internet connection, and drives a big 48" display. Watch cable, programs previously recorded to disk (BeyondTV software is great with a half-terabyte drives), or Internet content. There's never even been a keyboard on this machine. If I wanna navigate there's a wireless mouse that sits on the hassock next to the tuner card remote controls. If I really need to type, I have to use a laptop with VNC. Essentially a TIVO on steroids. It's geek heaven! Secondly, if we are talking about IPTV bandwidth needs, we need to forecast that a 1.25Mbps sustained stream is necessary for one stream. Yeah, but ... Location Free, Slingbox, etc., do quite nicely on much much less BW. Is IPTV really that much of a hog that it needs 1.25Mbps? How could it possibly compete against products out there already that use only a tenth of this BW? Rich - Original Message - From: George Rogato To: WISPA General List Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 9:28 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] IPTV Nice easy reading here. http://www.comscore.com/press/release.asp?press=1264 Looks like the trend is towards video on demand. Here's a link: http://www.tv-links.co.uk/index.do/4 We have a long way to go before this stuff is mainstream for sure. But there is a convergence happening. I myself don't want to watch a movie on my pc monitor. I like the comfort of a big picture in my easy chair. When I can do that with internet tv, it will be a lot more popular. Travis Johnson wrote: > I can say that I have always been a gadget freak. I almost always have > the newest toys (cell phones, laptops, two-way radios, etc.) and I > usually play with them for a few months, and then put them on ebay. I am > a technology freak. I love new things (like our newest toy, an 18ghz > Dragonwave AirPair100). Call me what you will, but I like new technology. > > However, I can also tell you that I have a regular POTS line at home > (pay $35/mo for all features like vmail, call waiting, etc.) and I also > have DISH network at home. I would never consider using an internet > connection for TV... EVER. VoIP works for some people (I can always tell > when I'm talking to someone on a VoIP phone), but I can never see using > my internet connection for TV... here are a few reasons: > > (1) The internet is very unstable. When people want to watch TV, they > don't want excuses on why it's not working. Imagine the calls you would > get when a person's internet, telephone and TV are all down because one > of their PC's is infected with the latest virus or spyware. > > (2) I like having things seperate. Seperate bills is a slight issue, but > with automatic billing now, it all comes out of the checking account > automatically anyway. > > (3) I'm not tied to a single provider. If I want to switch my phone > service or TV service to something different, I can. > > (4) With the free DVR's and 4 rooms hooked up for free from DISH and > only $29.99 per month for 60+ channels, who is going to compete with > that? How can anyone provide a sustained 4-6Mbps for up to 4 TV's to > _every_ subscriber across their network (including the cableco or > telco's). Even in a small town (say 5,000 population), if the cable > company had 500 customers, that would be up to 1Gbps of bandwidth needed > (50% utilization of the 500 subs). There is nobody that can support that > right now... or even 3-5 years from now. > > Before everyone gets too excited about IPTV, we need to look at reality. > Sure companies like Verizon are doing fiber to the house... we will > never compete with that... but why try? We will never dominate our > region... instead, we are happy to pick up the customers that are > unhappy with the telco or cableco or other wireless provider and want > internet that just works. That's what we do. Internet. That works. > > Travis > Microserv > > Marlon K. Schafer wrote: >> sigh
Re: [WISPA] IPTV
Right, I was just reading this a couple days ago. It did not look good for the future of network based dvr and it sounded like it had implications for anyone wanting to cache primetime tv. David Hughes wrote: One of the major cable systems just lost that fight. The studios and networks filed suit and won on the issue of copyright infringmement. Dave David T. Hughes Director, Corporate Communications Roadstar Internet 604 South King Street -Suite 200 Leesburg, VA 20175 -HOME OF INET LOUDOUN- Office - (703) 234-9969 Direct - (703) 953-1645 Cell -(703) 587-3282 Corporate Offices - (703) 554-6621 Fax - (703) 258-0003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] AIM: dhughes248 - Video conference capable -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sam Tetherow Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 11:06 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] IPTV Peter, do you have much information on Network DVR (like the term). I would think that if you could get DR owners to agreee to Network DVR it would just be a small jump to real VOD. But then again, I still struggle with the concept of them bitching about people copying stuff that they broadcast freely over the air... Sam Tetherow Sandhills Wireless Peter R. wrote: Remember that like the term wireless, iptv has way too many meanings. IPTV to the telcos is TV to the cablecos. By saying IPTV, they figure they get around a lot of stuff and make it sound better than broadcast TV. Broadcast TV isn't much of a bandwidth problem - they do it fine today. TV over the internet will take time since most people don't want to watch TV on a laptop or PC. Until the Converged Living Room becomes mainstream, bandwidth won't be a huge problem. VOD (video on demand) is being confused with Network DVR. Instead of home DVR, it will be at the NOC. Maybe the way hotel on-demand is. That's what the content companies want. We'll see. Even DISH promises Caller ID on the TV screen, but that isn't IPTV. Just some thoughts this morning. Peter -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] CALEA compliance methods
I bet the technical aspects of how to comply will be emerging soon. I understand the wispa calea meeting went very well. So there must be some good news. Adam Greene wrote: Hi, While I appreciate Mark's comments and point of view, I for one would like to also start looking for ways to possibly comply with CALEA in a cost-effective way. I'm afraid that if the conversation here is limited to whether we should comply or not, we might lose the opportunity to share with each other about technical implementation. Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that the conversation about whether to comply should be halted, just that some room be given to those of us who also want to speak about implementation. I'm still interested if anyone has any point of view about any of the compliance methods that I discussed in my original post, from a technical standpoint. Thanks, Adam - Original Message - From: "wispa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "WISPA General List" Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 1:16 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA compliance methods On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 08:21:53 -0400, Peter R. wrote Mark, CALEA IS LAW. There are interpretations of that law, but they have been upheld by courts. YOu're arguing against things I'm not saying. CALEA is not the opinion of the DOJ or FCC. It is not far-reaching (like say the Patriot Act) or secret and possibly illegal like the NSA-AT&T wiretapping / surveillance. The whole idea that WE are covered under CALEA is just FCC opinion, which is as changeable and variable as the wind. The ruling is capricious and founded on VAPOR, not substance. I just cannot believe you approve of unfunded federal mandates for public purposes. CALEA was not. Misapplying CALEA is. This is not OSHA mandates. This is not the same as requiring that a tower service company require their climbers to use a safety system. Not even close. If the federal government is justified with making us provide, AT OUR EXPENSE, law enforcement services, then we're one little itty bitty non- existent step from from being mandated to do ANYTHING they happen to wish for, and the wish lists from the swamp on the Potomac are so large they boggle the mind. And don't give me the "we play dead for regulatory favors in the future" crap. Nothing we do will buy us one MOMENT's worth of consideration, in EITHER direction. Mark Koskenmaki <> Neofast, Inc Broadband for the Walla Walla Valley and Blue Mountains 541-969-8200 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] CALEA compliance methods
ese other places you speak of? I learned a long time ago that providing links in an argument about ideas merely changes the topic to attacking the source, not the topic itself. If I can't sell you on the idea, and you haven't already looked to see what other arguments are out there, then you're not really interested in any other opinions and this whole link thing is futile. Below is a link to the latest report about CALEA and the reclassification of Wireless Providers as information services in case anyone is interested in reading. Page 18 and 19 make for some interesting reading. ;-) http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-30A1.pdf Mark Koskenmaki <> Neofast, Inc Broadband for the Walla Walla Valley and Blue Mountains 541-969-8200 -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] Wireless Credit Cards
Courtesy of ATT wireless. Just wave your cell phone at the cash register! What will they think of next? -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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 Credit Cards
Imagine a hacker type that could just drive downtown Tokyo and charge everyones cell phone at the same time. I bet they could rack up so much money, they couldn't move it fast enough. Dawn DiPietro wrote: George, In Japan they have been doing this for quite awhile now. Regards, Dawn George Rogato wrote: Courtesy of ATT wireless. Just wave your cell phone at the cash register! What will they think of next? -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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 Credit Cards
One of these days David David E. Smith wrote: George Rogato wrote: Imagine a hacker type that could just drive downtown Tokyo and charge everyones cell phone at the same time. As Dawn mentioned, this has been big in Japan for a while, and AFAIK nothing like this has happened yet. Usually, you do have to confirm (via pressing buttons on your phone) that you want to buy something from that Coke machine or whatever. David Smith MVN.net -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] CALEA compliance methods
Clint Ricker wrote: Just as a general rule, CALEA monitoring is not something that you need to--or want to--do at each individual CPE or router. Wouldn't it be cool, and cheap, if it was just that easy? Here's your encrypted access to xxx customers radio / port, it's yours to monitor...? Maybe a CALEA button that we can turn on at will Somehow I doubt it will be this easy. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] CALEA compliance methods
Blair Davis wrote: Because at WISPA, we don't have to all think the same and have the same opinions all in step. We're not clones. We're individuals who each have our own beliefs and run our operation individually, sometimes uniquely And fortunately WISPA is an organization made up of individuals who do NOT want to make you think a certain way. WISPA doesn't want to run your business or tell you how to run your business. We're just working for the common ground that will benefit all wisps, not just some wisps. Another good thing is, with such as small membership, those who decide to participate can have an impact or effect. And as I understand it there is many openings on various committees. As for 477, CALEA, and certified equipment, that all came out of the FCC's horses mouths. All we can do is help people comply. But you don't see WISPA wanting to deny membership to those that does NOT comply. I Believe if WISPA was to go down the path of dictating what a wispa member was required to do, it would be wrong. We would loose our individualism and that won't teach us anything new. I've fought this thinking in the board room. We are not here to alienate each other but to find a common ground. If you have a real difference of opinion, rather than hold it against anyone or keep it to yourself, you should express your self and not hold it against anyone for disagreeing or having a different opinion. I think most people here are not going to loose their respect for each other over a difference of opinion. Anyways WISPA is an opportunity to participate. Two months ago, we were ready to join WISPA. At the time, I felt that WISPA had proven its longevity and was becoming a mature voice for the WISP's. But, after the form 477 issue, FCC sticker issue, and now the CALEA issue, I'm pretty sure that I disagree with the majority of the members on what stance should be taken on these issues. That being the case, why should I still join? -- Blair Davis West Michigan Wireless ISP 269-686-8648 -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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] CALEA compliance methods
Sounds vagely familiar, Like I said, from my opinion, wispa would not be an industry association Remember once had a guy selling jock straps with the wispa logo thinking that was a good idea too. Blair Davis wrote: George As to form 477 and CALEA, no, no one has spoken of making membership contingent on their position on these issues. But, I do recall a discussion, on this list, 'Dealing with bad players', starting on Feb 8, that basically proposed requiring the use of stickered equipment to be a member. Not sure what became of it. George Rogato wrote: Blair Davis wrote: Because at WISPA, we don't have to all think the same and have the same opinions all in step. We're not clones. We're individuals who each have our own beliefs and run our operation individually, sometimes uniquely And fortunately WISPA is an organization made up of individuals who do NOT want to make you think a certain way. WISPA doesn't want to run your business or tell you how to run your business. We're just working for the common ground that will benefit all wisps, not just some wisps. Another good thing is, with such as small membership, those who decide to participate can have an impact or effect. And as I understand it there is many openings on various committees. As for 477, CALEA, and certified equipment, that all came out of the FCC's horses mouths. All we can do is help people comply. But you don't see WISPA wanting to deny membership to those that does NOT comply. I Believe if WISPA was to go down the path of dictating what a wispa member was required to do, it would be wrong. We would loose our individualism and that won't teach us anything new. I've fought this thinking in the board room. We are not here to alienate each other but to find a common ground. If you have a real difference of opinion, rather than hold it against anyone or keep it to yourself, you should express your self and not hold it against anyone for disagreeing or having a different opinion. I think most people here are not going to loose their respect for each other over a difference of opinion. Anyways WISPA is an opportunity to participate. Two months ago, we were ready to join WISPA. At the time, I felt that WISPA had proven its longevity and was becoming a mature voice for the WISP's. But, after the form 477 issue, FCC sticker issue, and now the CALEA issue, I'm pretty sure that I disagree with the majority of the members on what stance should be taken on these issues. That being the case, why should I still join? -- Blair Davis West Michigan Wireless ISP 269-686-8648 -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA www.wispa.org 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/
