[WISPA] monitoring product (was Re: Ubiquiti Beta 5.2.4 Released)

2010-04-09 Thread Matt Liotta
This makes me think about a cool product someone needs to produce. Some sort of 
device that could be deployed at a wireless colocation site that would simply 
listen on a variety of bands and collect weather information. The device would 
make all this data available via some reasonable API; possibly SNMP. Then a 
monitoring system to collect this data and graph it historically. This would 
allow the operator to have a much better view of the environment for which 
their network is operating in.

-Matt

On Apr 9, 2010, at 10:00 AM, John Scrivner wrote:

 I am not a huge UBNT fan but I might be persuaded to buy one of these for
 each tower to setup as a remote Spectrum Analyzer for each tower location.
 How much do these radios run and who sells them on here?
 Scriv




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] Building Heights?

2010-03-29 Thread Matt Liotta
Skyscrapers.com is often useful in major cities.

-Matt

On Mar 29, 2010, at 2:07 PM, Charles Hooper wrote:

 Hello,
 
 Does anyone know a reliable source/method of getting building heights? 
 Something like a topographical map that included buildings would be 
 excellent, but I haven't been able to find anything like this.
 
 Thanks!
 Charles
 
 
 
 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] BIP/BTOP

2010-03-02 Thread Matt Liotta
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
NTIA and RUS will grant a limited extension of time to file infrastructure 
applications in the second funding round. Specifically, applicants for BTOP 
Comprehensive Community Infrastructure projects will have until March 26th to 
file their applications to NTIA. Applicants for BIP infrastructure projects 
will have until March 29th to file their applications to RUS. Applications in 
NTIA's two other project categories - Public Computer Centers and Sustainable 
Broadband Adoption - remain due on March 15th.

-Matt

On Mar 2, 2010, at 12:02 PM, Chuck Bartosch wrote:

 I don't see anything about that listed on broadbandusa.gov. The only posting 
 for today is the latest winners from round one. Where are you looking?
 
 Chuck
 
 On Mar 2, 2010, at 11:51 AM, ccoo...@intelliwave.com wrote:
 
 For those of you following the game, BB USA advises that they have  
 extended the deadline on both BIP and BTOP applications.
 
 Chris Cooper
 Intelliwave
 
 
 This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
 
 
 
 
 
 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/
 
 --
 Chuck Bartosch
 Clarity Connect, Inc.
 200 Pleasant Grove Road
 Ithaca, NY 14850
 (607) 257-8268
 
 When the stars threw down their spears,
 and water'd heaven with their tears,
 Did He smile, His work to see?
 Did He who made the Lamb make thee?
 
 From William Blake's Tiger!, Tiger!
 
 
 
 
 
 
 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] Clear

2010-02-24 Thread Matt Liotta
They have to do something. If they don't start adding customers soon their 
first mover advantage is going to be lost.

-Matt

On Feb 24, 2010, at 9:03 AM, Jayson Baker wrote:

 They've met with our datacenter folks and been on the roof numerous times.
 To me, that says they're getting ready to make some sort of move.
 
 On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 6:39 AM, Dylan Bouterse dy...@corp.power1.comwrote:
 
 Interesting. They are installing equipment on towers in our area (after
 having leases for 4+ years) but I'm not seeing Orlando as a current or
 future area. Actually I'm not seeing future areas (just in the legend).
 Maybe I have the wrong map.
 
 http://www.clear.com/coverage
 
 Dylan
 
 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of Mike Hammett
 Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2010 11:20 PM
 To: wireless@wispa.org
 Subject: [WISPA] Clear
 
 In looking at Clear's web site, they have a green for areas that are
 covered now and a dark grey for future coverage.  Does anyone know how
 quickly they expect to fill that coverage?  How quickly they'll expand
 beyond their future coverage?
 
 
 -
 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] new FCC report out

2010-02-23 Thread Matt Liotta
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-296442A1.pdf

* 35% percent of americans unserved

* We need to tackle the challenge of connecting 93 million Americans to our 
broadband future, said FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski in a statement timed 
with the release of the survey. In the 21st century, a digital divide is an 
opportunity divide.

* 29% stated they received service from a fixed wireless provider

** Notwithstanding the possible confusion reflected in the survey responses, it 
seems likely that the vast majority of home broadband access is wireline. In 
fact, estimates place wireless home broadband access at 2 percent of homes—that 
would include fixed wireless or satellite service.

-Matt




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] [WISPA Members] Possible way to create a free tool for 477 reporting data at the tract level

2010-02-18 Thread Matt Liotta
You raise the money. I'll do the programming. WISPA can keep the money.

-Matt

On Feb 18, 2010, at 10:07 AM, Mac Dearman wrote:

 I would be glad to start a $$ pool to have someone develop a tool for WISPA
 members to get the data we need for the form 477. On second thoughts - - it
 would be better if we allowed everyone to use it (members and non members)
 if we could just get them to report!
 
 Mac
 
 
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of Rick Harnish
 Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 6:48 PM
 To: bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com; memb...@wispa.org; 'WISPA List';
 'Motorla List Beehive'; 'WISPA Board'
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] [WISPA Members] Possible way to create a free tool
 for 477 reporting data at the tract level
 
 WISPA will gladly place this on our webpage if we can find someone to
 help
 get it in place.
 
 
 
 Thanks,
 
 Rick
 
 
 
 From: members-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:members-boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf
 Of Brian Webster
 Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 7:20 PM
 To: WISPA List; memb...@wispa. org; Motorla List Beehive; WISPA Board
 Subject: [WISPA Members] Possible way to create a free tool for 477
 reporting data at the tract level
 
 
 
 I just found this web page that talks about a free API that could be
 used on
 a web page to do address lookup/geocode as well as map to the proper
 census
 tract and/or census block. I'm not a programmer but maybe someone on
 the
 list could look at this and put together something that could be used.
 Ideally it would do both single and batch lookups. If there is a way to
 also
 standardize the address fields to increase the accuracy that would be a
 big
 plus.
 
 
 
 https://webgis.usc.edu/Services/Geocode/WebService/GeocoderWebService.a
 spx
 
 
 
 Thank You,
 
 Brian Webster
 
 
 
 No virus found in this incoming message.
 Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
 Version: 8.5.435 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2691 - Release Date:
 02/17/10
 07:35:00
 
 
 
 ---
 -
 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/
 No virus found in this incoming message.
 Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
 Version: 8.5.435 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2694 - Release Date:
 02/17/10 22:30:00
 
 
 
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 
 
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
 
 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
 
 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


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

2010-02-16 Thread Matt Liotta
I don't think this is good. The last time it was tried we got a bunch of 
unsustainable business models along with increasing gamesmanship from the 
ILECs. Besides, the RBOCs are looking for reasons to shutdown their wireline 
operations anyway. This will only speed that up.

I think we need smarter policy to increase competition. How about fair and 
reasonable real estate access? WISPA should be all over that one. I know every 
business WISP has run into an unreasonable landlord. I also sure plenty of 
residential WISPs have had their share of landlord problems.

-Matt

On Feb 16, 2010, at 2:57 PM, Scottie Arnett wrote:

  
 http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/02/regulators-may-drop-broadband-line-sharing-bombshell.ars?utm_source=rssutm_medium=rssutm_campaign=rss
  
 
 Could be good?
 
 Scottie
 
 Wireless High Speed Broadband service from Info-Ed, Inc. as low as $30.00/mth.
 Check out www.info-ed.com/wireless.html for information.
 
 
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 
 
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
 
 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
 
 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] [Wispashow] Decision on WISPA Show

2010-02-08 Thread Matt Liotta
Central is better. I like not losing a day for travel. I thought St. Louis was 
suggested at one point, which seems like a decent idea.

-Matt

On Feb 8, 2010, at 9:49 AM, Tom DeReggi wrote:

 I personally like central shows because less travel time and less time zone 
 change for all America attending. As well, this even is targeted as a RURAL 
 conference, and might make sense for it to be closer to more  Rural market. 
 I'd argue there are more Rural locations in the Western States.  But 
 Orlando is one of the lowest cost venue places for shows in a major market 
 (after considering all extra costs) and Flights are always pretty cheap, 
 even from the west coast.
 
 Tom DeReggi
 RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
 IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
 
 
 - Original Message - 
 From: Chuck Hogg ch...@shelbybb.com
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Monday, February 08, 2010 9:38 AM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] [Wispashow] Decision on WISPA Show
 
 
 Tickets to Orlando for me are dirt cheap.  Always have been. From KY to 
 Orlando for the FISPA conference next month it's only $222 roundtrip.
 
 Regards,
 Chuck Hogg
 Shelby Broadband
 502-722-9292
 ch...@shelbybb.com
 http://www.shelbybb.com
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
 Behalf Of Jayson Baker
 Sent: Monday, February 08, 2010 9:37 AM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] [Wispashow] Decision on WISPA Show
 
 You're wanting to go on a family vacation?  I thought this was to be a WISP
 conference.  Like, for WISP operators.
 I, personally, have no intention of spending that much for airline tickets,
 and going to play with Mickey Mouse while I'm at a conference.
 
 On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 6:44 AM, Dylan Bouterse dy...@corp.power1.comwrote:
 
 Orlando!
 
 We have the 4 Disney parks, Universal Studios, Blue Men, Sea World, 
 I-Drive
 area, Kissimmee area and a WHOLE lot more. I'm not aware of any zip lines
 though. :oP
 
 Dylan
 
 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of Mike
 Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 8:29 AM
 To: 'WISPA General List'
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] [Wispashow] Decision on WISPA Show
 
 Phoenix.  Dry and warm.
 
 *OR* I live 5 minutes up the hill from a world class casino and hotel
 complex. http://www.meskwaki.com/
 
 I could host, and you could take turns climbing my towers, and riding the
 zip lines here at Gilly Hollow.  One of them is a terror at 750 feet.
 
 Mike
 
 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of Robert West
 Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 11:18 PM
 To: 'WISPA General List'
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] [Wispashow] Decision on WISPA Show
 
 I'm the same.  If Vegas, I'd pass.  Having shows in Vegas isn't about the
 show, it's about Vegas.  The show is just the vehicle to use to get there.
 A show in Vegas has become a cliché.
 
 Bob-
 
 
 
 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of Glenn Kelley
 Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 11:39 AM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] [Wispashow] Decision on WISPA Show
 
 I was just in Vegas for the Ubiquity meeting
 
 If you are planning to take your family anywhere - VEGAS is not the 
 place -
 IMHO
 
 When you get off the plane and exit the airport you are handed pamphlets
 for
 prostitutes to come to your hotel room from $25/ hr
 Having 3 daughters and 1 son ... I can tell you - this is hardly the place
 I
 would like to take my family on vacation.
 
 Disney sounds better ;-)
 
 Of course this is all business - - going out to Columbus, Philadelphia,
 Indy, Chicago, Denver - yeah - much nicer...
 
 
 
 
 _
 Glenn Kelley | Principle | HostMedic |www.HostMedic.com
 Email: gl...@hostmedic.com
 Pplease don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.
 
 On Feb 4, 2010, at 11:23 AM, Randy Cosby wrote:
 
 Next time, drive up to Mesquite  (1.25 hours) or St. George - Great
 rooms / prices you can feel good about taking the family to. :)
 
 Randy
 
 
 On 2/4/2010 9:12 AM, Eje Gustafsson wrote:
 *shudder* Reminds me of WISPCon in Vegas. The WISPCon hotel screwed up
 my
 families reserveration. Roadeo show in town and one other large
 conference.
 There was not a hotel room in entire Vegas, Henderson or anywhere close
 enough to drive to. Got to the hotel around 7pm to find out there was 
 no
 available room for us. We called probably 100 different places and
 visited
 probably another 40+ places, pleading and begging for a room. We didn't
 even
 find any rooms at the ones that only rented per week.
 Me, my wife, one baby and one toddler.
 Finally about 2:30am we gave up and ended up sleeping in our rental
 minivan
 on the parking lot. In the middle of the night by accident set of the
 car
 alarm. Got kicked off 

Re: [WISPA] [Wispashow] Decision on WISPA Show

2010-02-08 Thread Matt Liotta
Seems like a logical position if the purpose of the show is to drive WISPA 
membership. Maybe the existing members want a show for another purpose.

-Matt

On Feb 8, 2010, at 3:03 PM, Forbes Mercy wrote:

 While I initially had the same concerns you had and was not even that 
 personally impressed in our meeting with their promoters, I eventually 
 decided it was the way to go for one reason, membership.  Yes our trade 
 needs a good show but I did the math, If we sent out 2000 invitations to 
 the WISP-DIRECTORY list we might get about 3-400 people in our trade.  
 Of those likely 200 would be our own members and likely we would add 
 about 100 new members tops.
 
 With this other show we stand the chance at being exposed to 1500 
 attendees, forging this new alliance would help to cement our integrated 
 interests and have them start recommending their area WISP's, that's 
 great for our membership.  Also we might get their interest in joining 
 so potentially adding hundreds of new members to WISPA. Even if they are 
 affiliate members that still adds up to more than we get at our own show 
 PLUS it would be more inviting for the other 1800 wisps to have 
 something other than just us there.
 
 It just seems like an easier sell to WISP 's who aren't in WISPA, it 
 might push a lot of business to our members and we potentially could see 
 a much greater membership increase than if we did our own.  That versus 
 the hazard of losing money when we would rather spend it on filings and 
 true WISPA business, that's my thinking anyway.
 
 Also for those who have stated we have made up our minds, those people 
 are just people stirring s^t, they speak from no fact whatsoever and 
 just like to say the board just does what they want, it's crap, untrue.  
 We've been very transparent and this debate is us taking that input and 
 using it to weigh heavily in our decision.  It's a huge decision, easy 
 for members to say hey you put on your own show but just think about 
 the work that would put on a volunteer board versus the idea of what I 
 stated above.  Most opinions I've read have been self serving ones, 'put 
 it five miles from my house' kind of thing.  We're trying to serve the 
 entire country and those with the middle America approach are very valid 
 for that reason. We'd really enjoy hearing these kind of ideas but if we 
 sit here and argue where all day we'll never get to put it on and yet 
 another WISPA initiative gets buried in minutia, as a board this is 
 exactly what we are trying to stop.
 
 Forbes
 
 
 
 
 
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 
 
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
 
 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
 
 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: TheFCC'sroleinregulationofnet-neutrality

2010-02-06 Thread Matt Liotta

On Feb 6, 2010, at 12:07 PM, Jeff Broadwick wrote:

 I am afraid you will have to be disapointed.  I know that American  
 Thinker has a point of view...but what SPECIFICALLY did they get wrong?
 
It doesn't matter what was right or wrong in the article you cited because even 
if everything was right the article didn't conclude, imply, or even suggest 
that the CRA was the cause of the housing crisis. That article was squarely 
placing the blame on Fannie and Freddie.

Again, for someone who has seen plenty of research please cite it. You could 
also just withdraw your statement in light of the facts and research shared.

-Matt



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in regulationof net-neutrality

2010-02-05 Thread Matt Liotta
The Community Reinvestment Act was first passed in 1977. It was later changed 
under Bush in 1989 because of the S  L crisis. I mention this only to provide 
some context as to how long it has been with us and the variety of 
administrations that have affected it. It was really the Federal Housing 
Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992 that put us in the 
current situation with Fannie and Freddie securitizing CRA loans. That in and 
of itself didn't get us here. It was really the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act that 
started us down the wrong road. This ultimately allowed companies like Goldman 
to create CDOs, sell them, and buy insurance against their failure all without 
having any interest in the underlying securities.

Sorry for the history lesson, but I thought the background was useful. 
Understand that by 2004 only 30% of mortgages were done under CRA and in 2005 
regulatory changes allowed certain banks to do less CRA mortgage lending. Thus, 
it just isn't credible to suggest that the CRA caused the housing crisis.

Was the housing crisis created by people getting mortgages they couldn't 
afford? Yes, but that wasn't limited to CRA mortgages. Both parties helped get 
more people into houses they couldn't afford for their own reasons.

-Matt

On Feb 5, 2010, at 9:04 AM, Jeff Broadwick wrote:

 That's just not accurate Tom.  The Community Reinvestment Act required
 lenders to do a lot of this stuff and then Fannie and Freddie created the
 market for the paper. 
 
 
 Regards,
 
 Jeff
 
 
 Jeff Broadwick
 ImageStream
 800-813-5123 x106 (US/Can)
 +1 574-935-8484 x106  (Int'l)
 
 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
 Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 2:19 AM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in regulationof
 net-neutrality
 
 Brad,
 
 People are losing their homes.many of which never should have been 
 afforded the privilege of home ownership if it were not for big 
 government forcing lenders to lend to unqualified buyers.
 
 You had me, until the above paragraph.  That is a crock of ShXX.
 
 Most housing foreclosures are conscious business decissions by the middle
 class, to improve their finance and cash flow. They ask, Is it worth
 continuing to sink money into this bad investment losing money?  I will say
 that there are a shortage of buyer. So when an investor cant offload their
 losing investment (House) to someone else, they resort to less ethical
 choices.
 What does someone do if their house jsut lost 50k in value? IF they go to
 foreclosure, they can pretty much live rent free for a year in their home,
 before they are forced out. If they put their rent check in hidden savings
 instead, they earn 50k that year. That combined with gettting out of a loan
 taht is valued at mor ethan the house, it is a net $100k earning, for doing
 nothing. They learn they can earn more losing their home than some people do
 holding on to their home as an investment to resale.
 
 And governments were not the ones forcing lenders to lend. Its the
 opposite Government regulation is unnecessarilly setting regulations to
 make buying harder for consumers, to address a problem that didn't exist.
 
 Some People loose homes because a home is a 30 year commitment, and its
 hard for anyone to predict how one's life will pan out every year for 30
 years. All it takes is one bad year, and there goes the house. People loose
 houses because they loose jobs.  People loose houses because most personal
 debt is secured by their house, and loosing the house is the easiest way to
 get rid of the other debt. People lose houses because they cant live within
 their mean in other areas of their life. Or because they set their sights to
 high. But the biggest reason people default, is because they develop a sense
 of satisfaction or entitlement in screwing their lender when they feel they
 were taken advantage of by their lendor. Even with Bankruptcy, there are
 some interesing stats, for example, almost all people that go bankrupt
 religiously paid their bills the many years prior to, and that they had an
 average interest increase of 80-100% the year they filed.  The borrower
 could have paid and wanted to pay, but whenthey felt there was no way out of
 getting screwed by the lender, they make a business decission.
 
 Part of the problem was dishonest overstated appraisals, and greedy lenders
 approving loans at values higher than the homes should be worth. Sure there
 is a percentage of foreclosure that are legitimate cases where the homeowner
 can no longer afford to pay their mortgage. But many are conscience business
 decissions on their investment. Why do you think Obama decided to help
 Middle class save their homes, while they let the most needy loose their
 homes? A Interest rate savings canbe justified as a clear business decission
 that might influence the middle class 

Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in regulationofnet-neutrality

2010-02-05 Thread Matt Liotta
That is factual incorrect. Only minor changes were made to CRA under Clinton. 
It was the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act also 
under Clinton that required Fannie and Freddie to securitize a certain 
percentage of CRA mortgages.

Again, only a fraction of the bad mortgages that caused the housing crisis were 
subject to CRA.

-Matt

On Feb 5, 2010, at 9:41 AM, Jeff Broadwick wrote:

 CRA was started under Carter and greatly expanded under Clinton.  This is a
 far more detailed conversation then we can have here, but the fact is that
 if the government (Fan and Fred) hadn't created the market for the paper,
 this could not have happened. 
 
 
 Regards,
 
 Jeff
 
 
 Jeff Broadwick
 ImageStream
 800-813-5123 x106 (US/Can)
 +1 574-935-8484 x106  (Int'l)
 
 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of Matt Liotta
 Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 9:36 AM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in
 regulationofnet-neutrality
 
 The Community Reinvestment Act was first passed in 1977. It was later
 changed under Bush in 1989 because of the S  L crisis. I mention this only
 to provide some context as to how long it has been with us and the variety
 of administrations that have affected it. It was really the Federal Housing
 Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992 that put us in the
 current situation with Fannie and Freddie securitizing CRA loans. That in
 and of itself didn't get us here. It was really the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act
 that started us down the wrong road. This ultimately allowed companies like
 Goldman to create CDOs, sell them, and buy insurance against their failure
 all without having any interest in the underlying securities.
 
 Sorry for the history lesson, but I thought the background was useful.
 Understand that by 2004 only 30% of mortgages were done under CRA and in
 2005 regulatory changes allowed certain banks to do less CRA mortgage
 lending. Thus, it just isn't credible to suggest that the CRA caused the
 housing crisis.
 
 Was the housing crisis created by people getting mortgages they couldn't
 afford? Yes, but that wasn't limited to CRA mortgages. Both parties helped
 get more people into houses they couldn't afford for their own reasons.
 
 -Matt
 
 On Feb 5, 2010, at 9:04 AM, Jeff Broadwick wrote:
 
 That's just not accurate Tom.  The Community Reinvestment Act required 
 lenders to do a lot of this stuff and then Fannie and Freddie created 
 the market for the paper.
 
 
 Regards,
 
 Jeff
 
 
 Jeff Broadwick
 ImageStream
 800-813-5123 x106 (US/Can)
 +1 574-935-8484 x106  (Int'l)
 
 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] 
 On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
 Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 2:19 AM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in 
 regulationof net-neutrality
 
 Brad,
 
 People are losing their homes.many of which never should have been 
 afforded the privilege of home ownership if it were not for big 
 government forcing lenders to lend to unqualified buyers.
 
 You had me, until the above paragraph.  That is a crock of ShXX.
 
 Most housing foreclosures are conscious business decissions by the 
 middle class, to improve their finance and cash flow. They ask, Is it 
 worth continuing to sink money into this bad investment losing money?  
 I will say that there are a shortage of buyer. So when an investor 
 cant offload their losing investment (House) to someone else, they 
 resort to less ethical choices.
 What does someone do if their house jsut lost 50k in value? IF they go 
 to foreclosure, they can pretty much live rent free for a year in 
 their home, before they are forced out. If they put their rent check 
 in hidden savings instead, they earn 50k that year. That combined with 
 gettting out of a loan taht is valued at mor ethan the house, it is a 
 net $100k earning, for doing nothing. They learn they can earn more 
 losing their home than some people do holding on to their home as an
 investment to resale.
 
 And governments were not the ones forcing lenders to lend. Its the 
 opposite Government regulation is unnecessarilly setting 
 regulations to make buying harder for consumers, to address a problem that
 didn't exist.
 
 Some People loose homes because a home is a 30 year commitment, 
 and its hard for anyone to predict how one's life will pan out every 
 year for 30 years. All it takes is one bad year, and there goes the 
 house. People loose houses because they loose jobs.  People loose 
 houses because most personal debt is secured by their house, and 
 loosing the house is the easiest way to get rid of the other debt. 
 People lose houses because they cant live within their mean in other 
 areas of their life. Or because they set their sights to high. But the 
 biggest reason people default

Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in regulationofnet-neutrality

2010-02-05 Thread Matt Liotta

On Feb 5, 2010, at 10:06 AM, Brad Belton wrote:

 The underlying point still holds true; big government imposing rules on
 lenders forcing them to lend to those that wouldn't have normally qualified.
 
No, it in fact does not hold true. Since CRA mortgages were only a fraction of 
the bad mortgages it is logical to conclude the other bad mortgages would have 
still been made if there were no CRA mortgages. Further, it is reasonable to 
assume that if no CRA mortgages were made even more non-CRA mortgages would 
have been made given the additional available capital.

There is plenty of blame to go around; trying to pin it on one thing is a waste 
of time.

-Matt



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role inregulationofnet-neutrality

2010-02-05 Thread Matt Liotta
You keep make unsubstantiated claims. Where is your data? If you are so sure of 
CRA's effect where is the data? I mean every bank must disclose there numbers 
of CRA mortgages, so it is not hard to see what percentage of the overall 
market they are. Further, banks also publish what percentage of bad mortgages 
they have on the books. The numbers are there and CRA is a fraction. Look it up.

Remember, we are talking about subprime mortgages. in 2006, of the top 25 
subprime lenders only 1 was subject to CRA. In fact, Fannie and Freddie went 
from a high of 48 percentage of subprime loans in 2004 to 24 percent in 2006 
because of the enormous private market for subprime.

-Matt

On Feb 5, 2010, at 10:39 AM, Jeff Broadwick wrote:

 I'm really not interested in getting into a big hairy argument with you
 on-list Matt.  The CRA DID have an effect, and the market created by Fannie
 and Freddie allowed the whole thing to happen.  There are certainly other
 factors, but those are the two biggest.  I will agree with you that there
 were plenty of stupid people with Cs in their titles that bellied up to the
 trough. 
 
 
 Regards,
 
 Jeff
 
 
 Jeff Broadwick
 ImageStream
 800-813-5123 x106 (US/Can)
 +1 574-935-8484 x106  (Int'l)
 
 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of Matt Liotta
 Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 10:13 AM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role
 inregulationofnet-neutrality
 
 
 On Feb 5, 2010, at 10:06 AM, Brad Belton wrote:
 
 The underlying point still holds true; big government imposing rules 
 on lenders forcing them to lend to those that wouldn't have normally
 qualified.
 
 No, it in fact does not hold true. Since CRA mortgages were only a fraction
 of the bad mortgages it is logical to conclude the other bad mortgages would
 have still been made if there were no CRA mortgages. Further, it is
 reasonable to assume that if no CRA mortgages were made even more non-CRA
 mortgages would have been made given the additional available capital.
 
 There is plenty of blame to go around; trying to pin it on one thing is a
 waste of time.
 
 -Matt
 
 
 
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 
 
 
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
 
 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
 
 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
 
 
 
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 
 
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
 
 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
 
 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role in regulation of net-neutrality

2010-02-05 Thread Matt Liotta

On Feb 5, 2010, at 11:04 AM, Chuck Bartosch wrote:

 That statement completely ignores history. The tendency of any unconstrained 
 capitalist is to form a monopoly. Hell, *I'd* do it if I could ;-). And 
 unconstrained capitalism that achieves a monopoly rarely acts in its 
 customers own best interests.
 
 If nothing else, it's in our society's interest to prevent monopolies because 
 innovation stagnates in a monoploy situation.
 
It should be every capitalist desire to become a monopolist. The government's 
role should be to encourage businesses to innovate and grow towards being a 
monopoly while hoping the market has sufficient competition to stop that 
ultimate result. If not, then step in to prevent the monopoly from abusing its 
position. The government must only set the rules of the game and ensure market 
fairness through their rules. The government shouldn't participate in the 
market either with its own entity or by picking winners and losers through its 
actions.

-Matt





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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's roleinregulationofnet-neutrality

2010-02-05 Thread Matt Liotta
What does your quip have to do with your earlier assertions regarding CRA? Is 
your response to facts that challenge your position to simply change the 
subject? I worry you formed your position without proper research.

-Matt
 
On Feb 5, 2010, at 2:17 PM, Jeff Broadwick wrote:

 Talk to a mortgage lender...they have all become agents for Fannie and
 Freddie.  Few of them do their own underwriting anymore. 
 
 
 Regards,
 
 Jeff
 
 
 Jeff Broadwick
 ImageStream
 800-813-5123 x106 (US/Can)
 +1 574-935-8484 x106  (Int'l)
 
 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of Matt Liotta
 Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 10:53 AM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's
 roleinregulationofnet-neutrality
 
 You keep make unsubstantiated claims. Where is your data? If you are so sure
 of CRA's effect where is the data? I mean every bank must disclose there
 numbers of CRA mortgages, so it is not hard to see what percentage of the
 overall market they are. Further, banks also publish what percentage of bad
 mortgages they have on the books. The numbers are there and CRA is a
 fraction. Look it up.
 
 Remember, we are talking about subprime mortgages. in 2006, of the top 25
 subprime lenders only 1 was subject to CRA. In fact, Fannie and Freddie went
 from a high of 48 percentage of subprime loans in 2004 to 24 percent in 2006
 because of the enormous private market for subprime.
 
 -Matt
 
 On Feb 5, 2010, at 10:39 AM, Jeff Broadwick wrote:
 
 I'm really not interested in getting into a big hairy argument with 
 you on-list Matt.  The CRA DID have an effect, and the market created 
 by Fannie and Freddie allowed the whole thing to happen.  There are 
 certainly other factors, but those are the two biggest.  I will agree 
 with you that there were plenty of stupid people with Cs in their 
 titles that bellied up to the trough.
 
 
 Regards,
 
 Jeff
 
 
 Jeff Broadwick
 ImageStream
 800-813-5123 x106 (US/Can)
 +1 574-935-8484 x106  (Int'l)
 
 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] 
 On Behalf Of Matt Liotta
 Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 10:13 AM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role 
 inregulationofnet-neutrality
 
 
 On Feb 5, 2010, at 10:06 AM, Brad Belton wrote:
 
 The underlying point still holds true; big government imposing rules 
 on lenders forcing them to lend to those that wouldn't have normally
 qualified.
 
 No, it in fact does not hold true. Since CRA mortgages were only a 
 fraction of the bad mortgages it is logical to conclude the other bad 
 mortgages would have still been made if there were no CRA mortgages. 
 Further, it is reasonable to assume that if no CRA mortgages were made 
 even more non-CRA mortgages would have been made given the additional
 available capital.
 
 There is plenty of blame to go around; trying to pin it on one thing 
 is a waste of time.
 
 -Matt
 
 
 --
 --
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 --
 --
 
 
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
 
 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
 
 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
 
 
 
 --
 --
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 --
 --
 
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
 
 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
 
 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
 
 
 
 
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 
 
 
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
 
 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
 
 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
 
 
 
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 
 
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
 
 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
 
 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC'sroleinregulationofnet-neutrality

2010-02-05 Thread Matt Liotta
I won't attempt to prove a negative. It was you who made the claim CRA caused 
the housing crisis. It is therefore incumbent on you to prove the claim. This 
is especially true since you have provided no basis for your claim. I have 
provided facts related to the CRA that have not been refuted by you or anyone 
else..

Now then, here is your chance. Back up your claims. Refute the facts I have 
provided. Provide at least a theory as to how the CRA caused the housing crisis.

-Matt

On Feb 5, 2010, at 3:36 PM, Jeff Broadwick wrote:

 I've seen plenty of research Matt.  You ask for proof from me and you've
 provided none yourself.  If you want to provide the basis for your
 statements and have an argument, let's have it.  We'll probably have to do
 it off-list, since I'm sure everyone is getting tired of this, as am I.  
 
 
 Regards,
 
 Jeff
 
 
 Jeff Broadwick
 ImageStream
 800-813-5123 x106 (US/Can)
 +1 574-935-8484 x106  (Int'l)
 
 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of Matt Liotta
 Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 3:29 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The
 FCC'sroleinregulationofnet-neutrality
 
 What does your quip have to do with your earlier assertions regarding CRA?
 Is your response to facts that challenge your position to simply change the
 subject? I worry you formed your position without proper research.
 
 -Matt
 
 On Feb 5, 2010, at 2:17 PM, Jeff Broadwick wrote:
 
 Talk to a mortgage lender...they have all become agents for Fannie and 
 Freddie.  Few of them do their own underwriting anymore.
 
 
 Regards,
 
 Jeff
 
 
 Jeff Broadwick
 ImageStream
 800-813-5123 x106 (US/Can)
 +1 574-935-8484 x106  (Int'l)
 
 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] 
 On Behalf Of Matt Liotta
 Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 10:53 AM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's 
 roleinregulationofnet-neutrality
 
 You keep make unsubstantiated claims. Where is your data? If you are 
 so sure of CRA's effect where is the data? I mean every bank must 
 disclose there numbers of CRA mortgages, so it is not hard to see what 
 percentage of the overall market they are. Further, banks also publish 
 what percentage of bad mortgages they have on the books. The numbers 
 are there and CRA is a fraction. Look it up.
 
 Remember, we are talking about subprime mortgages. in 2006, of the top 
 25 subprime lenders only 1 was subject to CRA. In fact, Fannie and 
 Freddie went from a high of 48 percentage of subprime loans in 2004 to 
 24 percent in 2006 because of the enormous private market for subprime.
 
 -Matt
 
 On Feb 5, 2010, at 10:39 AM, Jeff Broadwick wrote:
 
 I'm really not interested in getting into a big hairy argument with 
 you on-list Matt.  The CRA DID have an effect, and the market created 
 by Fannie and Freddie allowed the whole thing to happen.  There are 
 certainly other factors, but those are the two biggest.  I will agree 
 with you that there were plenty of stupid people with Cs in their 
 titles that bellied up to the trough.
 
 
 Regards,
 
 Jeff
 
 
 Jeff Broadwick
 ImageStream
 800-813-5123 x106 (US/Can)
 +1 574-935-8484 x106  (Int'l)
 
 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
 On Behalf Of Matt Liotta
 Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 10:13 AM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role 
 inregulationofnet-neutrality
 
 
 On Feb 5, 2010, at 10:06 AM, Brad Belton wrote:
 
 The underlying point still holds true; big government imposing rules 
 on lenders forcing them to lend to those that wouldn't have normally
 qualified.
 
 No, it in fact does not hold true. Since CRA mortgages were only a 
 fraction of the bad mortgages it is logical to conclude the other bad 
 mortgages would have still been made if there were no CRA mortgages.
 Further, it is reasonable to assume that if no CRA mortgages were 
 made even more non-CRA mortgages would have been made given the 
 additional
 available capital.
 
 There is plenty of blame to go around; trying to pin it on one thing 
 is a waste of time.
 
 -Matt
 
 
 -
 -
 --
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 -
 -
 --
 
 
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
 
 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
 
 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
 
 
 
 -
 -
 --
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 -
 -
 --
 
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
 
 Subscribe

Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: TheFCC'sroleinregulationofnet-neutrality

2010-02-05 Thread Matt Liotta
That's it? Your basis against the CRA is a partisan blog post? Really? The 
guy's article doesn't even lay the blame at the CRA's feet. It is more a 
commentary on Fannie and Freddie.

I am pretty disappointed. I expected that someone who has seen plenty of 
research would have shared something that counts for research. Something like 
http://www.minneapolisfed.org/publications_papers/pub_display.cfm?id=4136 done 
by Minneapolis Federal Reserve Economists.

or

Comptroller of the Currency:  http://www.occ.gov/ftp/release/2008-136.htm

or

FDIC Chairman Shelia Bair:  
http://www.fdic.gov/news/news/speeches/archives/2008/chairman/spdec1708.html

-Matt

On Feb 5, 2010, at 4:12 PM, Jeff Broadwick wrote:

 Here is a nice timeline for anyone that wants to read it.  I'm done with
 this on-list:
 
 http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/what_really_happened_in_the_mo.html 
 
 
 Regards,
 
 Jeff
 
 
 Jeff Broadwick
 ImageStream
 800-813-5123 x106 (US/Can)
 +1 574-935-8484 x106  (Int'l)
 
 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of Matt Liotta
 Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 3:53 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what:
 TheFCC'sroleinregulationofnet-neutrality
 
 I won't attempt to prove a negative. It was you who made the claim CRA
 caused the housing crisis. It is therefore incumbent on you to prove the
 claim. This is especially true since you have provided no basis for your
 claim. I have provided facts related to the CRA that have not been refuted
 by you or anyone else..
 
 Now then, here is your chance. Back up your claims. Refute the facts I have
 provided. Provide at least a theory as to how the CRA caused the housing
 crisis.
 
 -Matt
 
 On Feb 5, 2010, at 3:36 PM, Jeff Broadwick wrote:
 
 I've seen plenty of research Matt.  You ask for proof from me and 
 you've provided none yourself.  If you want to provide the basis for 
 your statements and have an argument, let's have it.  We'll probably 
 have to do it off-list, since I'm sure everyone is getting tired of this,
 as am I.
 
 
 Regards,
 
 Jeff
 
 
 Jeff Broadwick
 ImageStream
 800-813-5123 x106 (US/Can)
 +1 574-935-8484 x106  (Int'l)
 
 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] 
 On Behalf Of Matt Liotta
 Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 3:29 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The 
 FCC'sroleinregulationofnet-neutrality
 
 What does your quip have to do with your earlier assertions regarding CRA?
 Is your response to facts that challenge your position to simply 
 change the subject? I worry you formed your position without proper
 research.
 
 -Matt
 
 On Feb 5, 2010, at 2:17 PM, Jeff Broadwick wrote:
 
 Talk to a mortgage lender...they have all become agents for Fannie 
 and Freddie.  Few of them do their own underwriting anymore.
 
 
 Regards,
 
 Jeff
 
 
 Jeff Broadwick
 ImageStream
 800-813-5123 x106 (US/Can)
 +1 574-935-8484 x106  (Int'l)
 
 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
 On Behalf Of Matt Liotta
 Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 10:53 AM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's 
 roleinregulationofnet-neutrality
 
 You keep make unsubstantiated claims. Where is your data? If you are 
 so sure of CRA's effect where is the data? I mean every bank must 
 disclose there numbers of CRA mortgages, so it is not hard to see 
 what percentage of the overall market they are. Further, banks also 
 publish what percentage of bad mortgages they have on the books. The 
 numbers are there and CRA is a fraction. Look it up.
 
 Remember, we are talking about subprime mortgages. in 2006, of the 
 top
 25 subprime lenders only 1 was subject to CRA. In fact, Fannie and 
 Freddie went from a high of 48 percentage of subprime loans in 2004 
 to
 24 percent in 2006 because of the enormous private market for subprime.
 
 -Matt
 
 On Feb 5, 2010, at 10:39 AM, Jeff Broadwick wrote:
 
 I'm really not interested in getting into a big hairy argument with 
 you on-list Matt.  The CRA DID have an effect, and the market 
 created by Fannie and Freddie allowed the whole thing to happen.  
 There are certainly other factors, but those are the two biggest.  I 
 will agree with you that there were plenty of stupid people with Cs 
 in their titles that bellied up to the trough.
 
 
 Regards,
 
 Jeff
 
 
 Jeff Broadwick
 ImageStream
 800-813-5123 x106 (US/Can)
 +1 574-935-8484 x106  (Int'l)
 
 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
 On Behalf Of Matt Liotta
 Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 10:13 AM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Common Carrier or what: The FCC's role 
 inregulationofnet-neutrality
 
 
 On Feb 5, 2010, at 10:06 AM, Brad Belton wrote:
 
 The underlying point still holds true; big

Re: [WISPA] BGP Load Balancing Help

2010-01-17 Thread Matt Liotta
Prepending is no longer the desirable solution and should only be used if your 
upstreams don't support a better way.

The preferred way is to adjust local preference based on a route policy. You 
can simply prefer your fiber circuit if you want or adjust it on an AS basis. 
You will likely only want to consider the major carriers when doing this. For 
example, just the top ten carriers. You of course can only adjust local 
preference on your side affecting outbound traffic. To adjust local preference 
on the carrier side to affect inbound traffic you will need to have a carrier 
that supports communities. See http://onestepconsulting.net/communities/ for a 
good listing of carriers that support BGP communities.

-Matt

On Jan 17, 2010, at 8:41 PM, Matt Jenkins wrote:

 The simplest way is to prepend the DS3 circuit.
 
 Scott Vander Dussen wrote:
 On a single ImageStream router we have two circuits:
 DS3 @ 45mb/s
 Fiber @ 100mb/s
 
 The DS3 is routed more efficiently (less hops) and the fiber less efficient 
 (more hops).  Since the BGP is routing traffic based upon number of hops to 
 final destination only, the DS3 gets 95+% of all our internal traffic.  What 
 can I do to shift some (or even possibly all) of the traffic to the Fiber to 
 balance things out?  Thanks in advance.
 
 `S
 
 
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 
 
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
 
 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
 
 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
 
 
 
 
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 
 
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
 
 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
 
 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




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] Wimax gear - licensed bands btw

2009-12-31 Thread Matt Liotta
Many of those licenses had serious restrictions, which is why the auction 
reverse was so low in the first place.

-Matt

On Dec 31, 2009, at 1:24 AM, Charles Wu wrote:

 Speaking of which, did anyone notice the results of the latest BRS Auction 
 (#86)
 
 Licenses went for an average of $0.03 / MHz POP
 
 That means if 60 MHz covering 100,000 people (as defined by Census 2000 
 numbers) would have gone for $180k -- with the small business 35% credit - 
 that means a WISP would've paid $117k for that spectrum
 
 While $117k is nothing to sneeze at, it's just worth noting that getting a 
 license is not something unreasonable or unobtainable for the small guy
 
 -Charles
 
 
 
 
 
 
 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] stimulus announcements thus far

2009-12-17 Thread Matt Liotta
A $33.5 million grant to the North Georgia Network Cooperative for a  
fiber-optic ring that will bring high-speed Internet connections to  
the northern Georgia foothills of the Appalachian Mountains. The  
project will serve an eight-county area with a population of 334,000.

A $25.4 million grant to the Biddleford Internet Corp., a partnership  
between the University of Maine and service providers, to build three  
fiber-optic rings across rural Maine. The network will pass through  
more than 100 communities with 110,000 households and will connect 10  
University of Maine campuses.

A combined grant/loan of $2.4 million to the Consolidated Electric  
Cooperative in north central Ohio to build a 166-mile fiber network  
that will be used, among other things, to connect 16 electrical  
substations to support a smart grid project.

A 4G wireless network to be built by an Alaska Native Corporation in  
southwestern Alaska, a fiber-to-the-home project in a remote corner of  
New Hampshire and computer centers for 84 libraries in Arizona.

-Matt



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] stimulus announcements thus far

2009-12-17 Thread Matt Liotta
See the highlighted projects here...

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/20091217-recovery-act-investments-broadband.pdf

-Matt

On Dec 17, 2009, at 3:20 PM, David E. Smith wrote:

 On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 13:24, Robert West robert.w...@just- 
 micro.comwrote:

 So how did it get through?  :)


 The grants were reviewed and scored by independent volunteers (I was  
 one),
 who scored each of them using a fairly complex rubric. It covered  
 things
 like does this meet one of the government's broadband deployment and
 economic stimulus goals, of course, but there also were a lot of  
 points for
 things like is this budget realistic and will this technology  
 actually do
 what the applicant says it will. Obviously, the volunteers' scores  
 weren't
 the only factor considered by NTIA, but I'm proud to have been a bit  
 of a
 nonsense-filter. Obviously I can't talk about any of the specific
 applications I reviewed, but the five applications, totaling over 1000
 pages, had a couple doozies in there. Some folks were interested in  
 trying
 to build out broadband, others were pretty clearly just making a  
 cash grab.
 I'm hoping I was able to do a little bit to help the former and  
 quell the
 latter.

 David Smith
 MVN.net


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

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Insurance thread- Matt and the rest

2009-12-10 Thread Matt Liotta

On Dec 9, 2009, at 5:02 PM, Tom DeReggi wrote:

 Matt, would you mind clarifying.When you said... have not the  
 left the
 business, did you mean

I don't mind clarifying, but I am not sure what the interest is.

 1) Have not left OneRing/RapidLink, and are involved in a non-employee
 capacity.
 or that
 2) Have not left the Wireless Industry.

I have not left the wireless industry. The simplest way to describe my  
status with Rapid Link is to state that it is what was before except I  
am no longer on the board and am not an employee. Rapid Link did file  
an 8-K when I resigned from the board. Further, they have also filed  
that they entered into a merge transaction and subsequent management  
agreement. If you are interested in Rapid Link there is plenty of SEC  
filings to read.

 When you said...  I cant talk about it, did you mean

 1) You cant talk about your status at OneRing/RapidLink
 or that
 2) You cant talk about what you are doing now..

I can't talk about what I am doing now.

-Matt



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Insurance thread- Matt and the rest

2009-12-10 Thread Matt Liotta

On Dec 10, 2009, at 1:29 AM, rwf wrote:

 Oh?
 So you are still a WISP then?
 What is your company called?

Guess your filter still isn't working then. I am not a WISP and never  
have been.

If you think you know something and would like to get yourself and  
others in trouble then by all means post away.

-Matt





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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Insurance....

2009-12-09 Thread Matt Liotta
I can't reread what you said. I can however reread what you wrote. I  
suggest you do the same. You state that you weren't commenting on the  
whole healthcare debate. Yet you were responding to a thread that was  
specifically a healthcare debate. Thus, it is reasonable to take your  
comments in the context of the overall debate. Further, I understand  
your comment was limited to your personal experience with Cuba. As I  
stated though, such anecdotes may be true, but are meaningless in the  
larger debate. While you may have meant only to share your personal  
experience with Cuba you ended up presenting a standard straw-man  
argument that has been used throughout the debate. If you don't want  
people to interpret your comments in the larger context of the debate  
you are participating in then I suggest stating that or simply don't  
comment.

Now with specific regard to Cuba... Here you have a nation that is  
estimated to be the 70th largest economy in the world and ranked  
directly behind the largest economy in world in terms of healthcare.  
Maybe the rankings are flawed. Maybe Cuba lies about their statistics.  
Maybe they provide good healthcare to some and deny it to others. I  
don't really care since I have no desire to emulate our healthcare  
after Cuba. But, it is telling that such a poor country can do so well  
and a rich country like ours can do so poor.

-Matt

On Dec 8, 2009, at 9:08 PM, os10ru...@gmail.com wrote:

 Matt,

   Please reread what I said. I wasn't commenting on the whole  
 healthcare debate. I was talking about Cuba. CUBA CUBA CUBA. Do you  
 get it now? Just CUBA. Reread the original post and get off your  
 high horse. Have you noticed everyone else stopped replying to you.

   Everyone else, sorry, that's my last post on this topic no matter  
 what Matt says next.

 Greg

 On Dec 8, 2009, at 9:05 PM, Matt Liotta wrote:


 On Dec 8, 2009, at 8:56 PM, os10ru...@gmail.com wrote:

 Matt,

 Chill, you're taking a really harsh tone. I'm talking about Cuba
 because I know about that. I have many Latino friends. I speak
 Spanish. I know Cubans and I know a lot of people who have been to
 Cuba. You're putting words in my mouth. I'm not refuting all those
 other countries statistics. I thought you wanted debate of the
 facts. Or do you just want us to sit at your feet and listen?

 I do want to debate the facts, but you are responding with anecdotes.
 This is a standard straw-man used throughout the healthcare debate. I
 know person X from country Y that says this or had such and such
 happen to them. Such a statement can be true, but it is meaningless  
 in
 the context of the debate. Such a situation needs to be statistically
 significant to matter. All systems have their flaws as no one  
 believes
 a perfect system exists.

 -Matt



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

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



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

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Insurance....

2009-12-09 Thread Matt Liotta

On Dec 8, 2009, at 9:32 PM, MDK wrote:

 As I stated before...   Medicare reimburses such low amounts, that  
 ever
 doctor, hospital, clinic, lab, etc, that accepts it does so at a  
 loss.   Not
 just no profit but at a loss.Not only that, but Medicare has the
 highest level of financial fraud, period.   It's very efficient...  
 at giving
 away money for nothing, and yet, at the same time,  has created the  
 single
 largest pick the pocket of someone else program to exist.

Cite your sources.

-Matt




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Insurance....

2009-12-09 Thread Matt Liotta

On Dec 8, 2009, at 11:29 PM, MDK wrote:

 I'm sure you're a nice guy...

 But you're trying to convince a lot of people who know better by  
 long years
 of experience, that life would be beautiful and all will be fine, if  
 we just
 give Congress a few more trillion dollars a year of our hard earned  
 money.

I am pretty sure that wasn't his position.

-Matt



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Insurance....

2009-12-09 Thread Matt Liotta

On Dec 9, 2009, at 12:20 AM, MDK wrote:

 Every country with a government run medical system   Denies  
 routine
 medical care, extraordinary medical care, or expensive medical care  
 on a
 routine basis.   This is why babies delivered by the NHS hospitals in
 Britain are less than 90% born in a hospital room or delivery  
 room. The
 rest are born in hallways, waiting rooms, streets, cabs, or ambulances
 because there are no available rooms.And, this number hasn't  
 changed
 significantly in years and will not change, because the government  
 simply
 hasn't enough money to expand facilities.

What is your point? Every private insurance company in the US denies  
routine medical care, extraordinary medical care, or expensive medical  
care on a routine basis.

 This is why in some cities in Canada, the wait for the assignment of a
 personal physician can take up to 5 years.The government can't  
 hire
 enough doctors, and those that are hired have no incentive to take on
 greater case loads.

That would likely happen here as well if the entire population had  
access to healthcare. What isn't clear from your statement is that  
while true it is believed to only affect 5% of the Canadian  
population. Whereas around at least 15% of americans are in the same  
boat since they don't have insurance.

 This is why Veterinarians in Canada have near instant access to MRI
 machines, while people do not.Veterinary services are free market,
 people's service are socialized.

I think your point is that if you pay for the MRI you can get it  
immediately. This is true for people in Canada as well.

 In every case, the government balances it's books by simply denying  
 services
 or delaying services to people.

Sounds like our private insurance companies only their books have to  
also balance the profit they need to deliver to their shareholders.

 I mean, it's so easy, once the government has to decide, not you  
 having to
 decide whether you have to sacrifice for charity, your conscience  
 and self
 righteousness can remain fully intact - it won't be YOUR fault they  
 died
 like my mother did, because Medicare refused treatment, right? 
 After all,
 Medicare denies treatment to covered patients MORE than any other  
 insurer,
 public or private, in some cases by more than 5 times as many  
 denials as
 private insurance.Yet, Medicare has the largest percentage of  
 fraudulent
 payments of any insurer, BY FAR.But, hey, if it's the government's
 responsibility, we're morally relieved of any personal  
 responsibility for
 those who suffer for a lack, right?

Cite your sources.

 Or, are you going to tell us that government can buy unlimited  
 health care
 for everyone?

No one thinks they can.

-Matt





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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Insurance....

2009-12-09 Thread Matt Liotta
 failure  
 to pull
 out our wallets and give to help the needy, but if someone dies  
 because they
 themselves could not afford to pay for it (as opposed to the agency  
 budget
 not having the money), we get to get all righteous and get on our  
 soapbox
 and yell rants and raves and excoriate those selfish bastards who are
 refusing to give Congress a few more trillion dollars a year to  
 spend in
 ways to benefit themselves politically.

 I mean, it's so easy, once the government has to decide, not you  
 having to
 decide whether you have to sacrifice for charity, your conscience  
 and self
 righteousness can remain fully intact - it won't be YOUR fault they  
 died
 like my mother did, because Medicare refused treatment, right? 
 After all,
 Medicare denies treatment to covered patients MORE than any other  
 insurer,
 public or private, in some cases by more than 5 times as many  
 denials as
 private insurance.Yet, Medicare has the largest percentage of  
 fraudulent
 payments of any insurer, BY FAR.But, hey, if it's the  
 government's
 responsibility, we're morally relieved of any personal  
 responsibility for
 those who suffer for a lack, right?

 Or, are you going to tell us that government can buy unlimited  
 health care
 for everyone?

 --
 From: Matt Liotta mlio...@r337.com
 Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 4:59 PM
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Insurance


 And I guess because you know someone from Canada/Britain/France/ 
 Spain/
 etc that swears the healthcare is worse then they make it out to be
 and that the US is where everyone with money goes then it must be
 true. Let's all just ignore study after study that shows every  
 single
 first world country has it better than the US. Sure, I'll believe  
 Cuba
 is hiding the real story. What about the other 30+ countries that  
 have
 better healthcare at a lower GDP cost? Are they lying too?

 -Matt






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

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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





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

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Insurance thread- Matt and the rest

2009-12-09 Thread Matt Liotta

On Dec 9, 2009, at 9:50 AM, rwf wrote:

 Matt-

 Please consider taking your insurance debate to another list.

It is not my debate. I believe the list was discussing this for at  
least 3 days before I made my first post.

 When you pop in, you just make the discussion hotter and more active.

I'll take that as a compliment.

 Some of us are here for wireless discussion, and Matt, although I  
 understand
 you are no longer actively in the business, the rest of us still are.

I suspect the majority of us are here for discussion regarding WISP  
related issues. Matt Larsen recently posted on the relevance of the  
discussion to WISPs. I can't speak to your incorrect understanding  
regarding my activity in this industry.

-Matt



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Insurance thread- Matt and the rest

2009-12-09 Thread Matt Liotta
I am not longer with Rapid Link/One Ring as an employee, but I have  
not left the business. Ralph likes to speak out of turn.

-Matt

On Dec 9, 2009, at 9:57 AM, Brad Belton wrote:

 Matt's not in the business anymore?  News to me.  I thought he was  
 with
 Rapid or Ring something or another?  Not anymore?  If true, that  
 really is
 interesting...


 Brad

 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]  
 On
 Behalf Of rwf
 Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 8:50 AM
 To: 'WISPA General List'
 Subject: [WISPA] Insurance thread- Matt and the rest

 Matt-

 Please consider taking your insurance debate to another list.

 When you pop in, you just make the discussion hotter and more active.

 Some of us are here for wireless discussion, and Matt, although I  
 understand
 you are no longer actively in the business, the rest of us still are.



 I even made a filter but you keep slipping through.







 
 
 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] What the heck is Matt doing now?!? WAS: Re: Insurance

2009-12-09 Thread Matt Liotta
I can't talk about anything of the things I am involved in currently.  
Maybe in the next few months things will change. I do expect they will  
benefit the industry though.

-Matt

On Dec 9, 2009, at 10:30 AM, Ryan Spott wrote:

 WOW!

 What ARE you doing now Matt? I really enjoyed your talk at the *last*
 ISP-Con.

 ryan

 On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 7:24 AM, Chuck Profito cprof...@cv- 
 access.comwrote:

 Well Matt, Just what are you doing after One Ring? Where are you  
 hanging
 out, what does your virtual shingle say? Are you writing I Phone  
 apps? New
 bikini code? A new mac maybe?

 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless- 
 boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of Matt Liotta
 Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 7:08 AM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Insurance thread- Matt and the rest

 I am not longer with Rapid Link/One Ring as an employee, but I have
 not left the business. Ralph likes to speak out of turn.

 -Matt

 On Dec 9, 2009, at 9:57 AM, Brad Belton wrote:

 Matt's not in the business anymore?  News to me.  I thought he was
 with
 Rapid or Ring something or another?  Not anymore?  If true, that
 really is
 interesting...


 Brad

 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
 On
 Behalf Of rwf
 Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 8:50 AM
 To: 'WISPA General List'
 Subject: [WISPA] Insurance thread- Matt and the rest

 Matt-

 Please consider taking your insurance debate to another list.

 When you pop in, you just make the discussion hotter and more  
 active.

 Some of us are here for wireless discussion, and Matt, although I
 understand
 you are no longer actively in the business, the rest of us still  
 are.



 I even made a filter but you keep slipping through.









 
 
 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] Insurance....

2009-12-08 Thread Matt Liotta
History should be a guide; not a box. Our country has proven that our  
system of government and its attitude towards the free market is  
unmatched by any other system of government past or present. However,  
multinational corporations are something new that our system is having  
a hard time with. This is because a perfect capitalist is a monopolist  
and monopolies destroy innovation, which is the heart of our country's  
success.

Healthcare is tough because it allows for so many straw-man arguments  
that real debate is lost in the noise. Further, healthcare is now a  
global concern, so the actions of other nations impact our own. What I  
would like to see is a real debate that leads to a solution.  
Businesses simply can't sustain the increasing cost of healthcare and  
neither can their employees.

Right now we have the scariest of all worlds whether you are a liberal  
or a conservative. People without healthcare aren't healthy and cost  
us all too much. Doctors have to employ more people to deal with  
insurance company bureaucracy than to actually provide healthcare.  
Further, as a percentage of GDP we spend the most and get the least.

-Matt

On Dec 8, 2009, at 8:29 AM, os10ru...@gmail.com wrote:

 Owen,

   I think maybe what you're missing is the historical perspective.  
 Our history is people left Europe which was mostly feudal with kings  
 and rulers dictating the details of people's lives and these people  
 came here to be free. Collaboration is needed so the whole can  
 exceed what the mere individual is capable of but as is evident in  
 the constitution the founding fathers were trying to have just  
 enough, just the bare minimum of government needed to all that to  
 happen. That's why according to the constitution the federal  
 government's roll is only supposed to involve national security and  
 interstate commerce.

   At one point in time the US government felt it was necessary in  
 order to provide good telephone communications to force there to be  
 only one national telephone company (the streets were getting  
 cluttered with wires and clearly none of the little companies would  
 ever cover the entire nation). Some years later the government felt  
 it was necessary to break up that telecommunications company (the  
 divestiture) and allow competition in those markets. Both decisions  
 were right at the time.

   Certain aspects of socialism have merit and if you exclude a few  
 totalitarian regimes no socialist country is purely socialist  
 without any private property or capitalism, and all mainly  
 capitalist countries have some social programs.

   So it comes down to how much is right. Most people feel we need  
 Medicare, VA hospitals and other things you mention below (we're a  
 compassionate people though the majority would say those things need  
 fixing) but it's a big leap from a medical system which takes care  
 of the elderly and honored veterans to a healthcare system for  
 everyone. And from what I've heard (I watch Glen Beck and Jon  
 Stewart so I know I'm getting both sides) there's some language in  
 the government's proposals which clearly makes their thing an  
 option. It sounds more like an offer you can't refuse when they  
 say you can only keep your current private insurance if you don't  
 make any changes or else you default to the government system. What  
 the majority of Americans want is freedom even if it's dangerous  
 (think 2nd amendment).

 Greg

 On Dec 8, 2009, at 7:32 AM, Owen Harrell wrote:

  I keep reading what everyone is saying about government and
 insurance, but I don't really believe you. Most of you say that you  
 are
 against the government getting involved in health care, that it is a
 Socialist idea. What I haven't heard is any of you saying you  
 wanted to stop
 Medicare or Social Security or shut down the VA hospitals. Why not?  
 These
 are Socialist programs. These are Government run programs with no  
 choice to
 purchase it from the private market. Why haven't you said to stop  
 those
 programs? You say you believe in the Free Market, but I do not see  
 you
 asking to stop regulating electricity, or natural gas. Only if we  
 let these
 companies truly charge whatever they wanted to would it be a free  
 market.
 Most of you claim to be Christians, but you do not really believe  
 what you
 preach. A true Christian always wants to help those that are less  
 fortunate
 than yourself. Well I believe that includes health care. Or does it  
 mean you
 can pick and choose who should be helped and who shouldn't. Yes, I  
 have had
 insurance almost my whole life. Some was paid for by my employer,  
 some has
 been paid for by myself. What I have seen is premiums go up every  
 year.
 However, the health of this nation ranks in the 30's among other  
 nations. We
 live 3-7 years less than countries with health care. Does that mean  
 National
 Health Care will be perfect? I do not 

Re: [WISPA] Insurance....

2009-12-08 Thread Matt Liotta

On Dec 8, 2009, at 11:10 AM, Jeff Broadwick wrote:

 Not sure where you got this info Matt.  I've seen just the  
 opposite.  In
 Mississippi they had lost most of the OB/GYN docs.  They are now  
 getting
 what they need since they enacted tort reform.

You've seen or read the studies? Because the studies are very clear on  
this. Remember, exceptions don't prove the rule.

 The cost of malpractice, jury awards, and defensive medicine are  
 massive.

Indeed, but no better viable system of checks and balances in  
healthcare has yet to emerge.

-Matt



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Insurance....

2009-12-08 Thread Matt Liotta

On Dec 8, 2009, at 11:18 AM, Brad Belton wrote:

 Agreed.  Tort reform will help save healthcare costs and enable more  
 doctors
 to practice their trade.  My doctor just shut down his practice of  
 20-30
 years and let his entire staff go due to the cost of business  
 growing out of
 control.

Go get his income statement and you will find where the costs where.  
It wasn't malpractice that drove him out of business.

-Matt




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Insurance....

2009-12-08 Thread Matt Liotta

On Dec 8, 2009, at 11:32 AM, Jeff Broadwick wrote:

 From the NY Times:

 http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/05/us/05doctors.html?_r=1

The article certainly shares some facts and anecdotes regarding the  
2003 Texas tort reform. However, it doesn't point to any research that  
ties cause and effect. What I find interesting about the Texas case is  
that Texas has one of the best and most thorough databases regarding  
insurance claims. The idea behind the 2003 tort reform was to stop the  
excess malpractice problems. However, we now know there wasn't  
actually a problem. See 
http://www.utexas.edu/law/academics/centers/clcjm/stability_release.pdf 
, which references a study released in 2005 that found, Recent spikes  
in medical malpractice premiums in Texas were not caused by rising  
payouts on claims or rising jury verdicts. The study looked at data  
between 1988 and 2002 i.e. before the 2003 tort reform. Additionally,  
the proponents of tort reform claim it will lower insurance costs. Yet  
in Texas insurance premiums rose the 3rd fastest nationally.

Unfortunately, tort reform is a red herring when it comes to  
healthcare costs. The estimates right now are that jury awards for  
malpractice cost about $3.6 billion annually, while we spend $2.3  
trillion annually. That would mean jury awards count for .001% of our  
healthcare costs. Some would argue there is more than jury awards to  
malpractice cost. To that end, a 2004 report by the Congressional  
Budget Office said medical malpractice makes up only 2 percent of U.S.  
health spending. Even “significant reductions” would do little to curb  
health-care expenses, it concluded.

Then there is insurance giant WellPoint that released its own report  
detailing what it thought was the source of increased costs, which  
doesn't conclude malpractice is a major issue. See 
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUS137490+27-May-2009+PRN20090527 
.

-Matt





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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Insurance....

2009-12-08 Thread Matt Liotta

On Dec 8, 2009, at 12:55 PM, Andy Trimmell wrote:

 Kinda like when I was home schooled as a kid and my parents had to pay
 school taxes for public school? Only makes sense that we'd again pay
 twice for another public option.

 Good analogy.

I don't think your parents had to pay twice. They could have sent you  
to public school. This why the analogy breaks down. A more reasonable  
analogy would be an existing public service that is augmented or  
replaced with a private one for personal reasons. Maybe owning a car  
when public transit is available. Or living in a gated community with  
security when there is a police force. Or having a bottled water  
service in addition to your regular water service. Or using a private  
toll bridge to shorten a trip as compared with using the public road.  
These are all examples of the private option being used because of  
personal circumstances even though a public option exists.

I personally would like to see something more like the post office.  
This is a public organization that is self-supported. Yet UPS and  
FedEx are viable companies offering a private choice. I like how  
online retailers have learned to mix and match the post office with  
UPS and FedEx to minimize their shipping costs and yet still get their  
products to consumers effectively.

-Matt



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Insurance....

2009-12-08 Thread Matt Liotta
Those other countries that have better health outcomes and a longer  
life expectancy have taken profit out of healthcare. Further, their  
doctors are smart and spent a lot of time and money going to medical  
as well. Most did it for the same reasons as doctors here. And many  
get paid well like you would expect a doctor to. Of course, they don't  
have to deal with insurance companies or have huge staffs of people  
try to collect on fees.

-Matt

On Dec 8, 2009, at 3:30 PM, ccrum wrote:

 Take the profit out of health care and the quality will go with it.
 Would you do your job for what the gov will pay? Maybe you haven't
 noticed, but it takes a smart person and a whole lot of hard work to  
 get
 into and get through medical school in the US. If there is no  
 incentive
 above helping my fellow man, then you will see a mass exodus of the
 best people in the field. I know several doctors (specialists too) who
 are already looking at plan B in case of a government takeover of the
 health care sytem.

 Cameron

 Robert West wrote:
 Exactly.  We are the one and only industrialized country (with  
 whatever
 industry we might have left) who puts profit in healthcare.  As you
 stated, their goal is to NOT pay and they can and do come up with  
 anything
 they can find to do that.

 Profit has no place in healthcare.  Single payer is the only thing  
 I see
 working.  As far as increased taxes to pay for it, we already are  
 paying for
 it and getting zero bang for our buck.  As George from the great  
 white north
 said, healthcare shows up nowhere in his budget.  They just pay  
 extra in
 taxes.

 Medicare for all.  End of the controversy.  Simple.







 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless- 
 boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of Tom Sharples
 Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 7:24 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Insurance

 One of the basic probems IMO is that the whole idea of medical  
 insurance, as

 currentlky implemented, is fundamentally flawed. Consider selling ISP
 services under the model of broadband insurance. Under that  
 model, your
 customer would pay you a certain amount per month in case he needs
 broadband, and you would do your best to find reasons to deny him  
 access. Or

 how about housing insurance instead of monthly rent. You pay the  
 landlord
 a certain amount every month in case you need shelter and he  
 oversubscribes
 a number of his units and hires guards to keep people out on various
 pretexts. Sound completely ridiculous, yet unless you're in an HMO  
 like
 Kaiser that's the system we have now.

 What we need is universal (private or public) access to medical care,
 healthy lifestyle incentives, and the elimination of stupid laws  
 that only
 serve to increase the costs of medical care and prescription drugs  
 to US
 consumers, restrict free-market access across state and international
 lines,create incentives toward excess consumption and CYA medical  
 pratices,
 and only serve to increase the costs of medical care and  
 prescription drugs
 to US consumers.

 Tom S.

 - Original Message -
 From: RickG rgunder...@gmail.com
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 4:06 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Insurance



 Someone posted earlier that the health insurance industry is not  
 truly run
 in a free market. It's failure is exactly due to this. Even  
 after all
 the government rules and regulations, who in the USA does not have
 access
 to health care?

 On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 5:58 PM, David E. Smith d...@mvn.net wrote:


 On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 16:42, MDK rea...@muddyfrogwater.us wrote:


 The free market really does work.   We use it daily in our  
 business...
 Now

 imagine if we used it for health care, too.We know how to do  
 that,
 don't

 we?

 There is a fundamental difference between broadband Internet and  
 basic
 medical care, and the fact that tens of millions of Americans  
 have better
 access to the former than the latter shows that in this instance  
 the free
 market has failed miserably.

 David Smith
 MVN.net





 
 

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



 
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




 
 

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


 
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



 

Re: [WISPA] Insurance....

2009-12-08 Thread Matt Liotta

On Dec 8, 2009, at 4:18 PM, Blake Bowers wrote:

 If Cuba is so good, why do they rank below the US?

Mostly likely because they are such a poor country and can't spend  
much money on healthcare.

-Matt




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Insurance....

2009-12-08 Thread Matt Liotta

On Dec 8, 2009, at 5:37 PM, Blake Bowers wrote:

 You can't have it both ways.

 The survey (which is flawed, but it was brought up) says that Cuba
 rates below the US.  Did you read how the numbers were come up
 with?

I guess I don't understand how I am expecting it both ways. You asked  
why Cuba is ranked lower and I answered.

-Matt




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Insurance....

2009-12-08 Thread Matt Liotta

On Dec 8, 2009, at 7:16 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:

 Exactly.  Bernie Madoff went to jail because of his Ponzi scheme,  
 why didn't
 FDR for social security?  Well, other than the obvious of him dieing.

Maybe you don't realize that Madoff fraudulently mislead investors  
whereas social security is a government mandate. Of course, this has  
been refuted by many others; see...

http://www.socialsecurity.gov/history/ponzi.htm

http://www.fool.com/retirement/general/2009/07/21/is-social-security-a-giant-ponzi-scheme.aspx

http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/economicsunbound/archives/2008/12/is_social_secur.html

http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/06/news/economy/social.security.fortune/index.htm

I challenge you to take a supportable position that can actually move  
the healthcare debate forward. Again, I believe it is people like you  
that keep legitimate debate from occurring. Shame on you.

-Matt



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Insurance....

2009-12-08 Thread Matt Liotta
And I guess because you know someone from Canada/Britain/France/Spain/ 
etc that swears the healthcare is worse then they make it out to be  
and that the US is where everyone with money goes then it must be  
true. Let's all just ignore study after study that shows every single  
first world country has it better than the US. Sure, I'll believe Cuba  
is hiding the real story. What about the other 30+ countries that have  
better healthcare at a lower GDP cost? Are they lying too?

-Matt

On Dec 8, 2009, at 7:47 PM, os10ru...@gmail.com wrote:

 Sorry guys, I just have to jump in on the Cuban health care thing. I  
 live in Venezuela and we have LOTS of Cuban doctors. I know some  
 personally. I know Venezuelans who have studied in Cuba. It's  
 nothing like they (the Cuban govt) say it is. The numbers are good  
 because it's a closed totalitarian system where one doesn't dare  
 report what is unpopular. Come on guys, you know enough about Cuba.  
 People are clinging to inner tubes and hunks of wood to get away.  
 When I was in the merchant marine we picked up two boat loads of  
 them. Do you guys remember when Russia was still the USSR and on  
 Radio Moscow they had the farm report segment telling about the  
 great excesses of food produced mean while our merchant marine was  
 busying bringing loads of give-away grain to the USSR. Please don'e  
 buy what their state-run media is saying. Anyone see Fahrenheit 911?  
 Remember when Michael Moore arrived at the neighborhood hospital  
 but then they (and their cameras) were quickly directed to
 the other hospital? Wonder why? Because the neighborhood one (and  
 the whole healthcare system for the people) would have been a  
 laughing stock. Instead they were directed to the premier 5 star  
 hospital that is probably for party officials and military higher ups.

 Greg

 On Dec 8, 2009, at 1:43 PM, Robert West wrote:

 Actually, the United States ranks number 37 in the world for the best
 doctors and health care system.  Most Americans are under the  
 impression
 that we are number one in so many things but sadly we are way less  
 than
 number one in most everything.  The best doctors and healthcare  
 system?
 France and Italy.  Cuba actually has a very impressive health  
 system and
 many countries send their doctors there for training.  Again, sad  
 but true.
 Hiding ones head in the sand and ignoring what goes on outside our  
 borders
 is what we've been doing.  I know it's not competition, per se, but  
 it
 should at least be used as a measuring tool.  I'm not under any  
 delusion
 that we or myself are best in anything.  Keeps me moving.

 Bob-

 Is this the Insurance List?This is why politics should be a  
 No-No.
 It's 99% of the list now.

 Bob-




 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless- 
 boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of Brad Belton
 Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 11:48 PM
 To: 'WISPA General List'
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Insurance

 No kidding.  No profits no medical advancements.  Where do people  
 go when
 they seek the best doctors and health system in the world?  America.

 Brad

 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless- 
 boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of Josh Luthman
 Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 8:15 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Insurance

 No, not that simple...

 On 12/7/09, Robert West robert.w...@just-micro.com wrote:
 Exactly.  We are the one and only industrialized country (with  
 whatever
 industry we might have left) who puts profit in healthcare.  As  
 you
 stated, their goal is to NOT pay and they can and do come up with  
 anything
 they can find to do that.

 Profit has no place in healthcare.  Single payer is the only thing  
 I see
 working.  As far as increased taxes to pay for it, we already are  
 paying
 for
 it and getting zero bang for our buck.  As George from the great  
 white
 north
 said, healthcare shows up nowhere in his budget.  They just pay  
 extra in
 taxes.

 Medicare for all.  End of the controversy.  Simple.







 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless- 
 boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of Tom Sharples
 Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 7:24 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Insurance

 One of the basic probems IMO is that the whole idea of medical  
 insurance,
 as

 currentlky implemented, is fundamentally flawed. Consider selling  
 ISP
 services under the model of broadband insurance. Under that  
 model, your
 customer would pay you a certain amount per month in case he needs
 broadband, and you would do your best to find reasons to deny him  
 access.
 Or

 how about housing insurance instead of monthly rent. You pay the
 landlord
 a certain amount every month in case you need shelter and he
 oversubscribes
 a number of his units and hires guards to keep people out on various
 pretexts. Sound completely ridiculous, 

Re: [WISPA] Insurance....

2009-12-08 Thread Matt Liotta

On Dec 8, 2009, at 8:56 PM, os10ru...@gmail.com wrote:

 Matt,

   Chill, you're taking a really harsh tone. I'm talking about Cuba  
 because I know about that. I have many Latino friends. I speak  
 Spanish. I know Cubans and I know a lot of people who have been to  
 Cuba. You're putting words in my mouth. I'm not refuting all those  
 other countries statistics. I thought you wanted debate of the  
 facts. Or do you just want us to sit at your feet and listen?

I do want to debate the facts, but you are responding with anecdotes.  
This is a standard straw-man used throughout the healthcare debate. I  
know person X from country Y that says this or had such and such  
happen to them. Such a statement can be true, but it is meaningless in  
the context of the debate. Such a situation needs to be statistically  
significant to matter. All systems have their flaws as no one believes  
a perfect system exists.

-Matt




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] OSPF Calculations

2009-11-25 Thread Matt Liotta
show ip route

-Matt

On Nov 25, 2009, at 1:47 PM, Scott Reed wrote:

 Does the lack of response mean there is no tool?
 Is this something WISPS would use if it were available?

 Scott Reed wrote:
 Does anyone have a tool you use to help determine OSPF link costs  
 and
 track what you have set for OSPF costs?
 What I would really like is something I can enter the link costs for
 all the paths and then it will show the costs and routes between 2
 selected nodes.




 


 No virus found in this incoming message.
 Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
 Version: 8.5.425 / Virus Database: 270.14.79/2522 - Release Date:  
 11/23/09 19:45:00



 -- 
 Scott Reed
 Sr. Systems Engineer
 GAB Midwest
 1-800-363-1544 x4000
 Cell: 260-273-7239



 
 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] Which WiMAX Are You?

2009-09-13 Thread Matt Liotta
Too many lists just fragment the conversation. Many including myself  
just don't feel like joining a bunch of lists. Ultimately, if WISPA is  
trying to move the value of the lists to just members then they should  
just make the existing list, members only and be done with.

-Matt

On Sep 12, 2009, at 9:52 PM, Chuck Bartosch wrote:

 Ah. I never quite remember that:

 the WISP list is for WISPA members only, while

 the WISPA list is for any WISP.

 Definitely clever naming ;-).   cough

 Still, I wish they'd change that since us not-so-clever people would
 expect the reverse!

 Anyway, I generally support moving some of this onto internal lists,
 but I don't think it makes a lot of sense to divide things up so
 finely that we have frequency-labelled lists.

 Chuck

 On Sep 12, 2009, at 9:15 PM, Rubens Kuhl wrote:

 A members-only list, so if people don't mind to keep it going on this
 list instead of the closed one...


 Rubens


 On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 8:53 PM, Josh Luthman
 j...@imaginenetworksllc.com wrote:
 Heads up thread - Jack made a new list for 3.650 topics  
 specifically.

 On 9/12/09, Chuck Bartosch ch...@clarityconnect.com wrote:
 Tom,

 802.16d implementations can and do support diversity antennas on  
 the
 AUs.

 I don't know the definitive answer to the rest of the question.
 But I
 do know that:

 (1) Clients in 802.16e can and do support diversity

 (2) The clients are supposed to be interoperable

 (3) I know of no clients that support diversity in 802.16d

 So, speculatively, the point might that 802.16e clients support
 diversity and interoperate.

 You pick up at least a few db with client diversity antennas-though
 not nearly enough to make up for the lower power regime you have to
 operate in.

 Chuck



 On Sep 11, 2009, at 7:12 PM, Tom DeReggi wrote:

 Patrick,

 Always great to see your list posts filled with good info.
 Responses
 inline...

 The E standard does enable use of diversity, but it comes at a
 high
 cost
 and is of limited benefit for rural operators. The truth is that
 diversity is designed to increase link budgets to support self-
 install.

 Can you clarify? Are you saying D Spec does not support Diversity?
 Or that most D vendors focusing on price chose not to include
 implementation
 of it?

 Even most Wifi chipsets supports diversity.

 My understanding was D supported diversity, because the early Pre-
 Wimax
 Aperto supported all types of Diversity.
 Please clarify.

 I'd like to add... I'd like to see more FIXED products support
 Diversity at
 the AP.
 Trials have shown that Polarity diversity yielded much better
 results than
 Spacial diversity for NLOS. BUT, that data does not consider
 spectrum
 availabilty and congestion.
 Many Metro deployments can't afford to waste a polarity, with
 limited
 spectrum and lots of noise, and forced to abandon the idea of
 Polarity
 diversity.
 Spacial Diversity at teh AP is an enhancement that can be used
 without any
 trade-off other than Colo fees if can't avoid paying colo per
 antenna.
 Actually in newer MIMO designs Spacial Diversity on its own showed
 signficant improvements in range.
 This could becaome even more important in 3.65 with few channels.

 Basically, each standard has its place, E is for people in 2.5  
 GHz
 doing
 self-install, like Clearwire, and we all know the low service
 (especially low upstream) packages offered in Clearwire's  
 service.
 D is
 better and cheaper for rural fixed operators, and especially for
 public
 safety video type networks and definitely for voice-centric  
 users.
 D is
 better for enterprise, where many users sit behind the CPE. E is
 better
 for roaming individual users with modest expectations.

 I'd agree. And I'd agree D is most appropriate for most WISPs.

 I think the biggest factor in deciding though isn't technology
 specs?
 People want to pick the technology with the longest life span.
 Many WISPs might prefer D, but are afraid D might be discontinued
 sooner,
 since the big dollar might have followed E.
 Just like is happening right now.
 I think the number one factor that will lead WISPs to pick D is
 acknowledgement that Vendors understand and see the long term
 potential and
 MArket for D, so we can be confident about our vendors.
 So far, I think the primary vendors have done a good job showing
 their
 supprot for D.

 The other number 1 barrier to WiMax is price, so once again many
 have chosen
 D for price reasons.
 But that is a fake benefit, because technically there is no reason
 that E
 product couldn't be sold just as Cheap if it came down to it.
 If anything, E has the potential to drop to lower prices, because
 of
 economy
 of scale and diverse use for WiMax chipsets.

 So what I'm saying is... Wimax E is killing themselves by pricing
 their
 products to high. Right now D has the potential to regain its
 market
 share
 because its price advantage.
 However, one good way for E to protect its market share is to try
 and
 influence the 

Re: [WISPA] Which WiMAX Are You?

2009-09-09 Thread Matt Liotta
E is only really useful for mobile and mobile is not supportable with the
current 3650 rules.
-Matt

On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 6:42 PM, Tim Sylvester t...@avanzarnetworks.comwrote:

 I would like to see more vendors support 802.16e at 3.65GHz. Also I would
 like to see 802.16e at 3.65GHz supported in a netbook and a USB dongle.
 Does
 anyone know if the Intel WiMAX chips support 3.65GHz?

 Tim

  -Original Message-
  From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
  Behalf Of Matt Liotta
  Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 3:34 PM
  To: WISPA General List
  Subject: Re: [WISPA] Which WiMAX Are You?
 
  I look forward to seeing everyone at 4G World next week.
  Personally, I don't care for D or E in a fixed deployment, but if you
  nailed
  me down I would go with D. WiMAX tries to be too many things for too
  many
  people. WiMAX-based proprietary systems are far more useful for fixed
  deployments.
 
  -Matt
 
  On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 5:28 PM, Patrick Leary ple...@apertonet.com
  wrote:
 
   The subject question is one Aperto thinks should be asked and now is
  the
   time to ask it. The WiMAX Forum has been beating the 802.16e drum in
  a
   manner trying to chump 802.16d. The fact is, there are two WiMAX
   standards, not one. By the Forum's own words from a 2005 paper it put
   out in November 2005, penned by Monica Paoli of Seza Fila:
  
   The WiMAX Forum is committed to providing optimized solutions for
   fixed, nomadic,
   portable and mobile broadband wireless access. Two versions of WiMAX
   address the
   demand for these different types of access:
   * 802.16-2004 WiMAX. This is based on the 802.16-2004 version of the
   IEEE 802.16
   standard and on ETSI HiperMAN. It uses Orthogonal Frequency Division
   Multiplexing (OFDM) and supports fixed and nomadic access in Line of
   Sight
   (LOS) and Non Line of Sight (NLOS) environments.
   * 802.16e WiMAX. Optimized for dynamic mobile radio channels, this
   version is
   based on the 802.16e amendment and provides support for handoffs and
   roaming.
  
   It is time the Forum own up to their own words, so Aperto is going to
   asking the question at 4G World coming up in Chicago next week. The
  fact
   is, the fixed standard is stable and ideal for what it was designed
  to
   do: deliver fixed (and limited nomadicity) wireless broadband. This
   version of the standard is better, yes better, than the mobile
  version
   for doing metroscale fixed. It provides 13% more capacity per MHz and
   35% or so less latency. It can also be configured for symmetric or
  even
   higher ratio upstream vs. downstream, which is critical for networks
   doing high capacity upstream like video surveillance.
  
   For too long, vendors that now only do the mobile standard have been
   trying to squeeze the round peg of the mobile standard into the
  square
   hole of fixed networks. This has been confusing many, and leading
  some
   to overpay for their networks. Why pay for millions in RD for
  features
   that you can never use, especially in a 3.65 GHz network where mobile
   can't happen? We have seen consultants spec'ing in E for 3.65 GHz,
   thinking they will get interoperability and even PC cards for their
   networks. They also think they can get self-install -- something this
   community knows is not possible in 3.65 GHz due to the power
   restrictions placed on indoor modems. Operators and other would-be
  WiMAX
   deployers are being hoodwinked.
  
   The E standard does enable use of diversity, but it comes at a high
  cost
   and is of limited benefit for rural operators. The truth is that
   diversity is designed to increase link budgets to support self-
  install.
  
   Basically, each standard has its place, E is for people in 2.5 GHz
  doing
   self-install, like Clearwire, and we all know the low service
   (especially low upstream) packages offered in Clearwire's service. D
  is
   better and cheaper for rural fixed operators, and especially for
  public
   safety video type networks and definitely for voice-centric users. D
  is
   better for enterprise, where many users sit behind the CPE. E is
  better
   for roaming individual users with modest expectations.
  
   We'd like to hear your opinions, and if you like to discuss this with
  us
   while at 4G World, please drop me a note.
  
   Regards,
  
   Patrick Leary
   Aperto Networks
  
  
   Patrick Leary
   Aperto Networks
   813.426.4230 mobile
  
  
  
   -
  ---
   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] Which WiMAX Are You?

2009-09-09 Thread Matt Liotta
I didn't state E was not supportable. I stated mobile was not supportable
because of the current rules, which severally limit the power of mobile
devices. Couple that with the poor physics of 3650 and the limited power
available at the base stations to compensate; mobile will never work.
-Matt

On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 6:52 PM, Tim Sylvester t...@avanzarnetworks.comwrote:

 What part of the 3650 rules make E not supportable?

 Tim

  -Original Message-
  From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
  Behalf Of Matt Liotta
  Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 3:47 PM
  To: WISPA General List
  Subject: Re: [WISPA] Which WiMAX Are You?
 
  E is only really useful for mobile and mobile is not supportable with
  the
  current 3650 rules.
  -Matt
 
  On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 6:42 PM, Tim Sylvester
  t...@avanzarnetworks.comwrote:
 
   I would like to see more vendors support 802.16e at 3.65GHz. Also I
  would
   like to see 802.16e at 3.65GHz supported in a netbook and a USB
  dongle.
   Does
   anyone know if the Intel WiMAX chips support 3.65GHz?
  
   Tim
  
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-
  boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Matt Liotta
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 3:34 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Which WiMAX Are You?
   
I look forward to seeing everyone at 4G World next week.
Personally, I don't care for D or E in a fixed deployment, but if
  you
nailed
me down I would go with D. WiMAX tries to be too many things for
  too
many
people. WiMAX-based proprietary systems are far more useful for
  fixed
deployments.
   
-Matt
   
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 5:28 PM, Patrick Leary
  ple...@apertonet.com
wrote:
   
 The subject question is one Aperto thinks should be asked and now
  is
the
 time to ask it. The WiMAX Forum has been beating the 802.16e drum
  in
a
 manner trying to chump 802.16d. The fact is, there are two WiMAX
 standards, not one. By the Forum's own words from a 2005 paper it
  put
 out in November 2005, penned by Monica Paoli of Seza Fila:

 The WiMAX Forum is committed to providing optimized solutions
  for
 fixed, nomadic,
 portable and mobile broadband wireless access. Two versions of
  WiMAX
 address the
 demand for these different types of access:
 * 802.16-2004 WiMAX. This is based on the 802.16-2004 version of
  the
 IEEE 802.16
 standard and on ETSI HiperMAN. It uses Orthogonal Frequency
  Division
 Multiplexing (OFDM) and supports fixed and nomadic access in Line
  of
 Sight
 (LOS) and Non Line of Sight (NLOS) environments.
 * 802.16e WiMAX. Optimized for dynamic mobile radio channels,
  this
 version is
 based on the 802.16e amendment and provides support for handoffs
  and
 roaming.

 It is time the Forum own up to their own words, so Aperto is
  going to
 asking the question at 4G World coming up in Chicago next week.
  The
fact
 is, the fixed standard is stable and ideal for what it was
  designed
to
 do: deliver fixed (and limited nomadicity) wireless broadband.
  This
 version of the standard is better, yes better, than the mobile
version
 for doing metroscale fixed. It provides 13% more capacity per MHz
  and
 35% or so less latency. It can also be configured for symmetric
  or
even
 higher ratio upstream vs. downstream, which is critical for
  networks
 doing high capacity upstream like video surveillance.

 For too long, vendors that now only do the mobile standard have
  been
 trying to squeeze the round peg of the mobile standard into the
square
 hole of fixed networks. This has been confusing many, and leading
some
 to overpay for their networks. Why pay for millions in RD for
features
 that you can never use, especially in a 3.65 GHz network where
  mobile
 can't happen? We have seen consultants spec'ing in E for 3.65
  GHz,
 thinking they will get interoperability and even PC cards for
  their
 networks. They also think they can get self-install -- something
  this
 community knows is not possible in 3.65 GHz due to the power
 restrictions placed on indoor modems. Operators and other would-
  be
WiMAX
 deployers are being hoodwinked.

 The E standard does enable use of diversity, but it comes at a
  high
cost
 and is of limited benefit for rural operators. The truth is that
 diversity is designed to increase link budgets to support self-
install.

 Basically, each standard has its place, E is for people in 2.5
  GHz
doing
 self-install, like Clearwire, and we all know the low service
 (especially low upstream) packages offered in Clearwire's
  service. D
is
 better and cheaper for rural fixed operators, and especially for
public
 safety video type

Re: [WISPA] Grant

2009-08-12 Thread Matt Liotta
My two cents is that BIP/BTOP is going to be great for vendors and  
terrible for WISPs. The vendors don't care who gets awarded the money  
as long as they sell gear.

-Matt

On Aug 12, 2009, at 3:39 PM, Blake Bowers wrote:

 Just an observation.

 Lots of companies are asking for letters of support from
 public safety agencies.  As Chief of my Fire Department, I have
 gotten a number of requests in the past week.

 The really interesting ones are the ones that

 A.  Show no benefit to public safety other than they say
 broadband will be more available and cheaper.

 b.  Come from companies that are my normal vendors in
 my business, that are branching out.  Now, instead of selling
 me product so I can make money, they are going to put up
 their own, so they can compete with me in the leasing world,
 while they also provide broadband.

 Hmmm
 Don't take your organs to heaven,
 heaven knows we need them down here!
 Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today.



 
 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 Awarded Approximately $2.8 Million Grant Fromthe California Advanced Services Fund (CASF)

2009-07-17 Thread Matt Liotta

On Jul 17, 2009, at 11:09 AM, Tom DeReggi wrote:

 Clearly a victory that some government bodies are recognizing WISP  
 provers.
 (Even if they are a publically traded company :-)

Just to clarify... We partnered with a local operator named Mother  
Lode Internet. The local operator will focus on last mile, while we  
focus on backhaul and backend operations. Since we are already a  
regulated telecommunications provider in all 48 states, use GAAP, and  
have regular audits, we are well positioned to work with the government.

 advanced broadband services to five counties in Northern California

 Do you mind sharing what 5 counties RapidLink will be serving?

Alpine, Calaveras, Amador, Mariposa, Tuolumne

-Matt



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale

2009-07-17 Thread Matt Liotta
Revenue matters a lot less now. Earnings-based deals are what are  
being done now. Of course, many WISPs are spending all of their  
earnings on CAPEX. This is where capitalized leases play such a  
critical role.

-Matt

On Jul 17, 2009, at 3:57 PM, Travis Johnson wrote:

 3x gross annual was a very nice number... but not realistic any  
 longer.

 1.5x is the last number I heard for an actual sale that went through.

 Travis


 Josh Luthman wrote:

 One way I have heard it done:

 Take the annual gross revenue, times it by 3 (three years gross  
 revenue) and
 that's the buy out cost starting point.  Seen this more so with  
 telecom
 (voice) then data services, but it's a place to start.

 Josh Luthman
 Office: 937-552-2340
 Direct: 937-552-2343
 1100 Wayne St
 Suite 1337
 Troy, OH 45373

 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however
 improbable, must be the truth.
 --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle


 On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 3:21 PM, Patrick D. Nix, Jr 
 pni...@cnetworksolutions.com wrote:


 I apologize as I know this has been discussed on the list before.   
 We
 are entertaining the idea of selling out of our respectable size
 wireless ISP business in eastern Oklahoma.  We have about 500  
 (growing
 daily) subscribers.  Anyway, we are working on determining the net  
 worth
 of the business.  Any thoughts or formulas for determining this?



 Patrick Nix, Jr.,
 Computer Network Solutions
 CSWEB.NET Internet Services
 IT Manager

 http://www.cnetworksolutions.com
 http://www.csweb.net

 (918) 235-0414



 

 Attention: This e-mail and any attachments may contain  
 confidential and
 privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient,  
 please
 notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail  
 and
 destroy any copies. Any dissemination or use of this information  
 by a
 person other than the intended recipient is unauthorized and may be
 illegal.






 
 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] Question re: WISP for sale

2009-07-17 Thread Matt Liotta
So it would seem, but that is not the case. There are plenty of  
companies looking to acquire operators right now that are EBITDA  
positive. Unfortunately, too many operators that would normally be  
interested in a deal are hoping for a windfall thanks to ARRA. This  
means that the supply of available companies is low.

I think I am going to be stuck buying companies not interested in ARRA.

-Matt

On Jul 17, 2009, at 5:02 PM, Tom DeReggi wrote:

 I'd point out that the best time to get a high valuation in a rural  
 area is
 not likely going to be at the launch of a $7billion dollar grant  
 program.
 Why buy other's outdated equipment when you can get the brand new  
 state of
 the art for FREE?  You are probably going to have to rely more on  
 cash
 flow related methods of valuation.

 Instead, you might want to look at your finances, and see if your  
 network
 could be leveraged to be combined with another's RUS loan/grant.
 For example, if the assets could be leveraged to make expanding from  
 it more
 cost effective. Because then your value might be higher based on the
 additional grants that are enabled because your infrastructure helps  
 qualify
 it.

 Tom DeReggi
 RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
 IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


 - Original Message -
 From: Patrick D. Nix, Jr pni...@cnetworksolutions.com
 To: wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 3:21 PM
 Subject: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale


 I apologize as I know this has been discussed on the list before.  We
 are entertaining the idea of selling out of our respectable size
 wireless ISP business in eastern Oklahoma.  We have about 500  
 (growing
 daily) subscribers.  Anyway, we are working on determining the net  
 worth
 of the business.  Any thoughts or formulas for determining this?



 Patrick Nix, Jr.,
 Computer Network Solutions
 CSWEB.NET Internet Services
 IT Manager

 http://www.cnetworksolutions.com
 http://www.csweb.net

 (918) 235-0414



 

 Attention: This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential  
 and
 privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please
 notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail  
 and
 destroy any copies. Any dissemination or use of this information by a
 person other than the intended recipient is unauthorized and may be
 illegal.





 
 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] Rapid Link Awarded Approximately $2.8 Million Grant Fromthe California Advanced Services Fund (CASF)

2009-07-17 Thread Matt Liotta

On Jul 17, 2009, at 9:09 PM, Chuck Bartosch wrote:

 Isn't Ben a WISPA member? I thought he'd told me two ISPCons ago he
 was going to join...

Not that I am aware.

-Matt





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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


[WISPA] Rapid Link Awarded Approximately $2.8 Million Grant From the California Advanced Services Fund (CASF)

2009-07-16 Thread Matt Liotta
CASF Funding to Accelerate Broadband Services Delivery to Five Counties

Company to Seek Additional Funding Through ARRA Broadband Stimulus  
Programs

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Rapid-Link-Awarded-iw-2628732805.html?x=0.v=1

-Matt



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] ntop

2009-07-10 Thread Matt Liotta
Just to follow up, IP SLA via SNMP gets me most of the way there. For  
Netflow I am having to write a Java daemon, but I am having some  
initial success. Looks like a couple more days of programming and I  
will be there. I did find that not every Cisco supports IP SLA.  
Luckily, every voice customer of ours has a Cisco that does.

-Matt

On Jul 8, 2009, at 11:55 AM, Matt Liotta wrote:

 Good call... I forgot all about IP SLA. We can easily query that via
 SNMP.

 -Matt

 On Jul 8, 2009, at 11:35 AM, Rutis, Cameron wrote:

 I haven't worked with it yet but cisco's IP SLA feature can generate
 a MOS score
 http://www.cisco.com/en/US/technologies/tk648/tk362/tk920/technologies_white_paper0900aecd801752ec.html


 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
 On Behalf Of Matt Liotta
 Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 4:29 AM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] ntop


 On Jun 29, 2009, at 7:02 PM, Jeff Broadwick wrote:

 Matt,

 Are you looking for specific specs like latency and jitter?

 I was hoping for something better. I can get latency and jitter
 information at layer3 from our Ciscos as well as latency and jitter  
 of
 RTP itself from our soft switches. However, it is hard to correlate
 that into something high level and useful. Clearly thresholding
 latency and jitter is useful, but assuming neither are too high how
 does one know about the quality of a call. A MOS score would be more
 ideal.

 -Matt



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

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


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

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



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

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] ntop

2009-07-08 Thread Matt Liotta
Good call... I forgot all about IP SLA. We can easily query that via  
SNMP.

-Matt

On Jul 8, 2009, at 11:35 AM, Rutis, Cameron wrote:

 I haven't worked with it yet but cisco's IP SLA feature can generate  
 a MOS score
 http://www.cisco.com/en/US/technologies/tk648/tk362/tk920/technologies_white_paper0900aecd801752ec.html


 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]  
 On Behalf Of Matt Liotta
 Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 4:29 AM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] ntop


 On Jun 29, 2009, at 7:02 PM, Jeff Broadwick wrote:

 Matt,

 Are you looking for specific specs like latency and jitter?

 I was hoping for something better. I can get latency and jitter
 information at layer3 from our Ciscos as well as latency and jitter of
 RTP itself from our soft switches. However, it is hard to correlate
 that into something high level and useful. Clearly thresholding
 latency and jitter is useful, but assuming neither are too high how
 does one know about the quality of a call. A MOS score would be more
 ideal.

 -Matt



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

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


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

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] ntop

2009-06-30 Thread Matt Liotta

On Jun 29, 2009, at 7:02 PM, Jeff Broadwick wrote:

 Matt,

 Are you looking for specific specs like latency and jitter?

I was hoping for something better. I can get latency and jitter  
information at layer3 from our Ciscos as well as latency and jitter of  
RTP itself from our soft switches. However, it is hard to correlate  
that into something high level and useful. Clearly thresholding  
latency and jitter is useful, but assuming neither are too high how  
does one know about the quality of a call. A MOS score would be more  
ideal.

-Matt




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


[WISPA] ntop

2009-06-29 Thread Matt Liotta
Anyone have any experience with ntop? Specially, with analysis of  
netflow and voip.

-Matt



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] ntop

2009-06-29 Thread Matt Liotta
I am looking for something more historical and high level.

-Matt

On Jun 29, 2009, at 11:06 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:

 I prefer analyzing with Wireshark, as it is much easier and has a  
 lot of
 tools.

 Josh Luthman
 Office: 937-552-2340
 Direct: 937-552-2343
 1100 Wayne St
 Suite 1337
 Troy, OH 45373

 When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however
 improbable, must be the truth.
 --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle


 On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 11:01 AM, Matt Liotta mlio...@r337.com  
 wrote:

 Anyone have any experience with ntop? Specially, with analysis of
 netflow and voip.

 -Matt



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

 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



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

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] ntop

2009-06-29 Thread Matt Liotta

On Jun 29, 2009, at 11:21 AM, Jeremy Parr wrote:

 Do you have any specific questions? Yes, it can identify most VoIP
 traffic, and yes, it can take a netflow feed.

I am looking for a few things. One is to be able to track utilization  
on a per AS basis both in realtime and over time. We have an appliance  
that can do this now, but I am not overly happy with the information I  
can get out of it. Regarding VoIP, I'd like to capture quality metrics  
in realtime and over time. Further, if ntop can perform these tasks -- 
which I understand it can-- then I am looking for feedback on how well  
it does in this regard.

-Matt



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] 3.65GHz Exclusion Zone

2009-06-18 Thread Matt Liotta
150km radius

-Matt

On Jun 18, 2009, at 11:01 AM, 3-dB Networks wrote:

 Okay I'm banging my head against the wall a bit this morning J



 Subpart Z of the FCC Part 90 Rules - Wireless Broadband Serices in the
 3650-3700 MHz Band - Section 90.1331 states:



 (a)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (a)(2) of this section, base  
 and
 fixed stations may not be located within 150 km of any grandfathered
 satellite earth station operating in the 3650-3700 MHz band. The  
 coordinates
 of these stations are available at http://www.fcc.gov/ib/sd/3650;



 My interpretation of that rule would mean that you need to draw a  
 circle of
 a radius of 150Km from each station, and this is your exclusion zone.



 Yet many maps on the web show this 150Km requirement as diameter.  
 not as a
 radius.



 Our office would be outside of the exclusion zone if it is a diameter
 requirement, yet inside the exclusion zone if it is a radius  
 requirement.



 Can anyone point me to something from the FCC that specifies what the
 requirement is?



 Thank you,



 Daniel White

 3-dB Networks

 http://www.3dbnetworks.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] 3.65GHz Exclusion Zone

2009-06-18 Thread Matt Liotta
The appendix calculations are only an example. Earth stations are not  
required to follow them for determining interference. IMHO, keyhole  
calculations coupled with standard interference calculations a la part  
101 PCN is a superior methodology.

-Matt

On Jun 18, 2009, at 1:28 PM, Charles Wyble wrote:

 BTW the calculations in the RO appendix have errors. I have a  
 corrected
 version provided to me by the FCC OET. If there is interest I can post
 it online and send the link.

 Matt Liotta wrote:
 150km radius

 -Matt

 On Jun 18, 2009, at 11:01 AM, 3-dB Networks wrote:

 Okay I'm banging my head against the wall a bit this morning J



 Subpart Z of the FCC Part 90 Rules - Wireless Broadband Serices in  
 the
 3650-3700 MHz Band - Section 90.1331 states:



 (a)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (a)(2) of this section, base
 and
 fixed stations may not be located within 150 km of any grandfathered
 satellite earth station operating in the 3650-3700 MHz band. The
 coordinates
 of these stations are available at http://www.fcc.gov/ib/sd/3650;



 My interpretation of that rule would mean that you need to draw a
 circle of
 a radius of 150Km from each station, and this is your exclusion  
 zone.



 Yet many maps on the web show this 150Km requirement as diameter.
 not as a
 radius.



 Our office would be outside of the exclusion zone if it is a  
 diameter
 requirement, yet inside the exclusion zone if it is a radius
 requirement.



 Can anyone point me to something from the FCC that specifies what  
 the
 requirement is?



 Thank you,



 Daniel White

 3-dB Networks

 http://www.3dbnetworks.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] OSPF and BGP for Internal Network

2009-06-14 Thread Matt Liotta
More importantly OSPF or most IGPs for that matter can only get so  
large before their performance becomes an issue. BGP doesn't have  
these scalability issues. Therefore, large networks run OSPF or ISIS  
for select parts of their network and then aggregate the parts behind  
BGP.

-Matt

On Jun 14, 2009, at 1:07 AM, Charles Wu wrote:

 Dynamic route redistribution if your network is sufficiently complex  
 and you have customers that you are servicing bgp to that you want  
 to protect from intra-network failure

 -Charles

 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]  
 On Behalf Of Gino Villarini
 Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2009 2:50 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: [WISPA] OSPF and BGP for Internal Network

 What are the bennefits of running both protocols in the internal
 network?


 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/


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

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Need BGP Support ASAP

2009-06-09 Thread Matt Liotta

On Jun 9, 2009, at 3:02 PM, David wrote:

 You prepend the link you want to disfavor.  The more you prepend the  
 longer
 a route will look.

Assuming your upstream didn't increase your local preference, which is  
normally the case these days. AS prepending is no longer the ideal  
methodology for traffic engineering.

-Matt




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Need BGP Support ASAP

2009-06-09 Thread Matt Liotta
If you provide the prefixes in question it would be easier. You may  
want to have your customer check with their other upstreams to see  
what communities they support. BGP communities that adjust local  
preference are preferred over prepending. See http://www.onesc.net/communities/ 
  for a listing for a number of providers.

-Matt

On Jun 9, 2009, at 3:09 PM, Gino Villarini wrote:

 Exactly,

 The problem is not for own ip space, its for a downstream customer ips
 space,  they have several providers and want to favor our link for  
 some
 ip ranges.  They are prepending such ranges to the other providers to
 favor our link.


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

 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]  
 On
 Behalf Of David
 Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 3:02 PM
 To: 'WISPA General List'
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Need BGP Support ASAP

 You prepend the link you want to disfavor.  The more you prepend the
 longer a route will look.

 David

 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
 On Behalf Of Gino Villarini
 Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 12:57 PM
 To: WISPA General List; can...@believewireless.net
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Need BGP Support ASAP

 Should I not prepend to favor our link?


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

 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
 On Behalf Of Michael Baird
 Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 2:52 PM
 To: can...@believewireless.net; WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Need BGP Support ASAP

 You mean prepending AS numbers, not routes. Prepending will also
 lengthen the the calculation, so if they are prepending to you, this
 would the route through your link less favorable to the outside  
 world.

 Are you seeing the prepend coming from their routers? On a cisco it
 would be show ip neighbor ipaddress received-routes, if you are
 seeing the prepend from them, check and see if you are forwarding  
 them

 on to your upstream show ip neighbor ipaddress of upstream  
 interface

 advertised-routes. If you see these in both places, it's most likely
 your upstream not allowing the prepend.

 Regards
 Michael Baird
 Did you notify your upstream that you be advertising your customers
 routes?

 On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Jeff Broadwickjeffl...@comcast.net
 wrote:

 I recommend Tony Mattke for dynamic routing work.

 t...@mattke.net

 Regards,

 Jeff

 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org
 [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
 On Behalf Of Gino Villarini
 Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 2:22 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: [WISPA] Need BGP Support ASAP

 Anyone available for some BGP support?

 Im providing Internet service to another ISP, they are prepending
 some routes to favor our link, still my router doesnt acknoledge it


 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/



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

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




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

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




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

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


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

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

2009-06-03 Thread Matt Liotta
There is only one PA that can support GigE, which is the PA-GE.  
Unfortunately, the slot can't support the full capacity of the  
interface. Depending on what engine you have you will not likely  
exceed 200Mbps with that interface. The only way to really handle GigE  
with a 7200 is to get at least an NPE-G1, which has GigE interfaces on  
board. The NPE-G2 also has GigE interfaces on board.

-Matt

On Jun 3, 2009, at 1:57 PM, Matt Jenkins wrote:

 I have a 7204VXR router as my core. I am looking at upgrading from a
 100mb ethernet to a gigE. I am having a really hard time find out  
 how I
 can add gigabit ethernet (via RJ-45 connectors) to this router. I have
 two spare slots of expansion cards but I cannot find a card that does
 gig. Can anyone point me in the right direction?

 Thanks,

 - Matt


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

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


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

2009-06-03 Thread Matt Liotta
A lot less than you would think. We run Cisco for our entire network.  
Costs have come way down on new equipment and there is a ton of used  
equipment for pennies on dollar.

-Matt

On Jun 3, 2009, at 2:10 PM, Kevin Neal wrote:

 I've found Cisco ports are more expensive than a Mikrotik distribution
 router.  We currently have a Cisco handling BGP and upstream  
 connections,
 then we distribute it using a switch to multiple Mikrotik boxes that
 distribute and route(OSPF) to our various backhauls.  I'd cringe to  
 think
 what it would cost for us to run all of our radios at our NOC into a  
 cisco.
 -Kevin


 On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 12:05 PM, Matt Jenkins m...@smarterbroadband.net 
 wrote:

 Even if I go to a NPE-G1 or G2 I still need a total of 5 ports.

 1 for inbound connection.
 2 for outbound to radios that serve different towers
 1 for local network of servers etc.
 1 for colo customer.

 How do I add those other two ports?


 Randy Cosby wrote:
 Which NPE are you using?

 Randy

 Matt Jenkins wrote:
 I have a 7204VXR router as my core. I am looking at upgrading  
 from a
 100mb ethernet to a gigE. I am having a really hard time find out  
 how I
 can add gigabit ethernet (via RJ-45 connectors) to this router. I  
 have
 two spare slots of expansion cards but I cannot find a card that  
 does
 gig. Can anyone point me in the right direction?

 Thanks,

 - Matt



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

 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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





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

 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



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

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


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

2009-06-03 Thread Matt Liotta

On Jun 3, 2009, at 3:49 PM, David E. Smith wrote:

 Did Cisco ever come to their senses on IOS licensing? Used to be, the
 software on a Cisco router was licensed to an entity separate from the
 purchase of the hardware. Thus, if you bought a router used, its
 (already-installed) copy of IOS was unlicensed and you'd have to buy a
 new software license to use the router.

That is FUD from competing vendors.

-Matt




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


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

2009-06-03 Thread Matt Liotta
That was worthless... don't take your word, take some some blogger's  
word.

-Matt

On Jun 3, 2009, at 4:03 PM, Jeff Broadwick wrote:

 It's not FUD Matt.  It's real.  I have a pricelist from them with  
 the fees
 required to relicense gear...might as well buy the new ones.  Don't  
 take my
 word:

 http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/14756

 Jeff
 ImageStream

 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]  
 On
 Behalf Of Matt Liotta
 Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2009 3:53 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] OT: Cisco 7200 Gigabit Ethernet Cards?


 On Jun 3, 2009, at 3:49 PM, David E. Smith wrote:

 Did Cisco ever come to their senses on IOS licensing? Used to be, the
 software on a Cisco router was licensed to an entity separate from  
 the
 purchase of the hardware. Thus, if you bought a router used, its
 (already-installed) copy of IOS was unlicensed and you'd have to  
 buy a
 new software license to use the router.

 That is FUD from competing vendors.

 -Matt



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

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



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

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


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

2009-06-03 Thread Matt Liotta
 From your own article reference...

Legal experts have varied opinions on the enforceability of some  
transfer restrictions, but they agree on one point: If anyone is to be  
found guilty of violating the software license, it would be the  
original purchaser who resold the equipment. The first buyer, after  
all, is the one who had a chance to see the license agreement and know  
about the software transfer restriction.

Think about it... if the FUD was correct then leasing Cisco hardware  
would not work. This is because title to the hardware is in the hands  
of the leaser and is generally transfered at the end with a buy out.  
The amount of leased Cisco hardware is astounding.

-Matt

On Jun 3, 2009, at 4:09 PM, David E. Smith wrote:

 Matt Liotta wrote:
 Did Cisco ever come to their senses on IOS licensing?

 That is FUD from competing vendors.

 http://www.infoworld.com/t/hardware/hidden-cost-hardware-729

 This is six years old - but that's kinda my point. At least in the  
 past,
 Cisco was insistent on relicensing IOS fees, which were sold  
 separately
 from SmartNet support contracts.

 Cisco itself still seems to think this is the case:
 http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/iosswrel/prod_gen_ios_licensing.html
 Do not transfer Cisco IOS software licenses from one company to  
 another
 except in special circumstances, such as company mergers.

 And the license itself:
 http://www.cisco.com/public/sw-license-agreement.html
 uses the word nontransferable in a couple places, though that  
 could be
 boilerplate.

 I'd love to be wrong on this, so if you've got documentation  
 supporting
 your assertion that IOS licenses are attached to hardware (and thus  
 can
 be transferred with the hardware itself), please post it.


 David Smith
 MVN.net


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

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


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

2009-06-03 Thread Matt Liotta

On Jun 3, 2009, at 4:29 PM, Jeff Broadwick wrote:

 Matt,

 That was just the first article I found.  There are plenty of  
 others.  When
 this first came out, I was on the ISP-Equipment List and it was a huge
 subject of conversation.  Many of the resellers of used Cisco gear  
 put a
 note on their front web pages that software relicensing is the
 responsibility of the buyer.  Cisco was clearly trying to get rid  
 of the
 used market at that time.

 I have a Cisco pricelist with the relicense fees.

I am sure you do. The question is who is subject to them and in what  
case do they apply. I doubt you will provide answers.

-Matt





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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


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

2009-06-03 Thread Matt Liotta
That is a policy statement. It is not legal fact.

-Matt

On Jun 3, 2009, at 4:31 PM, Jeff Broadwick wrote:

 From Cisco's own website:

 Policy:
 Cisco's current policy is that Software is not transferable without  
 Cisco's
 prior written consent and payment of any license fee (License Fee)  
 unless
 one of the exceptions below in the Exceptions section applies.  
 Regardless
 of whether a License Fee is payable under this Policy, the  
 transferee may be
 required to pay Service inspection or reinstatement fees in  
 accordance with
 Cisco policies located here.

 http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/cisco_software_transfer_relicensing_policy.h
 tml

 Jeff
 ImageStream

 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]  
 On
 Behalf Of Matt Liotta
 Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2009 4:20 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] OT: Cisco 7200 Gigabit Ethernet Cards?

 That was worthless... don't take your word, take some some blogger's  
 word.

 -Matt

 On Jun 3, 2009, at 4:03 PM, Jeff Broadwick wrote:

 It's not FUD Matt.  It's real.  I have a pricelist from them with the
 fees required to relicense gear...might as well buy the new ones.
 Don't take my
 word:

 http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/14756

 Jeff
 ImageStream

 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
 On
 Behalf Of Matt Liotta
 Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2009 3:53 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] OT: Cisco 7200 Gigabit Ethernet Cards?


 On Jun 3, 2009, at 3:49 PM, David E. Smith wrote:

 Did Cisco ever come to their senses on IOS licensing? Used to be,  
 the
 software on a Cisco router was licensed to an entity separate from
 the
 purchase of the hardware. Thus, if you bought a router used, its
 (already-installed) copy of IOS was unlicensed and you'd have to
 buy a
 new software license to use the router.

 That is FUD from competing vendors.

 -Matt




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

 
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




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

 
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



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

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



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

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


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

2009-06-03 Thread Matt Liotta

On Jun 3, 2009, at 4:44 PM, Jeff Broadwick wrote:

 Also, your opinion on this subject seems to have changed.  This is  
 from your
 post on 3-18-2008.  The first part is David Smith's question to you:

How so? The IOS software issue continues to be complicated, which was  
my original point. Meanwhile, competing vendors like yourself continue  
to spread FUD.

-Matt




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Cisco IOS licensing policies (was: Cisco 7200 Gigabit Ethernet cards)

2009-06-03 Thread Matt Liotta

On Jun 3, 2009, at 6:26 PM, David E. Smith wrote:

 So you actually don't have any documentation that resale of Cisco gear
 transfer the IOS license, thus making the gear usable (in Cisco's  
 eyes)
 to the second-hand buyer. Gotcha.

Do you have any actual documentation where Cisco successfully sued the  
parties involved in a resale? Gotcha

 While I believe they'd be in the legal right to start shutting down  
 eBay
 auctions and resale businesses, they know it'd be a PR nightmare.

What gives you that belief? What legal concept would allow for such a  
thing?

 Cisco likely turns a blind eye to this sort of thing for the same  
 reason
 many software companies are somewhat ambivalent about the rampant  
 piracy
 of their software. They don't lose that much in real sales (John Q.
 Highschooler wasn't about to spend $1000 on Photoshop anyway), and  
 if he
 has a talent for art and gets a Real Job, it's very likely his  
 employer
 will insist on using properly-licensed software instead of that  
 pirated
 copy that came with a keygen and a bonus Trojan.

Cisco doesn't turn a blind eye at all. They don't want a grey market  
for their gear. They have written a license, created a policy, and  
have put forth various efforts to convince people against the resell  
of their product. The fact that millions of dollars worth of Cisco  
resale goes on tells how ineffective these techniques are. Of course,  
the best part is that their policy's biggest advocates are their  
competitors. Too often these competitors find their new products  
priced similar to used Cisco products. And the used Cisco product  
still wins! Not on merit or anything, but Cisco owns the majority of  
the market and they control the majority of the labor pool who makes  
product decisions.

Anyway... I don't stand to benefit by scaring people away from Cisco.  
I am also not stuck using non-Cisco gear in my network where I feel  
some need to attack Cisco. Cisco gear may not be the best on the  
market in a very category, but it is hard to argue the gear isn't good  
and effective. It is also hard to reconcile the fact that there is a  
huge labor pool of Cisco trained and experienced professionals. Any  
successful business knows that people are the hardest part when one  
tries to scale a business. Picking Cisco makes that easier.

Now on to the actual argument. Can Cisco sell a piece of hardware with  
included software required to run it, force the owner of the hardware  
to accept a license in order to use it and subsequently tie a future  
owner of the hardware that acquires it from the original owner to the  
terms of the license? No. The license is simply unenforceable. There  
is a ton of case law to support this and Cisco knows it. Further,  
their suggestion that they have these rights, but thus far have failed  
to enforce them only furthers their inability to enforce the license  
terms.

Does that mean you can move software images from device to device  
without a license? No. Does that mean you can buy some router and  
install any software you want on it without a license? No.

-Matt



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Broadband Stimulus Allocations?

2009-05-25 Thread Matt Liotta
At the end of the day, the agencies giving out the money have to give  
out a lot of money in a very short period of time. To achieve this  
they plan on dividing up the allocations across a variety of other  
entities for help as well as allocating large sums to individual  
companies. This means applications for small amounts of money just  
aren't going to be considered. Of course the flip side is that  
organizations submitting applications for larger amounts than they can  
actual handle are going to be denied as well. In other words, this  
whole process is self-selecting for large companies with resources.

Now then... what do you need to be able to show to have any chance?  
Your application needs to be for a large amount of money say at least  
$25MM. Your company needs to have previously been awarded a grant for  
a broadband project. You need to have matching funds lined up ahead of  
time that cover not only the requirements of the grant, but also your  
overhead costs associated with ramping up to do the project. This is  
because you need to hire people to implement the project or it won't  
be shovel ready.

Once you have the above then you will be just another application  
worthy of consideration. If you want to get to the top of the pile  
then you are going to need recommendations from your PUC/PSC, and/or  
congressman, and/or governor.

Also, should you be submitting applications to RUS that plan on  
utilizing 3650, remember that Adelstein was a major proponent of  
3650's hybrid licensing model. Do you have a large 3650 deployment? Is  
it compliant with the rules?

-Matt

On May 25, 2009, at 9:01 AM, 3-dB Networks wrote:

 Charles is right 100%, and he is being as proactive as any VAR  
 (including DR
 and ourselves... Charles did a WiNOG on this not to long ago) trying  
 to
 figure the mess out so you can get the money (hopefully you'll spend  
 it with
 us right!).

 Here is what I know (and I've done more research and had more  
 conversations
 than I think I cared to):

 - No one knows where the money is going to go or who is going to get  
 it.
 Some people think the States are going to get all the money, others  
 that
 Fiber will get all of the money, Telco's will get it, only people  
 that have
 received RUS funding in the past will get it, etc.  No one has a  
 clear idea
 of where the money is going, so it's hard to say what anyone can do  
 to help
 you get the money except give you an idea of what the RUS process is  
 like.

 - Realistically, the only (and best) thing WISPA can do is provide a  
 forum
 for people to discuss what they are doing to get the money, and  
 WISPA can
 help lobby the government to get the money into our hands.  I wouldn't
 expect WISPA to provide a grant in a box widget :-)

 - Many people are arguing already that if you haven't already filed
 paperwork, you're not going to get any money.  It's amazing how many  
 people
 have already put in RUS applications to get this money, before the  
 rules on
 who is going to get it has been defined!

 - There are a 1,000 people now that think they are going to get a  
 million
 dollars from the Government to start a WISP... I'm afraid they are  
 going to
 crash and burn Metricom style.  So while an incumbent might be the  
 better
 choice to get the money, the packages newcomers are putting together  
 are
 pretty impressive.  But I digress... because...

 - Personally, I'm going to be surprised if the WISP industry gets  
 even 10%
 of the money... the sad thing being we can do much more with it than  
 the
 people that probably will get it.

 Anyways, I wouldn't expect any reseller/distributor/trade  
 organization to
 give you the secret sauce on how to get that money.  Sure we are all  
 doing
 research to try to help people get money, but it doesn't mean they  
 will be
 right (I've seen some pretty interesting ideas on who/how people are  
 going
 to get money... some that I've wanted to laugh at).  So I would start
 looking at filling out some of the RUS paperwork, and gathering as  
 much
 information as you can.  In the long run, if you want the money,  
 YOUR going
 to have to go get it... everyone else can help though :-)

 Daniel White
 3-dB Networks
 http://www.3dbnetworks.com


 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless- 
 boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of Charles Wu
 Sent: Sunday, May 24, 2009 10:46 PM
 To: sarn...@info-ed.com; WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Broadband Stimulus Allocations?

 Hi Scott,

 What has WISPA came up with to help WISP's get in on the broadband
 stimulus package? Throw me some bait? As I promised before, my
 membership fees(after tax season) are sitting here... give me  
 something
 to bite. Not being an A**, but I belonged to one place(not WISPA),  
 but
 didn't get much out of it.

 I did receive an invitation from Double Radius to help me get in on
 this. Just wanting to know if WISPA got anything going on, 

Re: [WISPA] Service Limits

2009-05-21 Thread Matt Liotta
: [WISPA] Service Limits

 Care to explain how that is illegal?

 Tom DeReggi
 RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
 IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


 - Original Message -
 From: Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 12:51 AM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Service Limits


 Actually, there was a law passed a couple years ago that prevented  
 this
 very
 thing.  They cannot stop Verizon, Comcast, Time Warner, Level 3,  
 or Joe's
 Crab Shack Internet Service from installing cables from outside into
 their
 suite.  They can make it costly and they can make it a PITA, but  
 they
 must
 allow their installation.

 The flip side of this issue is property own only allowing Bob's  
 Telecom,
 which is excessively priced because Bob and Jim (your landlord) are
 brothers.  That is illegal.  Same situation as we're talking about  
 here.


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



 --
 From: Brad Belton b...@belwave.com
 Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2009 9:11 PM
 To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Service Limits

 Hello Mike,

 Have to step in here and disagree.  Private property.  If they  
 don't
 want
 you they can keep you out one way or another.  This may not sit  
 well
 with
 some, but it is the proper thing to do.  The market will always  
 sort
 these
 type of issues out themselves without third party or government
 intervention.

 This is no different than comparing any property amenity.   
 Property A
 has
 XYZ vs. Property B doesn't.  Some will find the XYZ amenity  
 important
 and
 opt for Property A over B.  If enough people do then you can  
 bet
 Property B will find a way to add XYZ or a comparable amenity.

 Best,


 Brad


 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless- 
 boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of John Thomas
 Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2009 8:26 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: [WISPA] Service Limits

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

 John


 Mike Hammett wrote:
 If you want their service, they can't restrict you, AFAIK.


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



 --
 From: John Thomas jtho...@quarnet.com
 Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2009 9:57 PM
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] I need a few people to run a bandwidth test
 tomeplease... As they say, your mileage may vary   We have a  
 2xT1
 that
 we pay $560

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

 John


 Matt Liotta wrote:

 Personally, I wouldn't go with TW Telecom for bandwidth. They  
 tend to
 be overly pricy and their peering is too selective. In a case  
 where
 the city you are located in doesn't have good peering such as  
 Orlando
 you need to carefully select your upstream. In the case of TW
 Telecom,
 they have hardly any peers in Atlanta, which is the closest  
 major
 peering point to you. This causes most of your US based  
 traffic to
 flow through Ashburn or Dallas.

 -Matt

 On May 14, 2009, at 9:48 PM, Scott Carullo wrote:



 Just download a file via http from our web server at
 http://208.65.55.55/dummy.zip
 and then
 http://64.128.251.33/dummy.zip

 Then email me with how fast each went and a traceroute from  
 you to
 just one
 of the servers please (they take same route).

 If you are not capable of downloading at 20MB on the Internet  
 then
 the data
 is not too useful for me...

 Thank you I appreciate your time and assistance.

 Scott Carullo
 Brevard Wireless
 321-205-1100 x102





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


 
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Service Limits

2009-05-21 Thread Matt Liotta

On May 21, 2009, at 12:39 PM, Brad Belton wrote:

 Your argument makes the assumption there are no other options for a  
 tenant
 other than the property in question.

No it doesn't make that assumption. Tenants make long term decisions  
related to property leases. In many cases, the tenant makes  
assumptions and expectations about their use of the property without  
getting those assumptions and expectations in a lease document.  
Further, the property owner does a similar thing and as such has  
certain liabilities that aren't protected in their leases. All of this  
is because generally the people negotiating the leases aren't savvy  
with technology.

A perfect case in point is Wi-Fi. I know of no major REITs that have  
clauses in their leases regarding Wi-Fi or indeed inference issues.  
Yet, every company I know plans to have a Wi-Fi network deployed in  
their leased space. Now if you assume that an MTU is going to have  
multiple tenants that all are going to deploy Wi-Fi in close proximity  
you have a natural interference issue. In fact, with today's 802.11N  
you now have less overlapping channels then you did before. Couple  
this with many enterprise Wi-Fi vendors including rogue AP  
detection and mitigation features that attempt to disable Wi-Fi APs  
over the air. Clearly a war is brewing between tenants' Wi-Fi networks  
that can only result in multiple tenants becoming unhappy with the  
interference. It will fall to the property owner to resolve the issue.  
Yet the property owner doesn't have any legal standing to force  
tenants to deploy their Wi-Fi networks in any particular way.

 This is really no different than restaurants that allow smoking vs.
 restaurants that don't allow smoking.  If you want to smoke you will  
 dine at
 restaurants that allow smoking and the ones that forbid smoking  
 won't get
 your business.  This works for the non-smokers too.  Personally I'm a
 non-smoker and dine at either smoking or non-smoking restaurants,  
 but we all
 know people that are adamant on both sides of the issue.

It is quite different actually. Again, telecom issues are almost never  
dealt with until after the lease has been signed. I can't tell you how  
many deals we get because tenants signed a lease and need telecom  
services delivered, but their preferred vendor is unable to deliver in  
time or in budget due to construction issues.

 Regarding your tenant lease renewal example, doubt the property  
 owner will
 make publicly known (regardless as to the reason) why he chooses not  
 to
 renew a tenant's lease.  Is there a law I'm unaware of that forces a
 landlord to give reason for not renewing a lease?  Eviction, sure,  
 but not
 for renewals.  Have you ever read a lease agreement closely?  They are
 always heavily weighted towards the landlord vs. the tenant as they  
 should
 be.  Again, there is nothing forcing a tenant to lease there as they  
 can
 always lease elsewhere.

I shutter to think about the shear number of lease agreements I have  
signed, so I have a pretty good idea about the process and standard  
terms. You argue the tenant will never know. Yet, my experience is  
that landlords are all to eager to tell a tenant why.

 There are many limitations that can prevent the number of providers  
 in one
 property.  Riser space or roof space may be limited among many other
 limitations.  Roof or other building warranties may be voided if the  
 new
 provider is negligent or even if they aren't negligent.  Insurance
 requirements will need to meet the property owner's requirements.  The
 property owner can essentially make it cost prohibitive for you to  
 enter the
 property if they choose to do so.

Maybe; I have never seen it with any large REIT. Little property  
owners often try and fail.

 Again, in the end the property owner will prevail as they should.   
 It is
 after all their property and they should have final say what happens  
 to
 their property.  If their decisions are poor and result in lost lease
 revenue than they'll be gone soon enough and maybe the new owner  
 will see
 the benefit to allowing the right additional providers into the  
 property.

Depending on what you mean by prevail. I have had my share of property  
owners win the battle and lose the war so to speak.

 The market always works these issues out themselves.

No it doesn't. Again, see the Sherman Act for generic anti-trust  
issues and the 1996 Telecom Act for specific competitive issues  
relating to our industry. In both cases, the government was forced to  
act because the market couldn't work it out for themselves.

 If you are truly offering a better product that is desirable then  
 all of
 this is a moot point.  The problem is today (due to our current  
 government
 nanny state) any Joe Shmo can call themselves a Telco Provider.  Savvy
 property owners should, can and will keep those out that they don't  
 see as a
 benefit.

If that was only the case. There may be 

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

2009-05-15 Thread Matt Liotta
[~]# wget http://208.65.55.55/dummy.zip
--07:49:09--  http://208.65.55.55/dummy.zip
= `dummy.zip'
Connecting to 208.65.55.55:80... connected.
HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
Length: 63,375,843 (60M) [application/zip]

100% 
[= 
= 
]  
63,375,843 4.08M/sETA 00:00

07:49:21 (5.14 MB/s) - `dummy.zip' saved [63375843/63375843]

[~]# wget http://64.128.251.33/dummy.zip
--07:49:33--  http://64.128.251.33/dummy.zip
= `dummy.zip.1'
Connecting to 64.128.251.33:80... connected.
HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
Length: 63,375,843 (60M) [application/zip]

100% 
[= 
= 
]  
63,375,843 2.42M/sETA 00:00

07:49:58 (2.41 MB/s) - `dummy.zip.1' saved [63375843/63375843]

[~]# traceroute 64.128.251.33
traceroute to 64.128.251.33 (64.128.251.33), 30 hops max, 38 byte  
packets
  1  66.187.180.9 (66.187.180.9)  0.379 ms  0.342 ms  0.224 ms
  2  ge3-43.ar1.atl1.us.nlayer.net (69.31.135.65)  0.500 ms  0.481 ms   
0.359 ms
  3  ae0.cr1.atl1.us.nlayer.net (69.31.135.129)  0.293 ms  0.281 ms   
0.221 ms
  4  xe-0-1-0.cr2.iad1.us.nlayer.net (69.22.142.106)  13.458 ms   
16.902 ms  13.460 ms
  5  eqix.asbn.twtelecom.net (206.223.115.36)  14.210 ms  14.403 ms   
14.194 ms
  6  66.192.243.164 (66.192.243.164)  24.834 ms  24.774 ms  24.831 ms
  7  64.128.251.33 (64.128.251.33)  26.691 ms  26.759 ms  26.943 ms

On May 14, 2009, at 9:48 PM, Scott Carullo wrote:


 Just download a file via http from our web server at
 http://208.65.55.55/dummy.zip
 and then
 http://64.128.251.33/dummy.zip

 Then email me with how fast each went and a traceroute from you to  
 just one
 of the servers please (they take same route).

 If you are not capable of downloading at 20MB on the Internet then  
 the data
 is not too useful for me...

 Thank you I appreciate your time and assistance.

 Scott Carullo
 Brevard Wireless
 321-205-1100 x102



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

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


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

2009-05-15 Thread Matt Liotta
Personally, I wouldn't go with TW Telecom for bandwidth. They tend to  
be overly pricy and their peering is too selective. In a case where  
the city you are located in doesn't have good peering such as Orlando  
you need to carefully select your upstream. In the case of TW Telecom,  
they have hardly any peers in Atlanta, which is the closest major  
peering point to you. This causes most of your US based traffic to  
flow through Ashburn or Dallas.

-Matt

On May 14, 2009, at 9:48 PM, Scott Carullo wrote:


 Just download a file via http from our web server at
 http://208.65.55.55/dummy.zip
 and then
 http://64.128.251.33/dummy.zip

 Then email me with how fast each went and a traceroute from you to  
 just one
 of the servers please (they take same route).

 If you are not capable of downloading at 20MB on the Internet then  
 the data
 is not too useful for me...

 Thank you I appreciate your time and assistance.

 Scott Carullo
 Brevard Wireless
 321-205-1100 x102



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

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


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

2009-05-15 Thread Matt Liotta
Since you replied onlist... Yes, nLayer is in our mix, but they only  
get about 10% of our transit traffic. It helps being peered to 100s of  
ASNs. ;)

-Matt

On May 15, 2009, at 3:23 PM, Charles Wu wrote:

 You're using Nlayer these days?

 -Charles

 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]  
 On Behalf Of Matt Liotta
 Sent: Friday, May 15, 2009 6:53 AM
 To: sc...@brevardwireless.com; WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] I need a few people to run a bandwidth test to  
 me please...

 [~]# wget http://208.65.55.55/dummy.zip
 --07:49:09--  http://208.65.55.55/dummy.zip
= `dummy.zip'
 Connecting to 208.65.55.55:80... connected.
 HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
 Length: 63,375,843 (60M) [application/zip]

 100%
 [=
 =
 ]
 63,375,843 4.08M/sETA 00:00

 07:49:21 (5.14 MB/s) - `dummy.zip' saved [63375843/63375843]

 [~]# wget http://64.128.251.33/dummy.zip
 --07:49:33--  http://64.128.251.33/dummy.zip
= `dummy.zip.1'
 Connecting to 64.128.251.33:80... connected.
 HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
 Length: 63,375,843 (60M) [application/zip]

 100%
 [=
 =
 ]
 63,375,843 2.42M/sETA 00:00

 07:49:58 (2.41 MB/s) - `dummy.zip.1' saved [63375843/63375843]

 [~]# traceroute 64.128.251.33
 traceroute to 64.128.251.33 (64.128.251.33), 30 hops max, 38 byte
 packets
  1  66.187.180.9 (66.187.180.9)  0.379 ms  0.342 ms  0.224 ms
  2  ge3-43.ar1.atl1.us.nlayer.net (69.31.135.65)  0.500 ms  0.481 ms
 0.359 ms
  3  ae0.cr1.atl1.us.nlayer.net (69.31.135.129)  0.293 ms  0.281 ms
 0.221 ms
  4  xe-0-1-0.cr2.iad1.us.nlayer.net (69.22.142.106)  13.458 ms
 16.902 ms  13.460 ms
  5  eqix.asbn.twtelecom.net (206.223.115.36)  14.210 ms  14.403 ms
 14.194 ms
  6  66.192.243.164 (66.192.243.164)  24.834 ms  24.774 ms  24.831 ms
  7  64.128.251.33 (64.128.251.33)  26.691 ms  26.759 ms  26.943 ms

 On May 14, 2009, at 9:48 PM, Scott Carullo wrote:


 Just download a file via http from our web server at
 http://208.65.55.55/dummy.zip
 and then
 http://64.128.251.33/dummy.zip

 Then email me with how fast each went and a traceroute from you to
 just one
 of the servers please (they take same route).

 If you are not capable of downloading at 20MB on the Internet then
 the data
 is not too useful for me...

 Thank you I appreciate your time and assistance.

 Scott Carullo
 Brevard Wireless
 321-205-1100 x102



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

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



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

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


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

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

2009-05-12 Thread Matt Liotta

On May 12, 2009, at 1:25 PM, Scott Carullo wrote:


 Eje Gustafsson says this is not the case or elsewhen I buy a minipci
 wireless card for my laptop it would be illegal...

This has been discussed at length. No matter how many times someone  
makes the laptop argument it doesn't change the fact that the FCC  
disagrees with that argument. Now someone could pay an attorney to  
argue with the FCC and get them to clarify the situation. Until that  
time the system certification requirement stands.

-Matt



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

2009-05-12 Thread Matt Liotta

On May 12, 2009, at 2:24 PM, Scott Carullo wrote:


 I've been told personally by an FCC testing lab that I can take a  
 XR5 which
 has been tested with say a 23db panel antenna (with FCC) and use the  
 same
 gain antenna or less for myself and would not have to have it  
 certified
 again...  They told me not to get it tested because I didn't need to
 because Ubiquity already part certified it on that type antenna.

You are mixing issues. The ability to change antennas is different  
than system certification. If you had a system that was certified with  
one antenna you could change the antenna to something of similar type  
with the same or less gain without an issue. But, the system itself  
must certified.

 If this is an argument we will never resolve I can live with that,  
 but I am
 fairly sure with the resources on this list we can come to a final
 conclusion based on facts and I think we should.

This list is filled with resources that will tell you what you don't  
want to hear and another group that will tell you want you do want to  
hear. None of that matters. What you need to do is assume the worst  
case or get your specific case approved by the FCC. In other words,  
what you want will not work and you cannot do it until the FCC gives  
you written approval.

-Matt



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

2009-05-12 Thread Matt Liotta

On May 12, 2009, at 4:21 PM, Scott Carullo wrote:


 Ok...  so back to original dilemma...

 I take a XR5, the precise antenna they certified with this radio  
 card, a
 RB411 and hook it all up and use it myself within FCC RF guidelines.

 Criminal or law abiding citizen...

Neither, but you would be in violation of the FCC regulations and be  
subject to civil penalties.

Think about this like tax law. Imagine someone makes a great case  
about how you can avoid taxes legally by doing a certain thing. You  
may believe the person and the person's reasons may seem perfectly  
logical. However, would it be smart to follow them? Probably not  
without signoff from a CPA and/or tax attorney.

-Matt



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


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

2009-05-11 Thread Matt Liotta
I could download the file in 16 seconds from Atlanta. Never saw it get  
past 48Mbps. Did notice it was routing through Ashburn, which is less  
than ideal if you are Florida.

-Matt

On May 11, 2009, at 8:15 PM, Scott Carullo wrote:


 Yes lots of them, from different internet connections as well.   
 Focusing on
 customers from BHN connecting to our TW Telecom fiber circuit.  Have  
 not
 been able to do enough testing outside our network though to be  
 certain.

 That leads me to a request...  can anyone who reads this that has  
 decent
 amount of bandwidth (20mb available) download this file and tell me  
 your
 provider and how fast the transfer was so long as its not being  
 limited on
 your side.  I should have approx 80MB free bandwidth for this  
 transfer when
 you run it...

 http://208.65.55.55/dummy.zip

 This will help me out a bit...   thanks.   Email me off list if you  
 want
 with the results...

 Scott Carullo
 Brevard Wireless
 321-205-1100 x102

  Original Message 
 From: Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com
 Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 1:53 PM
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] One connection bandwidth=x / 2 commections
 bandwidth=2x why?

 Have you tried with a different PC?

 On 5/11/09, Scott Carullo sc...@brevardwireless.com wrote:
 Any TCP traffic multiple apps same results

 Scott Carullo
 Brevard Wireless
 (321) 205-1100 x102

 On May 11, 2009, at 10:14 AM, Jeff Broadwick jeffl...@comcast.net
 wrote:

 We ran into something like that when a customer was using his  
 laptop
 to
 generate traffic on a frac DS3 circuit.  The issue was primarily  
 due
 to how
 his application was trying to generate traffic.

 Jeff

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

 Speed limit per connection?  Or per IP?

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

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





 Scott Carullo wrote:
 On our main upstream connection 100mb fiber a speedtest to BHN
 yeilds
 about
 7MB max when 15 is there...

 Open two connections tcp and now the transfer rate doubles (from
 same
 server to same client).

 What would cause this?

 Scott Carullo
 Brevard Wireless
 321-205-1100 x102




 ---
 ---

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

 ---
 ---

 --
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



 ---
 ---

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

 --
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



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

 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: 

Re: [WISPA] 3650Mhz and Wimax Vendors

2009-04-23 Thread Matt Liotta
You are not going to get the answers you are seeking. Worse still  
anyone who tries to give you those answers is either uninformed or  
lying. As I stated several posts ago, you need to have a thorough  
understanding of the equipment, have conducting extensive field  
trials, and produced a business plan specifically for the equipment  
you selected. You CANNOT get these answers from a mailing list or from  
datasheets and technical specifications. There are too many tradeoffs  
that are not altogether clear until have a specific set of equipment,  
geography, and experience.

For example, just consider the variables involved in determining  
effective throughput for a subscriber. Your SNR determines what  
modulation you can run. However, your SNR is affected by your channel  
width, use of uplink subchannelization, and/or diversity. Of course,  
lowering the channel width and using uplink subchannelization lowers  
the theoretical throughput, while raising the SNR. Then there is your  
framerate and which service flow polling priority you have assigned  
it, which determines the latency for the flow. Latency has a huge  
impact on theoretical throughput. Strangely because of the TDD nature  
of WiMAX radios higher latency enables greater throughput up and until  
it lowers the theoretical maximum throughput of the flow.

The above doesn't even consider the differences between 802.16d and  
802.16e. Nor does it consider the impact of multiple subscribers and/ 
or multiple services flows per subscriber. So what is the right answer  
to whether to use WiMAX or even which WiMAX flavor or vendor? It  
depends.

-Matt

On Apr 23, 2009, at 8:42 AM, Michael Baird wrote:

 Do you have any coverage plots? When I started the other thread, I was
 really looking for the technical merit's, more then the cost  
 benefits or
 political arguments. I'm interested 802.16d vs 802.16e, some say 16e  
 is
 the greatest, some say 16d is the best, what are the technical reasons
 behind which is which.  My task at hand is to write up a comparison  
 for
 the benefit of my boss, so that we can make an informed decision on
 which technology to choose.

 I've read the specs, but I was hoping to get beyond that, and be  
 able to
 include issues with real world deployments, pros/cons of either  
 tech. We
 don't want to make the investments (we will run fiber to each tower)  
 and
 replace our existing deployments with it. We do want to do voice as  
 well
 (we have a switch and are a CLEC).

 Regards
 Michael Baird
 John,

 My boss has field tested Aperto's gear to 15miles at full  
 modulation... so a
 30km cell radius (18 miles) is possible.

 But the thing is that wouldn't be the average deployment... and  
 with Cyclone
 gear you could push the system out that far too (because its going  
 to be
 line of sight, and the cell is going to be on a mountain top  
 probably)

 If the only thing you know about deploying gear is trees like the  
 east
 coast... that expectation isn't going to work for you.  If you live  
 in the
 west where you have towers on mountaintops that can be seen from 70  
 miles
 away... its okay.

 My biggest problem with Jeff's analysis is how many customers  
 signed up in a
 year... I don't think any WISP will grow 500 customers in 5  
 months.  Or even
 150 customers in 5 months (well I've setup a tower before and  
 signed up that
 many customers to one... but that is the exception rather than the  
 norm).
 The other catch would be... none of this math makes sense in a rip  
 and
 replace... so unless your new... you have to rip an old system out  
 to get
 WiMAX.

 I also have a slight issue with the assertion that Canopy does not do
 VoIP... it does it just fine and many Canopy WISP's also sell VoIP  
 services
 (prime example... Skybeam/JAB).  There also is never a 100% take  
 rate on it
 (probably more like 50% tops) so that has to be factored in.

 With that said... besides the ugly CPE... we have chosen Aperto as  
 our
 vendor of choice in the 3.65GHz band.  I like it, and I think if  
 you do
 field trials with it, it will win out over many of the other systems.

 Daniel White
 3-dB Networks
 http://www.3dbnetworks.com



 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless- 
 boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of John Scrivner
 Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 12:13 AM
 To: jefftho...@fastmail.fm; WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650Mhz and Wimax Vendors


 Cell radius= 30km

 The point is for a TCO, that's one tower site to cover a
 20km radius, meaning less leases per month of 1k or more, so  
 isntead

 of 4

 tower sites to cover this area ( and pay 4k per month )


 So...how are you breaking the laws of physics with this system?  
 Unless
 you are serving the middle of the dessert then you probably need to
 back your cell radius down to say 3km. I see above you use 2  
 different
 cell radius figures. Is it possible you are overstating expectations
 in a 

Re: [WISPA] 3650Mhz and Wimax Vendors

2009-04-23 Thread Matt Liotta

On Apr 23, 2009, at 11:43 AM, Patrick Leary wrote:

 Matt, you said you needed to provide a reason why you did not suggest
 Aperto. Would it not be preferrable to provide a real reason, not
 something that is based on a weak deduction, e.g. Aperto issues few  
 PRs
 so they must not do any business?

I don't believe that is an accurate summarization. You can attack the  
messenger if you want, but that doesn't change the public information  
that exists. You may not like the conclusions I reached from anecdotal  
public evidence, but don't get mad at me; direct your anger to your  
marketing department. Of course, you could also point all of us to  
real 3650 Aperto deployments actively serving customers. Jeff said he  
had a list, but I haven't seen it, which means I can only use the  
public information available from Aperto PR and ULS.

 We are not nearly so large as my friends at Alvarion to be sure (who
 uses PRs sparringly, in a manner I support and respect). But we are  
 also
 far different then the three small publicly-held companies under very
 severe financial survival diress (as in they have publicly announced
 they are searching for options in order to survive) who need to issue
 customer PRs.

That is a double-edged sword you are wielding. You and Jeff are making  
financials of WiMAX vendors an issue. Public companies have audited  
financials we can all examine. Where is Aperto's financials for us to  
review?

 I'd also argue that we are right-sized for the 3650 space -- big  
 enough
 to have some of the best scientific minds in WiMAX (look at our  
 patents
 and role in creating the 802.16 standard), yet small enough to  
 actually
 REALLY care about the business of North American WISPs, not just
 carriers.

Again, maybe you need to talk to the marking department because your  
own website states, Aperto Networks is the technology leader in the  
most challenging segment of the WiMAX equipment market: carrier-class  
infrastructure.

-Matt




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] 3650Mhz and Wimax Vendors

2009-04-23 Thread Matt Liotta

On Apr 23, 2009, at 11:48 AM, Patrick Leary wrote:

 That was a PR from June 2008 Matt, when few vendors even had certified
 product in the market for more than a month or two. Further, Manish is
 not even here any longer. I joined, first as a full time consultant,  
 in
 October 22, 2008. Check out PRs since September when the new CEO,  
 Brian,
 joined.

Check them out for what? The Zing PR I mentioned before was Nov 4, 2008.

 There is plenty to debate here without grinding axes and manufacturing
 faux criticism.

Bring on the real debate then.

-Matt



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] How does a WISP respond to this situation?

2009-04-23 Thread Matt Liotta

On Apr 23, 2009, at 2:12 PM, Lists wrote:

 Am I owed the balance of the contract?  Am I owed the cost of my  
 equipment?

Yes and yes assuming there is no provision in the contract why that  
would not be the case. Since the customer owes you for the service and  
the equipment if they destroy it then you need to seek payment from  
the customer. Most likely they will need to ask their insurance to  
cover it.

-Matt



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] 3650Mhz and Wimax Vendors

2009-04-22 Thread Matt Liotta
Those of us operators who actually have experience in the field with  
the gear tend to avoid posting to threads about WiMAX because the  
threads quickly devolve. I suggest you read the archives of this  
mailing list. To summarize though; operators who use WiMAX like it and  
think the technology is actually different and better than what else  
is out there. The people who don't use WiMAX think it is overpriced  
and not particularly interesting.

-Matt

On Apr 22, 2009, at 1:41 PM, Charles Wyble wrote:

 I'm looking for more operational experience and end user experience.
 Certainly good technology contributes to that, but that isn't my  
 primary
 goal.


 Michael Baird wrote:
 It was interesting, but I was hoping for some more first hand  
 experience
 reporting. Essentially the only explanation for improved range was a
 lower noise floor, which isn't a wimax thing, but a 3.65 thing. I  
 think
 a lot of the 802.16d/e talk is market speak, I'm trying to get  
 through
 that and establish technical reasons why one or the other is  
 superior.

 Regards
 Michael Baird
 So the recent thread on Wimax was quite interesting. I need to  
 read up
 on the different technologies involved. I believe that a fixed
 deployment is sufficient for many many many needs and markets  
 (wireless
 local loop if you will). If people want mobility/end user wireless  
 they
 can hang an 802.11 AP off the ethernet port of whatever CPE. Wimax
 directly to the end device doesn't make much sense to me, in most
 markets and use cases. Obviously if you are supporting a highly  
 mobile
 workforce (say public sector type stuff) then it makes a lot more  
 sense.

 It got me thinking... if one was a new WISP entering an  
 un(der)served
 market, it seems that it would not make sense to deploy standard  
 802.11
 gear, but rather Wimax gear in 3650Mhz. Is this an accurate  
 assessment?

 One particular area that I'm targeting, doesn't have any broadband
 available (other then 3g from Verzion). So they would need to  
 purchase
 CPE anyway, and it wouldn't be anything they could get from Best Buy
 (DSL or Cable modem).

 I'm in the process of negotiating access to the excluded areas (in
 Southern California), but it's been slow going. Once I gain access  
 it
 will open up many areas to some sorely needed competition.

 So who are the vendors in this space worth considering?
 What are peoples experiences with the sales process (both pre and  
 post
 sales engineering)
 etc etc.



 
 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] 3650Mhz and Wimax Vendors

2009-04-22 Thread Matt Liotta
WiMAX relationships tend to be self-limiting. The good vendors are  
expensive and as such their customers tend to be more capable. In  
capable; I mean the operator has done thorough evaluations including  
field trials of equipment from various vendors. Developed a business  
plan specifically for the equipment they have selected and the market  
for which they plan to deploy it. Shared this business plan with the  
same vendor and have gotten a positive response from all before they  
deploy the first customer.

The above is different from how most WISPs approach WiMAX.  
Specifically, WISPs tend to already have existing customers, networks,  
etc and a working business model. These WISPs tend to be looking for  
new technology that solves specific problems for their existing  
customers or allows them to better execute their existing business  
plan. Generally, these WISPs find that WiMAX technology fails in that  
regard.

If you are up for what I mentioned in the first paragraph then I would  
suggest taking a look at Redline and Alvarion. Both vendors will  
likely recommend deploying their gear in a fixed architecture using  
3650Mhz. You will want to understand how Redline's use of 802.16d with  
uplink subchannelization compares to Alvarion's use of 802.16e with  
diversity and how that affects your ability to deliver a specific  
amount of throughput to your target market.

If you are more in the situation that I mentioned in the second  
paragraph then I would suggest taking a look at Aperto and Tranzeo.

My personal recommendation would be for Redline. That is the vendor we  
selected and have deployed. I would also recommend that you only  
consider WiMAX for deployments where differentiated services are a  
core part of your business plan. Without differentiated services I  
fear WiMAX may never make sense.

-Matt

On Apr 22, 2009, at 2:07 PM, Charles Wyble wrote:

 Yes. I know. Which is why I asked very specific questions. I don't
 really care about the technology involved and am not looking for
 information on it.

 I'm asking for vendor recommendations and WISP experiences from people
 that have actually deployed Wimax in the 3650Mhz space. The area I'm
 looking to serve wouldn't be cost effective to serve via Wifi.


 Matt Liotta wrote:
 Those of us operators who actually have experience in the field with
 the gear tend to avoid posting to threads about WiMAX because the
 threads quickly devolve. I suggest you read the archives of this
 mailing list. To summarize though; operators who use WiMAX like it  
 and
 think the technology is actually different and better than what else
 is out there. The people who don't use WiMAX think it is overpriced
 and not particularly interesting.

 -Matt

 On Apr 22, 2009, at 1:41 PM, Charles Wyble wrote:

 I'm looking for more operational experience and end user experience.
 Certainly good technology contributes to that, but that isn't my
 primary
 goal.


 Michael Baird wrote:
 It was interesting, but I was hoping for some more first hand
 experience
 reporting. Essentially the only explanation for improved range  
 was a
 lower noise floor, which isn't a wimax thing, but a 3.65 thing. I
 think
 a lot of the 802.16d/e talk is market speak, I'm trying to get
 through
 that and establish technical reasons why one or the other is
 superior.

 Regards
 Michael Baird
 So the recent thread on Wimax was quite interesting. I need to
 read up
 on the different technologies involved. I believe that a fixed
 deployment is sufficient for many many many needs and markets
 (wireless
 local loop if you will). If people want mobility/end user wireless
 they
 can hang an 802.11 AP off the ethernet port of whatever CPE. Wimax
 directly to the end device doesn't make much sense to me, in most
 markets and use cases. Obviously if you are supporting a highly
 mobile
 workforce (say public sector type stuff) then it makes a lot more
 sense.

 It got me thinking... if one was a new WISP entering an
 un(der)served
 market, it seems that it would not make sense to deploy standard
 802.11
 gear, but rather Wimax gear in 3650Mhz. Is this an accurate
 assessment?

 One particular area that I'm targeting, doesn't have any broadband
 available (other then 3g from Verzion). So they would need to
 purchase
 CPE anyway, and it wouldn't be anything they could get from Best  
 Buy
 (DSL or Cable modem).

 I'm in the process of negotiating access to the excluded areas (in
 Southern California), but it's been slow going. Once I gain access
 it
 will open up many areas to some sorely needed competition.

 So who are the vendors in this space worth considering?
 What are peoples experiences with the sales process (both pre and
 post
 sales engineering)
 etc etc.



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

 WISPA

Re: [WISPA] 3650Mhz and Wimax Vendors

2009-04-22 Thread Matt Liotta

On Apr 22, 2009, at 3:17 PM, 3-dB Networks wrote:

 Matt,

 How does what you say in the first paragraph make Aperto not viable?

I don't think anything from my first paragraph makes Aperto not  
viable. I am not sure I even like the term viable. I wouldn't suggest  
Aperto or recommend them as a WiMAX vendor. Of course, I don't have  
any direct experience with Aperto's current product line. Therefore, I  
can't compare and contrast their offerings to other WiMAX vendors that  
I do have experience with. Anecdotical evidence suggests that Aperto  
is not widely deployed. According to Aperto's press releases I only  
see one company mentioned that has deployed their WiMAX gear in the  
US. I don't know much about Zing to which the press release mentions.  
What I do know is that according to ULS they have only been approved  
to deploy a single Aperto radio. Further, at WiMAX World last year it  
seemed that Zing's CTO was employed by Aperto in sales. Compare this  
to Redline and Alvarion, which have lots of approved radios in ULS and  
multiple US customers including some large customers.

-Matt



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] 3650Mhz and Wimax Vendors

2009-04-22 Thread Matt Liotta

On Apr 22, 2009, at 4:55 PM, Butch Evans wrote:

 Matt, I apologize for the earlier post regarding your response in this
 thread.  This post was certainly one that is helpful and addresses the
 questions that started the thread.

I obviously missed this email before my most recent post. However, if  
my response was short please let me know.

-Matt



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] 3650Mhz and Wimax Vendors

2009-04-22 Thread Matt Liotta

On Apr 22, 2009, at 4:46 PM, Butch Evans wrote:

 WiMAX obviously has some things to offer.  It was written specifically
 as an outdoor wireless specification.  I think your summarization is a
 little short of the truth, though.  It would be nice, IMO, if you,  
 as an
 operator who acutally [has] experience in the field with the gear
 would at least answer the question instead of sitting on a high-horse.

How is it short specifically? Further, I thought the actual question  
was which WiMAX vendors were worth considering. And, I thought I  
answered that question.

-Matt



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] 3650Mhz and Wimax Vendors

2009-04-22 Thread Matt Liotta
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/localnews/content/business/epaper/2009/04/20/0420airspan.html

-Matt

On Apr 22, 2009, at 5:30 PM, Pat O'Connor wrote:

 Anybody use Airspan for Wimax?



 Michael Baird wrote:
 It was interesting, but I was hoping for some more first hand  
 experience
 reporting. Essentially the only explanation for improved range was a
 lower noise floor, which isn't a wimax thing, but a 3.65 thing. I  
 think
 a lot of the 802.16d/e talk is market speak, I'm trying to get  
 through
 that and establish technical reasons why one or the other is  
 superior.

 Regards
 Michael Baird

 So the recent thread on Wimax was quite interesting. I need to  
 read up
 on the different technologies involved. I believe that a fixed
 deployment is sufficient for many many many needs and markets  
 (wireless
 local loop if you will). If people want mobility/end user wireless  
 they
 can hang an 802.11 AP off the ethernet port of whatever CPE. Wimax
 directly to the end device doesn't make much sense to me, in most
 markets and use cases. Obviously if you are supporting a highly  
 mobile
 workforce (say public sector type stuff) then it makes a lot more  
 sense.

 It got me thinking... if one was a new WISP entering an  
 un(der)served
 market, it seems that it would not make sense to deploy standard  
 802.11
 gear, but rather Wimax gear in 3650Mhz. Is this an accurate  
 assessment?

 One particular area that I'm targeting, doesn't have any broadband
 available (other then 3g from Verzion). So they would need to  
 purchase
 CPE anyway, and it wouldn't be anything they could get from Best Buy
 (DSL or Cable modem).

 I'm in the process of negotiating access to the excluded areas (in
 Southern California), but it's been slow going. Once I gain access  
 it
 will open up many areas to some sorely needed competition.

 So who are the vendors in this space worth considering?
 What are peoples experiences with the sales process (both pre and  
 post
 sales engineering)
 etc etc.



 
 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] Sprint Wholesale

2009-04-20 Thread Matt Liotta
Mike Tataris
Specialized Account Manager - WSG
Phone: 404-649-1521
Cell: 678-478-9132
Fax: 800-329-6882
Email: mike.tata...@sprint.com

On Apr 20, 2009, at 5:30 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:

 Does anyone have a contact at Sprint wholesale.


 -
 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/


Re: [WISPA] Wireless Ethernet

2009-03-25 Thread Matt Liotta
You want a pseudowire appliance that creates a T1 across an Ethernet  
link. Rad, Telco, and Dragonwave all make good products at reasonable  
prices. I have some extra ones if you want a deal.

-Matt

On Mar 25, 2009, at 6:39 PM, Forbes Mercy wrote:

 I have a customer who wants to use our towers to relay a signal  
 between
 two sites so he can have a T1 equivalent.  He said Wireless T1's are
 more expensive than a 1-10 MB Wireless Ethernet. They offered to  
 have us
 buy it then charge them on it.  Now I have to research this kind of
 product, can anyone be of assistance on this issue?

 Thanks,
 Forbes
 Washington Broadband, Inc.


 
 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] 2nd Look @ 3.65 ?

2009-03-20 Thread Matt Liotta
According to the FCC you haven't deployed any 3.65 gear, so you must  
not be talking about the same radios I am.

-Matt

On Mar 18, 2009, at 6:33 PM, Travis Johnson wrote:

 We have a sector feeding 3 other towers that has been rock solid for  
 59 days now. Using a 10mhz channel, delivering 11Mbps at 18 miles.

 Travis
 Microserv

 Matt Liotta wrote:

 Yes, but the UBNT 3.65 radios are crap. Everyone we tried was
 worthless. On the other hand, every Redline 3.65 radio whether RedMax
 or AN80 has worked perfect.

 -Matt

 On Mar 18, 2009, at 3:20 PM, Brian Rohrbacher wrote:


 Wow.  I have 200 UBNT radios out there and not a single failure, not
 even to lightning.  These are 2.4, but still.  I sure do like them.

 rea...@muddyfrogwater.us wrote:

 I put up some Ubiquiti based gear,  one of the radios died about
 1hr into
 carrying traffic.

 UBNT shipped me new ones to try overnight.

 I'll update.



 
 insert witty tagline here

 - 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/


 
 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] 2nd Look @ 3.65 ?

2009-03-20 Thread Matt Liotta

On Mar 20, 2009, at 1:57 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:

 2 megs is yesterday's news.

 U-Verse is 18/1.5
 FiOS is 50/20
 Charter has 60/5
 Comcast has 50/10

 2 megs is 36 times faster than 56k.  Charter is 30 times faster than  
 that.

 Why is the wireless world happy with being 10 years behind the wired  
 world?

Not sure how any of the above is relevant to 3.65 specifically or to  
where the thread veered off to. There is not going to be a wireless- 
based system that can compete with cable/fiber for residential use.

-Matt



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] 2nd Look @ 3.65 ?

2009-03-20 Thread Matt Liotta
Might want to get a license for that.

-Matt

On Mar 20, 2009, at 12:59 PM, Travis Johnson wrote:

 I have a single 3.65 Mikrotik system (RB411 with XR3-3.7 cards)  
 feeding three remote towers. Rock solid. 60+ days now. 11Mbps. 18  
 miles.

 Travis
 Microserv

 Matt Liotta wrote:

 According to the FCC you haven't deployed any 3.65 gear, so you must
 not be talking about the same radios I am.

 -Matt

 On Mar 18, 2009, at 6:33 PM, Travis Johnson wrote:


 We have a sector feeding 3 other towers that has been rock solid for
 59 days now. Using a 10mhz channel, delivering 11Mbps at 18 miles.

 Travis
 Microserv

 Matt Liotta wrote:

 Yes, but the UBNT 3.65 radios are crap. Everyone we tried was
 worthless. On the other hand, every Redline 3.65 radio whether  
 RedMax
 or AN80 has worked perfect.

 -Matt

 On Mar 18, 2009, at 3:20 PM, Brian Rohrbacher wrote:



 Wow.  I have 200 UBNT radios out there and not a single failure,  
 not
 even to lightning.  These are 2.4, but still.  I sure do like  
 them.

 rea...@muddyfrogwater.us wrote:


 I put up some Ubiquiti based gear,  one of the radios died about
 1hr into
 carrying traffic.

 UBNT shipped me new ones to try overnight.

 I'll update.



 
 insert witty tagline here

 - 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/



 
 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/




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 ?

2009-03-20 Thread Matt Liotta

On Mar 20, 2009, at 3:50 PM, rea...@muddyfrogwater.us wrote:

 Mike Hammett and I both are watching huge amounts of investment  
 being poured
 into WIMAX equipment that's designed to meet last year's bandwidth  
 model and
 asking the same question.When are the WIMAX folks going to  
 realize that
 we do not want to spread 18 mbit across 100 customers, we want to  
 spread
 36mbit across 100 customers.

I don't know any company investing huge amounts into WiMAX for last  
year's bandwidth model. For example, our WiMAX equipment is competing  
against NxDS1, which is this year's and next year's bandwidth model  
for every reasonably sized SMB. Go ahead and argue again that you  
don't sell to the same business or residential markets that those of  
us who have invested in WiMAX sell to. We don't want your market and  
we don't want the WiMAX vendors focusing on your market. We want them  
focusing on our market and we are putting our money where are mouth is  
ensuring the WiMAX vendors do focus on our market.

The sum up the thread you want the radio vendors to make a product to  
enable your business model to thrive today and into the future.  
Whereas today's WiMAX operators have created a business model to  
thrive today and into the future based upon currently available  
products.

-Matt




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] 2nd Look @ 3.65 ?

2009-03-19 Thread Matt Liotta
We are seeing  around $500 ARPU and on average 6 customers deployed  
per 7Mhz channel with our RedMax basestations. I see no reason to  
complain.

-Matt

On Mar 19, 2009, at 2:33 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:

 Good efficiencies, not enough throughput per channel, however.

 In one thread in one list we have people complaining about not  
 having enough
 bandwidth to serve their customers now much less next year or the  
 next and
 in the other, we have people excited about an AP that only does 18  
 megabit.


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



 --
 From: Gino Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com
 Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 1:24 PM
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] 2nd Look @ 3.65 ?

 Not enough? You get 18 mbps in a 7 mhz channel


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

 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless- 
 boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of Mike Hammett
 Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 2:20 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] 2nd Look @ 3.65 ?

 More troll than substance but I wouldn't put more than 30 users on a
 WiMAX AP anyway...  not enough bandwidth.


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



 --
 From: Jeff Booher jefftho...@fastmail.fm
 Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 11:28 AM
 To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] 2nd Look @ 3.65 ?

 It is not the same gear by any means. Tranzeo's AP is a micro base
 station,
 that only supports 30 subscribers.

 -

 Jeff


 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
 On
 Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
 Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2009 7:34 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] 2nd Look @ 3.65 ?

 I'm certainly interested in ptmp.

 The Tranzeo gear is the same as Aperto isn't it?
 marlon

 - Original Message -
 From: Gino Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2009 6:35 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] 2nd Look @ 3.65 ?


 Ligowave its ptp in 3.65...

 Might wanna look at tranzeo for 3.65 ptmp


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

 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless- 
 boun...@wispa.org]
 On
 Behalf Of Leon Zetekoff
 Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2009 9:32 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 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/







 
 
 
 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 

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   >