Re: [WISPA] Ping monitoring?

[John Thomas]

PRTG?
 
- Original Message - Subject: [WISPA] Ping monitoring?
From: "Jon Langeler" 
Date: 1/18/17 6:35 pm
To: a...@afmug.com

I can't get smokeping to send a ping say every second and only one each time. 
Any alternatives or suggestions? 
 
 Jon Langeler
 Michwave Technologies, Inc.
 
 ___
 Wireless mailing list
 Wireless@wispa.org
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

[WISPA] Renton WA - Looking for service

[John Thomas]

I'm looking for service
 
600 Powell Ave SW
Renton WA 98057
 
need 13 Static IP addresses
5 Megabits symmetric bandwidth
___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

[WISPA] Looking for service

[John Thomas]

Looking for 10 meg 

1640 West Yosemite Blvd.
Manteca, CA 95337

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

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

[John Thomas]

You have the right idea. It is only when you increase power on both ends that 
the distance increases.

Tablets in particular only have about 10 - 15 mW radios so that is the lowest 
common denominator. If you have radios with removable antennas, you can 
sometimes use different antennas to improve your coverage.

I found some dual band omnis for like $8 each that were rated 7 dB. I'm seeing 
a 9 dB improvement on 2.4 GHz, but only about 3 dB on 5 GHz.

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID

Colton Conor  wrote:

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

Re: [WISPA] Anyone serving Pompey NY? PR for WISPA

[John Thomas]

And I know someone in San Ramon that the business complex is across the street 
from Comcast. They want $10,000 to cross the street.

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID

Mike Lyon  wrote:

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

Re: [WISPA] security certificate

[John Thomas]

If you use Exchange 2007 or newer, you can change the internal dns name in your 
send and receive connectors to match the cert.

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID

Timothy Way  wrote:

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

Re: [WISPA] security certificate

[John Thomas]

http://www.netcentraldomains.com

$209 per year.

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID

Josh Luthman  wrote:

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

Re: [WISPA] security certificate

[John Thomas]

Or you can buy a wildcard for a few hundred dollars and use it on all your 
devices.

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID

Josh Luthman  wrote:

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

Re: [WISPA] Commission Sales

[John Thomas]

Normally sales people will work off a base + commission. Sometimes the base is 
a draw, or partial commission in advance.

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID

Carl Shivers  wrote:

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

Re: [WISPA] Need 50Mb highly symmetrical service in Dallas, Texas

[John Thomas]

Do you have a tower that can service Plano?

Looking for 10 meg/10 meg IP v4, IP v6, BGP.

I checked with every other wireless provider in the area, and no one does IP 
v6, and most can't do BGP.

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID

Brad Belton  wrote:

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

Re: [WISPA] Need 50Mb highly symmetrical service in Dallas, Texas

[John Thomas]

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID

Brad Belton  wrote:

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

Re: [WISPA] package ideas

[John Thomas]

My suggestion was only relative to your current pricing. 

For reference, AT&T UVerse in my area is $34.95 for 6 Meg down, and 768 k up, 
and when you go past 150 gigs in a month, it's $10 for each 50 gigs. Charter is 
bragging about 30 megs down, and 4 megs up, capped at 250 gig ( I think) for 
$29.95 (12 month promo), however, they have it oversubscribed so bad I have run 
speed tests to Charters speedtest server and got 30 kilobits per second 
down-not a good way to impress a $100 per month Business class customer.

Greg Osborn  wrote:

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

Re: [WISPA] pay per use billing

[John Thomas]

How about tiering? If you have the infrastructure for it, 2 megabits limited to 
50 gig, and then it slows down to 128 k for the rest of the month.

wi...@mncomm.com wrote:

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

Re: [WISPA] package ideas

[John Thomas]

How about adding 5 Meg at $79, then 10 Meg at $109?

wi...@mncomm.com wrote:

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

Re: [WISPA] Banswidth usage

[John Thomas]

Netflix at 480p does about 3 to 5 megabits per second.
That upstream number looks high for Netflix.
Sent with AquaMail for Android
http://www.aqua-mail.com

On February 18, 2014 9:51:51 AM
"~NGL~"  wrote:
I
have a customer that has used 19 GBytes down and 9 GBytes up in the last 
18 hours.
 
What does a smart TV use?
 
What can they be doing?
 
NGL
 

  
  

If you can read this Thank A Teacher.And if it's 
  in English Thank A Soldier!




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

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

[John Thomas]

Interesting statement regarding Cisco.
They sell $3000 per unit mesh equipment whose range would be hurt if power 
limits were dropped.


John

Sent with AquaMail for Android
http://www.aqua-mail.com


On February 10, 2014 6:15:22 AM Fred Goldstein  wrote:


Blair Davis wrote,

> I just went and read a bunch of  the comments on the proceeding...
 >
 > I didn't read them all, but I didn't find one in favor of the lower
antenna gain...
 >
 > Has anyone else?


Motorola Solutions, makers of $6000 police walkie-talkies, explicitly 
supports the lower gain limit.


Cisco also supports the lower power rule. They only make local access 
points, after all, and are buddy-buddy with the Bells.


We should keep that in mind when making our purchase decisions.

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

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

[John Thomas]

Hey Ubiquiti, here is an idea for a new product... :-)

Sent with AquaMail for Android
http://www.aqua-mail.com


On November 15, 2013 6:51:00 AM Eric Muehleisen  wrote:

http://www.ruckuswireless.com/press/releases/20130610-ruckus-adds-zoneflex-7781cm-access-point-to-its-portfolio

$5k MSRP. Even at half that...ouch!


On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 8:37 AM, Gino Villarini  wrote:

>  Anyideas on the cost? It would be a great addition to any aerial fiber
> built out
>
>
>
> Gino A. Villarini
>
> g...@aeronetpr.com
>
> Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
>
> 787.273.4143
>
> *From:* wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Zach Mann
> *Sent:* Friday, November 15, 2013 10:30 AM
> *To:* WISPA General List
> *Subject:* Re: [WISPA] Comcast asking FCC for more 5GHz spectrum.
>
>
>
> It's not just Comcast, TW, Cox are also taking advantage of the simplicity
> of the newer 7781-CM Access Point.   They are offering free wifi to
> existing clients for retention.  Down the road cellular offloading
> 802.11u
>
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Matt Hoppes 
> wrote:
>
> That's one way to avoid pole attachment fees! LOL.
>
> What is Comcast trying to accomplish with these?
>
>
> Matt Hoppes
> Director of Information Technology
> Indigo Wireless
> +1 (570) 723-7312
>
>
> On 11/15/13, 9:26 AM, Zach Mann wrote:
> > He's talking about these... (see attached)
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 8:01 AM, Scott Carullo
>
> > mailto:sc...@brevardwireless.com>> wrote:
> >
> > I'm not talking about the ones in peoples homes, I'm talking about
> > the ones the cable carrier hangs on the lines outside runing through
> > the city on every corner  clear LOS to every tower around.
> >
> > Scott Carullo
> > Technical Operations
> > 855-FLSPEED x102
> >
> >
> >
>
> >
> 
> > *From*: "Brian Webster"  > >
> > *Sent*: Friday, November 15, 2013 8:24 AM
> > *To*: "WISPA General List"  > >
> > *Subject*: Re: [WISPA] Comcast asking FCC for more 5GHz spectrum.
>
> >
> > One good thing about the higher bands and the noise floor is that
> > free space loss works to your advantage. That being that a 5 GHz
> > indoor Omni home AP router signal will fall off as an interference
> > source as a much shorter distance than a 2.4 GHz device will. The
> > laws of physics work in your favor.
> >
> > Thank You,
> >
> > Brian Webster
> >
>
> > www.wirelessmapping.com 
> >
> > www.Broadband-Mapping.com 
> >
> > *From:*wireless-boun...@wispa.org
> > 
> > [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org
> > ] *On Behalf Of *Scott Carullo
> > *Sent:* Thursday, November 14, 2013 6:52 PM
> > *To:* Matt Hoppes; sc...@brevardwireless.com
> > ; WISPA General List
> > *Subject:* Re: [WISPA] Comcast asking FCC for more 5GHz spectrum.
>
> >
> > Hard to tell, noise floor is noise floor which keeps creeping up -
> > we all know things work better when its quiet.  This used to worry
> > me a lot when I saw it coming, but then I realized it was already
> > there and I had no idea until I just happened to scan on some radios
> > (I don't usually install the stuff).  I'm not worried any more, if
> > its not one thing it will be another any way.  Thats what gives us
> > the edge every day, flexibility.  We will work around it, we always
> do.
> >
> > I figure a high gain antenna on a tower with a good directional CPE
> > will continue to work fine.  Their omni low gain antenna can't
> > compete with a 20-30db directional one.  Still sucks though, you
> > drive down the street and see one after another running 5Ghz just
> > knowing there probably isn't 3 connections in the whole city to
> them
> >
> > Scott Carullo
> > Technical Operations
> > 855-FLSPEED x102
> >
>
> >
> 
> >
> > *From*: "Matt Hoppes"  > >
> > *Sent*: Thursday, November 14, 2013 6:43 PM
> > *To*: "sc...@brevardwireless.com "
> > mailto:sc...@brevardwireless.com>>,
> > "WISPA General List" mailto:wireless@wispa.org
> >>
> > *Cc*: "WISPA General List"  > >
> > *Subject*: Re: [WISPA] Comcast asking FCC for more 5GHz spectrum.
>
> >
> > Are you seeing any impact from them?
> >
> >
> > On Nov 14, 2013, at 18:03, "Scott Carullo"
>
> > mailto:sc...@brevardwireless.com>>
> wrote:
> >
> > Yeah, won't matter either way with a 5Ghz AP on every street
> > corner.  Already seeing that in ou

Re: [WISPA] packaging suggestions

[John Thomas]

Also, if your billing systems allow for it, you probably want 3 tiers, minimal 
users, average users, and streaming users.

John

Joe Fiero  wrote:
>Joe, 
>
> 
>
>I too built up on an open usage platform and yes, when the subscribers
>logged into their PowerCode portals and viewed usage charts I got
>plenty of
>calls.  We have not yet implemented metered billing because the pipe is
>still not capable of delivery, but soon.
>
> 
>
>What I told the concerned callers was pretty much what I explained
>previously, that a small percentage of subscribers are utilizing the
>majority of the system’s resources and that it was effecting  everyone.
> I
>went on to explain how the goal was to charge those that use more
>services
>for their usage, and assure resources remain available for low volume
>users.
>I also add that based on FCC regulations I can not restrict any
>specific
>type of traffic, so this is the only fair way to assure everyone gets
>what
>they want.  
>
> 
>
>I tell them that our pricing model will not change cost to about 80% of
>our
>subscribers, and the other 20% will see increases based on actual
>usage.
>Many are fearful because they see the abusive rates charged by cellular
>carriers for small packages and immediately thing we are going to start
>hammering them for $150 per month.  Like much of what I have read here,
>I
>too am looking at about 30-50 GB of transfer as a base with a small per
>GB
>cost.  
>
> 
>
>The real value to the upgrade for me will be once we demonstrate we can
>deliver a solid stream that people that are trying to pull multiple
>streams
>will have the option to doing so by upgrading to a higher bandwidth
>package.
>And that is the point I was making before, that the amount of transfer
>has
>little to do with the pipe size, but that size does impact the
>subscriber’s
>ability to have concurrent streams.
>
> 
>
>So we are really focusing on three things; first, we are separating the
>basic and power subscribers, then we are offering those power
>subscribers
>the option to get whatever they want, providing they are paying for it.
>Sure a few will be pissed because they have this entitlement to
>unlimited
>service.  Tell them you will start the day the power and gas company
>remove
>their meters.
>
> 
>
>In the long run, the decisions made will provide maximum benefit to all
>subscribers.  Perhaps we will see a few that refuse to pay and leave,
>but we
>will increase significantly as word gets out about our new
>capabilities.
>Remember, all those smart televisions need a pipe to connect to these
>streaming services.  And that is the simplest answer, your changes in
>billing are to accommodate a market that did not exist when you
>deployed.
>When you and I put our systems in place Netflix was not streaming.  So
>we
>absolutely must accommodate these new high demand users, while
>acknowledging
>the long time basic users.  Just remember that many of them will move
>to the
>other side over the next few years and be very glad you were able to
>accommodate their new requirements.
>
> 
>
>Joe
>
> 
>
> 
>
> 
>
> 
>
>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>Behalf Of Joe Miller
>Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 11:18 AM
>To: 'WISPA General List'
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] packaging suggestions
>
> 
>
>Joe,
>
> 
>
>I do agree that usage based billing is the way to go. However, when our
>system was originally built 10 years ago, it was done so on the
>“unlimited”
>platform. The customers that we have I believe will respond in a
>negative
>way to the change. So how can we migrate a unlimited system to a UBB
>system
>without for a better word, piss off the existing customer base. I have
>thought about this for quite some time and the billing system I have in
>place can handle running both at the same time. What would be a good
>price
>point per gig of bandwidth? From looking at the current customer usage
>I
>think using $1.00 per gig would be a good starting point for
>discussion.
>Some customers will see a reduction in monthly cost while most will see
>an
>increase in their monthly service. I can see how we can re coup the
>cost of
>bandwidth a lot easier.
>
> 
>
>I would like to come up with an email  for my customers to ask them
>what
>they think in regards to having virtually as much bandwidth as they can
>use
>in exchange for billing for that usage. Basically, caped speed with
>flat
>rate vs uncapped speed with metered rate.
>
> 
>
>I’m looking at expanding into a new area and using the UBB platform
>will be
>a lot easier to start out with, but changing out the current customer
>base
>to UBB will be a bigger pill to swallow. 
>
> 
>
>I think that this is a good discussion for a session in Vegas.
>
> 
>
>We have hundreds of companies that are members of WISPA, and I think
>with
>enough minds on this that we can come up with a good solution for
>everyone.
>
> 
>
>Regards,
>
> 
>
>Joe Miller
>
>www.dslbyair.com
>
>www.facebook.com/dslbyair
>
>228-831-8881
>
>

Re: [WISPA] packaging suggestions

[John Thomas]

Joe, for 1 reason, you have the fact that others are already doing it. My AT&T 
6 meg / 768 k circuit started out at unmetered for $19.99 per month. Then it 
went to 29.99 per month. Then came the 150 gig cap and $ 10 per each additional 
50 gigs, then the base rate went to $34.95, and with my overages (Netflix) I 
ended up paying $55 per month. I started shopping, and Charter cable does the 
same cap, but no overage, they reserve the right to up your tier or cancel your 
service. I ended up going Charter small business with 20 meg down and 3 meg up 
advertised, and 5 static IPs with no caps for $ 99.00 per month.

Are your clients going to push back? Yes, some of them will. Are some of them 
going to cancel service? Same answer.You just need to figure out the best way 
to get from here to there.

 John

Joe Miller  wrote:
>Joe,
>
> 
>
>I do agree that usage based billing is the way to go. However, when our
>system was originally built 10 years ago, it was done so on the
>“unlimited”
>platform. The customers that we have I believe will respond in a
>negative
>way to the change. So how can we migrate a unlimited system to a UBB
>system
>without for a better word, piss off the existing customer base. I have
>thought about this for quite some time and the billing system I have in
>place can handle running both at the same time. What would be a good
>price
>point per gig of bandwidth? From looking at the current customer usage
>I
>think using $1.00 per gig would be a good starting point for
>discussion.
>Some customers will see a reduction in monthly cost while most will see
>an
>increase in their monthly service. I can see how we can re coup the
>cost of
>bandwidth a lot easier.
>
> 
>
>I would like to come up with an email  for my customers to ask them
>what
>they think in regards to having virtually as much bandwidth as they can
>use
>in exchange for billing for that usage. Basically, caped speed with
>flat
>rate vs uncapped speed with metered rate.
>
> 
>
>I’m looking at expanding into a new area and using the UBB platform
>will be
>a lot easier to start out with, but changing out the current customer
>base
>to UBB will be a bigger pill to swallow. 
>
> 
>
>I think that this is a good discussion for a session in Vegas.
>
> 
>
>We have hundreds of companies that are members of WISPA, and I think
>with
>enough minds on this that we can come up with a good solution for
>everyone.
>
> 
>
>Regards,
>
> 
>
>Joe Miller
>
>www.dslbyair.com
>
>www.facebook.com/dslbyair
>
>228-831-8881
>
> 
>
>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>Behalf Of Joe Fiero
>Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 9:17 AM
>To: 'WISPA General List'
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] packaging suggestions
>
> 
>
>I believe Fred to be correct.  Packages based on speed are not the
>answer.
>We call our connection a “pipe”, so let’s use a related analogy;
>
> 
>
>You can have two homes with water service.  One is an older home that
>has a
>½ inch water main, the other is new construction and has a 1 inch
>service
>main.  
>
> 
>
>House number 1 has the original fixtures, so the toilet uses 6 gallons
>per
>flush, the shower flow is 7 gallons per minute and the clothes washer
>uses
>40-55 gallons per load.
>
> 
>
>House number two, being built under new codes that promote conservation
>has
>a low flow toilet that will use 1.6 – 2 gallons per flush, a low flow
>shower
>head that restricts flow to 2.5 gallons per minute and a new clothes
>washer
>that uses 20 gallons per load.
>
> 
>
>With a family of 5 in each house, it’s easy to see that , despite the
>smaller service pipe, that house number 1 will have many times the
>water
>usage as house number 2.  A smaller pipe did nothing to control the
>flow
>because the flow limit of the pipe was not reached.  
>
> 
>
>Those two pipes are exactly like a 3 meg and 5 meg Internet connection.
>Within reason, the size of the pipe will do little to limit heavy
>bandwidth
>usage.  It only serves to spread it out, creating a longer period of
>time
>that it puts a demand on our networks.
>
> 
>
>Like most,  we saw our network performance begin to deteriorate as
>Netflix
>switched from a physical to a digital delivery system.  The others
>since
>then have continued to slow our once speedy connections.  Now we, as an
>industry, are faced with a continued rebuild to meet a voracious demand
>for
>bandwidth to deliver content that we never intended, or anticipated. 
>Worse
>yet, we are being positioned to provide these improvements to support
>the
>business model of companies that barely acknowledge our existence.
>
> 
>
>And they are getting smarter in their use of our pipes.  There was a
>time
>when if you didn’t have a good 4.5 meg flow, Netflix would not stream. 
>They
>have gone to much more advanced encoding that will adjust to feeds of
>less
>than 2 megs, rendering a 3 meg rate limit useless in defending against
>them.
>
> 
>
>The issue of Net Neutrality somehow became synonymous with no caps. 

Re: [WISPA] 802.11 and roaming

[John Thomas]

It sounds like you didn't try Cisco CAPWAP controller based APs. You have very 
fine control of how they roam.

John

Blair Davis  wrote:
>I've tried MikroTik.
>
>I've tried Cisco.
>
>I've tried UniFi.
>
>I pretty much don't think there is a working way to roam from AP to AP
>with 802.11 in an open system.
>
>The client holds on to the weak AP long after there are stronger AP's
>to talk to.
>
>I think this is just the way it works.
>
>Now, we are giving each AP a unique ESSID but keeping them bridged on
>the wired side and requiring the user to change the connection when out
>of range...
>
>Not the best answer, but it works much better for the clients who don't
>move much...  I'd love a better answer...
>
>-- West Michigan Wireless ISP Allegan, Michigan 49010 269-686-8648 A
>Division of: Camp Communication Services, INC 
>
>
>
>___
>Wireless mailing list
>Wireless@wispa.org
>http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

-- 
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] ConnectEd

[John Thomas]

Unfortunately, pricing is all over the board, and there are schools that are 
buying 100 meg circuits. In CA Comcast territory, they offer 100 meg by 10 ( or 
20 ) for about $399 per month. Now, we all know that Comcast cherry picks where 
they provide service, so there are those that are a block away from Comcast 
facilities that have been quoted $10,000 or more to get connected.

In Oakland CA, there is a wireless provider that is doing 25 meg / 25 meg at 
$375 per month. In San Francisco Monkey brains is doing something similar.

John

Kevin Owen  wrote:
>It will be an interesting discussion for sure.  We currently have
>service built to many schools, most with the capacity to provide 100 +
>megs.  Most schools are purchasing somewhere in the 5 – 20meg range as
>that is what they can afford, including their current subsidy from
>E-Rate.  We are providing service to rural schools and they just can’t
>afford more.  Not sure how the FCC feels these schools will be able to
>afford 100+ meg connections and beyond that, where does the money come
>from to continue to fund E-Rate with what are sure to be large
>increased demands on the funding to support these larger pipes.
>
>Kevin
>
>
>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>Behalf Of Mike Hammett
>Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2013 12:35 PM
>To: WISPA General List
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] ConnectEd
>
>I think so. I asked the same question a few weeks ago and the response
>was something to the effect of, "Is this something WISPA members want
>to respond to?" The response seemed to be a resounding yes.
>
>Now I just hope that it's something that we can get a piece of vs.
>telling them to not do it.
>
>
>-
>Mike Hammett
>Intelligent Computing Solutions
>http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>From: "Kevin Owen" mailto:ko...@fsr.com>>
>To: "WISPA General List"
>mailto:wireless@wispa.org>>
>Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2013 1:42:13 PM
>Subject: [WISPA] ConnectEd
>Do we know if WISPA as an organization is currently reviewing or plans
>to review/make comments to the NPRM for the revisions to the E-Rate
>program.  Is WISPA following the discussions concerning the Federal
>ConnectED program that wants to see a minimum connection standard to
>all schools and libraries of 100 megs with a 5 year goal of having
>access to 1 gig of available bandwidth for all schools and libraries?
>
>thanks,
>
>Kevin Owen
>First Step Internet, LLC
>
>___
>Wireless mailing list
>Wireless@wispa.org
>http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
>
>
>
>
>___
>Wireless mailing list
>Wireless@wispa.org
>http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

-- 
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] Goodbye to Whitespace for WISP's uses?

[John Thomas]

What is really sad is that they could license lite, for a couple hundred 
dollars a year, spectrum to several thousand wisps and end up with the same $ 
as selling it to the big boys that would just end up camping on it.

John

Doug Clark  wrote:

>Sorry John, this should have been directed @ Tim.  
> 
> 
> 
> 
>---Original Message---
> 
>From: Doug Clark
>Date: 9/29/2012 7:43:43 AM
>To: j...@mvn.net;  WISPA General List
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] Goodbye to Whitespace for WISP's uses?
> 
>John, What delusional world are you living in to think that our
>government
>ever had the publics best interest at heart?  I wished it was so, but
>the
>reality is simply
>that the government will go down the road making mistake after mistake
>and
>giving in to Large Corporations that support them personally
>financially.
>What is best for the American public is "Z" on the list of almost every
>member that is in a position to shape the future and especially last on
>the
>list for this
>administration!  We will be lucky to have a couple of frequencies with
>heavy
>handed rules in place to use them.. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>---Original Message---
> 
>From: John Scrivner
>Date: 9/28/2012 8:14:44 PM
>To: WISPA General List
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] Goodbye to Whitespace for WISP's uses?
> 
>The auctioning of SOME of the TVWS was set in stone by the FCC
>broadband
>plan and I by legislative mandate. There was a push by House
>Republicans to
>sell off ALL the TVWS to the highest bidders, leaving ZERO for
>unlicensed
>use. The Democratic controlled Senate prevailed and held strong to
>allowing
>a mix of incentive auctioned and unlicensed use of the TVWS. Having
>some
>beats having none.  
>Scriv
>
>
> 
>On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Tim Reichhart 
>wrote:
>
>Hey Guys
>I just seen this article and I just wanted to pass it along:
>http://news
>cnet
>com/8301-13578_3-57522584-38/fcc-kicks-off-effort-to-reclaim-tv-spectrum-for-
>ireless/
> 
>Wanted to get your thoughts?
> 
>My thoughts is that all mobile carriers will buy all the whitespaces
>before
>we “WISP’s” even get to get play in the whitespaces.
> 
>Tim
>
>___
>Wireless mailing list
>Wireless@wispa.org
>http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>___
>Wireless mailing list
>Wireless@wispa.org
>http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> 
>
>
>
>___
>Wireless mailing list
>Wireless@wispa.org
>http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

-- 
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] Cogent?

[John Thomas]

That statement alone sys a lot. We have a client with an MPLS network at 
Megapath- they don't do BGP. :-(

Bret Clark  wrote:

>No problems and their 1st level tech support actually have a clue about
>
>BGP.
>
>On 09/24/2012 06:46 PM, Victoria Proffer wrote:
>> Love them~
>>
>> Victoria Proffer
>> President/CEO
>> 314-974-5600
>> St. Louis Broadband, LLC
>> www. StLouisBroadband.com
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
>On
>> Behalf Of Adam Greene
>> Sent: Monday, September 24, 2012 4:32 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: [WISPA] Cogent?
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Cogent approached us recently, trying to sell us a 100M/100M Internet
>pipe.
>> Anyone using them for upstream? Has your experience been generally
>positive
>> or negative?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Adam
>> ___
>> Wireless mailing list
>> Wireless@wispa.org
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> ___
>> Wireless mailing list
>> Wireless@wispa.org
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
>___
>Wireless mailing list
>Wireless@wispa.org
>http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

-- 
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] Can they really do this?

[John Thomas]

Ciscos wireless LAN controllers can do this. From the web page at

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps6366/products_qanda_item09186a008064a991.shtml

Q. What is a Rogue AP? Can the rogue APs in my wireless network be 
automatically blocked?

A. APs that are not part of your wireless deployment are called rogue APs. It 
can be either an autonomous AP or Lightweight AP that happens to be in the 
range of authorized APs. Rogue APs cannot be automatically blocked. This must 
be done manually. The reason for this is that, when a rogue AP is found, the 
finding AP disassociates the clients of the rogue AP, which causes denial of 
service to the clients. This can cause legal issues if the AP of the neighbor 
is detected as a rogue, and its clients are denied service. For more 
information on how rogue APs are detected by the WLC, refer to the document 
Rogue Detection under Unified Wireless Networks.

Greg Ihnen  wrote:

>There's a current debate raging right now on the NANOG list about the
>ins
>and outs of setting up large temporary networks for things like
>conventions.
>
>This one post caught my attention. Has anyone heard of a WiFi AP that
>will
>spoof neighboring networks to intentionally interfere with them, not by
>occupying/jamming the spectrum in a brute force way, but rather by
>impersonating the other network and rejecting new associations?
>
>The quote:
>
>> One of which I forgot to mention. Many of the hotels (I believe all
>> Hilton properties at this time) have sold the facilities space for
>their
>> wifi network to another company. They CAN'T negotiate it with you,
>> because they don't own it any more. And most of these wifi networks
>have
>> stealth killers enabled, so that they spoof any other wifi zone they
>see
>> and send back reject messages to the clients. So you can't run them
>side
>> by side.
>
>Greg
>
>
>
>
>___
>Wireless mailing list
>Wireless@wispa.org
>http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

-- 
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

[WISPA] Internet Censorship

[John Thomas]

What is everyone's take on this?
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/technology/2011/11/sopa-internet-piracy-bill-criticized-as-internet-censorship/



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Fwd: Choosing core router for small - medium WISP

[John Thomas]

Roman, for the things you are talking about, Ciscos are not necessarily 
stupid expensive.
We typically are installing Cisco 881 series routers on Cable modem 
Internet connections that run at 87 meg down and 20 meg up, and they 
rarely push more than a few % CPU. 880 series routers can be had for in 
the $450 - 700 range. Up a notch to the 891 series that is around $1000 
and the 1900 series in the 1200-1500 dollar range. The 1900s are 
necessary if you are into T-1's. The smartnets on these run from around 
$100 per year into about $200 per year.



John

On 7/7/2011 1:31 PM, Roman wrote:


Great thanks for all who participated in discussion! This community is 
very good place to ask question and get opinions from experienced 
wireless professionals.



Opinions vary, though. And as the way to thank community and to 
provoke additional discussion I would like to summarize all the inputs 
from community members. Hope to get unbiased view of core routers 
market as it is today.



Feel free to criticize it if you want! We can make it even better with 
help of WISP community!



Market segment



Econom



Middle



Top

Market players



Mikrotik



Imagestream



Vyatta



Juniper SRX



Cisco

Performance and price



20 Mbps – 219$ (RB750G)

2 GE – 1219$ (Power router 732)





Up to 8x1GE



300 Mbps – 1500$

Up to 8x1GE



Features



Proprietary OS



Open source, Linux-based

Quagga as dynamic routing package



High end of open source routers



Cisco competitor,

Junos



IOS – stable and proven

Advantages











Disadvantages



Up to 2x10GE (
Powerouter 732?)



OSPF issues







Use cases



Startups



Startups





Large enterprises with certified engineers



Large enterprises with certified engineers

Technical support



Free forum or Fee-based from Mikrotik consultants



Free software upgrades for life, 1 year of free support



You can purchase service contract



Many paid options



Many paid options

Try before buy



http://demo2.mt.lv/










-- Forwarded message --
From: *Roman* mailto:consulttele...@gmail.com>>
Date: Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 12:00 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Choosing core router for small - medium WISP
To: wireless@wispa.org 


What I would like to get at this stage is not actual configuration for 
one-time project. I need some "rule-of-thumb" in order to apply it for 
all of my projects to get budget calculation.
For example, for projects with not more than 200 subscribers and 10 
Mbps backhaul you advise to use configuration "Small". Then, for 
projects with up to 1000 subscribers and 100 Mbps backhaul, you advise 
to use configuration "Medium". For every type of configuration I would 
like to know its technical characteristics and price.


Thank you in advance!





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

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

[John Thomas]

Rick, what price are you offering 10 megs at? In our neck of the woods 
Towerstream is doing 8 meg at $800 per month.


John

On 4/5/2011 9:23 PM, RickG wrote:
Thats what I thought which is why I spent so much time and money on 
upgrading. I've got 30-50 megs at nearly every tower and I started 
offering 10Mbps posted rates. I even lowered the upgrade prices above 
3Mbps. Very few care and even fewer take it. In fact, I have some that 
ask if we have a slower plan! I'm starting to be concerned that 
dial-up is good enough!


On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 12:15 AM, Jerry Richardson 
mailto:jrichard...@aircloud.com>> wrote:


For now.  I doubt that you will be able to sustain that 90% with
1.5 or 3.0 indefinitely. I know we won't.

- Jerry

*From:*wireless-boun...@wispa.org

[mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org
] *On Behalf Of *RickG
*Sent:* Tuesday, April 05, 2011 9:08 PM

*To:* WISPA General List
*Subject:* Re: [WISPA] Verizon 4G LTE - WOW - update

+100%! I've upgraded my network to the point that I cant anymore
but 90% of the customers are fine with 1.5 or 3Mbps!

On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Travis Johnson mailto:t...@ida.net>> wrote:

The other question is how much do you pay for the service? It all
comes
down to price.

I can deliver 10Mbps x 10Mbps up to 300Mbps x 300Mbps to anyone that
wants it... however, most people don't want to pay for it... ;)

Travis
Microserv



On 4/5/2011 5:37 AM, Charles Wu wrote:
> It's generally known that the 20 Mb "burst" given by cable
companies is throttled to sustained download speeds in the 1-3 Mb
range
>
> That said, the point I'm trying to make is that the technology
has come so far for mobile cellular data that we are now
"unconsciously" comparing it side-by-side to fixed terrestrial
broadband technologies (think of it this way, how many WISPs can
deliver "up-to" speeds of 8-10 Mb to a low power handset in the
middle of a concrete building 3+ miles away from a tower)
>
> -Charles
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org

[mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org
] On Behalf Of St. Louis Broadband
> Sent: Monday, April 04, 2011 9:33 PM
> To: 'WISPA General List'
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Verizon 4G LTE - WOW - update
>
> I just checked my Charter via Ookla and it said I was getting 20
Mbps down
> and 1 Mbps up, horse pucky.
> I only get that in speedtests and never when I have to upload or
download a
> big file via FTP or whatever.
> It generally gets throttled to dial up speeds or worse.
>
> ~V~
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org

[mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org
] On
> Behalf Of Charles Wu
> Sent: Monday, April 04, 2011 9:21 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Verizon 4G LTE - WOW - update
>
> Sitting in my living room at 8 pm3 bars, laptop connected to
wireless
> router on phone
>
> http://www.speedtest.net/result/1236758959.png
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org

[mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org
] On
> Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
> Sent: Monday, April 04, 2011 6:39 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Verizon 4G LTE - WOW
>
> Yeah, its nice when a product is brand new, and you get the
whole sector all
>
> to yourself.
>
> I guess, its amazing that you are getting the speed to a
handset, without
> the big antenna outside.
>
> Tom DeReggi
> RapidDSL&  Wireless, Inc
> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Charles Wu"mailto:c...@cticonnect.com>>
> To:mailto:paolo.difrance...@level7.it>>; "WISPA
GeneralList"mailto:wireless@wispa.org>>
> Sent: Sunday, April 03, 2011 8:31 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Verizon 4G LTE - WOW
>
>
>> It is my understanding that Verizon is deploying an FDD version
of LTE
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org

[mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org
] On
>> Behalf Of Paolo Di Francesco
>> Sent: Sunday, April 03, 2011 11:09 AM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Verizon 4G LTE - WOW
>>
>> most of the test are "half duplex" tests. In few words, they do one
>> direction, then the other direction (e.g. first the customer
download,
>> then the customer upload).

[WISPA] Marketing ( was Re: Verizon 4G LTE - WOW - update)

[John Thomas]

Smart marketing goes a long way. I know of a company that was basically 
getting a 3 x T-1 pushed its way because AT&T wanted to sell it to them. 
Wow, for only $700 per month you can have 4.5 Megabits per second. We 
told them go ask about Fiber. By going through a reseller, they were 
able to get AT&T to install a 10 meg x 10 meg fiber connection for $973 
per month. Of course the equipment is 100 meg port and they are actually 
getting about 20 + meg both directions, and are VERY happy with this 
arrangement. Of course if The TW Telecom rep had actually wanted to sell 
the product, they could have had 100 meg over fiber to their site for 
about $1400 per month. The fiber is literally in the street outside 
their building, but the TW Telecom guy didn't want to sell it.


A fellow Network Engineer has 1.5 meg / 384 k ADSL to his house. 
According to AT&T's website, for $45 he can get 6 meg / 768 k + 5 static 
IP addresses for $45 per month.  After having AT&T *hang up* on him 3 
times, hes has decided to drop AT&T and look at other alternatives.


John


On 4/5/2011 9:19 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:

You can always upgrade More!

The key central question is ... how to 'Capitalize' on it  and make 
some Money.


There are always two ways the Market move .. Either PUSH (try to sell 
your excess capacity on the network , making it attractive , lower the 
selling price, while increasing margins ... or Packaging your products 
differently for a different Target Market).


or PULL .. where the customers are knocking on your doors to demand more.

So.. here is bit of Challenge for All of US, including Rick & Travis

If we have the capacity to deliver the high bandwidth to our 
customers.. and in our market place the Phone Company is still selling 
T1' s and Metro Ethernet's  like hot cakes.. then there is only one 
possible conclusion .


We need to Review our products / pricing / packaging strategy... since 
we are leaving a LOT on the Table..


now, if you tell me that in your / our market place.. the Telco's are 
hurting in business because folks are lining up purchase your / our 
circuits.. .then and only then I can say you are starting to 
'saturate' your territory.. time to expand and break new ground.


Some Food For Thought..

Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet&  Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, Fl 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232
Helpdesk: 305 663 5518 option 2 Email:supp...@snappydsl.net

On 4/6/2011 12:08 AM, RickG wrote:
+100%! I've upgraded my network to the point that I cant anymore but 
90% of the customers are fine with 1.5 or 3Mbps!


On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Travis Johnson > wrote:


The other question is how much do you pay for the service? It all
comes
down to price.

I can deliver 10Mbps x 10Mbps up to 300Mbps x 300Mbps to anyone that
wants it... however, most people don't want to pay for it... ;)

Travis
Microserv


On 4/5/2011 5:37 AM, Charles Wu wrote:
> It's generally known that the 20 Mb "burst" given by cable
companies is throttled to sustained download speeds in the 1-3 Mb
range
>
> That said, the point I'm trying to make is that the technology
has come so far for mobile cellular data that we are now
"unconsciously" comparing it side-by-side to fixed terrestrial
broadband technologies (think of it this way, how many WISPs can
deliver "up-to" speeds of 8-10 Mb to a low power handset in the
middle of a concrete building 3+ miles away from a tower)
>
> -Charles
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org

[mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org
] On Behalf Of St. Louis Broadband
> Sent: Monday, April 04, 2011 9:33 PM
> To: 'WISPA General List'
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Verizon 4G LTE - WOW - update
>
> I just checked my Charter via Ookla and it said I was getting
20 Mbps down
> and 1 Mbps up, horse pucky.
> I only get that in speedtests and never when I have to upload
or download a
> big file via FTP or whatever.
> It generally gets throttled to dial up speeds or worse.
>
> ~V~
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org

[mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org
] On
> Behalf Of Charles Wu
> Sent: Monday, April 04, 2011 9:21 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Verizon 4G LTE - WOW - update
>
> Sitting in my living room at 8 pm3 bars, laptop connected
to wireless
> router on phone
>
> http://www.speedtest.net/result/1236758959.png
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org

[mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org
] On
> Behalf Of Tom DeReggi

Re: [WISPA] 5.2 or 5.4 Short Hops

[John Thomas]

Cisco 1200 series are FCC certified for DFS bands.

We have a pair of 1250's doing a .3 mile link at 135 Megabits/sec. 
Throughput at about 9.5 Megabytes per second on a file copy. Yes, they 
are more expensive at about $650 each (CDW), but they work. If you don't 
need 802.11n, then the 1242's will do 802.11a at about $475 each. You do 
have to mount them in NEMA boxes.


John

On 1/20/2011 2:00 PM, Jerry Richardson wrote:
> If you want DFS2 legal the only thing I am aware of is moto
>
> Anything (old) DFS that is not already in the air is not legal to hang.
>
> There is a slough full of stuff that is pending DFS2 certification including 
> ubiquity.
>
> Mikrotik is not DFS2.
>
> Jerry Richardson
> Sent Mobile
>
> On Jan 20, 2011, at 1:40 PM, "Matt"  wrote:
>
>> Looking for some gear to do 4 short hops under a mile and not interfer
>> with existing 2.4 or 5.7 gear.  Was thinking of the 5.2 or 5.4 band
>> gear.  Whats out there that wont break the bank and is FCC compliant
>> in that band?  Leaning towards canopy but would like more bandwidth
>> and a lower price.
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Email Accounts

[John Thomas]

On 12/15/2010 12:08 PM, Glenn Kelley wrote:

I have found vmware to be a nightmare in many instances.


>> That is a pretty bold statement, can you describe an instance where 
it was a nightmare?



In others I absolutely love it.

Check out the opensource project called ProxMox.

It allows you to run containers as well as KVM instances - and has 
tons and tons of template machines (including the ability to use any 
VMWare one.

http://proxmox.org/products/proxmox-ve

We have tons of templates from Cacti, WHMCS, cPanel, Zimbra, PRoxMox 
AntiSpam and others - well worth the testing




On Dec 15, 2010, at 3:00 PM, Andy Trimmell wrote:

Great thing about ESXi is that its footprint is so small. It uses 
like 300k of memory and you can run it from a USB thumbdrive and all 
the storage is simply virtual machines.

EUREKA!
*From:*wireless-boun...@wispa.org 
[mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]*on 
Behalf Of*Josh Luthman

*Sent:*Wednesday, December 15, 2010 2:55 PM
*To:*WISPA General List
*Subject:*Re: [WISPA] Email Accounts

That's for premier.  You want partner, like an ISP.  Someone said 
like a dollar forty?


On Dec 15, 2010 1:29 PM, "Cameron Crum" > wrote:
> On the Gmail...how cheap is cheap? They just quoted us $50 per user 
per year
> (that's over $4/month per user JUST for email). That's pretty 
pricey to me.
> People complain about the price of our software which does a ton of 
stuff at

> less than $1/month/sub.
>
> Cameron
>
> On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 12:07 PM, Matt > wrote:

>
>> > Great stuff...can't say enough good about VMware and their 
support. Dell

>> > support has been fantastic too.
>>
>> I think Redhat uses KVM?
>>
>>http://www.redhat.com/virtualization/rhev/server/
>>
>> Imagine it will work its way into CentOS soon. How does it compare to
>> VMware?
>>
>>
>>
>> 


>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>http://signup.wispa.org/
>>
>> 


>>
>> WISPA Wireless List:wireless@wispa.org 
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives:http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


WISPA Wireless List:wireless@wispa.org 

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

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


_
*Glenn Kelley | Principal | HostMedic |www.HostMedic.com *
Email: gl...@hostmedic.com 
Pplease don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Problems with facebook and hotmail

[John Thomas]

Have you looked at MTUs on the client PCs?

If they have Windows PCs, download TCP Optimizer and set the MTU down to 
1472 or less.
A lot of ADSL circuits use PPPoE and it adds overhead. By dropping the 
MTU to allow for the PPPoE overhead, things will start working. IF 
testing show that this makes a difference, you may need to adjust the 
MTU or MSS size in your edge router to 1472 or smaller.

John


On 12/2/2010 7:21 AM, Optimum Wireless Services wrote:
> Marlon.
>
> That's exactly how things are in our network. Speedtest look good but,
> once the client goes to Facebook and Hotmail things just don't work
> well.
>
> Any solution or suggestions?
>
>
> On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 11:22 -0800, Marlon K. Schafer wrote:
>> Oh yeah, we'd run speed tests and they'd look great.  Google would load
>> right up etc.  Reboot the router/radio and things would run fine for a
>> little bit.
>>
>> Then try to go to MSN, Myspace, facebook etc. and things would die.
>>
>> marlon
>>
>> - Original Message -
>> From: "Optimum Wireless Services"
>> To: "RickG"
>> Cc: "WISPA General List"
>> Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2010 10:34 AM
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Problems with facebook and hotmail
>>
>>
>>> I don't use Facebook much but, I had to lately in order to test the
>>> problem. Is actually a little slow from time to time. All other pages
>>> load fine. That's what I don't understand.
>>>
>>> I found this about facebook:
>>>
>>> http://www.5starsocialnetwork.com/facebook-connection-problems/
>>>
>>> http://support.momentoapp.com/discussions/problems/106-problem-with-facebook-connection
>>>
>>> http://www.facebook.com/KnownIssues/posts/171845609509593
>>>
>>> I'm puzzled at all this and is really "getting on my nerves". I have
>>> people complaining about it.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> On Thu, 2010-11-25 at 13:26 -0500, RickG wrote:
 Have you seen the actual problem for yourself? If so, does it do it at
 your core?

 On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 8:45 AM, Optimum Wireless Services
   wrote:
  Hello.

  Lately my customers have been experiencing problems accessing
  facebook
  and hotmail. They claim they can't access their email on
  hotmail after
  entering their credentials and can't see pictures and other
  people's
  profile on facebook. Don't know if is our network or what. We
  have 3
  5mbps/1mbps dsl lines that really give us 4.5/800. We have
  about 120
  customers and have complained so much about it that is already
  getting
  on me.

  Just wanted to know if any of you have experienced problems
  with these
  two websites.

  Thanks in advanced.



  
 
  WISPA Wants You! Join today!
  http://signup.wispa.org/
  
 

  WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



 -- 
 -RickG
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Covad Wireless

[John Thomas]

On 11/21/2010 5:48 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
> Has anyone worked with Covad Wireless before?
>
>
Yes, what do you want to know?

John



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Full BGP on RouterOS

[John Thomas]

You can *probably* do full tables on a pair of 1941's or 2900 Series 
Cisco's these days. With a pair of 1 U routers using VRRP or HSRP, you 
should be good to go.

John

On 11/2/2010 11:14 PM, Tom DeReggi wrote:
> Actually, answered own question... Saw picts on Google.
>
> Pretty sweet switch/router (12000 series), as long as its not sitting in an
> Equinix cage at $50/ 1U / month. Probably would costs $500-$700/mon to colo.
>
>
> Tom DeReggi
> RapidDSL&  Wireless, Inc
> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Travis Johnson"
> To: "WISPA General List"
> Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2010 11:37 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Full BGP on RouterOS
>
>
>> Tom,
>>
>> I agree that Linux works very well as a router, but it still doesn't
>> compare to a dedicated hardware platform (like Cisco) that was built
>> from the ground up to do nothing but routing. We purchased a used Cisco
>> 12008 router about 1.5 years ago off ebay. They are very, very cheap...
>> the only downside is they are BIG and require 240VAC. But it's way cool
>> to pull the CPU card while the router is moving 500Mbps of traffic and
>> have it not even miss a single ping (due to the redundant CPU card).
>> Same goes for the route fabric card. ;)
>>
>> We use Mikrotik for our inside "core" router and this big Cisco for our
>> border router to our BGP upstreams. I have slept very well for the last
>> 1.5 years knowing everything in the box is fully redundant (CPU, route,
>> power, etc.). :)
>>
>> Travis
>> Microserv
>>
>>
>> On 11/2/2010 9:04 PM, Tom DeReggi wrote:
>>> Note: Quagga has been very reliable for quite some time now. Imagestream
>>> and
>>> Vyatta both use Quagga. Both are great choices for BGP routers.
>>>
>>> I personally use Mandrake (Mandriva) Linux with a slew of custom
>>> modifications that we have made, loaded on SuperMicro, and then use
>>> latest
>>> Quagga.
>>> That has worked well for us, the last 5 years. (although, I dont
>>> recommend
>>> that to someone, until they are vastly familiar with their distro of
>>> Linux.
>>> Last thing you want to do is use your BGP router for a Guinee Pig Science
>>> project, rebooting it all the time to test script changes.) But once you
>>> are
>>> comfortable with your Distro, it works well.
>>>
>>> There are a million arguements "for" and "against" Cisco versus Linux, to
>>> be
>>> used for the ISPs' average NOC/POP router/switch. I dont dispute any of
>>> the
>>> arguements. But one area where I believe Linux stands tall, is as a CORE
>>> BGP
>>> router. A core BGP router can be one of the more simplistic configured
>>> routers because it only really needs to perform one function, BGP routing
>>> to
>>> its connected peers.  For BGP there are two critical needs Fast
>>> processors and Lots of RAM. In todays world there is no excuse to not
>>> have
>>> both of those.  The problem with Cisco is that it lacks both, unless you
>>> pay
>>> big bucks. Linux on the other hand has an abundance of both, when
>>> combined
>>> with PC-Like hardware.
>>>
>>>I laugh at my competitors, when they say, "oh no, BGP reset, had to
>>> reload
>>> BGP tables, now there is latency for like 3 minutes or compromised
>>> routing
>>> for that period" or "got a route problem, the small prefixes aren't in my
>>> tables". . On Linux, if you want to restart BGP, well thats like 1 second
>>> to
>>> reload tables. And no need to drop any routes, unless you want to. You
>>> could
>>> have Full routes with like 30 peers from a single router, if you wanted
>>> to.
>>> You can load up Linux with like 32 NICs (qty8 4port GIG NICs) in a 2U
>>> case,
>>> if you want to, and dont even need a Switch. (Although new will cost you
>>> about $430 per 4port PCI-E Gig NIC).
>>>
>>> Tom DeReggi
>>> RapidDSL&   Wireless, Inc
>>> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>>>
>>>
>>> - Original Message -
>>> From: "Kristian Hoffmann"
>>> To: "WISPA General List"
>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2010 8:37 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Full BGP on RouterOS
>>>
>>>
 On Tue, 2010-11-02 at 18:52 -0500, Scott Lambert wrote:

> I still need to try a Vyatta system.
 I loathe the idea of managing a *nix distro on a router (which is why we
 use RouterOS now).  Apparently I've had too much Tik-aid, because I had
 completely forgotten about Vyatta and similar options.

 I have a SuperMicro 5015A-H (Atom 330 dual-core) coming in tomorrow.
 I'm going to try RouterOS and Vyatta and see how BGP responds on each
 with a single feed.  If anyone else has an x86-based distro they'd like
 to see performance on, let me know.

 And thanks for all the responses.  The information has been very
 helpful.  Unfortunately, the conclusion I came to is "I have no idea
 what I'm going to do."  Cisco = $$$ and MikroTik = coin flip.  Hopefully
 Vyatta lands somewhere in the middle.

 Thanks,

 -Kristian



 --

[WISPA] Remote Controlled Drone

[John Thomas]

I have no idea if this would be on any use to anyone, but it seems like 
it might save a tower climb somewhere.

http://www.brookstone.com/ar-drone-quadricopter.html?bkiid=hmpg|hdr|652479p


You can remote control it with an iPhone and it has a camera.

John



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

[WISPA] Carrier pigeons faster then rural wierless?

[John Thomas]

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/networking/it-8217s-official-carrier-pigeons-are-faster-than-rural-internet/173?tag=nl.e539





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] XBOX live, NAT, and UPnP

[John Thomas]

Yes, I have heard of them. Time Warner (TW Telecom) is my upstream. We aren't 
paying for IP addresses, but we only have a /27 of addresses with them.



Robert West  wrote:

>ATT and Time Warner.  You may have heard of them.  :)
>
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>Behalf Of John Thomas
>Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2010 1:28 AM
>To: WISPA General List
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] XBOX live, NAT, and UPnP
>
>Robert, what upstream is charging $15 per month? If that is true, I have a
>portable /19 I am going to start renting..
>
>John
>
>Robert West  wrote:
>
>>Depends on if you have to pay for it.  Some upstreamproviders give them 
>>for free, others not.  Some WISPS pay for their own block.  Either way, 
>>as with everything in  business, if I have to pay 15 bucks for a static 
>>you better believe that cost is gonna be passed on.  That's a HUGE 
>>percentage of the cost of providing service to that customer.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>-Original Message-
>>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
>>Behalf Of Blake Covarrubias
>>Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 11:55 PM
>>To: WISPA General List
>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] XBOX live, NAT, and UPnP
>>
>>I wasn't aware so many WISPs charge for static and/or public IPs.
>>
>>We have a /19 and /21 IPv4 allocation, and a /32 v6 allocation. All 
>>customers get dynamic, possibly changing, public IPs. We charge for a 
>>consistent public IP.
>>
>>NAT causes too many potential headaches for us to even bother with it.
>>
>>--
>>Blake Covarrubias
>>
>>On Aug 2, 2010, at 7:31 PM, Jeremie Chism wrote:
>>
>>> True. Sounds like a bandwidth hog to me.
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> 
>>> On Aug 2, 2010, at 8:46 PM, "Mike"  wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Simple analysis might expose that customer to be one you'd rather let
>go.
>>>> Or not.
>>>> 
>>>> -Original Message-
>>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
>>>> On Behalf Of John Thomas
>>>> Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 6:27 PM
>>>> To: WISPA General List
>>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] XBOX live, NAT, and UPnP
>>>> 
>>>> And if I were your client, and you told me $10 for an IP address, I 
>>>> would find a new ISP. The most I have ever seen charged was $5 a month.
>>>> 
>>>> John
>>>> 
>>>> Kurt Fankhauser  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Everything i keep coming up with to make this work "ideal" 
>>>>> according to the
>>>> 
>>>>> customer is I"m gonna have to sell them a public ip for $10/month
>>>>> *grins* and then make sure their CPE is in bridge mode and assign 
>>>>> that static to
>>>> the
>>>>> customers router so they can enable UPnP themselves.
>>>>> 
>>>>> -Kurt Fankhauser
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> - Original Message -
>>>>> From: "Josh Luthman" 
>>>>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>>>>> Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 11:45 AM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] XBOX live, NAT, and UPnP
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Don't the majority of us NAT at the customer SM?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Adam Kennedy 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> I would agree that it is a security hole for an ISP. UPnP would 
>>>>>>> let me
>>>> do
>>>>>>> my own forwards for just about any port I want, including SSH, 
>>>>>>> telnet
>>>> and
>>>>>>> web. For that matter, I could just be selfish and port map every 
>>>>>>> port from 1024 through 65535 to my IP, completely killing access 
>>>>>>> to anyone else.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> In an ISP environment, the best option really is to disable UPnP 
&g

Re: [WISPA] XBOX live, NAT, and UPnP

[John Thomas]

Robert, what upstream is charging $15 per month? If that is true, I have a 
portable /19 I am going to start renting..

John

Robert West  wrote:

>Depends on if you have to pay for it.  Some upstreamproviders give them for
>free, others not.  Some WISPS pay for their own block.  Either way, as with
>everything in  business, if I have to pay 15 bucks for a static you better
>believe that cost is gonna be passed on.  That's a HUGE percentage of the
>cost of providing service to that customer.
>
>
>
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>Behalf Of Blake Covarrubias
>Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 11:55 PM
>To: WISPA General List
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] XBOX live, NAT, and UPnP
>
>I wasn't aware so many WISPs charge for static and/or public IPs.
>
>We have a /19 and /21 IPv4 allocation, and a /32 v6 allocation. All
>customers get dynamic, possibly changing, public IPs. We charge for a
>consistent public IP.
>
>NAT causes too many potential headaches for us to even bother with it.
>
>--
>Blake Covarrubias
>
>On Aug 2, 2010, at 7:31 PM, Jeremie Chism wrote:
>
>> True. Sounds like a bandwidth hog to me.
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>> On Aug 2, 2010, at 8:46 PM, "Mike"  wrote:
>> 
>>> Simple analysis might expose that customer to be one you'd rather let go.
>>> Or not.
>>> 
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] 
>>> On Behalf Of John Thomas
>>> Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 6:27 PM
>>> To: WISPA General List
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] XBOX live, NAT, and UPnP
>>> 
>>> And if I were your client, and you told me $10 for an IP address, I 
>>> would find a new ISP. The most I have ever seen charged was $5 a month.
>>> 
>>> John
>>> 
>>> Kurt Fankhauser  wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Everything i keep coming up with to make this work "ideal" according 
>>>> to the
>>> 
>>>> customer is I"m gonna have to sell them a public ip for $10/month 
>>>> *grins* and then make sure their CPE is in bridge mode and assign 
>>>> that static to
>>> the
>>>> customers router so they can enable UPnP themselves.
>>>> 
>>>> -Kurt Fankhauser
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> - Original Message -
>>>> From: "Josh Luthman" 
>>>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>>>> Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 11:45 AM
>>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] XBOX live, NAT, and UPnP
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> Don't the majority of us NAT at the customer SM?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Adam Kennedy 
>>>>> 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> I would agree that it is a security hole for an ISP. UPnP would 
>>>>>> let me
>>> do
>>>>>> my own forwards for just about any port I want, including SSH, 
>>>>>> telnet
>>> and
>>>>>> web. For that matter, I could just be selfish and port map every 
>>>>>> port from 1024 through 65535 to my IP, completely killing access 
>>>>>> to anyone else.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> In an ISP environment, the best option really is to disable UPnP 
>>>>>> if you are doing NAT.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Adam Kennedy
>>>>>> Network Engineer
>>>>>> Omnicity, Inc.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -Original Message-
>>>>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org 
>>>>>> [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
>>>>>> Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 10:43 AM
>>>>>> To: WISPA General List
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] XBOX live, NAT, and UPnP
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Man that sucks. We turn off upnp on ALL routers. I've always been 
>>>>>> told that it's a big security hole.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thoughts on that?
>>&

Re: [WISPA] XBOX live, NAT, and UPnP

[John Thomas]

Are you always that quick to jump to conclusions? I guess I am just spoiled 
living in CA and NV as all the ISPs I have ever known of assign IP addresses 
either free or $5 per month. 

Jeremie Chism  wrote:

>True. Sounds like a bandwidth hog to me.
>
>Sent from my iPhone
>
>On Aug 2, 2010, at 8:46 PM, "Mike"  wrote:
>
>> Simple analysis might expose that customer to be one you'd rather let go.
>> Or not.
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>> Behalf Of John Thomas
>> Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 6:27 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] XBOX live, NAT, and UPnP
>>
>> And if I were your client, and you told me $10 for an IP address, I would
>> find a new ISP. The most I have ever seen charged was $5 a month.
>>
>> John
>>
>> Kurt Fankhauser  wrote:
>>
>>> Everything i keep coming up with to make this work "ideal" according to the
>>
>>> customer is I"m gonna have to sell them a public ip for $10/month *grins*
>>> and then make sure their CPE is in bridge mode and assign that static to
>> the
>>> customers router so they can enable UPnP themselves.
>>>
>>> -Kurt Fankhauser
>>>
>>>
>>> - Original Message -
>>> From: "Josh Luthman" 
>>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>>> Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 11:45 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] XBOX live, NAT, and UPnP
>>>
>>>
>>>> Don't the majority of us NAT at the customer SM?
>>>>
>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>> Suite 1337
>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Adam Kennedy 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> I would agree that it is a security hole for an ISP. UPnP would let me
>> do
>>>>> my own forwards for just about any port I want, including SSH, telnet
>> and
>>>>> web. For that matter, I could just be selfish and port map every port
>>>>> from 1024 through 65535 to my IP, completely killing access to anyone
>>>>> else.
>>>>>
>>>>> In an ISP environment, the best option really is to disable UPnP if you
>>>>> are doing NAT.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Adam Kennedy
>>>>> Network Engineer
>>>>> Omnicity, Inc.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -Original Message-
>>>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>>>>> Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
>>>>> Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 10:43 AM
>>>>> To: WISPA General List
>>>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] XBOX live, NAT, and UPnP
>>>>>
>>>>> Man that sucks. We turn off upnp on ALL routers. I've always been told
>>>>> that it's a big security hole.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thoughts on that?
>>>>> marlon
>>>>>
>>>>> - Original Message -
>>>>> From: "Josh Luthman" 
>>>>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>>>>> Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 7:29 AM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] XBOX live, NAT, and UPnP
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't seem to have any issues with double or triple NAT.
>>>>>
>>>>> When I was working with MT to fix the upnp issue with Xboxes. I have
>>>>> it marked as 4.6 with modifications (it was an unofficial 4.6 they
>>>>> gave me) so I would say 4.7 or higher should enable Xbox upnp. Even
>>>>> this requires a public IP on the Mikrotik to remove even nice strict
>>>>> (I think it's called open?).
>>>>>
>>>>> Josh Luthman
>>>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>>>> Suite 1337
>>>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 10:07 AM, Kurt Fankhauser 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> So does anyone here have any customers that use XBOX live and bark to
>>>>>> you
>>>>>> about you NAT? Apparen

Re: [WISPA] XBOX live, NAT, and UPnP

[John Thomas]

And if I were your client, and you told me $10 for an IP address, I would find 
a new ISP. The most I have ever seen charged was $5 a month.

John

Kurt Fankhauser  wrote:

>Everything i keep coming up with to make this work "ideal" according to the 
>customer is I"m gonna have to sell them a public ip for $10/month *grins* 
>and then make sure their CPE is in bridge mode and assign that static to the 
>customers router so they can enable UPnP themselves.
>
>-Kurt Fankhauser
>
>
>- Original Message - 
>From: "Josh Luthman" 
>To: "WISPA General List" 
>Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 11:45 AM
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] XBOX live, NAT, and UPnP
>
>
>> Don't the majority of us NAT at the customer SM?
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Adam Kennedy  
>> wrote:
>>> I would agree that it is a security hole for an ISP. UPnP would let me do 
>>> my own forwards for just about any port I want, including SSH, telnet and 
>>> web. For that matter, I could just be selfish and port map every port 
>>> from 1024 through 65535 to my IP, completely killing access to anyone 
>>> else.
>>>
>>> In an ISP environment, the best option really is to disable UPnP if you 
>>> are doing NAT.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Adam Kennedy
>>> Network Engineer
>>> Omnicity, Inc.
>>>
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
>>> Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
>>> Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 10:43 AM
>>> To: WISPA General List
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] XBOX live, NAT, and UPnP
>>>
>>> Man that sucks. We turn off upnp on ALL routers. I've always been told
>>> that it's a big security hole.
>>>
>>> Thoughts on that?
>>> marlon
>>>
>>> - Original Message -
>>> From: "Josh Luthman" 
>>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>>> Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 7:29 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] XBOX live, NAT, and UPnP
>>>
>>>
>>> I don't seem to have any issues with double or triple NAT.
>>>
>>> When I was working with MT to fix the upnp issue with Xboxes. I have
>>> it marked as 4.6 with modifications (it was an unofficial 4.6 they
>>> gave me) so I would say 4.7 or higher should enable Xbox upnp. Even
>>> this requires a public IP on the Mikrotik to remove even nice strict
>>> (I think it's called open?).
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 10:07 AM, Kurt Fankhauser  
>>> wrote:
 So does anyone here have any customers that use XBOX live and bark to 
 you
 about you NAT? Apparently the XBOX live service is very picky about 
 being
 behind any NAT device and its ability to make connections to other
 servers.
 From what I gathered is that the LIVE service uses Universal Plug and 
 Play
 (UPnP) to get around this but the question I have is. If your doing
 masquerade on a Mikrotik Core Router should you enable UPnP on that
 device?
 Or should I just issue public IP's to the customer that games and let 
 them
 worry about it? And if you have UPnP enabled on the core router and then
 do
 a double-NAT through the customers Linksys router with UPnP enable does
 that
 not work because of the double-NAT?



 Kurt Fankhauser
 WAVELINC
 P.O. Box 126
 Bucyrus, OH 44820
 419-562-6405
 www.wavelinc.com








 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http

Re: [WISPA] OFFLIST - Looking to Sell..........

[John Thomas]

Robert West  wrote:

>Thanks for the gumball, Popeye.
>
>Thanks for the gumball.
>
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>Behalf Of Scott Piehn
>Sent: Saturday, June 12, 2010 6:35 PM
>To: WISPA General List
>Cc: i...@jcwifi.com
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] OFFLIST - Looking to Sell..
>
>I work with Sara who started the thread
>
>We have 40 - 80 currently and will have more that would like to move CPQ19's
>all generations, current firmware
>
>
>
>
>
>Scott Piehn
>JCWIFI.com Division Manager
>Computer Dynamics
>451 W. South St
>Freeport, IL 61032
>spi...@computerdyn.com
>V 815.233.2641
>F 815.233.6225
>- Original Message -
>From: "Matt Larsen - Lists" 
>To: 
>Sent: Saturday, June 12, 2010 10:46 AM
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] Looking to Sell..
>
>
>> Anyone who has Tranzeo CPQ15, CPQ19, SL2-15, SL2N, SL5 or TR5a radios
>> for sale, please contact me.   We are switching to 10mhz channels and I
>> have about 500 or so of the older CPE200 and CPE80 radios to switch out.
>>
>> I've been buying a lot of NS2/NS5 and Bullet2/Bullet5, but it is a lot
>> easier to switch to a Tranzeo when the customer already has a Tranzeo,
>> and there are quite a few situations where a Tranzeo works better than a
>> Ubiquiti radio.
>>
>> Matt Larsen
>> mlar...@vistabeam.com
>>
>>
>> On 6/11/2010 11:01 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>> An NS2 is $80 list.
>>>
>>> I think most will agree it is superior, too.
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> "Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to
>>> continue that counts."
>>> --- Winston Churchill
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Tom DeReggi 
>>> wrote:
>>>
> $100
>
 I doubt it.  "New" equivellent class or better 2.4 CPEs at near that 
 gain
 (alternate brands), are going for as low as $80 now adays. Maybe even 
 less.
 Why buy old/used Wifi?
 Atleast not in 2.4G, that have so many vendor options, new and used.

 Good luck with liquidating, but I'd side with Chuck, that you'd be lucky
>
 to
 get $50, on the high side.

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


 - Original Message -
 From: "Sara Gray"
 To: "'WISPA General List'"
 Sent: Friday, June 11, 2010 10:54 AM
 Subject: [WISPA] Looking to Sell..



> Tranzeo CPQ 19f
>
>
>
> We are switching frequencies and have between 50 and 100 to sell. 
> Hoping
> they are worth around $100.  Please reply offlist to i...@jcwifi.com.
>
>
>
>
>
> Sara Gray
>
>
>
>
>
>
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>
>
>
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>



>
>
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/

>
>

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


>>>
>>>
>
>
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>>
>
>
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>
>
>
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>> 
>
>
>
>
>
>WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>http://signup.wispa.org/
>
>
> 
>WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
>Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
>Archives: http

Re: [WISPA] Repeater

[John Thomas]

.e ww.sa xs,cssx. Z. 

Josh Luthman  wrote:

>>Issue I see is that not many other units, UBNT or MT have a 2nd Ethernet that 
>>pass through POE?
>
>Not to my knowledge.
>
>I've always done two lines up the tower.  Usually MT APs so I can do
>tons of troubleshooting but an NS2 works great, too.
>
>Josh Luthman
>Office: 937-552-2340
>Direct: 937-552-2343
>1100 Wayne St
>Suite 1337
>Troy, OH 45373
>
>“Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to
>continue that counts.”
>--- Winston Churchill
>
>
>
>On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 10:24 AM, Steve Barnes  wrote:
>> Thanks for the advice guys on the Deliberant.  However,  Last thing I really 
>> want to do is learn another radio system.
>>
>> Really hoping for a MT or UBNT option.
>>
>> Steve Barnes
>> RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
>> Behalf Of Jason Hensley
>> Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 9:56 AM
>> To: 'WISPA General List'
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Repeater
>>
>> Get a Deliberant AP Duo.  $350 and no hassle.
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
>> Behalf Of Steve Barnes
>> Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 9:01 AM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: [WISPA] Repeater
>>
>> I have avoided repeaters like the plague but I have a situation where I have 
>> one and I am looking for a better option.  When I started my wisp I was 100% 
>> Tranzeo.  At this one location I setup a CPE connected to a TR-6000 that has
>> 2 Ethernet ports that pass through POE.  I ran 1 Ethernet up the tower with 
>> a POE at the bottom, and a crossover in between.
>>
>> I would like a similar layout for other locations.   Issue I see is that not
>> many other units, UBNT or MT have a 2nd Ethernet that pass through POE?
>>
>> How does everyone you get around this?
>>
>> Trying to stay cheaper than a RB433, 2 radios, and 2- antennas, box, 
>> pigtails, 2 LMR cables.
>>
>> Steve Barnes
>> RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service
>>
>>
>> 
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>
>
>
>WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>http://signup.wispa.org/
>
> 
>WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
>Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
>Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Repeater

[John Thomas]

Josh Luthman  wrote:

>>Issue I see is that not many other units, UBNT or MT have a 2nd Ethernet that 
>>pass through POE?
>
>Not to my knowledge.
>
>I've always done two lines up the tower.  Usually MT APs so I can do
>tons of troubleshooting but an NS2 works great, too.
>
>Josh Luthman
>Office: 937-552-2340
>Direct: 937-552-2343
>1100 Wayne St
>Suite 1337
>Troy, OH 45373
>
>“Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to
>continue that counts.”
>--- Winston Churchill
>
>
>
>On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 10:24 AM, Steve Barnes  wrote:
>> Thanks for the advice guys on the Deliberant.  However,  Last thing I really 
>> want to do is learn another radio system.
>>
>> Really hoping for a MT or UBNT option.
>>
>> Steve Barnes
>> RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
>> Behalf Of Jason Hensley
>> Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 9:56 AM
>> To: 'WISPA General List'
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Repeater
>>
>> Get a Deliberant AP Duo.  $350 and no hassle.
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
>> Behalf Of Steve Barnes
>> Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 9:01 AM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: [WISPA] Repeater
>>
>> I have avoided repeaters like the plague but I have a situation where I have 
>> one and I am looking for a better option.  When I started my wisp I was 100% 
>> Tranzeo.  At this one location I setup a CPE connected to a TR-6000 that has
>> 2 Ethernet ports that pass through POE.  I ran 1 Ethernet up the tower with 
>> a POE at the bottom, and a crossover in between.
>>
>> I would like a similar layout for other locations.   Issue I see is that not
>> many other units, UBNT or MT have a 2nd Ethernet that pass through POE?
>>
>> How does everyone you get around this?
>>
>> Trying to stay cheaper than a RB433, 2 radios, and 2- antennas, box, 
>> pigtails, 2 LMR cables.
>>
>> Steve Barnes
>> RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service
>>
>>
>> 
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>
>
>
>WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>http://signup.wispa.org/
>
> 
>WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
>Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
>Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Repeater

[John Thomas]

Josh Luthman  wrote:

>>Issue I see is that not many other units, UBNT or MT have a 2nd Ethernet that 
>>pass through POE?
>
>Not to my knowledge.
>
>I've always done two lines up the tower.  Usually MT APs so I can do
>tons of troubleshooting but an NS2 works great, too.
>
>Josh Luthman
>Office: 937-552-2340
>Direct: 937-552-2343
>1100 Wayne St
>Suite 1337
>Troy, OH 45373
>
>“Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to
>continue that counts.”
>--- Winston Churchill
>
>
>
>On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 10:24 AM, Steve Barnes  wrote:
>> Thanks for the advice guys on the Deliberant.  However,  Last thing I really 
>> want to do is learn another radio system.
>>
>> Really hoping for a MT or UBNT option.
>>
>> Steve Barnes
>> RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
>> Behalf Of Jason Hensley
>> Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 9:56 AM
>> To: 'WISPA General List'
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Repeater
>>
>> Get a Deliberant AP Duo.  $350 and no hassle.
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
>> Behalf Of Steve Barnes
>> Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 9:01 AM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: [WISPA] Repeater
>>
>> I have avoided repeaters like the plague but I have a situation where I have 
>> one and I am looking for a better option.  When I started my wisp I was 100% 
>> Tranzeo.  At this one location I setup a CPE connected to a TR-6000 that has
>> 2 Ethernet ports that pass through POE.  I ran 1 Ethernet up the tower with 
>> a POE at the bottom, and a crossover in between.
>>
>> I would like a similar layout for other locations.   Issue I see is that not
>> many other units, UBNT or MT have a 2nd Ethernet that pass through POE?
>>
>> How does everyone you get around this?
>>
>> Trying to stay cheaper than a RB433, 2 radios, and 2- antennas, box, 
>> pigtails, 2 LMR cables.
>>
>> Steve Barnes
>> RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service
>>
>>
>> 
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>
>
>
>WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>http://signup.wispa.org/
>
> 
>WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
>Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
>Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] West Coast WISPA activities?

[John Thomas]

Josh Luthman  wrote:

>Bill Prince is out that way.
>
>http://skylinebroadbandservice.com/
>
>Josh Luthman
>Office: 937-552-2340
>Direct: 937-552-2343
>1100 Wayne St
>Suite 1337
>Troy, OH 45373
>
>“Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to
>continue that counts.”
>--- Winston Churchill
>
>
>
>On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Alex Perez  wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> I've been lurking on the lists for a few weeks now, and don't really see any 
>> activity by ISPs in the western united states (PST/PDT). Is anybody out 
>> there? I'm in Silicon Valley, and believe it or not, there are lots of folks 
>> with almost zero terrestrial wireless options at 3+ megabits on the 
>> periphery of Silicon Valley.  If you're out there, any chance we can talk 
>> off-list?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Alex Perez
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>
>
>
>WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>http://signup.wispa.org/
>
> 
>WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
>Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
>Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

[WISPA] 10 ways you might be breaking the law with your computer: UPDATED

[John Thomas]

http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/10things/?p=1400&tag=nl.e102




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Ubiquity Pico2HP.

[John Thomas]

Cisco 1100 series a/b/g can be repeaters using both bands, Cisco 1200 
series can be AP (root), CPE (non-root) or bridge.

John


Josh Luthman wrote:
> I'm thinking that every 802.11 device can be an AP or CPE.
>
> Pretty sure Tranzeo can.  I know Engenius can.  MT semi-can (requires
> lvl 4 to do ptmp).
>
> Ruckus/Cisco probably can't.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to
> continue that counts.”
> --- Winston Churchill
>
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 3:12 PM, Eje Gustafsson  wrote:
>   
>> Either or. Any of the Ubiquiti products can be used as a CPE or a AP don't
>> matter no price difference or different specific hardware to function as a
>> CPE (what canopy call SM) or a AP.
>>
>> / Eje
>> WISP-Router, Inc.
>> Follow us on twitter.com/wisprouter
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>> Behalf Of Scottie Arnett
>> Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 1:34 PM
>> To: wireless@wispa.org
>> Subject: [WISPA] Ubiquity Pico2HP.
>>
>> Can the Ubiquity Pico2HP be used as a SM or is it only an AP? The doc's do
>> not say for sure.
>>
>> TIA,
>> Scottie
>>
>> Wireless High Speed Broadband service from Info-Ed, Inc. as low as
>> $30.00/mth.
>> Check out www.info-ed.com/wireless.html for information.
>>
>>
>> 
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>> 
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] FCC Broadband plan call for more spectrum---- but not forWISP's that's for sure.

[John Thomas]

I've wondered what would happen with something like a licensed lite that 
you had to pay $200 a year for access to a band. If the FCC did that, 
and people actually used the bands, then they could make some money, and 
people could get access. If, for instance, you had say 700-740 MHz and 
each WISP paid $200 a year for that band, wouldn't that add up?

John

Philip Dorr wrote:
> What if all the wispa members put in $200 (or $2000) to buy the space?
>
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 4:37 PM, MDK  wrote:
>   
>> Yup.   "Auction" = "huge dollars", the kind none of us have.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> From: "Brian Webster" 
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2010 12:33 PM
>> To: "WISPA List" ; "memb...@wispa.org"
>> ; "Motorla List Beehive" 
>> Subject: [WISPA] FCC Broadband plan call for more spectrum but not
>> forWISP's that's for sure.
>>
>> 
>>> This plan also looks real bad for white spaces ---
>>>
>>> 1. FCC plan calls for 500 MHz of new spectrum for wireless
>>>
>>> By Phil Goldstein  Comment |  Forward
>>>
>>> WASHINGTON--FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski said the commission's national
>>> broadband plan will call for freeing up 500 MHz of spectrum over the next
>>> decade for mobile broadband use, noting that expanded wireless Internet
>>> access will be key to making America more technologically competitive.
>>>   
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>> 
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Regulators may drop broadband line-sharing bombshell

[John Thomas]

Wouldn't it be great if there was something resembling consistent 
policies regarding facilities? Years ago, there was the suggestion that 
phone companies should be broken into 2 pieces, facilities and services. 
The facilities unit could sell access to the copper/fiber/cable to *any* 
buyer. You would have some limitations, but you would be able to freely 
get access to the middle/last mile.

Here in the East San Francisco Bay Area, I know of the following

San Ramon CA, Bishop Ranch- Time Warner has fiber at our CURB, and 
offers 5 Meg business grade access for $700 per month, ut Bishop Ranch 
won't allow Time Warner in the MPOE to pull the Glass. The fact that ATT 
is a few blocks away has nothing to do with it, I am sure... :-(

Danville CA, customer wants Comcast Business grade Internet access. 
Comcast's services stop across the street from his building. Comcast 
wants $10,000 to go across the street. That is the same $10,000 they 
have wanted for better than 10 years.

Walnut Creek CA, Astound pulled fiber to a clients site and gave them 5 
Meg access for $700 per month.

Fiber Internet Center will do 5 meg burstable to 10 meg for $1595-1695 
per month through most of Northern California, and they bring the trucks 
and pull the fiber. They once quoted me at $7000/ month for 100 Meg over 
glass.

I realize that it costs some pretty big $ to get glass in the ground, 
but why is the pricing all over the board? If there were someone that 
didn't need a 1 year ROI, they could be out building out fiber, and 
making a lot of money, but it would take 5 - 10 years to see the big $.

John



Matt Liotta wrote:
> I don't think this is good. The last time it was tried we got a bunch of 
> unsustainable business models along with increasing gamesmanship from the 
> ILECs. Besides, the RBOCs are looking for reasons to shutdown their wireline 
> operations anyway. This will only speed that up.
>
> I think we need smarter policy to increase competition. How about fair and 
> reasonable real estate access? WISPA should be all over that one. I know 
> every business WISP has run into an unreasonable landlord. I also sure plenty 
> of residential WISPs have had their share of landlord problems.
>
> -Matt
>
> On Feb 16, 2010, at 2:57 PM, Scottie Arnett wrote:
>
>   
>> < 
>> http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/02/regulators-may-drop-broadband-line-sharing-bombshell.ars?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rss
>>  >
>>
>> Could be good?
>>
>> Scottie
>>
>> Wireless High Speed Broadband service from Info-Ed, Inc. as low as 
>> $30.00/mth.
>> Check out www.info-ed.com/wireless.html for information.
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>> 
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Semi-OT: Mobile phone platform questions

[John Thomas]

Droid can do RDP and VPN

John

Brad Belton wrote:
> I used to remote desktop from my Sprint Touch phone (and earlier models
> too).  However, a year or more ago I saw one of the guys here running remote
> desktop on his iPhone and was blown away how much better it worked than my
> HTC Touch.  I punted the Touch for an iPhone and couldn't be happier with
> everything across the board.  The iPhone is hands down the best phone I've
> ever had...and it isn't even the newer "S" model.
>
> There are two iPhone apps that I downloaded to run RDC a year or more ago.
> There may be more today.  WinAdmin & RDP.  I forget which was free or maybe
> neither was free, but I prefer WinAdmin over RDP on the iPhone.
>
> Best,
>
>
> Brad
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
> Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 9:53 AM
> To: wireless@wispa.org
> Subject: [WISPA] Semi-OT: Mobile phone platform questions
>
> Do any of the mobile phone platforms support VPN at all from the phone
> itself?  Any have a Remote Desktop client?
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Short range backhaul

[John Thomas]

Midnight overhead fiber run...  :-)

John

Jeremie Chism wrote:
> I have a pop across the street from one of my towers. The phone  
> company there is giving me a great deal on bandwidth but I have to get  
> it across to the tower. Any recommendations for something reliable at  
> that range.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] omni upside down

[John Thomas]

Stock Cisco omnis, we were hanging them from light poles.

John


RickG wrote:
> Which antenna did you use? -RickG
>
> On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 6:03 PM, John Thomas  wrote:
>
>   
>> We have mounted omnis upside down because an omni pattern tends to
>> radiate from the base of the antenna upward. By turning the antenna
>> upside down, it becomes slight better at receiving and sending. That,
>> and Cisco 1500's make it easy to do...
>>
>> John
>>
>> RickG wrote:
>> 
>>> Thanks!
>>> Is there any advantage for a WISP to do this?
>>> -RickG
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 4:02 PM, Eje Gustafsson 
>>>   
>> wrote:
>> 
>>>   
>>>> Those are more than likely cell phone sites that have those big whip
>>>> antennas going up and down (believe they are 800Mhz frequency range
>>>> systems)
>>>> My understanding it has one out of two reasons why they are built like
>>>> that.
>>>> Antenna diversion or increased base station density.
>>>> Have one not too far from me that has a crown with a total of 6 omni's.
>>>> 
>> 3
>> 
>>>> up
>>>> and 3 down, mounted on a triangular crown. Those omnis are massive and
>>>> 
>> my
>> 
>>>> guess are they are at least 10-15 feet it's hard to tell because the
>>>> 
>> access
>> 
>>>> road is blocked and I never walked down to get close enough to compare
>>>> 
>> to
>> 
>>>> the tower leg joints.
>>>>
>>>> / Eje
>>>>
>>>> -Original Message-
>>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>>>> Behalf Of RickG
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 2:55 PM
>>>> To: WISPA General List
>>>> Subject: [WISPA] omni upside down
>>>>
>>>> While traveling around, I've noticed a few towers with omnis mounted
>>>> 
>> upside
>> 
>>>> down with a neighbor omni mounted right side up. Whats the purpose in
>>>> 
>> this?
>> 
>>>> -RickG
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 
>> 
>> 
>>>> 
>>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 
>> 
>> 
>>>> 
>>>>
>>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>>
>>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>>
>>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 
>> 
>> 
>>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 
>> 
>> 
>>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>>
>>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>>
>>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 
>>>
>>>   
>> 
>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>>
>>>   
>> 
>> 
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>   
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>> 
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] omni upside down

[John Thomas]

We have mounted omnis upside down because an omni pattern tends to 
radiate from the base of the antenna upward. By turning the antenna 
upside down, it becomes slight better at receiving and sending. That, 
and Cisco 1500's make it easy to do...

John

RickG wrote:
> Thanks!
> Is there any advantage for a WISP to do this?
> -RickG
>
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 4:02 PM, Eje Gustafsson  wrote:
>
>   
>> Those are more than likely cell phone sites that have those big whip
>> antennas going up and down (believe they are 800Mhz frequency range
>> systems)
>> My understanding it has one out of two reasons why they are built like
>> that.
>> Antenna diversion or increased base station density.
>> Have one not too far from me that has a crown with a total of 6 omni's. 3
>> up
>> and 3 down, mounted on a triangular crown. Those omnis are massive and my
>> guess are they are at least 10-15 feet it's hard to tell because the access
>> road is blocked and I never walked down to get close enough to compare to
>> the tower leg joints.
>>
>> / Eje
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>> Behalf Of RickG
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 2:55 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: [WISPA] omni upside down
>>
>> While traveling around, I've noticed a few towers with omnis mounted upside
>> down with a neighbor omni mounted right side up. Whats the purpose in this?
>> -RickG
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>
>> 
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>> 
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Promo

[John Thomas]

Kinda sounds like a WISP, eh? As long as they aren't overselling it to 
the point quality suffers, who cares? We had to work at just doing a 
speed test on our 100 meg connection as most of the servers couldn't do 
100 meg up and 100 meg down. We finally were able to do a ftp and get 95 
meg/95 meg to verify that it was working as advertised. I still smile 
when I can do traceroutes to cities miles away and have all the hops at 
1 ms, or less when using Linux.

John

Justin Wilson wrote:
> Plus they want to oversell this cheap bandwidth.  They don¹t want you to
> max out that Gig circuit.  Allows them to oversell their bandwidth that much
> more.
>   
> 
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Promo

[John Thomas]

Strangely, our experience was the opposite, Hurricane Electric wanted 
about $500 more per month for 100 meg and a cabinet than our reseller did.

John


Andy Trimmell wrote:
> Resellers are a little bit more expensive actually and all of them don't have 
> fiber already ran. It's ridiculous the cost we pay.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
> Behalf Of John Thomas
> Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2010 9:44 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Promo
>
> We buy ours through a reseller, and they have quoted us $1000/month for 
> Gig at Hurricane Electric in Fremont CA.
>
> John
>
>
> Mike Hammett wrote:
>   
>> I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if GigE connections were under $1 now. 
>> I know a couple companies were at $1.
>>
>> Bandwidth pricing is the inverse of real estate pricing.  Downtown Chicago, 
>> a sq.ft. of land could buy you hundreds of acres in Montana.  A single meg 
>> in Montana could buy you hundreds of megs  (or a couple gigs) in Chicago.
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> From: "Andy Trimmell" 
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2010 2:20 PM
>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Promo
>>
>>   
>> 
>>> 50Mbit for $450 a month isn't bad for a pipe to AT&T. We're paying 10x 
>>> that from AT&T right now.
>>>
>>> $0.90? come on give me a break. If that's possible then we should sue AT&T 
>>> for highway robbery.
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
>>> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2010 1:26 PM
>>> To: WISPA General List
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Promo
>>>
>>> Did you mean $9/meg or $0.90/meg?  $9/meg isn't much to write home about.
>>> ;-)
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> From: "Justin Wilson" 
>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2010 11:48 AM
>>> To: "WISPA General List" ; "RickG"
>>> 
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Promo
>>>
>>> 
>>>   
>>>>Yup.  If you are at an on-net building you can get it even cheaper.
>>>> One
>>>> client is buying for $9 a meg in bulk in Chicago.  Their biggest hurdle
>>>> are
>>>> peering agreements with the big boys.  The AT&t¹s of the world are sort 
>>>> of
>>>> tolerating them at the moment until they can figure out what to do.  They
>>>> tried de-peering with them a few years ago and there was an outcry.  Lots
>>>> of
>>>> web-sites are hosted on cogent bandwidth.
>>>>
>>>> Justin
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> Justin Wilson 
>>>> CCNA ­ CCNT ­ Mikrotik Advanced
>>>> http://www.mtin.net   - Homepage
>>>> http://www.mtin.net/blog  - Technical Blog
>>>>
>>>> XISP solutions ­ Hosting ­ Consulting ­ Tower Climbing
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From: RickG 
>>>> Reply-To: WISPA General List 
>>>> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 02:33:16 -0500
>>>> To: WISPA General List 
>>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Promo
>>>>
>>>> I hear $1500 for a gig!
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 12:39 PM, Mike Hammett
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>   
>>>> 
>>>>> I wish I was a bit closer to a POP to take advantage of it, but my 
>>>>> Cogent
>>>>> rep informed me that through the end of the month, they have a promo
>>>>> going
>>>>> $400/100 megabit 1 year contract.  Only available at Cogent and carrier
>>>>> neutral data centers.  These facilities are listed on their web site
>>>>> under
>>>>> the network heading.  A complete building list (and not eligible for 
>>>>> this
>>>>> promo) is available in the service locator under Dedicated Internet
>>>>>

Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Promo

[John Thomas]

We buy ours through a reseller, and they have quoted us $1000/month for 
Gig at Hurricane Electric in Fremont CA.

John


Mike Hammett wrote:
> I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if GigE connections were under $1 now. 
> I know a couple companies were at $1.
>
> Bandwidth pricing is the inverse of real estate pricing.  Downtown Chicago, 
> a sq.ft. of land could buy you hundreds of acres in Montana.  A single meg 
> in Montana could buy you hundreds of megs  (or a couple gigs) in Chicago.
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
> --
> From: "Andy Trimmell" 
> Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2010 2:20 PM
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Promo
>
>   
>> 50Mbit for $450 a month isn't bad for a pipe to AT&T. We're paying 10x 
>> that from AT&T right now.
>>
>> $0.90? come on give me a break. If that's possible then we should sue AT&T 
>> for highway robbery.
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
>> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2010 1:26 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Promo
>>
>> Did you mean $9/meg or $0.90/meg?  $9/meg isn't much to write home about.
>> ;-)
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> From: "Justin Wilson" 
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2010 11:48 AM
>> To: "WISPA General List" ; "RickG"
>> 
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Promo
>>
>> 
>>>Yup.  If you are at an on-net building you can get it even cheaper.
>>> One
>>> client is buying for $9 a meg in bulk in Chicago.  Their biggest hurdle
>>> are
>>> peering agreements with the big boys.  The AT&t¹s of the world are sort 
>>> of
>>> tolerating them at the moment until they can figure out what to do.  They
>>> tried de-peering with them a few years ago and there was an outcry.  Lots
>>> of
>>> web-sites are hosted on cogent bandwidth.
>>>
>>> Justin
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Justin Wilson 
>>> CCNA ­ CCNT ­ Mikrotik Advanced
>>> http://www.mtin.net   - Homepage
>>> http://www.mtin.net/blog  - Technical Blog
>>>
>>> XISP solutions ­ Hosting ­ Consulting ­ Tower Climbing
>>>
>>>
>>> From: RickG 
>>> Reply-To: WISPA General List 
>>> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 02:33:16 -0500
>>> To: WISPA General List 
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Promo
>>>
>>> I hear $1500 for a gig!
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 12:39 PM, Mike Hammett
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>   
 I wish I was a bit closer to a POP to take advantage of it, but my 
 Cogent
 rep informed me that through the end of the month, they have a promo
 going
 $400/100 megabit 1 year contract.  Only available at Cogent and carrier
 neutral data centers.  These facilities are listed on their web site
 under
 the network heading.  A complete building list (and not eligible for 
 this
 promo) is available in the service locator under Dedicated Internet
 access.

 Not all of their host buildings allow roof access, but I believe a
 significant number of them do.  I encourage you to build your network 
 out
 to
 these facilities.

 Sure, someone's going to hop on here and complain about how horrible
 Cogent
 is, but every carrier has their good and bad spots.  I'm sure I could
 find
 someone to honestly say the same things about AT&T, VZB, Level3,
 InterNAP,
 XO, MZima, etc., etc.  It doesn't matter the carrier, I strongly
 encourage
 you to have more than one.

 Feel free to blast the list with questions about building your network 
 to
 Cogent, routing policies to best combine Cogent and your existing
 provider,
 etc.  These things would apply to any carrier, not just Cogent.


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





 
>>> 
>>>   
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/


 
>>> 
>>>   
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail

Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Promo

[John Thomas]

Start lining up the lawsuit then.

We pay about $350 for 100 megabits/sec at Hurricane Electric in Fremont CA.

John

Andy Trimmell wrote:
> 50Mbit for $450 a month isn't bad for a pipe to AT&T. We're paying 10x that 
> from AT&T right now. 
>
> $0.90? come on give me a break. If that's possible then we should sue AT&T 
> for highway robbery.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
> Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2010 1:26 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Promo
>
> Did you mean $9/meg or $0.90/meg?  $9/meg isn't much to write home about. 
> ;-)
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
> --
> From: "Justin Wilson" 
> Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2010 11:48 AM
> To: "WISPA General List" ; "RickG" 
> 
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Promo
>
>   
>>Yup.  If you are at an on-net building you can get it even cheaper. 
>> One
>> client is buying for $9 a meg in bulk in Chicago.  Their biggest hurdle 
>> are
>> peering agreements with the big boys.  The AT&t¹s of the world are sort of
>> tolerating them at the moment until they can figure out what to do.  They
>> tried de-peering with them a few years ago and there was an outcry.  Lots 
>> of
>> web-sites are hosted on cogent bandwidth.
>>
>> Justin
>>
>> -- 
>> Justin Wilson 
>> CCNA ­ CCNT ­ Mikrotik Advanced
>> http://www.mtin.net   - Homepage
>> http://www.mtin.net/blog  - Technical Blog
>>
>> XISP solutions ­ Hosting ­ Consulting ­ Tower Climbing
>>
>>
>> From: RickG 
>> Reply-To: WISPA General List 
>> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 02:33:16 -0500
>> To: WISPA General List 
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth Promo
>>
>> I hear $1500 for a gig!
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 12:39 PM, Mike Hammett
>> wrote:
>>
>> 
>>> I wish I was a bit closer to a POP to take advantage of it, but my Cogent
>>> rep informed me that through the end of the month, they have a promo 
>>> going
>>> $400/100 megabit 1 year contract.  Only available at Cogent and carrier
>>> neutral data centers.  These facilities are listed on their web site 
>>> under
>>> the network heading.  A complete building list (and not eligible for this
>>> promo) is available in the service locator under Dedicated Internet 
>>> access.
>>>
>>> Not all of their host buildings allow roof access, but I believe a
>>> significant number of them do.  I encourage you to build your network out 
>>> to
>>> these facilities.
>>>
>>> Sure, someone's going to hop on here and complain about how horrible 
>>> Cogent
>>> is, but every carrier has their good and bad spots.  I'm sure I could 
>>> find
>>> someone to honestly say the same things about AT&T, VZB, Level3, 
>>> InterNAP,
>>> XO, MZima, etc., etc.  It doesn't matter the carrier, I strongly 
>>> encourage
>>> you to have more than one.
>>>
>>> Feel free to blast the list with questions about building your network to
>>> Cogent, routing policies to best combine Cogent and your existing 
>>> provider,
>>> etc.  These things would apply to any carrier, not just Cogent.
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>   
>> 
>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>>
>>>
>>>   
>> 
>> 
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>>   
>> 
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>> 
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archiv

Re: [WISPA] [Motorola II] metered billing

[John Thomas]

Read the fine print in the contracts. With AT&T, if you call people 
outside AT&T's network too much, they will raise your rates.

John

Josh Luthman wrote:
> I expect if it comes to a point where services are degraded and enough
> customers complain they will do just what Vonage does - find the top 3%
> heaviest users and give them the boot.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> "The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources."
> --- Albert Einstein
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 11:09 PM, Travis Johnson  wrote:
>
>   
>> Hi,
>>
>> While watching TV today, I noticed several adds for both Verizon and AT&T
>> now offering UNLIMITED voice service for $69 per line. We also have a
>> regional cell provider (Syringa Wireless) that is doing $75 UNLIMITED
>> everything (voice, texts, internet) per line.
>>
>> It would seem all the cell carriers are moving to an unlimited system...
>>
>> Travis
>> Microserv
>>
>>
>> -
>> Official List of the Animal Farm Motorola Users Group - afmug.com
>>
>>
>> 
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Network Gigabit Switch Recommendations

[John Thomas]

Thanks, that is good to know. It looks like the 1810G-24 can be upstream 
powered using POE. That could be a good thing for a WISP.

John


Nick Olsen wrote:
> The 1810G-24 can. The 1800-24 & 8 can't.
>
> Nick Olsen
> Brevard Wireless
> (321) 205-1100 x106
>
>
> --------
>
> From: "John Thomas" 
> Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2010 12:20 AM
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Network Gigabit Switch Recommendations
>
> Try to find out what mac address is on which port-you can't do that with 
> the HP 1800's, you need something higher up the food chain.
>
> John
>
> Scott Vander Dussen wrote:
>   
>> Nick-
>> Thanks for the info - I'm looking at specifications between the HP 
>> 
> ProCurve 1810G Switch Series http://bit.ly/5g2F0B and HP ProCurve 2810 
> Switch Series http://bit.ly/5Nqvwc 
>   
>> It seems much of the capabilities are the same, with the 2810 offering a 
>> 
> bit more horsepower at about 2x the cost - plus the 2810 series offers a 48 
> port version.  Any experience with the 2810 series?  Thanks in advance.
>   
>> `S
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
>> 
> Behalf Of Nick Olsen
>   
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 8:55 AM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Network Gigabit Switch Recommendations
>>
>> I've always been a fan of the HP switches, The 1800-24G is nice, But the 
>> 
> new one I'm liking is the 1810G-24
>   
>> 24 Port Gig, Port mirroring...ect..
>>
>> Nick Olsen
>> Brevard Wireless
>> (321) 205-1100 x106
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>> From: "Tom DeReggi" 
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 11:27 AM
>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Network Gigabit Switch Recommendations
>>
>> Yes, you are correct, several typical models, such as 100mb L2 and AL2 
>> (These are Both full featured VLAN switches with different OSs which are 
>> 
>
>   
>> similar to their equivellent gig version) only support mirroring in TX or 
>> 
> RX 
>   
>> per port, not simultaneous.  For example To Do Calea monitoring it would 
>> 
> be 
>   
>> necessary to mirror two ports. For example, TX on the customer port, and 
>> 
> RX 
>   
>> on the backbone port, and sort through it.
>>
>> But I did not check the highest end SMC yet. I'll plug one in, and check 
>> 
> for 
>   
>> you, shortly..
>>
>> Tom DeReggi
>> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
>> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>>
>> - Original Message - 
>> From: "Scott Vander Dussen" 
>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 8:08 AM
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Network Gigabit Switch Recommendations
>>
>>   
>> 
>>> Thx Tom- really only need rx/tx port mirroring - can your smc switch
>>> do that? I have some smcs that can only do rx or tx but not at the
>>> same time. Thx for info.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> 'S
>>>
>>> ---
>>> Sent mobile (and probably one handed while driving!)
>>>
>>> On Jan 12, 2010, at 12:28 AM, "Tom DeReggi"
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> 
>>>   
>>>> Depends on your Requrements for the switch, that is not enough info.
>>>>
>>>> SMC has a fully featured switch that we love, the 24 cat5 Gig port
>>>> (w/ 4
>>>> fiber module ports) model is about $750.
>>>> It does everything.(complete VLAN, Multiple spanning tree, good
>>>> monitoring
>>>> stats, SNMP, Command prompt also, can Label Ports with names, etc)
>>>>
>>>> SMC has a 24 port Gig model for about $500 that does a lot, but you
>>>> cant
>>>> label ports with names.
>>>>
>>>> Then if all you want is WebSmart switch, now you are in the $300
>>>> range.  And
>>>> there are lots of manufacturer options for webSmart type.
>>>>
>>>> NetGear has a good one for about $550, might even have OSPF, but
>>>> lacks a few
>>>> VLAN features, but allows ports to have names..
>>>>
>>>> Tom DeReggi
>>>> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
>>>> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>>

Re: [WISPA] Network Gigabit Switch Recommendations

[John Thomas]

Try to find out what mac address is on which port-you can't do that with 
the HP 1800's, you need something higher up the food chain.

John

Scott Vander Dussen wrote:
> Nick-
> Thanks for the info - I'm looking at specifications between the HP ProCurve 
> 1810G Switch Series http://bit.ly/5g2F0B and HP ProCurve 2810 Switch Series 
> http://bit.ly/5Nqvwc 
>
> It seems much of the capabilities are the same, with the 2810 offering a bit 
> more horsepower at about 2x the cost - plus the 2810 series offers a 48 port 
> version.  Any experience with the 2810 series?  Thanks in advance.
>
> `S
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
> Behalf Of Nick Olsen
> Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 8:55 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Network Gigabit Switch Recommendations
>
> I've always been a fan of the HP switches, The 1800-24G is nice, But the new 
> one I'm liking is the 1810G-24
> 24 Port Gig, Port mirroring...ect..
>
> Nick Olsen
> Brevard Wireless
> (321) 205-1100 x106
>
>
> 
>
> From: "Tom DeReggi" 
> Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 11:27 AM
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Network Gigabit Switch Recommendations
>
> Yes, you are correct, several typical models, such as 100mb L2 and AL2 
> (These are Both full featured VLAN switches with different OSs which are 
> similar to their equivellent gig version) only support mirroring in TX or RX 
> per port, not simultaneous.  For example To Do Calea monitoring it would be 
> necessary to mirror two ports. For example, TX on the customer port, and RX 
> on the backbone port, and sort through it.
>
> But I did not check the highest end SMC yet. I'll plug one in, and check for 
> you, shortly..
>
> Tom DeReggi
> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Scott Vander Dussen" 
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 8:08 AM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Network Gigabit Switch Recommendations
>
>   
>> Thx Tom- really only need rx/tx port mirroring - can your smc switch
>> do that? I have some smcs that can only do rx or tx but not at the
>> same time. Thx for info.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> 'S
>>
>> ---
>> Sent mobile (and probably one handed while driving!)
>>
>> On Jan 12, 2010, at 12:28 AM, "Tom DeReggi"
>>  wrote:
>>
>> 
>>> Depends on your Requrements for the switch, that is not enough info.
>>>
>>> SMC has a fully featured switch that we love, the 24 cat5 Gig port
>>> (w/ 4
>>> fiber module ports) model is about $750.
>>> It does everything.(complete VLAN, Multiple spanning tree, good
>>> monitoring
>>> stats, SNMP, Command prompt also, can Label Ports with names, etc)
>>>
>>> SMC has a 24 port Gig model for about $500 that does a lot, but you
>>> cant
>>> label ports with names.
>>>
>>> Then if all you want is WebSmart switch, now you are in the $300
>>> range.  And
>>> there are lots of manufacturer options for webSmart type.
>>>
>>> NetGear has a good one for about $550, might even have OSPF, but
>>> lacks a few
>>> VLAN features, but allows ports to have names..
>>>
>>> Tom DeReggi
>>> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
>>> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>>>
>>>
>>> - Original Message -
>>> From: "Scott Vander Dussen" 
>>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 12:24 AM
>>> Subject: [WISPA] Network Gigabit Switch Recommendations
>>>
>>>
>>>   
 Need to upgrade several 10/100 switches to 10/100/100; I'm looking
 for
 recommendations on good reliable equipment.  Will need 24 and 48 port
 units, Rx/Tx port mirroring is a must!

 Thanks in advance,
 Scott



 --- 
 --- 
 --- 
 --- 
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 --- 
 --- 
 --- 
 --- 
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


 -- 
 Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
 Checked by AVG.
 Version: 7.5.560 / Virus Database: 270.12.26/2116 - Release Date:
 5/15/2009 6:16 AM

 
>>>
>>> --- 
>>> --- 
>>> --- 
>>> --- 
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> --- 
>>> --- 
>>> --- 
>>> --- 
>>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>>
>>>   
>> -

Re: [WISPA] Re-evaluating our anti-spam solution

[John Thomas]

What are the issues with your Barracuda?

John

Ugo Bellavance wrote:
> On 2009-07-13 20:08, Don Grossman wrote:
>   
>> It seems time to take a look at our anti-spam solution.  Currently we
>> are looking to replace out Barracuda due to ongoing issues with the
>> box that after several attempts to work with Barracuda can not be
>> resolved.
>> 
>
> I tend to use a mix of:
>
> - clamav-milter (with unofficial signatures)
> - spamassassin-milter
> - sendmail tweaks http://www.technoids.org/dossed.html
> - MailScanner
>
> For a more corporate-ready product, FSL is doing excellent products.
>
> http://www.fsl.com/
>
> BarricadeMX is very interesting, as it does everything at the SMTP 
> phase, which is very efficient.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ugo
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

[WISPA] AT&T was Re: Wimax gear

[John Thomas]

Unless the Federal Government gives AT&T a blank check and ORDERS them 
to this, it is NOT ever going to happen. I have seen copies of Project 
Pronto documents that said the San Francisco Bay Area was supposed to 
have fiber to the home 10 years ago. Yes, there were a few strands 
installed, but nowhere near what what promised to get what they wanted 
from the lawmakers. We just tried to get an ADSL circuit installed in 
Concord CA, and it took a month, and at least 5 different tech site visits.

John

Tom DeReggi wrote:
> Patrick,
>
> << Major SNIP>>The technology is there, I just hope our industry accomplishes 
> the price 
>   
> point needed for mass scale in time, before companies like ATT get fiber to 
> every home by 2015 :-)
>
> Tom DeReggi
> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>
>
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

[WISPA] WiFiSplurper

[John Thomas]

Has anyone ever seen this?

http://www.boingboing.net/2007/05/30/wifi-slurper-grabs-u.html

John



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] public subnet

[John Thomas]

A great article talking about why NOT to block ICMP

http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/tutorials/6524/1/

 From the article,

In short, blocking ICMP is detrimental to the successful operation of 
networks. It will break more than just ping; in fact, many protocols 
will be neutered if ICMP isn't working.

John




RickG wrote:
> Ya, and further proof it should work is that it works at my office on the
> same tower. I cant blame their cisco because I bypassed it with my laptop.
> No proxy server. Everything goes through the RB450G. So, the only
> differences are the WRAP on the tower and the CPE. I'll try the CPE next.
> Will advise.
>
> BTW: I agree with you on ICMP. I usually make them allow that, if they want
> my help :)
>
> Thanks! -RickG
>
> On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 12:06 AM, Jeromie Reeves wrote:
>
>   
>> Unless there is a rouge NAT statement someplace, I do not see anything
>> specific that would be causing this (as described)
>> What about a proxy server ? Are all connections heading out the NAT IP
>> or only HTTP?
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 4:40 AM, RickG  wrote:
>> 
>>> The thing is they had a bridge from the other tower and it was working.
>>>   
>> The
>> 
>>> only thing thats changed is the tower. RIP is on RB450G and WRAP's. Dont
>>> know about Cisco as it is the customers and I dont have control. They
>>>   
>> also
>> 
>>> have ICMP turned off amongst other things. Should I still see it?
>>>   
>> I would request that ICMP be allowed to your internal network at
>> least. Personally, I control everything down to the ethernet
>> port. Past that, its their ball (but mostly I handle the LAN too)
>>
>> 
>>> Yes, NAT is being done from RB450G using 10.0.0.0/8.
>>> Thanks! -RickG
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 9:08 PM, jree...@18-30chat.net <
>>> jree...@18-30chat.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>   
 Mmmm. bridging CPE, make sure its not proxy arping.

 Check your RIP, if its turned on, on both the wrap and Csico, should be
 seen.

 Where is the IP that is doing NAT located, on the RB450? The only way I
 
>> had
>> 
 that
 work correctly was to drop all chain rules and tell NAT to source
 10.0.0.0/8
 when going out dst interface. I have 2 routers at the core one for BGP &
 etc
 upstream, the other for NAT and in building hand-off (couple lans's and
 wireless, then the BH's to the rest of the network + the hotspot).


 RickG wrote:
 
> I agree but traceroutes run perfectly. Just to be clear, here is the
>   
 setup:
 
> Inet->RB450G(Firewall)->WRAP/StarOS->CPE->Customer Device (Cisco).
> The subnet is 204.62.63.76/30.
> RB450G has the subnet defined in the filter rules as chain forward.
> The wireless interface on the WRAP has 204.62.63.77 assigned.
> The CPE is in bridge mode so its on a private IP.
> The Cisco has 204.62.63.78 assigned to ether1.
> All with a 255.255.255.252 subnet mask.
> I tested with my laptop in place of the router.
> One strange item I noticed. I'm running RIP and it does not see the
>   
>> WRAP
>> 
> with 204.62.63.77 assigned.
> Any other ideas?
> -RickG
>
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 5:13 PM, jree...@18-30chat.net <
> jree...@18-30chat.net> wrote:
>
>   
>> Routing or firewall setup issues. I pass a /24 and a /8 (NAT) across
>> 
>> my
>> 
>> entire
>> network. I use one place of NAT (well a few users still have in house
>> 
 NAT)
 
>> I
>> would do traceroutes from and to the end IPs and see where things
>> 
>> start
>> 
 to
 
>> look
>> wrong.
>>
>> RickG wrote:
>> 
>>> OK, I've got a good one. I’m trying to pass public subnets to a
>>>   
>> couple
>> 
 of
 
>>> customers. They worked before I switched them to a new, closer
>>>   
>> tower.
>> 
>>> Bascially, it will not show the public IP when checking at
>>> whatismyip.combut rather my firewall ip. Obviuosly, I can get on the
>>> net with the public
>>> ip's. What's weird is that it works at my office which is on the
>>>   
>> same
>> 
>> tower
>> 
>>> although it is a different access point. However, the AP's are the
>>>   
>> both
>> 
>>> WRAP/StarOS units. My AP is running 5GHz and the customers is
>>>   
>> running
>> 
>>> 2.4GHz. One other difference is that the customer's CPE is aNS2L and
>>>   
 mine
 
>> is
>> 
>>> a NS5. I did try a Tranzeo CPQ as well. The only other difference is
>>>   
 that
 
>>> the customer is now only one hop from the firewall versus two hops
>

Re: [WISPA] 5.6 GHZ?

[John Thomas]

On a Cisco 1231, Band 3 is 5.470 to 5.725 GHz.

John


George Morris wrote:
> Its part of 5.4. In Canada, you have to stay out of 5600-5650 due to weather
> radar, suspect the US may be much the same...
>
> George 
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Forbes Mercy
> Sent: Friday, November 20, 2009 6:22 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: [WISPA] 5.6 GHZ?
>
> My new MIMO radios have 5.6 GHZ on them, I don't recall that frequency
> being available in the US.  Is it?
>
> Forbes
>
>
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Need a new AP

[John Thomas]

Cisco 1200 series will plug right in

John

AJ wrote:
> Hahaha Gmail ads came up with this firmware as I was reading this thread:
>
> http://www.fireserve.com/products/ubiquiti/bullet-m-firmware.php
>
> chop
> *Adds 802.11-compatible encryption modes
> *The stock Ubiquiti firmware only supports WPA-AES encryption.  Our firmware
> adds support for 64-bit and 128-bit WEP, WPA-TKIP and WPA2-TKIP.
> /chop
>
>
> Pretty spendy for just a single unit...
>
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Jayson Baker wrote:
>
>   
>> In that case, use a MikroTik RB411R.
>> Integrated radio, and MT can do various encryptions you need.
>>
>> Sorry, I overlooked that part of the request.
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 3:16 PM, pat  wrote:
>>
>> 
>>> Bullet M2's won't do WEP until the release of firmware version 5.1 which
>>> has been "in just a couple of weeks" for at least the last two months.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Jayson Baker wrote:
>>>   
 UBNT Bullet M2?

 On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 2:59 PM, pat  wrote:


 
> I have one small group on an old Cisco Aironet 350, which only does
> 802.11b.
>
> 1)  I want to have at least a b/g mix, n capable a bonus.
>
> 2)  Must support WEP encryption, but be able to handle a mix of WEP
>   
>> and
>> 
> WPA simultaneously.  (WEP for legacy clients that I haven't upgraded)
>
> 3)  Must play nice with Tranzeo CPQ and CPE200.
>
> You input is helpful.
>
> TIA,
>
> Pat
>
>
>
>
>
>   
>> 
>> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>
>
>   
>> 
>> 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>   

 
>> 
>> 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/

 
>> 
>> 
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>   
>> 
>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>>
>>>
>>>   
>> 
>> 
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>>   
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>> 
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Cat3 instead of Cat5

[John Thomas]

Also HP had 100 VG AnyLAN that used 4 wires.

John


Jerry Richardson wrote:
> There was a technology that used all 4 pairs. It was a proprietary solution 
> that put Video on one set and data on the other. Broadxxx or something like 
> that.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
> Behalf Of Josh Luthman
> Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 6:01 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Cat3 instead of Cat5
>
> Don't think so, pretty confident gigabit is 2 pair still.  Could be wrong...
>
> On 11/18/09, Mike Hammett  wrote:
>   
>> I believe 100 megs requires 2 pair and Gig requires all 4 pair in addition
>> to certain quality measures.
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> From: "Robert West" 
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 11:58 PM
>> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Cat3 instead of Cat5
>>
>> 
>>> Phone line is twisted pair and normally 2 pair.  Transmit and receive.
>>> Can
>>> easily do 100mbps.  You could even get it to do gigabit with not much
>>> effort.  No PoE though, no pair for that. HOWEVER, the problems come from
>>> the nasty connections everyone including the phone company has made.  Most
>>> phone line isn't "clean" like a network cable you would run.  Who knows
>>> where the hell the splices and rodent chewed ends are at and if they stick
>>> with a common wiring scheme throughout the structure.  If it was the best
>>> option, you could at least test and give up quickly if it fell on its
>>> face.
>>>
>>> There used to be some home networking nics that used the phone lines in
>>> the
>>> home and you could also use the phones with the things connected.  That
>>> was
>>> in the late 1990's, early 2000.  Some Gateway desktops came with them.  I
>>> never saw them used though.
>>>
>>> Bob-
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>>> Behalf Of RickG
>>> Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 12:02 AM
>>> To: WISPA General List
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Cat3 instead of Cat5
>>>
>>> That would be great! But, I cant find anything on the net except
>>> references
>>> to the standard being 10Mbps:
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category_3_cable
>>> Any examples?
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Kevin Neal  wrote:
>>>
>>>   
 With the right equipment I've heard of gigabit over rusted old barbwire!

 -Kevin


 On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 7:32 PM, RickG  wrote:
 
> 100Mbps on cat 3? Really?
>
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Forbes Mercy
> wrote:
>
>   
>> We currently run a Cat5 into the wall then put a jack into the house.
>> My question is since you can get 100MB through a Cat3 which is the
>> same
>> as a phone line why can't we run the connection into their phone line?
>> Most of our customers have cell phone only and their internal wiring
>> is
>> virtually unused.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Forbes
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>   
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>
>>
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>   
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>> 
>
>   
>>> 
>>> 
>>>   
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>
>   
>>> 
>>> 
>>>   
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>   


 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>   
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/


 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>   
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> ---

Re: [WISPA] Small Managed Switches

[John Thomas]

I know that used to be an issue, but we have been seeing great results 
with Cisco 2960 series switches.

John


RickG wrote:
> Cisco makes great routers but their switches suck. They have port
> compatability issues with other equipment.
>
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 11:48 PM, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
>
>   
>> There are tons of great Cisco Switches going for cheap on the secondary
>> markets in that price range and port density...
>>
>> I think the orignial poster of the email thread was looking for something
>> small, hardend, low power for outdoor application.
>>
>>
>> Faisal Imtiaz
>> Computer Office Solutions Inc. /SnappyDSL.net
>> Ph: (305) 663-5518 x 232
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>> Behalf Of Jayson Baker
>> Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 11:45 PM
>> To: fai...@snappydsl.net; WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Small Managed Switches
>>
>> Not really, but if MT would come out with a RouterBoard that had 12, 24, 48
>> ports and was under $300 we'd buy a *ton* of them.
>> I wouldn't think it'd be that difficult, actually.
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 9:36 PM, Faisal Imtiaz 
>> wrote:
>>
>> 
>>> BTW, quick question, anyone out there using Router Boards as l3 Switches
>>>   
>> ?
>> 
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>>
>>> Faisal Imtiaz
>>> Computer Office Solutions Inc. /SnappyDSL.net
>>> Ph: (305) 663-5518 x 232
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
>>> On Behalf Of Nick Olsen
>>> Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 7:53 PM
>>> To: WISPA General List
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Small Managed Switches
>>>
>>> This is my main complaint with the 1800-8G and the 1800-24G
>>>
>>> I've asked procurve to add these 3 features and got a standard "we'll
>>> think about it" answer.
>>>
>>> 1. Ability to label ports
>>> 2. Ability to label vlans
>>> 3. Ability to disable a port
>>>
>>> All very simple requests that can't take much in terms of
>>> memory/firmware size to implement.
>>>
>>> In terms of speed, stability, function other then the above, its a
>>> awesome switch.
>>>
>>> Nick Olsen
>>> Brevard Wireless
>>> (321) 205-1100 x106
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>> From: "Tom DeReggi" 
>>> Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 7:42 PM
>>> To: "n...@brevardwireless.com" , "WISPA
>>> General List" 
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Small Managed Switches
>>>
>>> There are several classes of VLAN switches.
>>>
>>> I'll use SMC as an example...
>>>
>>> 1) They have the higher end models that are Full VLAN support that are
>>> very
>>>
>>> intuitive and fully flexible. For example, they'll allow you to label
>>> each
>>>
>>> port in web interface. They fully refer to each ports specifying their
>>> Egress and Ingress VLAn support, etc.  They allow every thing to be done.
>>> But because they are intuitive, in the web interface itself,  its easy
>>> to configure them without accidentally misconfiguring another clients.
>>> They make great switches that will act as both Trunk backbone switches
>>> and end location switches.
>>>
>>> 2) then they have lower end model. They let one do almost everything
>>> with VLAN. But they are way less intuitive. And they dont work as well
>>> for dual
>>>
>>> purpose, and tend to work better as a backbone or end location switch.
>>> They
>>>
>>> lack abilty to label ports.They have confusing terminology to enable
>>> or disable like "VLAN Aware" that may not be specific on what VLAN
>>> functionality is enabled by making it aware.
>>> It usually takes a quick read of the manual before making a config,
>>> because
>>>
>>> the logic is not straight forward. Many Web Switches are like this.
>>>
>>> SMC and Intellinet have affordable 8 port VLAN switches that are
>>> functional, but with the firmware that is equivellent to low end VLAN
>>> switches as described in #2 above.
>>> But I beleive both have text, SNMP, serial, and Web interfaces, which
>>> give
>>>
>>> them a step up over other basic web switch products.
>>> Both models sell under $200, and have atleast 2 Gigabit ports,
>>> possibly SPF
>>>
>>> ports.
>>>
>>> I just wish someone made a 8 port VLAN switch for the low dollar cost,
>>> that
>>>
>>> had the HIGH END INTUITIVE VLAN firmware, that allowed each port to be
>>> labled in software.
>>>
>>> Tom DeReggi
>>> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
>>> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>>>
>>> - Original Message -
>>> From: "Nick Olsen" 
>>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>>> Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 3:07 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Small Managed Switches
>>>
>>>   
 Well, there is the Procurve 1800-8G that is 8 ports gigabit,
 Management
 
>>> is
>>>   
 a little light, but it will do the simple stuff. like vlans and such.
 They are fanless and we have them on towers, bullet proof all day long.

 Nick Olsen
 Brevard Wireless
 (321) 205-1100 x106


 --

Re: [WISPA] customers dogs chewing on CAT5

[John Thomas]

How about

http://www.lowes.com/lowes/lkn?action=productDetail&productId=69899-1267-FO550M&lpage=none

where the dogs can reach it?

John

Kurt Fankhauser wrote:
> I've had several customers that have had their dog chew on the Cat5 going
> from the house to the TV tower and some of them multiple times.
>
>  
>
> Anyone have ideas on how to keep the dog from chewing on the wire? I've got
> one customer on their 3rd Cat5 run and going out right now to replace a
> different customer that will be his 3rd one as well. 
>
>  
>
> I'm about ready to shoot the stinking dog..
>
>  
>
> Kurt Fankhauser
> WAVELINC
> P.O. Box 126
> Bucyrus, OH 44820
> 419-562-6405
> www.wavelinc.com
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] MT Lamer question

[John Thomas]

Is there any reason that you want those IP addresses accessing your box 
at all?
You can probably block several /8's and make things work better.

John


Scott Vander Dussen wrote:
> Lamer question-
> I have a MT box we use for a public hotspot and logs reveal folks are trying 
> to hack the password (from WAN, not actual customers) - IPs trace back to 
> China and stuff.. anyhow - is there an easy way to implement a temporary (12 
> hour) or so ban on an IP after x attempts?  Thanks.
>
> `S
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Court says cities have the right tobar telecommunicationstowers

[John Thomas]

There are several of these on I80 and Hwy 50 in Northern CA. These silly 
things cost like $40,000 to sort of look like a tree

John

Tom Sharples wrote:
> We spotted several on a recent road-trip around the Sacramento area. Looked 
> like the world's worst fake Christmas tree from Walmart!
>
> Tom S.
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Eje Gustafsson" 
> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
> Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 9:04 AM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court says cities have the right tobar 
> telecommunicationstowers
>
>
>   
>> You can find a lot of fake palm trees in Las Vegas for similar reasons 
>> that
>> if they didn't "hide" the towers then they couldn't put up any more. Drive
>> north towards Nellis airforce base on I-15 on the left side along the rail
>> road tracks one of the palms is not a real palm. There are plenty others
>> around that I seen on different smaller roads.
>>
>> Cities wants cell phones and good coverage but many starts to be sticklers
>> about letting the towers go up to give this coverage. T-mobile and AT&T 
>> had
>> a very long outdrawn "fight" to be able to install the towers they needed 
>> in
>> Pittsburg to get the coverage required. They ended up having to share 
>> tower
>> but even then it was not easy for then. Sister town Frontenac expedited
>> their request on the other hand. The differences between cities politics 
>> and
>> building approvals can be very different (one reason we are now located in
>> Frontenac instead of Pittsburg because Frontenac bent over backwards to 
>> make
>> us happy and get us going while with both Pittsburg as well the county
>> everything we wanted threw up red flags).
>>
>> / Eje
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>> Behalf Of Greg
>> Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 10:19 AM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court says cities have the right to bar
>> telecommunicationstowers
>>
>> The town of Saddle River NJ fought the phone company and they reached an
>> agreement - the phone company decorated the tower with fake evergreen
>> branches. The tower looks like a big pine tree. If you're ever driving on
>> Rt. 17 look at the big pine tree right next to the highway at the Saddle
>> River exit.
>>
>> Greg
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 10:27 AM, Jeff Broadwick
>> wrote:
>>
>> 
>>> "After all, travel is often as much about the journey as it is about the
>>> destination."
>>>
>>> WOW?!?!
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>>> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
>>> Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 10:48 AM
>>> To: wireless@wispa.org
>>> Subject: [WISPA] Court says cities have the right to bar
>>> telecommunicationstowers
>>>
>>> http://www.benton.org/outgoingframe/29127
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>   
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>>
>>>
>>>   
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>   
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>>
>>>
>>>   
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>>   
>> 
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 
>> 
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> --

Re: [WISPA] cellular repeater/bidirectional amps

[John Thomas]

Sometimes, you can contact the carriers and they will install repeaters 
for their clients.

John


jp wrote:
> I've got a wi-ex zboost yx500-cel at home and it works great to bring 
> cellular into my home which is otherwise a dead-zone.
>
> Now, since we're the local gurus of all thing wireless, one of our 
> customers is wanting something comparable for a larger area in an rf 
> unfriendly building (large metal building with various metal additions). 
> It may be necessary to have multiple cellular boosters to provide the 
> indoor coverage they need. I'm studying the various brands at Tessco, 
> and they include the wi-ex series, Wilson, and Digital Antenna Inc.
>
> Seems these are amps, do I need to be concerned about feedback between 
> systems if these are within earshot of each other? I know the outdoor 
> antenna has to be sufficiently isolated from the indoor antenna to 
> provide the gain, which shouldn't be a problem based on the type of 
> construction. Has anyone does a project like this?
>
>
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] choice of upstreams

[John Thomas]

I just got a quote today from a HE reseller for the HE facility in 
Fremont CA
$599 cabinet with 15 amps
$699 cabinet with 15 amps and 20 Megabits/sec
$899 cabinet with 15 amps and 100 megabits/sec

John


Tom DeReggi wrote:
>> HE even has $1250 GEs
>> 
>
> Wow, is that transport or transit?
>
> Yeah, 2 months ago, we were going to get an Abovenet transport to Hurricain 
> transit because Hurricane's market low pricing, but then Equinix started 
> giving us a hard time on colo, trying to charge us more for the colo than 
> both the transport and transit links combined, so we pulled the plug on the 
> order.
>
> Hurricaine had the $2 /mb on GIg-E as long as also do IPv6 w/ IPv4. But 
> where HE did better is they also gave good pricing on the low capacity 
> commits. That makes it cost effective to give HE a try, before going all 
> out, provided you're in a colo they are at.
>
> We also found a couple providers that had some really cool programs like you 
> commit to a monthly dollar figure, but could accept the bandwdith from any 
> Equinix facility or distributed between several of them, and move the 
> capacity on the fly to either location. It was  great option for someone 
> wanting to expand nationwide, but not knowing where sales will develop first 
> more.
> But it also allowed Gig-E pricing without having to pay for GIg-E in 
> multiple locations.
>
> Its to bad its at Equinix though, cause a lot of teh value proposition got 
> killed once transport added to it to get out to remote cell site, or 
> Equinix's clueless overcharging of antenna roof space.
> Again its really sad when someone tried to charge more for an antenna 
> position than a GIg-E fiber link.
>
> Tom DeReggi
> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Mike Hammett" 
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2009 2:24 AM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] choice of upstreams
>
>
>   
>> Not to you, but to the thread:
>>
>> Cogent isn't even the low cost leader anymore.
>>
>> PCCW is often cheaper as is HE.
>>
>> HE even has $1250 GEs and $400 FEs.
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> From: "Tom DeReggi" 
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 9:17 PM
>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] choice of upstreams
>>
>> 
>>> Brad,
>>>
>>> Once again I disagree.
>>>
>>> Cogent represents themselves as  low cost, but they have never 
>>> represented
>>> themselves as low quality.
>>>
>>> Second, Cogent is most ideal as the FIRST PRIMARY provider, because 
>>> Cogent
>>> is higher performing, and faster speed connections are more affordable.
>>> I agree, a backup secondary provider is needed to help when there are
>>> short
>>> outages. The backup providers dont need to be as high a capacity, or as
>>> quality, as they are seldom used exempt in the rare emergencies.
>>>
>>> Third, What determines how inexpensive a Transit provider is has nothing
>>> to
>>> do with Quality, it has to do with who has more settlement free peers.
>>> Cogent costs less, because Cogent has to pay "fewer" other ISPs for
>>> capacity.  This DOES NOT mean they use low quality public peering, it
>>> means
>>> that they have more quality private peering negotiated at better terms.
>>>
>>>   
 Bottom line is any carrier can break
 
>>> That, I agree with.  Which is why its important to have two upstreams.
>>> But,
>>> that is not a reason to not buy Cogent first.
>>> By buying Cogent first it allows a provider to become more profitable
>>> sooner, and therefore able to afford sooner multiple upstreams.
>>>
>>> Its also depends on what the downstream offers in its value proposition.
>>> With Cogent, I offer my custoemrs Gig-E when others can offer 100mb.
>>> With Cogent, I can offer my customers half the price, if not 1/3rd the
>>> price
>>> that my tier2 competitiors can offer.
>>> With Cogent, I offer excellent performance, better than most, most of the
>>> time, and if they get an outage so what.
>>> Is it really better to have less good performance all the time, to gain
>>> .009
>>> better uptime?
>>> That depends on the target client base of the WISP.
>>>
>>> You also got another thing right... I am largely dependant on Cogent, and
>>> I
>>> hate that.  But its relevent to ask why I'm dependant? When I first
>>> started
>>> out, it was because of price, but not anymore. I'm dependant on Cogent
>>> because its really hard to find a Tier1 Carrier that can offer anywhere
>>> near
>>> as equivellent consistent performance and tech support. My customers
>>> really
>>> noticed, everytime I tried someone else, so someone else never lastest.
>>>
>>> Note that I did not say "uptime", I said "performance".
>>>
>>> Tom DeReggi
>>> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
>>> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>>>
>>>
>>> - Original Message - 
>>> From: "Bra

Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)

[John Thomas]

Cisco's 1242's are certified for 5.4-5.7 GHz. Could you use Cisco APs' 
and Mikrotik clients?

John


Randy Cosby wrote:
> I know the mikrotik R52N card is.. I was so excited...
>
> Until I read closer.  It's certified as a client device, but not as an 
> AP.  The AP has to do all the heavy DFS/TPC lifting :(
>
> Randy
>
>
> jp wrote:
>   
>> I'll send one lucky winner $30 paypal if they can show me within a week 
>> the M series is 5.4 certified via an FCC document.
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 09:18:30PM -0400, Gino Villarini wrote:
>>   
>> 
>>> Where?
>>>
>>> This is the FCC cert for the M5 Rocket
>>>
>>> http://tinyurl.com/yaolxlj
>>>
>>> its only certified for 5.8 ghz AND get this, for PTMP its only certified
>>> with 6db omnis . so how come they are selling sectors for them .
>>>
>>> Show me where its certified for 5.4, ill send you a $100 paypal
>>>
>>> Gino A. Villarini
>>> g...@aeronetpr.com
>>> Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
>>> tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>>> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
>>> Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 8:42 PM
>>> To: WISPA General List
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
>>>
>>> Actually, their new M series has 5.4 GHz certification.
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> From: "jp" 
>>> Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 2:42 PM
>>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] To G or not to G :-)
>>>
>>> 
>>>   
 On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 11:08:02PM -0400, David Hulsebus wrote:
   
 
> I have used 411 AP's with XR5 cards and NS5L's with good success in
> small subdivision projects. 1/2 to 1 mile using 5M channels running
> 
>   
>>> G,
>>> 
>>>   
> mostly horizontal. We lock the rates lower than 54 if we see any CCQ
> numbers consistently below 66%. We've had our best success at 36MB.
> Lowering not raising the power in most cases improves our CCQ. But
> again, we're mostly within a half mile. We don't have a sector
> 
>   
>>> broader
>>> 
>>>   
> than 90 deg, run mostly 5.4 on the AP and 5.7 on our backhauls. One
> 
>   
>>> site
>>> 
>>>   
> Dave Hulsebus
> 
>   
 I'm curious what you use that is cheap and legal for 5.4 APs? I know
 that nothing UBNT makes is legal for 5.4 use in the US. Not being a
 frequency nazi, just looking for something legal for me to use.

 -- 
 /*
 Jason Philbrook   |   Midcoast Internet Solutions - Wireless and DSL
KB1IOJ|   Broadband Internet Access, Dialup, and Hosting
 http://f64.nu/   |   for Midcoast Mainehttp://www.midcoast.com/
 */



   
 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>   
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/

   
 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>   
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

   
 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>>  
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>> 
>>>   
>>   
>> 
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa

Re: [WISPA] solar site

[John Thomas]

It looks like there is a sweet spot at 60 watts

http://www.solarhome.org/51-60wattsolarpanels.aspx

About $250 each.

John

Mike wrote:
> I was shocked to find the 15W panels at Northern for $79.00.  I 
> ordered some and they work great.  You need a charge controller, 
> $45.00 to keep the batteries from over charging.  You have to get 
> creative with uni-strut and angle iron to make your own mount, or buy 
> them.  Batteries are the biggest expense.  So to answer your question, yes.
>
>
> At 11:29 AM 8/25/2009, you wrote:
>   
>> Are you really saying that less than 500 bucks will build a solar system
>> good enough for our radios these days?
>>
>> Dude, if that's true I can open up a LOT more doors!
>> marlon
>> 
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] solar site

[John Thomas]

Absolutely, 12, 24, or 48 volts depending on what you are trying to do.

John


Paul Rice wrote:
> I'd recommend you use either a unmanaged or managed industrial DC powered 
> switch 12-20 vdc
> otherwise your going to need a LOT of solar panels (650 watts is what my 
> calcs came up with)
> In fact eliminate all 120 AC from your outdoor install for the best results 
> to save money on smaller solar rigs.
>
> Paul
>
> --
> From: "Paul Rice" 
> Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 12:09 PM
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] solar site
>
>   
>> Yikes, that is daunting.
>>
>> Is that the site your putting in, or your example site?
>>
>> --
>> From: "Marlon K. Schafer" 
>> Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 12:04 PM
>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] solar site
>>
>> 
>>> 120
>>>
>>> - Original Message - 
>>> From: "Paul Rice" 
>>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 9:35 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] solar site
>>>
>>>
>>>   
 Hey Marlon

 is that 1.8 amps at 120VAC or 1.8 amps at 12VDC?

 volts x amps = watts
 the precise nominal and max watts that is the real factor determining 
 the
 size of the power system needed
 the difference is 25 watts or 250 watts :)
 CostCo has a solar panel + charger + frame that would work for 25 watts,
 I
 think

 500 is good price, since your able to access it easily, it shouldn't be
 much
 of risk.

 --
 From: "Marlon K. Schafer" 
 Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 11:29 AM
 To: "WISPA General List" 
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] solar site

 
> Are you really saying that less than 500 bucks will build a solar 
> system
> good enough for our radios these days?
>
> Dude, if that's true I can open up a LOT more doors!
> marlon
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Mike" 
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 8:50 AM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] solar site
>
>
>   
>> I bought two of the Northern Tool $79.00 15 watt panels, their $49.00
>> charge controller, a deep cycle marine battery from Walmart and built
>> my own.  So far, the "fully charged" light comes on every day.  The
>> battery should run my two radio repeater for more than a week.  Might
>> not be the club way to do it, but it works.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> At 11:09 PM 8/24/2009, you wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> Sorry for the cross post.  Time is short on this project and I need a
>>> lot
>>> of
>>> help.
>>>
>>> I've never done a solar project.  Never really even looked at them due
>>> to
>>> the costs I've seen tossed about.
>>>
>>> Now I have a customer that's willing to purchase the initial equipment
>>> needed to cover his community.  The ONLY way into the area is a hill
>>> that's
>>> within sight of my tower and NOT anywhere near power.
>>>
>>> I'll be able to just run a single MT board with two radios in it for
>>> this
>>> site.  One backhaul and 1 distribution.  I'll guess that I'll have 
>>> less
>>> than
>>> a 2 amp draw (probably much less than 1 amp in reality).
>>>
>>> We don't often get long periods of no sun.  Could be days of fog or 
>>> low
>>> clouds in the winter, but mostly we'll have a lot of sun.  On the 
>>> foggy
>>> or
>>> cloudy days we often don't have enough wind to worry about wind
>>> generation.
>>> I think.
>>>
>>> So, please clue me in on what to buy, who to buy it from (vendors
>>> welcome!)
>>> and anything else I'm missing.
>>>
>>> Thanks all!
>>> marlon
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>   
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>> 
>
> ---

Re: [WISPA] [Wisp] solar site

[John Thomas]

Is there any reason you can't mount the panels close to the ground? In 
Nevada, this is common practice.

Can you setup a small windmill? Home Depot has these ( as do many other 
suppliers)
http://www.homedepot.com/h_d1/N-5yc1vZ1xr5/R-100658295/h_d2/ProductDisplay?langId=-1&storeId=10051&catalogId=10053

400 watts rated.

John


Marlon K. Schafer wrote:
> H.  Note to self.  Build good mounts, but make them so that they 
> collapse in high winds instead of breaking.
>
> Thanks for the tip Bill!
> marlon
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Bill Prince" 
> To: "Principal WISPA Member List" 
> Cc: "'WISPA General List'" ; 
> 
> Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 8:21 AM
> Subject: Re: [Wisp] [WISPA] solar site
>
>
>   
>> IMO 24 hours is not enough reserve.  In our area, we have many occasions
>> when there is not enough sun for several days running.  I would plan on
>> at least 100 hours reserve; more if you are more conservative.
>>
>> Another issue is storm damage.  Two years ago we lost the panels on a
>> solar-powered site because of hurricane-force winds.  One of the panels
>> only flew about 100 feet from the tower, and was not damaged
>> electrically.  The other panel went 200 yards, and was damaged pretty
>> badly.  We put the surviving panel back up in 3 days (we had to build a
>> new mount, as the old one was completely destroyed).  Still, the site
>> never went down because we built a week reserve into the batteries.
>>
>> We emergency-ordered a replacement panel, and got it less than a week
>> later.  We were able to operate on that one panel for the intervening
>> time.  We weren't completely charging the batteries, but there was
>> enough reserve to limp along for the time we were down one panel.
>>
>> YMMV
>>
>>
>> Bill Prince
>> Skyline Broadband Service
>> (a division of Coastal Sierra)
>> 650-917-9279
>>
>>
>>
>> Scott Parsons wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Marlon, Long time...
>>>
>>> Voltage 12V
>>> Power Consumption: MT 4 watts, 2 Radio cards 8 watts
>>> Total= 12 watts @ 12V
>>>
>>> We have a handy calculator at
>>> http://tyconpower.com/learning_center/learning_center.htm
>>>
>>> I've attached the results. I used 4 hours of sun for your location based 
>>> on
>>> another post I saw.
>>> I used 24 hours extra battery capacity. You may want to increase or 
>>> decrease
>>> this depending on the reliability of the sun in your area.
>>>
>>> You need 73 watts minimum solar panel capacity
>>> You need at least 88 Ah in battery capacity
>>>
>>> This is bigger than the stuff we offer right now but here's a starting 
>>> list:
>>>
>>> 1. 85W solar panel - You should be able to get for about $350 or less
>>>
>>> 2. 12V 8A Solar Controller - You should be able to get for $60 or less
>>>
>>> 3. 100Ah battery - You don't need a deep discharge type because the solar
>>> controller will disconnect the load when the battery voltage reaches 
>>> 11.1V
>>> which protects the battery from over discharge. You just need a type that
>>> has good performance in cold weather. You should be able to pick up a
>>> battery for less than $200
>>>
>>> 4. You'll need a mount for the solar panels try here:
>>> http://power-fab.com/products.htm They make all kinds of mounts. I'm not
>>> sure the cost.
>>>
>>> 5. You'll need a vented outdoor enclosure if you are putting the battery
>>> inside. I've seen people put the battery in one of those plastic battery
>>> cases you see in small power boats and then the enclosure requirements 
>>> for
>>> the controller and electronics becomes easy. We have suitable enclosures 
>>> for
>>> $70 14"x10"x5" Polycarbonate outdoor enclosure
>>>
>>> 6. Wiring is quite simple.
>>>
>>> Any decent vendor will warranty the panels for 20-25 years and the solar
>>> controller for 1 year.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Scott
>>>
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>>> Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
>>> Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 10:10 PM
>>> To: WISPA General List
>>> Cc: Principal WISPA Member List; isp-wirel...@isp-wireless.com
>>> Subject: [WISPA] solar site
>>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> Sorry for the cross post.  Time is short on this project and I need a lot 
>>> of
>>>
>>> help.
>>>
>>> I've never done a solar project.  Never really even looked at them due to
>>> the costs I've seen tossed about.
>>>
>>> Now I have a customer that's willing to purchase the initial equipment
>>> needed to cover his community.  The ONLY way into the area is a hill 
>>> that's
>>> within sight of my tower and NOT anywhere near power.
>>>
>>> I'll be able to just run a single MT board with two radios in it for this
>>> site.  One backhaul and 1 distribution.  I'll guess that I'll have less 
>>> than
>>>
>>> a 2 amp draw (probably much less than 1 amp in reality).
>>>
>>> We don't often get long periods of no sun.  Could be days of fog or low
>>> clouds in the winter, but mostly we'll have a lot of sun.  On the foggy 
>>> or
>>> cloudy days we often don'

Re: [WISPA] On-line back-up

[John Thomas]

Are you willing to setup a server for their backups?
For home users, Mozy charges $4.95 per month. If you setup your own 
backup server, you would have the initial expense of a server with big 
drive space, but you could charge $4.95 and at least save money on your 
upstream bandwidth.

John

Mike wrote:
> In my heart, I know you are right.  The nature of our business is we 
> buy bandwidth wholesale, and then resell it to others who can't 
> afford to buy dedicated bandwidth.  We factor an oversubscription 
> rate, and count on bursty, short lived traffic from users that share 
> the bandwidth.
>
> If I could afford to add bandwidth so everybody could maintain a 500 
> kbps connection for days on end, then I would.  But the economics are 
> I pay $350.00 for my first MB and $250.00 for each additional.  So a 
> person using the system for backup is utilizing a $175.00 resource 
> for $42.40 a month; IF the back-up software only uses 500 kbps, and 
> I've seen them surge way over that.
>
> So, two people running Mosy hog a Meg or more of a precious 
> resource.  Four of them, and they've used a couple MB or more.  I'm 
> sure you get the point.
>
> I do have a Netequalizer in place with fairness rules that will 
> penalize those packets, because they are long duration IF and when 
> the network gets near capacity.  So, they get penalized, and grandma 
> downloading pictures from her grand kids also gets penalized, even 
> though her use is bursty and infrequent, just because there is not 
> enough overhead on the pipe BECAUSE of the long duration back-up users.
>
> Without the Netequalizer, just a few of these users would bring my 
> network to its knees.
>
> I am beginning to think Mosy and their ilk belong in the same camp as 
> Netflix and the P2Pers.
>
> Mike
>
> At 05:51 AM 8/13/2009, you wrote:
>   
>> Mike wrote:
>> 
>>> Seems wrong too that a company can make money off using MY bandwidth
>>> for hours on end with no compensation.
>>>   
>> You are getting compensated, by your customer, so now it isn't really
>> your bandwidth, but theirs. The customer is paying you to transport
>> data, be it pictures of kittens, a HDD backup, or something else. If the
>> terms of your contract are such that you can't support this usage, then
>> you should probably look at changing the terms of the contract.
>>
>> However, I would think that it would be pretty easy to look at the flows
>> and put throttling rules in place that limit Carbonite/Mozy/xyz traffic
>> when there is congestion.
>>
>> Josh
>>
>>
>> --
>> Josh Cheney
>> josh.che...@gmail.com
>> http://www.joshcheney.com
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>> 
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Small auto start generator

[John Thomas]

Unless your equipment is tolerant of voltage swings, you will still 
probably want a DC-DC regulator, but that will likely be more efficient 
than a 12/24volt to 120 volt inverter.

John


Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE wrote:
> Hi Guys...I'd steer away from inverters since they soak up a lot of 
> power. You might want to look at some solar stuff with some of the AGM 
> batteries Marlon mentioned in another thread. Run everything @ 24V is 
> good that way you don't need any dc-dc converters.
>
> Leon
>
> * os10ru...@gmail.com wrote, On 8/2/2009 3:27 PM:
>> You might want something like an inverter (Xantrex for example) 
>> which  includes a DC to AC inverter, battery charger, and automatic 
>> transfer  switch. Add the batteries and you're done.
>>
>> Greg
>>
>> On Aug 2, 2009, at 2:38 PM, Jerry Richardson wrote:
>>
>>  
>>> Thank you,
>>> That is very good advice. After some research, I'm leaning toward a  
>>> UPS.
>>>
>>> A pair of good AGM batteries and charge controller will cost less  
>>> and be far less maintainence. Then I'd just run the CMM off the  
>>> batteries @ 24VDC.
>>>
>>> Thanks again
>>> Jerry
>>>
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org 
>>> [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]  On Behalf Of Gary Garrett
>>> Sent: Sunday, August 02, 2009 11:59 AM
>>> To: WISPA General List
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Small auto start generator
>>>
>>> Small generators do not auto start very reliably.
>>> When cold or dampness causes hard starting the starter can overheat  
>>> and
>>> burn out. Generally you need an electric choke to start gas engines,
>>> propane can "flood" and need to rest before trying again, diesel 
>>> can  be
>>> REAL hard to start when cold. Auto starters can not adapt to changing
>>> conditions.
>>> Our best generator is a Propane Ford inline 6 cyl. 25 KW 3 phase.  
>>> (1955
>>> Model)
>>> The monitor cranks for 1 min then rests and tries 3 times.  
>>> Everything is
>>> adjustable. It knows to stop cranking when it sees AC voltage from the
>>> Gen. so the motor over runs the starter for just a few seconds. Only a
>>> huge starter motor can take this abuse and last unattended.
>>>
>>> You may be money ahead to find out why the existing generator is not
>>> starting and get it fixed.
>>>
>>> Jerry Richardson wrote:
>>>
 We rent on a tower that is suspposed to have gen-set backup but it  
 does not start reliably.

 Any recommendations on a small auto-start generator? We only need  
 to power a CMMmicro - ~100watts.

 Thanks

 __
 Jerry Richardson
 airCloud Communications
   
> 
>
>
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
> Version: 8.5.406 / Virus Database: 270.13.42/2278 - Release Date: 08/02/09 
> 17:56:00
>   
> 
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Small auto start generator

[John Thomas]

Is this some place you could put some batteries and a solar panel or 
small windmill?

John


Jerry Richardson wrote:
> Thank you,
> That is very good advice. After some research, I'm leaning toward a UPS. 
>
> A pair of good AGM batteries and charge controller will cost less and be far 
> less maintainence. Then I'd just run the CMM off the batteries @ 24VDC.
>
> Thanks again
> Jerry
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
> Behalf Of Gary Garrett
> Sent: Sunday, August 02, 2009 11:59 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Small auto start generator
>
> Small generators do not auto start very reliably.
> When cold or dampness causes hard starting the starter can overheat and 
> burn out. Generally you need an electric choke to start gas engines, 
> propane can "flood" and need to rest before trying again, diesel can be 
> REAL hard to start when cold. Auto starters can not adapt to changing 
> conditions.
> Our best generator is a Propane Ford inline 6 cyl. 25 KW 3 phase. (1955 
> Model)
> The monitor cranks for 1 min then rests and tries 3 times. Everything is 
> adjustable. It knows to stop cranking when it sees AC voltage from the 
> Gen. so the motor over runs the starter for just a few seconds. Only a 
> huge starter motor can take this abuse and last unattended.
>
> You may be money ahead to find out why the existing generator is not 
> starting and get it fixed.
>
> Jerry Richardson wrote:
>   
>> We rent on a tower that is suspposed to have gen-set backup but it does not 
>> start reliably.
>>
>> Any recommendations on a small auto-start generator? We only need to power a 
>> CMMmicro - ~100watts.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>>
>> __
>> Jerry Richardson
>> airCloud Communications
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>  
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>> 
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Are customers increasingly clueless? Or is itgettingbetter?

[John Thomas]

Ryan, when you agree to offer service, that becomes your responsibility, 
and when someone is paying for it, they have a reasonable expectation of 
the service they are paying for.
With that said, is it crazy expensive to get a 2 x T-1 where you are? 
Maybe a T-3 is stupid expensive, but if you even had *some* backup 
bandwidth available, you may have saved that client.
I keep seeing people complain about how they can't sell their wireless 
service and make any money. In the San Francisco Bay Area, people pay 
from $250 to $600 per month for a 1.5 - 5 Megabit Business Class 
Wireless Internet connections, and are generally happy to pay for it as 
2 x T-1's tend to run $700 - 1000 per month. With that said, most of 
those companies have multiple redundant upstreams, and they *rarely* 
have problems.

 Towerstream spells it out on their web page

http://www.towerstream.com/index.asp?ref=products_faq

Hide Answer
Q: Is TowerStream a residential ISP?
A:
TowerStream is a business internet provider. Our smallest connection is 
$256 a month; if you need business-class service at your residence, 
please contact our sales team






Ryan Ghering wrote:
> Actually we maintain pretty good transparency with our clients, we did let
> them know it was a qwest issue, and even went as far as giving the customer
> the qwest trouble ticket number if the wanted it. We also updated the
> customers each time if we got any ETA information. We NEVER leave the
> customer in the dark. Also how is it MY fault that I can't find affordable
> redundant upstream?
> Where is that cost gona come from? You think my customers are gona pay
> double so that I can get a 2nd upstream in here?
> Hell no.. Customers only want a few things. As much bandwidth as they can
> get, 100 % uptime and it all has to be for 25 bucks a month or less.
>
> Now thats keeping it real..
>
> Nobody can tell me that they honestly will by a 10,000 to 15,000 dollar
> secondary pipe if their business won't support it without passing that cost
> to the customer. Its not only stupid but bad business. Customers today,
> don't care WHO's fault it is, fact is the ISP is blamed for ANY problem.
> Hell we have a older couple that blames us everytime that epson updates
> drivers for their printer and it stops working, "because the update was done
> over my internet".
>
> Its lets get real time.. If you are a WISP or ISP in BFE. Costs are higher
> profit margins are way lower and redundant connections are REALLY costly and
> hard to come by. So who loose's here due to LEC stupidity? (which we found
> out is what it was btw) the ISP.. We always loose as its always our fault.
> No matter what the problem we are at fault.
>
> Last week we had a major hail storm, Thankfully only a few canopy units were
> damaged. However 2 of those customers had the same opinion.. "How come "you"
> can't protect these things better. Why do I have to be without service for a
> day because "your gear" is made faulty.
>
> Is this my fault? NO its Motorola's for putting the quality hardware that
> never fails that we love so much, in a crappy plastic casing.
>
> Thats reality..
>
> Ryan
>
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 5:33 PM, Tom DeReggi wrote:
>
>   
>> Actually, I disagree with your example.
>>
>> You let your customer down, not Qwest.
>> Did you route them out your secondary transit? If you didn;t have one,
>> thats
>> not the customer's faught.
>> Did you let him know that you are trying to contact Quest yourself to get
>> more information on an ETA, and influence a work around?
>> Did he feel you were in control of the situation? Or did you leave him to
>> fend for himself, even though you were the expert on the technology?
>>
>> Sending the message, "oh well, its down, not my problem, let all my own
>> customers suffer, so what" is not taking care of your clients.
>> If you had communicated with your client making him feel like you were
>> working towards defending his interests, he never would have took action
>> into his own hands and called Qwest directly to investigate further, and
>> get
>> false answers.
>>
>> So yes, Customers can be irrational, often unfair and unforgiving, but if
>> you want to keep your clients its up to you to deal with it and take care
>> of
>> them.
>> Who's faught it is, is irrelevent. Customer Service is about taking care of
>> the customer.
>>
>> I just lost a customer 2 weeks ago. Power went out AGAIN! It keeps blowing
>> breakers on electrical panels not under my controll or access.  I can put
>> UPSes there all day, but that does no good if breakers turn off upstream of
>> my electrical Demarc.  But DSL, CABLE, and Cellular EVDO didn't go out
>> every
>> time the property had power failures.  It was my faught that I designed a
>> business install to be behind an electric  breaker that was outside my
>> control to manage.  If I did my job and took care of the client, I would
>> have called the power company or property management and redesign an
>> alternate solu

Re: [WISPA] Dragonwave Support

[John Thomas]

To be fair, I wonder how much larger Cogent is than Dragonwave?
Someone has to pay the engineer's salary, and it costs to have a 24/7 
support staff.

I always find it interesting to see people's perspective's on support.

John

Tom DeReggi wrote:
> Well, when I really needed support for Dragonwave, 3-DB Networks (Daniel 
> White) was the man. (even though he's in sales)
> So I'm saying, you can also rely on the channel.
>
> As for Dragonwave direct support, during business hours I had found them to 
> be helpful, and I have respect for their engineer's skill sets. And 24x7 
> support is an option for REAL Emergencies.
> But, I tried calling the 24x7 support twice (not crazy hours), and I got a 
> call back promptly both times, and they answered my questions. BUT they made 
> me feel so guilty for calling, I'm not sure I'll ever call it again.  And 
> support was rushed, and to the minimum level needed to get me going.  Be 
> prepared for the typical, you sure have better read the manual thouroughly 
> before wasting their time on Sunday, and better have justification that its 
> important.  It is NOT regular support given 24/7.  Its page someone at home 
> 24x7, when they don't really want to be disturbed, but they'll take the 
> call, if its important.  I'm not complaining, I'm very thankful I had an 
> option to call them on Sunday.  I'm just setting realistic expectations.
>
> Compare that to Cogent Communcations support. You can call them at 3am in 
> the morning, and get an experienced CISCO certified engineer, to help you do 
> just about anything. And they welcome your call, because they have a full 
> night crew there waiting for work. Its a whole nother level of 24x7 support.
>
> Tom DeReggi
> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "can...@believewireless.net" 
> To: 
> Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 8:52 AM
> Subject: [WISPA] Dragonwave Support
>
>
>   
>> Just curious what everyone's experience with Dragonwave support has been.
>> Do they answer e-mail/phone calls promptly?  Is their support 24/7?  Is
>> the product so good you just don't know because you've never contacted 
>> them?
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 
>> 
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Sales Lead Zip code 95008

[John Thomas]

Is Covadwireless out of their price range?

John

Jerry Richardson wrote:
> Name
> Ray
>
> Email
> r_a_...@yahoo.com
>
> Phone
> 408-421-2100
>
> Your message: Do you guys cover 95008 zip code for wireless internet? if not 
> any suggestions who does?
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] POE Switch box

[John Thomas]

Yes, but Cisco switches only do Cisco Prestandard and 802.3af 48 volt.

John


Charles Wyble wrote:
> On a cisco poe enabled switch can't you just do
>
> conf t
> interface Gig0/0
> shutdown
> no shutdown
> done
>
> to power cycle?
>
> Lots of resellers out there.
>
>
> Jason Hensley wrote:
>   
>> Looking for recommendations on a 10+ port POE switch that will do up to
>> 24volt.  Prefer remote manageable with options to switch power on and off
>> per port (remote reboot per port).
>>
>> Thanks in advance!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>  
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>> 
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Re-evaluating our anti-spam solution

[John Thomas]

I know of Barracudas that the only time they get rebooted is for 
firmware updates.
They can run for months without a reboot, but usually the firmware 
updates have useful stuff in 3-6 months that requires a firmware upgrade.

John


Charles Wyble wrote:
> David E. Smith wrote:
>
>   
>> What kind of problems were/are you having with your Barracudas? On the 
>> (exceedingly rare) occasion that ours do anything odd, rebooting them 
>> almost always clears it up.
>> 
>
> One should NEVER have to reboot a mail server, outside of a kernel 
> upgrade (and even then one can use ksplice).
>
> I'm sorry but that's a pathetic resolution process.
>
> I have mail/web/dns servers with years of uptime. They sit there and 
> just work. RAID + UPS = 100% uptime.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Re-evaluating our anti-spam solution

[John Thomas]

Please see my responses inline

Jeremy Parr wrote:
> 2009/7/14 David E. Smith :
>   
>> Don Grossman wrote:
>> 
>>> It seems time to take a look at our anti-spam solution.  Currently we
>>> are looking to replace out Barracuda due to ongoing issues with the
>>> box that after several attempts to work with Barracuda can not be
>>> resolved.  Barracuda is helpful but like to point at other things like
>>> DNS and unrelated stuff.  In the end they log into the box after
>>> wasting time so something to kick the box and we are good for an
>>> undetermined amount of time.
>>>   
>> What kind of problems were/are you having with your Barracudas? On the
>> (exceedingly rare) occasion that ours do anything odd, rebooting them
>> almost always clears it up.
>> 
>
> I've had them get overwhelmed with mail, and the solutions was to wait
> for their support to connect in and "clear the logs". I could have
> done that myself!
>   
I have a client that was taking 60,000 + messages a day and his 300 
wasn't even breathing hard. We had another client whose Barracuda 300 
*tried* to take 100,000 messages in an hour. That took Barracuda 
Networks logging in to clear up as 99% of them were SPAM and virii.


> What pushed me over the edge, was a failed hard drive. I was running a
> Spam Firewall 300, which yes, I know, is not a RAIDed config. (which
>   
> is another rabbit hole to go down, considering the box is $3k+)
Hard drives fail, that is why there is RAID. Yes, the 400 is more 
expensive, but then it is a much better fit for an ISP than a 300.
The Barracuda 300 *lists* at $1,999. The hardware replacement is $449 
per year and the updates are $499 per year.

>  and
> the hard drive started to throw errors. The problem, was that these
> errors were not evident to us as the admins of the machine. None of
> the Barracuda logs indicated any sort of issue. The box got slower and
> slower, until one day, it refused to pass mail. When tech support took
> a look, they exclaimed that the hard drive had been throwing errors
> for quite some time, any now it was too late, the box was dead.
>
> Their solution always worked very well, and I didn't need to think
> about it. Until it blew up without telling anyone it planned to.
>   
I have seen a few of them fail, but never one doing like you are talking 
about. Usually, they stop passing email, then Barracuda logs in and 
calls them dead and ships a replacement.

John

>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] OT, pesky email stuff

[John Thomas]

http://www.mxlogic.com/services/email-filtering/index.cfm

they have done good by us.

John


George Rogato wrote:
> Wonder how much it is.
> Says it's based on qty of email addresses.
>
>
>
> RickG wrote:
>   
>> Cost?
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 2:07 PM, Pat O'Connor wrote:
>> 
>>> We're switching to this over this weekend.
>>>
>>> http://www.redcondor.com/products/appliances.htm
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> rea...@muddyfrogwater.us wrote:
>>>   
 One of the things I've done in the spam war is to use something called 
 ASSP,
 which is just Anti Spam SMTP Proxy.

 It does a passable job of prevening inbound spam, and it prevents anyone 
 not
 on my network from sending mail out through my server, via firewall rules
 put on the server.

 You can use a similar setup to have your customer's emails filtered 
 outbound
 through something like this.It can also be placed on alternate ports 
 and
 using firewall rules, prevent any cust omer from sending mail directly out.

 I haven't needed to do that, at least not yet.

 ASSP, when run on the mail server machine itself, can also act as an
 authentication and filtering of outbound emails.




 
 

 - Original Message -
 From: "Marlon K. Schafer" 
 To: "WISPA General List" 
 Sent: Friday, June 26, 2009 8:33 AM
 Subject: [WISPA] OT, pesky email stuff



 
> Hi All,
>
> What are you guys doing for email these days?  I LOVE my setup for it's
> reliability, ease of use etc.
>
> Hacked customer accounts and virus's are killing me though.  We don't
> catch
> things until 100,000s of messages go out and we get black listed.  This
> has
> now happened 3 or 4 times in the last couple of years.
>
> My server admins aren't coming up with a solution to this other than to
> limit cc's to 25 per message.  We did that once before and my phone rang
> off
> the hook because people can't send jokes to their friends.
>
> The other thing that makes it hard is that the log files that I get (up to
> 40 megs per day!) don't list the authenticated sender, only the reply
> address.  So I see tens of thousands of messages from a user that's not
> even
> mine (faked info).  sigh
>
> We use Courier MTA.
>
> My thought is to set the server to allow a max of 1000 messages per day
> per
> user.  And to somehow make the log file ONLY send me the number of
> messages
> received per a user, and the number sent, user name and ip addy of all
> those
> sending.  Twice now I've asked about that idea and gotten no response from
> the server admins.
>
> Suggestions?
>
> laters,
> marlon
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>   
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


 
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>>   
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>  
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>> 
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> 

Re: [WISPA] OT, pesky email stuff

[John Thomas]

I don't know about those, but Frontbridge got blacklisted once and they 
are an anti-spam provider

John


George Rogato wrote:
> How come Google, Yahoo, and Live.com don't get black listed.
> I'm pretty sure 1 million times more spam comes out of those domains 
> than any small independent isp's ...
>
>
>
> Marlon K. Schafer wrote:
>   
>> Hi All,
>>
>> What are you guys doing for email these days?  I LOVE my setup for it's 
>> reliability, ease of use etc.
>>
>> Hacked customer accounts and virus's are killing me though.  We don't catch 
>> things until 100,000s of messages go out and we get black listed.  This has 
>> now happened 3 or 4 times in the last couple of years.
>>
>> My server admins aren't coming up with a solution to this other than to 
>> limit cc's to 25 per message.  We did that once before and my phone rang off 
>> the hook because people can't send jokes to their friends.
>>
>> The other thing that makes it hard is that the log files that I get (up to 
>> 40 megs per day!) don't list the authenticated sender, only the reply 
>> address.  So I see tens of thousands of messages from a user that's not even 
>> mine (faked info).  sigh
>>
>> We use Courier MTA.
>>
>> My thought is to set the server to allow a max of 1000 messages per day per 
>> user.  And to somehow make the log file ONLY send me the number of messages 
>> received per a user, and the number sent, user name and ip addy of all those 
>> sending.  Twice now I've asked about that idea and gotten no response from 
>> the server admins.
>>
>> Suggestions?
>>
>> laters,
>> marlon
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>  
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>> 
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] dual ethernte port router

[John Thomas]

If you are ONLY going to route, no NAT, firewall or other stuff, then a 
Cisco 871 will do what you want. We have tested it at wirespeed.

John


Alan Long wrote:
> Anyone have a suggestion for a dual ethernet port router, that can handle
> 30-50mb/s of traffic. I do not need it to do nat or anything like that, just
> need it to route..I have looked at a cisco 2811..but know there are other
> options..Thanks for any help.
>
>  
>
>
>
>
>
>   
>
>  
>
>  
>
>
>
> Alan Long
> Director of Network Operations 
>
> Aerowire
>  
>  rn%2C+AL+36830&country=us> 687 North Dean Road
> Auburn, AL 36830 
>
>
>   alan.l...@aerowire.net 
>
>
> tel: 
> mobile: 
>
>  
>  mail=along5...@yahoo.com> 3342759998
>  
>  mail=along5...@yahoo.com> 336092 
>
>  
>
>
>
>  
>  nvite=1<=en> Always have my latest info
>
>   Want a
> signature like this?
>
>  
>
>
>   
> 
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Suggestions on Firewall

[John Thomas]

Here is some info

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/secursw/ps5318/index.html

John




Josh Luthman wrote:
> Wait pictures of this GUI???
>
> On 6/23/09, John Thomas  wrote:
>   
>> You might also consider a Cisco 800 or 1800 series router. They do
>> firewalls well and have a nice GUI.
>>
>> John
>>
>> Patrick D.. Nix, Jr wrote:
>> 
>>> Any suggestions on a good linux firewall distro.  I'm looking at either
>>> implementing this or going with an older Cisco PIX 525.  Which would be
>>> the best way to go?  Something with a nice GUI would be good
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>   
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>> 
>
>
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Magic Jack

[John Thomas]

Other opinions about Magic Jack

http://uninstallmagicjack.com/?p=5

John


Chuck Profito wrote:
> That's is what I remember from the list.  Once it was in, a 'normal'
> subscriber couldn't get it out, and they, MJ, had a subscriber installed,
> and "agreed to", OPEN Back Door to any computer it was installed on!   We
> have a lot of subs with these, and I mention it to them, but they don't seem
> to get it.  Scary stuff 
>
> Chuck Profito
> 209-988-7388
> CV-ACCESS, INC
> cprof...@cv-access.com 
> Providing High Speed Broadband 
> to Rural Central California
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick
> Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 8:32 AM
> To: 'WISPA General List'
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Magic Jack
>
> There is some icky stuff in the EULA and apparently there is no way to
> remove it automatically...have to go to the registers to do it properly.
>
> Jeff
>  
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Josh Luthman
> Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 11:21 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Magic Jack
>
> I played with it a while back.  Very good stuff, just needs number
> portability and a little better support.  I know someone who spent nearly
> two days to pay their bill...
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> "When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however
> improbable, must be the truth."
> --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 11:18 AM, George Rogato wrote:
>
>   
>> Who owns Magic Jack?
>>
>>
>>
>> Josh Luthman wrote:
>> 
>>> Summary:
>>>
>>> Google is becoming a phone company.  They just reserved a *million DIDs.
>>>
>>> *Google Voice has great features, idealing for ringing numbers you
>>>   
>> already
>> 
>>> have and its own voicemail.
>>>
>>> Google is taking over the technology market.  Shortly followed by 
>>> the economy.  Then the world.
>>> *
>>> *Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> "When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, 
>>> however improbable, must be the truth."
>>> --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 10:57 AM, David E. Smith  wrote:
>>>
>>>   
 George Rogato wrote:
 
> http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/061809-google-voice.html
>   
 Between this (Google acquiring a million phone numbers), and their 
 announcement a few days ago about their plans to support number 
 portability, it's almost like Google wants to be a phone company too.

 Curiously, I think I might be alright with something like that.

 (Aside: Woulda been nice to put in even a brief summary of the 
 article instead of making everyone click.)

 David Smith
 MVN.net




 
>> --
>> --
>> 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/


 
>> --
>> --
>> 
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

 
>>>
>>>   
>> --
>> --
>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>>
>>>   
>> --
>> --
>> 
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>   
>>
>> --
>> --
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>
>> --
>> --
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>> 
>
>
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join

Re: [WISPA] Suggestions on Firewall

[John Thomas]

You might also consider a Cisco 800 or 1800 series router. They do 
firewalls well and have a nice GUI.

John

Patrick D.. Nix, Jr wrote:
> Any suggestions on a good linux firewall distro.  I'm looking at either
> implementing this or going with an older Cisco PIX 525.  Which would be
> the best way to go?  Something with a nice GUI would be good
>
>  
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] OT: Cisco 7200 Gigabit Ethernet Cards?

[John Thomas]

If you guys want to bash Cisco, that's your perogative, but my 
experience has been somewhat different. We recently took on a new client 
that has some Cisco switches that their old VAR sols them 5 YEARs of 
Smartnets on. Since we are looking at them upgrading to some new 
equipment, we asked Cisco if they would be willing to do something for 
the client, and they said yes, they are willing to credit them for 
existing Smartnets to the new equipment.

John


Rogelio wrote:
> Mike Hammett wrote:
>   
>> Agreed.  I don't intend on buying anything Cisco.  Over priced, under 
>> performing, and their "we will screw you whether you like it or not" 
>> policies.  No thanks, someone else, please.
>> 
>
> One of my clients (a big cable company) just bought hundreds of 
> thousands of dollars of Cisco gear, only to find that it's going to be 
> end of life in just a few months.
>
> Their Cisco rep royally screwed them on that one, and when they 
> complained, they got nowhere and have since started to move to other 
> vendors.
>
> Another client of mine in the City of San Jose is really careful about 
> buying anything Cisco-related after a big Cisco scandal a few years ago. 
>Apparently they tried to move some Cisco gear at the 11th hour into 
> some big proposal, and it went over like a fart in church when people 
> found out (it was a VoIP install, if I remember right). Now they use 
> Nortel, NOT Cisco.
>
> It is my experience that Cisco reps are pretty brazen about their antics.
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] OT: Cisco 7200 Gigabit Ethernet Cards?

[John Thomas]

Cisco 2960G-24's are an option too.

John


Jon Auer wrote:
> I second that. We use 7200s trunked to, variously, 3500XLs, 3550s, and
> Zyxel switches.
> For gig ports go with a NPE-G1/G2 for routing and a 3560 as a port expander.
> Dot1q subinterfaces are your friend.
>
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 1:16 PM, Gino Villarini  wrote:
>   
>> Switch and vlan
>>
>>
>> Gino A. Villarini
>> g...@aeronetpr.com
>> Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
>> tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>> Behalf Of Matt Jenkins
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2009 2:06 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] OT: Cisco 7200 Gigabit Ethernet Cards?
>>
>> Even if I go to a NPE-G1 or G2 I still need a total of 5 ports.
>>
>> 1 for inbound connection.
>> 2 for outbound to radios that serve different towers
>> 1 for local network of servers etc.
>> 1 for colo customer.
>>
>> How do I add those other two ports?
>>
>>
>> Randy Cosby wrote:
>> 
>>> Which NPE are you using?
>>>
>>> Randy
>>>
>>> Matt Jenkins wrote:
>>>   
 I have a 7204VXR router as my core. I am looking at upgrading from a
 100mb ethernet to a gigE. I am having a really hard time find out how
 
 I can add gigabit ethernet (via RJ-45 connectors) to this router. I
 have two spare slots of expansion cards but I cannot find a card that
 
 does gig. Can anyone point me in the right direction?

 Thanks,

 - Matt


 -
 ---
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 -
 ---

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

 
>> 
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>> 
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

[WISPA] Service Limits

[John Thomas]

I realize that is the way it is supposed to happen, but that hasn't 
happened here.
We have Office space in Bishop Ranch, San Ramon CA. We are not allowed 
in the MPOE, and apparently others aren't either. We have been able to 
get T-1s pulled in, and then we gave handed the authorized personnel the 
other end of our Cat 5 to punch down and connect our Service Providers 
T-1's. When we asked Time Warner about the fiber, they sent us a map, 
showing fiber at the sidewalk, less than 100 feet away, and they claimed 
that Bishop Ranch wouldn't lt them in the MPOE, so they couldn't 
deliver. Maybe someone has bogus information?

John


Mike Hammett wrote:
> If you want their service, they can't restrict you, AFAIK.
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
> ------
> From: "John Thomas" 
> Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2009 9:57 PM
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] I need a few people to run a bandwidth test 
> tomeplease...> As they say, your mileage may vary   We have a 2xT1 that 
> we pay $560
>   
>> per month for, and the routing/peering at TW Telecom is good, but then
>> again, we are in the San Francisco Bay Area. If the building owners
>> would have let TW Telecom into this buildings MPOE's we would have a 10
>> meg fiber circuit and be paying about $700 for it. The fiber is at the
>> curb, but Bishop Ranch won't let TW Telecom in
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>> Matt Liotta wrote:
>> 
>>> Personally, I wouldn't go with TW Telecom for bandwidth. They tend to
>>> be overly pricy and their peering is too selective. In a case where
>>> the city you are located in doesn't have good peering such as Orlando
>>> you need to carefully select your upstream. In the case of TW Telecom,
>>> they have hardly any peers in Atlanta, which is the closest major
>>> peering point to you. This causes most of your US based traffic to
>>> flow through Ashburn or Dallas.
>>>
>>> -Matt
>>>
>>> On May 14, 2009, at 9:48 PM, Scott Carullo wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>   
>>>> Just download a file via http from our web server at
>>>> http://208.65.55.55/dummy.zip
>>>> and then
>>>> http://64.128.251.33/dummy.zip
>>>>
>>>> Then email me with how fast each went and a traceroute from you to
>>>> just one
>>>> of the servers please (they take same route).
>>>>
>>>> If you are not capable of downloading at 20MB on the Internet then
>>>> the data
>>>> is not too useful for me...
>>>>
>>>> Thank you I appreciate your time and assistance.
>>>>
>>>> Scott Carullo
>>>> Brevard Wireless
>>>> 321-205-1100 x102
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 
>>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>>> 
>>>>
>>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>>
>>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>>
>>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>>
>>>> 
>>>
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>   
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>> 
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] I need a few people to run a bandwidth test to me please...

[John Thomas]

As they say, your mileage may vary   We have a 2xT1 that we pay $560 
per month for, and the routing/peering at TW Telecom is good, but then 
again, we are in the San Francisco Bay Area. If the building owners 
would have let TW Telecom into this buildings MPOE's we would have a 10 
meg fiber circuit and be paying about $700 for it. The fiber is at the 
curb, but Bishop Ranch won't let TW Telecom in

John


Matt Liotta wrote:
> Personally, I wouldn't go with TW Telecom for bandwidth. They tend to  
> be overly pricy and their peering is too selective. In a case where  
> the city you are located in doesn't have good peering such as Orlando  
> you need to carefully select your upstream. In the case of TW Telecom,  
> they have hardly any peers in Atlanta, which is the closest major  
> peering point to you. This causes most of your US based traffic to  
> flow through Ashburn or Dallas.
>
> -Matt
>
> On May 14, 2009, at 9:48 PM, Scott Carullo wrote:
>
>   
>> Just download a file via http from our web server at
>> http://208.65.55.55/dummy.zip
>> and then
>> http://64.128.251.33/dummy.zip
>>
>> Then email me with how fast each went and a traceroute from you to  
>> just one
>> of the servers please (they take same route).
>>
>> If you are not capable of downloading at 20MB on the Internet then  
>> the data
>> is not too useful for me...
>>
>> Thank you I appreciate your time and assistance.
>>
>> Scott Carullo
>> Brevard Wireless
>> 321-205-1100 x102
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>> 
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] One connection bandwidth=x / 2 commections bandwidth=2x why?

[John Thomas]

1 minute 49 seconds from a 100 Meg feed at Hurricane Electric in Fremont CA.

John


Scott Carullo wrote:
> Yes lots of them, from different internet connections as well.  Focusing on 
> customers from BHN connecting to our TW Telecom fiber circuit.  Have not 
> been able to do enough testing outside our network though to be certain.  
>
> That leads me to a request...  can anyone who reads this that has decent 
> amount of bandwidth (>20mb available) download this file and tell me your 
> provider and how fast the transfer was so long as its not being limited on 
> your side.  I should have approx 80MB free bandwidth for this transfer when 
> you run it...
>
> http://208.65.55.55/dummy.zip
>
> This will help me out a bit...   thanks.   Email me off list if you want 
> with the results...
>
> Scott Carullo
> Brevard Wireless
> 321-205-1100 x102
>
>  Original Message 
>   
>> From: "Josh Luthman" 
>> Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 1:53 PM
>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One connection bandwidth=x / 2 commections 
>> 
> bandwidth=2x why?
>   
>> Have you tried with a different PC?
>>
>> On 5/11/09, Scott Carullo  wrote:
>> 
>>> Any TCP traffic multiple apps same results
>>>
>>> Scott Carullo
>>> Brevard Wireless
>>> (321) 205-1100 x102
>>>
>>> On May 11, 2009, at 10:14 AM, Jeff Broadwick 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>   
 We ran into something like that when a customer was using his laptop
 to
 generate traffic on a frac DS3 circuit.  The issue was primarily due
 to how
 his application was trying to generate traffic.

 Jeff

 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
 On
 Behalf Of Dennis Burgess - Linktechs
 Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 9:41 AM
 To: sc...@brevardwireless.com; WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] One connection bandwidth=x / 2 commections
 bandwidth=2x
 why?

 Speed limit per connection?  Or per IP?

 * ---
 Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer WISPA Board
 Member -
 wispa.org  Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik
 & WISP
 Support Services WISPA Vendor Member*
 *Office*: 314-735-0270 *Website*: http://www.linktechs.net
  */LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training/*
 

 The information transmitted (including attachments) is covered by the
 Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is
 intended only
 for the person(s) or entity/entities to which it is addressed and may
 contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review,
 retransmission,
 dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance
 upon,
 this information by persons or entities other than the intended
 recipient(s)
 is prohibited, If you received this in error, please contact the
 sender and
 delete the material from any computer.





 Scott Carullo wrote:
 
> On our main upstream connection 100mb fiber a speedtest to BHN 
>   
> yeilds
>   
 about
 
> 7MB max when 15 is there...
>
> Open two connections tcp and now the transfer rate doubles (from 
>   
> same
>   
> server to same client).
>
> What would cause this?
>
> Scott Carullo
> Brevard Wireless
> 321-205-1100 x102
>
>
>
>
>   
 ---
 ---

 
> --
>   
 
 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>
>   
 ---
 ---

 
> --
>   
 
 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>   
 ---
 ---

 
> --
>   
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 ---
 ---

 
> --
>   
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



 ---
 ---
 ---
 ---
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 ---
 ---
 ---
 ---
 --

Re: [WISPA] Cost of bandwidth

[John Thomas]

My question would be, is there anyone doing glass from the Carrier hotel 
to the edge of town?
If you were able to get fiber on the edge of Spokane, wouldn't it save 
you a few towers?
I wish it weren't top secret as to where the fiber is. Wouldn't it be 
nice to be able to go somewhere ( website) and see who has glass and where?
I wouldn't be a bit surprised if many on this list were within spittin' 
distance of glass.

John

Marlon K. Schafer wrote:
> It's the economies of it all in so many places.
>
> Many areas will require the construction of 100+ foot towers.  At what, $10 
> to $20k per tower (complete install), even for a small one that won't hold 
> many antennas.
>
> Then there are hills, mountains, permitting issues etc.
>
> I know I can get a fiber connection to Spokane and I can get it fairly 
> cheaply.  But it's still 3 to 4x what I'm paying for my bandwidth today. 
> Just for the loop, forget the cost of data, no matter how cheap, from there.
>
> I asked Century Tel what it would cost to rent dark fiber from them.  They 
> laughed at me.
>
> Spokane is only 75 or so miles from here.  But I'd need 1 hop to get out of 
> town, at least 5 or 6 to get to the edge of Spokane, then 2 or 3 more to get 
> down to the telco hotel there.  IF I could even get BW on the roof (probably 
> could but I don't know what the cost per month would be).
>
> We all look at these options all of the time.  I just got the last bit of 
> hardware that I'll need to link my Grant Co. and Lincoln Co. networks 
> together.  This will give me the ONLY backup link into Odessa.  It'll also 
> give me access to cheaper bandwidth here (after I upgrade to better faster 
> backhauls on all of the towers between the two networks).
>
> We'll get there eventually.
> marlon
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Harold Bledsoe" 
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Saturday, March 21, 2009 6:47 AM
> Subject: [WISPA] Cost of bandwidth
>
>
>   
>> Those of you that are paying >$50/Mbps, what is keeping you from
>> building your own backhaul to cheaper bandwidth (wireless, dark fiber,
>> etc.)?  It seems to me that this would be a major consideration in the
>> business plan as this is a big MRC.  Don't wait for someone to bring you
>> cheap bandwidth...go get it!  :-)
>>
>> -Hal
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 
>> 
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] speaking of ARIN

[John Thomas]

I would tell you to ask the ISP in San Jose about ATT's billing 
practices, but they are no longer in business.
It seems that 1 day they got a bill for some stupid amount of outbound 
minutes for their *inbound only* T-1's and were given hours to pay or 
they would be shut off. They weren't able to react quickly enough and 
ATT pulled the plug. Apparently this has been a common problem as I have 
heard of others in the same boat.

John


Chadd Thompson wrote:
> Been there done that.
>
> We were getting double billed for about 8 months because they didn't remove
> our billing on some old circuits after they forced us to upgrade from the
> old SBC network. We paid it for a few months because our account rep said it
> would be fixed and they would credit our account for what we over paid. Well
> they didn't get it fixed and we stopped paying it, our account rep assured
> us it was nothing to worry about and that it would be taken care of. Well 8
> months later the ATT collections dept was calling me saying they were going
> to turn us over to an outside collection agency. A quick call to my account
> rep and then one to the IL commerce commission had the problem taken care of
> in about 2 weeks.
>
> Sounds like you have had similar issues with them but you have no idea how
> much grief ATT/SBC has caused me over the last 6 yrs we have been in
> business. I wish I could get away from them but at this point in time no one
> seems to be able to help us out down here.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]on
> Behalf Of RickG
> Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 10:49 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] speaking of ARIN
>
> Of course, they'll bill you 10 times that and never fix their billing
> issues! -RickG
>
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 11:22 PM, Chadd Thompson  wrote:
>
>   
>> Here are some quotes that I received a while back from ATT for a partial
>> DS3.
>>
>> 10mb: $4300
>> 20mb: $4788
>> 30mb: $5300
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]on
>> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 1:33 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] speaking of ARIN
>>
>> It would be possible to get a wireless link off the Sears Tower (no, I
>> won't
>> say the new name), but a DS3 delivered here is well over $5k.
>>
>> The provider must always provide you with IPs, assuming you meet
>> justification.
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> From: "Richey" 
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 10:39 AM
>> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] speaking of ARIN
>>
>> 
>>> /rant on
>>>
>>> Dealing with Arin is frustrating if you are a smaller provider in a
>>>   
>> market
>> 
>>> where it's not cost effective to multi home.  Where many people might
>>>   
> get
>   
>>> a
>>> DS3 for as little as $1500/mo or less, some may pay $3,000+/month.   For
>>> those who are in more rural areas stuck paying high prices for their
>>> connection to the backbone it's just not cost effective to multi home in
>>> the
>>> beginning.
>>>
>>> If you are single homed you must use /20 (4096 IPs) before they will
>>>   
> give
>   
>>> you an allocation.  I have had problems in the past with a similar
>>> situation
>>> where a network was using 12 class c and the upstream refused to
>>>   
> allocate
>   
>>> any more IPs saying we needed to go to ARIN.  ARIN would not do anything
>>> until we were using a /20 so it became a chicken or the egg problem.
>>>
>>> The policy should be different for an ISP.   If you are a small ISP
>>> multi-homed or not you should be able to get a /22.  It makes it hard
>>>   
> for
>   
>>> the smaller provider to change backbone providers because their IP
>>>   
> blocks
>   
>>> are non portable.
>>>
>>> /rant off
>>>
>>> Richey
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>>> Behalf Of Cliff Olle
>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 9:02 AM
>>> To: 'WISPA General List

Re: [WISPA] speaking of ARIN

[John Thomas]

Unfortunately, the requirements are based on what they think a routing 
slot in the BGP table costs, and they want to keep that manageable.
There has been discussion on the ARIN list about reducing the 
requirement to a /24 for PI space both single and multi homed. The 
thought being that there are probably a lot of people that have a /20 
that only have it because they want PI space and don't want to be locked 
into their ISP.

There is not reason someone couldn't utilize their second T-1, and I am 
not advocating buying it and not using it.
The question becomes, is it worth the money to have a slow connection, 
or no connection at all.
I am not out to start a flame war here. As far as I am concerned, if I 
am a business and I am buying business class service from you, and 
paying business class money for that service, I expect you to have 
redundant upstreams. I do not expect to pay $50 for that service. 
CovadWireless gets $349 per month for business class 1.5 Meg Internet 
access, and they have multiple upstreams.
I realize that this will be argued until the cows come home, but when 
you offer business class service with SLA's you can't do it for $50 per 
month.

Jerry over at Aircloud is doing a 2 meg connection for $179 per month, 
and has been doing right by his clients.

John



Richey wrote:
> Why should you HAVE to pay for something that you really will never use?   I
> read about guys in rural areas that are still paying $700+ for a T1.  Even
> at $500/mo that's a lot of money to spend on something you will never really
> use.You might as well be down if your DS3 takes a hit and your traffic
> rolls over to the T1.
>
> Richey
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of John Thomas
> Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 10:53 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] speaking of ARIN
>
> Are you saying that it is not practical for you to get a T-1 so that you 
> can legitimately run BGP and multi home?
> You can set BGP so that 99% of the traffic goes over the bigger pipe if 
> necessary.
>
> I am curious where people are getting DS3's at $1500 per month? We have 
> a client that has a point to point DS3 for 2 buildings that are 2 blocks 
> apart and they pay $2000 for each end, and that *does not* include 
> Internet access, only point to point.
>
> John
>
> Richey wrote:
>   
>> /rant on
>>
>> Dealing with Arin is frustrating if you are a smaller provider in a market
>> where it's not cost effective to multi home.  Where many people might get
>> 
> a
>   
>> DS3 for as little as $1500/mo or less, some may pay $3,000+/month.   For
>> those who are in more rural areas stuck paying high prices for their
>> connection to the backbone it's just not cost effective to multi home in
>> 
> the
>   
>> beginning.  
>>
>> If you are single homed you must use /20 (4096 IPs) before they will give
>> you an allocation.  I have had problems in the past with a similar
>> 
> situation
>   
>> where a network was using 12 class c and the upstream refused to allocate
>> any more IPs saying we needed to go to ARIN.  ARIN would not do anything
>> until we were using a /20 so it became a chicken or the egg problem.   
>>
>> The policy should be different for an ISP.   If you are a small ISP
>> multi-homed or not you should be able to get a /22.  It makes it hard for
>> the smaller provider to change backbone providers because their IP blocks
>> are non portable.
>>
>> /rant off
>>
>> Richey
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>> Behalf Of Cliff Olle
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 9:02 AM
>> To: 'WISPA General List'
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] speaking of ARIN
>>
>> I was told that I would have to have BGP and be multi-homed within 30 days
>> or they could revoke my IP's.  Would they allot a /20 in the case you are
>> only using 4 class Cs?
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>> Behalf Of Scott Piehn
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 7:29 AM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] speaking of ARIN
>>
>> One add to the /22.  You need to be or plan to be running BGP.
>>
>>
>> Scott
>> - Original Message - 
>> From: "John Thomas" 
>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>> Sent: Monday, March 16, 2009 9:54 PM
>>

Re: [WISPA] speaking of ARIN

[John Thomas]

Yes, I know we could have done that, but this client makes a lot of 
noise when anything resembling a hiccup occurs, and we weren't going to 
take that chance. ATT gets to deal with them when the DS3 has 
problems  :-)

On another note, they have been quite happy with their Covad Wireless 
Internet connection at $599 per month for 3 Meg Burstable to 6 meg. It 
has been down 2 times in the past year. Covad had a couple of nasty 
outages in the past month or so.

John


Travis Johnson wrote:
> You are missing an opportunity there...
>
> Tell them you will provide them a 300Mbps full duplex link for $3,000 
> per month. Then go buy a Trango licensed link for $11k and make $3k a 
> month profit after 4 months. :)
>
> Travis
> Microserv
>
> John Thomas wrote:
>> Are you saying that it is not practical for you to get a T-1 so that you 
>> can legitimately run BGP and multi home?
>> You can set BGP so that 99% of the traffic goes over the bigger pipe if 
>> necessary.
>>
>> I am curious where people are getting DS3's at $1500 per month? We have 
>> a client that has a point to point DS3 for 2 buildings that are 2 blocks 
>> apart and they pay $2000 for each end, and that *does not* include 
>> Internet access, only point to point.
>>
>> John
>>
>> Richey wrote:
>>   
>>> /rant on
>>>
>>> Dealing with Arin is frustrating if you are a smaller provider in a market
>>> where it's not cost effective to multi home.  Where many people might get a
>>> DS3 for as little as $1500/mo or less, some may pay $3,000+/month.   For
>>> those who are in more rural areas stuck paying high prices for their
>>> connection to the backbone it's just not cost effective to multi home in the
>>> beginning.  
>>>
>>> If you are single homed you must use /20 (4096 IPs) before they will give
>>> you an allocation.  I have had problems in the past with a similar situation
>>> where a network was using 12 class c and the upstream refused to allocate
>>> any more IPs saying we needed to go to ARIN.  ARIN would not do anything
>>> until we were using a /20 so it became a chicken or the egg problem.   
>>>
>>> The policy should be different for an ISP.   If you are a small ISP
>>> multi-homed or not you should be able to get a /22.  It makes it hard for
>>> the smaller provider to change backbone providers because their IP blocks
>>> are non portable.
>>>
>>> /rant off
>>>
>>> Richey
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>>> Behalf Of Cliff Olle
>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 9:02 AM
>>> To: 'WISPA General List'
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] speaking of ARIN
>>>
>>> I was told that I would have to have BGP and be multi-homed within 30 days
>>> or they could revoke my IP's.  Would they allot a /20 in the case you are
>>> only using 4 class Cs?
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>>> Behalf Of Scott Piehn
>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 7:29 AM
>>> To: WISPA General List
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] speaking of ARIN
>>>
>>> One add to the /22.  You need to be or plan to be running BGP.
>>>
>>>
>>> Scott
>>> - Original Message - 
>>> From: "John Thomas" 
>>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>>> Sent: Monday, March 16, 2009 9:54 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] speaking of ARIN
>>>
>>>
>>>   
>>> 
>>>> If you are multihomed you need to justify a /22 ( 4 Class C's) and if
>>>> you are not, then you will need to justify a /20  ( 16 class C's)
>>>>
>>>> John
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Marlon K. Schafer wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>   
>>>>> We probably need to get our own ip addys now.  We're using 4 class c's 
>>>>> and
>>>>> will need more pretty soon in one location.
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyone know a consultant that can help with the application process?
>>>>>
>>>>> marlon
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>   
>>>>> 
>>> 
>&g