Re: [WISPA] About Hulu and Netflix and youtube...increaseddata delivery is here to stay.

2009-11-14 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
The XR3 has FCC compliance.

* Michael Baird wrote, On 11/14/2009 12:24 AM:
 Ubiquity does not have any licensed 3.65 gear for the US, they have 
 XR3/Nano3's but they are for overseas customers.

 They have announced they will be coming out with 3.65/900 mhz airmax 
 gear 2nd Quarterish next year.

 Regards
 Michael Baird
   
 UBNT has fully licensed and approved 3.65 gear.



 --
 From: Ralph ralphli...@bsrg.org
 Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 12:34 PM
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Cc: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] About Hulu and Netflix and 
 youtube...increaseddatadeliveryis here to stay.

   
 
 What ubnt 3.65 are you saying you tried? Afaik ubnt has 3 gig but not
 on US channels. What country are you in?

 On Nov 13, 2009, at 1:15 PM, MDK rea...@muddyfrogwater.us wrote:


   




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] WISPA FCC FILING re: Section 706

2009-09-12 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE

* Jack Unger wrote, On 9/12/2009 3:06 PM:
On Friday (9/4) WISPA, with assistance from Rini/Coran, filed Comments 
in the FCC's Section 706 Notice of Inquiry. This NOI asked if 
Broadband was being deployed in a reasonable and timely fashion to all 
Americans.


WISPA's reply answered No to this question and went on to address 
issues like:


1. The definition of broadband.

2. The need for the FCC to act on WISPA's TV White Space Petition for 
Reconsideration.


3. Affordable access to the middle mile.

4. The adequacy of broadband mapping efforts.

5. Actions to accelerate the deployment of broadband to all Americans.

WISPA's filing is attached and your comments and questions are 
welcomed. All WISPA members who would like to participate in crafting 
future FCC filings are invited to join WISPA's FCC Committee.


Respectfully,

Jack Unger
Chair - WISPA FCC Committee
Hey Jack...I skimmed through the document and from what I see you did 
your homework. I'm printing it out for further review and passed it on 
to some other folks as well. Good job.


Leon
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.412 / Virus Database: 270.13.94/2366 - Release Date: 09/12/09 
17:50:00



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/

Re: [WISPA] 900Mhz question

2009-09-03 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
Rick...what data rate(s) are you running on the CPE and AP? What speed 
is the cust supposed to get? I would use something like 6/9/12/18 data 
rates at both ends. The slower the data rate the more headroom you will 
have.


Leon

* RickG wrote, On 9/2/2009 8:44 PM:

I've got two customers on a 900MHz AP RB-433/XR9 running Mikrotik
3.10, with a 13db v-pol omni.
Customer 1 has RB-411/XR9 running Mikrotik 3.10, with a 18db grid. 1
mile of solid trees. Signal is -85. Noise floor = -102.
Customer 2 has RB-411/XR9 running Mikrotik 3.10 with a 15db yagi. 1/4
mile solid trees. Signal is -65. Noise floor = -102.
Both customers live with in a mile of each other in the same direction
from the AP.

Customer 1 is complaining about speed. My tests show about 600-1000Kbps.
Customer 2 is working well with 2-3Mbps speeds.

Up until a few weeks ago Customer 1 had near 3Mbps speeds. I lean
towards blaming the foliage but full bloom has long since passed. Any
thoughts?
  

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.76/2343 - Release Date: 09/03/09 
05:50:00



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/

Re: [WISPA] 5.8ghz PTP

2009-09-01 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE

* Josh Luthman wrote, On 9/1/2009 6:31 PM:

30 megs with a 20 mhz channel is what Travis and I always see in 5ghz.
 Xr5 and r52(h) myself.
  
we had almost a 30 mile path using I believe SR5s and I think it was 10 
mHz channels and I think we topped it at 15m but throttled it back to 
cap @ 10m (mostly that link was for residential and a few biz).


leon

On 9/1/09, Scott Carullo sc...@brevardwireless.com wrote:
  

Mikrotik with R52N cards and say a RB411AH

I see almost that much throughput with the regular rb411 boards but the cpu
i believe is the bottleneck but its close.

Scott Carullo
Brevard Wireless
321-205-1100 x102

 Original Message 


From: Cameron Kilton c...@midcoast.com
Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2009 5:38 PM
To: wireless@wispa.org wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] 5.8ghz PTP

Anybody know of any equipment for under 5K that can deliver 100Mbit
(ish) with Dual Polarity with Adaptive Modulation? (Anything that is not
Ubiquiti for now.)

Also anybody know when the Rocket M will be shipping?

Thank You,
Cameron Kilton
  
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.74/2339 - Release Date: 09/01/09 
06:52:00



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/

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik and 3650

2009-08-20 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE

* Jason Hensley wrote, On 8/20/2009 3:51 PM:

I know it works, but will the FCC come crashing down on me if they find out
I have these in place?
  
FIrst you need to lite-license yourself and make sure you (your 
locations) are not in an exclusion zone. If so, then take 2. Otherwise, 
proceed and follow the rules.


I also would use the Ligowave stuff as well even though I've used the 
MTK stuff. I'm disappointed in the Ubiquiti stuff (at least 900) and 
wouldn't want the same thing to happen there (3650)


leon



-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2009 2:44 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik and 3650

I personally am avoiding 3.65 and MT.  Ligowave and an80 are what I am
going to do.

I do know it works, though.  You have to find the cable that matches
5.8 frequency in MT to 3.65 in actual output.  No support by MT (or
even as much as an answer to my questions).

On 8/20/09, Jason Hensley ja...@jaggartech.com wrote:
  

I need a backhaul link outside of 2.4 and 5.8.  If I put together a


Mikrotik
  

system, say an RB600 with an Xr3 and put a 20db Grid on each end would


that
  

be legal?  Admittedly I'm not up to speed on what is and is not allowed in
3650 as far as power output, etc etc.  This would be a short backhaul - 2
miles or less.

Along these same lines, can I build a PtMP 3650 system with these same


type
  

specs?

Thanks!



No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.62/2315 - Release Date: 08/20/09 
06:05:00



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/

Re: [WISPA] Direct Lightning Strikes

2009-08-07 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE

* Gary Garrett wrote, On 8/7/2009 2:34 PM:
Seems to me it is ethernet cable picking up EMP. I seem to lose a lot of 
Netgear routers lately. Seems to go right through the POE and gets the 
WAN port.  Also Transmit side of XR2's. Always see receive side 
degrading after mid path lightning strikes even a mile away.
Trango ethernet survives. Once we got a direct Tower strike and 
everything on the tower was shot, the only survivor was the top antenna 
a Trango 900 EXT. that was the only one with non-shielded cat 5.

Go figure.
  
One of the things I remember is like some have said not have a ground 
loop. Also, usually one side of the cable should be grounded.


WHen I lived in South Florida and hada  35' tower for my ham and tv 
stuff, I put in a Joslyn (sp) surge suppressor in the electrical panel 
across the AC feed coming in and put in some GFI breakers for that 
stuff. I also had some GFI outlets running the equipment. Luckily never 
had a problem as South Florida has lots of lightning.


Leon
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.406 / Virus Database: 270.13.46/2288 - Release Date: 08/07/09 
13:13:00



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/

Re: [WISPA] Small auto start generator

2009-08-02 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
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/

Re: [WISPA] [WISP] 900 PtP

2009-06-03 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
check out the ligowave stuffif not then probably an XR9 like 
mentioned below


leon

* Marlon K. Schafer wrote, On 6/3/2009 1:09 AM:
I have a trango link that's only giving me 2 megs.  Sometimes much less. 
The link is 2.3 or so miles.  There are TWO pine trees in the way.


What would you guys use?  I need to get more speed to the remote tower.

thanks,
marlon

- Original Message - 
From: RickG rgunder...@gmail.com

To: w...@part-15.org
Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2009 8:47 PM
Subject: Re: [WISP] 900 PtP


I just did this set up for a customer. Unfortunately they have ltos of
pine trees. The panels didnt cut it and neither did yagis. Big grids
did the trick.
-RickG

On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 8:08 PM, Justin Wilson j...@mtin.net wrote:
  

Mikrotik xr9's with arc wireless panels If the link budget supports them.
Throw in 411a boards and you have a sweet setup.

Justin


--
Justin Wilson j...@mtin.net


From: Jeremy Grip g...@nbnworks.net
Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2009 7:06 PM
To: w...@part-15.org
Subject: [WISP] 900 PtP

Anyone have any suggestions for a 900 PtP link? 2.5 miles, 25% trees at 
the
far end. Should give me as much BW as possible, support most flavors of 
QOS

for VoIP, and price matters.

TIA,

Jeremy Grip
North Branch Networks, LLC



No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.52/2152 - Release Date: 06/03/09 
05:53:00



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/

Re: [WISPA] 2nd Look @ 3.65 ?

2009-03-19 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
* Marlon K. Schafer wrote, On 3/18/2009 10:32 PM:
 Thanks Leon,
   
You;re welcome Marlon...
 Do you have a contact person?
   
Harold Bledsoe he's a WISPA member vendor.
 Also, what ranges and speeds are people seeing with 3650?
   
I don;t know as I'm not with Bluemont anymore and we/I were looking at 
all the 3650 stuff last year. Depends on the channel size too.
 Anyone worried about self inflicted interneference?  There is only 50mhz of 
 spectrum right?
   
I don't think that should be an issue.

Let me know how it goes.

Leon
 marlon

 - Original Message - 
 From: Leon Zetekoff wa4...@arrl.net
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2009 6:31 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] 2nd Look @ 3.65 ?


   
 Hi Marlon...I'd look at the Ligowave stuff similar in principle to the
 UBNT stuff but I think much better. That's what I'd do today.

 Take care leon

 Marlon K. Schafer wrote:
 
 I'm looking into this too.

 So far I can't find a solution for rural towers.  A 3 sector install at
 $20k?  Not to service the 20 people that will be able to even see that
 tower

 Anyone have any better ideas?
 marlon

 - Original Message - 
 From: Gino Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com
 To: Motorola Canopy User Group motor...@wispa.org; WISPA General 
 List
 wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2009 7:55 AM
 Subject: [WISPA] 2nd Look @ 3.65 ?



   
 Fellow operators:

 Any updates on your experienes with 3.65 gear? PMP and PTP?

 Any updates on experiences with:

 Redline, Aperto, Tranzeo, Vecima, Alvarion, Ligowave, Solectek, Airspan
 ???


 Gino A. Villarini
 g...@aeronetpr.com
 Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
 tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

 




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] Managing Multiple Mikrotiks - User Control

2009-01-31 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
Scott has a good idea. Combine that with the Dude and it works nice. 
Another thing to do is make the management of the devices on a 
non-routeable.

Leon

* Scott Reed wrote, On 1/31/2009 11:08 AM:
 Radius.
 You can make groups in Radius that map to groups on the routers.  You 
 can then make groups on the router for the specific functions you want 
 the user to have.
 First the MT will check locally for the user.  If that fails, it will 
 check Radius.  Thus, you can have an ID on the MT to ensure some has 
 access, but let Radius to the normal authenication.

 Gino Villarini wrote:
   
 Hello all
  
 WE have about 100 Mk units in our network, what tool is available to
 manage them effectively?  We are looking in a way to manage our own
 internal access to them... Admins and techs getting into groups with
 individual pwds?
  
 Any ideas to a centrilized security management system for 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/


Re: [WISPA] Microtik Remote Weirdness

2009-01-21 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
Hi Forbes...

YOu can also look at the connectors on the cable you might want to try 
and put new ones on there. Also, did you try a different POE injector at 
the tower?
Let us know what you come up with.

Leon

* Forbes Mercy wrote, On 1/20/2009 7:33 PM:
 Hi Forbes

 A few questions/comments:
 :
 How long is the ethernet run?

 About 50 feet

 We had a MTK client radio on an RB113 go irratic at times.

 We brought the 133 back into the office and had no problem accessing it
 with short length Cat 5 and the wireless worked great, same for the new
 433A board. So this leaves us with the 433AH and one card working at the
 50 foot length radio mount but not the 133 or 433a which work perfectly
 in the office.

 You can't upload into the MTK when using Winbox with the MAC address,
 only IPs.
 How about duplex/speed are they both matched? You might want to crank it
 to 10M/FULL and see if that helps.

 We can try this.

 Forbes


 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
 Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2009 4:21 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Microtik Remote Weirdness

 * Forbes Mercy wrote, On 1/20/2009 7:00 PM:
   
 snip

 Took a back-up 433AH board up and used the same radio card, worked
 
 like
   
 a charm for both our access and customer throughput.  We didn't want
 
 to
   
 waste a three port/LAN board so ordered a 433a single port board.
 
 Once
   
 it arrived we logged into it by MAC in the office with no problem,
 programmed it and sent it up to the tower.  Once on the tower
 
 customers
   
 associated just fine but once again we couldn't access the management
 side.  We saw the MAC and the identity for it but we couldn't ping
 
 that
   
 IP (yes, the 433AH radio was unplugged) and trying to load by MAC
 
 would
   
 start the RouterOS download but at various places it would crash.

 Moved the 433A down to the hut and a laptop easily logged into it,
 
 even
   
 when plugged into the switch, but we still couldn't log into it from
 remote, although the laptop on scene was going through the same switch
 and by MAC just like we were trying, sigh.  OK we put the 433AH back
 
 in
   
 service and again everything worked great.  I'm stumped, we isolated
 
 the
   
 switch, Cat 5, and IP Address but those two single cards won't allow
 
 us
   
 to log in over using Winbox either by IP or by MAC while it allows it
 locally.   *banging head against the wall.  Any ideas?
 
 Hi Forbes

 A few questions/comments:
 :
 How long is the ethernet run?
 We had a MTK client radio on an RB113 go irratic at times.
 You can't upload into the MTK when using Winbox with the MAC address, 
 only IPs.
 How about duplex/speed are they both matched? You might want to crank it

 to 10M/FULL and see if that helps.

 Leon




 
 
 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/

 No virus found in this incoming message.
 Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com 
 Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.10/1905 - Release Date:
 1/20/2009 2:34 PM
   




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] Microtik Remote Weirdness

2009-01-20 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
* Forbes Mercy wrote, On 1/20/2009 7:00 PM:
 snip

 Took a back-up 433AH board up and used the same radio card, worked like
 a charm for both our access and customer throughput.  We didn't want to
 waste a three port/LAN board so ordered a 433a single port board.  Once
 it arrived we logged into it by MAC in the office with no problem,
 programmed it and sent it up to the tower.  Once on the tower customers
 associated just fine but once again we couldn't access the management
 side.  We saw the MAC and the identity for it but we couldn't ping that
 IP (yes, the 433AH radio was unplugged) and trying to load by MAC would
 start the RouterOS download but at various places it would crash.

 Moved the 433A down to the hut and a laptop easily logged into it, even
 when plugged into the switch, but we still couldn't log into it from
 remote, although the laptop on scene was going through the same switch
 and by MAC just like we were trying, sigh.  OK we put the 433AH back in
 service and again everything worked great.  I'm stumped, we isolated the
 switch, Cat 5, and IP Address but those two single cards won't allow us
 to log in over using Winbox either by IP or by MAC while it allows it
 locally.   *banging head against the wall.  Any ideas?
Hi Forbes

A few questions/comments:
:
How long is the ethernet run?
We had a MTK client radio on an RB113 go irratic at times.
You can't upload into the MTK when using Winbox with the MAC address, 
only IPs.
How about duplex/speed are they both matched? You might want to crank it 
to 10M/FULL and see if that helps.

Leon





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 up AM radio tower

2009-01-03 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
One thing you might try is making an RF choke at the tower base coiling 
up the CAT5 and possibly even using a ferrite on it as well.

Leon

* Jack Unger wrote, On 1/3/2009 3:35 PM:
 Doug,

 The only way to tell if using shielded cable would work is to try it. 
 Every high-power (radio tower) situation is unique. Most tower problems 
 occur on high-power FM towers where the FM frequency is close to the 
 Ethernet frequency but problems can easily exist on AM towers too 
 depending on AM transmit power levels, proximity to your cabling, 
 effectiveness of your shielding and grounding, filters internal to and 
 external from your equipment, etc. This topic (with examples) can be 
 discussed endlessly but each and every tower is going to be unique so if 
 you want a quick and correct answer then I'd suggest just going ahead 
 and trying it. Do your best on the initial shielding and grounding to 
 get the best result then see if that is good enough to meet your needs.

 jack

 Doug Ratcliffe wrote:
   
 We've had for many years access to a non-live AM radio tower (by non-live, 
 the antennas are mounted on the sides of the tower, insulated, look like 
 long steel cables).  For a long time we ran AC to the top, into a small 
 choke/transformer (some little gizmo) that filtered the AM radio signal, 
 along with a fiber cable to the bottom.  A lightning strike zapped all the 
 equipment a few years ago, and we never replaced it.  The time has come that 
 we need to put equipment on it again.

 I'd like to move towards running POE to the bottom, and at the top would be 
 Nanostations 2/5's.  The tower is 160 ft tall self-supporting.  I was 
 thinking about running shielded twisted pair cable.  In the past we've been 
 able to run short lengths of CAT5 at the top from the main power box, but 
 the last time any experimentation was done with CAT5 was with a former 
 partner, and the now deceased engineer that used to run the radio station.  

 Would the shielded cable remove the interference/static charge/etc or is 
 this just not possible?
 




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 up AM radio tower

2009-01-03 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
* Jack Unger wrote, On 1/3/2009 8:15 PM:
 ... the TRANSMITTER is 10 kW, not the tower...

 Doug Ratcliffe wrote:
 The tower is a 4-leg self supporting tower, it was built a long time ago, 
 built from what I've heard in the mid 1900's...  The antennas for the tower 
 are isolated from the tower, it appears that there are 3 vertical antennas, 
 attached with copper tubing from the transmitter to each of the antennas 
 (which are on isolated standoffs, top to bottom.  There is some kind of 
 matching transformer in the building under the tower.  The tower is 10kW, 
 1450 AM (good guess on the frequency!)..
 
snip

What is the callsign of the station we can then find out the true power 
from the FCC DB.

Leon



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 up AM radio tower

2009-01-03 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
* Doug Ratcliffe wrote, On 1/3/2009 7:33 PM:
 The tower is a 4-leg self supporting tower, it was built a long time ago, 
 built from what I've heard in the mid 1900's...  The antennas for the tower 
 are isolated from the tower, it appears that there are 3 vertical antennas, 
 attached with copper tubing from the transmitter to each of the antennas 
 (which are on isolated standoffs, top to bottom.  There is some kind of 
 matching transformer in the building under the tower.  The tower is 10kW, 
 1450 AM (good guess on the frequency!)..
   
I think 1450 is a CLASS IV (or what was a CLASS IV) freq and should be 
1kW. What's the callsign and location?

leon



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] Domain name registrars

2008-12-31 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
* Patrick Shoemaker wrote, On 12/30/2008 3:40 PM:
 What companies are the operators here using for domain registration? I 
 am looking to transfer my customers' domains to a new registrar. I am 
 looking for a credible US-based company that does not have a huge setup 
 fee and that does not employ any shady practices such as holding domain 
 names for ransom when they expire.

   
I've used Network Solutions for years and also using the folks that have 
done hosting for us, Dreamhost.com Their support is pretty good too.

Leon



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] Fw: [TowerTalk] Some spectacular views of theabandonedRussian Woodpecker antenna array

2008-12-20 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
I was in South Florida during those years and remember that irritant!

I've got some dipoles in the attic setup and need to find some time to 
get back on.

Leon

* Jack Unger wrote, On 12/20/2008 1:39 AM:
 Yep. I remember the Woodpecker too. It really made a mess of the 40 
 meter ham band.

 _ _ . . .   . . . _ _ .  ..._ _ .  _ .

 Chuck McCown wrote:
 I remember the woodpecker.  Have not been on HF in years.  Need to get a QRP 
 rig and do some CW.

 - Original Message - 
 From: jp j...@saucer.midcoast.com
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Friday, December 19, 2008 8:37 AM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Fw: [TowerTalk] Some spectacular views of 
 theabandonedRussian Woodpecker antenna array


   
 Looks like a bigger version of the 8-bay UHF television antenna I just
 ordered for OTA HD service.

 On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 06:33:25AM -0800, Marlon K. Schafer wrote:
 
 H, wonder how far we could shoot a wifi signal with one of these? 
 grin
 marlon

   
 This gigantic antenna system called Duga-3 is located near Prypiat
 in the Chernobyl area.  It was built in the 70's as an early missile
  detection system (over-the-horizon radar system). It was also
 called  the Steel Yard hence its distinctive appearance. The antenna
 was  deactivated in 1989.

 The Russian Woodpecker was a notorious Soviet signal that could be
 heard on the shortwave radio bands worldwide between July 1976 and
 December 1989. It sounded like a sharp, repetitive tapping noise, at
  10 Hz, giving rise to the Woodpecker name. The random frequency
 disrupted legitimate broadcast, amateur radio, and utility
 transmissions and resulted in thousands of complaints by many
 countries worldwide.

 Starting in 1976 a new and powerful radio signal was detected
 worldwide, and quickly dubbed the Woodpecker by amateur radio
 operators. Transmission power on some woodpecker transmitters was
 estimated to be as high as 10 MW EIRP. As well as disrupting
 shortwave amateur radio and broadcasting it could sometimes be heard
  over telephone circuits due to the strength of the signals. This
 led  to a thriving industry of Woodpecker filters and noise
 blankers.

 http://www.artificialowl.net/2008/12/abandoned-giant-duga-3-system-antenna.html



 _

 This message was typed using the DVORAK keyboard layout.

 http://www.mwbrooks.com/dvorak/


 http://gigliwood.com/abcd/




 _
 You live life online. So we put Windows on the web.
 http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/127032869/direct/01/
 ___



 ___
 TowerTalk mailing list
 towert...@contesting.com
 http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

   
 ___



 ___
 TowerTalk mailing list
 towert...@contesting.com
 http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
 
 
 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/
   
 -- 
 /*
 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/



   

 -- 
 Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
 Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993
 Cisco Press Author - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs
 WISPs - Do you know where your customers are?
 For wireless coverage mapping see http://www.ask-wi.com/mapping
 FCC Lic. #PG-12-25133 LinkedIn Profile http://www.linkedin.com/in/jackunger
 Phone 818-227-4220  Email jun...@ask-wi.com


   
 



 

Re: [WISPA] FCC ULC

2008-08-12 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
* Jerry Richardson wrote, On 8/12/2008 11:55 AM:
 How accurate is the FCC ULC?
  
 I am searching by call sign for grandfathered earth stations and all
 four of the call signs come back not found.
   
It's not in there except a reference to the grandfathered PDF. The 
International Bureau is where the FSSes are dealt with.

Leon
  
  
 Jerry Richardson
 VP Operations
 925-260-4119
 P Please consider the environment before printing this email
  

   
 



 
 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] new site install pictures

2008-08-10 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
THought was a surge suppressor. Nice install.

Are you using silicone to seal besides the tape? We used silicone in our 
amateur stuff iat our  FLorida repeater location and also at my house 
when I lived down there. Works good.

Leon

PS: The battery is there are a failover, I'm assuming you have AC power 
there?

* Kurt Fankhauser wrote, On 8/10/2008 1:23 PM:
 That's not a barrel connector it is a PolyPhaser surge surpressor. I've
 never had an issue with water getting in a connector in 4 years of sealing
 this way. We must have pretty mild weather or something. I do try to get the
 tape all the way up to the antenna though but sometimes its tight and the
 roll of tape won't make it but it turns out alright every time.

 Kurt Fankhauser
 WAVELINC
 P.O. Box 126
 Bucyrus, OH 44820
 419-562-6405
 www.wavelinc.com
  
  
 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Travis Johnson
 Sent: Sunday, August 10, 2008 12:30 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] new site install pictures

 Hi,

 Looks very nice... I did notice a couple things that we have seen in our 
 environment that may or may not be an issue. The first is the 
 weatherproof on the LMR jumper cables. We have found that we have to 
 seal all the way up against the plastic case on the antenna, otherwise 
 water will eventually penetrate into the seal. The other thing is using 
 an RJ45 barrel connector inside your outdoor box. We've had many of them 
 fail after a year or two (in our environment, it's probably due to the 
 large temperature swings in summer vs. winter. We see -30F in the winter 
 and up to 105F in the summer).

 Just some thoughts... take it for what it's worth... ;)

 Travis
 Microserv

 Kurt Fankhauser wrote:
   
 Hey guys I just got some pictures uploaded of one of my AP sites if you
 
 want
   
 to check it out. Hopefully someone starting out can benefit from it as
 
 this
   
 is 4 years of knowledge from being on the lists here and picking up on
 better ways of how to do installs. Got any questions just ask. I'd
 appreciate some comments as well. :)

  

 http://www.wavelinc.com/towers/DSGE_Tower/

  

  

 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://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] Transportable/Mobile 3650mhz band Base Stations

2008-08-10 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
Mobile type ops in 3650 probably is not going to happen IMHO - a big can 
of worms the FCC opened up. But in an emergency, then there's always the 
capability of getting an STA.

Leon

* Stuart Browne wrote, On 8/10/2008 1:28 PM:
 The transportable 3650 base station idea is akin to a transportable
 satellite terminal. FCC requires that the satcom terminal be licensed
 but permits uplinking from ad hoc sites without registration.
 Imagine needing to relocate a base station after a tornedo wipes out
 the base station and tower...

 On Sat, Aug 9, 2008 at 9:42 PM,  [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
   
 It focuses on the base station because that is where authorization for the 
 client to transmit happens.

 Its up to the base station to track where the client station is dynamically.

 I mean mobility is why we are in the wireless business isn't it? If client 
 stations couldn't move around then it would be kind of pointless.

 Charles
 Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2008 18:45:20
 To: WISPA General Listwireless@wispa.org
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Transportable/Mobile 3650mhz band Base Stations


 I see no reason why they would not.   The question is not if you can move
 the building or structure or whatever it is mounted to, but whether or not
 you properly update your location registration(s).One thing I find odd,
 is that the process ignores the client and focuses on the base station.

 Having been through that process - I'm still in it, the first app was
 rejected and had to be amended, it's a bit of a pain, and the FCC is NOT
 fast in responding.   Well, fast to me is overnight, fast to them is a week
 or so.   It actually looks like I'll have the first licensed and registered
 site in OR and WA state.

 They're very adamant about warning you not to put equipment online until the
 site registration is done.




 
 insert witty tagline here

 - Original Message -
 From: Stuart Browne [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2008 5:04 PM
 Subject: [WISPA] Transportable/Mobile 3650mhz band Base Stations


 
 I'm interested in if the FCC permits the use of transportable 3650 mhz
 band base stations.

 Stu Browne


 
 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] Court Injunction

2008-08-04 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
* Jerry Richardson wrote, On 8/4/2008 3:44 PM:
 Is it possible to get an injunction against a HAM if he moved to a
 900MHz frequency as is causing interference that would disrupt our
 ability to do business? I know he has a license and I don't however
 there must be some precedent that allows for commercial venture versus
 amateur radio.
  
 Any ideas?
   
Jerry...sorry Part 97 licensees override anything on part 15. Part 15 
devices must accept interference. Have you tried talking with him?

Leon WA4ZLW
  
  
 Jerry Richardson
 VP Operations
 925-260-4119
 P Please consider the environment before printing this email
  

   
 



 
 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] The PDF I mentioned

2008-08-03 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
* Charles Wyble wrote, On 8/3/2008 11:54 AM:
 I was searching for information on  grandfathered earth stations and
 came across

 www.comsearch.com/files/PA-102473-EN_Extended_C-Band_Protection_3650-3700.pdf 

 Our friends at comsearch. :)
   
Comsearch is in the business of protection in addition to other things. 
But the protection folks don't seem to want to send business to the 
other side of Comsearch. Long story still unraveling.

ldz



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] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?

2008-08-01 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
* Charles Wyble wrote, On 8/1/2008 11:08 AM:
 Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE wrote:
 Charles...As I found out, Appendix D is just ONE way to do those 
 calculations.   
 Can you expand on this a bit?

 Is there another way they should be done? Or are there different 
 conclusions one can reach by doing them differently (ie you follow the 
 method in appendix d and the earth station uses some other method to 
 invalidate your data)?

 Is this something to be concerned about?
Hi Charles...from my talks with the WTB folks they indicated that 
Appendix D was just one way to get there from here so to speak. I do not 
know if COmsearch et al are using this procedure or something else.

Leon



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] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?

2008-07-31 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
Charles...As I found out, Appendix D is just ONE way to do those 
calculations.

Leon

* Charles Wyble wrote, On 7/31/2008 3:22 PM:
 Doug Ratcliffe wrote:
   
 I've read your blogs and have been keeping up with them.  What I can't seem 
 to find is the ULS registrations for the actual earth satellite stations. 
 It seems like most other ULS entires, they have a contact address and a 
 person's name.

 I did a Geosearch of Orange County, FL (the Sprint Communications Orlando, 
 FL  county) using Frequencies 3500 to 5000mhz (All Service Types), and found 
 nothing but a cancelled point to point license for ATT.
   
 
 Check out http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/General_Menu_Reports/filenum.cfm to 
 search by file number.

 I'm reading over the applications now. Lots of good info which you will 
 need for base station
 placement calculations (try saying that 3 times fast)  located appendix 
 D of the frequency rules document.
 I don't know the formal name of that document.



 
 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] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?

2008-07-27 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
Hi Doug...I've been doing this since January and it's been very slow. 
Comsearch seems to rep many of the FSSes. As soon as I have more info on 
where we are I'll post it or you can contact me off list.

Thanks leon

* Doug Ratcliffe wrote, On 7/27/2008 6:16 PM:
 Has anyone gotten any headway on company negotiations in protected zones? 
 Almost all of the zones near me (105km is the closest to the SW, 146.7km 
 next closest to the South) and I have no desire to point coverage in that 
 direction - mainly north and northwest.  But according to the FCC, I'd be 
 dealing with Sprint, and Harris Corporation - these people don't even have 
 phone numbers on their web sites for any departments that would look like 
 they would even know what I was talking about.

 And even if I found a human being, it seems unlikely I'd talk to anyone with 
 the power to make a real decision.

 Is this something best sent from a telecommunications attorney to their FCC 
 attorney of record?  Is the consent more like a contract?  Would they be 
 able to charge me for consent (like a spectrum lease)?  Is this like asking 
 for keys to the space shuttle?
   




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] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?

2008-07-27 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
I used to live in Boca Raton and my ham repeater is still on the air 
down there. We're also doing some 3650 in Florida as well. Currently 
we're 4 miles just west of the 150km zone so we're in the clear.

I've had numerous calls with higherups at the WTB on this over the last 
few months.

Leon

* Doug Ratcliffe wrote, On 7/27/2008 6:52 PM:
 I've read your blogs and have been keeping up with them.  What I can't seem 
 to find is the ULS registrations for the actual earth satellite stations. 
 It seems like most other ULS entires, they have a contact address and a 
 person's name.

 I did a Geosearch of Orange County, FL (the Sprint Communications Orlando, 
 FL  county) using Frequencies 3500 to 5000mhz (All Service Types), and found 
 nothing but a cancelled point to point license for ATT.

 A quick search of the FCC site for Sprint's filing # (SESRWL2000101902129) 
 finds nothing but the mention in the FCC 3650 FSS list.  If I were to call 
 the FCC with that number would they be able to provide me contact 
 information for that company that pertains to the FSS department?

 I wonder if creating a website that documented all the FSS contact info, 
 combined with map distance, automatic EIRP / bearing calculations (i.e. the 
 stuff the FCC talks about in their 3650 document), would be beneficial to 
 the other WISPs who want to serve the 125 million people who live INSIDE of 
 these zones.

 It seems silly, like a 5-10W transmitter pointing the opposite direction 
 would even make a difference - you would think the FCC would have integrated 
 distance AND antenna direction when it comes to base station registration...

 Florida is flat.  At 105km, I would need to have at least a 450 foot tower 
 or higher on both ends to even send a signal that far.  45 miles ended up 
 needing over 400ft on both ends.  It's not like I want to broadcast 3650 
 from the top of a 10,000 foot mountain peak.

 - Original Message - 
 From: Charles Wyble [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 6:20 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?


   
 Doug Ratcliffe wrote:
 
 Has anyone gotten any headway on company negotiations in protected zones?
 Almost all of the zones near me (105km is the closest to the SW, 146.7km
 next closest to the South) and I have no desire to point coverage in that
 direction - mainly north and northwest.  But according to the FCC, I'd be
 dealing with Sprint, and Harris Corporation - these people don't even 
 have
 phone numbers on their web sites for any departments that would look like
 they would even know what I was talking about.

   
 I have done several blog posts on this subject:

 http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/satellite-related-brain-dump.html
 http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/80211y-3650-mhz-in-southern-california.html

 http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/3650mhz-southern-california-malibu.html
 http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/3650mhz-southern-california-malibu_05.html

 Hope that helps.
 
 And even if I found a human being, it seems unlikely I'd talk to anyone 
 with
 the power to make a real decision.

   
 Indeed.
 
 Is this something best sent from a telecommunications attorney to their 
 FCC
 attorney of record?  Is the consent more like a contract?  Would they be
 able to charge me for consent (like a spectrum lease)?  Is this like 
 asking
 for keys to the space shuttle?

   
 Excellent questions. Hopefully someone here can help.


 -- 
 Charles Wyble (818) 280 - 7059
 http://charlesnw.blogspot.com
 CTO Known Element Enterprises / SoCal WiFI project



 




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] 900 MHz Foliage Penetration

2008-07-20 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
* Mike Hammett wrote, On 7/20/2008 12:09 PM:
 So could the link work because both ends are 200'+ over the bulk of the 
 middle?
   
I don't think it will work. We tried last year to get through some thick 
trees and couldn't do it even with a relay at the edge of the tree line.

We do have 900 deployed with trees.

Leon

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


 - Original Message - 
 From: D. Ryan Spott [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2008 11:28 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] 900 MHz Foliage Penetration


   
 Yes.

 ryan


 On Jul 19, 2008, at 8:39 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:

 
 Is that elevation at the bottom?


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


 - Original Message -
 From: D. Ryan Spott [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2008 10:01 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] 900 MHz Foliage Penetration


   
 Mike,

 Take a look at tranzeofaq.com. I have a pretty good example of a 2.75
 mile shot through trees with 6mbps throughput.

 ryan


 On Jul 19, 2008, at 1:32 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:

 
 How much foliage penetration should I expect from a 900 MHz system?

 I'm looking at an area which has 30' - 50' thick tree lines every
 1/2 to 1.5 miles.  I'm looking at 13 dBi sector with an approx 24 dB
 radio (figure a dB or two for cable loss).  For CPE I'm looking at
 13 - 15 dB CPE antenna (the 18 dB was just too big and expensive)
 with 20 - 24 dB radios.

 Looking at the XR9 radios.


 --
 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/
 
  
 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] 900 MHz Integrated Antenna Enclosure

2008-07-19 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
* Mike Hammett wrote, On 7/19/2008 12:40 PM:
 I've seen one by PacWireless and one by MTI.  Does anyone know of one with 
 greater gain than 12.5 dBi?
   
Hi Mike...ArC Wireless has some...we use them and are good Titan 
Wireless carriers them.

take care leon



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] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP

2008-07-02 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
* Harold Bledsoe wrote, On 7/2/2008 3:19 PM:
 I respectfully disagree.  In my opinion, any frequency that is tied to a 
 particular standard by regulation will do nothing but stifle innovation
 in that band.
   
I agree with Hal. As an amateur radio operator as well as someone in 
this and the broadcast business I have seen too many times where the FCC 
tried to over-regulate and stifled innovation.

3650 is a real PITA because of the grandfathered FSSes.  I think, 
though, we might want to think about moving the full 50 mHz to 
restricted instead of unrestricted as I don't see unrestricted coming 
anytime soon.

Leon
 -Hal

 -Original Message-
 From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP
 Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 16:14:48 -0500

 I would like to see WiMax approved for the entire 50 MHz and do away
 with the contention mechanism requirement for the upper 25 MHz as
 required under the rules. I know this is a flip-flop of position from
 our earlier position but frankly I see this as a god opportunity for
 WISPs to move up to the next level of reliability and scale. Many
 people are building in WiMax with success in the 3.5 to 3.8 GHz bands
 across the world. If WiMax were the standard for the 3650 band across
 50 MHz then carriers could easily work together to band plan and move
 away from interference. With GPS sync the bands can be reused multiple
 times anyway. Sticking with one standard in this band just makes sense
 for us. It can be a WISP band if we do this. Spanking more out of
 802.11 is old news and needs to be put to bed. It is time to use a
 real platform for scalable and reliable outdoor wireless broadband.
 WiMax is the path to this in 3.65 GHz. 802.22 will be the standard in
 the TV whitespaces (hopefully). It is time for us to standardize and
 use something better than repurposed WiFi.
 Scriv




 On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 10:15 AM,  [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
   
 The energy level for backoff CAN be adjusted.

 The FCC says that NEITHER is acceptable, and even though the atheros
 mechanism is just an energy detection,  it will not be allowed.   This is
 what I gathered from an assortment of emails on the topic, some of which
 were from the FCC to someone wanting certification.




 
 insert witty tagline here

 - Original Message -
 From: Harold Bledsoe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 4:52 AM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP


 
 The RF energy detection mechanism of 802.11a is sort of based on power
 level.  If the preamble is detected and decoded, then the mechanism is
 activated at -82dBm.  Otherwise it requires a relatively high energy
 level (-62dBm).

 Although I agree that even -62dBm seems fair.  It would be very useful
 to know what part of the CCA mechanism of 802.11a does not work for the
 FCC's contention requirement.  If it is not the detection mechanism,
 then perhaps it is the backoff mechanism?

 -Hal

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP
 Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 01:23:31 -0700

 That's nice, but in real life the FCC has simply gotten on a tear and
 decided that NOTHING qualifies for what they want.

 I have no idea what the purpose of this rather odd bit of nonsense is
 about,
 but when it declares that 802.11 does not detect dissimilar systems,
 then
 nothing can EVER be made to work.  After all, the whole listen before
 talk
 is AN RF ENERGY DETECTOR.If that doesn't work, nothing can.  Or, only
 that device or mechanism the person passing judgement wants to promote
 will
 work.

 We would spectulate who has bought this favor from the FCC, but in
 reality,
 it doesn't matter.  I predict NO equipment will be certified for the rest
 of
 the spectrum and it will be auctioned for big bucks to some large entity.
 We'll still be in the same boat 2 years from now, with statements about
 we're watching the development of insert technology du jour here with
 interest.




 
 insert witty tagline here

 - Original Message -
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 4:28 PM
 Subject: [WISPA] Update from the FCC on 3.65Ghz and CBP


   
 Update from the FCC. This makes is very clear to me what the FCC is
 looking
 for, if there are any questions or comments feel free.

 Sincerely, Tony Morella
 Demarc Technology Group, A Wireless Solution Provider
 Office: 207-667-7583 Fax: 207-433-1008
 http://www.demarctech.com


 Tony:
 Thank you for your inquiry.

 In the email you mentioned that several companies have obtained equipment
 authorization for 

Re: [WISPA] RouterBoard 112

2008-07-01 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
* Blair Davis wrote, On 7/1/2008 2:33 PM:
 Anyone happen to know the Power Supply voltage for the old RouterBoard 
 112?  Just got some of them and I can't find it on the RouterBoard 
 ste   Thanks.

   
up to 48volts

leon



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] XR9 separation from other 2.4 stuff

2008-06-14 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
* Kurt Fankhauser wrote, On 6/13/2008 5:27 PM:
 Leon,
   
Hi Kurt...
 How close are the 2.4 cards to that one SR9 card? What SBC are you using?
   
We're using I think a RB333 currently on that tower. We have three cards 
plugged into the board.

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

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
 Sent: Friday, June 13, 2008 4:15 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] XR9 separation from other 2.4 stuff

 * Kurt Fankhauser wrote, On 6/13/2008 3:56 PM:
   
 It is my understanding that the 900mhz cards are actually 2.4ghz with
 converters built in. So obviously putting a 900mhz card on the same board
 
 as
   
 a 2.4ghz card would be a bad idea. Now can I put them on the same tower?
 Lets say I put the 900mhz radio at the bottom and run some coax since
 
 900mhz
   
 should have much less cable loss I should be able to do this. I'll leave
 
 the
   
 2.4 stuff up top. But will the 900mhz antenna mounted in close proximity
 
 to
   
 the 2.4 antenna pick up the 2.4 and allow it to still cause interference
 
 to
   
 the radio below? Also would putting a 900mhz filter before the radio solve
 this?
   
 
 Hi Kurt...we're currently doing this. We have two 2.4 cards and an SR9 
 in one box at the top of a tower. On the same tower, lower down, we have 
 a box with two SR9s in it. I thought at first we might have some 
 problems but I think if you are shielded and the connections are good 
 and tight you shouldn't have much of a problem. If you want to isolate 
 physically then that shouldn't be an issue IMHO.

 LEoN
   
  

 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/


Re: [WISPA] XR9 separation from other 2.4 stuff

2008-06-13 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
* Kurt Fankhauser wrote, On 6/13/2008 3:56 PM:
 It is my understanding that the 900mhz cards are actually 2.4ghz with
 converters built in. So obviously putting a 900mhz card on the same board as
 a 2.4ghz card would be a bad idea. Now can I put them on the same tower?
 Lets say I put the 900mhz radio at the bottom and run some coax since 900mhz
 should have much less cable loss I should be able to do this. I'll leave the
 2.4 stuff up top. But will the 900mhz antenna mounted in close proximity to
 the 2.4 antenna pick up the 2.4 and allow it to still cause interference to
 the radio below? Also would putting a 900mhz filter before the radio solve
 this?
   
Hi Kurt...we're currently doing this. We have two 2.4 cards and an SR9 
in one box at the top of a tower. On the same tower, lower down, we have 
a box with two SR9s in it. I thought at first we might have some 
problems but I think if you are shielded and the connections are good 
and tight you shouldn't have much of a problem. If you want to isolate 
physically then that shouldn't be an issue IMHO.

LEoN
  

 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] Mikrotik User Manager- Help needed

2008-06-08 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
Ralph -- please contact me off list.

Thanks leon

* ralph wrote, On 6/8/2008 2:43 PM:
 I'm very frustrated with this application. Having trouble getting SSL
 activated on the authentication server.
 I have posted numerous times on MT's forum and received not even one answer.
 I have not received any support from my support ticket either.

 Who is the best MT consultant to use to help me figure out what is wrong?

 Thanks

 Ralph
 Brightlan.net
 Atlanta



 
 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] Rapid Link Launches WiMax Service in Atlanta

2008-06-04 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
* Travis Johnson wrote, On 6/3/2008 10:17 PM:
 Yup... and it's only because they can... they are getting the big 
 operators to pay that kind of money, so they will keep selling at those 
 prices. Supply and demand... but you can build a MT 3.65ghz CPE for less 
 than $400, but it's still expensive compared to all the other frequencies.
   
You can Heathkit your own 3650 solution with 
Mikrotik/Ubquitit/StarOS/etc but it is NOT FCC Type Accepted. Until 
someone goes through the process it's not doable.

Leon
 Travis
 Microserv

 Mike Hammett wrote:
   
 Yeah, I think I'm going to be passing on 3650 until something cheaper comes 
 along.  Ubiquiti has the XR3, but that's still a $260 mPCI card when I 
 normally spend $35.  There's also no RooTennas, so I have to go with a more 
 expensive solution... I think I figured $500 for a CPE instead of the $150 I 
 pay now.  I don't expect to pay $150 for a WiMAX CPE or $750 for a WiMAX AP, 
 but the prices these guys are asking is ridiculous.


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


   - Original Message - 
   From: Travis Johnson 
   To: WISPA General List 
   Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 9:01 PM
   Subject: Re: [WISPA] Rapid Link Launches WiMax Service in Atlanta


   Maybe they are trying to get enough new business to pay for $7,000 
 basestations? :)

   Travis
   Microserv

   Mike Hammett wrote: 
 and I thought they already posted this or a similar press release a time or 
 two.


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


 - Original Message - 
 From: Gino Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 6:42 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Rapid Link Launches WiMax Service in Atlanta


   I thought you were One ring ...

 Gino A. Villarini
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
 tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Mike Prachar
 Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 6:37 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: [WISPA] Rapid Link Launches WiMax Service in Atlanta
 Importance: High

 -  Atlanta business can now enjoy the only wide-area alternative to ATT
 -


 OMAHA, NE - June 3, 2008 - Rapid Link, Incorporated (OTCBB: RPID), a
 leading provider of WiMax and Communication Services, announced today
 the official launch of its much anticipated WiMax service offering in
 the Atlanta Metropolitan area.

 Following the soft launch of this service in February 2008, Rapid Link
 has several active customers enjoying the benefits of this cutting edge
 technology.  Due to the overwhelming success of the early release
 through our Channel Partners, Rapid Link is now offering voice and
 internet service via WiMax to the commercial public.

 Operating in the licensed-only 3650 MHz spectrum, customers can now
 enjoy guaranteed high speed connectivity, voice and internet bundled
 service, at the best cost/efficiency ratio in the industry.

 Matt Liotta, Chief Technology Officer of Rapid Link states, We are
 clearly ahead of the competition and the technology power curve with
 this offering.  Customers are increasingly discovering the limitations
 of antiquated technologies.  Following the recent release of WiMax
 technologies and equipment in the United States, Rapid link is proud to
 be a licensed WiMax carrier offering this breakthrough service to our
 foundation of customers in the greater Atlanta area.


 About Rapid Link

 Rapid Link, Incorporated is a Diversified Communication Services
 company, supplying bundled internet and voice services to Business and
 Residential customers. Rapid Link offers broadband access via its own
 facilities to ensure fast and reliable delivery of its content. As a
 leading licensed WiMAX carrier, Rapid Link is on the cutting edge of
 this exciting new technology. We are one of the only carriers that can
 offer an end-to-end solution for our customers without a dependency on
 any other company's resources.

 For more information, visit www.rapidlink.com.

 Safe Harbor Statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform
 Act of 1995: With the exception of historical information, the
 statements set forth above include forward-looking statements that
 involve risk and uncertainties. The Company wishes to caution readers
 that a number of important factors could cause actual results to differ
 materially from those in the forward-looking statements. Those factors
 include, but are not limited to, risks and uncertainties such as the
 failure to satisfy contractually agreed upon closing conditions that may
 delay or prevent the closings of subsequent debt financings contemplated
 by the applicable agreements; the risk factors noted in the Company's
 filings with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, such
 as the trading price of the Company's common stock reaching levels that
 

Re: [WISPA] Rapid Link Launches WiMax Service in Atlanta

2008-06-04 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
The rules are quite clear unfortunately. The FCC opened a can of worms 
IMHO. All licensees have to work together to resolve anything. There 
are no first rights to a site I've been told.

Leon

* Scottie Arnett wrote, On 6/4/2008 2:45 AM:
 All I can say is OUCH!

 -- Original Message --
 From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Date:  Tue, 3 Jun 2008 20:32:35 -0500

   
 I am going to launch and I am going to hold others to the interference
 avoidance requirements of the rules. If others come to town after me and
 interfere with me and do not remedy it after I spend several grand to launch
 then they will move or face a day in court. That is what is going to be
 different in my eyes. People have a mandate to behave in this band. I
 genuinely believe this gives a first in upper hand in this band. At least
 that is my perception. Others may vary.
 Scriv


 On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 7:38 PM, Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 
  John,

 Here is what I have heard or read so far:

 (1) I heard that 3650 users that are conflicting will have to work it
 out and that more than likely the FCC would not get involved in a
 frequency conflict.

 (2) Getting a license for 3650 takes about 2 hours, start to finish (from
 what I have heard from people that have done it). Meaning any person with
 Internet access can have a valid, FCC license in 2 hours.

 (3) The FCC has already approved someone using just the Ubiquiti XR3 card
 as the registered base station. Putting that card in a MT system does not
 broadcast any call signs or info in the packet frame, yet you are licensed
 and FCC legal as per the registration.

 (4) If it truly is a first registered, everyone else work around me then
 I will be registering every single tower within a 1,000 mile radius from my
 NOC. :)

 I'm not trying bash you or anything you said... I'm just thinking the 3650
 band is going to get just as messy as the 5ghz band within a few years...
 and I think the FCC has given false hope that it is somewhat protected...
 yet I don't see how.

 Travis
 Microserv


 John Scrivner wrote:

 Here is how it is different than 5 GHz. In 5 GHz the rules are that you have
 to accept interference. Also any equipment on earth can use the band from
 mobile phones to cameras and of course broadband devices of many types.
 There is little involved in dropping your link. Also there is little chance
 of you knowing what the interfering source is without some leg work. In 3650
 only people who get a license can launch. Base stations must be certified
 systems with the FCC and must be registered with the FCC. The rules state
 that it is a requirement that anyone using the band must work to eliminate
 interference with other users. That means if you are there first and someone
 interferes with you then they broke the law and it is their duty to fix it.
 Also, since everyone must register base stations, you will know who is
 interfering. In the case of WiMAX base stations, the call letters of the
 license holder are actually transmitted in the data frames which show up as
 the intefering carrier within the monitoring tools in the base stations
 themselves. I think there is a great opportunity in this band and I am proud
 to say I just got my license in 3650 last week. I am looking to build my
 first WiMAX base station very soon.
 Scriv


 On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 5:52 PM, Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL 
 PROTECTED] wrote:



  So, how exactly does 3.65ghz licensing work? If Rapid Link has licensed
 a base station at tower X, and I want to license 3.65ghz at tower X as
 well, what happens? Also, what if I want to license at Tower Y that is
 100 feet away? Is this band really any different than 5ghz, except you
 have to tell the FCC where your base stations are located?

 Travis
 Microserv

 Mike Prachar wrote:


  -  Atlanta business can now enjoy the only wide-area alternative to ATT
 -


 OMAHA, NE - June 3, 2008 - Rapid Link, Incorporated (OTCBB: RPID), a
 leading provider of WiMax and Communication Services, announced today
 the official launch of its much anticipated WiMax service offering in
 the Atlanta Metropolitan area.

 Following the soft launch of this service in February 2008, Rapid Link
 has several active customers enjoying the benefits of this cutting edge
 technology.  Due to the overwhelming success of the early release
 through our Channel Partners, Rapid Link is now offering voice and
 internet service via WiMax to the commercial public.

 Operating in the licensed-only 3650 MHz spectrum, customers can now
 enjoy guaranteed high speed connectivity, voice and internet bundled
 service, at the best cost/efficiency ratio in the industry.

 Matt Liotta, Chief Technology Officer of Rapid Link states, We are
 clearly ahead of the competition and the technology power curve with
 this offering.  Customers are increasingly discovering the limitations
 of 

Re: [WISPA] Rapid Link Launches WiMax Service in Atlanta

2008-06-04 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
You're welcome. First I don't want to jeopardize my FCC Commercial and 
Amateur licenses because of something stupid. And second, I'm deep in 
the middle of all this trying to negotiate with FSS' and have been in 
talks with higher ups at the WTB over the last few months.

Leon

* ralph wrote, On 6/4/2008 9:40 AM:
 Thank You for saying that.
 I hope all of us have sense enough not to home build solutions on a LICENSED
 band now that we have one!

 Ralph
 Brightlan.net
 Atlanta Ga
 (yes, we too have a 3650 license - big woop-de-do)




 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
 Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 9:07 AM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Rapid Link Launches WiMax Service in Atlanta

 * Travis Johnson wrote, On 6/3/2008 10:17 PM:
   
 Yup... and it's only because they can... they are getting the big 
 operators to pay that kind of money, so they will keep selling at those 
 prices. Supply and demand... but you can build a MT 3.65ghz CPE for less 
 than $400, but it's still expensive compared to all the other frequencies.
   
 
 You can Heathkit your own 3650 solution with 
 Mikrotik/Ubquitit/StarOS/etc but it is NOT FCC Type Accepted. Until 
 someone goes through the process it's not doable.

 Leon
   
 Travis
 Microserv

 Mike Hammett wrote:
   
 
 Yeah, I think I'm going to be passing on 3650 until something cheaper
   
 comes along.  Ubiquiti has the XR3, but that's still a $260 mPCI card when I
 normally spend $35.  There's also no RooTennas, so I have to go with a more
 expensive solution... I think I figured $500 for a CPE instead of the $150 I
 pay now.  I don't expect to pay $150 for a WiMAX CPE or $750 for a WiMAX AP,
 but the prices these guys are asking is ridiculous.
   
 --
 Mike Hammett
 Intelligent Computing Solutions
 http://www.ics-il.com


   - Original Message - 
   From: Travis Johnson 
   To: WISPA General List 
   Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 9:01 PM
   Subject: Re: [WISPA] Rapid Link Launches WiMax Service in Atlanta


   Maybe they are trying to get enough new business to pay for $7,000
   
 basestations? :)
   
   Travis
   Microserv

   Mike Hammett wrote: 
 and I thought they already posted this or a similar press release a time
   
 or 
   
 two.


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


 - Original Message - 
 From: Gino Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 6:42 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Rapid Link Launches WiMax Service in Atlanta


   I thought you were One ring ...

 Gino A. Villarini
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
 tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Mike Prachar
 Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 6:37 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: [WISPA] Rapid Link Launches WiMax Service in Atlanta
 Importance: High

 -  Atlanta business can now enjoy the only wide-area alternative to ATT
 -


 OMAHA, NE - June 3, 2008 - Rapid Link, Incorporated (OTCBB: RPID), a
 leading provider of WiMax and Communication Services, announced today
 the official launch of its much anticipated WiMax service offering in
 the Atlanta Metropolitan area.

 Following the soft launch of this service in February 2008, Rapid Link
 has several active customers enjoying the benefits of this cutting edge
 technology.  Due to the overwhelming success of the early release
 through our Channel Partners, Rapid Link is now offering voice and
 internet service via WiMax to the commercial public.

 Operating in the licensed-only 3650 MHz spectrum, customers can now
 enjoy guaranteed high speed connectivity, voice and internet bundled
 service, at the best cost/efficiency ratio in the industry.

 Matt Liotta, Chief Technology Officer of Rapid Link states, We are
 clearly ahead of the competition and the technology power curve with
 this offering.  Customers are increasingly discovering the limitations
 of antiquated technologies.  Following the recent release of WiMax
 technologies and equipment in the United States, Rapid link is proud to
 be a licensed WiMax carrier offering this breakthrough service to our
 foundation of customers in the greater Atlanta area.


 About Rapid Link

 Rapid Link, Incorporated is a Diversified Communication Services
 company, supplying bundled internet and voice services to Business and
 Residential customers. Rapid Link offers broadband access via its own
 facilities to ensure fast and reliable delivery of its content. As a
 leading licensed WiMAX carrier, Rapid Link is on the cutting edge of
 this exciting new technology. We are one of the only carriers that can
 offer an end-to-end solution for our customers without a dependency on
 any other company's resources.

 For more information, visit www.rapidlink.com.

 Safe Harbor

Re: [WISPA] Rapid Link Launches WiMax Service in Atlanta

2008-06-04 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
* Travis Johnson wrote, On 6/4/2008 10:07 AM:
 Why does it matter who it is? Fill out the FCC online registration 
 forms, get your 3650 license using the XR3 specs and description and 
 away you go.
Because it is wrong and not legal. We already have the license. The 3650 
solution the FCC concocted is not just a simple plug-n-build solution. 
There are very specific requirements and because a device has modular 
acceptance does not mean it is certified for that specific part 90 use. 
As I previously said, I'm not going to jeopardize any of my FCC licenses 
because we want to deploy on 3650 and it's taking so long.

Leon

 Travis
 Microserv

 George Rogato wrote:
 Does this mean we can all do this now?
 Who is the wisp?

 George

 Mike Hammett wrote:
   
 On one of the wireless lists someone stated that the FCC approved a site 
 registration with the XR3's FCC ID.  They even corrected an error in his 
 registration.


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


 - Original Message - 
 From: Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 8:07 AM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Rapid Link Launches WiMax Service in Atlanta


 
 * Travis Johnson wrote, On 6/3/2008 10:17 PM:
   
 Yup... and it's only because they can... they are getting the big
 operators to pay that kind of money, so they will keep selling at those
 prices. Supply and demand... but you can build a MT 3.65ghz CPE for less
 than $400, but it's still expensive compared to all the other 
 frequencies.

 
 You can Heathkit your own 3650 solution with
 Mikrotik/Ubquitit/StarOS/etc but it is NOT FCC Type Accepted. Until
 someone goes through the process it's not doable.

 Leon
   
 Travis
 Microserv

 Mike Hammett wrote:

 
 Yeah, I think I'm going to be passing on 3650 until something cheaper 
 comes along.  Ubiquiti has the XR3, but that's still a $260 mPCI card 
 when I normally spend $35.  There's also no RooTennas, so I have to go 
 with a more expensive solution... I think I figured $500 for a CPE 
 instead of the $150 I pay now.  I don't expect to pay $150 for a WiMAX 
 CPE or $750 for a WiMAX AP, but the prices these guys are asking is 
 ridiculous.


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


   - Original Message - 
   From: Travis Johnson
   To: WISPA General List
   Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 9:01 PM
   Subject: Re: [WISPA] Rapid Link Launches WiMax Service in Atlanta


   Maybe they are trying to get enough new business to pay for $7,000 
 basestations? :)

   Travis
   Microserv

   Mike Hammett wrote:
 and I thought they already posted this or a similar press release a time 
 or
 two.


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


 - Original Message - 
 From: Gino Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 6:42 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Rapid Link Launches WiMax Service in Atlanta


   I thought you were One ring ...

 Gino A. Villarini
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
 tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Mike Prachar
 Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 6:37 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: [WISPA] Rapid Link Launches WiMax Service in Atlanta
 Importance: High

 -  Atlanta business can now enjoy the only wide-area alternative to ATT
 -


 OMAHA, NE - June 3, 2008 - Rapid Link, Incorporated (OTCBB: RPID), a
 leading provider of WiMax and Communication Services, announced today
 the official launch of its much anticipated WiMax service offering in
 the Atlanta Metropolitan area.

 Following the soft launch of this service in February 2008, Rapid Link
 has several active customers enjoying the benefits of this cutting edge
 technology.  Due to the overwhelming success of the early release
 through our Channel Partners, Rapid Link is now offering voice and
 internet service via WiMax to the commercial public.

 Operating in the licensed-only 3650 MHz spectrum, customers can now
 enjoy guaranteed high speed connectivity, voice and internet bundled
 service, at the best cost/efficiency ratio in the industry.

 Matt Liotta, Chief Technology Officer of Rapid Link states, We are
 clearly ahead of the competition and the technology power curve with
 this offering.  Customers are increasingly discovering the limitations
 of antiquated technologies.  Following the recent release of WiMax
 technologies and equipment in the United States, Rapid link is proud to
 be a licensed WiMax carrier offering this breakthrough service to our
 foundation of customers in the greater Atlanta area.


 About Rapid Link

 Rapid Link, Incorporated is a Diversified Communication Services
 company, supplying bundled internet and voice services to Business

Re: [WISPA] Rapid Link Launches WiMax Service in Atlanta

2008-06-04 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
George...you can not plug-n-play components as I said earlier. It has to 
be certified as a system that makes use of a contention based protocol.

Leon

* George Rogato wrote, On 6/4/2008 11:22 AM:
 Thanks for explaining that Travis.
 I asked Jack Unger to look into this recently.
 There was a post somewhere else recently about 3650 use and I forwarded 
 it to Jack to find out from the FCC if in fact it is the way the post read.

 I'd like to hear Jack's opinion based on what he has found out from the FCC.

 As far as using those cards, if they work in mt and star, then for most 
 of us it's just add another card to the multi port board and go. It 
 sounds a lot cheaper than I had expected.

 George

 Travis Johnson wrote:
   
 John,

 Here is what I have heard or read so far:

 (1) I heard that 3650 users that are conflicting will have to work it 
 out and that more than likely the FCC would not get involved in a 
 frequency conflict.

 (2) Getting a license for 3650 takes about 2 hours, start to finish 
 (from what I have heard from people that have done it). Meaning any 
 person with Internet access can have a valid, FCC license in 2 hours.

 (3) The FCC has already approved someone using just the Ubiquiti XR3 
 card as the registered base station. Putting that card in a MT system 
 does not broadcast any call signs or info in the packet frame, yet you 
 are licensed and FCC legal as per the registration.

 (4) If it truly is a first registered, everyone else work around me 
 then I will be registering every single tower within a 1,000 mile radius 
 from my NOC. :)

 I'm not trying bash you or anything you said... I'm just thinking the 
 3650 band is going to get just as messy as the 5ghz band within a few 
 years... and I think the FCC has given false hope that it is somewhat 
 protected... yet I don't see how.

 Travis
 Microserv

 John Scrivner wrote:
 
 Here is how it is different than 5 GHz. In 5 GHz the rules are that you have
 to accept interference. Also any equipment on earth can use the band from
 mobile phones to cameras and of course broadband devices of many types.
 There is little involved in dropping your link. Also there is little chance
 of you knowing what the interfering source is without some leg work. In 3650
 only people who get a license can launch. Base stations must be certified
 systems with the FCC and must be registered with the FCC. The rules state
 that it is a requirement that anyone using the band must work to eliminate
 interference with other users. That means if you are there first and someone
 interferes with you then they broke the law and it is their duty to fix it.
 Also, since everyone must register base stations, you will know who is
 interfering. In the case of WiMAX base stations, the call letters of the
 license holder are actually transmitted in the data frames which show up as
 the intefering carrier within the monitoring tools in the base stations
 themselves. I think there is a great opportunity in this band and I am proud
 to say I just got my license in 3650 last week. I am looking to build my
 first WiMAX base station very soon.
 Scriv


 On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 5:52 PM, Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

   
   
 So, how exactly does 3.65ghz licensing work? If Rapid Link has licensed
 a base station at tower X, and I want to license 3.65ghz at tower X as
 well, what happens? Also, what if I want to license at Tower Y that is
 100 feet away? Is this band really any different than 5ghz, except you
 have to tell the FCC where your base stations are located?

 Travis
 Microserv

 Mike Prachar wrote:
 
 
 -  Atlanta business can now enjoy the only wide-area alternative to ATT
 -


 OMAHA, NE - June 3, 2008 - Rapid Link, Incorporated (OTCBB: RPID), a
 leading provider of WiMax and Communication Services, announced today
 the official launch of its much anticipated WiMax service offering in
 the Atlanta Metropolitan area.

 Following the soft launch of this service in February 2008, Rapid Link
 has several active customers enjoying the benefits of this cutting edge
 technology.  Due to the overwhelming success of the early release
 through our Channel Partners, Rapid Link is now offering voice and
 internet service via WiMax to the commercial public.

 Operating in the licensed-only 3650 MHz spectrum, customers can now
 enjoy guaranteed high speed connectivity, voice and internet bundled
 service, at the best cost/efficiency ratio in the industry.

 Matt Liotta, Chief Technology Officer of Rapid Link states, We are
 clearly ahead of the competition and the technology power curve with
 this offering.  Customers are increasingly discovering the limitations
 of antiquated technologies.  Following the recent release of WiMax
 technologies and equipment in the United States, Rapid link is proud to
 be a licensed WiMax carrier offering this breakthrough service to our
 foundation of customers in the greater Atlanta area.


 About Rapid 

Re: [WISPA] Rapid Link Launches WiMax Service in Atlanta

2008-06-04 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
HI George...can't be done with 3650 at least not now. There's not going 
to be any change in the Feds IMHO. It's lucky we got what we have now 
and it's hard enough to try and deploy as well due to the grandfathered 
FSS'.

Leon

* George Rogato wrote, On 6/4/2008 12:03 PM:
 WISPA had a tele conference with the FCC about plug n playin certified 
 components last year.
 It was a consideration of ours to try to see what needs to be done so 
 that we can legally build on the fly systems that were made up of 
 certified components.

 We need to go back to the FCC and get that going again. There was 
 ideas hashed around between them and us.

 Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE wrote:
 George...you can not plug-n-play components as I said earlier. It has 
 to be certified as a system that makes use of a contention based 
 protocol.

 Leon

 * George Rogato wrote, On 6/4/2008 11:22 AM:
 Thanks for explaining that Travis.
 I asked Jack Unger to look into this recently.
 There was a post somewhere else recently about 3650 use and I 
 forwarded it to Jack to find out from the FCC if in fact it is the 
 way the post read.

 I'd like to hear Jack's opinion based on what he has found out from 
 the FCC.

 As far as using those cards, if they work in mt and star, then for 
 most of us it's just add another card to the multi port board and 
 go. It sounds a lot cheaper than I had expected.

 George

 Travis Johnson wrote:
  
 John,

 Here is what I have heard or read so far:

 (1) I heard that 3650 users that are conflicting will have to 
 work it out and that more than likely the FCC would not get 
 involved in a frequency conflict.

 (2) Getting a license for 3650 takes about 2 hours, start to finish 
 (from what I have heard from people that have done it). Meaning any 
 person with Internet access can have a valid, FCC license in 2 hours.

 (3) The FCC has already approved someone using just the Ubiquiti 
 XR3 card as the registered base station. Putting that card in a 
 MT system does not broadcast any call signs or info in the packet 
 frame, yet you are licensed and FCC legal as per the registration.

 (4) If it truly is a first registered, everyone else work around 
 me then I will be registering every single tower within a 1,000 
 mile radius from my NOC. :)

 I'm not trying bash you or anything you said... I'm just thinking 
 the 3650 band is going to get just as messy as the 5ghz band within 
 a few years... and I think the FCC has given false hope that it 
 is somewhat protected... yet I don't see how.

 Travis
 Microserv

 John Scrivner wrote:

 Here is how it is different than 5 GHz. In 5 GHz the rules are 
 that you have
 to accept interference. Also any equipment on earth can use the 
 band from
 mobile phones to cameras and of course broadband devices of many 
 types.
 There is little involved in dropping your link. Also there is 
 little chance
 of you knowing what the interfering source is without some leg 
 work. In 3650
 only people who get a license can launch. Base stations must be 
 certified
 systems with the FCC and must be registered with the FCC. The 
 rules state
 that it is a requirement that anyone using the band must work to 
 eliminate
 interference with other users. That means if you are there first 
 and someone
 interferes with you then they broke the law and it is their duty 
 to fix it.
 Also, since everyone must register base stations, you will know 
 who is
 interfering. In the case of WiMAX base stations, the call letters 
 of the
 license holder are actually transmitted in the data frames which 
 show up as
 the intefering carrier within the monitoring tools in the base 
 stations
 themselves. I think there is a great opportunity in this band and 
 I am proud
 to say I just got my license in 3650 last week. I am looking to 
 build my
 first WiMAX base station very soon.
 Scriv


 On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 5:52 PM, Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


 So, how exactly does 3.65ghz licensing work? If Rapid Link has 
 licensed
 a base station at tower X, and I want to license 3.65ghz at tower 
 X as
 well, what happens? Also, what if I want to license at Tower Y 
 that is
 100 feet away? Is this band really any different than 5ghz, 
 except you
 have to tell the FCC where your base stations are located?

 Travis
 Microserv

 Mike Prachar wrote:

 -  Atlanta business can now enjoy the only wide-area alternative 
 to ATT
 -


 OMAHA, NE - June 3, 2008 - Rapid Link, Incorporated (OTCBB: 
 RPID), a
 leading provider of WiMax and Communication Services, announced 
 today
 the official launch of its much anticipated WiMax service 
 offering in
 the Atlanta Metropolitan area.

 Following the soft launch of this service in February 2008, 
 Rapid Link
 has several active customers enjoying the benefits of this 
 cutting edge
 technology.  Due to the overwhelming success of the early release
 through our Channel Partners, Rapid Link is now offering voice and
 internet service

Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations

2008-06-04 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
* Randy Cosby wrote, On 6/4/2008 12:36 PM:
 Thanks for the clarification on the cards.  Any hints on getting someone 
 at UBNT to talk to you?  My emails, private forum messages, etc. have 
 been ignored.  I understand they are completely buried with NS2 / NS5 
 demand, but come on... :)
   
As far as I know, 3650 requires a contention based protocol not just a 
modular part's FCCID to use it.

Leon
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
   
 I've been in contact with UBNT for some time.The modular approval 
 specifies the antenna to be used, and it is, according to both the FCC ( 
 email from the FCC in response to an inquiry ) and UBNT entirely legal to 
 use with any OS that properly operates the card.

 So, yes you can grow your own, and if nothing else, you simply use the FCC 
 ID on the card itself as your FCC ID...If you wish to have your own 
 number on the box, you must apply to the FCC for your own number, and simply 
 cite the this is unchanged from XX  in your applicaiton.

 All stated clearly and unambiguously by the FCC personell.

 I hope this puts this argument to bed.Modular approval is just that. 
 The module, ON ITS OWN, is approved and can be put in anything appropriate. 
 Again, stated clearly by the FCC.

 BTW, on your license, you're required to put the ID of the equipment you're 
 putting in place.   In this case, it's the FCC ID for UBNT.

 BTW, current XR3's out now are not ACTUALLY the right card.   I've been 
 promised a pair from the first stickered and channelized batch.   I would 
 not deploy anything being sold by retailers right now, as they are pretty 
 much engineering mules...   Not optimized and not properly channel filtered 
 and limited.




 
 insert witty tagline here

 - Original Message - 
 From: Randy Cosby [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 9:12 AM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations (was: Rapid Link Launches WiMax)


   
 
 I had a feeling this would unleash a can of worms.

 I'm the one who registered the locations.  My first location (my office
 rooftop) was done purely as an academic exercise to see what exactly was
 required.  I had hoped the FCC would come back and say, you need to do
 X Y and Z before this is acceptable. I would have been fine with that
 and taken that into consideration in my feasibility study.  They did not.

 Since then, there has been some further digging to clarify some
 questions that were brought up by this approval.  From what I
 understand, using the XR3, MT and an 18dbi antenna (or smaller) is
 approved as far as Part 90 goes.  See
 http://forum.ubnt.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1451start=14 for 
 clarification.

 Now, if you were to go out and SELL that bundle as a product, I would
 think there would need to be further licensing
 (http://www.fcc.gov/oet/ea/ ) to be approved. Hana Wireless (
 http://www.streakwave.com/mmSWAVE1/Video/HW3.pdf ) is selling pretty
 much the same kit I made myself, but I do NOT see any OET approvals for
 them.   I hear other WISPS are using the Hana units, but I see nothing
 of the sort registered in ULS, so I would think they are not legal.

 If I use any of these, they will be for PTP links.  Because the XR3 was
 only approved for 18dBi antennas, and has a max output of 25dbm (see
 *http://tinyurl.com/4jpndg *,
 http://ubnt.com/downloads/ubi_mtik_power.pdf ) and assuming .5 dB loss
 for the jumper cable, at slow speeds we're only going to get a 42.5 dBm
 or 17.8 watts, not the full 20 watts allowed under the rules in a 20 mhz
 channel.   If you want  to run  at full 54 mbps, you will only get 18
 dBm on the radio,  plus 18 on the antenna, or 35.5 dbm, or 3.5 watts.
 Not the ideal PTP solution.

 So is it moral or legal to run it?  I'm glad this has stirred some
 debate and further clarifications.  I'd like to see 802.11Y moved along
 and put into MT and the cards, that would help open up lots of other
 non-wimax possibilities.  For now, it is what it is.  I've seen nothing
 to indicate it is illegal.  Is it unwise?

 I honestly am interested in hearing verifiable refutations to anything
 I've found so far.  I want to do what is legal, as well as wise.

 Randy




 Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE wrote:
 
   
 George...you can not plug-n-play components as I said earlier. It has to
 be certified as a system that makes use of a contention based protocol.

 Leon

 * George Rogato wrote, On 6/4/2008 11:22 AM:

   
 
 Thanks for explaining that Travis.
 I asked Jack Unger to look into this recently.
 There was a post somewhere else recently about 3650 use and I forwarded
 it to Jack to find out from the FCC if in fact it is the way the post 
 read.

 I'd like to hear Jack's opinion based on what he has found out from the 
 FCC.

 As far as using those cards, if they work in mt and star, then for most
 of us it's just add another card to the multi port board and go. It
 sounds a lot

Re: [WISPA] Rapid Link Launches WiMax Service in Atlanta

2008-06-04 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
* Tom DeReggi wrote, On 6/4/2008 2:38 PM:
 Just be clear, there is a big difference between doing 3650, and doing 3650 
 with WiMax.
   
Tom I beg to differ. 3650 rules were written without any WiMax 
reference. The key is contention protocol must be used in the restricted 
25 mHz and the unrestricted 25 mHz is currently not available.

Leon
 I'd argue, it could be more advantageous to an operator with non-Wimax, just 
 because the 50mhz of available spectrum they would have available to them, if 
 they used the contention based rules.
 Although they'd have to do without all the cool useful features for carrier 
 level deployments.

 Tom DeReggi
 RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
 IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


   - Original Message - 
   From: Travis Johnson 
   To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; WISPA General List 
   Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 8:34 AM
   Subject: Re: [WISPA] Rapid Link Launches WiMax Service in Atlanta


   Another WISP has already gotten an FCC license using the Ubiquiti XR3 card 
 as the registered device... in fact, the FCC actually called this person to 
 clarify the specified frequency ranges.

   Travis
   Microserv

   Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE wrote: 
 * Travis Johnson wrote, On 6/3/2008 10:17 PM:
   Yup... and it's only because they can... they are getting the big 
 operators to pay that kind of money, so they will keep selling at those 
 prices. Supply and demand... but you can build a MT 3.65ghz CPE for less 
 than $400, but it's still expensive compared to all the other frequencies.
   
 You can Heathkit your own 3650 solution with 
 Mikrotik/Ubquitit/StarOS/etc but it is NOT FCC Type Accepted. Until 
 someone goes through the process it's not doable.

 Leon
   Travis
 Microserv

 Mike Hammett wrote:
   
 Yeah, I think I'm going to be passing on 3650 until something cheaper 
 comes along.  Ubiquiti has the XR3, but that's still a $260 mPCI card when I 
 normally spend $35.  There's also no RooTennas, so I have to go with a more 
 expensive solution... I think I figured $500 for a CPE instead of the $150 I 
 pay now.  I don't expect to pay $150 for a WiMAX CPE or $750 for a WiMAX AP, 
 but the prices these guys are asking is ridiculous.


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


   - Original Message - 
   From: Travis Johnson 
   To: WISPA General List 
   Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 9:01 PM
   Subject: Re: [WISPA] Rapid Link Launches WiMax Service in Atlanta


   Maybe they are trying to get enough new business to pay for $7,000 
 basestations? :)

   Travis
   Microserv

   Mike Hammett wrote: 
 and I thought they already posted this or a similar press release a time or 
 two.


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


 - Original Message - 
 From: Gino Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 6:42 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Rapid Link Launches WiMax Service in Atlanta


   I thought you were One ring ...

 Gino A. Villarini
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
 tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Mike Prachar
 Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 6:37 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: [WISPA] Rapid Link Launches WiMax Service in Atlanta
 Importance: High

 -  Atlanta business can now enjoy the only wide-area alternative to ATT
 -


 OMAHA, NE - June 3, 2008 - Rapid Link, Incorporated (OTCBB: RPID), a
 leading provider of WiMax and Communication Services, announced today
 the official launch of its much anticipated WiMax service offering in
 the Atlanta Metropolitan area.

 Following the soft launch of this service in February 2008, Rapid Link
 has several active customers enjoying the benefits of this cutting edge
 technology.  Due to the overwhelming success of the early release
 through our Channel Partners, Rapid Link is now offering voice and
 internet service via WiMax to the commercial public.

 Operating in the licensed-only 3650 MHz spectrum, customers can now
 enjoy guaranteed high speed connectivity, voice and internet bundled
 service, at the best cost/efficiency ratio in the industry.

 Matt Liotta, Chief Technology Officer of Rapid Link states, We are
 clearly ahead of the competition and the technology power curve with
 this offering.  Customers are increasingly discovering the limitations
 of antiquated technologies.  Following the recent release of WiMax
 technologies and equipment in the United States, Rapid link is proud to
 be a licensed WiMax carrier offering this breakthrough service to our
 foundation of customers in the greater Atlanta area.


 About Rapid Link

 Rapid Link, Incorporated is a Diversified Communication Services
 company, supplying bundled internet and voice services to Business and
 Residential customers. Rapid Link offers broadband access via its own
 facilities

Re: [WISPA] Rapid Link Launches WiMax Service in Atlanta

2008-06-04 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
* Tom DeReggi wrote, On 6/4/2008 2:40 PM:
 Regardless, Are 3650 registrations being allowed for modular 
 components?

 They might be using the experiemental license?
As far as I know from my contacts you need a full system certified. You 
just can't register a single unit of a certified system. It's possible 
the ULS has a bug whereby it has allowed this.

Also, forget about getting any experimental licenses anytime soon as 
they told me directly unless it's related to Homeland security they're 
bogged down with those (OET that is).

Leon

 Tom DeReggi
 RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
 IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


 - Original Message - From: Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE 
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 9:01 AM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Rapid Link Launches WiMax Service in Atlanta


 * ralph wrote, On 6/4/2008 9:40 AM:
 Who?

 yeah who? My contacts at Ubiquiti as of about a week or two ago said
 there are no FCC Approved solutions. Ubiquity's device is FCC approved
 but just as a modular component.

 Leon
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Travis Johnson
 Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 9:34 AM
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Rapid Link Launches WiMax Service in Atlanta



 Another WISP has already gotten an FCC license using the Ubiquiti 
 XR3 card
 as the registered device... in fact, the FCC actually called this 
 person to
 clarify the specified frequency ranges.

 Travis
 Microserv

 Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE wrote:

 * Travis Johnson wrote, On 6/3/2008 10:17 PM:


 Yup... and it's only because they can... they are getting the big
 operators to pay that kind of money, so they will keep selling at those
 prices. Supply and demand... but you can build a MT 3.65ghz CPE for 
 less
 than $400, but it's still expensive compared to all the other 
 frequencies.



 You can Heathkit your own 3650 solution with
 Mikrotik/Ubquitit/StarOS/etc but it is NOT FCC Type Accepted. Until
 someone goes through the process it's not doable.

 Leon


 Travis
 Microserv

 Mike Hammett wrote:



 Yeah, I think I'm going to be passing on 3650 until something 
 cheaper comes
 along.  Ubiquiti has the XR3, but that's still a $260 mPCI card when I
 normally spend $35.  There's also no RooTennas, so I have to go with 
 a more
 expensive solution... I think I figured $500 for a CPE instead of 
 the $150 I
 pay now.  I don't expect to pay $150 for a WiMAX CPE or $750 for a 
 WiMAX AP,
 but the prices these guys are asking is ridiculous.


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


   - Original Message -   From: Travis Johnson
   To: WISPA General List
   Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 9:01 PM
   Subject: Re: [WISPA] Rapid Link Launches WiMax Service in Atlanta


   Maybe they are trying to get enough new business to pay for $7,000
 basestations? :)

   Travis
   Microserv

   Mike Hammett wrote:
 and I thought they already posted this or a similar press release a 
 time or
 two.


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


 - Original Message - From: Gino Villarini  
 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List  mailto:wireless@wispa.org 
 wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 6:42 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Rapid Link Launches WiMax Service in Atlanta


   I thought you were One ring ...

 Gino A. Villarini
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
 tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Mike Prachar
 Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 6:37 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: [WISPA] Rapid Link Launches WiMax Service in Atlanta
 Importance: High

 -  Atlanta business can now enjoy the only wide-area alternative to 
 ATT
 -


 OMAHA, NE - June 3, 2008 - Rapid Link, Incorporated (OTCBB: RPID), a
 leading provider of WiMax and Communication Services, announced today
 the official launch of its much anticipated WiMax service offering in
 the Atlanta Metropolitan area.

 Following the soft launch of this service in February 2008, Rapid Link
 has several active customers enjoying the benefits of this cutting edge
 technology.  Due to the overwhelming success of the early release
 through our Channel Partners, Rapid Link is now offering voice and
 internet service via WiMax to the commercial public.

 Operating in the licensed-only 3650 MHz spectrum, customers can now
 enjoy guaranteed high speed connectivity, voice and internet bundled
 service, at the best cost/efficiency ratio in the industry.

 Matt Liotta, Chief Technology Officer of Rapid Link states, We are
 clearly ahead of the competition and the technology power curve with
 this offering.  Customers are increasingly discovering the limitations
 of antiquated technologies.  Following the recent release of WiMax
 technologies and equipment

Re: [WISPA] Rapid Link Launches WiMax Service in Atlanta

2008-06-04 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
* Mike Hammett wrote, On 6/4/2008 6:12 PM:
 It doesn't have to have a contention based protocol for use in the 
 lower half of the spectrum.  What do you think WiMax is?
A contention based protocol MUST be used in the lower 25 which is the 
only spectrum currently avail for use.
WiMax is a layer up from the physical layer.

ldz


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


 - Original Message - From: Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE 
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 10:35 AM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Rapid Link Launches WiMax Service in Atlanta


 George...you can not plug-n-play components as I said earlier. It has to
 be certified as a system that makes use of a contention based protocol.

 Leon

 * George Rogato wrote, On 6/4/2008 11:22 AM:
 Thanks for explaining that Travis.
 I asked Jack Unger to look into this recently.
 There was a post somewhere else recently about 3650 use and I forwarded
 it to Jack to find out from the FCC if in fact it is the way the 
 post read.

 I'd like to hear Jack's opinion based on what he has found out from 
 the FCC.

 As far as using those cards, if they work in mt and star, then for most
 of us it's just add another card to the multi port board and go. It
 sounds a lot cheaper than I had expected.

 George

 Travis Johnson wrote:

 John,

 Here is what I have heard or read so far:

 (1) I heard that 3650 users that are conflicting will have to 
 work it
 out and that more than likely the FCC would not get involved in a
 frequency conflict.

 (2) Getting a license for 3650 takes about 2 hours, start to finish
 (from what I have heard from people that have done it). Meaning any
 person with Internet access can have a valid, FCC license in 2 hours.

 (3) The FCC has already approved someone using just the Ubiquiti XR3
 card as the registered base station. Putting that card in a MT 
 system
 does not broadcast any call signs or info in the packet frame, yet you
 are licensed and FCC legal as per the registration.

 (4) If it truly is a first registered, everyone else work around me
 then I will be registering every single tower within a 1,000 mile 
 radius
 from my NOC. :)

 I'm not trying bash you or anything you said... I'm just thinking the
 3650 band is going to get just as messy as the 5ghz band within a few
 years... and I think the FCC has given false hope that it is 
 somewhat
 protected... yet I don't see how.

 Travis
 Microserv

 John Scrivner wrote:

 Here is how it is different than 5 GHz. In 5 GHz the rules are 
 that you have
 to accept interference. Also any equipment on earth can use the 
 band from
 mobile phones to cameras and of course broadband devices of many 
 types.
 There is little involved in dropping your link. Also there is 
 little chance
 of you knowing what the interfering source is without some leg 
 work. In 3650
 only people who get a license can launch. Base stations must be 
 certified
 systems with the FCC and must be registered with the FCC. The 
 rules state
 that it is a requirement that anyone using the band must work to 
 eliminate
 interference with other users. That means if you are there first 
 and someone
 interferes with you then they broke the law and it is their duty 
 to fix it.
 Also, since everyone must register base stations, you will know 
 who is
 interfering. In the case of WiMAX base stations, the call letters 
 of the
 license holder are actually transmitted in the data frames which 
 show up as
 the intefering carrier within the monitoring tools in the base 
 stations
 themselves. I think there is a great opportunity in this band and 
 I am proud
 to say I just got my license in 3650 last week. I am looking to 
 build my
 first WiMAX base station very soon.
 Scriv


 On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 5:52 PM, Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



 So, how exactly does 3.65ghz licensing work? If Rapid Link has 
 licensed
 a base station at tower X, and I want to license 3.65ghz at tower 
 X as
 well, what happens? Also, what if I want to license at Tower Y 
 that is
 100 feet away? Is this band really any different than 5ghz, 
 except you
 have to tell the FCC where your base stations are located?

 Travis
 Microserv

 Mike Prachar wrote:


 -  Atlanta business can now enjoy the only wide-area alternative 
 to ATT
 -


 OMAHA, NE - June 3, 2008 - Rapid Link, Incorporated (OTCBB: 
 RPID), a
 leading provider of WiMax and Communication Services, announced 
 today
 the official launch of its much anticipated WiMax service 
 offering in
 the Atlanta Metropolitan area.

 Following the soft launch of this service in February 2008, 
 Rapid Link
 has several active customers enjoying the benefits of this 
 cutting edge
 technology.  Due to the overwhelming success of the early release
 through our Channel Partners, Rapid Link is now offering voice and
 internet service via WiMax to the commercial public.

 Operating in the licensed

[WISPA] Sale: Last Batch of Tsunami and more Enterasys equipment

2008-05-06 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
We have the following equipment available for shipment:

Tsunami 45m full duplex radio 301-27710-1A1/301-27710-1A2 (5.7/5.8g)
Tsunami 100m full duplex radio 301-27720-1A1/301-27720-1A2 (5.3/5.8g)

Multiple Enterasys SSR8 with controller boards and fast ethernet cards
Multiple Enterasys SSR16 with controller boards, fast Ethernet and HSSI
Multiple Enterasys ANG1105 and ANG1100

The Tsunami radios were removed from service recently as we needed 
higher bandwidth backhauls. Radios do NOT come with antennas.

If interested in any of the above, please contact us off-list at 
703-787-7700 x6130 or via e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] for particular 
details and quantity available.





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] Sale: Tsunami and Enterasys equipment

2008-04-22 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
We have the following equipment available for shipment:
 

Tsunami 45m full duplex radio 301-27710-1A1/301-27710-1A2 (5.7/5.8g)

Tsunami 100m full duplex radio 301-27720-1A1/301-27720-1A2 (5.3/5.8g)

Multiple Enterasys SSR8 with controller boards and fast ethernet cards

Multiple Enterasys SSR16 with controller boards, fast Ethernet and HSSI

Multiple Enterasys ANG1105 and ANG1100
 

The Tsunami radios were removed from service recently as we needed 
higher bandwidth backhauls. Radios do NOT come with antennas.
 

If interested in any of the above, please contact us off-list at 
703-787-7700 x6130 or via e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] for particular details and quantity available.




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] FYI - New how-to-get-a-3650-license whitepaper available -- link

2008-04-08 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
I'm currently working on that myself. I have had numerous discussions 
with the WTB and IB over the last few months regarding the grandfathered 
FSS'

Leon

* Joe Miller wrote, On 4/8/2008 3:27 PM:
 Partrick,

 Thanks a lot, this is more information regarding the
 3.65 ghz band than I've ever gotten from the FCC. 

 I wonder why that is?
 --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

   
 Living in the fringe of an exclusion zone, I'd like
 to see more information
 on negotiating or contacting the existing license
 holders...  

 On Tue, 8 Apr 2008 09:57:10 -0700, Patrick Leary
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
 I wrote a step-by-step guide showing the actual
   
 application process.
 
 100% vendor neutral. You can download it from our
   
 Web site via the home
 
 page. Make sure to select the U.S. Web version
   
 from the drop down at the
 
 top right.

 http://www.alvarion.com/

 Cheers,

 Patrick





   
 
   
 This footnote confirms that this email message has
   
 been scanned by
 
 PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious
   
 code, vandals 
 computer
 
 viruses(84).

   
 
   



   
 
   
 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/

 



   
 
 You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster 
 Total Access, No Cost.  
 http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.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] more decommissioned equipment

2008-03-28 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
We've retired the following and looking to find a good home for them:

Tsunami 100M full duplex radio
Tsunami 45M full duplex radio
Barracuda Spam Firewall 400 (This was purchased from another company and 
we have no use for it.)

Please contact me off-list with any questions.

Thanks, Leon



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] Equipment for sale

2008-02-26 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
We've got the following that we just removed from service replaced with 
higher bandwidth equipment:


Four (4) pairs of Tsunami 45m full duplex radios 
(301-27710-1a1/301-27710-1a2)

One (1) pair Tsunami 100m full duplex radio
Two (2) pairs Alvarion LB; one pair 36m, one pair 72m

No antennas included.

Please contact me off list for further information.

Thanks, Leon



begin:vcard
fn:Leon Zetekoff
n:Zetekoff;Leon
org:BackWoods Wireless
adr;dom:;;505 B Main Street;Blandon;PA;19510
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
title:Owner
tel;home:610-916-0230
tel;cell:610-223-8642
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
url:http://www.backwoodswireless.net
version:2.1
end:vcard




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] Mikrotik/RB112/SR9

2006-11-16 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE

Mark Nash - Lists wrote:

Has anyone used the SR9's in a RB112?  They are a little bigger so will they
physically fit?  How do you like them?
  
We're using them and they seem to work ok. Having the right antenna is a 
key too.


leon

Mark Nash
Network Engineer
UnwiredOnline.Net
350 Holly Street
Junction City, OR 97448
http://www.uwol.net
541-998-
541-998-5599 fax


  
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik/RB112/SR9

2006-11-16 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE

Mark Nash - Lists wrote:

What antenna are you using?
  

900 yagis and roos...ldz

Anyone used the 900MHz Rootenna?

Mark Nash
Network Engineer
UnwiredOnline.Net
350 Holly Street
Junction City, OR 97448
http://www.uwol.net
541-998-
541-998-5599 fax

- Original Message - 
From: Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 11:52 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik/RB112/SR9


  

Mark Nash - Lists wrote:


Has anyone used the SR9's in a RB112?  They are a little bigger so will
  

they
  

physically fit?  How do you like them?

  

We're using them and they seem to work ok. Having the right antenna is a
key too.

leon


Mark Nash
Network Engineer
UnwiredOnline.Net
350 Holly Street
Junction City, OR 97448
http://www.uwol.net
541-998-
541-998-5599 fax



  







  

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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







  
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Transtector Lightning Suppression

2006-11-15 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
I have a few of them to use with my Trango 900s. A little pricey but 
they're built well.


Leon

Eric Rogers wrote:

I don't know if anyone has looked into modular lightning suppression,
but I have been talking with someone from Transtector.  They make a 24V
version for Motorola with Cat5 jacks, and they make a 48V version for
Proxim/Cisco/Mikrotik/Whatever but they are screw terminals (for power
only).

 


He is looking to see if they can change the diodes on the 24V version to
allow clamp at 60V for the power side, and 15V on the data side with
Cat5 jacks.  Here is what it looks like
http://www.transtector.com/productdetail?item=1101-670.  Since this is
modular, I want to have the option to have Motorola, Mikrotik, and/or
Alvarion on the tower.  With this distribution panel, you can swap out
the lightning suppression to what you are using 24V equipment or 48V
Equipment.  Any ideas?  Anyone doing anything similar?

 


Would anyone else be interested in getting some?  I don't have any costs
yet, but he will get back with me soon.

 


Eric Rogers

Precision Data Solutions, LLC

 

  
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Initial SR9 test results

2006-09-17 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE




Lonnie Nunweiler wrote:
http://forums.star-os.com/showthread.php?t=5838
  
  
I just posted our early rsults of the 900 MHz gear. Needless to say
  
this is better than I was hoping for and this stuff has a FIRM place
  
in our tool chest. Forget higher power on 2.4 GHz to get through some
  
trees. This is truly NON LOS.
  
  

Hi Lonnie...what polarization did you use?

Thanks leon

-- 

  

   Leon Zetekoff
  Proprietor 
  


  
  

  
 Work:
484-335-9920
Mobile:
610-223-8642
Fax: 484-335-9921

 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 http://www.linkedin.com/in/leonzetekoff

 BackWoods Wireless
 505 B Main Street
 Blandon, PA 19510 
"Bringing
Broadband Technology to Rural Areas" 
  

  
  


  See who we
know in common
  Want a signature like
this? 

  




begin:vcard
fn:Leon Zetekoff
n:Zetekoff;Leon
org:BackWoods Wireless
adr;dom:;;505 B Main Street;Blandon;PA;19510
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
title:Owner
tel;work:484-335-9920
tel;fax:484-335-9921
tel;home:610-916-0230
tel;cell:610-223-8642
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
url:http://www.backwoodswireless.net
version:2.1
end:vcard

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Initial SR9 test results

2006-09-17 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE

Lonnie Nunweiler wrote:

Vertical and horizontal were tried.  The results are the same.
Thanks Lonnie...we're trying some Mikrotik with the 900 cards and not 
having much luck through the trees using a 900 120* sector H-pol


Leon


Lonnie

On 9/17/06, *Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE*  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


Lonnie Nunweiler wrote:

http://forums.star-os.com/showthread.php?t=5838

I just posted our early rsults of the 900 MHz gear.  Needless to say
this is better than I was hoping for and this stuff has a FIRM place
in our tool chest.  Forget higher power on 2.4 GHz to get through
some
trees.  This is truly NON LOS.


Hi Lonnie...what polarization did you use?

Thanks leon

-- 
*Leon Zetekoff*

Proprietor  
*Work:* 484-335-9920
*Mobile:* 610-223-8642
*Fax:* 484-335-9921
*Email:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*http://www.linkedin.com/in/leonzetekoff*
*BackWoods Wireless*
http://www.backwoodswireless.net 505 B Main Street
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=505+B+Main+Street%2CBlandon%2CPA+19510hl=en
Blandon, PA 19510
Bringing Broadband Technology to Rural Areas

See who we know in common
http://www.linkedin.com/e/wwk/1265359/  Want a signature like
this? http://www.linkedin.com/e/sig/1265359/


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

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

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






--
Lonnie Nunweiler
Valemount Networks Corporation
http://www.star-os.com/ 


--
*Leon Zetekoff*
Proprietor  
*Work:* 484-335-9920
*Mobile:* 610-223-8642
*Fax:* 484-335-9921
*Email:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*http://www.linkedin.com/in/leonzetekoff*
*BackWoods Wireless*
http://www.backwoodswireless.net 505 B Main Street
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=505+B+Main+Street%2CBlandon%2CPA+19510hl=en 
Blandon, PA 19510

Bringing Broadband Technology to Rural Areas

See who we know in common http://www.linkedin.com/e/wwk/1265359/ 	Want 
a signature like this? http://www.linkedin.com/e/sig/1265359/


begin:vcard
fn:Leon Zetekoff
n:Zetekoff;Leon
org:BackWoods Wireless
adr;dom:;;505 B Main Street;Blandon;PA;19510
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
title:Owner
tel;work:484-335-9920
tel;fax:484-335-9921
tel;home:610-916-0230
tel;cell:610-223-8642
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
url:http://www.backwoodswireless.net
version:2.1
end:vcard

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Initial SR9 test results

2006-09-17 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE

Larry Yunker wrote:
What antenna/cable solution are you using on the client side of the 
link? How far are you trying to shoot?
Down in Virginia we're using a 13db (11 ele) Yagi horizontal shooting to 
a tower where there is a 120* hor sector antenna. Antenna pigtail 
connects through a double-barrel right into the radio. Any ideas? I am 
stumped as this should work; in one case the yagi is in the attic and 
the signal is horrible. We're trying to shoot from 1-6 miles or so. We 
did get a -65 way on the other side up in the clear when we were driving 
around on Thurs.


Thanks leon
- Original Message - From: Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: Lonnie Nunweiler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 2:04 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Initial SR9 test results



Lonnie Nunweiler wrote:

Vertical and horizontal were tried.  The results are the same.

Thanks Lonnie...we're trying some Mikrotik with the 900 cards and not
having much luck through the trees using a 900 120* sector H-pol

Leon


Lonnie

On 9/17/06, *Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE*  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Lonnie Nunweiler wrote:

http://forums.star-os.com/showthread.php?t=5838

I just posted our early rsults of the 900 MHz gear.  Needless 
to say
this is better than I was hoping for and this stuff has a FIRM 
place

in our tool chest.  Forget higher power on 2.4 GHz to get through
some
trees.  This is truly NON LOS.


Hi Lonnie...what polarization did you use?

Thanks leon

-- *Leon Zetekoff*
Proprietor
*Work:* 484-335-9920
*Mobile:* 610-223-8642
*Fax:* 484-335-9921
*Email:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*http://www.linkedin.com/in/leonzetekoff*
*BackWoods Wireless*
http://www.backwoodswireless.net 505 B Main Street

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=505+B+Main+Street%2CBlandon%2CPA+19510hl=en 


Blandon, PA 19510
Bringing Broadband Technology to Rural Areas

See who we know in common
http://www.linkedin.com/e/wwk/1265359/ Want a signature like
this? http://www.linkedin.com/e/sig/1265359/


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

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

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






--
Lonnie Nunweiler
Valemount Networks Corporation
http://www.star-os.com/


--
*Leon Zetekoff*
Proprietor
*Work:* 484-335-9920
*Mobile:* 610-223-8642
*Fax:* 484-335-9921
*Email:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*http://www.linkedin.com/in/leonzetekoff*
*BackWoods Wireless*
http://www.backwoodswireless.net 505 B Main Street
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=505+B+Main+Street%2CBlandon%2CPA+19510hl=en 


Blandon, PA 19510
Bringing Broadband Technology to Rural Areas

See who we know in common http://www.linkedin.com/e/wwk/1265359/ Want
a signature like this? http://www.linkedin.com/e/sig/1265359/





 





--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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






begin:vcard
fn:Leon Zetekoff
n:Zetekoff;Leon
org:BackWoods Wireless
adr;dom:;;505 B Main Street;Blandon;PA;19510
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
title:Owner
tel;home:610-916-0230
tel;cell:610-223-8642
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
url:http://www.backwoodswireless.net
version:2.1
end:vcard

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Initial SR9 test results

2006-09-17 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE

Larry Yunker wrote:
Let us know more about the configuration(s) and maybe we can figure 
out what else you should try.

OK here's the Sector antenna:

http://www.teletronics.com/tant900sector12-5dbi.html

The yagi's are PacWireless YA9-13

Interesting that at the customer with the yagi in the attic, the 
CPE-tower signal was weaker than the tower-CPE signal. Both running the 
Ubiquiti 900 cards on a  RB112 and the sector antenna is 12.5 db gain so 
you would think the signals at each end should be pretty close.


THanks leon
begin:vcard
fn:Leon Zetekoff
n:Zetekoff;Leon
org:BackWoods Wireless
adr;dom:;;505 B Main Street;Blandon;PA;19510
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
title:Owner
tel;home:610-916-0230
tel;cell:610-223-8642
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
url:http://www.backwoodswireless.net
version:2.1
end:vcard

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Initial SR9 test results

2006-09-17 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE

Larry Yunker wrote:

How much difference are you seeing?  2db or more?

yeah maybe 6-10 I think


- Original Message - From: Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: Larry Yunker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 5:55 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Initial SR9 test results



Larry Yunker wrote:

Let us know more about the configuration(s) and maybe we can figure
out what else you should try.

OK here's the Sector antenna:

http://www.teletronics.com/tant900sector12-5dbi.html

The yagi's are PacWireless YA9-13

Interesting that at the customer with the yagi in the attic, the
CPE-tower signal was weaker than the tower-CPE signal. Both running the
Ubiquiti 900 cards on a  RB112 and the sector antenna is 12.5 db gain so
you would think the signals at each end should be pretty close.

THanks leon




 





--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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






begin:vcard
fn:Leon Zetekoff
n:Zetekoff;Leon
org:BackWoods Wireless
adr;dom:;;505 B Main Street;Blandon;PA;19510
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
title:Owner
tel;home:610-916-0230
tel;cell:610-223-8642
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
url:http://www.backwoodswireless.net
version:2.1
end:vcard

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Initial SR9 test results

2006-09-17 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE

Larry Yunker wrote:
Sounds like multipath you are probably picking up a bounced signal 
on one end.
could be  I think we saw this somewhere else but I can't remember; 
we did so much on Thursday it sometimes is a blur :-(
I think the plan is to try a yagi up on the tower in place of the sector 
for a test and check the signal at the one 900 CPE in the attic 
remotely. (We've only got one 900 CPE currently.)


Any other ideas?

Thanks leon

--
*Leon Zetekoff*
Proprietor  
*Work:* 484-335-9920
*Mobile:* 610-223-8642
*Fax:* 484-335-9921
*Email:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*http://www.linkedin.com/in/leonzetekoff*
*BackWoods Wireless*
http://www.backwoodswireless.net 505 B Main Street
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=505+B+Main+Street%2CBlandon%2CPA+19510hl=en 
Blandon, PA 19510

Bringing Broadband Technology to Rural Areas

See who we know in common http://www.linkedin.com/e/wwk/1265359/ 	Want 
a signature like this? http://www.linkedin.com/e/sig/1265359/


begin:vcard
fn:Leon Zetekoff
n:Zetekoff;Leon
org:BackWoods Wireless
adr;dom:;;505 B Main Street;Blandon;PA;19510
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
title:Owner
tel;work:484-335-9920
tel;fax:484-335-9921
tel;home:610-916-0230
tel;cell:610-223-8642
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
url:http://www.backwoodswireless.net
version:2.1
end:vcard

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Trango M900 AP - Connectorized?

2006-06-28 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE

Mark Nash wrote:

I'm getting conflicting information from Trango sales reps, their online PDF
datasheet and others who know the product.  So... Does the M900 AP come
connectorized?  If so, what connector?

My application is about 2 miles NLOS (many trees).  Looking to do it with
omni...don't have to go hpol.  Who's using what and are you happy with it?

Thanks!
  
Hi Mark...I have one and it does have a connector; I believe it's 
Reverse SMA. We're not deployed yet but I'm going to be using it with an 
omni as well. Take care leon

Mark Nash
Network Engineer
UnwiredOnline.Net
350 Holly Street
Junction City, OR 97448
http://www.uwol.net
541-998-
541-998-5599 fax


  


--
*Leon Zetekoff*
Proprietor  
*Work:* 484-335-9920
*Mobile:* 610-223-8642
*Fax:* 484-335-9921
*Email:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*http://www.linkedin.com/in/leonzetekoff*
*BackWoods Wireless*
http://www.backwoodswireless.net 505 B Main Street
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=505+B+Main+Street%2CBlandon%2CPA+19510hl=en 
Blandon, PA 19510

Bringing Broadband Technology to Rural Areas

See who we know in common http://www.linkedin.com/e/wwk/1265359/ 	Want 
a signature like this? http://www.linkedin.com/e/sig/1265359/


begin:vcard
fn:Leon Zetekoff
n:Zetekoff;Leon
org:BackWoods Wireless
adr;dom:;;505 B Main Street;Blandon;PA;19510
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
title:Owner
tel;work:484-335-9920
tel;fax:484-335-9921
tel;home:610-916-0230
tel;cell:610-223-8642
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
url:http://www.backwoodswireless.net
version:2.1
end:vcard

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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