-
From: "Brad Larson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 7:30 AM
Subject: [WISPA] Farewell folks
For those of you that would like to keep in touch, my contact
information is below. A new Alvarion carrier group was formed a few
months ago and I was as
VAR's, distributor's, and Wisp's, it was
time for a change. A req was opened and several interviews have taken
place so a new hire in the Northeast Channel will be on board shortly.
I'm sure I will see some of you at shows etc and I wish wellness and
happy deployments to all! Brad
Dang Dee that's cool! Get Ed Wyatt fishing will ya? Brad
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of W.D.McKinney
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 2:39 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] news
Not far enough north Patrick :-) Try Kenai, Alaska
WaveAccess was bought by Lucent.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Rick Harnish
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2007 12:41 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: old WLAN history, was RE: [WISPA] Broadband Wireless...
Patrick,
I remember a lo
Jack, Well said. Some have been saying this for years. Load testing
should be a mandatory category of wisp test procedures but it seldom is
even considered. Brad
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007
I have kept pretty silent watching all the grandstanding. But Marty
brings up an excellent point. The licensed operators are using the
flaunting of the laws as good reason to not give you any more UL
spectrum. I have seen and heard this first hand. You guys can throw all
the darts you want but I'm
I'll be nice.Brad
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jeffrey Thomas
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 4:03 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] churn, double play and why WLP is key - I
finallyunderstand it
> I believe it can now
Rich, Thanks for clearing the air on this one. Brad
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Rich Comroe
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 12:54 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] churn,double play and why WLP is key - I finally
understand
congratulating post from one of our customers or someone
asking for insight on the value of an Alvarion rollout...Brad Larson
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jon Langeler
Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 7:05 AM
To: WISPA General List
Jon, LOL. Our engineers don't watch these threads and they probably
never will and I wouldn't want them to. It's funny that this thread was
started by a very happy Alvarion customer whom just broke the 1,000 cpe
threshold with VL and he's doing the very things that aren't supposed to
be possible ac
Can anyone else hear the axe grinding in the background..
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Belton
Sent: Friday, December 22, 2006 7:04 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Alvarion Comnet Radios have arrived
Hello Alber
They get exclusive rights to light poles for a mesh deployment. I'm not
at all advocating these projects but at the same time I just can't see
several mesh muni projects per city being successful. I agree that there
are way too many "consultants" jumping into the game. I heard about a
consultant to
wned by a single intity.
"exclusivity" should be the number one topic that WISPs are fighting
against.
Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
- Original Message -
From: "Brad Larson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA G
Most of the Muni contracts I have worked on so far are exclusive. An RFP
would have been a better way to resolve the issue. Just letting anyone
use city property is a sure way for failure. I'm not so sure letting
wisp's "deploy at will" for Muni wifi is such a great idea. Brad
-Original Messag
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dylan Oliver
Sent: Sunday, December 03, 2006 11:34 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion vs Moto/802.11 network value
Dylan, Here's a good example: Providers buying voip/data wisp's. On th
And we're also offering the VoIP feature set of version 4.0 that pushes
40,000 small packets per second thru the base station. 10X's the
performance of many of the current products out there today including
our older versions of 3X firmware. Brad
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
D] On
Behalf Of Jon Langeler
Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 6:55 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Alvarion is Back!!!
Now we just need to get Moto to do that! Canopy Lite Advantage AP :-)
Jon Langeler
Michwave Tech.
Brad Larson wrote:
>I'm guessing Patrick went over the 2
nt details. Thanks!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Larson
Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 3:29 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Alvarion is Back!!!
I'm guessing Patrick went over the 25 user stand alone base st
I'm guessing Patrick went over the 25 user stand alone base station that
will retail for $2,595. This will be an upgradeable version that you can
start a POP with, recover some costs, then upgrade when the time comes
and you get close to the 25 subscriber attachments. Brad
-Original Message---
I just got Patrick out of the Alvarion AIR Summit meeting that is going
on at Corporate. Many of our VAR partners are in Mountain View for a few
days getting briefed on Roadmaps, this new wisp program, and other
things. His email will go out in the next couple hours. Brad
-Original Message
Butch, I don't believe Tom spent 2 days installing the Alvarion linkBrad
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 6:28 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Real World comparison of Trango-staros-Alvarion
On Wed
Thanks Tom, Your findings are in line with what many Alvarion operators also
enjoy. Ease of installs and low operational costs. Brad
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 3:28 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] R
ng a product that a crap load of people are happy
about in it's current state.
Best,
Brad
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Larson
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 12:59 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA]
it for
us. Again, that's what discussion is for...I'm here to discuss improvements
I'd like to see in the VL product. What is wrong with that?
Best,
Brad
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Larson
Sent: Monday, Sep
mprovements the VL product is too susceptible to
noise and therefore not a viable solution for committed rate business
offerings.
Best,
Brad
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Larson
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 9:31 AM
To: &#x
WIMAX compatibility. In the mean time I'm more
concerned with providing reliable pipes...
Jon Langeler
Michwave Tech.
Brad Larson wrote:
>Jon, Canopy is not fast enough for many now and voip performance is
lacking.
>Depending on the circumstance you may be right for many but the t
>From my understanding the business is up for grabs. Moto got a foot hold on
current cell sites and deployments. It remains to be seen what happens to
new cell/city rollouts. Brad
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 2:00 AM
Gino, I have to admit Alvarion has some work to do for the smaller wisp's
out there. Patrick will have his hands full on this one. But for wisps
buying 100 packs on a bi or monthly plan the pricing below just doesn't seem
like such a deal breaker anymore when you add up the feature sets. For a few
Jon, Canopy is not fast enough for many now and voip performance is lacking.
Depending on the circumstance you may be right for many but the times are
changing very quickly. There are more and more projects hitting the streets
where you don't even make the cut if you can't pass the higher data traf
Scriv, very good news and congrats. BTW, I'm still waiting for your update
on your BreezeAccess VL upgrade? Brad
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 10:35 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC wireless auction
David, let's keep this board non-political except relating to internet or
frequency issues . Saying "including Fox News (We report, we decide)" just
didn't need to be said. TIA, Brad
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2006 10:
IMHO. For some reason wifi has gone from being a convenience and hotspot
technology to the 4th leg of broadband for the masses or the 4th leg of
broadband to close the digital divide (meaning 95% or more coverage over a
whole community-large and small). Mesh on the edge could be getting oversold
an
Matt, I understand your frustration. Did you spend the time to try and
figure out what the cost would be for the Atlanta build out? Today most
Muni's want someone to build and maintain on the service provider's dollar
which puts larger projects beyond most wisp budgets. Brad
-Original Message-
10:17 AM, "Brad Larson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There is no UL Wimax..maybe he is confused. Brad
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Dawn DiPietro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 1:30 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subjec
No. I'm doubting he's using 802.11b. I'm guessing he's getting 5.5 meg using
something else.
-Original Message-
From: George Rogato [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 2:07 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ed Whitacre Loves Hi
.
And these are the people who sway public policy..
George
Brad Larson wrote:
> There is no UL Wimax..maybe he is confused. Brad
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Dawn DiPietro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 1:30 PM
> To: WISPA General
means WiMAX?
-Matt
Brad Larson wrote:
> There is no UL Wimax..maybe he is confused. Brad
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Dawn DiPietro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 1:30 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ed Whitac
gets 5.5 Mbps downstream over unlicensed spectrum. "It's
not ready for primetime, but I really like it," he said."
Regards,
Dawn DiPietro
Brad Larson wrote:
>Lonnie, LOL. I knew as soon as that link was posted the dissing would
start.
>AT&T is a company to watch because
Lonnie, LOL. I knew as soon as that link was posted the dissing would start.
AT&T is a company to watch because they own spectrum and have capital. He
was clear in saying that he was using UL and not Wimax BTW. Brad
-Original Message-
From: Lonnie Nunweiler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:
ow is absolutely true but this could get funny if your
insisting on backing up that 8-10 number regarding Canopy...
Jon Langeler
Michwave Tech.
Brad Larson wrote:
>John, Testing by Alvarion engineers has been done. Saying that a radio has
>an aggregate throughput of 14 meg's for voip
I have seen testing on 4.0 BreezeAccess VL with 64 k packets where the new
4.0 outperformed version 3.1.25 by a very wide margin. Downstream throughput
of 40.29 meg's per second with 59,952 frames per second passed! Data from
3.1.25 was 2.46 meg's and 3,662 frames per second. Most 5 GHz solutions I
John, Testing by Alvarion engineers has been done. Saying that a radio has
an aggregate throughput of 14 meg's for voip is not really applicable. Small
packets through the radio can bring most systems to their knees. Brad
-Original Message-
From: Jon Langeler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sen
So you're using a 20 mhz channel to support one business client? Brad
-Original Message-
From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 10:37 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] OT: about 70Mbps for under $6K
We rarely use multi-point systems for custo
Patrick, With version 4.0 on VL the radio will support jumbo frames and that
is 1540 to allow QinQ transport. Brad
-Original Message-
From: Patrick Leary
Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 12:06 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] OT: about 70Mbps for under $6K
As a non engineer, thi
you are not the intended recipient please contact the
sender by return electronic mail and delete all copies of this communication
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brad Larson
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 9:42
AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: [WIS
A few corrections:
The issue with 3.650 is the FCC has not
decided on "ANY" spec. Wimax was never a 3.650 "issue"
and this has been corrected time and time again. The FCC has stated publicly
many times that Wimax was never overlooked as a platform. The wifi crowd took
the "contention base
Tom, Dang you got this all wrong. Let's make sure we understand what
Alvarion's comments said so everyone understands. Our comment breaking the
band in two was to strip rural and suburban from the top 100 US markets. Top
100 markets split in two 25 Mhz chunks and licensed with the REST of the US
be
Most of these muni projects are basing the 700 Mhz on the public safety band
that is not yet available. High speed roaming is the application not
broadband. I know the Wimax Forum is at least looking at the band for "e"
which fits the mold. Every public safety entity I have talked with in the
last
I'm biting my tongue on this topicI have been on enough of these
projects, well over 50 in the last 12 months alone, and I have to say there
are a pile of people that don't know what they're getting into and many will
get hurt. For instance, I have a unnamed mesh vendor quoting 14 nodes per
squ
HP has a Wireless Engineering Group acting as an integrator for Muni
Projects. Alvarion has worked with them on several projects. Brad
-Original Message-
From: Carl A Jeptha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2006 7:32 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Pioneer
#x27;s just too expensive.
North East Oregon Fastnet, LLC 509-593-4061
personal correspondence to: mark at neofast dot net
sales inquiries to: purchasing at neofast dot net
Fast Internet, NO WIRES!
-
- Original Message ---
A scheduled mac alone does not make something "carrier grade". I can list a
bunch of manufacturers that have polling mac's yet you'll never find them
hanging on a carriers depolyment but you'll find lots of Alvarion
BreezeAccess VL. And to add version 4.0 changes the rules again.
Stay tuned
Mark, Come on.The whole BreezeAccess product family was made and
continues to get upgrades for WISP's. There are well over 1,000 WISP's using
our gear in the states alone. You won't find many of them here or on other
WISP threads but it doesn't mean they don't exist. Saying we're "niche" and
no
m?
Marlon
(509) 982-2181 Equipment sales
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp!
64.146.146.12 (net meeting)
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam
- Original Message
niche markets.
I've hedged all my bets. I chose a niche market, and seek price levels
which will bring ubiquitous acceptance. What can I say, it's only how I
think...
North East Oregon Fastnet, LLC 509-593-4061
personal correspondence to: mark at neofast dot net
sales inquiries to: p
A typical BTA for a MMDS or ITFS build may only be 24 Mhz. Half of what
you're saying isn't enough (50 Mhz). Some projects I'm working on have a
whopping total of 10 mhz.
I remember Patrick disagreeing with the contention based protocal in 3650
not the amount of spectrum.
Like I said before, th
I would strike the "only 50 MHz of spectrum" statement about 3650. The
industry has paid billions for way less. The answer is using spectrally
efficient systems with what we get for free...
-Original Message-
From: Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tu
Steve, DFS. Dynamic Frequency Selection. Brad
-Original Message-
From: Steve Stroh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 5:19 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5.4 very close now
Rick:
I think you're confused with 3.65 GHz (still in the works, FCC pro
Brian, Exactly my thoughts. And I'm with you in the "show me" category. Brad
-Original Message-
From: Brian Webster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 11:01 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Basic Mesh Theory
Jack,
Let me jump in with some m
BTW, this is what gets lots of people in trouble. Quoting 16-18 mesh nodes
per square mile may be a correct number in AZ or TX. You may need 3 times
that in my neck of the woods here in NE USA. Even more where interference
shrinks cell sizes. Be cautious John. Brad
-Original Message-
Fro
> that, but there is no reason for me to.
> Thats the point of modelling. So you can pre-dict BEFORE you spend.
> Its the Muni's budget to pay for, to find the true answer, not mine.
>
> Tom DeReggi
> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>
Tom, IMHO mesh is great for lighting up downtown and city parks etc. but it
has yet to prove itself in a large deployment with 1,000's of customers or
1,000's of nodes deployed. I too have first hand experience backhauling
several mesh projects and the mesh edge so far has not been easy at all.
Her
Alvarion. Brad
Brad Larson
Northeast Regional Manager
Alvarion
965 Rakestraw Rd
Montoursville, PA 17754
Phone 570-433-4608
Cell 570-419-0029
Fax 570-433-4603
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 11:05 PM
To: '
How do you know 700 Mhz isn't on the roadmap? News to me. Brad
-Original Message-
From: G.Villarini [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2006 8:15 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] TRANGO!!
One thing is that Wimax wont certify gear in the 700 , 900 or oth
be
agreed on.
-
Jeff
On Wed, 4 Jan 2006 17:34:42 -0800 , "Brad Larson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Jeff, In what Frequency? There is allot of BS out there in the first wave
> of
> testing for those that have yet to get a product to market. We can
> discuss
> if
f and
> in some markets the price is easily recovered through ROI.
> Thanks,
> Scriv
>
>
>
> Brad Larson wrote:
>
> >John, Typically 4 sector base stations are built with either 5.3 or a
> >licensed link as backhaul. With BreezeAccess VL, true data sector
>
take that as a slam. It is not. I know the
quality is there and it is a matter of economics for me only that has
ever kept me away from Alvarion products. You guys build good stuff and
in some markets the price is easily recovered through ROI.
Thanks,
Scriv
Brad Larson wrote:
>John,
uld you be more
specific? VoIP will be used across the radio links however the traffic
is encapsulated in MPLS.
-Matt
Brad Larson wrote:
>Matt, How much capacity do you need per 5.8 Ghz sector? Is this a business
>or residential rollout or both? How many subscribers per sector do you want
Matt, How much capacity do you need per 5.8 Ghz sector? Is this a business
or residential rollout or both? How many subscribers per sector do you want
to support? How large do you want to scale this network and is managment,
batch firmware loads for radio updates, vlan tagging, voip support importa
ng WISPs and
is not a sales advertisement I would gladly listen to what you guys have
to say about the VL platform. Brad, do you think this 2400 subscriber
WISP operator would be interested in joining WISPA? We could use some
input from more WISPs who are doing well.
Thanks,
Scriv
Brad Larso
. The
base station antennas are the 90 or 120 sectors we ship with the
BreezeAccess VL platform. Brad
Brad Larson
Northeast Regional Manager
Alvarion
-Original Message-
From: dustin jurman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2006 10:48 AM
To: 'WISPA General List&#x
Not all OFDM radios are created equally (especially PTMP). In many areas of
NorthEast USA we have 1 mile radius's with eave mounted BreezeAccess VL
Subscribers (5.8 Ghz) doing mod 6 which reflects a 10 meg true data rate.
Typically these are obstructed NLOS links instead of going thru 1 mile of
sol
"Just incase I have missed
something... has anyone actually shipped a Wimax compliant product? Is the Wimax
standard been ratified? I kind of tuned out the hype about a year ago, and
havent really been following it."
Pete, There are well over 110 Wimax trials
going on right now in which I
willing
to collaborate to make it happen (and both parties are willing to see that
it's accomplished). The issue of "who" does the presentation may be set in
stone, but if both parties are willing to agree that "what" is presented
should be agreeable to both, it
Video stream Mac from the field into the FCC meetingBrad
-Original Message-
From: George [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2005 1:27 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Need Inputs From Hurricane Relief WISP Teams
ForFCCPresentation on Thursday
Jo
Alvarion asked that 3650 be split
between unlicensed and licensed use is this correct? What else was
requested and who requested what exactly?
Thanks,
Scriv
Brad Larson wrote:
>John, I feel I have contributed with past posts. Google search 802.16h and
>you'll see what the Wimax group
FCC stipulate this in their
proposed ruling? Scriv
Brad Larson wrote:
>"While I confess I am not an engineer, I am informed by those that are that
>while theoretically true, the practical effect will
>be to make contention-based technology impossible and to limit the utility
>of
77 matches
Mail list logo
