Having used Allot NetEnforcer for years, then moved to Exinda for years, we are
now considering removing bandwidth managers altogether and relying solely on
policing on radios, QoS policies on core routers layer 3 switches, and
monitoring flows using Netflow.
More work, but much less $$.
I understand that in order for an ISP to limit its liability regarding the
copyright infringements of its customers, it must comply with the Digital
Millennium Copyright Act, in particular its “notice and take down” and
“counter notice and put back” procedures.
I believe these procedures
Fred,
I think one aspect of the new 15.407 (U-NII) rules that UBNT may not yet
meet is the 40MHz filter requirement on both ends of the 5725MHz-5850MHz
spectrum, which as I understand it, will effectively limit the usable range
to 5765MHz - 5810MHz. Or maybe they already have the filter? In any
Yep so do we. We run Zimbra servers in our datacenters. For more info, you
can contact
Ed Parker
epar...@webjogger.net mailto:epar...@webjogger.net
(845) 757-4000 x124
Thanks,
Adam
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of ~NGL~
Sent:
Hi Edward, I think this is what you may be looking for:
On the AU:
5 - Advanced Configuration
4 - Bridge Parameters
4 - Broadcast/Multicast Relaying AND 5 - Unicast Relaying
Adam
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Edward Spoon
Sent:
Hi,
We have a small Alvarion VL 5.8GHz cell with two links of less than a mile.
Generally they are beautiful. However, since Dec 23, we are getting lots of
packet loss and high latency on almost all frequencies.
Every day we have to go through all the available frequencies in order to
TV Whitespace . have not deployed, but a company we partner with has had
good results. Still a wild west beta technology and on the pricey side, but
AFAIK it's the only thing that will penetrate in a heavily wooded
environment.
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org
share your contact
information with me off list and I can engage you directly. My direct email
is agre...@webjogger.net.
Thanks!
Adam
--
Adam Greene
Webjogger
www.webjogger.net http://www.webjogger.net/
agre...@webjogger.net mailto:agre...@webjogger.net
845-757-4000
...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Adam Greene
Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2013 5:47 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: [WISPA] HIPAA
Hi guys,
I understand the Dept of Health and Human Services has published final HIPAA
guidelines which go into effect as of 9/23/13, and that the scope of
liability
Josh,
Thanks a bunch! These all seem to be oriented toward a scenario where the WISP
owns the link and is responsible for meeting uptime and latency metrics. In our
case, the links are being sold to the customer for intra-campus connectivity,
and they will just contract us to perform annual
] maintenance agreements?
I'd be interested in seeing whatever you come up with.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
_
From: Adam Greene maill...@webjogger.net mailto:maill...@webjogger.net
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org mailto:wireless
Hey guys,
We're quoting a customer on some point to point gigabit links (60GHz), and
the equipment vendor mentioned, Don't forget to quote for a maintenance
agreement. This is where our partners really make their money. He called it
a Service Level Agreement. He said it typically includes an
Anyone else receive a Law Enforcement Contact Verification email from
Mosaik Solutions (formerly American Roamer) requesting our company's
organizational contacts responsible for interacting with Homeland Security
and other law enforcement agencies, as is required of us by the US
Department of
Thinking of moving to Autotask with QB integration .
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Layne Sisk
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 4:43 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Complete list of WISP used billing products
These are the
: [WISPA] DMCA infringent notices...
On 03/16/2013 09:31 AM, Adam Greene wrote:
The DCMA guidelines are pretty clear on the notice and take down
requirements you have to fulfill to remain compliant yourself as the ISP.
It's not a big deal in our experience.
Been awhile since we've gotten any
We block the offending traffic from the customer (it's almost always
bittorrent or another peer to peer protocol), send the notice to the
customer, and ask them to comply with the notice. We unblock the protocol if
they inform us they have taken down the offending content. We reserve the
right to
One of our customers near NYC had their Level3 BGP session flap a couple
times between 3:30am - 3:50am this morning.
We also noticed some issues around 1:15am - 1:30am on a circuit we have
to a provider that peers with Level3. We're in upstate NY but I believe
the peering occurs in NYC.
On
I have the same question as to whether non-proprietary devices like
cellphones and laptops will be able to connect to the AP. For example,
in a municipal deployment where the town wants to give all residents
low-cost or free Internet access.
On 1/27/2013 7:57 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
I'm
If they establish a VPN to the hospital, the medium shouldn't matter, as
traffic will be encrypted.
On 1/10/2013 4:32 PM, Scott Reed wrote:
We have a local hospital that won't allow using wireless because they
had a bad experience with a different supplier.
Since a lot of their people don't
Anyone using these?
They operate in the 71-76 GHz licensed frequency band and can do
900M/100M, 750M/250M, or 500M/500M.
Price point is nice -- more $ than a typical 100M link, but less $ than
a gigabit link.
Adam
Webjogger
(845) 757-4000
www.webjogger.net
://www.thebrotherswisp.com
-Original Message-
From: Adam Greene maill...@webjogger.net
Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Date: Monday, September 24, 2012 5:31 PM
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] Cogent?
Hi all,
Cogent approached us recently, trying to sell
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
Hi all,
I am under the impression that the FCC charges $1040 for a 10-yr 23GHz
license.
Can anyone confirm?
Thanks,
Adam
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
This operates on 10.322 GHz - 10.574 GHz.
Is this unlicensed? If not, is it possible to buy a license from the FCC?
Looks like a good product.
I did call the FCC and was told that this would probably fall under part
section 101 of the rules, subpart G, and if it operates on 5MHz
channels, it
duplex 2 channels one for tx other for rx
Gino A. Villarini
g...@aeronetpr.com
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
787.273.4143
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Adam Greene
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2011 3:21 PM
Guys,
I appreciate all the feedback. We're looking into Exalt 24GHz for a
3-mile link. Not sure if it will reach that far ...
Anyone have direct experience with Exalt? We're using Dragonwave and
love it, but wanted to stay in the $5k - $7k range on this one ... only
need 50M FD at the
easily do that for $3K
Steve Barnes
General Manager
PCS-WIN/RC-WiFi http://www.rcwifi.com/
*From:*wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
*On Behalf Of *Adam Greene
*Sent:* Tuesday, August 02, 2011 11:36 AM
*To:* wireless@wispa.org
*Subject:* Re: [WISPA] inexpensive non-2.4
Has anyone tried the SnapLink Blast?
http://www.wisptech.com/index.php/Microwave_Backhaul_Comparison_Chart
shows 24GHz, 160M half-duplex, $6k ... if it really works, that's pretty
good, in my book
On 7/26/2011 10:47 AM, Adam Greene wrote:
This question has probably been asked on this list
This question has probably been asked on this list before ... if needed,
just tell me to check the archives ...
Becoming increasingly frustrated with chasing apparent interference
issues on our Alvarion Mikrotik 2.4GHz and 5.4 - 5.8GHz point to point
links, I am wondering if anyone has a
Hi,
Just installed a 5.8GHz Alvarion VL on a roof with lots of TV antennas.
Interference was horrible. We were not expecting that, as the main TV
antenna culprit says 490 on the side -- I assume 490MHz.
My obscure reasoning tells me that if there were a really strong signal
on 483.33MHz, it
on roofs don't transmit (currently). Any cell phone
tower
backhauls nearby or 5.8 phones? Perhaps the tv antennas are just a scapegoat.
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 06:14:52PM -0400, Adam Greene wrote:
Hi,
Just installed a 5.8GHz Alvarion VL on a roof with lots of TV antennas
We're seeing almost exactly the same thing on one of our 5.8GHz VL links
(could be PTMP but at the moment is just PTP) a little north of NYC. We
know we have a multipath issue at the site to begin with, and the
fresnel zone is just grazing some trees. I suspect that the humidity /
temp
We had some issues initially setting up our unlicensed 24GHz Dragonwave link
because of some environmental issues, and the support was, in general,
terrific. After-hours (even weekend) cell-phone support from a very
knowledgable technician. Not all technicians were on the same level, but in
Yep, we may have about 10 as well. Cameron, if you still have need, contact
me offlist: agre...@webjogger.net
- Original Message -
From: e...@wisp-router.com
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org; c...@midcoast.com
Sent: Monday, July 06, 2009 9:46 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion
13, 2009 2:14 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] basic mikrotik question
On Sat, 2009-06-13 at 09:01 -0400, Adam Greene wrote:
A while back we experimented with trunking VLANs over a Mikrotik
backhaul,
and *at the same time* putting the Mikrotiks themselves into a tagged
802.1q
management VLAN. We
The advice I have generally received is to use OSPF only for distributing
infrastructure routes within one's network, and iBGP for all production
routes (i.e. netblocks associated with customers and services).
Thanks,
Adam
Webjogger Internet Services
ASN 20208
- Original Message -
A while back we experimented with trunking VLANs over a Mikrotik backhaul,
and *at the same time* putting the Mikrotiks themselves into a tagged 802.1q
management VLAN. We had major problems with that.
But yeah, just bridging 802.1q VLANs over the Mikrotiks while keeping the
radios themselves
-
From: Adam Greene maill...@webjogger.net
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Saturday, June 06, 2009 10:09 AM
Subject: [WISPA] LanRoamer TP500
Anyone know if this tests crossover as well as straightthrough cat5/6?
Thanks,
Adam
Hi ...
I'm planning to deploy a Mikrotik backhaul, with the Mikrotiks themselves in an
untagged management subnet. The traffic passing over the backhaul would be
802.1q tagged (i.e. customer traffic, each customer in their own VLAN). I
assume this should work without a hitch, right? Maybe a
Another option is to send the contract to customer via email and have them
(a) fax back the signature page as proof of order, and (b) mail in two
partially executed originals. You sign both, keep one original and send the
2nd original back in the mail. Or use the installer as the courier in one
Anyone know if this tests crossover as well as straightthrough cat5/6?
Thanks,
Adam
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
Hi guys! Nice new website! Congratulations!
Just curious ... what is the backend? Wordpress? ... or another content
management system? We're looking to upgrade our own website and are evaluating
a number of options
Thanks!
Adam
You could be dealing with reflection, where the signal bounces off a nearby
object(s) and cancels itself out at certain locations -- any big walls in
the vicinity?
- Original Message -
From: Jason Wallace supp...@azii.net
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, April
You might look into the Radwin RW-2000 ... speeds and price may be in the range
... 5.x GHz
- Original Message -
From: Travis Johnson
To: WISPA General List
Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 12:12 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Short 100Meg full duplex hop needed
The Mikrotik
Just curiously, have those of you using these sites found that they've
helped grow your business?
- Original Message -
From: Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2009 12:07 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] LinkedIn
I'm on many
I've always had good experience with this company:
www.transition.com
- Original Message -
From: Gino Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2009 5:26 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Fiber to Gige Converter ?
I know thwy are lots of
Huh ... interesting. I wonder if something similar exists for the healthcare
IT initiatives coming down the pike ..
- Original Message -
From: Adam Greene maill...@webjogger.net
To: agre...@webjogger.net
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 9:03 AM
Subject: Fw: [WISPA] WikiLeaks Document
24 Ghz Unlicensed
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 Adam Greene
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 2:41 PM
I second that.
- Original Message -
From: Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 o...@odessaoffice.com
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2009 6:08 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion
I have some on the network.
So far I like my Alvarion gear. It's over
Just to resuscitate this thread ...
We have a 1.2Km urban link, really only need 100Mbps, need ~5 9's of
reliability.
We have deployed Mikrotik 5.3GHz and Radwin 5.3GHz and are getting
interference. We've also gotten interfered with on Alvarion VL 5.8.
We'd like to do 80GHz Bridgewave, but
Yep, we're bonding DSL with MLPPP as well, with direct PVCs through Verizon.
Caveat: we generally see only about 80% performance rates (i.e. if [4] 1Mbps
circuits are bonded together, we get 3.2Mbps throughput). Have not found a
way to improve this. Using Cisco gear on both ends.
-
Have had good results with radwin ...
- Original Message -
From: John McDowell j...@boonlink.com
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 12:50 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5.8GHz Backhaul Radio Recommendations
We're pretty exclusive to the AN80 on
Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
- Original Message -
From: Adam Greene [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 3:32 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Radwin 2000
Hi,
Has anyone heard of or used products by Radwin
Hi,
Has anyone heard of or used products by Radwin (www.radwin.com)?
I understand they are releasing the Radwin 2000 series of 5.x GHz
point-to-point links in the US in November.
The price is very attractive.
My main concern is performance reliability. We can test the performance
within a
Gino,
WS-C2960G-24TC-L. But won't be less than $1k on ebay I'm afraid ...
Adam
- Original Message -
From: Gino Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org; Motorola Canopy User Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2008 3:44 PM
Subject: [WISPA]
Mike,
In the Cisco world, it's layer 3 only:
WS-C3560E-24TD-S
WS-C3750E-24TD-S (stackable)
I've always had good experience with Cisco's layer 3 switches from a
performance standpoint. Also, by default IP routing is turned off.
Of course, they are not cheap.
Thanks,
Adam
- Original
We've had very good success with Bridgewave gear. They have 60GHz unlicensed
and 80GHz licensed solutions which support 100Mbps and Gigabit speeds.
Link range on the 60GHz is about 1-2 miles; I think the 80GHz is similar.
Reliability is very high.
Good luck,
Adam
- Original Message
ISP that conforms to the standard
will be able to obtain safe harbor with *all* LEA's (or just the FBI)?
Thanks,
Adam
Adam Greene
VP, Operations
Webjogger Internet Services
http://www.webjogger.net
(845) 757-4000 x134
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http
think it would benefit them and the
larger community.
Also thanks to Clint for his recent posts, in particular the contact info of
the fellow at the FBI who we can work with to test our compliance.
Best regards,
Adam
---
Adam Greene
VP, Operations
Webjogger
] On
Behalf Of Adam Greene
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 1:08 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA compliance methods
Hi,
While I appreciate Mark's comments and point of view, I for one would
like
to also start looking for ways to possibly comply with CALEA in a
cost-effective way
Hi,
While I appreciate Mark's comments and point of view, I for one would like
to also start looking for ways to possibly comply with CALEA in a
cost-effective way. I'm afraid that if the conversation here is limited to
whether we should comply or not, we might lose the opportunity to share
Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Adam Greene
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 1:08 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA compliance methods
Hi,
While I appreciate Mark's comments and point of view, I for one would
like
to also start looking
a hold of this CALEA beast.
Thanks,
Adam
---
Adam Greene
VP, Operations
Webjogger Internet Services
http://www.webjogger.net
(845) 757-4000 x134
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman
63 matches
Mail list logo
