[WISPA] Preferred RADIUS Setup

[Sam Morris]

A simplified overview of this configuration is a MikroTik CCR at the two 
PoPs (one on each end of a service area, running BGP), and MikroTik 1009 
routers at each tower in the service area.

We're in the process of setting up our first RADIUS installation. For 
those of you who have set this up before, do you prefer to run a 
standalone FreeRadius server at each PoP, or would you run RADIUS on the 
CCR routers at each PoP? (Hopefully this isn't too ambiguous of a 
question...) If load matters, the most data that could be coming into 
the CCRs is less than 1 Gbps - and more-likely to be closer to 300 Mbps 
than 1 Gbps.

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

[WISPA] CALEA Document

[Sam Morris]

It's my understanding that one just needs to have documentation in place 
as to what they will do if presented with a CALEA request. Does this 
need to be extremely detailed, or can it be boilerplate? Does anyone 
have a CALEA document they wouldn't mind sharing? There's a couple beers 
in it for you at Wispapalooza. :)

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

[WISPA] 18 Ghz Range

[Sam Morris]

At what distance would one expect to start having attenuation issues
with an 18 GHz link? Assume 2ft dishes on each end with clear Fresnel
zone. (Dishes at 60ft AGL on each end in case that makes a difference)

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

Re: [WISPA] NEPA/SHPA Requirement

[Sam Morris]

On 1/12/2017 9:53 AM, Henry N. Chappell II wrote:
> Josh,
>
> No, the NEPA & SHPO is required in all states for all new structures
> with licensed and unlicensed equipment.

Henry, we have been told by the FCC that it's not required if the 
structure will hold only unlicensed equipment. I have a query into them 
regarding the lightly-licensed (3.65) radios, but it takes a while to 
hear back from them. I posted here hoping to expedite my question 
somewhat. :)


>  Original message 
> From: Josh Reynolds 
> Date: 1/12/17 9:42 AM (GMT-06:00)
> To: WISPA General List 
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] NEPA/SHPA Requirement
>
> This seems to be only required in certain areas, correct? Mainly on or
> near areas of historical or religious significance?
>
> On Jan 12, 2017 9:35 AM, "Sam Morris"  <mailto:w...@csilogan.com>> wrote:
>
> (Sorry... SHPO, not SHPA)
>
> National Environmental Policy Act, and State Historical Preservation
> Office. I'm not a lawyer, and I didn't sleep in a Holiday Inn Express
> last night, but the way I understand it, they are legal requirements
> pertaining to new structures that are going to hold radio equipment that
> uses licensed (or lightly-licensed?) frequencies, and makes a
> requirements to go through a certification process from these two
> offices. NEPA
> (https://www.epa.gov/nepa/national-environmental-policy-act-review-process
> 
> <https://www.epa.gov/nepa/national-environmental-policy-act-review-process>)
> is an EPA requirement, and SHPO,
> (https://www.nps.gov/Nr/shpolist.htm
> <https://www.nps.gov/Nr/shpolist.htm>)
> as it has pertained to us, is primarily native-Americans inspecting the
> site and certifying that you're not desecrating sacred ground.
>
> I know it's a requirements if the structure holds 11 Ghz, 220 Mhz, 6
> Ghz, etc. I don't know if it is also a requirements if it's the 3.65
> type of license, hence my question. :)
>
> Thanks
> Sam
>
> On 1/12/2017 8:40 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote:
>  > NEPA/SHPA? Educate me pls
>  >
>  > On Jan 12, 2017 7:05 AM, "Sam Morris"  <mailto:w...@csilogan.com>
>  > <mailto:w...@csilogan.com <mailto:w...@csilogan.com>>> wrote:
>  >
>  > Good Morning,
>  >
>  > It's my understanding that if a new structure that will hold only
>  > non-licensed equipment is built, that NEPA/SHPA certification
> isn't
>  > required. What about 3.65 equipment? Since it's "lightly
> licensed",
>  > where would a new structure (where 3.65 equipment will
> reside) fall with
>  > regards to the NEPA/SHPA requirement?
>  >
>  > Thanks!
>  > Sam
>  > ___
>  > Wireless mailing list
>  > Wireless@wispa.org <mailto:Wireless@wispa.org>
> <mailto:Wireless@wispa.org <mailto:Wireless@wispa.org>>
>  > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> <http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless>
>  > <http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> <http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless>>
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > ___
>  > Wireless mailing list
>  > Wireless@wispa.org <mailto:Wireless@wispa.org>
>  > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> <http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless>
>  >
>
> ___
> Wireless mailing list
> Wireless@wispa.org <mailto:Wireless@wispa.org>
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> <http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless>
>
>
>
> ___
> Wireless mailing list
> Wireless@wispa.org
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>

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

Re: [WISPA] NEPA/SHPA Requirement

[Sam Morris]

We put up (mostly-complete but still a few locations left to do) about 
12,000 poles ranging in height from 40 to 60 feet tall for the Positive 
Train Control mandate alongside out right-of-way. This covers about 
25,000 miles across 23 states west of the Mississippi River. Every one 
of these poles was subject to NEPA/SHPO, as they hold radios that use 
licensed spectrum. I'd have to defer to Brian or Steve (or maybe Fred) 
as this seems to be more in their area of expertise, but the way I 
understand it, it's supposed to apply everywhere.


On 1/12/2017 9:42 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote:
> This seems to be only required in certain areas, correct? Mainly on or
> near areas of historical or religious significance?
>
> On Jan 12, 2017 9:35 AM, "Sam Morris"  <mailto:w...@csilogan.com>> wrote:
>
> (Sorry... SHPO, not SHPA)
>
> National Environmental Policy Act, and State Historical Preservation
> Office. I'm not a lawyer, and I didn't sleep in a Holiday Inn Express
> last night, but the way I understand it, they are legal requirements
> pertaining to new structures that are going to hold radio equipment that
> uses licensed (or lightly-licensed?) frequencies, and makes a
> requirements to go through a certification process from these two
> offices. NEPA
> (https://www.epa.gov/nepa/national-environmental-policy-act-review-process
> 
> <https://www.epa.gov/nepa/national-environmental-policy-act-review-process>)
> is an EPA requirement, and SHPO,
> (https://www.nps.gov/Nr/shpolist.htm
> <https://www.nps.gov/Nr/shpolist.htm>)
> as it has pertained to us, is primarily native-Americans inspecting the
> site and certifying that you're not desecrating sacred ground.
>
> I know it's a requirements if the structure holds 11 Ghz, 220 Mhz, 6
> Ghz, etc. I don't know if it is also a requirements if it's the 3.65
> type of license, hence my question. :)
>
> Thanks
> Sam
>
> On 1/12/2017 8:40 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote:
>  > NEPA/SHPA? Educate me pls
>  >
>  > On Jan 12, 2017 7:05 AM, "Sam Morris"  <mailto:w...@csilogan.com>
>  > <mailto:w...@csilogan.com <mailto:w...@csilogan.com>>> wrote:
>  >
>  > Good Morning,
>  >
>  > It's my understanding that if a new structure that will hold only
>  > non-licensed equipment is built, that NEPA/SHPA certification
> isn't
>  > required. What about 3.65 equipment? Since it's "lightly
> licensed",
>  > where would a new structure (where 3.65 equipment will
> reside) fall with
>  > regards to the NEPA/SHPA requirement?
>  >
>  > Thanks!
>  > Sam
>  > ___
>  > Wireless mailing list
>  > Wireless@wispa.org <mailto:Wireless@wispa.org>
> <mailto:Wireless@wispa.org <mailto:Wireless@wispa.org>>
>  > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> <http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless>
>  > <http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> <http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless>>
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > ___
>  > Wireless mailing list
>  > Wireless@wispa.org <mailto:Wireless@wispa.org>
>  > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> <http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless>
>  >
>
> ___
> Wireless mailing list
> Wireless@wispa.org <mailto:Wireless@wispa.org>
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> <http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless>
>
>
>
> ___
> Wireless mailing list
> Wireless@wispa.org
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>

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

Re: [WISPA] NEPA/SHPA Requirement

[Sam Morris]

(Sorry... SHPO, not SHPA)

National Environmental Policy Act, and State Historical Preservation 
Office. I'm not a lawyer, and I didn't sleep in a Holiday Inn Express 
last night, but the way I understand it, they are legal requirements 
pertaining to new structures that are going to hold radio equipment that 
uses licensed (or lightly-licensed?) frequencies, and makes a 
requirements to go through a certification process from these two 
offices. NEPA 
(https://www.epa.gov/nepa/national-environmental-policy-act-review-process) 
is an EPA requirement, and SHPO, (https://www.nps.gov/Nr/shpolist.htm) 
as it has pertained to us, is primarily native-Americans inspecting the 
site and certifying that you're not desecrating sacred ground.

I know it's a requirements if the structure holds 11 Ghz, 220 Mhz, 6 
Ghz, etc. I don't know if it is also a requirements if it's the 3.65 
type of license, hence my question. :)

Thanks
Sam

On 1/12/2017 8:40 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote:
> NEPA/SHPA? Educate me pls
>
> On Jan 12, 2017 7:05 AM, "Sam Morris"  <mailto:w...@csilogan.com>> wrote:
>
> Good Morning,
>
> It's my understanding that if a new structure that will hold only
> non-licensed equipment is built, that NEPA/SHPA certification isn't
> required. What about 3.65 equipment? Since it's "lightly licensed",
> where would a new structure (where 3.65 equipment will reside) fall with
> regards to the NEPA/SHPA requirement?
>
> Thanks!
> Sam
> ___
> Wireless mailing list
> Wireless@wispa.org <mailto:Wireless@wispa.org>
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> <http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless>
>
>
>
> ___
> Wireless mailing list
> Wireless@wispa.org
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>

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

[WISPA] NEPA/SHPA Requirement

[Sam Morris]

Good Morning,

It's my understanding that if a new structure that will hold only 
non-licensed equipment is built, that NEPA/SHPA certification isn't 
required. What about 3.65 equipment? Since it's "lightly licensed", 
where would a new structure (where 3.65 equipment will reside) fall with 
regards to the NEPA/SHPA requirement?

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

[WISPA] Going Rate for Smaller Structures

[Sam Morris]

Without giving away any proprietary or sensitive information, can you 
give me an idea of what you'd expect to pay for tower rent for a 
structure that's between something like 50ft - 70ft tall where you would 
place two PtP dishes, and two PtMP radios (i.e. two PMP 450i APs and two 
PTP 650 backhauls), and a NEMA box at the base to hold your 
router/switch? I know that leaves some variables, but just a ballpark 
for what the going rate is in your neck of the woods.

Thanks,
Sam

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

Re: [WISPA] 3.65 Precedence

[Sam Morris]

On 12/27/2016 2:34 PM, Johnathan Penberthy wrote:
> I believe it is really difficult to get a 3.65 Ghz license now. Though 3.65 
> Ghz is basically treated as 5 Ghz, it can share the same space as another 
> provider, though every link is registered with the FCC.

We do have a nationwide 3.65 license. However we are only using it 
currently in one very small area in Iowa. There are other areas into 
which we're looking to put up service, but I know for a fact that in 
some of them there are existing WISPs that are using 3.65. I'm 
researching this for my boss to let him know that there may (or may not) 
be issues if we try to go into an area that already has a licensed 3.65 
WISP using these frequencies there.

I should've done a better job with the background on my original post.


>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
> Behalf Of Sam Morris
> Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2016 1:26 PM
> To: WISPA General List 
> Subject: [WISPA] 3.65 Precedence
>
> I have a question to which I suspect I know the answer but wanted to defer to 
> you smart guys.
>
> Let's say I'm opening up a new WISP and want to go into an area where there 
> is an existing WISP already there. And let's say I want to use
> 3.65 GHz (non-LTE if that matters) gear in that area, but that the existing 
> WISP already has 3.65 GHz gear up in the same area, and has it licensed 
> properly with the FCC.
>
> I'm guessing that the existing WISP wins, and that I wouldn't be allowed to 
> come in and put my gear up, potentially interfering with his existing 
> operation.
>
> Is that correct or is it not as simple as this?
>
> Thanks
> Sam
> ___
> Wireless mailing list
> Wireless@wispa.org
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> ___
> Wireless mailing list
> Wireless@wispa.org
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>

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

[WISPA] 3.65 Precedence

[Sam Morris]

I have a question to which I suspect I know the answer but wanted to 
defer to you smart guys.

Let's say I'm opening up a new WISP and want to go into an area where 
there is an existing WISP already there. And let's say I want to use 
3.65 GHz (non-LTE if that matters) gear in that area, but that the 
existing WISP already has 3.65 GHz gear up in the same area, and has it 
licensed properly with the FCC.

I'm guessing that the existing WISP wins, and that I wouldn't be allowed 
to come in and put my gear up, potentially interfering with his existing 
operation.

Is that correct or is it not as simple as this?

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

Re: [WISPA] WISPA Webpage is down

[Sam Morris]

Running on Windows? :)

On 9/27/2016 12:23 PM, Jim Patient wrote:
> Ok, Trina, I’ll be Patient.
>
> cid:image001.png@01D03C92.EFCBD870
>
> _jpati...@linktechs.net _
>
> www.LinkTechs.net *| *www.TowerCoverage.com
> 
>
> usa_flag *Phone:* 314-735-0270 *FAX*: 636-660-1534
>
> *canada_flagPhone:*647-725-7011
>
> *From:* wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
> *On Behalf Of *Trina Coffey, Director of Operations
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 27, 2016 11:12 AM
> *To:* memb...@wispa.org; 'WISPA General List' ;
> wi...@wispa.org
> *Subject:* [WISPA] WISPA Webpage is down
> *Importance:* High
>
> Hello all
>
> The server that houses our website is down.  This means until it is
> fixed you will be unable to login to your account or register for
> WISPAPALOOZA.  Please be patient, we have contacted our software company
> and they are aware of the problem.
>
> My staff and I will also be unable to access your profile, account, or
> membership information during the outage.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Trina Coffey
>
> Director of Operations
>
> WISPA
>
> 260-622-5775 direct
>
> 866-317-2851 ext. 102 (US only)
>
> 530-227-6696 cell
>
> www.wispa.org 
>
> Come see us at WISPAPALOOZA !!
>
>
>
> ___
> Wireless mailing list
> Wireless@wispa.org
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>

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