Re: [WISPA] Wireless Digest, Vol 61, Issue 2

2017-02-02 Thread Sam Tetherow
If you have questions about specific issues of mixing equipment post to 
either of their respective lists make sense (like posting on the UBNT 
list about issues/questions/concerns running UBNT with Netonix).


If you are looking for a better replacement for a brand of equipment 
then the general list (this list) is probably the better place.  
Legitimate concerns/complaints shouldn't been discouraged on any list.


On 02/02/2017 01:03 PM, OOLLC-Support wrote:
> Is there a users group that post about mixed hardware networks? and what
> would be there name for postings?
>
> I use Ubiquiti and am looking for other hardware that would function
> well with or better than what I have
>
> Jan
>
> On 02/02/2017 07:33 AM, wireless-requ...@wispa.org wrote:
>> Send Wireless mailing list submissions to
>>  wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>  http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>  wireless-requ...@wispa.org
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>  wireless-ow...@wispa.org
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of Wireless digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>>  1. Re:  Static IP Pricing (Brad Belton)
>>  2. Re:  Static IP Pricing (Simon Westlake)
>>  3. Re:  Static IP Pricing (Troy Gibson, Byhalia.net)
>>  4. Re:  Static IP Pricing (Bryce Duchcherer)
>>  5. Re:  Static IP Pricing (Colton Conor)
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2017 09:24:48 -0600
>> From: "Brad Belton" 
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Static IP Pricing
>> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
>> Message-ID: <17be01d27d68$7d5ec7c0$781c5740$@belwave.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> If they are able to legitimately justify a /26 in IP space then it?s 
>> possible you aren?t charging enough for your service.
>>
>>
>>
>> Brad
>>
>>
>>
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
>> Behalf Of Tim Way
>> Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2017 9:14 AM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Static IP Pricing
>>
>>
>>
>> Life in IPv4 is getting more expensive as scarcity increases.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Feb 2, 2017 9:13 AM, "Colton Conor"  wrote:
>>
>> So a /26 has 64 total IPs, but only 62 are useable. So you are saying you 
>> would charge $5 - $10 per IP times 62 IPs? The cost of their statics would 
>> then cost more than the actual service?
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 8:44 AM, Scott Pope  wrote:
>>
>> We charge $8.50 per month/per IP for our Static IP addresses.  This has been 
>> our pricing for 10+ years.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Scott Pope
>>
>> Network and Operations Officer
>>
>> Arbuckle Communications, LLC
>>
>> Office: 580-226-1234 
>>
>> Mobile: 580-277-1108 
>>
>> sp...@arbucklecomm.com
>>
>> www.arbucklecomm.com
>>
>> "We Are Built For Business"
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 7:16 AM, Troy Gibson, Byhalia.net  
>> wrote:
>>
>> $5/month/IP
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
>>
>>
>>
>>  Original message 
>>
>> From: Judd Dare 
>>
>> Date: 2/1/17 9:28 PM (GMT-05:00)
>>
>> To: WISPA General List 
>>
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Static IP Pricing
>>
>>
>>
>> Typical cost is around $1-2/IP/Month with various fiber providers.
>>
>> I've been planning to charge something like $10-20/IP/Mo for commercial in 
>> order to only sell to people who really need it.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 7:22 PM, Colton Conor  wrote:
>>
>> How much do you charge business customers for static IPs?
>>
>>
>>
>> Comcast Business class cable internet charges
>>
>>1 - $14.95/mo.
>>
>>5 - $19.95/mo
>>
>>13 - $34.95/mo.
>>
>>
>>
>> What do fiber providers charge?
>>
>>
>>
>> I have a potential client that currently has a /27 with his current 
>> provider, and would like at least a /27 or preferably a /26 from us.
>>
>>
>>
>> We only have a /21 worth of space from ARIN.
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Wireless mailing list
>> Wireless@wispa.org

Re: [WISPA] Residential service terms

2017-02-02 Thread Sam Tetherow
I've always been month to month with an install fee to cover the 
install.  I know several others that after the contract has expired they 
convert to a month to month at the same rate.  The idea being the 
contract term is just to cover the cost of the install.



Having a longer term contract is not going to make any difference with 
the flaky people.  You are much better off turning customers off 
sooner.  I bill at the beginning of the month for the service for that 
month, if they haven't paid by the 15th of the following month they are 
turned off.  Another option is go card/ach only and shorten that period 
to the 15th of the current month so you would only be out 15 days service.



Only out 45 days worth of service which isn't a bad hit for the few 
absolute flakes.  It also helps keep the bill small for those that just 
have a hard time managing the budget.  It is easier for them to pay 1 or 
2 months of service to get turned back on rather than having to pay 4 or 
more months.



On 02/02/2017 11:07 AM, Daniel Peoples wrote:
Quick question, what is your length of contract for a residential 
customer? Do you move to a month to month after that term?


We've always done a straight month to month agreement and our 
customers of course love that and for the most part they stay. But in 
doing account audits we have a quite a few flaky people who pay the 
install and then never pay again. They use the service until we cut 
them off and the drop of the face of the earth.


Thanks!

/Regina Peoples/
Resonance Broadband
/Resonancebroadband.com/ 
918-429-3620



___
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] Rogue Accesspoint Detection

2015-01-06 Thread Sam Tetherow

I got dibs on linksys and NETGEAR1-NETGEAR99 :)

On 01/06/2015 03:16 PM, Scott Piehn wrote:
What would be your take if their AP uses the same SSID as yours.  
Assuming Ruckus etc can knock out only that type of AP

-
Scott M Piehn
*From:* Dennis Burgess mailto:dmburg...@linktechs.net
*Sent:* Tuesday, January 6, 2015 3:09 PM
*To:* WISPA General List mailto:wireless@wispa.org
*Subject:* Re: [WISPA] Rogue Accesspoint Detection

While I understand your reasoning, I would disagree.   If you could do 
this, for the security of a WISP, we will shut down all Access Points 
via Deauth attack that my Access Points can see.  Also note, I am not 
talking for the FCC, but for what I believe is right, in this case, 
you can’t own a location or area of the wifi bands, therefore, you 
can’t cause harmful interference, and a deauth attack would be 
harmful, and interference.


I  can agree that you can detect it and shut it off on a port on your 
network, but you should not be able to interfere with other 
operations, regardless if it is your property or not.  Maybe that’s 
not the intent from those actions, but it’s clear that if it’s not on 
your network then you can’t do much about it.Now, if they are on 
your property, sure you can tell them to turn it off or leave, but 
that’s another issue. lol


Dennis Burgess, CTO, Link Technologies, Inc.

den...@linktechs.net mailto:den...@linktechs.net – 314-735-0270 – 
www.linktechs.net http://www.linktechs.net


*From:*wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] 
*On Behalf Of *Mike Hammett

*Sent:* Tuesday, January 06, 2015 2:02 PM
*To:* WISPA General List
*Subject:* Re: [WISPA] Rogue Accesspoint Detection

There is no mention of a blanket refusal. In the FCC citation, the 
fact that they're charging for Internet access is brought up every 
time the deauthing activity is.


https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-329743A1.pdf

https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-14-1444A1.pdf

In reading that second one, they also keep bringing up that Marriott 
charged for Internet (and a lot at that).


Specifically, such employees had used this capability to prevent 
users from connecting to the Internet via their own personal Wi-Fi 
networks when these users did not pose a threat to the security of the 
Gaylord Opryland network or its guests.


Sounds like security is a viable defense.



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

https://www.facebook.com/ICSILhttps://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalbhttps://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutionshttps://twitter.com/ICSIL



*From: *Dennis Burgess dmburg...@linktechs.net 
mailto:dmburg...@linktechs.net
*To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org 
mailto:wireless@wispa.org

*Sent: *Tuesday, January 6, 2015 11:43:53 AM
*Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Rogue Accesspoint Detection

You cannot do it at all….

Dennis Burgess, CTO, Link Technologies, Inc.

den...@linktechs.net mailto:den...@linktechs.net – 314-735-0270 – 
www.linktechs.net http://www.linktechs.net


*From:*wireless-boun...@wispa.org mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org 
[mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] *On Behalf Of *Mike Hammett

*Sent:* Tuesday, January 06, 2015 11:06 AM
*To:* WISPA General List
*Subject:* Re: [WISPA] Rogue Accesspoint Detection

You can do it all day long within your own company. Marriott was doing 
it to force people to give them money. A company doing it has plenty 
of other reasons.




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

https://www.facebook.com/ICSILhttps://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalbhttps://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutionshttps://twitter.com/ICSIL



*From: *Dennis Burgess dmburg...@linktechs.net 
mailto:dmburg...@linktechs.net
*To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org 
mailto:wireless@wispa.org

*Sent: *Tuesday, January 6, 2015 10:05:02 AM
*Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Rogue Accesspoint Detection

Note that many of these systems (rather rogue AP prevention) have been 
deemed illegal by the FCC, a hotel chain was fined 600k I think due to 
it.


Dennis Burgess, CTO, Link Technologies, Inc.

den...@linktechs.net mailto:den...@linktechs.net – 314-735-0270 – 
www.linktechs.net http://www.linktechs.net


*From:*wireless-boun...@wispa.org mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org 
[mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] *On Behalf Of *Scott Piehn

*Sent:* Tuesday, January 06, 2015 9:49 AM
*To:* WISPA General List
*Subject:* [WISPA] Rogue Accesspoint Detection

I have a customer that is being required to get rogue access point 
detection.  not a one time thing but ongoing detection.  What products 
have people used.





-
Scott M Piehn


Re: [WISPA] Quick Question: Title II, for or against?

2014-11-19 Thread Sam Tetherow
I'm guessing that while the phone companies may not like the idea it 
seems a little less onerous to them since they are already dealing with 
Title II.  If nothing else it will weed out the smaller competition in 
their eyes.


While the cable companies or more strongly in the hate it camp I doubt 
they will be getting out of the business if it comes about.


Depending on what requirements actually come out of Title II for ISPs 
will probably have several WISPs close their doors.  If there isn't some 
sort of small business exemption I doubt I will stay in the business.


On 11/19/2014 07:51 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:

I can't imagine why anyone other than a blind consumer would love it.



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

https://www.facebook.com/ICSILhttps://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalbhttps://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutionshttps://twitter.com/ICSIL


*From: *Drew Lentz d...@drewlentz.com
*To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
*Sent: *Wednesday, November 19, 2014 7:49:20 AM
*Subject: *[WISPA] Quick Question: Title II, for or against?

I put up a quick poll, results will be shared and are anonymous.

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/3R6YTH9

I'm curious to see what the percentages are between those that support 
and those that don't support the Title II argument. I've been trying 
to get a good feel for who would and wouldn't like it (mostly it seems 
carriers love it, web services hate it.) I have a feeling WISPs might 
be on the hate it side, but I'm interested to find out. Thanks for 
your answer and have a fantastic day!


-d

___
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


Re: [WISPA] Quick Question: Title II, for or against?

2014-11-19 Thread Sam Tetherow
. This also works on the upstream, as a small WISP do you
really want to be on the receiving end of a big provider possibly
your only option for decent upstream connectivity to suddenly
start slowing down certain types of traffic? Then you are faced
with trying to provide a service that your customers might demand
without any ability other than potentially an extremely expensive
one to fill that need. I think it is always better to not shape
traffic for customers. Let them manage their connection to the
Internet. Instead for high throughput applications we should push
for the option to deploy CDN like edge devices from these larger
service providers if the actual throughput is not available or
more costly.

Alright I've got my flame retardant cap on let the replies flood in :)

Tim


On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 9:24 AM, Sam Tetherow tethe...@shwisp.net 
mailto:tethe...@shwisp.net wrote:


I'm guessing that while the phone companies may not like the idea
it seems a little less onerous to them since they are already
dealing with Title II.  If nothing else it will weed out the
smaller competition in their eyes.

While the cable companies or more strongly in the hate it camp I
doubt they will be getting out of the business if it comes about.

Depending on what requirements actually come out of Title II for
ISPs will probably have several WISPs close their doors.  If there
isn't some sort of small business exemption I doubt I will stay in
the business.


On 11/19/2014 07:51 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:

I can't imagine why anyone other than a blind consumer would love it.



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


https://www.facebook.com/ICSILhttps://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalbhttps://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutionshttps://twitter.com/ICSIL


*From: *Drew Lentz d...@drewlentz.com mailto:d...@drewlentz.com
*To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
mailto:wireless@wispa.org
*Sent: *Wednesday, November 19, 2014 7:49:20 AM
*Subject: *[WISPA] Quick Question: Title II, for or against?

I put up a quick poll, results will be shared and are anonymous.

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/3R6YTH9

I'm curious to see what the percentages are between those that
support and those that don't support the Title II argument. I've
been trying to get a good feel for who would and wouldn't like it
(mostly it seems carriers love it, web services hate it.) I have
a feeling WISPs might be on the hate it side, but I'm
interested to find out. Thanks for your answer and have a
fantastic day!

-d

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



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



___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org mailto: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


Re: [WISPA] security certificate

2014-10-21 Thread Sam Tetherow
http://ssls.com you can get a wildcard for $98/yr (or $86/yr if you buy 
4 years)


On 10/19/2014 12:28 PM, John Thomas wrote:

http://www.netcentraldomains.com

$209 per year.

/Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID/


Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com wrote:

Few hundred?  I remember them being crazy expensive.

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

On Oct 19, 2014 10:08 AM, John Thomas jtho...@quarnet.com 
mailto:jtho...@quarnet.com wrote:


Or you can buy a wildcard for a few hundred dollars and use it on
all your devices.

/Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID/


Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com
mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com wrote:

Pay for a certified SSL cert for each host. That's 50/device/year.

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

On Oct 17, 2014 5:43 PM, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net
mailto:wispawirel...@ics-il.net wrote:

Ignore it.



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


*From: *~NGL~ n...@ngl.net mailto:n...@ngl.net
*To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
mailto:wireless@wispa.org
*Sent: *Monday, October 13, 2014 7:18:08 PM
*Subject: *[WISPA] security certificate


  There is a problem with this website's security certificate.

How do I correct this problem? I get this almost every time I
log in to a Ubiquiti radio.
NGL
If you can read this Thank A Teacher.
And if it's in English Thank A Soldier!


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


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


___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org mailto: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


Re: [WISPA] Cencus block to Google Earth?

2014-08-11 Thread Sam Tetherow

ogr2ogr will do all sorts of Geo formats, geojson, tiger shape, kml, kmz.


On 08/11/2014 10:24 AM, Gino Villarini wrote:

Anyone has a way to convert files for google earth evaluation?



Gino A. Villarini
President
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
www.aeronetpr.com
@aeronetpr




___
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] Cencus block to Google Earth?

2014-08-11 Thread Sam Tetherow
Related note, does anyone know where I can get shape files for census 
tract?  Seems like everything I find is only down to the block level.

On 08/11/2014 12:02 PM, Bill Schoolfield wrote:
 What specifically do you need to do? We have been working a lot in this
 area for the new FCC 477 report requirements.

 Bill

 On 8/11/2014 10:24 AM, Gino Villarini wrote:
 Anyone has a way to convert files for google earth evaluation?



 Gino A. Villarini
 President
 Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
 www.aeronetpr.com
 @aeronetpr




 ___
 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


Re: [WISPA] Cencus block to Google Earth?

2014-08-11 Thread Sam Tetherow

If you are just looking for a simple map, the simplest way I have found is:
1. Download the shapefiles you are interested in (county was easiest for 
me).
2. Strip out the tracts you don't want to see, either with a script or 
an editor

3. upload the resulting geojson to geojson.io

This only shows the shapefiles but it gives you an idea on what areas 
they are claiming are unserved.  I was surprised what it my coverage 
area is up for funding.


Hoping to get something put together with a web interface.

I just don't see how I could meet the 100% service requirement though.  
Some of it is pretty tough terrain and no population density at all.


On 08/11/2014 04:58 PM, Cameron Crum wrote:

How dies this show you the census block boundary?


On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 4:53 PM, Torin Dow t...@airspan.com 
mailto:t...@airspan.com wrote:


Here is a link to a website that allows you to upload a
spreadsheet so that you can view the information in Google Earth:

http://www.earthpoint.us/ExcelToKml.aspx

It tells you what columns are required and you can even pick what
icons, colors, sizes , etc to use.

Good luck,

Torin

Torin Dow
Technical / Sales Director - North America East
Airspan Networks Inc.
Mobile: (914) 582-3888 tel:%28914%29%20582-3888
Email: t...@airspan.com mailto:t...@airspan.com
http://www.airspan.com


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org
mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org
[mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org
mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of
wireless-requ...@wispa.org mailto:wireless-requ...@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, August 11, 2014 12:00 PM
To: wireless@wispa.org mailto:wireless@wispa.org
Subject: Wireless Digest, Vol 31, Issue 80

Send Wireless mailing list submissions to
wireless@wispa.org mailto:wireless@wispa.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
wireless-requ...@wispa.org mailto:wireless-requ...@wispa.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
wireless-ow...@wispa.org mailto:wireless-ow...@wispa.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more
specific than Re: Contents of Wireless digest...


Today's Topics:

   1.  Cencus block to Google Earth? (Gino Villarini)
   2. Re:  Cencus block to Google Earth? (Josh Luthman)
   3. Re:  Cencus block to Google Earth? (Gino Villarini)


--

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 15:24:00 +
From: Gino Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com mailto:g...@aeronetpr.com
Subject: [WISPA] Cencus block to Google Earth?
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
mailto:wireless@wispa.org
Message-ID: d00e584b.5c009%...@aeronetpr.com
mailto:d00e584b.5c009%25...@aeronetpr.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Anyone has a way to convert files for google earth evaluation?



Gino A. Villarini
President
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
www.aeronetpr.com http://www.aeronetpr.com
@aeronetpr


-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:

http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/attachments/20140811/716ea4f0/attachment-0001.html

--

Message: 2
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 11:32:08 -0400
From: Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com
mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Cencus block to Google Earth?
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
mailto:wireless@wispa.org
Message-ID:
   
CAN9qwJ_apx7BuaYJ0MfnWyxwB05=vipqlb+scmuao1b68cw...@mail.gmail.com mailto:vipqlb%2bscmuao1b68cw...@mail.gmail.com

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

Brian Webster.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340 tel:937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343 tel:937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Aug 11, 2014 11:24 AM, Gino Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com
mailto:g...@aeronetpr.com wrote:

   Anyone has a way to convert files for google earth evaluation?



  Gino A. Villarini
 President
 Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
 www.aeronetpr.com http://www.aeronetpr.com
 @aeronetpr



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


-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:

http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/attachments/20140811/1c902c3b/attachment-0001.html

--

Message: 3
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 15:56:40 +
From: Gino Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com 

Re: [WISPA] Mimosa B5-160 v UBNT AF5-US Chart (working)

2014-08-07 Thread Sam Tetherow
Bring jerky.

On 08/07/2014 11:35 AM, Robert wrote:
 Patrick,  I've never met you, but now you know what I'll be expecting
 when I do happen to meet you!   LOL

 On 08/07/2014 09:25 AM, Patrick Leary wrote:
 With a size 15 shoe, it's a bit like a sasquatch sighting, only more rare...

 Patrick Leary
   M 727.501.3735






 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
 Behalf Of Jeff Broadwick
 Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2014 12:07 PM
 To: 'WISPA General List'
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mimosa B5-160 v UBNT AF5-US Chart (working)

 Hey!  A Patrick sighting!


 Regards,

 Jeff Broadwick
 Bitlomat Sales Director
 847-238-2481 Office
 574-220-7826 Cell
 www.bitlomat.com
 https://www.facebook.com/Bitlomat
 http://www.linkedin.com/company/bitlomat

 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
 Behalf Of Patrick Leary
 Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2014 11:49 AM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mimosa B5-160 v UBNT AF5-US Chart (working)

 Everything old is new again. Back in the day the STANDARD was the Western 
 Multiplex Tsunami, which chewed up 100 MHz of 5 GHz ISM (upper 5 GHz) 
 spectrum...and everything in its path.

 Patrick Leary
   M 727.501.3735





 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
 Behalf Of Matt Hoppes
 Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 4:55 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mimosa B5-160 v UBNT AF5-US Chart (working)

 Yes... but not normally on 80MHz wide channels...

 On 8/6/14, 4:54 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
 It is by far and away the most prevalent method...  ;-)



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

 https://www.facebook.com/ICSILhttps://plus.google.com/+IntelligentC
 omputingSolutionsDeKalbhttps://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-
 computing-solutionshttps://twitter.com/ICSIL

 --
 --
 *From: *Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com
 *To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 *Sent: *Wednesday, August 6, 2014 1:03:11 PM
 *Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Mimosa B5-160 v UBNT AF5-US Chart (working)

 I guess... all this backhauling in 5GHz is just making me nauseous.



 On 8/6/14, 1:48 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
 Higher one way throughput.
 More channels to choose from.
 DFS hit doesn't take your link down.
 External antennas.
 Once you add in those external antennas, there are a ton of things
 that vary like X-pol and F/B.
 Lower power consumption.
 Standard PoE.
 Etc.




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


 https://www.facebook.com/ICSILhttps://plus.google.com/+IntelligentC
 omputingSolutionsDeKalbhttps://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-
 computing-solutionshttps://twitter.com/ICSIL
 -
 ---
 *From: *Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com
 *To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 *Sent: *Wednesday, August 6, 2014 12:40:36 PM
 *Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Mimosa B5-160 v UBNT AF5-US Chart (working)

 THanks Josh!
 I'm not sure this puts the Mimosa device in a positive spot light?

 H/V instead of cross-slant antennas.
 Pretty bad F/B compared to the airFiber.
 And latency is higher than an airFiber

 What's the amazing thing about this new device?

 On 8/5/14, 6:16 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote:
 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1gurmZ2nJru0e87DZuGxfipTB326NiP
 OTkLXNIXBDfdc/edit?usp=sharing
 submit comments for approval / additions please

 I'm waiting back on UBNT to help further fill in the chart, and some
 of it I'm lazy on.

 TODO: For sure, add bandwidth / distance / modulation / signal /
 channel width table

 Also, would like to hear Mimosa's PPS count, and see any results of
 an
 RFC2544 test (which normally eats most wireless gear alive).

 ___
 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



 ___
 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

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

Re: [WISPA] UBNT RocketAC spotted on FCC site

2014-07-02 Thread Sam Tetherow
The new ethernet cover looks like it could be a pain on the back of a 
sector attached to a pole mount.


On 07/02/2014 10:42 AM, Gino Villarini wrote:

https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/ViewExhibitReport.cfm?mode=ExhibitsRequestTimeout=500calledFromFrame=Napplication_id=527992fcc_id=SWX-RM5ACPTP



Gino A. Villarini
President
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
www.aeronetpr.com
@aeronetpr




___
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] UBNT RocketAC spotted on FCC site

2014-07-02 Thread Sam Tetherow

Glad to hear.

On 07/02/2014 12:31 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote:

I'm sure it'll be fine :)

On 07/02/2014 07:51 AM, Sam Tetherow wrote:
The new ethernet cover looks like it could be a pain on the back of a 
sector attached to a pole mount.


On 07/02/2014 10:42 AM, Gino Villarini wrote:

https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/ViewExhibitReport.cfm?mode=ExhibitsRequestTimeout=500calledFromFrame=Napplication_id=527992fcc_id=SWX-RM5ACPTP



Gino A. Villarini
President
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
www.aeronetpr.com
@aeronetpr




___
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


--

Josh Reynolds

Chief Information Officer
SPITwSPOTS



___
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] Google luring Business Market with Wifi gear?

2014-05-22 Thread Sam Tetherow
Great, so sell service to a business, they put in the discounted 
equipment and then receive phone calls from the customer complaining 
about the speed because Google's customers are streaming video off their 
connection...



On 05/22/2014 11:19 AM, Gino Villarini wrote:

http://gigaom.com/2014/05/21/google-reportedly-plans-to-target-businesses-with-wi-fi/?



Gino A. Villarini
President
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
www.aeronetpr.com
@aeronetpr




___
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] pay per use billing

2014-05-06 Thread Sam Tetherow
We don't do usage based, for something like thermostats I would set them 
to 128k/128k or 512k/512k and charge them $20ish.  The camera's I would 
charge them full rate because they are going to use a lot of bandwidth 
depending on how often they are view them.


On 05/06/2014 03:03 PM, wi...@mncomm.com wrote:
I am starting to get hit by part time users going to their fishing 
house on the weekends. I also have customers that were on seasonal 
plans where their internet was shut down while they were gone, however 
they needed an active connection for remote access to thermostats and 
cameras.
So what's an average price for selling usage based service? We 
currently do not offer it now, but I may want to try it out on these 
instances

thanks
heith


___
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] test

2014-04-15 Thread Sam Tetherow

hey stranger.

On 04/15/2014 04:11 PM, Tom DeReggi wrote:

hi there
Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
301-515-7774
IntAirNet - Fixed Wireless Broadband


___
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] Solar powered repeater kit

2014-04-09 Thread Sam Tetherow
Locked tote.
We currently haven't been securing it to the ground, hasn't been an 
issue yet, but both of my locations are off road on private property.  
4x125aH batteries weighs more than a bag of concrete :)

Usually set the battery tote under the solar panel.

Separate box for electronics attached directly to the tower.

Holes drilled individually for the power leads that are the size of the 
cable.

2 styrofoam board underneath and on the sides of the battery tote.

Best things I have found to keep pests out is insecticide laced cattle 
ear tags for bugs.  Keeping mice out of larger conduit, stuff the ends 
with steel wool.

On 04/09/2014 05:54 AM, Erik Anderson wrote:
 How do you guys secure these totes? Mix an 80 lb sack of Quickcrete in
 the bottom? Padlock on the outside -- one key for you and one for the
 customer?
 Do you run two pvc sweeps - one for current and one for cat-5? Anything
 to keep pests out of those sweeps?
 Do you insulate around the battery to prolong battery life during those
 long cold spells?

 Thanks.

 On 4/8/2014 5:01 PM, Chris Hudson wrote:
 I have a customer with an old telephone pole that wasn't used up the hill
 from his house and I put the following: (My costs)

 1x Solar Cynergy 100W 12V panel - $125+shipping
 1x Morningstar Sunsaver SS-10 10A, 12V Pwm Charge Controller $44.46+shipping
 2x 35Ah SLA Batteries $65+tax each
 2x TP-DCDC-1224 $32ish+shipping each
 1x Tractor Supply Plastic Box $69.99+tax -
 http://www.tractorsupply.com/en/store/tractor-supply-coreg%3B-chest-32-in?cm
 _vc=-10005
 1x RB-Sextant for the link to our tower
 2x RB-Omnitik to link to house could be an RB-SXT and bridge it

 I think we charged $700 for the setup.

 Chris

 I just checked and it has been up for 220days.

 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of Robert
 Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2014 11:31 AM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Solar powered repeater kit

 Yes,
  We got a pair of 100 Watt panels at a great price off newegg.com  ,
 no shipping, which for solar panels was a deal maker! Only used one panel.
 We build the mounts with Home Depot Superstrut and 1 conduit. ~$50 We
 used

 http://thesolarstore.com/charge-controllers-charge-controllers-morningstar-p
 rostar-charge-controller-volt-p-455.html
 ~$100

 And a Walmart 124 Amp hour battery...  ~$100

 Good for 1.4 weeks no sun..   We use Mikrotik so we get remote voltage
 that way, use a 750UP for that with UBNT, but be sure and correct the
 voltage on your monitoring...   You are working off 12V so you have to
 worry about your amperage through the 750UP, but with UBNT gear that
 shouldn't be a problem..  MT radios are a problem at 12V...   So we use
 a 12-24V converter.  ($70)

 We put it in a Walmart plastic tub.  The one that is strong enough to stand
 on. ~$30

 We figured we saved about $400 vs buying a pre-built solution.  More like
 $700 over Tycon's solution.

 Panels were $299 for 2 they are still there.  But just saw this which is a
 good deal too!


 Complete Solar Kit 200W: 2pcs 100W Solar Panels+20' Solar cable in
 Pair+PWM 30A Charge Controller+2 Sets Z Brackets+MC4 Branch Connectors
 Pair+Pair

 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA29R0RA4028



 On 04/08/2014 09:00 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
 Has anyone deployed a solar powered repeater for a single customer?
 For example, their house is in the middle of a forest but you can
 provide service at the end of their lane.

 This comes up here and there and I'm looking to put together a kit of
 Nanos, solar panels, battery and give the customer the price.  I
 thought I would ask here before reinventing the wheel.

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


 ___
 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
 ___
 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] Solar powered repeater kit

2014-04-08 Thread Sam Tetherow
I have one up for 2 customers.  They paid the cost on the tower and 
solar setup, I put up the AP.  Pretty low maintenance, only issue I have 
on them is snow accumulating on the panels.


Astronergy 290W 24V panel $280
Morningstar SunSaver SS-10L-24V Charge Controller   $63
MC4 cable $31
Shipping $249

Two deep-cycle RV battteries from Sams Club (120ah)  $250

Wire the load out of the charge controller to the DC in on a Toughswitch 
put up a NanoBridge for the backhaul and a NanoStation for the AP.


On 04/08/2014 11:00 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
Has anyone deployed a solar powered repeater for a single customer? 
 For example, their house is in the middle of a forest but you can 
provide service at the end of their lane.


This comes up here and there and I'm looking to put together a kit of 
Nanos, solar panels, battery and give the customer the price.  I 
thought I would ask here before reinventing the wheel.


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


___
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] Solar powered repeater kit

2014-04-08 Thread Sam Tetherow
According to the spec sheets you are looking at 8W for the NS + 5.5W for 
the NB and probably another 6W for the TS (only shows maximum 
consumption which would include all POE ports active) so about 20W total 
consumption.


Running it in a 24V configuration hence 2 12V batteries.  I figured more 
like 5 days on the batteries by the time you figure in low voltage 
cutoff and winter conditions.  I could have went with smaller batteries, 
but getting +40ah for $20/battery.  I've had problems with equipment 
acting flakey when running UBNT with 12V power.  My goal was as low 
maintenance as possible since the site is not easy to get to in the 
winter and did want to leave room in case I needed to add any equipment.


The problem with sizing an all solar setup is you generally end up with 
overkill for 80% of the time since you are designing for crappy weather 
on the shortest days of the year with minimal sunlight and they tend not 
to be in places that it is easy to haul a generator to when your 
batteries die in the middle of a blizzard.



On 04/08/2014 11:41 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
That looks like massive overkill, are you using a ~10 watt load or are 
you doing much more?  Quick math tells me the batteries would do 12 
days on a 10 watt load.


Do you find you need a 290 watt panel (though this also leads back to 
the question)?



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


On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Sam Tetherow tethe...@shwisp.net 
mailto:tethe...@shwisp.net wrote:


I have one up for 2 customers.  They paid the cost on the tower
and solar setup, I put up the AP.  Pretty low maintenance, only
issue I have on them is snow accumulating on the panels.

Astronergy 290W 24V panel  $280
Morningstar SunSaver SS-10L-24V Charge Controller   $63
MC4 cable $31
Shipping $249

Two deep-cycle RV battteries from Sams Club (120ah)  $250

Wire the load out of the charge controller to the DC in on a
Toughswitch put up a NanoBridge for the backhaul and a NanoStation
for the AP.


On 04/08/2014 11:00 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:

Has anyone deployed a solar powered repeater for a single
customer?  For example, their house is in the middle of a forest
but you can provide service at the end of their lane.

This comes up here and there and I'm looking to put together a
kit of Nanos, solar panels, battery and give the customer the
price.  I thought I would ask here before reinventing the wheel.

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


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



___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org mailto: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


Re: [WISPA] Solar powered repeater kit

2014-04-08 Thread Sam Tetherow
Or better yet, call some place like wholesale solar and have someone 
walk you through everything.  The guy I talked to was really helpful in 
helping me do all of the calculations for northern Nebraska and walking 
me through all of the math.

On a larger site (5 rockets and a TS, 4 batteries instead of 2) I have 
had the batteries drain to the point that low voltage cutoff kicked in 
due to snow on the panels.  Brushed off the panels mid morning and the 
site comes right back up and thanks to the larger panel it ran the 
equipment all day and had enough wattage to charge the batteries to make 
it through the night without any issue.

On 04/08/2014 12:09 PM, Robert wrote:
 Honestly I have no clue what your exposure is like...   Go off the sites
 at the solar panel stores that describe it and compare it to Northern
 Nevada...  BUT if it's not critical to the customer, or the customer is
 willing to swap a battery or two out when things get bad, you can save a
 lot of cash.   We also have a set of batteries that are always ready to
 go to any site(s) that get in battery trouble to make it a non-issue.
 That's what we do with the solar site batteries when we feel we aren't
 getting max performance out of them Replace them and they go in
 trickle backup..

 On 04/08/2014 10:02 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
 Oh, so since I'm in Ohio I'm going to need at least the 290 watt panel =P


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


 On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Robert nos...@avantwireless.com
 mailto:nos...@avantwireless.com wrote:

  It gets to the key of any solar project, what's the exposure.   We are
  out in NV where 100 watt panel and 2x124 amp hour batteries is more than
  enough all year to span cloudy sessions.   We get one full day and we
  are recharged and rarely go a week without one day of enough sun to get
  another week of run time until we get the period that everything is
  fully charged.   More panel gets you back up faster so Sam's setup will
  get him back to normal in 1/3 the time = 3x the clouds.

  BTW set your solar panels for the maximum sun declination.  That's when
  days are the shortest and the need for power is the greatest and usually
  the weather is the worst.   It also helps with the snow issue.  By the
  time the sun is higher the days are longer and you make up for the bad
  angle with more exposure/better weather...

  On 04/08/2014 09:41 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
   That looks like massive overkill, are you using a ~10 watt load or are
   you doing much more?  Quick math tells me the batteries would do
  12 days
   on a 10 watt load.
  
   Do you find you need a 290 watt panel (though this also leads back to
   the question)?
  
  
   Josh Luthman
   Office: 937-552-2340 tel:937-552-2340
   Direct: 937-552-2343 tel:937-552-2343
   1100 Wayne St
   Suite 1337
   Troy, OH 45373
  
  
   On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Sam Tetherow tethe...@shwisp.net
  mailto:tethe...@shwisp.net
   mailto:tethe...@shwisp.net mailto:tethe...@shwisp.net wrote:
  
   I have one up for 2 customers.  They paid the cost on the
  tower and
   solar setup, I put up the AP.  Pretty low maintenance, only
  issue I
   have on them is snow accumulating on the panels.
  
   Astronergy 290W 24V panel
   $280
   Morningstar SunSaver SS-10L-24V Charge Controller   $63
   MC4
   cable
   $31
   Shipping
   $249
  
   Two deep-cycle RV battteries from Sams Club (120ah)  $250
  
   Wire the load out of the charge controller to the DC in on a
   Toughswitch put up a NanoBridge for the backhaul and a NanoStation
   for the AP.
  
  
   On 04/08/2014 11:00 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
   Has anyone deployed a solar powered repeater for a single
   customer?  For example, their house is in the middle of a forest
   but you can provide service at the end of their lane.
  
   This comes up here and there and I'm looking to put together
  a kit
   of Nanos, solar panels, battery and give the customer the price.
I thought I would ask here before reinventing the wheel.
  
   Josh Luthman
   Office: 937-552-2340 tel:937-552-2340 tel:937-552-2340
  tel:937-552-2340
   Direct: 937-552-2343 tel:937-552-2343 tel:937-552-2343
  tel:937-552-2343
   1100 Wayne St
   Suite 1337
   Troy, OH 45373
  
  
   ___
   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

Re: [WISPA] Solar powered repeater kit

2014-04-08 Thread Sam Tetherow
Should be roughly the same power consumption.  I used the spec sheets 
figuring the numbers would be higher than actual used.  The only expense 
that makes me cringe in this setup (used it twice now) is the shipping 
cost, it cost as much to ship a single panel as the cost of the panel.  
If I was doing a lot of these I could cut the cost down quite a bit just 
by ordering 5-10 panels.


On 04/08/2014 12:19 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
I measured a NSM2 a long time ago, it's 4-5 watts according to my amp 
meter.


I'm not doing a ToughSwitch, I'm avoiding them entirely.  I'll be 
doing an rb750p.



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


On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 1:17 PM, Sam Tetherow tethe...@shwisp.net 
mailto:tethe...@shwisp.net wrote:


According to the spec sheets you are looking at 8W for the NS +
5.5W for the NB and probably another 6W for the TS (only shows
maximum consumption which would include all POE ports active) so
about 20W total consumption.

Running it in a 24V configuration hence 2 12V batteries. I figured
more like 5 days on the batteries by the time you figure in low
voltage cutoff and winter conditions.  I could have went with
smaller batteries, but getting +40ah for $20/battery.  I've had
problems with equipment acting flakey when running UBNT with 12V
power.  My goal was as low maintenance as possible since the site
is not easy to get to in the winter and did want to leave room in
case I needed to add any equipment.

The problem with sizing an all solar setup is you generally end up
with overkill for 80% of the time since you are designing for
crappy weather on the shortest days of the year with minimal
sunlight and they tend not to be in places that it is easy to haul
a generator to when your batteries die in the middle of a blizzard.



On 04/08/2014 11:41 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:

That looks like massive overkill, are you using a ~10 watt load
or are you doing much more?  Quick math tells me the batteries
would do 12 days on a 10 watt load.

Do you find you need a 290 watt panel (though this also leads
back to the question)?


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


On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Sam Tetherow
tethe...@shwisp.net mailto:tethe...@shwisp.net wrote:

I have one up for 2 customers.  They paid the cost on the
tower and solar setup, I put up the AP.  Pretty low
maintenance, only issue I have on them is snow accumulating
on the panels.

Astronergy 290W 24V panel$280
Morningstar SunSaver SS-10L-24V Charge Controller   $63
MC4 cable $31
Shipping $249

Two deep-cycle RV battteries from Sams Club (120ah)  $250

Wire the load out of the charge controller to the DC in on a
Toughswitch put up a NanoBridge for the backhaul and a
NanoStation for the AP.


On 04/08/2014 11:00 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:

Has anyone deployed a solar powered repeater for a single
customer?  For example, their house is in the middle of a
forest but you can provide service at the end of their lane.

This comes up here and there and I'm looking to put together
a kit of Nanos, solar panels, battery and give the customer
the price.  I thought I would ask here before reinventing
the wheel.

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


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



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




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



___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org mailto: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


Re: [WISPA] Solar powered repeater kit

2014-04-08 Thread Sam Tetherow
And cost ;)  There is some room in that you can always add batteries or 
a panel (or swap out the panel).  I guess my thought on Josh's original 
post was over engineer it, if the customer doesn't want to pay for the 
equipment you are out nothing (other than a customer you couldn't reach 
anyway).  And if they do pay for it, you want something that is reliable 
since they are outlaying a good chunk of cash in their mind whether that 
is $500 or $1000 dollars.


You don't want them saying I spent $500 for this setup and it dies in 
the middle of a snow storm, and you don't want to be running out to do 
maintenance on a site for a single customer in inclement weather which 
is about the only time you have problems with a solar setup.


On 04/08/2014 12:45 PM, Tom Fadgen wrote:
You have to remember, in the winter the sun is much less available. 
There is no such thing as too much... only your tolerance for  downtime!

I have overshot the mark a few times.

120(min) watt Solar Panel
Morningstar SunSaver SS-10L-24V Charge Controller
Solar Cable
Tycon *TP-DCDC-1224*
*Cabinet*
*Batteries, at least 180amp hours, gives 3 days of no sun*
*
*
*Tom Fadgen*
On Tuesday 08/04/2014 at 9:49 am, Josh Luthman wrote:
Robert's over here doing 1/3 of that, though.  He's got a 15 watt 
load (two Ubnt, rb750p).



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


On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Mike Hammett 
wispawirel...@ics-il.net mailto:wispawirel...@ics-il.net wrote:


More panel is better than less panel.  ;-)

Not sure I'd go less than half of that.




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


*From: *Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com
mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com
*To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
mailto:wireless@wispa.org
*Sent: *Tuesday, April 8, 2014 11:41:52 AM
*Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Solar powered repeater kit


That looks like massive overkill, are you using a ~10 watt load
or are you doing much more?  Quick math tells me the batteries
would do 12 days on a 10 watt load.

Do you find you need a 290 watt panel (though this also leads
back to the question)?


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


On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Sam Tetherow
tethe...@shwisp.net mailto:tethe...@shwisp.net wrote:

I have one up for 2 customers.  They paid the cost on the
tower and solar setup, I put up the AP.  Pretty low
maintenance, only issue I have on them is snow accumulating
on the panels.

Astronergy 290W 24V panel$280
Morningstar SunSaver SS-10L-24V Charge Controller   $63
MC4 cable $31
Shipping  ?? $249

Two deep-cycle RV battteries from Sams Club (120ah)  $250

Wire the load out of the charge controller to the DC in on a
Toughswitch put up a NanoBridge for the backhaul and a
NanoStation for the AP.


On 04/08/2014 11:00 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:

Has anyone deployed a solar powered repeater for a single
customer?  For example, their house is in the middle of a
forest but you can provide service at the end of their lane.

This comes up here and there and I'm looking to put
together a kit of Nanos, solar panels, battery and give
the customer the price.  I thought I would ask here
before reinventing the wheel.

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


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




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



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


___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org mailto: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

Re: [WISPA] Solar powered repeater kit

2014-04-08 Thread Sam Tetherow
Maybe you have better customers than I do, but mine will pick the cheap 
one and bitch like they paid for the expensive one every time something 
goes wrong with it.  Maybe I'm just not that good of a salesman, I find 
it easier to just tell them this is what it costs, if that is too much I 
fully understand and they can find another option.


When I started we did several motels and I took that approach and 3 of 
them have since moved on because I let them take the cheap option with 
the understanding that it will not have as good of coverage. All they 
seem to remember is they paid me money for an option that I suggested to 
them and it didn't work.  Never mind the part about different options 
and what the trade offs were.  To each their own, that was just my 
experience.


On 04/08/2014 01:04 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
Old proven trick:  Give the customer 2-3 options.  I like 2, since I 
find customers like simplicity.  Cheap option, list the caveats and 
problems.  Expensive option, get the most solid over engineered fool 
proof stuff out there.


Let the customer decide if they want to be cheap or have a solid 
solution.  If you have problems with the cheap one, they call and you 
fix it and charge appropriately.



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


On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 2:02 PM, Sam Tetherow tethe...@shwisp.net 
mailto:tethe...@shwisp.net wrote:


And cost ;)  There is some room in that you can always add
batteries or a panel (or swap out the panel).  I guess my thought
on Josh's original post was over engineer it, if the customer
doesn't want to pay for the equipment you are out nothing (other
than a customer you couldn't reach anyway).  And if they do pay
for it, you want something that is reliable since they are
outlaying a good chunk of cash in their mind whether that is $500
or $1000 dollars.

You don't want them saying I spent $500 for this setup and it dies
in the middle of a snow storm, and you don't want to be running
out to do maintenance on a site for a single customer in inclement
weather which is about the only time you have problems with a
solar setup.


On 04/08/2014 12:45 PM, Tom Fadgen wrote:

You have to remember, in the winter the sun is much less
available. There is no such thing as too much... only your
tolerance for  downtime!
I have overshot the mark a few times.

120(min) watt Solar Panel
Morningstar SunSaver SS-10L-24V Charge Controller
Solar Cable
Tycon *TP-DCDC-1224*
*Cabinet*
*Batteries, at least 180amp hours, gives 3 days of no sun*
*
*
*Tom Fadgen*
On Tuesday 08/04/2014 at 9:49 am, Josh Luthman wrote:

Robert's over here doing 1/3 of that, though.  He's got a 15
watt load (two Ubnt, rb750p).


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


On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Mike Hammett
wispawirel...@ics-il.net mailto:wispawirel...@ics-il.net wrote:

More panel is better than less panel.  ;-)

Not sure I'd go less than half of that.




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


*From: *Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com
mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com
*To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
mailto:wireless@wispa.org
*Sent: *Tuesday, April 8, 2014 11:41:52 AM
*Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Solar powered repeater kit


That looks like massive overkill, are you using a ~10 watt
load or are you doing much more?  Quick math tells me the
batteries would do 12 days on a 10 watt load.

Do you find you need a 290 watt panel (though this also
leads back to the question)?


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


On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Sam Tetherow
tethe...@shwisp.net mailto:tethe...@shwisp.net wrote:

I have one up for 2 customers.  They paid the cost on
the tower and solar setup, I put up the AP.  Pretty low
maintenance, only issue I have on them is snow
accumulating on the panels.

Astronergy 290W 24V panel$280
Morningstar SunSaver SS-10L-24V Charge Controller   $63
MC4 cable $31
Shipping  ?? $249

Two deep-cycle RV battteries from Sams Club (120ah)  $250

Wire the load out of the charge controller to the DC in
on a Toughswitch put up a NanoBridge for the backhaul

Re: [WISPA] Charger

2014-04-08 Thread Sam Tetherow
I haven't used the 12v version, but the Meanwell AD-155A is smaller and 
it looks like significantly cheaper.



On 04/08/2014 02:23 PM, Roger Howard wrote:
Which 12v DC chargers do you guys use to power small rooftop repeaters 
from?


I've been using iota dls chargers, but 12v at 15 amps is as small as 
they go. It'd be nice if they were physically smaller to save room in 
the cabinet, too.


Cheers,
Roger
G5 Internet, LLC



___
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] Motel WiFi Authentication

2014-03-26 Thread Sam Tetherow
We run the unifi server in the office.  The only requirement is the 
unifi units need to be able to connect to the unifi controller on port 
8080, you will also need 8880 and 8843 if using the portal redirect.  So 
even if the controller is behind a NAT you can set up a port forwards.


While I haven't set up the AWS controller, those that I have talked to 
said it was dead simple using the steps on the wiki, even from people 
who aren't system administrators.


If the staff is willing to do the vouchers they are pretty simple. You 
just create a bunch ahead of time, print out the codes and they can hand 
them out as needed.  Every place I have wanted to use it the staff 
didn't want to mess around with it so they just change the WPA2 key 
every month.


On 03/26/2014 08:50 AM, Mark Spring wrote:

Heith,

Do you run those back to your server over a vpn on the tik or is it 
all just local? I am planning on doing some unifi work in the near 
future and I'm just curious what others have run into when the unifi 
is not on your network. My knowledge of unifi is almost none, just 
trying to come up with some scenarios that would work best. It seems 
like others are confirming what I think you would run into, the unifi 
server just won't play that well on site for most installs.


Thanks for your feedback!

Mark Spring
Systems Analyst

New Knoxville Telephone Company
301 W. South St.
New Knoxville, OH 45871
419.753.5000

This message and the file(s) attached are confidential and proprietary
information of NKTelco for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any
unauthorized review, distribution, disclosure, copying, use, or
dissemination, either whole or in part, is strictly prohibited. Do not
transmit these documents, in any form, to any third party without the
expressed written permission of NKTelco.


On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 9:47 AM, wi...@mncomm.com 
mailto:wi...@mncomm.com wrote:


Yeah, I run a UniFi server at my office to drive the 3 HotSpot pay
per use
camp grounds we have and operate, but they are all driven from
Mikrotik
routers on site. I suppose we could run something here, but
allocating its
own server or virtual server locally could be beyond me. I bought
a few
slots on amazon aws before, just never dug into it too deeply yet

heith

-Original Message-
From: Stuart Pierce
Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2014 6:51 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Motel WiFi Authentication


I've got Tik hotspots set up at a few towers and have setup
usermanager for
a retirement community. You definitely have more control with a
Tik box but
using Unifi with vouchers would be far easier.

You can still host the Unifi server at your place if they do not
keep a
computer running and they can print out vouchers ahead of time or
at the
time.

-- Original Message --
From: wi...@mncomm.com mailto:wi...@mncomm.com
Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
mailto:wireless@wispa.org
Date:  Tue, 25 Mar 2014 15:11:44 -0500

Thanks!

From: Bryce Duchcherer
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 2:34 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Motel WiFi Authentication

I did a hotel a few months ago using UniFi and MikroTik.

We are running Hotspot service on the MikroTik (RB1100AHx2) and
UserManager.

For user account creation I put in a HotSpot printer from
Technologic. It
uses API to create user accounts in UserManager so it is very
easy for
clerks to be able to create users for guests. You can set limits
for days,
speed, data transfer, etc.

ItâEUR^(TM)s not cheap, and not the easiest to set up but once it
is in it works
well.



Check out www.hotspot-printer.com http://www.hotspot-printer.com



Another option, depending on the billing system they use, could
be to use
radius integrated with their billing system to create users.



Or, you could just enable user manager and the clerk could create
users in
the web interface.



If you want some more info shoot me an email off list.



Bryce D

bduc...@netago.ca mailto:bduc...@netago.ca



From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org
mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org
[mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org
mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of wi...@mncomm.com mailto:wi...@mncomm.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 11:24
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Motel WiFi Authentication



Not sure if I should post to UBNT or Mikrotik. Anyways we have a
few motels
that we run the UniFi APs in and they offer free use of the
service. Of
course its all you can eat for anyone across the street from the
motel, or
those who loiter in the parking 

Re: [WISPA] Guy Wire Calculator

2014-03-21 Thread Sam Tetherow
Of course that doesn't take into consideration how much slack you need 
prior to tensioning the guy wires.


On 03/17/2014 09:44 PM, Roger Howard wrote:
Assuming the tower is vertical and the ground is flat, they are two 
sides of a triangle and the guy wire is the hypotenuse. So the 
calculation you are looking for is the pythagoras theorem. A squared, 
plus B squared = C squared.


Here's an explanation...

http://www.wikihow.com/Find-the-Length-of-the-Hypotenuse

You probably need a guy wire about every 25 feet vertically, but I'd 
look up the rohn docs to be sure.




On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Eagle One Wireless e...@e1w.com 
mailto:e...@e1w.com wrote:


We are putting up a 120 ft rohn 25 tower. First tower we have
actually put up in a few years. Anyone have a calculator to help
me figure up how much guy wire to order?

And maybe how many sets i need?

Thanks,

Kevin Melson

Eagle One Wireless

1505 Hwy 72 E

Corinth, MS 38834

662-287-1722 tel:662-287-1722

e...@e1w.com http://e...@e1w.com

_www.e1w.com http://www.e1w.com_

__


___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org mailto: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


Re: [WISPA] remote employee

2014-03-05 Thread Sam Tetherow
And to pick on law makers, if you have to already be in the business to 
be considered a contractor, then how the heck do you get your first client?


On 03/05/2014 04:07 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote:

Directly on point for you:

http://dlr.sd.gov/ui/publications/independent_vs_employee_fact_sheet.pdf

South Dakota Codified Law 61-1-11 states to be considered an 
independent contractor,
a worker must be both free from direction and control and have an 
independently
established business. Since other state and federal agencies may have 
slightly different
definitions of independent contractors, their criteria may not apply 
to South Dakota

Unemployment Insurance.
The courts have defined both portions of the South Dakota statute. The 
first portion of
the statute concerns control. Although individuals may have freedom of 
action in the
way work can be performed, control can still be exercised through 
other means such as
written or verbal agreements or a contract. What really matters is who 
has the legal

right to control the outcome of the work.
The second portion of the statute concerns whether the individual is 
customarily
engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, profession, 
or business.
The word independently means a trade, occupation, profession, or 
business must be
established independently of, and exist separately from, the services 
rendered to the
alleged employer. The present tense is indicates the individual must 
be engaged in
such independent activity at the time of rendering the service to the 
alleged employer. 


The linked .pdf has more information, and I'm sure state government 
will help you further...


-forrest


On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 11:39 AM, heith petersen wi...@mncomm.com 
mailto:wi...@mncomm.com wrote:


So, we finally got our former local tech set up at his office at
his new home 3 hours away. He has tunnel access into our net,
access to billing and his VoIP phone tied to our switch to make
and receive calls on our local lines, just like he did when he sat
10 feet from me. So next is to fine tune things.
We dumped him as a regular employee and moved to contract labor
with no benefits, basically bumped him to a level where his pay
per hour covered what he received via benefits, like insurance and
vacation. Makes it easier for the accountant as she just cuts a
check and doesn't have to deduct taxes, however it now becomes his
responsibility to claim wages and pay the taxes.
What we are working on now is management. My boss wants him to log
everything he does and pay from there, but to me that seems to be
a lot of work. We have a web based time clock, but I already have
issues with techs forgetting to clock in or clock out, I cant
imagine it would be better having a guy clock out after every
single support call. Our phone system can log time on the phone
and where the calls went to, but of course a guy can be busy
updating firmware and re-configuring equipment without being on
the phone.
The guy really only wants to clock 4 hours a day, but I need him
available off an on during the day. He is unique and he could sit
at home all day. I would almost just pay him 4 hours flat a day to
sit and have him there and available, but the bosses want to pay
him for only what he works, which I think puts more load on us
deciphering logs to see what he actually worked.
Anyways kind of a first for us, and maybe a last. Just wondering
what others, if any, have done. I don't want to lose the guy
because he takes care of a lot of stuff when I am gone and I don't
have to train him.
thanks
heith

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org mailto: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


Re: [WISPA] Banswidth usage

2014-02-18 Thread Sam Tetherow

  
  
You can ssh into the nanostation and use tcpdump to see what the
traffic is and where it is going.

On 02/18/2014 12:06 PM, Josh Luthman
  wrote:


  If you're limited to Nanostations, you're going to
have to do a packet capture some how.


Mikrotik would make this much much much easier.
  
  

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


On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 1:05 PM, ~NGL~
  n...@ngl.net
  wrote:
  

  How do I check for UDP
connections, I am using Nanostations?

  

  From: Ben
  West 
  Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2014 9:57 AM
  To: WISPA
  General List 
  Subject: Re: [WISPA] Banswidth usage


  


Torrents can consume up and down
  bandwidth with no limit, depending on how the
  client is set up. Do you see that customer
  opening many many many UDP connections?


  
  On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at
11:50 AM, ~NGL~ n...@ngl.net
wrote:

  
I have a customer that has used 19
  GBytes down and 9 GBytes up in the last 18
  hours.

What does a smart TV use?

What can theybe doing?

NGL


  

  
  If you can read
  this Thank A Teacher.
  And if it's in English Thank A
  Soldier!

  

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

  
  
  
  
  -- 
  Ben West
  http://gowasabi.net
b...@gowasabi.net
314-246-9434
  

  

 


  ___
  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



  

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


Re: [WISPA] Banswidth usage

2014-02-18 Thread Sam Tetherow

  
  
Not sure I understand what the problem is. I use tcpdump all the
time on a nanostation to check traffic out.

On 02/18/2014 12:18 PM, Josh Luthman
  wrote:


  How are you going to tcpdump with 16 MB of
memory/flash? netstat would be pretty hard to read if it's
bridge mode and iptraf doesn't exist.
  

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


On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 1:15 PM, Josh
  Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com
  wrote:
  

  Horsepoopy

tcpdump / netstat / iptraf

See, before there was Mikrotik, there was this thing
called Linux. Once upon a time, people actually knew how
to use it.

  
 Josh Reynolds
  Chief Information Officer
  SPITwSPOTS
  j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com

  

  

   On 02/18/2014 09:06 AM, Josh Luthman
wrote:
  

  
  

  
If you're limited to Nanostations,
  you're going to have to do a packet capture some
  how.
  
  
  Mikrotik would make this much much much
easier.


  
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
  
  
  On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at
1:05 PM, ~NGL~ n...@ngl.net
wrote:

  
How do I check for UDP connections, I am using
  Nanostations?
  

  
From: Ben West 
Sent: Tuesday, February 18,
  2014 9:57 AM
To: WISPA General List

Subject: Re: [WISPA]
  Banswidth usage
  
  

  
  
  Torrents can consume up
and down bandwidth with no limit,
depending on how the client is set
up. Do you see that customer
opening many many many UDP
connections?
  
  

On Tue, Feb
  18, 2014 at 11:50 AM, ~NGL~ n...@ngl.net
  wrote:
  

  I have a customer that
has used 19 GBytes down and
9 GBytes up in the last 18
hours.
  
  What does a smart TV use?
  
  What can theybe doing?
  
  NGL
  
  

  

If
you can read this
Thank A Teacher.
And if it's in
English Thank A
Soldier!
  
  

Re: [WISPA] Banswidth usage

2014-02-18 Thread Sam Tetherow

  
  
ip_conntrack is only there if the radio is doing NAT (OP didn't say
one way or the other)

On 02/18/2014 12:30 PM, Ben West wrote:


  
If you're handy with an SSH console, and you can log in
  directly to the Nanostation in question, this command can dump
  a list of all active connections:
  
  cat /proc/net/ip_conntrack
  

If you know the IP address issued to the client in
  question, or you want to filter the list to active UDP
  connections, you can use grep:
  

grep udp /proc/net/ip_conntrack

grep 192.168.x.x /proc/net/ip_conntrack # where 192.168.x.x
  is client's IP


  This works on Picostations running UniFi, should work on
  AirMax too. Indeed, it will probably work on an
  802.11g-generation Nanostation as well. This is just querying
  netstate state info from the Linux kernel.
  


  
  On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 12:24 PM,
John Thomas jtho...@quarnet.com
wrote:

  

  Netflix at 480p does about 3 to 5 megabits per
second.
  That upstream number looks high for Netflix.
  Sent with AquaMail for Android
http://www.aqua-mail.com
  

  
On February 18, 2014
  9:51:51 AM
  "~NGL~" n...@ngl.net
  wrote:

  I
have a customer that has used 19 GBytes down
and 9 GBytes up in the last 18 hours.
  
  What does a smart TV use?
  
  What can theybe doing?
  
  NGL
  
  

  

If you can read
this Thank A Teacher.
And if it's in English Thank A
Soldier!
  

  

  

  

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

  
  
  
  
  -- 
  Ben West
  http://gowasabi.net
b...@gowasabi.net
314-246-9434
  

  
  
  
  
  ___
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] Banswidth usage

2014-02-18 Thread Sam Tetherow

  
  
If the radio did 19x9 in 18 hours it should be pretty obvious what
is eating all the traffic. If you want to look at historical
traffic he is going to need to be running (and capturing) netflow
data.

On 02/18/2014 01:00 PM, Josh Luthman
  wrote:


  Sure for currently active traffic. But I think OP
is after something a bit different.
  

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


On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 1:58 PM, Josh
  Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com
  wrote:
  

  

You're running tcpdump in an SSH session. All the data
gets displayed on the ssh client, it doesn't stay on the
nanostation or whatever device you're running.

  

   Josh Reynolds
Chief Information Officer
SPITwSPOTS
j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com
  

  


   On 02/18/2014 09:45 AM, Josh Luthman
wrote:
  

  
  

  
For an hour?
Josh Luthman
  Office: 937-552-2340
  Direct: 937-552-2343
  1100 Wayne St
  Suite 1337
  Troy, OH 45373
On Feb 18, 2014 1:30 PM,
  "Sam Tetherow" tethe...@shwisp.net
  wrote:
  
 Not sure
  I understand what the problem is. I use
  tcpdump all the time on a nanostation to check
  traffic out.
  
  On 02/18/2014 12:18 PM, Josh Luthman
wrote:
  
  
How are you going to tcpdump
  with 16 MB of memory/flash? netstat would
  be pretty hard to read if it's bridge mode
  and iptraf doesn't exist.

  
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
  
  
  On Tue, Feb 18,
2014 at 1:15 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com
wrote:

  
Horsepoopy
  
  tcpdump / netstat / iptraf
  
  See, before there was Mikrotik,
  there was this thing called Linux.
  Once upon a time, people actually
  knew how to use it.
  

   Josh Reynolds
Chief Information
Officer
SPITwSPOTS
j...@spitwspots.com
| www.spitwspots.com
  

  

  
 On 02/18/2014 09:06 AM,
  Josh Luthman wrote:

  


  

  If you're
limited to Nanostations,
you're going to have to do a
packet captur

Re: [WISPA] Bandwidth usage

2014-02-18 Thread Sam Tetherow
Which is why you really should limit the behavior and not the 
application.  The problem isn't because they are torrents, it is because 
the a) use a lot of download bandwidth b) use a lot of upload bandwidth 
c) have a high pps d) have a large connection count.  Pick which one is 
affecting your network and limit that rather than trying to limit a 
specific application.  That way you are fixing the problem and not 
chasing today's cause of the problem.

On 02/18/2014 01:18 PM, Matt Jenkins wrote:
 My torrents are encrypted over port 443 in a tunnel to a registered tracker.

 But if they are using plain ol' piratebay or equivalent a box like that
 will work fine to block it.

 Matthew Jenkins
 SmarterBroadband
 m...@sbbinc.net
 530.272.4000

 On 02/18/2014 11:15 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote:
 We do L7 QoS / shaping / filtering at our head end with a very
 expensive IPOQUE PRX device, and explicitly block torrents. It's also
 discussed in our ToS. The only way I've found to get around it is by
 using a socks proxy to another country just for torrent traffic.

 *Josh Reynolds*
 Chief Information Officer
 SPITwSPOTS
 j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com

 On 02/18/2014 10:08 AM, ~NGL~ wrote:
 So how do you stop torrents?
 NGL

  *From:* Josh Reynolds mailto:j...@spitwspots.com
  *Sent:* Tuesday, February 18, 2014 11:03 AM
  *To:* wireless@wispa.org mailto:wireless@wispa.org
  *Subject:* Re: [WISPA] Banswidth usage

  It's kind of hard to score a touchdown when you keep moving the
  goal line.

  *Josh Reynolds*
  Chief Information Officer
  SPITwSPOTS
  j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com http://www.spitwspots.com

  On 02/18/2014 10:00 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
  Sure for currently active traffic.  But I think OP is after
  something a bit different.


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


  On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 1:58 PM, Josh Reynolds
  j...@spitwspots.com mailto:j...@spitwspots.com wrote:

  

  You're running tcpdump in an SSH session. All the data gets
  displayed on the ssh client, it doesn't stay on the
  nanostation or whatever device you're running.


  *Josh Reynolds*
  Chief Information Officer
  SPITwSPOTS
  j...@spitwspots.com mailto:j...@spitwspots.com |
  www.spitwspots.com http://www.spitwspots.com

  On 02/18/2014 09:45 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
  For an hour?

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

  On Feb 18, 2014 1:30 PM, Sam Tetherow
  tethe...@shwisp.net mailto:tethe...@shwisp.net wrote:

  Not sure I understand what the problem is. I use
  tcpdump all the time on a nanostation to check traffic out.

  On 02/18/2014 12:18 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
  How are you going to tcpdump with 16 MB of
  memory/flash?  netstat would be pretty hard to read if
  it's bridge mode and iptraf doesn't exist.


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


  On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 1:15 PM, Josh Reynolds
  j...@spitwspots.com mailto:j...@spitwspots.com wrote:

  Horsepoopy

  tcpdump / netstat / iptraf

  See, before there was Mikrotik, there was this
  thing called Linux. Once upon a time, people
  actually knew how to use it.

  *Josh Reynolds*
  Chief Information Officer
  SPITwSPOTS
  j...@spitwspots.com mailto:j...@spitwspots.com |
  www.spitwspots.com http://www.spitwspots.com

  On 02/18/2014 09:06 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:
  If you're limited to Nanostations, you're going
  to have to do a packet capture some how.

  Mikrotik would make this much much much easier.


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


  On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 1:05 PM, ~NGL~
  n...@ngl.net mailto:n...@ngl.net wrote:

  How do I check for UDP connections, I am
  using Nanostations?

  *From:* Ben West mailto:b...@gowasabi.net
  *Sent:* Tuesday, February 18, 2014 9:57 AM
  *To:* WISPA General List

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik on Multi-core

2014-01-24 Thread Sam Tetherow
Replaced an aging powerrouter 732 with a CCR-1036.  Set up as a 
transparent bridge for traffic shaping.  Passing 478M peak with 8200 
interface bridge filter rules and 8000 queue tree entries, cpu 
utilization peaks at about 50 and all 36 CPUs are in use according to 
/system resource cpu print


The 732 started giving us CPU limitations at about 240Mbps.  The whole 
thing could be reworked so we didn't have so many filter rules or queue 
tree entries, but the original installation replaced a MAC based 
bandwidth limiter and they wanted to keep that setup.


Other than some lockup issues we had on ROS versions before 6.7 we have 
been pretty happy with the box and for under $1k it is hard to beat.



On 01/24/2014 03:53 PM, Tom DeReggi wrote:
Hi everyone. Been awhile since Ive been here, so not sure if this is a 
redundant topic or not.
Anyone got experience with Mikrotik on their newer Multi-Core 
platform, using as a Core Router for interconnecting multiple Gig 
backbone connections (w/ BGP, OSPF, Queues, Firewalls, VLAN  tagging)?
To be more specific Comparing Mikrotik's 36 core 1.2Ghz models to 
say a third party Quad core 3Ghz model.
What do we need 36 cores for, when we got 11 eth ports? Are they even 
used by software? Is later Mikrotik Firmware allowing

- multiple processors to handle a singe NIC port?
- which Mikrotik software features are able to effectively spread 
accross to a unique processor or use multiple processors?

Is 1.2Ghz enough?
Do the embedded NICs in the 36core units pass full Gig capacity? (In 
past, we learned depending on which NIC and driver brand, a NIC could 
pass as low as only 30% of full capacity w/ large packets, where as 
a later generation PCIE w/ ATIO Intel could pass upward of 90% of full 
capacity w/ small packets.)
Im asking because back in the day, there were many Linux services 
relating to routing that were written to be only single processor support.
Because of this, it was important to have the highest speed Ghz 
processor possible, since some critical services (the bottleneck) 
would share only 1 primary processor, regardless of how many 
processors were in the router.
In past experience specific to Mikrotiktik, I often ran into issues 
with added features (firewall rules, Queues, etc) drastically draining 
the processing power of a MT router slowing throughput way below the 
theoretical published port throughput.

For example, can Queues or Firewalls spread multiple processors?
Can these 36core units handle bandwdith management (Limiting or 
Queues) for high speed subscribers, such as 100mb and 200 mbps customers?
In the GUI of v6.7, I dont see anything higher than 2mb or 10mb 
depending on location of parameter.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
301-515-7774
IntAirNet - Fixed Wireless Broadband


___
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] Internet Packages regarding geography

2013-12-31 Thread Sam Tetherow

We are suppose to make a profit?

On 12/30/2013 09:51 PM, Phil Curnutt wrote:
Granted that our model is way different then yours, we are a 
non-profit member owned, volunteer operated, coop, but we give 
everybody 2 up and 2 down (now that we have an AirFiber backhaul) and 
are still scrambling to keep up with the members usage (400 members 
covering 600 square miles).  And, they always want more.


Charging $30 a month.  Of course we only have one paid employee.  The 
folks here in NM are happy to get that as their only alternative is 
dial-up or satellite.  When CenturyLink finally moves into a 
neighborhood we actually encourage new inquires to go with them as we 
still have tons of folks with no options other then us.


It cost us about $30K every time we have to upgrade the backbone and 
back haul and APs, but luckily we have enough time between upgrades to 
bank the funds.


I don't know how you guys can make a profit.

Phil


On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 8:00 PM, Matt Hoppes 
mhop...@indigowireless.com mailto:mhop...@indigowireless.com wrote:


It's cut down in confusion. Oh yeah. 5 meg is x in town a but y in
town b.

And we don't do the upto game. So if you want 5 and can only get 3
we won't install you unless you'll take 3. We don't charge for
packages folks can't get.

Likewise this keeps our network happy since most links are pretty
clean.

On Dec 30, 2013, at 21:48, CBB - Jay Fuller
par...@cyberbroadband.net mailto:par...@cyberbroadband.net wrote:



That is a good idea

Sent from my wy too expensive android mobile vzw 4gish
device.

- Reply message -
From: Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com
mailto:mhop...@indigowireless.com
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
mailto:wireless@wispa.org
Cc: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
mailto:wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] Internet Packages regarding geography
Date: Mon, Dec 30, 2013 9:34 PM


What we have done is offer the same packages across the board. If
you can't get at least the package you want we don't install you.

On Dec 30, 2013, at 21:11, heith petersen wi...@mncomm.com
mailto:wi...@mncomm.com wrote:


We are getting to the point in a lot of our markets that we need
to offer different speed packages. Issue being some markets,
being 900 or slightly sub-par infrastructure, we wouldn't be
able to promote these packages across the board. Was curious if
others are offering packages to different areas that would not
be possible in some? And if so, do you get any backlash from
those who cannot get those packages? Is it appropriate to offer
extended packages to users on one tower when another tower down
the road wouldn't be capable of these packages? Its bad but we
just offer a residential rate, no matter if that customer can
get 1 meg down via Canopy 900 or close to 10 meg on a UBNT SM. I
have caught a little heat in an area where we fired up 900 about
4 years ago to a market that had only satellite. Then we hooked
up a tower in a small town 4 miles away with UBNT M2 and news
spread like wild fire. We went from 40 900 subs to about a
dozen, and a pile of radios I don't want to deploy again.  Shame
on me for not offering the extended packages at that time for
those wanting more bandwidth.
I also have the area outside my home town that Century Link
offers what they claim is 12 meg service, but it never gets
close. I am constantly adding more sectors in these areas, Im
getting to the point where I am adding UBNT to offload Canopy,
then adding more UBNT to offload the UBNT that was offloading
the Canopy, it gets to be a vicious circle. I am already $20 per
month more than CL, not sure if a lot of customers would stay if
I were to charge them more for what they are getting now. Once
again shame on me. The bosses think the prices should be the
same across the board, but technically performances cannot be
matched across the board, plus Im running ragged satisfying
existing customers when I should be looking at new areas, and
start the vicious circle all over again LOL.
thanks
heith
___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org mailto:Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

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


___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org mailto: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] decoy tower

2013-12-31 Thread Sam Tetherow

I would think a palm tree would look more out of place in SD than a tower :)

On 12/30/2013 05:18 PM, heith petersen wrote:
Curious is anyone has deployed a decoy tower, palm tree looking, with 
decent success and who is a good distributor/manufacturer. I have 
never seen one in person and we have a situation where we don't really 
need one but would likely look a lot better than a traditional tower

thanks
heith


___
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] Internet Packages regarding geography

2013-12-31 Thread Sam Tetherow
You can do all the routing magic with PPPoE (has it's own cost).  Or 
with dynamic routing (OSPF and BGP).


You can easily firewall the customers so they look just like a NATed IP 
(basically drop all !related !established traffic).


I give publics because I got tired of users complaining about strict NAT 
on their gaming consoles and issues with crappy VPNs.


Also go tired of managing 1-1 NATs for the ever growing list of 
customers with security cameras, remote light controls and other home 
automation/security products.  It still boggles my mind that I have 
customers that have home security systems and cameras installed, but 
they don't lock their doors.





On 12/31/2013 02:09 PM, Matt Larsen - Lists wrote:
Why would you give customers a public IP?   That is nuts as far as I 
am concerned.   Private IPs are easier to manage across multiple 
towers, you can setup routing properly so that subnets are completely 
separate for each AP, you can pick and choose how and where to route 
edge traffic to multiple backbone providers, you can move between 
backbone providers without having to re-ip all customers, customers 
are not exposed to external virus traffic...


I mean I could go on and on about why carrier-NAT is awesome. I see no 
reason to mess with public IPs unless forced to.


Matt Larsen
vistabeam.com

On 12/31/2013 12:17 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:

Your customers don't get a public IP?

I'll never understand why people do this.



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


*From: *Matt Larsen - Lists li...@manageisp.com
*To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
*Sent: *Tuesday, December 31, 2013 1:09:48 PM
*Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Internet Packages regarding geography

This last year, we finished unification of all our rate plans so 
that we would have consistency across our network.   At this time 
last year, we had several plans that had overlap and different sets 
of services as part of the plans.  For example, a 2meg plan for 
$49.95/month that included dialup and a public IP address sold next 
to a $49.95/month 4meg plan that did not have the dialup or public 
IP.   Most of the customers did not use public IP addresses or 
dialup, and we were starting to get 2meg customers complaining about 
the 4meg plan on our website that was 2x the speed for the same 
price.   At the same time, we still had a lot of 384k and 640k plans 
with people who were complaining about YouTube not working, but they 
were reluctant to upgrade to the next package because our prices were 
not as competitive on the lower end with the 1.5meg dsl bundles.


What we ended up doing was this:

1)  Replace the 384k and 640k plans with 1meg and 1.5meg speeds 
at the same prices
2)  Bump up all existing 1meg and 2meg customers to 2meg and 3meg 
speeds for the same prices
3)  Eliminate public IP addresses being included with plans, made 
them a separate monthly charge and adjusted customers to have a new 
speed package with the public IP added to it
4)  Later in the year we established a maintenance fee package 
that was automatically added to each customer account, but customers 
were given the choice of opting out of the plan


After doing all of this, we ended up having a much more competitive 
service on the low end, fewer customer complaints about YouTube and 
other sites from low end customers, and our revenue went up - mostly 
because of the addition of the maintenance package.   Any plan 
inconsistencies between customers and areas were also resolved.


The toughest part of this plan was the pre-planning that was involved 
to make it happen.   We did a ton of customer data cleanup and plan 
adjustment over the summer, but that was work that needed to be done 
anyway because of a lot of random, nonstandard plan changes that 
employees had been doing as shortcuts.We also had to take a 
really strong look at oversub ratios on our access points and what 
the resulting oversub ratios would be with the plan changes, since 
the ratios would generally double.   In doing so, we identified a 
bunch of places where we needed to add capacity or just needed to 
move higher bandwidth customers to other access points.   There were 
a lot of radio swaps and service calls involved in that process, but 
the end result was better network performance and higher customer 
satisfaction.


We set a 4:1 bandwidth ratio as our preferred point of upgrade on 
access points - meaning we can sell 40meg of customers plans on an AP 
that has approximately 10meg of capacity (such as a 2.4ghz 802.11g on 
10mhz channel). When the process started, we had about 27 APs that 
would have been overloaded with the new plans.   As of today, we have 
eight APs that are over 4:1, and six of those are just barely over.   
When it comes to the speeds that we offer in any particular area, we 
decided to make all speeds available, as long as 

Re: [WISPA] Internet Packages regarding geography

2013-12-31 Thread Sam Tetherow
To each their own, especially if they can get an extra $9.95 out of it ;)

I run CPE as router so only 1 IP per customer, traffic DMZed to customer 
router.

I agree on PPPoE but I haven't tried it in a long time so it may work 
better now that I'm not using CB3s and 802.11b (I did say it was a long 
time ago :)

On 12/31/2013 03:03 PM, li...@manageisp.com wrote:
 I like to assign a /24 to each access point to cover all of the IP
 addresses needed for customers and CPE radios.  No need to have public IP
 addresses on a CPE.   So if you use publics for customers, you have to
 setup another subnet of privates for the CPE radios.   More complexity.
 If you do publics, that means a minimum of two IPs on each end user subnet.
   That is kind of a waste.

 PPPoE is another point of failure and complexity both at the core and at
 the customer.   No desire to go there.

 Plus, if someone wants a public IP for their gaming or VPN or security
 system, I charge an extra $9.95/month for it.

 More cheddar!

 Matt Larsen
 vistabeam.com


 On Tue, 31 Dec 2013 14:55:05 -0600, Sam Tetherow tethe...@shwisp.net
 wrote:
 You can do all the routing magic with PPPoE (has it's own cost).  Or
 with dynamic routing (OSPF and BGP).

 You can easily firewall the customers so they look just like a NATed IP
 (basically drop all !related !established traffic).

 I give publics because I got tired of users complaining about strict NAT
 on their gaming consoles and issues with crappy VPNs.

 Also go tired of managing 1-1 NATs for the ever growing list of
 customers with security cameras, remote light controls and other home
 automation/security products.  It still boggles my mind that I have
 customers that have home security systems and cameras installed, but
 they don't lock their doors.




 On 12/31/2013 02:09 PM, Matt Larsen - Lists wrote:
 Why would you give customers a public IP?   That is nuts as far as I
 am concerned.   Private IPs are easier to manage across multiple
 towers, you can setup routing properly so that subnets are completely
 separate for each AP, you can pick and choose how and where to route
 edge traffic to multiple backbone providers, you can move between
 backbone providers without having to re-ip all customers, customers
 are not exposed to external virus traffic...

 I mean I could go on and on about why carrier-NAT is awesome. I see no
 reason to mess with public IPs unless forced to.

 Matt Larsen
 vistabeam.com

 On 12/31/2013 12:17 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
 Your customers don't get a public IP?

 I'll never understand why people do this.



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


 
 *From: *Matt Larsen - Lists li...@manageisp.com
 *To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 *Sent: *Tuesday, December 31, 2013 1:09:48 PM
 *Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Internet Packages regarding geography

 This last year, we finished unification of all our rate plans so
 that we would have consistency across our network.   At this time
 last year, we had several plans that had overlap and different sets
 of services as part of the plans.  For example, a 2meg plan for
 $49.95/month that included dialup and a public IP address sold next
 to a $49.95/month 4meg plan that did not have the dialup or public
 IP.   Most of the customers did not use public IP addresses or
 dialup, and we were starting to get 2meg customers complaining about
 the 4meg plan on our website that was 2x the speed for the same
 price.   At the same time, we still had a lot of 384k and 640k plans
 with people who were complaining about YouTube not working, but they
 were reluctant to upgrade to the next package because our prices were
 not as competitive on the lower end with the 1.5meg dsl bundles.

 What we ended up doing was this:

  1)  Replace the 384k and 640k plans with 1meg and 1.5meg speeds
 at the same prices
  2)  Bump up all existing 1meg and 2meg customers to 2meg and 3meg
 speeds for the same prices
  3)  Eliminate public IP addresses being included with plans, made
 them a separate monthly charge and adjusted customers to have a new
 speed package with the public IP added to it
  4)  Later in the year we established a maintenance fee package
 that was automatically added to each customer account, but customers
 were given the choice of opting out of the plan

 After doing all of this, we ended up having a much more competitive
 service on the low end, fewer customer complaints about YouTube and
 other sites from low end customers, and our revenue went up - mostly
 because of the addition of the maintenance package.   Any plan
 inconsistencies between customers and areas were also resolved.

 The toughest part of this plan was the pre-planning that was involved
 to make it happen.   We did a ton of customer data cleanup and plan
 adjustment over the summer, but that was work that needed to be done
 anyway because

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik PPPOE with External Radius -- Routing Issue

2013-12-27 Thread Sam Tetherow
Did you enable natting as mentioned in Step 1 on that guide (if you did, 
disabled it).

On 12/27/2013 11:23 AM, Mark Stephenson wrote:
 We are setting up PPPOE using Mikrotik routers at our towers. We have an
 external radius and the plan is to have username/password
 authentication, radius assigned IPs, and PPP protocol from Ubiquiti
 client equipment to the Mikrotik router at each tower. We setup these
 parameters in the radius server to do this:

 radcheck table:
 Cleartext-Password  password

 radreply table:
 Framed-IP-Address  desired ip address
 Framed-IP-Netmask desired net mask
 MS-Primary-DNS-Server   desired ip of the dns
 MS-Secondary-DNS-Server   desired ip of the second dns
 Mikrotik-Rate-Limit  rate limit like 1M/1M

 The Mikrotik router (currently version 5.21 RB750UP) has the PPPOE
 service running and radius authentication to our external radius server.
 We used http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Pppoe_with_external_radius as a
 starting point, but it assumes dynamically assigned IPs from a local
 pool not IPs assigned from the radius server.

 We set up our Ubiquiti client equipment as routed with PPPOE and entered
 the PPPOE username and the password. The Ubiquiti client equipment
 connects to a Ubiquiti access point that is bridged and then to a
 Mikrotik router at the tower. The tower then connects to backhaul radios
 to get back to our main tower and our core router.

 The good news is that this mostly works! The Ubiquiti client connects
 wirelessly to the access point and via PPPOE to the Mikrotik. It gets
 the IP address and the DNS set in radius. I know that because it shows
 in the Ubiquiti user interface and I see it in the Mikrotik logs. And
 the Mikrotik does the rate limiting beautifully. We can also browse the
 web through the connection. From a client user perspective it all works.
 But there is one big catch that we are missing.

 All outbound connections are using the IP of the Mikrotik router instead
 of the assigned IP address. So the Ubiquiti client equipment has the
 right IP but the connection is using network address translation through
 the router. We need the assigned IP to be accessible through the
 Mikrotik router so it shows as the IP address of the Ubiquiti client
 connection and so we can login to the Ubiquiti client radio from our
 network. Now the Ubiquiti client radio is hidden behind the Mikrotik
 router. What needs to be changed on the router or the radius to fix
 this?

 Thanks,
 Mark

 ___
 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] Mikrotik PPPOE with External Radius -- Routing Issue

2013-12-27 Thread Sam Tetherow
Does the PPPOE concentrator have an IP on the same block as the 
clients?  Is the address block for the clients routed to the PPPOE 
concentrator?

On 12/27/2013 02:17 PM, Mark Stephenson wrote:
 Well, I thought that would fix it. We did have NAT running and the radio
 became accessible via the IP address just like we need it to. Then I
 tried other IPs and later I tried the same IP again and the radio can't
 communicate at all out of the Mikrotik. The PPPOE connection seems fine.
 The issue is that the radio can't browse and the IP is not visible. Any
 thoughts?

 Thanks,
 Mark

 -- Original Message --
 From: Sam Tetherow tethe...@shwisp.net
 To: Mark Stephenson m...@countryconnections.net; WISPA General
 List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: 12/27/2013 12:34:36 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik PPPOE with External Radius -- Routing
 Issue
 Did you enable natting as mentioned in Step 1 on that guide (if you
 did,
 disabled it).

 On 12/27/2013 11:23 AM, Mark Stephenson wrote:
   We are setting up PPPOE using Mikrotik routers at our towers. We have
 an
   external radius and the plan is to have username/password
   authentication, radius assigned IPs, and PPP protocol from Ubiquiti
   client equipment to the Mikrotik router at each tower. We setup these
   parameters in the radius server to do this:

   radcheck table:
   Cleartext-Password password

   radreply table:
   Framed-IP-Address desired ip address
   Framed-IP-Netmask desired net mask
   MS-Primary-DNS-Server desired ip of the dns
   MS-Secondary-DNS-Server desired ip of the second dns
   Mikrotik-Rate-Limit rate limit like 1M/1M

   The Mikrotik router (currently version 5.21 RB750UP) has the PPPOE
   service running and radius authentication to our external radius
 server.
   We used http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Pppoe_with_external_radius as a
   starting point, but it assumes dynamically assigned IPs from a local
   pool not IPs assigned from the radius server.

   We set up our Ubiquiti client equipment as routed with PPPOE and
 entered
   the PPPOE username and the password. The Ubiquiti client equipment
   connects to a Ubiquiti access point that is bridged and then to a
   Mikrotik router at the tower. The tower then connects to backhaul
 radios
   to get back to our main tower and our core router.

   The good news is that this mostly works! The Ubiquiti client connects
   wirelessly to the access point and via PPPOE to the Mikrotik. It gets
   the IP address and the DNS set in radius. I know that because it
 shows
   in the Ubiquiti user interface and I see it in the Mikrotik logs. And
   the Mikrotik does the rate limiting beautifully. We can also browse
 the
   web through the connection. From a client user perspective it all
 works.
   But there is one big catch that we are missing.

   All outbound connections are using the IP of the Mikrotik router
 instead
   of the assigned IP address. So the Ubiquiti client equipment has the
   right IP but the connection is using network address translation
 through
   the router. We need the assigned IP to be accessible through the
   Mikrotik router so it shows as the IP address of the Ubiquiti client
   connection and so we can login to the Ubiquiti client radio from our
   network. Now the Ubiquiti client radio is hidden behind the Mikrotik
   router. What needs to be changed on the router or the radius to fix
   this?

   Thanks,
   Mark

   ___
   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

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


Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik PPPOE with External Radius -- Routing Issue

2013-12-27 Thread Sam Tetherow
I don't run PPPoE, but I am guessing this is your problem.  If it was 
straight routing I would say you need to turn proxy arp on for the MT.  
I don't know if that holds true for PPPoE or not.  The issue is the CPEs 
are sending traffic to the MT, the MT is sending to it's default GW and 
the return traffic is coming back to the cable modem which is dumping it 
out the ethernet side, the MT just doesn't know that it needs to relay 
the traffic on since it looks like it is destine for that LAN segment 
instead of needing to pass through the MT to the clients.

On 12/27/2013 03:27 PM, Mark Stephenson wrote:
 In this case, the Mikrotik has an IP in the same range as the radios but
 the gateway for all these IPs is external and inside a Time Warner owned
 business class modem.

 Mark

 -- Original Message --
 From: Sam Tetherow tethe...@shwisp.net
 To: Mark Stephenson m...@countryconnections.net; WISPA General
 List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: 12/27/2013 4:05:02 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik PPPOE with External Radius -- Routing
 Issue
 Does the PPPOE concentrator have an IP on the same block as the
 clients? Is the address block for the clients routed to the PPPOE
 concentrator?

 On 12/27/2013 02:17 PM, Mark Stephenson wrote:
   Well, I thought that would fix it. We did have NAT running and the
 radio
   became accessible via the IP address just like we need it to. Then I
   tried other IPs and later I tried the same IP again and the radio
 can't
   communicate at all out of the Mikrotik. The PPPOE connection seems
 fine.
   The issue is that the radio can't browse and the IP is not visible.
 Any
   thoughts?

   Thanks,
   Mark

   -- Original Message --
   From: Sam Tetherow tethe...@shwisp.net
   To: Mark Stephenson m...@countryconnections.net; WISPA General
   List wireless@wispa.org
   Sent: 12/27/2013 12:34:36 PM
   Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik PPPOE with External Radius -- Routing
   Issue
   Did you enable natting as mentioned in Step 1 on that guide (if you
   did,
   disabled it).

   On 12/27/2013 11:23 AM, Mark Stephenson wrote:
 We are setting up PPPOE using Mikrotik routers at our towers. We
 have
   an
 external radius and the plan is to have username/password
 authentication, radius assigned IPs, and PPP protocol from
 Ubiquiti
 client equipment to the Mikrotik router at each tower. We setup
 these
 parameters in the radius server to do this:

 radcheck table:
 Cleartext-Password password

 radreply table:
 Framed-IP-Address desired ip address
 Framed-IP-Netmask desired net mask
 MS-Primary-DNS-Server desired ip of the dns
 MS-Secondary-DNS-Server desired ip of the second dns
 Mikrotik-Rate-Limit rate limit like 1M/1M

 The Mikrotik router (currently version 5.21 RB750UP) has the
 PPPOE
 service running and radius authentication to our external radius
   server.
 We used http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Pppoe_with_external_radius
 as a
 starting point, but it assumes dynamically assigned IPs from a
 local
 pool not IPs assigned from the radius server.

 We set up our Ubiquiti client equipment as routed with PPPOE and
   entered
 the PPPOE username and the password. The Ubiquiti client
 equipment
 connects to a Ubiquiti access point that is bridged and then to a
 Mikrotik router at the tower. The tower then connects to backhaul
   radios
 to get back to our main tower and our core router.

 The good news is that this mostly works! The Ubiquiti client
 connects
 wirelessly to the access point and via PPPOE to the Mikrotik. It
 gets
 the IP address and the DNS set in radius. I know that because it
   shows
 in the Ubiquiti user interface and I see it in the Mikrotik logs.
 And
 the Mikrotik does the rate limiting beautifully. We can also
 browse
   the
 web through the connection. From a client user perspective it all
   works.
 But there is one big catch that we are missing.

 All outbound connections are using the IP of the Mikrotik router
   instead
 of the assigned IP address. So the Ubiquiti client equipment has
 the
 right IP but the connection is using network address translation
   through
 the router. We need the assigned IP to be accessible through the
 Mikrotik router so it shows as the IP address of the Ubiquiti
 client
 connection and so we can login to the Ubiquiti client radio from
 our
 network. Now the Ubiquiti client radio is hidden behind the
 Mikrotik
 router. What needs to be changed on the router or the radius to
 fix
 this?

 Thanks,
 Mark

 ___
 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] tower climbers/workers comp insurance

2013-12-11 Thread Sam Tetherow
First Comp is who I use.  I contract out my tower work, but still have 
to pay the workers comp on it because my contractor does not carry the 
workers comp.  The value is computed based on how much I pay him so it 
is probably quite a bit less than an employee since I only average about 
$12K worth of tower climber work a year.


On 12/11/2013 12:30 PM, heith petersen wrote:
I had an incident almost a year ago where a tech hurt his back on a 
water tower wiring in new service. Now the insurance company is 
starting to raise some questions. If they drop me or prohibit us from 
doing tower work, where do others go for this coverage? I am assuming 
its expensive. I want to avoid being at the mercy of a contracted 
tower climber when I have a radio down, you know I kind of need to fix 
that stuff. We have turned down wonderful tower locations because they 
the owners want their techs only. Anyways, we have never shopped for 
it before and was looking for some suggestions

thanks
heith


___
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] MDU wiring

2013-10-29 Thread Sam Tetherow
Switch on each floor, cat5e to each unit.  If you have the ability, wire 
each floor back to the telco room on the roof, otherwise you could 
'daisy-chain' each floor to the one above it back to the roof.  Second 
option has a lot more points of failure though.


On 10/29/2013 09:05 AM, Gino Villarini wrote:


Given the following scenario:

New MDU , 15 floors, telco room on top, telco closet on each floor 
with conduit to each Unit... what would be the cheapest way to wire 
this for Cat5 Ethernet?


Gino A. Villarini

g...@aeronetpr.com mailto:g...@aeronetpr.com

Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.

787.273.4143



___
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] MDU wiring

2013-10-29 Thread Sam Tetherow
Guess it depends on what you consider cheapest.  Homerun to the roof 
will add more labor, wiring complexity (and size) and you will probably 
run into distance issues on a 15 story MDU.


On 10/29/2013 09:20 AM, Gino Villarini wrote:


Then I have to add a switch and ups on each floor... I was thinking of 
home running all to the top floor... no?


Gino A. Villarini

g...@aeronetpr.com mailto:g...@aeronetpr.com

Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.

787.273.4143

*From:*wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] 
*On Behalf Of *Sam Tetherow

*Sent:* Tuesday, October 29, 2013 10:13 AM
*To:* WISPA General List
*Subject:* Re: [WISPA] MDU wiring

Switch on each floor, cat5e to each unit.  If you have the ability, 
wire each floor back to the telco room on the roof, otherwise you 
could 'daisy-chain' each floor to the one above it back to the roof.  
Second option has a lot more points of failure though.


On 10/29/2013 09:05 AM, Gino Villarini wrote:

Given the following scenario:

New MDU , 15 floors, telco room on top, telco closet on each floor
with conduit to each Unit... what would be the cheapest way to
wire this for Cat5 Ethernet?

Gino A. Villarini

g...@aeronetpr.com mailto:g...@aeronetpr.com

Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.

787.273.4143




___

Wireless mailing list

Wireless@wispa.org  mailto: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


Re: [WISPA] WISPALOOZA Slides

2013-10-21 Thread Sam Tetherow
Go to the wispapalooza event page and scroll through the agenda.  At the 
top of each session there is a link for 'Presentation' which contains 
the slides if they have been uploaded already.

On 10/21/2013 10:51 AM, Matt wrote:
 I was told Wispa members would be able to download the slides from the
 show and they were uploaded already for fiber weekend.  I cannot seem
 to find them anywhere on Wispa.org even when logged in.  Where are
 they?

 Also, when and where will the videos of the show be uploaded?
 ___
 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] WISPALOOZA Slides

2013-10-21 Thread Sam Tetherow
Looks like only the fiber slides so far.  I'm sure it won't be too long 
for the rest.

On 10/21/2013 11:13 AM, Sam Tetherow wrote:
 Go to the wispapalooza event page and scroll through the agenda.  At the
 top of each session there is a link for 'Presentation' which contains
 the slides if they have been uploaded already.

 On 10/21/2013 10:51 AM, Matt wrote:
 I was told Wispa members would be able to download the slides from the
 show and they were uploaded already for fiber weekend.  I cannot seem
 to find them anywhere on Wispa.org even when logged in.  Where are
 they?

 Also, when and where will the videos of the show be uploaded?
 ___
 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


Re: [WISPA] packaging suggestions

2013-10-08 Thread Sam Tetherow
For those that do strictly usage based billing, are your customer 
connections wide open or do you do some sort of rate limit as well?


On 10/08/2013 05:19 PM, Marlon Schafer (509.982.2181) wrote:
We've done usage based billing since day one.  We've lost roughly 15% 
of our customer base over the last couple of years because of it.
But the ones we've lost are the ones that think they should be able to 
give up a $100 per month cable bill and replace it with a $0 increase 
internet bill (keep that same ol' $40/month account but do $100+++ 
more with it).
We're starting to get a few of them back.  And our growth in other 
areas (non high usage customers) has still exceeded the losses.
Plus we have the reputation for being the fastest, most reliable 
provider in the area.  Probably the cheapest too.
The best part is that we've flooded our competitor's systems.  Even 
the telco has put a freeze on new DSL customers in some of the areas 
around here.  Last night a customer told me that the telco told them 
(moving into a house that already had DSL) that they were going to 
freeze the customer base where it's at for an unknown length of time.

laters,
marlon
*From:* Fred Goldstein mailto:fgoldst...@ionary.com
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 25, 2013 2:55 PM
*To:* wireless@wispa.org mailto:wireless@wispa.org
*Subject:* Re: [WISPA] packaging suggestions
On 9/25/2013 1:00 PM, heith petersen wrote:
I just got off the phone with a customer. I made some adjustments to 
his SM the other day to make netflix work. He called back today to 
tell me it works good but his direct tv showtime package is OK but 
not great. I kind of wanted to ask him what the hell gives dish net 
the right to sell you a service that rides on my back bone where I do 
not make anymore money for your additional use of my service. Anyways 
I got that off my chest.
So our situation has been for years residential customers pay a flat 
rate, we have no speed or usage based packages. When the customer 
calls about netflix I make throttle adjustments in the SM to make 
them happy. Well eventually I have an overloaded AP, then I have to 
either sectorize or add a different frequency, add higher capacity 
BHs out of my pocket, just to keep my customers happy at the same 
price we have been charging for 10 years. (We recently, since going 
to new billing service, added a $2 paper fee for non emailed invoices 
and I get crucified by the same customers every month). Ideally I 
want to get away from mechanical throttles.
We are in the middle running our authentication thru our new billing 
system, and converting bridged to fully routed. You know, the things 
we should have been doing from day one. Anyways, once we get things 
squared away, what's a common practice on doing packages? If you have 
basic customers out there that do not stream or use tons of bandwidth 
would you keep them at the current rate, or drop the rate and 
throttle them tight? I would assume that we would want to offer an 
increased package to known streamers, maybe throttle them down to a 
basic level and wait to hear from them when they are willing to 
upgrade their package? I would then anticipate that making the 
expenditures to provide them with the service would be worth the venture.
Anyways just looking for some suggestions. There is always time to do 
it right the second time around

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


This is a really big problem for WISPs.  Streaming high-quality video 
has been the potential elephant in the room of the ISP business for a 
long time.  It is finally starting to show up in the room, thanks to 
Netflix, Hulu, and others like them.


Poisoning the well is the public's paranoia about cable companies, who 
usually have ample Internet capacity (fiber to a major peering point; 
high capacity HFC networks).  So if they do anything to limit 
streaming, it's seen as an anti-competitive trick, to get people to 
buy more channels. This may or may not be true, but that's the public 
perception, which was a major driver of the network neutrality 
kerfuffle now in court.


Of course most WISPs are nothing like cable!  But the public doesn't 
see the difference, and if the FCC gains authority over WISPs (which 
they shouldn't have, by law, but what's the law when the public wants 
their circuses, I mean teevee?), then if WISPs do anything that 
selectively blocks video, or even UDP, it might be seen as a 
violation.  So your legal authority to act is in question.  And who is 
leading the appeal against the law?  Verizon, who is actually behind 
it (since it hurts Comcast more than them). Hence their arguments are 
on the lame side.  The only things going for us in the DC Circuit are 
that the DC Circuit dislikes the FCC in general, and the FCC did a 
really bad job in claiming the authority.


Thus the neutral answer is to move towards bandwidth caps.  This to 
me makes more sense, to a WISP, than a rate-based price tier.  
Somebody can burst at 10 

Re: [WISPA] ARIN numbers

2013-10-03 Thread Sam Tetherow
I literally just finished doing this (within the past month).  It was a 
very easy process.  I filed for a /22 multi-homed.  They needed copies 
of my upstream agreements from two different AS#, two /24's SWIP'ed to 
me, and spreadsheet with utilization of the two /24s.  Took 4 days to 
get an AS# and 15 days to get my /22 from beginning to end.


Not sure what it would be like going for single homed, but I would think 
it would be just as painless you just have to justify the need for a /20 
instead.



On 10/03/2013 11:37 AM, heith petersen wrote:
Kind of late in the game for this question, but has anyone been able 
to successfully acquire IP space from ARIN? I have read that they have 
1 full/8  3/4 of another /8. We have always received our IPs from our 
upstream provider, and where I live there are not a lot of other 
choices for providers. Honestly, we may have been lulled into thinking 
that we were to small to get our own space, or we needed to be 
multi-homed.
I have read on the website that we could fairly easily qualify, as far 
as what is currently percentage wise utilized. I need to start 
shifting all our networks to be fully routed and would be nice to have 
our own space. Our provider is fairly big in the upper plains, however 
things may change were we need to shift, or maybe get a second provider.
I assume that since ARIN is a non-profit organization that they would 
not be affected by the current government shut down. I could be wrong. 
I see they will be represented at WISPALooza this year. I was hoping 
to get a little input on current success from others before I put in a 
lot more research

thanks in advance
heith


___
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] ARIN numbers

2013-10-03 Thread Sam Tetherow
Only have one POP in Valentine, just two separate fiber feeds.  Haven't 
had much luck with Golden West on getting reasonable transport or DIA 
quotes.


Not sure what you are asking on the multihomed part.  You can advertise 
a subset of your IP space out different POPs if they are not 
interconnected.  So for instance you have half your network out of POP1 
with provider A and the other half out of POP2 with provider B, you can 
run BGP and advertise a different /21 out of each.  Obviously it would 
be better if you could route all traffic out of either but sometimes 
that is not a viable option.  I don't know if that is proper from ARINs 
perspective, but I do know it is technically possible.


On 10/03/2013 02:33 PM, heith petersen wrote:

Sam,
I have always wondered where your upstream came from. I might be close 
to one of your providers. If multihomed truly needed to be required, 
you think I would need to be at all of our POPs with our current provider?

thanks
heith
*From:* Sam Tetherow mailto:tethe...@shwisp.net
*Sent:* Thursday, October 03, 2013 1:48 PM
*To:* WISPA General List mailto:wireless@wispa.org
*Subject:* Re: [WISPA] ARIN numbers
I literally just finished doing this (within the past month).  It was 
a very easy process.  I filed for a /22 multi-homed.  They needed 
copies of my upstream agreements from two different AS#, two /24's 
SWIP'ed to me, and spreadsheet with utilization of the two /24s.  Took 
4 days to get an AS# and 15 days to get my /22 from beginning to end.


Not sure what it would be like going for single homed, but I would 
think it would be just as painless you just have to justify the need 
for a /20 instead.



On 10/03/2013 11:37 AM, heith petersen wrote:
Kind of late in the game for this question, but has anyone been able 
to successfully acquire IP space from ARIN? I have read that they 
have 1 full/8  3/4 of another /8. We have always received our IPs 
from our upstream provider, and where I live there are not a lot of 
other choices for providers. Honestly, we may have been lulled into 
thinking that we were to small to get our own space, or we needed to 
be multi-homed.
I have read on the website that we could fairly easily qualify, as 
far as what is currently percentage wise utilized. I need to start 
shifting all our networks to be fully routed and would be nice to 
have our own space. Our provider is fairly big in the upper plains, 
however things may change were we need to shift, or maybe get a 
second provider.
I assume that since ARIN is a non-profit organization that they would 
not be affected by the current government shut down. I could be 
wrong. I see they will be represented at WISPALooza this year. I was 
hoping to get a little input on current success from others before I 
put in a lot more research

thanks in advance
heith


___
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


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


Re: [WISPA] Help identifying this shackle

2013-09-16 Thread Sam Tetherow
Not sure if the block should be curved like that.  I would look at 
getting an equalizer plate if possible.  If this is a rohn, check 
http://www.3starinc.com/rohn_tower_guy_and_anchor.html


On 09/16/2013 01:32 PM, LaRoy McCann wrote:

Can anyone identify this shackle?
I think I have seen it before on the internet but can't find it now.






___
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] Latest trend for heavy wooded areas

2013-08-22 Thread Sam Tetherow
I don't have anything to compare it to other than Tranzeo 900, but I 
have had decent results with it.  It obviously won't push the throughput 
that 5G or even 2.4G will, even with the same channel sizes, but UBNT 
salvaged most of my 900 customers when the Tranzeo gear started running 
into problems.



On 08/22/2013 09:03 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
How is it junk? IIRC, everyone I've asked that claimed a given 900 MHz 
system was junk had a poor RF environment.




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


*From: *Erik Anderson erik.ander...@hocking.net
*To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
*Sent: *Thursday, August 22, 2013 8:49:55 AM
*Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Latest trend for heavy wooded areas

98% of our terrain is heavily wooded. Ubiquiti 900 is junk (but their 
other products perform quite well when they can be used). Cambium 900 
is better. Out limited experience with whitespace has been good. All 
of these technologies have very low bandwidth.


On 8/22/2013 12:04 AM, Chris Fabien wrote:

What are you guys deploying lately in heavily wooded areas? We've
used both Cambium pmp320 Wimax and UBNT M900, with mixed results
on both. We just put up a 130ft tower in a heavily wooded river
valley area, leaning towards the UBNT solution but hate putting
money into something I'm not really satisfied with.


___
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


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


Re: [WISPA] Hotspot Router/Software

2013-07-11 Thread Sam Tetherow
Just a correction, you do not have to run the UniFi controller on the 
same LAN segment as the APs. Check the UniFi wiki for instructions on 
setting up the controller in Amazon Web Services.  If you are using an 
MT probably the easiest way to do it is make sure that 'unifi' resolves 
to the controller address via DNS or DHCP option 43, instructions again 
found in the UniFi FAQ under L3 (Layer 3) Management


On 07/10/2013 11:41 PM, Ben West wrote:
I would second recommendations for UniFi APs.  Along with a Mikrotik 
box (I personally like the $60 RB750GL for small deployments) to 
manage DHCP lease assignment, do hotspot stuff, and manage the VPN 
tunnel back to headquarters.  That is, UniFi requires the java 
controller to sit on the same local network as the APs, so a 
work-around is to have the Mikrotik tunnel a VPN to your cloud server 
(or whatever) where the UniFi controller lives. You can also run your 
own hotspot server, and use some example PHP code provided by UBNT to 
integrate into existing infrastructure.


UniFi runs just fine on $80 Picostation M2's, if you flash them with 
that airos2unifi.bin binary floating around UBNT support forum.


If it's critical to support 'any' APs, maybe look into flashing those 
APs with OpenWRT, and then use a Mikrotik for the hotspot and lease 
assignment, coupled with a RADIUS server somewhere in the cloud.  This 
will likely send you down the the path of building your own system, as 
Scott describes, and I agree about being wary of the scope of such a 
task, from being in the midst of doing this myself.


On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 11:13 PM, Scott Carullo 
sc...@brevardwireless.com mailto:sc...@brevardwireless.com wrote:


Make your own web pages to collect money however you see fit, use
Mikrotik hotspot to handle the magic stuff, use whatever radios
you want.  Rolling your own system takes a respectable amount of
work and skill but there is nothing like it once done because you
control every aspect of it - how it looks, how it sends emails to
your staff or customers and whats in those emails, how it takes
the money, options for service lengths - just every aspect is
completely customizable.

If thats beyond the scope of what you are able to accomplish, I'm
sure there are lots of other good suggestions people are offering
as well.  Just letting you know how we do it and it works super
fantastic for a long time now.  Programming skills required...

Good luck

Scott Carullo
Technical Operations
855-FLSPEED x102




*From*: Chris Fabien ch...@lakenetmi.com
mailto:ch...@lakenetmi.com
*Sent*: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 9:59 PM
*To*: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
mailto:wireless@wispa.org
*Subject*: [WISPA] Hotspot Router/Software


I need suggestion for a hotspot system for a campground. Requirements:

Need to provide two levels of service
Basic Free Service - lower speed, limited MB per day
Paid Service - faster speed, unlimited use, billed as daily, 3
days or monthly service

Paid service can be purchased via credit card in online portal,
would be easiest if it could collect payment to our Propay
merchant account, paypal is a less desirable option, but we do
have a paypal acct as well.

Compatible with any wifi APs, this year we will connect to current
wifi APs in the park, probably overhaul that next season. Capable
of handling 100-200 users, maybe 50megs traffic max.

I would prefer an all in one box type system over a home
made/server/open source solution. Needs to be proven reliable
product and just work. Budget is ideally 200-300 for hardware
and some modest monthly cost is OK if necessary.

So, any suggestions? Thanks!


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




--
Ben West
http://gowasabi.net
b...@gowasabi.net mailto:b...@gowasabi.net
314-246-9434


___
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] Siklu Eband -finally affordable

2013-04-05 Thread Sam Tetherow

  
  
Yes, which is why they have a short
  distance. The difference is I don't think you have to worry about
  the oxygen level fluctuating so you don't have to build in huge
  fade margins for weather related events.
  
  On 04/05/2013 02:37 PM, Steve Barnes wrote:


  
  
  
  
  
When
you get into 80 GHz dont you have to worry about Oxygen
absorption of the signal.



  Steve Barnes
  General
  Manager
  PCS-WIN
  Howard
  LLC



  
From:
wireless-boun...@wispa.org
[mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
On Behalf Of Sam Tetherow
Sent: Friday, April 05, 2013 3:27 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Siklu Eband -finally
affordable
  



  Wow!

(partially because of the price drop, but mostly because I
haven't seen Tom post in forever, welcome back)

I haven't really studied up on 80GHz stuff, but it is my
understanding that you don't have to worry about rain fade,
and you have 10GHz of spectrum to use which should ease
co-location issues.

On 04/04/2013 09:06 PM, Tom DeReggi wrote:


  
Its
been ages since I've posted, butthis advertisement
surely caught my eye.
  
  

  
  
Siklu
Eband radios (licenced light) for sub $3500 per link.
FINALLY !!! We can afford to start using this 70G
spectrum.
  
  

  
  
Some
may say notthat exciting, considering24Ghz products
havealready hit that price mark and functionality, and
can go 3x the distance.
  
  
But,
I say its exciting, thats oneambitious price drop from
where other 80Ghz products have been priced at
($30k),historically2-4x over priced compared to 60Ghz
equivellent product, just because of the uniqueness to
license 80Ghz and slight increase in range. Its nice to
see someone finally do it, after I've been screaming for
it for the last 10 years.
  
  

  
  
Anyway...
anyone use the product yet and have feedback?
  
  
  

  
  

  
  

  
  
Tom DeReggi
  RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
  IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
  
  

  
  

  
  

  -
  Original Message -
  


  From:
~NGL~
  


  To:
WISPA
General List


  Sent:
  Thursday, April 04, 2013 7:55 PM


  Subject:
  [WISPA] Bullet M5HP


  


  What kind of throughput can I expect
with a pair of Bullet M5's PTP with 24 DBI Grids and
pure LOS at 2-5 miles?


  NGL


  

  

  
  
If you
can read this Thank A Teacher.
And if it's in English Thank A Soldier!
  

  


  

___
  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



  

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

Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti ERLite-3 3-port Router

2013-01-09 Thread Sam Tetherow
(this is not a reply to Brad, just couldn't find the head of the thread 
on this one)


It was more than just the capacitor issue with MT, there were the noisy 
532s which would interfere with two way radios as well at roughly the 
same time, there is the version crapshoot whenever a new release is 
made.  I usually have to troll through the forums to find the concensus 
on what firmware to be running for wireless and what firmware to be 
running for wired.


This is not to say that UBNT doesn't have issues, still fresh in 
everyone's mind is the toughcable debaucle, and it seems that new 
firmwares do have issues from time to time.  But it seems, to me at 
least, that UBNT is more than willing to own up to their mistakes, take 
their lumps and do the right thing with in reason. Their return policy 
is pretty liberal and I can only imagine how much they've spent shipping 
new toughcable.  I know it doesn't cover the cost of installation, but 
it is a far cry from the response we received from smartbridge or 
highgain and their products.


I have to admit I've never tried to RMA a routerboard, but I never got 
the impression I would have much luck.  MT rarely acknowledges bugs or 
defects in their product and has actively removed threads in their forum 
about legitimate bugs.


But the thing that gets me is how much people bitch about QA on a $70 
radio or a $500 core router and then in the same message bitch about 
slow releases and cry for new cutting edge features.  If you want to run 
tested and true routers or radios then get Cambium, Alvarion, Cisco or 
Juniper.  Too spendy?  Not enough new features? Wonder why?


There is a cost for cheaper cost and faster release cycles.  Is it 
frustrating, hell yes, but I accepted that frustration when I decided to 
go with their products.  I can only imagine what sort of regression 
testing has to occur on each new feature that goes in routeros and 
wireless can be set up in so many different ways and with so many 
different environmental variables that trying to account for all 
conditions and configurations would be a daunting task.


On 01/09/2013 07:44 AM, Brad Belton wrote:


Agreed. A carpenter once told me that some tools require more skill 
than other tools to use properly and get the desired results.  This 
isn't meant as a jab towards anyone, but I feel is an honest truth.  I 
know there are several tools in my bag that I wish I was more skilled 
with...MikroTik included.


The RouterBoard capacitor issue was a pain, but I believe they 
determined it was a counterfeiting issue and not a design problem.  
They received a large batch of capacitors that were not up to the 
specifications they should have been.  As compared to many wireless 
operators here we don't deploy a bunch of these boards, so I can 
appreciate the heartache some must be going through as these boards 
with bad capacitors fail slowly over time.


BTW, I think if you look at the board you can visually tell if it has 
counterfeit capacitors or not.  Pretty sure the green colored caps are 
the bad ones and the brown ones are good.


Best,

Brad

*From:*wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] 
*On Behalf Of *Gino Villarini

*Sent:* Wednesday, January 09, 2013 7:16 AM
*To:* WISPA General List
*Subject:* Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti ERLite-3 3-port Router

All I can say is that we have been running MK sinsce 2.x, some quirks 
along the way.  But we are happy with it,  No way we could have grown 
our company to this level on Cisco or Juniper since we rely heavy on 
VPLS and Mikrotik has allowed us to use it economically


Gino A. Villarini

g...@aeronetpr.com mailto:g...@aeronetpr.com

Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.

787.273.4143

*From:*wireless-boun...@wispa.org mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org 
[mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] *On Behalf Of *Matt Hoppes

*Sent:* Wednesday, January 09, 2013 9:06 AM
*To:* WISPA General List
*Cc:* WISPA General List
*Subject:* Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti ERLite-3 3-port Router

Each has their placeand MT has no place anywhere until they can 
prove that they can write reliable firmware and offer friendly support.


MikroTik - Latvian for . Oh I can't go there.


Sent from my iPad


On Jan 9, 2013, at 1:15, Blair Davis the...@wmwisp.net 
mailto:the...@wmwisp.net wrote:


I'd like to know as well.

We have been using MT since 2.3.

Been using UBNT since the SR2 came out..

Each has their place.

--

On 1/8/2013 10:35 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

I'm not bitter, I just don't see their advantage.  You can't
honestly expect support to exceed that of Mikrotik.  Features
are better in Mikrotik.  Price doesn't have a huge gap between
them.

Not exactly sure how you've had them running for months when
they haven't even started shipping.  Unless you got a beta
unit or something, which is probably not the same product that
you'd buy from a distributor.



Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti ERLite-3 3-port Router

2013-01-08 Thread Sam Tetherow
What is bandwidth shaping like on the EdgeRouter?  I know it can be done 
since it is debian under the hood, just wondering what the interface CLI 
or GUI is like.  I use to use a linux box for traffic shaping, but one 
of the main reasons for switch to MT back in the day was the fact that 
using tc on linux was painful.


On 01/08/2013 05:02 PM, Matt Hoppes wrote:
 Why not?  I've had very good success with mine so far. We've stopped buying 
 MikroTiks and will be phasing in ToughSwitches and EdgeRouters.

 I need support. MT was good while there was no other competition.

 On Jan 8, 2013, at 17:30, Christian Palecek christ...@cybernet1.com wrote:

 I wouldn't touch one with a ten foot pole.

 Sent from my Verizon Wireless smartphone

 Jon Auer j...@tapodi.net wrote:

 Streakwave is supposedly shipping orders placed back when it was announced.
 Mine hasn't arrived yet :-(
 On Jan 8, 2013 12:57 PM, Steve Barnes st...@pcswin.com wrote:

 That’s the new UBNT Edge Router line.  I was not aware that they have
 actually shipped to general public yet.  

 ** **

 UBNT is trying to get into the Router market as well.  Time will tell.

 ** **

 Steve Barnes

 General Manager

 PCS-WIN / RC-WiFi http://www.rcwifi.com/

 ** **

 *From:* wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] *On
 Behalf Of *~NGL~
 *Sent:* Tuesday, January 08, 2013 1:43 PM
 *To:* WISPA General List
 *Subject:* [WISPA] Ubiquiti ERLite-3 3-port Router

 ** **

 Anyone have any experience with this router?

 NGL

 

 If you can read this Thank A Teacher.
 And if it's in English Thank A Soldier!

 ** **

 ___
 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
 ___
 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] Ubiquiti ERLite-3 3-port Router

2013-01-08 Thread Sam Tetherow
Which is debian under the hood. Haven't used vyatta though so I don't 
know if there is a vyatta abstraction for tc or not, which is why I 
asked the question of the interface for bandwidth limiting.


On 01/08/2013 06:15 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:


Vyatta under the hood.

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

On Jan 8, 2013 6:55 PM, Sam Tetherow tethe...@shwisp.net 
mailto:tethe...@shwisp.net wrote:


What is bandwidth shaping like on the EdgeRouter?  I know it can
be done
since it is debian under the hood, just wondering what the
interface CLI
or GUI is like.  I use to use a linux box for traffic shaping, but one
of the main reasons for switch to MT back in the day was the fact that
using tc on linux was painful.


On 01/08/2013 05:02 PM, Matt Hoppes wrote:
 Why not?  I've had very good success with mine so far. We've
stopped buying MikroTiks and will be phasing in ToughSwitches and
EdgeRouters.

 I need support. MT was good while there was no other competition.

 On Jan 8, 2013, at 17:30, Christian Palecek
christ...@cybernet1.com mailto:christ...@cybernet1.com wrote:

 I wouldn't touch one with a ten foot pole.

 Sent from my Verizon Wireless smartphone

 Jon Auer j...@tapodi.net mailto:j...@tapodi.net wrote:

 Streakwave is supposedly shipping orders placed back when it
was announced.
 Mine hasn't arrived yet :-(
 On Jan 8, 2013 12:57 PM, Steve Barnes st...@pcswin.com
mailto:st...@pcswin.com wrote:

 That's the new UBNT Edge Router line.  I was not aware that
they have
 actually shipped to general public yet.  

 ** **

 UBNT is trying to get into the Router market as well.  Time
will tell.

 ** **

 Steve Barnes

 General Manager

 PCS-WIN / RC-WiFi http://www.rcwifi.com/

 ** **

 *From:* wireless-boun...@wispa.org
mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org
[mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org
mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] *On
 Behalf Of *~NGL~
 *Sent:* Tuesday, January 08, 2013 1:43 PM
 *To:* WISPA General List
 *Subject:* [WISPA] Ubiquiti ERLite-3 3-port Router

 ** **

 Anyone have any experience with this router?

 NGL

 

 If you can read this Thank A Teacher.
 And if it's in English Thank A Soldier!

 ** **

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

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org mailto: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


Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti Radios as routers

2012-10-19 Thread Sam Tetherow
No, I think he wants some piece of equipment that allows the subscriber 
to plug into the ethernet port on his CPE and it is handed a public IP 
address via DHCP (that he can control without knowing the MAC of the 
equipment).

One way to come close would be to assign a /30 to each customer and have 
the CPE in router mode handing out the other end of the /30, but this 
wastes 2 public IPs for each customer which is wasteful, it will also 
require each CPE to be provisioned individually to each customer and 
routing to be done to each CPE.


On 10/19/2012 04:40 PM, Butch Evans wrote:
 On Fri, 2012-10-19 at 15:52 -0500, Mike Hammett wrote:
 It's going to require the radio company to do it first.
 So, you want to see a mechanism in place where you (or your customer)
 purchase some random gear, put it on their tower or house and they are
 online without you doing anything?  THAT is a bad plan, even if it were
 possible.



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


Re: [WISPA] Ubiquiti Radios as routers

2012-10-11 Thread Sam Tetherow
We do it because it makes customer maintenance a lot easier.  They can 
replace/remove their router without having to call the office or 
changing settings in their computer or router, everything comes with 
DHCP enabled default.  There are very few places where the customer will 
ever know.  If there is a problem, we will set the radio in bridge mode 
and give them a static IP, but the only place we ever do that is if they 
have a higher end router and need to be able to run VPNs.


If they want to manage their own port forwarding and such, we just DMZ 
the radio (be sure you uncheck the DMZ management ports) and forward all 
the traffic to a static 192.168.100.x which is what they statically set 
their router to.


We use to be all bridged with CB3s back in the day, and I have no desire 
what so ever to go back.



On 10/11/2012 02:46 PM, Arthur Stephens wrote:
We currently use Ubiquiti radios in bridge mode and assign a ip 
address to the customers router.

He have heard other wisp are using the Ubiquiti radio as a router.
Would like feed back why one would do this when it appears customers 
would be double natted when they hook up their routers?

Or does it not matter from the customer experience?

Thanks

--
Arthur Stephens
Senior Sales Technician
Ptera Wireless Inc.
PO Box 135
24001 E Mission Suite 50
Liberty Lake, WA 99019
509-927-7837
For technical support visit http://www.ptera.net/support
 - 

This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, 
and is intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally 
addressed.
Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views 
or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and 
are not intended to represent those of the company.



___
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] Ubiquiti Radios as routers

2012-10-11 Thread Sam Tetherow
Not sure I under stand the no-NAT, so every device on the other side of 
the CPE has it's own public IP?


On 10/11/2012 4:53 PM, Scott Reed wrote:
We run MT, not UBNT, CPE, but it doesn't matter what brand it is. We 
run them in as routers, but do not NAT.  Same benefits others 
mentioned for routing, just one fewer NAT.  Never have a problem with 
it this way and can't see any good reason to NAT there.


On 10/11/2012 3:46 PM, Arthur Stephens wrote:
We currently use Ubiquiti radios in bridge mode and assign a ip 
address to the customers router.

He have heard other wisp are using the Ubiquiti radio as a router.
Would like feed back why one would do this when it appears customers 
would be double natted when they hook up their routers?

Or does it not matter from the customer experience?

Thanks

--
Arthur Stephens
Senior Sales Technician
Ptera Wireless Inc.
PO Box 135
24001 E Mission Suite 50
Liberty Lake, WA 99019
509-927-7837
For technical support visit http://www.ptera.net/support
 - 

This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, 
and is intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally 
addressed.
Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views 
or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author 
and are not intended to represent those of the company.



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


No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com http://www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.2677 / Virus Database: 2591/5802 - Release Date: 10/01/12
Internal Virus Database is out of date.



--
Scott Reed
Owner
NewWays Networking, LLC
Wireless Networking
Network Design, Installation and Administration

  


Mikrotik Advanced Certified
  
www.nwwnet.net

(765) 855-1060
(765) 439-4253
(855) 231-6239


___
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] Classified Ads Page

2012-09-13 Thread Sam Tetherow
There are a couple of easy ways to set up a classified section in drupal 
(once you get moved to a different hosting provider).  Workflows can be 
used to set up moderator queue so when a member posts a classified it 
sets in pending until someone with authority approves it.

I would think that classifieds would be restricted (at least from 
posting) to members only so I would think that that should keep the spam 
down.

On 09/13/2012 01:38 PM, Rick Harnish wrote:
 Scott,

 That is most of the spam I saw.

 Where there is a Wisp, there is a way!

 Respectfully,

 Rick Harnish
 Executive Director
 WISPA
 260-307-4000 cell
 866-317-2851 Option 2 WISPA Office
 Skype: rick.harnish.
 rharn...@wispa.org
 adm...@wispa.org (Trina and Rick)





 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of Scott Lambert
 Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2012 2:36 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Classified Ads Page

 On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 01:17:41PM -0400, Rick Harnish wrote:
 Matt,

 The classified ads was a part of the old website.  Since we changed
 hosting providers which ties the website to our database records, they
 do not let us add third party plugins.  Therefore, I have been unable
 to add a classified section.  We will hopefully be moving the website
 to a different host in the coming months because I would like to
 restore the classifieds and other features to the website.

 I did spend a lot of time on moderation of the ads.  Anytime you open
 a classified website, you open yourself up to a lot of spam ads.  It
 was a pain to tell you the truth.
 On our classifieds site, I eventually added a access list which allows
 only US IPs.
 People from china and india had no business posting their ads on our site.
 It's
 been pretty clean since then.

 --
 Scott LambertKC5MLE   Unix
 SysAdmin
 lamb...@lambertfam.org

 ___
 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


Re: [WISPA] Trango

2012-08-31 Thread Sam Tetherow
Can you log in, or is that the problem?

On 08/30/2012 07:00 PM, tcl wrote:
 Any old timers here remember how to reset a trango 58 series ap?

 t


 ___
 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] Wire shark !

2012-08-31 Thread Sam Tetherow

Pretty sure the Trango does, I know the T-LNK 11's do.

On 08/31/2012 11:22 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:


But it will not show if it doesn't put packets on the wire.

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

On Aug 31, 2012 12:16 PM, Eric Williams {WISP} 
w...@williamsteldata.com mailto:w...@williamsteldata.com wrote:


If your looking for the IP ? plug the radio into a computer and
run wire
shark. That has work for me ! you my need a cross over cable with
Trango.

Eric Williams {W7EMW}
Williams Tel Data / SDWISP
The man with a secure wireless plan!
8130 La Mesa Bl #700
La Mesa Ca 91942
619-698-3904 tel:619-698-3904 {office}

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org mailto: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


Re: [WISPA] Wire shark !

2012-08-31 Thread Sam Tetherow

At boot there is traffic.

On 08/31/2012 11:35 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:

Are you saying the APs just randomly put packets out there?

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


On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 12:31 PM, Sam Tetherow tethe...@shwisp.net 
mailto:tethe...@shwisp.net wrote:


Pretty sure the Trango does, I know the T-LNK 11's do.


On 08/31/2012 11:22 AM, Josh Luthman wrote:


But it will not show if it doesn't put packets on the wire.

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

On Aug 31, 2012 12:16 PM, Eric Williams {WISP}
w...@williamsteldata.com mailto:w...@williamsteldata.com wrote:

If your looking for the IP ? plug the radio into a computer
and run wire
shark. That has work for me ! you my need a cross over cable
with Trango.

Eric Williams {W7EMW}
Williams Tel Data / SDWISP
The man with a secure wireless plan!
8130 La Mesa Bl #700
La Mesa Ca 91942
619-698-3904 tel:619-698-3904 {office}

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



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



___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org mailto: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


Re: [WISPA] Pac Wireless DA58-29 polarity

2012-08-30 Thread Sam Tetherow
Patrick is correct, I was remembering wrong, the notches are on the 
inside of the dish at the base of the LNB.


On 08/30/2012 09:35 AM, Patrick Wheeland wrote:


Unfortunately, it's on the other side of the dish.  You'll have to 
take the radome cover off to see which polarity it's set for.


-Patrick

*From:*wireless-boun...@wispa.org mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org 
[mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org 
mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] *On Behalf Of *Scott Reed

*Sent:* Thursday, August 30, 2012 8:11 AM
*To:* WISPA General List
*Subject:* Re: [WISPA] Pac Wireless DA58-29 polarity

Which side of the dish is that on?  This one is over 100' up and has a 
radome on it.  We are redeploying it, but just a new direction on ht 
same tower so we don't want to take it apart.  We just can't find the 
records of which way it was installed.


On 8/29/2012 6:36 PM, Sam Tetherow wrote:

There should be a screw under the attachment nut that fits into a
groove on the dish.  If the screw is up or down it is vertical, if
it is left or right it is horizontal.

On 08/29/2012 05:25 PM, Scott Reed wrote:

Is this setup as vertical or horizontal polarity.


-- 


Scott Reed

Owner

NewWays Networking, LLC

Wireless Networking

Network Design, Installation and Administration

  

  

  


Mikrotik Advanced Certified

  


www.nwwnet.net  http://www.nwwnet.net

(765) 855-1060

(765) 439-4253

(855) 231-6239




___

Wireless mailing list

Wireless@wispa.org  mailto:Wireless@wispa.org

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





___

Wireless mailing list

Wireless@wispa.org  mailto:Wireless@wispa.org

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




No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com http://www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2197 / Virus Database: 2437/5232 - Release Date:
08/29/12



--
Scott Reed
Owner
NewWays Networking, LLC
Wireless Networking
Network Design, Installation and Administration
  
  
  
Mikrotik Advanced Certified
  
www.nwwnet.net  http://www.nwwnet.net

(765) 855-1060
(765) 439-4253
(855) 231-6239


___
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] Ubiquity ... Stock Price .. News ...

2012-08-09 Thread Sam Tetherow

  
  
If you still have faith in the company, now is a good time to buy
down your cost basis.

On 08/09/2012 05:44 PM, Doug Clark wrote:

  
  
  
  

  

  

  Have you ever had 100,000 barrels of oil that you
purchased at 110.00 per barrelthat you are sitting
on and then overnight
  the price per barrel drops to75.00 per barrel?
ON SALE HUH??
  
  

  
  



  ---Original
  Message---
  
  
From:
  Zach Mann
Date:
  8/9/2012 4:45:42 PM
To:
  WISPA General
List
Subject:
  Re: [WISPA] Ubiquity ... Stock Price .. News ...
  
  
  Sweet! It's on sale... 
  On Aug 9, 2012 5:40 PM, "Doug
Clark" d...@txox.com
wrote:

  

  

  

  
I just suddenly got very
  ill


  


  
  
  ---Original
  Message---
  
  
From: Faisal Imtiaz
Date:
  8/9/2012 4:31:54 PM
To: WISPA General
List
Subject:
  [WISPA] Ubiquity ... Stock Price
  .. News ...
  
  
  OUCH !
  
  Anyone following this stuff...
  
  http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/ubnt
  
  --
  Faisal Imtiaz
  Snappy Internet  Telecom
  7266 SW 48 Street
  Miami, Fl 33155
  Tel: 305 663 5518
  x 232
  Helpdesk: 305 663 5518
option 2 Email: supp...@snappydsl.net
  
  
  ___
  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
  

  

  
  

  

Re: [WISPA] UBNT APs: can they do UAM + DHCP on one fat AP?

2012-07-06 Thread Sam Tetherow
Inline.

On 07/06/2012 05:37 AM, Rogelio wrote:
 Thanks, Sam.  That is helpful.

 FWIW, I'm currently researching the following things on UBNT...

 1) How exactly is UAM done on all Ubiquiti radios?  Specifically, can
 an AP do the following...

 a) white lists an offsite portal page (e.g. NNU or Aptilo)
Yes, under guest control you specify it as 'External Portal Server' and 
set the custom portal IP and optional hostname (if using virtualhosts).
 b) redirects unauthorized users to this portal page?
Yes, all traffic not authorized is sent to the portal page.
 c) after client pays on portal page, tell the AP UAM webserver on
 Ubiquiti radio to authenticate the user
Yes there is an API that you can use to authenticate MAC addresses, the 
portal redirect sends uses to a PORTALIP/guest/ with two 'POST'ed 
arguments 'id' which is the MAC address of the connected client and 
'url' which is the destination of the original web request.

You can then perform any sort of authorization (payment, password 
verification, etc) and authorize the MAC to the UniFi controller for a 
specific amount of time.
 d) pre-authenticate user MAC addresses that roam from other APs?
I have not tried this so I'm not 100% sure.  Quick and dirty would to 
authorize the MAC address for a very long period of time (say 10 years).

 2) If a Ubiquiti device already services an SSID, how can it also
 serve a separate SSID that (a) does it's own UAM, and (b) does its own
 DHCP scope?  Can I do this existing hardware?  Or do I need to get a
 new radio for each new service?
UniFi units can service multiple 'Wireless Networks' which each have 
their own SSID and settings, you can have a network which has guest 
control as described above, another that has encryption and a third that 
is completely open.  One thing to keep in mind, each additional 
'Wireless Network' will reduce available throughput for each AP as some 
air time is spent on beacon traffic etc, I believe there is a hard limit 
of 4 networks, but I haven't tested anything more than 2.

I am not sure what a UAM is, as for DHCP the UniFi units act as wireless 
bridges basically, DHCP needs to be handled with a seperate DHCP server, 
such as a Mikrotik.

 From a UniFi standpoint everything occurs at the MAC level so you could 
have multiple UniFi units operating in private IP space behind seperate 
NAT routers all belonging to the same 'Wireless Network' (which means 
they share the same SSID, access control, and management interface).

 Ideally, I'd like to stack services on existing UBNT networks, as
 well as roll out new ones...hence the reason I'm hoping for some sort
 of simple UAM overlay.
Again, not sure what UAM stands for.  UniFi is a seperate firmware used 
on the UniFi products (indoor, indoor longrange, outdoor outdoor 5Ghz, 
indoor dual band), you can also flash the PicoM2s with the unifi 
firmware for a single pol 2Ghz.


 On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Sam Tetherowtethe...@shwisp.net  wrote:
 This sounds pretty much like UniFi.  The UniFi units do not handle the DHCP
 so you would need something handing out leases like a small Mikrotik box.
 You then add all the UniFi units that you want to be 'seamless' to the same
 network in the unifi controller.  The unifi controller can be run anywhere
 that is reachable from the UniFi units (the UniFi's do not have to be
 reachable from the controller though, so then can be behind a NAT).



 On 07/04/2012 05:17 PM, Rogelio wrote:

 (Apologies if my questions are a bit naive, I'm still getting used to how
 Ubiquiti does things. I've always done things the traditional way in carrier
 networks, i.e. tunneling everything back to the core and then breaking out
 traffic accordingly).

 I have some questions about Ubiquiti's ability to integrate with UAM.

 I have a scenario where I will have approximately 1000-2000 APs scattered
 across different extremely rural areas with limited backhaul space. These
 areas will likely NOT have the expertise to properly babysit a core
 solution.

 In a past life, I've often just put in an access point with some sort of
 DHCP solution and UAM redirect. This AP plugged directly into the modem
 (DSL, cable, etc) and then got a public CPE address which I could manage
 remotely. When customers hit the open SSID, they got a spash page that was
 served by NetNearU (NetNearU.com), and when they authenticated, their MAC
 was whitelisted on for the duration of time. When they went to another AP
 that had a different DHCP server, their MAC address was pre-authenticated
 and they appeared (from their perspective to roam).

 A few questions on how I can do this The Ubiquiti Way.

 1) Does Ubiquiti do DHCP at the edge on each AP? If not, is there some 3rd
 party software I can use? I understand if this is not supported and if I
 have to figure this out myself. That is not a problem.

 2) Does Ubiquiti have a way of vectoring the users off to this database? I
 see that Chili has a plugin, and it looks relatively 

Re: [WISPA] UBNT APs: can they do UAM + DHCP on one fat AP?

2012-07-06 Thread Sam Tetherow
Unless he is looking at overlaying on an existing network (as is alluded 
to at the bottom of this email), UniFi will handle basically everything 
he is asking for with about 1 hour worth of custom scripting for the 
authentication/payment piece.

Mikrotik will certainly handle this, but the implementation time would 
be significantly more.  If he is wanting to do this over the top of an 
existing network, then UniFi would not work, but Mikrotik certainly will.

On 07/06/2012 07:44 AM, Steve Barnes wrote:
 Mikrotik would be much better for what your talking about doing.  You are 
 talking about a lot of router functions.  UBNT has some ability but is mostly 
 a Wireless OS. Where Mtik has some wireless ability but is a RouterOS.

 Steve Barnes
 General Manager
 PCS-WIN / RC-WiFi


 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
 Behalf Of Rogelio
 Sent: Friday, July 06, 2012 6:37 AM
 To: Sam Tetherow
 Cc: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT APs: can they do UAM + DHCP on one fat AP?

 Thanks, Sam.  That is helpful.

 FWIW, I'm currently researching the following things on UBNT...

 1) How exactly is UAM done on all Ubiquiti radios?  Specifically, can an AP 
 do the following...

 a) white lists an offsite portal page (e.g. NNU or Aptilo)
 b) redirects unauthorized users to this portal page?
 c) after client pays on portal page, tell the AP UAM webserver on Ubiquiti 
 radio to authenticate the user
 d) pre-authenticate user MAC addresses that roam from other APs?

 2) If a Ubiquiti device already services an SSID, how can it also serve a 
 separate SSID that (a) does it's own UAM, and (b) does its own DHCP scope?  
 Can I do this existing hardware?  Or do I need to get a new radio for each 
 new service?

 Ideally, I'd like to stack services on existing UBNT networks, as well as 
 roll out new ones...hence the reason I'm hoping for some sort of simple UAM 
 overlay.

 On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Sam Tetherowtethe...@shwisp.net  wrote:
 This sounds pretty much like UniFi.  The UniFi units do not handle the
 DHCP so you would need something handing out leases like a small Mikrotik 
 box.
 You then add all the UniFi units that you want to be 'seamless' to the
 same network in the unifi controller.  The unifi controller can be run
 anywhere that is reachable from the UniFi units (the UniFi's do not
 have to be reachable from the controller though, so then can be behind a 
 NAT).



 On 07/04/2012 05:17 PM, Rogelio wrote:

 (Apologies if my questions are a bit naive, I'm still getting used to
 how Ubiquiti does things. I've always done things the traditional way
 in carrier networks, i.e. tunneling everything back to the core and
 then breaking out traffic accordingly).

 I have some questions about Ubiquiti's ability to integrate with UAM.

 I have a scenario where I will have approximately 1000-2000 APs
 scattered across different extremely rural areas with limited backhaul
 space. These areas will likely NOT have the expertise to properly
 babysit a core solution.

 In a past life, I've often just put in an access point with some sort
 of DHCP solution and UAM redirect. This AP plugged directly into the
 modem (DSL, cable, etc) and then got a public CPE address which I
 could manage remotely. When customers hit the open SSID, they got a
 spash page that was served by NetNearU (NetNearU.com), and when they
 authenticated, their MAC was whitelisted on for the duration of time.
 When they went to another AP that had a different DHCP server, their
 MAC address was pre-authenticated and they appeared (from their perspective 
 to roam).

 A few questions on how I can do this The Ubiquiti Way.

 1) Does Ubiquiti do DHCP at the edge on each AP? If not, is there some
 3rd party software I can use? I understand if this is not supported
 and if I have to figure this out myself. That is not a problem.

 2) Does Ubiquiti have a way of vectoring the users off to this
 database? I see that Chili has a plugin, and it looks relatively simple to 
 integrate.
 Does this still work with the current OS? Or have things changed?

 http://coova.org/node/3685

 3) Can someone recommend a hosted user database solution that is cheap
 and reliable? If I had to roll it myself, what would you recommend?

 4) Do I have to use UniFi? Can I just script out some sort of login
 script to quickly deploy and configure these thigns?

 This project (if it takes off) could be about 1000-2000 thousand APs
 scattered across rural Africa and South America. I'm hoping for
 limited equipment at the edge (things like battery backups and
 customized antennas may be needed in some cases, but I'm hoping for limited 
 network equipment).

 If anyone has any ideas or would like for me to connect them with the
 various decision makers, please feel free to contact me offline. I'm
 not looking to make anything off this project, just donate a little
 time in helping it get off the ground

Re: [WISPA] UBNT APs: can they do UAM + DHCP on one fat AP?

2012-07-05 Thread Sam Tetherow
This sounds pretty much like UniFi.  The UniFi units do not handle the 
DHCP so you would need something handing out leases like a small 
Mikrotik box.  You then add all the UniFi units that you want to be 
'seamless' to the same network in the unifi controller.  The unifi 
controller can be run anywhere that is reachable from the UniFi units 
(the UniFi's do not have to be reachable from the controller though, so 
then can be behind a NAT).



On 07/04/2012 05:17 PM, Rogelio wrote:
(Apologies if my questions are a bit naive, I'm still getting used to 
how Ubiquiti does things. I've always done things the traditional way 
in carrier networks, i.e. tunneling everything back to the core and 
then breaking out traffic accordingly).


I have some questions about Ubiquiti's ability to integrate with UAM.

I have a scenario where I will have approximately 1000-2000 APs 
scattered across different extremely rural areas with limited backhaul 
space. These areas will likely NOT have the expertise to properly 
babysit a core solution.


In a past life, I've often just put in an access point with some sort 
of DHCP solution and UAM redirect. This AP plugged directly into the 
modem (DSL, cable, etc) and then got a public CPE address which I 
could manage remotely. When customers hit the open SSID, they got a 
spash page that was served by NetNearU (NetNearU.com), and when they 
authenticated, their MAC was whitelisted on for the duration of time. 
When they went to another AP that had a different DHCP server, their 
MAC address was pre-authenticated and they appeared (from their 
perspective to roam).


A few questions on how I can do this The Ubiquiti Way.

1) Does Ubiquiti do DHCP at the edge on each AP? If not, is there some 
3rd party software I can use? I understand if this is not supported 
and if I have to figure this out myself. That is not a problem.


2) Does Ubiquiti have a way of vectoring the users off to this 
database? I see that Chili has a plugin, and it looks relatively 
simple to integrate. Does this still work with the current OS? Or have 
things changed?


http://coova.org/node/3685

3) Can someone recommend a hosted user database solution that is cheap 
and reliable? If I had to roll it myself, what would you recommend?


4) Do I have to use UniFi? Can I just script out some sort of login 
script to quickly deploy and configure these thigns?


This project (if it takes off) could be about 1000-2000 thousand APs 
scattered across rural Africa and South America. I'm hoping for 
limited equipment at the edge (things like battery backups and 
customized antennas may be needed in some cases, but I'm hoping for 
limited network equipment).


If anyone has any ideas or would like for me to connect them with the 
various decision makers, please feel free to contact me offline. I'm 
not looking to make anything off this project, just donate a little 
time in helping it get off the ground by asking the right questions.


--
Also on LinkedIn?  Feel free to connect if you too are an open 
networker: scubac...@gmail.com mailto:scubac...@gmail.com



___
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] Site Survey Method

2012-05-23 Thread Sam Tetherow
I'd have to dig around, but I'm pretty sure I have a wired ethernet card 
(PCMCIA) for the iPAQ.

On 05/17/2012 01:03 PM, Rick Kunze wrote:
 At 11:05 AM 5/16/2012, you wrote:
 Trying to figure out a good way to do site surveys and monitor
 signal strength while on the customer's roof
 To this day, I'm still using the same iPad PDA I used 12 years ago
 when I bought it.  I've not seen anything come along that would replace it.

 It's a PDA with the accessory pack thing attached, so that I can
 run an Orinoco PCMCIA card in it.  Someone back then whipped up
 driver for WinCE so that the Orinico card worked.  (Lonnie)  With
 that and a hand held small tubular yagi, it works like a charm.  It
 reads 802.11b only of course.  Shows other AP's, signal strength,
 noise floor, etc.  I use a 15db yagi and pigtail to the
 Orinoco.  Climb onto the roof, sweep for signal, read the level, and
 you can easily calculate margin for various alternative antennas.

 What I'd really like to find is a hand held device like that with an
 Etnernet port.  It seems nobody puts Ethernet ports in anything
 smaller than a laptop and even that's getting replaced more and more
 with wireless.

 Rk



 ___
 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] Site Survey Method

2012-05-23 Thread Sam Tetherow
I got tech much older than that laying around ;)

On 05/23/2012 02:55 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
 Customers might wonder if you're really up to snuff on this whole
 technology thing...

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


 On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 3:52 PM, Sam Tetherowtethe...@shwisp.net  wrote:
 I'd have to dig around, but I'm pretty sure I have a wired ethernet card
 (PCMCIA) for the iPAQ.

 On 05/17/2012 01:03 PM, Rick Kunze wrote:
 At 11:05 AM 5/16/2012, you wrote:
 Trying to figure out a good way to do site surveys and monitor
 signal strength while on the customer's roof
 To this day, I'm still using the same iPad PDA I used 12 years ago
 when I bought it.  I've not seen anything come along that would replace it.

 It's a PDA with the accessory pack thing attached, so that I can
 run an Orinoco PCMCIA card in it.  Someone back then whipped up
 driver for WinCE so that the Orinico card worked.  (Lonnie)  With
 that and a hand held small tubular yagi, it works like a charm.  It
 reads 802.11b only of course.  Shows other AP's, signal strength,
 noise floor, etc.  I use a 15db yagi and pigtail to the
 Orinoco.  Climb onto the roof, sweep for signal, read the level, and
 you can easily calculate margin for various alternative antennas.

 What I'd really like to find is a hand held device like that with an
 Etnernet port.  It seems nobody puts Ethernet ports in anything
 smaller than a laptop and even that's getting replaced more and more
 with wireless.

 Rk



 ___
 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

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


Re: [WISPA] 4g?

2012-05-23 Thread Sam Tetherow
I wonder if I would get any takers if I announced 4g plan options. Let 
the user run at 12x5 and charge the same pricing tiers.  Just ran a 
quick analysis and I would be billing 4x monthly.  And no-one would be 
paying less than they currently do now, although most would be paying 
atleast double.


On 05/23/2012 04:41 PM, Jason Bailey wrote:
http://www.mlive.com/business/index.ssf/2012/05/new_rural_internet_option_veri.html 





Nice



___
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] Help coming up with company name....

2012-05-11 Thread Sam Tetherow
Same here, I don't get it quite as much, but we use to get a lot of 
people calling for cellular service.

On 05/10/2012 08:45 PM, can...@believewireless.net wrote:
 Personally I'd avoid wireless in the name and use networks or broadband.

 GuarNet - Guardian Networks
 NetGuar - Network Guardians
 ___
 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] Brian's coverage map broken?

2012-05-11 Thread Sam Tetherow
Yes.

On 05/11/2012 05:51 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
 Does this fail to load at all or completely for anyone else?

 http://www.wirelessmapping.com/Google%20Maps3.htm

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

2012-04-27 Thread Sam Tetherow
Interesting, mine has been running without a glitch at home since 
November, nothing fancy in the config, just a standard SOHO setup with 
one pptp VPN connection.


On 04/26/2012 02:23 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:


Free one from Vegas died.  Bought one and it reboots every few days.  
Not customer ready.


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

On Apr 26, 2012 3:19 PM, Blake Covarrubias bl...@beamspeed.com 
mailto:bl...@beamspeed.com wrote:


Is anyone utilizing RB751's for this role? If so, are they reliable?

I've thought about using them since they can easily be managed
remotely by our staff via Webfig, or the API.

-- 
Blake Covarrubias


On Apr 26, 2012, at 11:40, Chris Fabien ch...@lakenetmi.com
mailto:ch...@lakenetmi.com wrote:


We use TP-Link WR340G and can usually get them for about $20
shipped. Just a basic G router, but adequate for most
customers/houses. We have over 100 in the field and only 1 bad
one in about a year of using them. Used to use Linksys and
Netgear, had 3-4 times the failure rate on those.

On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Darin Steffl dcsho...@gmail.com
mailto:dcsho...@gmail.com wrote:

Hey guys,

What are some of you providing for customer wireless routers
if you include them in the install as I do?  I currently have
a batch of 10 Ubiquiti Air Routers and the first two I pulled
out are giving me some problems.  Could be a bad batch.

I am also looking at TP-Link as they are about $30 on Amazon
with external antennas and pretty good reviews.

TP-Link TL-WR841N

What are you guys using?

-- 
Darin Steffl


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


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


___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org mailto: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


Re: [WISPA] Engenius hardware from Microcenter (don't do it!)

2012-01-24 Thread Sam Tetherow
Haven't bought anything from Engenius since the CB3s, we tried some of 
their new 802.11g gear when it first came out and found that it had 
hardware issues (high failure rate and overheating issues, even 
indoors).  It failed even faster than HighGain stuff did.


Now the CB3, that was an indistructable radio, I have over a hundred 
still deployed after 7 years although they are all due to get replaced 
this spring since we didn't get everything replaced last fall.


On 01/24/2012 09:16 PM, Ben West wrote:
Although I'm guessing very few folks on this list use Engenius 
EOC-1650 access points, I can relate that my very small experiment 
sampling product quality in outdoor Engenius gear from Microcenter has 
yielded 100% duds.


That is, of the APs purchased in a pinch last month because my usual 
supplier was out of stock, all of them, 100% of them, or not 0% of 
them, have been returned due to defects discovered.


Both appeared to have transmitter failures, one exhibited maybe 20% or 
30% of the tx power it should have had, and the other appears to have 
lost its transmitter entirely.


Thankfully, Microcenter took them both back, probably to be packed 
back into boxes and re-shelved.


--
Ben West
http://gowasabi.net
b...@gowasabi.net mailto:b...@gowasabi.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] population density map for Washington.

2012-01-05 Thread Sam Tetherow
I feel your pain Marlon

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/60/Nebraska_population_map.png

I'm in Cherry County (the largest county on the northern border)

On 1/5/12 10:31 AM, Marlon K. Schafer (509-982-2181) wrote:
 This is very interesting.

 http://wabroadbandmapping.org/PDF/Statewide/Population_Density_2010.pdf

 I'm in Lincoln Co.  Us and Douglas probably have the lowest population
 density in the entire state.

 I'd love to compare that to a state like Vermont or something.  People like
 to talk about rural access.  Man, I can tell you *all* about rural access!

 grin
 marlon



 
 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'm new, I hope this is the right list...

2011-11-28 Thread Sam Tetherow
Rich,
Given current gear, FCC regulations and available spectrum, outside of 
reselling cellular you are not going to going to find anything you will 
be able to reliable allow the customer to self-install.  Trust me, there 
are smarter minds than mine that have been trying to figure that one out 
since this industry started.

As Jay mentioned, Clearwire is probably the closest business model to 
what you are looking for, and even with their deep pockets and licensed 
spectrum they are having a tough time making it work.  And I think it is 
precisely because they are choosing to go the route that you are looking 
for.

If they took their spectrum and equipment and used it as traditional, 
professionally installed fixed wireless setup they would probably have a 
working business model.  Sure their return on investment would be higher 
due to the installer cost, but if they took a dish-network model to 
getting installs done they would only be looking at 3-6 months break 
even on the install cost and considering the amount of money that has 
already been poured into the business I would think that would be a drop 
in the bucket.

Rich _ wrote:
 Thx Faisal, I'm located in PA in the USA.
  
 But, I'm not interested in starting a WISP based on where I'm located. 
 I'm interested in finding a location that best enables success for the 
 business.
  
 Yes, I would be looked at as the business/funding person. A technical 
 partner or technical contractor/employee would be needed. I hope 
 available equipment is quite stable and reliable?

 On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 6:44 PM, Faisal Imtiaz fai...@snappydsl.net 
 mailto:fai...@snappydsl.net wrote:

 Hi Rich,
 WISPA General List is actually a Global List.
 It would go a long ways for relevant folks to reply back to you if
 you at least share what part of the world ? / State or City if in
 the US.

 My personal reaction after reading the first two paragraphs was to
 suggest that you should consider some other business other than
 being a WISP.

 However after reading the last two paragraphs, it sounds like you
 may be the Business / Funding guy, looking for a Technical Partner
 to build a business together.

 The only reason I am saying this is because this is a tough
 business to be in if you are not going to roll up your sleeves and
 get your hands dirty.


 Regards and Good Luck.


 Faisal Imtiaz
 Snappy Internet  Telecom
 7266 SW 48 Street
 Miami, Fl 33155
 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 tel:305%20663%205518%20x%20232
 Helpdesk: 305 663 5518 tel:305%20663%205518 option 2 Email: 
 supp...@snappydsl.net mailto:supp...@snappydsl.net


 On 11/28/2011 6:33 PM, Rich _ wrote:
 Hello,
  
 I operate in the custom software development industry and am
 considering setting up a WISP as a new business investment. I
 know very little about the industry and am hoping that some of
 you will not mind giving me some feedback. In exchange, I'll be
 glad to answer any software development questions you may have
 that I can answer or that I can get an answer for.
  
 I'm a business person. I'm not interested in learning the
 low-level details about wireless hardware or protocals above and
 beyond what I need to run the business. I have no desire to ever
 install/troubleshoot/repair the equipment myself.
  
 What I want to do is own the service and run the business. My
 first thoughts are I want a setup that makes it easiest for the
 customer to start using the service. If there is a particular
 hardware setup that lets me mail a dongle (small device that
 would plug into a USB port) to the customer and viola they're up
 and running, great! Also, I am wondering if operating in a
 licensed spectrum will provide me with some protection from
 frequency overload.
  
 I am interested in finding people who may be able to help me
 analyze a territory for potential profitability and engineer a
 setup. So, if it doesn't violate mailing list rules, feel free to
 respond with your contact information so that I can contact you
 to find out what it would cost for your services.
  
 I know I have a lot to learn and want to stick with high-level
 information so that I can quickly determine if this is a good
 opportunity for me.
  
  
 Thanks,
  
 Rich


 
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 
 
  
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org mailto:wireless@wispa.org

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

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



 
 

Re: [WISPA] I'm new, I hope this is the right list...

2011-11-28 Thread Sam Tetherow
Do you have a particular company in mind?  The only companies that I 
know of that are using dongles (somewhat successfully) are cellular 
companies.  They are using licensed frequencies that cost in hundreds of 
millions of dollars, assuming you can find any for sale.  The last 
public sale was parts of the 700MHz spectrum in 2009 which was purchased 
primarily by cellular companies (ATT and Verizon for instance spent 
billions for their slices of 700MHz).   The equipment cost is expensive 
as well with base stations in the tens of thousands of dollars and I'm 
sure the dongles are probably in the $100-200/unit range as well.


Rich _ wrote:
 How do the companies that have a dongle do it? Are they using 
 something other than a WISP?


  
 On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 8:02 PM, Sam Tetherow tethe...@shwisp.net 
 mailto:tethe...@shwisp.net wrote:

 Rich,
 Given current gear, FCC regulations and available spectrum, outside of
 reselling cellular you are not going to going to find anything you
 will
 be able to reliable allow the customer to self-install.  Trust me,
 there
 are smarter minds than mine that have been trying to figure that
 one out
 since this industry started.

 As Jay mentioned, Clearwire is probably the closest business model to
 what you are looking for, and even with their deep pockets and
 licensed
 spectrum they are having a tough time making it work.  And I think
 it is
 precisely because they are choosing to go the route that you are
 looking
 for.

 If they took their spectrum and equipment and used it as traditional,
 professionally installed fixed wireless setup they would probably
 have a
 working business model.  Sure their return on investment would be
 higher
 due to the installer cost, but if they took a dish-network model to
 getting installs done they would only be looking at 3-6 months break
 even on the install cost and considering the amount of money that has
 already been poured into the business I would think that would be
 a drop
 in the bucket.

 Rich _ wrote:
  Thx Faisal, I'm located in PA in the USA.
 
  But, I'm not interested in starting a WISP based on where I'm
 located.
  I'm interested in finding a location that best enables success
 for the
  business.
 
  Yes, I would be looked at as the business/funding person. A
 technical
  partner or technical contractor/employee would be needed. I hope
  available equipment is quite stable and reliable?
 
  On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 6:44 PM, Faisal Imtiaz
 fai...@snappydsl.net mailto:fai...@snappydsl.net
  mailto:fai...@snappydsl.net mailto:fai...@snappydsl.net wrote:
 
  Hi Rich,
  WISPA General List is actually a Global List.
  It would go a long ways for relevant folks to reply back to
 you if
  you at least share what part of the world ? / State or City
 if in
  the US.
 
  My personal reaction after reading the first two paragraphs
 was to
  suggest that you should consider some other business other than
  being a WISP.
 
  However after reading the last two paragraphs, it sounds
 like you
  may be the Business / Funding guy, looking for a Technical
 Partner
  to build a business together.
 
  The only reason I am saying this is because this is a tough
  business to be in if you are not going to roll up your
 sleeves and
  get your hands dirty.
 
 
  Regards and Good Luck.
 
 
  Faisal Imtiaz
  Snappy Internet  Telecom
  7266 SW 48 Street
  Miami, Fl 33155
  Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 tel:305%20663%205518%20x%20232
 tel:305%20663%205518%20x%20232
  Helpdesk: 305 663 5518 tel:305%20663%205518
 tel:305%20663%205518 option 2 Email: supp...@snappydsl.net
 mailto:supp...@snappydsl.net mailto:supp...@snappydsl.net
 
 
  On 11/28/2011 6:33 PM, Rich _ wrote:
  Hello,
 
  I operate in the custom software development industry and am
  considering setting up a WISP as a new business investment. I
  know very little about the industry and am hoping that some of
  you will not mind giving me some feedback. In exchange, I'll be
  glad to answer any software development questions you may have
  that I can answer or that I can get an answer for.
 
  I'm a business person. I'm not interested in learning the
  low-level details about wireless hardware or protocals
 above and
  beyond what I need to run the business. I have no desire to
 ever
  install/troubleshoot/repair the equipment myself.
 
  What I want to do is own the service and run the business. My
  first thoughts are I want a setup

Re: [WISPA] FCC releases USF/ICC Order, rules on subsidizing ILECs

2011-11-22 Thread Sam Tetherow
Is there any provision in the document for reducing funding in the
future as areas get overbuilt?  Or are we really looking at a 6-8month
land grab?

On 11/21/11 7:04 PM, Tom DeReggi wrote:
 Yes agreed, its not nearly as bad as it could have been. But I still say 
 ARRGGG!

 Price Cap Carriers will be offered $775 per
 line to add 4/1 broadband serivce to unserved areas
 Thats much better for WISPs than if they agreed to pay our competitors 
 greater than $10,000 per sub for FIOS like Fiber.
 WISPs atleast have a chance to compete against 4/1 services, and ILEC 
 reimbursement now inline with what it would cost a WISP to deploy, and not 
 to much more..

 So this might be a good time to make sure the mappers
 are aware of your service areas, or to think about short-term service
 expansion.
 yeah, you gotta love help that says WISPs Go hurry up and build a 
 network at your cost quickly, we wont pay you, but if you dont build quick, 
 we'll pay your competitor instead.
 (Sarcasm)

 The date by which you must be on the map isn't set yet,
 but it's presumably in 1H2012.
 Well, that is good, that they are looking at mapping for disqualification. 
 Also good that not all WISPs reported their coverage in the past.
 The rules are good incentive for rural WISPs to report now.  Those rules may 
 not have ever made it into the FCC rules, without the insight that it would 
 be incentive to get reamining WISPs to report.  If WISPs had already 
 reported, why would the FCC have needed to include consideration and 
 incentive in the new rules?

 Phase II starts in 2013.  For this, Price Cap Carriers will be
 offered support based on a cost model that the FCC will create in
 2012.  Once the model is complete, the ILEC will decide if it wants
 to take that support for its territory on a state-by-state (all of a
 state or nothing) basis.
 Thats the bad part Only a select few monopoly like companies can afford 
 to do complete State wide deployment, even when subsidized.
 So basically, the FCC is saying Time to force the Monopolies to serve 
 ALL Americans, and leave no unserved areas left for the competitive 
 property.
 Rather than fix the problem, the FCC is trying to secure that the remaining 
 25% of America will have subsidized competitors to private investment.
 There is no longer a consideration for the best party to serve a specific 
 area. Preferrence is given to the big boy.
 no different than Auctions, where only the most fortunate and dominant 
 player can win.
 The biggest flaw in telecom policy is the concept of Serving everyone or no 
 one. Its the founation for every monopoly cable franchise type agreement, 
 and now being replicated into CAF. Forcing acceptance on a complete 
 state-by-state basis in my opinion is a major loss for the industry. Because 
 the mind set hasn't changed from old telecom. They are still thinking state 
 regulation and utility electricity, where there is only ONE primary 
 provider per state.

 Although, I will admit, these funds are targeted to UNSERVED areas, so 
 atleast they aren't giving the whole state away. Just the least desirable 
 part of the state for wireline to serve.

 They are saying. WISPs, if you can serve someone new this year, great, 
 go for it, its your last chance, before we give the market to someone else.

 A separate Extremely High Cost fund will allocate up to $100M/year
 for locations too costly (by the model) to serve via the standard
 subsidy.  This will be separately bid, and it's assumed that fixed
 wireless and satellite will be the mostly likely technologies.  So
 this could allow some subsidies to rustic-but-Bell-area WISPs.
 Yes, that may be good for WISPs.
 Or, better positioned ILECs to become WISPs.

 So on balance, the FCC has done a lot less harm to the rural WISP
 community than it could have, while still encouraging ILECs to deploy
 more broadband via subsidies.
 I fully agree with your conclusion.
 Realistically, that could be considered a victory, for Rural WISPs.

 With that said, I would have preferred the FCC to have the balls to name the 
 new program what it really was...
 They could have called it the CAIF - Connect America to ILECs fund.  or 
 KCC-CAF - Kill Competiton and Choice, but Connect America Fund..

 The interesting part will be to see how many RURAL ILECs will choose to 
 accept $768 per sub, to build out to all remaining Americans in their state.
 What else will be interesting will be to see if, the RBOC fund recipients 
 really do what they are obligated to do afterwords.

 I think it is an ambitious plan to try to get the remaining American's some 
 form of broadband, which outcome would likely be good, I just cant say I 
 agree with the method.

 Tom DeReggi
 RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
 IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


 - Original Message - 
 From: Fred R. Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 6:02 PM
 Subject: [WISPA] 

Re: [WISPA] Internet Censorship

2011-11-17 Thread Sam Tetherow
As an individual I think it is way out of line.  Near as I can tell it 
circumvents due process.  I doubt it will stand up in court, but if it 
passes someone is going to have to challenge it first.  Basically it 
takes all those lovely copyright violation emails you get and turns them 
in to something with real teeth.

It assumes everyone who has a complaint filed against them is guilty 
until proven otherwise, it crosses international borders (.com, .org and 
.net are not US only domains), and like most anti-terrorism, anti-piracy 
legislation it is next to worthless in stopping the problem, but still 
manages to curtail citizen rights.  I wonder how long it will be before 
someone starts filing takedown notices on campaign sites that use 
copyrighted music in their ads...

If they spent half as much time trying to find a real solution to the 
problem or actually prosecuting violators of the laws on the books...

/rant

On 11/16/11 11:08 PM, John Thomas wrote:
 What is everyone's take on this?
 http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/technology/2011/11/sopa-internet-piracy-bill-criticized-as-internet-censorship/


 
 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] Internet Censorship

2011-11-17 Thread Sam Tetherow
I have no issue with prosecuting theft, and as you state, there are 
plenty of laws on the books, and mechanisms in place to be able to 
handle it.

I disagree on your statement about censorship.  If someone posts a fair 
use clip on a website parodying the MPAA or the RIAA for instance, all 
they need to do is file a complaint to paypal/CC processors and that 
site's ability to collect donations or conduct business online will be 
shut down until they can get a court order to have it turned back on, 
and if they find a sympathetic ear at the federal level the DNS for that 
site can be shut down.  All without due process of actually finding the 
party guilty or any violation other than offending someone with on-staff 
lawyers willing to file the paperwork.

There were plenty of cases on youtube where content creators had their 
content taken down because it was copyrighted (by them).  While 
inconvenient there were also other places you could place your content 
in the mean time.  But if they can reach into your own hosting and have 
payment processing and even DNS shut off indefinitely you are talking 
about giving someone the ability to put your business on financial hold 
without any real accountability.  And you can potentially do it to 
people and corporations over which you have no legal right to due so.

US IP laws are not global IP laws, yet it would be possible for someone 
to shutdown DNS to a non-US site operating legally within their own 
nation.  If you think this is a good thing, turn it around, how would 
you like foreign IP laws to now apply to your corporation and 
intellectual property (say those of Sweden).

And in the mean time all someone has to do is start posting IP addresses 
for thepiratebay.org and others to circumvent the DNS block and who have 
they really stopped?  Payment processing?  The online poker sites had 
circumvented that for years.  With the rise of bitcoin there will be 
even less entry to barrier for those that want to operate on the 
grey/black market of IP.  In my opinion all it really does is allow less 
than scrupulous companies to bully dissenting/alternative viewpoint 
companies and individuals with even less due process than before.

On 11/17/11 4:12 PM, Butch Evans wrote:
 On Wed, 2011-11-16 at 21:08 -0800, John Thomas wrote:
 What is everyone's take on this?
 http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/technology/2011/11/sopa-internet-piracy-bill-criticized-as-internet-censorship/
 My take is that piracy should be punishable by jail time.  We have laws
 against such things already.  The technology is there to detect the IP
 of the offending party, there are laws in place that permit law
 enforcement to request end user information from ISPs and there is no
 need for yet another law to do what is already in place.  I think that
 if enough people go to jail for theft, it will grow MUCH less common.
 As for the censorship idea...I think people need to get a life.  Theft
 is illegal and those crying censorship should focus on THAT.




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] Internet Censorship

2011-11-17 Thread Sam Tetherow
On 11/17/2011 06:10 PM, Butch Evans wrote:
 On Thu, 2011-11-17 at 17:41 -0500, Fred Goldstein wrote:
 Some of these proposals create a presumption of guilt, the burden of
 proof to prove one's innocence.  And some put more onus on the ISP
 than before, no small issue.  The copyright lobby does not like the
 Internet at all. It breaks their artifact-based business model.
 This is, unfortunately, one of the costs for ISPs who NAT their customer
 traffic.  When all users have a public IP (say, an IPv6 address), then
 the problem of identifying thieves would be much simpler and can be
 easily identified by the ISP AND law enforcement.

 There's also a question of what constitutes theft, vs. other
 copyright violations.  Literal theft refers to rivalrous goods:  If I
 steal the dish off of your tower, I have the dish, you
 don't.  So-called theft of so-called intellectual property -- more
 accurately, simply the violation of copyright -- does not deprive the
 legitimate owner of their property, it merely deprives the seller of
 the *opportunity cost* of the sale that was not made.  Which in most
 cases, frankly, would not have been made.
 SO, if you owned a Ford dealership and I came onto your lot and used one
 of your vehicles, it wouldn't be theft since I would never purchase that
 car anyway?  What a stupid argument.

 So there's a real spread between true piracy and some of the casual
 copyright violations that are being called piracy. True piracy is the
 crook who counterfeits a CD and sells it as real, or sells a
 counterfeit software DVD-ROM as the real thing.
 So downloading a movie without paying the author/owner (who IS selling
 that movie) is not piracy?  You really are as good as my first
 impression of you lead me to believe.

 But some of these copyright extremists want to put you in jail for
 having the radio on in a YouTube home movie (they've issued takedowns
 to look at our toddler dance, isn't she cute videos).  Just to give
 an example, my son just had a college class (TV production)
 assignment to make a music video.  So he had to take a copyrighted
 record and use it.  (Hey, I was the star!  We filmed at Occupy
 Boston.)  In class, it's no doubt Fair Use, though I suspect the RIAA
 wishes that weren't the case.  Is he a pirate if he posts it on
 YouTube?  I think not, but the RIAA probably does.  But somehow I
 don't equate that to the guys selling fake CDs to record store owners.
 Fair Use is defined by the owner of the content.  Note that owner is
 NOT the person who purchased a CD.
Fair Use is defined by law.

You are allowed to include excepts from a copyrighted work under fair 
use in a parody for example.  You are also allowed to make copies of 
your analog purchased media under fair use and you are allowed to 
distribute them as you see fit as long as you don't charge for them 
under fair use.

Despite common belief it is not clear black and white as to the rights 
on a CD.  It is pretty well excepted that purchasing a CD and ripping it 
to MP3s and then posting them online for anyone to download is illegal, 
but there is grey area on me loaning you a CD and you making a copy of 
that CD for your personal use.  Prior to DMCA it would have been legal, 
the DMCA which covers digital media however has vague wording when 
dealing with this case.

A copyright holder can loosen their copyright as they see fit, but they 
cannot further restrict it.  So for instance it would be possible for 
software writer to give their software away to certain people, but it 
would not be legal for them to further restrict software already sold.

 In other words, intellectual property law is a confused mess already,
 and the proposals on the table just make it worse, and won't actualy
 help the industries they're trying to help.  They're like ILECs, who
 harm ISPs because it's what they do, even if it costs them.  The
 scorpion and the frog comes to mind.
 Adding still more laws is that I said was a problem.  Glad you had a
 place to rant, though.





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] UBNT sectors 120s, 90s, or 60s?

2011-11-04 Thread Sam Tetherow

  
  
Ubiquiti is making/makes a dual pol yagi, check with your ubiquiti
dealer, I just seen one announce it on a new products list,
supposedly shipping in December. 

On 11/4/11 12:52 AM, Scottie Arnett wrote:

  
  
  
  
  
  Shane,
  
  Sorry, you answered this further
  down the thread.
  
  I have heard that the AP sectors
  Ubiquiti has released are not correct comparable to most
  sectors due to some -3dB down stuff. Like the 120 degree
  sectors are more like 90 degree? Is this true? is it true for
  all unlicensed bands?
  
  In my situation, I would really
  like to see a dual polarized 900 Mhz yagi, if it is even
  possible. We have many hills in our area, and we are trying to
  get more bandwidth to our customers. We have been/are using
  Canopy, but have some test units setup to try Ubiquiti for
  more bandwidth.Many consumers do not like the dish/loco
  Ubiquitihas, and we tried the panels from ITElite and most
  are not satisfied with the aesthetics of them also.
  
  Scottie Arnett
President
Info-Ed, Inc.
Electronics and More
931-243-2101
sarn...@info-ed.com
  
- Original Message - 
From: Scottie Arnett 
To: WISPA General List 
Sent: Friday, November 04,
  2011 12:18 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT
  sectors 120s, 90s, or 60s?


A little late, but what
frequencies are you inquiring about?

Scottie Arnett
  President
  Info-Ed, Inc.
  Electronics and More
  931-243-2101
  sarn...@info-ed.com

  - Original Message - 
  From: Mathew Howard 
  To: 'WISPA General List'
  
  Sent: Wednesday, November
02, 2011 10:18 AM
  Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT
sectors 120s, 90s, or 60s?
  
  
  
Id
vote for the 90s, but we arent likely to use anything
other than 120s in the near future anyway.


  
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org
[mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of
Shane MacDonald
Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 9:59 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] UBNT sectors 120s, 90s, or
60s?
  




  We are trying to decide which degree
Ubiquiti sectors to release in December.


  Our production line can handle two of
the three for a mid December release date and want your
feedback.


  The 120 degree version is pretty much
a lock but we want your opinion between the90s or
60sso we release the sectors you require.


  


  Please reply to the list or send me
an email directly as your response will weigh heavilyon
our decision.


  


  Thanks,


  


  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  Shane
MacDonald


  KP
Performance
Antennas


  Sales
  Marketing
  Manager


  

Re: [WISPA] How to control your mikrotik zombies ;)

2011-11-02 Thread Sam Tetherow
If the versions of mikrotik are different enough that you don't know if 
you have API access, the expect script is going to be a bit of work as 
well, the 2.8 to 2.9 to 3.x to 4.x to 5.x command structures and output 
changed enough to be a royal pain.

If the majority are post 3.x I would write code to handle those with the 
API and do the others by hand.

On 11/2/11 5:26 AM, Scott Reed wrote:
 I have used expect and telnet.
 Butch Evans has some scripts for doing something similar.

 On 11/2/2011 6:14 AM, Paolo Di Francesco wrote:
 Hi all

 I need to do update some parameters into the customer CPEs and it would
 be boring to do it for hundreds of them.

 Therefore I was wondering what is the best way to write a script to tell
 to a linux box to log into the cpe and do the following:

 1) read some firewall parameters
 2) add some firewall parameters
 3) check the configuration
 etc

 I have the IPs and passwords, I jut find it boring to do it by hand.

 About the API, the CPEs are different versions of mikrotik so I don't
 know if it's a good idea to start thinking about the API.

 Any example
 Thank you in advance





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] Website owner

2011-11-02 Thread Sam Tetherow
If they are not listed as the registrant on the domain they will need to 
provide proof to the registrar to get control of their domain.  If they 
are listed as the registrant they should be able to transfer their 
domain to a new registrar account.

As for access  to the content on the server, depending on where the 
server is located, should not take too much effort once they are listed 
as the registrant for the domain.

On 11/2/11 2:27 PM, Steve Barnes wrote:
 I know this is not a WISP issue per se. In our local area there was a network 
 admin for a large company who on the side setup about a hundred websites for 
 local small business and individuals.  Last month he took his wife's life and 
 then killed himself.   No other family left and no one to handle his affairs. 
  His Clients are coming to me and asking how do I get control of my website.  
 They had no agreements and no proof of ownership other than the dead mans 
 handshake.

 What steps can be taken to recover these sites?
 What is the best way to research and find where they are hosted, not just the 
 registrar?


 Steve Barnes
 General Manager
 PCS-WIN / RC-WiFi



 
 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] Neighbor Sharing Internet

2011-11-01 Thread Sam Tetherow
It's not fretting myself over potentially lost revenue.  It is a 
customer breaking the acceptable use policy.

If you don't have a problem with customers sharing internet by all means 
don't list that as unacceptable use, your network, your rules.

For me I see it as leaving money on the table.  It is listed as not 
allowed in my acceptable use policy and if I find it occurring I remind 
the customer that sharing internet with neighbors is not allowed and 
offer to help them secure the network.  I spin it as you don't want them 
'stealing' your internet, and you don't want them dragging down your 
speed.  If they say they know about it and condone it I remind them 
again that it is against policy and if it continues I will have to 
disconnect them.

If someone can get something for free, pay half price or pay full price, 
11 times out of 10 they will go with free.  Will I gain customer #2?  
Sometimes.  Will I lose customer #1?   Sometimes, but if don't do 
anything I will never gain customer #2 and it negatively impacts my 
network as I now have more resources used and I gain no additional 
revenue.  It also sets the precedent that the acceptable use policy does 
not need to be adhered to.

On 11/1/11 12:38 PM, MDK wrote:
 I don't do anything.  I will do tech support ONLY for the paying person, and
 won't respond to complaints of slow or anything else.

 Am I losing money?   Mulitple perspectives;   1.  I've got a customer that
 pays a bill.   2. if I prohibit it, there's probably not much chance they'll
 all sign up.  3.  I have no data use tracking anymore, so I don't know who's
 doing what.   4.  I know if the one paying the bill leaves, that  the
 other(s) will immediately call and re-up in another name.

 Potentially lost revenue isn't lost...  It's just what you don't have.  If
 we fret ourselves into a stroke over potentially lost,  life would be
 hell.

 As it is, I have bigger fish to fry and more pressing issues at hand.




 ++
 Neofast, Inc, Making internet easy
 541-969-8200  509-386-4589
 ++

 --
 From: Mattlm7...@gmail.com
 Sent: Monday, October 31, 2011 9:56 AM
 To: WISPA General Listwireless@wispa.org
 Subject: [WISPA] Neighbor Sharing Internet

 What do you do when you find out that a customer is using a wireless
 router to share Internet with neighbor and splitting the bill?  I am
 sure there are quite a few doing this but when they out right tell you
 about it when on a tech call is rare.  It is against our TOS.

 What do others do?


 
 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] Neighbor Sharing Internet

2011-10-31 Thread Sam Tetherow
Let them know that it is against the TOS of service and if they continue 
you will disconnect them.

On 10/31/11 11:56 AM, Matt wrote:
 What do you do when you find out that a customer is using a wireless
 router to share Internet with neighbor and splitting the bill?  I am
 sure there are quite a few doing this but when they out right tell you
 about it when on a tech call is rare.  It is against our TOS.

 What do others do?


 
 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] Neighbor Sharing Internet

2011-10-31 Thread Sam Tetherow
It is more than just usage.  Bandwidth is now less than 12% of my 
monthly operating expense.  There is customer service, support 
infrastructure, tower leases, office lease, billing expense, taxes, 
regulatory expense, insurance.


Even if they are under average on usage, don't call tech support and pay 
their bill on time, it is still costing you money in potential lost 
revenue.  If you acknowledge and allow this they will tell people and 
the practice will spread.


The only way I would ever allow this would be if the customer paid by 
the bit, not tiered service, but literally by the bit otherwise they are 
taking money out of your pocket.


On 10/31/11 12:23 PM, Dorn Hetzel wrote:
If the combined usage of the two households is well above average, It 
makes sense to take some kind of action.


But, if the combined usage of the two households is in the lower 50%, 
and as long as you never
hear from the non-customer household, and there aren't any problems 
you have to fix because
of the second household, maybe it doesn't make sense to alienate a 
paying customer.


Yes, they are violating your TOS, but perhaps they didn't really READ 
them, just skipped to the bottom and signed,

like most of us have done some time or another (especially with software).

If there usage could be mistaken for a single household, are the costs 
to service
them really higher?  Would servicing the second household with a 
second distant
link be better for everyone, or is the solution they have in place now 
reasonable?


If the usage is higher, maybe offer them a rate that takes that into 
account but is still a better deal

than each buying along and you having to install another link?

On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 12:56 PM, Matt lm7...@gmail.com 
mailto:lm7...@gmail.com wrote:


What do you do when you find out that a customer is using a wireless
router to share Internet with neighbor and splitting the bill?  I am
sure there are quite a few doing this but when they out right tell you
about it when on a tech call is rare.  It is against our TOS.

What do others do?




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



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

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

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






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] Verizon wants a piece of our pie

2011-10-27 Thread Sam Tetherow
By the same token I doubt they are going to have separate plans for 
rural and urban sites so what they do in the hinterlands they will have 
to support in the population centers.  An interesting question will be 
can I pick up my 'fixed' equipment and haul somewhere else and use it, 
which would make it somewhat mobile.

On 10/27/11 10:31 AM, Charles Wu wrote:
 I have a dissenting opinion...

 It all comes down to a simple economics in the end.  Who can most cost
 effectively provide broadband.
 A cellular network is built for coverage

 Additionally, large companies, from a scale and operations perspective, will 
 tend to put the same equipment everywhere

 What that means is in order to offer the nationwide network, that the tower 
 in the rural area that's required to cover that stretch of highway where 
 there's only a town of 1,000 people will have the same equipment and capacity 
 as the tower in downtown Chicago that has 1,000 simultaneous users

 So in rural areas, where the costs of the tower, backhaul and base station 
 have already been amortized and paid for to fulfill their coverage 
 requirements, but many of these towers are sitting at 5-10% capacity

 In their mind, to add another 100 or so fixed wireless users off an AP and 
 putting them in a lower QoS bucket (so the primary mobile customers aren't 
 affected when fixed customers start slamming Netflix) is found money -- 
 self installs are quite nice when putting out +60 dBi EIRP at the tower with 
 700 MHz on licensed spectrum with zero noise floor

 -Charles

 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
 Behalf Of Sam Tetherow
 Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2011 12:06 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Verizon wants a piece of our pie

 At the end of the day when a WISP puts
 up a 'cell' site it is probably costing them 1/100th of what it costs
 the cellco to do so.  The equipment used is most likely 1/100th the cost
 at the 'AP' and 1/10th at the CPE and the spectrum that the cellco uses
 is not free.

 Even when you take into account that the cellco operates on a much
 longer ROI and they can get some economy of scale on certain things I
 don't see how they can overcome the price difference to be able to
 effectively compete against a WISP, especially given their lack of
 spectrum.  Sure you get a much better noise floor, but they have fewer
 channels to deal with.  And from a cost perspective it is a lot harder
 to justify putting up micropops as a cellco.  I know plenty of WISPs
 that can afford to put a micro-pop up for 3 customers.  I do see how a
 cellco could afford to do that for eveny 20 times that number.

 Deep pockets only last so long when you are losing money.

 On 10/26/11 11:07 AM, Fred Goldstein wrote:
 At 10/26/2011 11:42 AM, Chuck Hogg wrote:
 The LIVE network here does 26Mb x 22Mb with70ms latency.
 The VZW network isn't such bad competition for a WISP for two reasons.

 One -- those numbers you see are on the brand-new, unloaded
 network.  The've just started selling LTE gear this year, so the
 cells are nowhere near full capacity.  As they get busier, average
 capacity per subscriber will go down, especially during busy
 hours.  At some point they will add cells, but I'm suspecting it's at
 a much lower performance point than you're seeing now.

 Two -- their per-cell costs are much higher, and thus they have to
 charge more for bulk usage.  They have caps on their plans, and
 additional usage is very costly.  So while LTE is okay for the
 vacation traveler looking to check email and read a few favorite web
 sites, or the light home user, it's not going to appeal to even
 moderate users.  Even Sprint is starting to cap its plans, after
 running a huge unlimited (uh, for the rest of the month?)
 advertising campaign.


 --
 Fred Goldsteink1io   fgoldstein at ionary.com
 ionary Consulting  http://www.ionary.com/
 +1 617 795 2701



 
 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] Verizon wants a piece of our pie

2011-10-27 Thread Sam Tetherow
Didn't Verizon announce FIOS is pretty much dead at this point.  I 
thought I read they are fulfilling their current obligations, but 
planned no new rollouts in the forseeable future.

On 10/27/11 11:20 AM, Daniel White wrote:
 Charles,

 I think you should rephrase your statement - Cellular networks (especially
 in metropolitan areas) WERE built for coverage.  With 4G services, they are
 built for capacity.  I doubt the coverage metric will change in rural areas
 though.

 There is also a major question on backhaul.  Microwave backhaul may be equal
 for 2G/3G networks, but as 4G proliferates it will have a higher dependency
 on Fiber or 60GHz/80GHz short range high capacity backhaul.  Most rural
 sites will only support 11GHz/6GHz for backhaul and therefore lower found
 capacity they could deliver via fixed wireless.

 On the other hand, WISP's can be nimble to all of these demands, at a much
 lower equipment cost.

 FTTH of course is a different metric altogether.  Verizon wireline loves to
 plow fiber now.

 Anyways, my 2 cents.  I could certainly be wrong :-)

 Daniel White

 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of Charles Wu
 Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 10:31 AM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Verizon wants a piece of our pie

 I have a dissenting opinion...

 It all comes down to a simple economics in the end.  Who can most cost
 effectively provide broadband.
 A cellular network is built for coverage

 Additionally, large companies, from a scale and operations perspective, will
 tend to put the same equipment everywhere

 What that means is in order to offer the nationwide network, that the tower
 in the rural area that's required to cover that stretch of highway where
 there's only a town of 1,000 people will have the same equipment and
 capacity as the tower in downtown Chicago that has 1,000 simultaneous users

 So in rural areas, where the costs of the tower, backhaul and base station
 have already been amortized and paid for to fulfill their coverage
 requirements, but many of these towers are sitting at 5-10% capacity

 In their mind, to add another 100 or so fixed wireless users off an AP and
 putting them in a lower QoS bucket (so the primary mobile customers aren't
 affected when fixed customers start slamming Netflix) is found money --
 self installs are quite nice when putting out +60 dBi EIRP at the tower with
 700 MHz on licensed spectrum with zero noise floor

 -Charles

 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of Sam Tetherow
 Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2011 12:06 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Verizon wants a piece of our pie

 At the end of the day when a WISP puts
 up a 'cell' site it is probably costing them 1/100th of what it costs the
 cellco to do so.  The equipment used is most likely 1/100th the cost at the
 'AP' and 1/10th at the CPE and the spectrum that the cellco uses is not
 free.

 Even when you take into account that the cellco operates on a much longer
 ROI and they can get some economy of scale on certain things I don't see how
 they can overcome the price difference to be able to effectively compete
 against a WISP, especially given their lack of spectrum.  Sure you get a
 much better noise floor, but they have fewer channels to deal with.  And
 from a cost perspective it is a lot harder to justify putting up micropops
 as a cellco.  I know plenty of WISPs that can afford to put a micro-pop up
 for 3 customers.  I do see how a cellco could afford to do that for eveny 20
 times that number.

 Deep pockets only last so long when you are losing money.

 On 10/26/11 11:07 AM, Fred Goldstein wrote:
 At 10/26/2011 11:42 AM, Chuck Hogg wrote:
 The LIVE network here does 26Mb x 22Mb with70ms latency.
 The VZW network isn't such bad competition for a WISP for two reasons.

 One -- those numbers you see are on the brand-new, unloaded network.
 The've just started selling LTE gear this year, so the cells are
 nowhere near full capacity.  As they get busier, average capacity per
 subscriber will go down, especially during busy hours.  At some point
 they will add cells, but I'm suspecting it's at a much lower
 performance point than you're seeing now.

 Two -- their per-cell costs are much higher, and thus they have to
 charge more for bulk usage.  They have caps on their plans, and
 additional usage is very costly.  So while LTE is okay for the
 vacation traveler looking to check email and read a few favorite web
 sites, or the light home user, it's not going to appeal to even
 moderate users.  Even Sprint is starting to cap its plans, after
 running a huge unlimited (uh, for the rest of the month?)
 advertising campaign.


 --
 Fred Goldsteink1io   fgoldstein at ionary.com
 ionary Consulting  http://www.ionary.com/
 +1 617 795 2701

Re: [WISPA] Verizon wants a piece of our pie

2011-10-26 Thread Sam Tetherow
It all comes down to a simple economics in the end.  Who can most cost 
effectively provide broadband.  At the end of the day when a WISP puts 
up a 'cell' site it is probably costing them 1/100th of what it costs 
the cellco to do so.  The equipment used is most likely 1/100th the cost 
at the 'AP' and 1/10th at the CPE and the spectrum that the cellco uses 
is not free.

Even when you take into account that the cellco operates on a much 
longer ROI and they can get some economy of scale on certain things I 
don't see how they can overcome the price difference to be able to 
effectively compete against a WISP, especially given their lack of 
spectrum.  Sure you get a much better noise floor, but they have fewer 
channels to deal with.  And from a cost perspective it is a lot harder 
to justify putting up micropops as a cellco.  I know plenty of WISPs 
that can afford to put a micro-pop up for 3 customers.  I do see how a 
cellco could afford to do that for eveny 20 times that number.

Deep pockets only last so long when you are losing money.

On 10/26/11 11:07 AM, Fred Goldstein wrote:
 At 10/26/2011 11:42 AM, Chuck Hogg wrote:
 The LIVE network here does 26Mb x 22Mb with70ms latency.
 The VZW network isn't such bad competition for a WISP for two reasons.

 One -- those numbers you see are on the brand-new, unloaded
 network.  The've just started selling LTE gear this year, so the
 cells are nowhere near full capacity.  As they get busier, average
 capacity per subscriber will go down, especially during busy
 hours.  At some point they will add cells, but I'm suspecting it's at
 a much lower performance point than you're seeing now.

 Two -- their per-cell costs are much higher, and thus they have to
 charge more for bulk usage.  They have caps on their plans, and
 additional usage is very costly.  So while LTE is okay for the
 vacation traveler looking to check email and read a few favorite web
 sites, or the light home user, it's not going to appeal to even
 moderate users.  Even Sprint is starting to cap its plans, after
 running a huge unlimited (uh, for the rest of the month?)
 advertising campaign.


--
Fred Goldsteink1io   fgoldstein at ionary.com
ionary Consulting  http://www.ionary.com/
+1 617 795 2701



 
 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] Open Range Closes: Broadband's Solyndra @$240M???

2011-10-07 Thread Sam Tetherow
Didn't one of the articles say the loan was rescinded and that was part 
of the issue (along with the spectrum issue)?


On 10/6/11 10:07 PM, Tom DeReggi wrote:
All I can say is That is one more potential HUGE competitor that 
is no longer going to be a threat to the small business WISP.
The jingle that keeps ringing in my head is, another one bites the 
dust, ah.
What I ask is... Did RUS keep or get the Tax Payer's money back? Or 
did it get spent and lost?

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband

- Original Message -
*From:* Fred Goldstein mailto:fgoldst...@ionary.com
*To:* tsharp...@qorvus.com mailto:tsharp...@qorvus.com ; WISPA
General List mailto:wireless@wispa.org
*Sent:* Wednesday, October 05, 2011 6:01 PM
*Subject:* Re: [WISPA] Open Range Closes: Broadband's Solyndra
@$240M???

At 10/5/2011 05:46 PM, Tom Sharples wrote:

Caution - this may make your ears bleed - strong language :-)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRmZ9zH-mYM


Yeah, but under the rapper profanity, he displays a profound
ignorance of macroeconomics and monetary policy.  There's a reason
that economics is called the dismal science.  It is  not
intuitively obvious, and is thus prone to demagoguery.

Open Range, on the other hand, appears to be a simple case of JP
Morgan's influence peddling to get a big loan for a risky venture
from the Bush administration.  I wonder if they will end up losing
their bet, or if there is some trick in there to get JP Morgan
Chase paid back.  Note how Iridium was Motorola's idea, and lost
several billion, but Motorola came out ahead (and Chase, being the
marks that time, lost).



On 10/5/2011 2:21 PM, Fred Goldstein wrote:

At 10/5/2011 04:20 PM, Rafman® wrote:

*Open Range Closes:

*http://www.dailywireless.org/2011/10/05/open-range-closes/
*
*Broadband's Solyndra with $240M Federal Funds..?


Interesting, but not surprising given the whole story.

The RUS (part of the USDA) usually just funds incumbent LECs,
not WISPs.  In 2008, Open Range got $100M from JP Morgan Chase
and then a bigger RUS loan.  The plan was to use Globalstar's
ATC frequencies.

Globalstar was a low Earth orbit satellite (LEOsat)
constallation launched in the late 1990s.  I think Qualcomm was
originally behind it; the idea was to be a simple bent-pipe
repeater for CDMA satphones.  They were competing with the
uber-baroque Iridium network, which of course bombed miserably
(I had a bit of an inside seat watching that failure; it was
kind of funny). GlobalStar's original satellites kind of went
haywire in 2007 and some of the replacements have been flaky
too, which is not doing them a lot of good.

Satellites were granted ancillary terrestrial component (ATC)
rights as a way to fill in gaps in satellite coverage; later
this was expanded to permit terrestrial-only users.  That's what
LightSquared is trying to do.  Open Range made a deal to use
GlobalStar's ATC, but something went wrong and the FCC revoked
it in 2010.  So Open Range has some license problems.  All that
money and no place to go.  They were also trying to make a deal
with LightSquared, but I think that was for MVNO use of the
network, not frequency leases.

I think the key difference between Open Range and your basic
WISP is that Open Range wanted to play Wall Street's game:  Take
a lot of money, spend big and fast, and hope for a return.  A
WISPA member can't afford to waste money that way.  I wonder if
Open Range has much cash left.  I don't see how they could have
spent it without access to enough spectrum.

 --
 Fred Goldsteink1io   fgoldstein at ionary.com
 ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/
 +1 617 795 2701


 --
 Fred Goldsteink1io   fgoldstein at ionary.com
 ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/
 +1 617 795 2701






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] [Bulk] Re: Wispalooza!

2011-10-04 Thread Sam Tetherow

*WHEW!*

On 10/04/2011 10:07 PM, Layne Sisk wrote:

Well, if it helps ServerPlus will be at the booth next to yours and we will be 
giving out free massages (not by me).

Layne Sisk
www.ServerPlus.com
801.426.8283, ext 102



From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org on behalf of Jim Patient
Sent: Tue 10/4/2011 10:12 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] [Bulk] Re: Wispalooza!



Well, since the cat is out of the bag, we have the Cubin roller coming to our 
MUM booth as well.  They will be there Tuesday and Thursday afternoons.



If we could get the booth next to us to give away free beer, we could make it a 
party;-)





Jim Patient

Link Technologies, Inc.

314-735-0270

www.linktechs.nethttp://www.linktechs.net/
  
http://mail.serverplus.com/exchange/layne/Drafts/RE:%20[WISPA]%20[Bulk]%20Re:%20%20Wispalooza!.EML/1_multipart/image001.png







From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf 
Of Rick Harnish
Sent: Monday, October 03, 2011 8:31 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] [Bulk] Re: Wispalooza!



Actually, Link Technologies is hiring a professional cigar roller to work in 
their booth one day.



From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf 
Of Sam Tetherow
Sent: Monday, October 03, 2011 5:44 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] [Bulk] Re: Wispalooza!



Hope they bring some!

On 10/3/11 4:27 PM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists wrote:

They generally have very good cigars too!



Regards,

Jeff
ImageStream Sales Manager
800-813-5123 x106



From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf 
Of Bob Moldashel
Sent: Monday, October 03, 2011 4:39 PM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [Bulk] Re: [WISPA] Wispalooza!



DISCLOSURE*  That's an inside joke for early WISPA/Microtik people.  It is 
no way intended to be derogatory.

People from Latvia are a lot of fun when you take them partying. They blow away 
most of us US attendees

Miss you guys.  Hope you have fun in Vegas!

  :-)

-B-




On 10/3/2011 4:25 PM, Bob Moldashel wrote:

Not Latvia!   You better not have taken payment in chickens  LOL



On 10/3/2011 4:07 PM, Rick Harnish wrote:

There are people registered from Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, Canada, Latvia, 
England, Ireland, Thailand, Israel and probably a few other countries.



From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf 
Of Rick Harnish
Sent: Monday, October 03, 2011 4:06 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Wispalooza!



We just topped 550 registrations.  Although there is overlap, I would guess the 
combination of WISPAPALOOZA, Ubiquiti AirMax, Motorola Service Provider Town 
Hall, Mikrotik MUM, Azotel Training, Redline Training, Trango Training and 
FISPAlive will account for at least 1000 different attendees for the week.



Rick



From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf 
Of Dennis Burgess
Sent: Monday, October 03, 2011 3:59 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Wispalooza!



Looks like a good week.  Should be an interesting time!



---
Dennis Burgess, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik  WISP Support Services
Office: 314-735-0270 Website: 
http://www.linktechs.nethttp://www.linktechs.net/
LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Traininghttp://www.onlinemikrotiktraining.com/   - Author of 
Learn RouterOShttp://routerosbook.com/



From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf 
Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Monday, October 03, 2011 2:32 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Wispalooza!



http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=16929680703

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

On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 3:30 PM, John McDowellj...@boonlink.com  wrote:

I finally found a way to completely delete my facebook account...not just 
deactivate it. Can provide the link for anyone interested.. :-)



John M. McDowell
256.996.0252
j...@boonlink.com



On Oct 3, 2011, at 2:26 PM, Justin Wilson wrote:



What happens in vegasgoes on facebook


--
Justin Wilsonj...@mtin.net
Aol  Yahoo IM: j2sw
http://www.mtin.net/blog ­ xISP News
http://www.twitter.com/j2sw ­ Follow me on Twitter




-Original Message-
From: Jeff Broadwick - Listsjeffl...@att.net
Organization: ImageStream
Reply-To: WISPA General Listwireless@wispa.org
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 12:55:18 -0400
To: 'WISPA General List'wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] Wispalooza!

Hi All,



We are rapidly approaching our max number of attendees.  If you want to

go,

sign up now!



If you miss it, you won't be able to say that you were there!  :-)



Regards,



Jeff





Jeff Broadwick

Sales Manager

Re: [WISPA] UBNT

2011-09-23 Thread Sam Tetherow
Longevity... I got some 7 year old CB3s for sale, just pulled working 
from my network ;)

You are right, there are lots of considerations.  Depending on your 
market cost really is a make or break for some folks.  In the 
residential world with competition you are not going to put up Motorola 
or Alvarion and make money.  In the high ARPU commercial world you would 
probably want to use Motorola or Alvarion.

On 9/23/11 3:44 PM, Chris Cooper wrote:
 There are other considerations besides cost.  It's important to
 consider total cost of ownership. What devices cost you the least to
 put up?  How does that square up with longevity?  What causes the
 fewest repeat truck rolls and gives the greatest customer experience?
 How does it scale across a large network?

 Thanks,

 Chris Cooper

 On Sep 23, 2011, at 4:30 PM, jch...@tritontelephone.com wrote:

 I'm not knocking motorola. It has it's place. (god knows I loved my
 startac:) but for the money ubnt makes Norte sense.

 Sent from my iPhone

 On Sep 23, 2011, at 3:34 PM, Robert Canaryrwcan...@mchn39.ocdirect.net
 wrote:
 I know this is bogus.  I ran Motorola and it was the worst system I
 had ever deployed.  I thought I was doing great, until I started
 runnng AirSpan and Alvarion.  It wasn't long I was on the phone
 selling *all* my motorola to my competitors.

 Robert Canary
 OCDirect Electrical-Datacomm
 (866) 594-0786 Fax
 (270) 955-0362 Voice

 - Original Message -
 Here is a radio comparison test done at the last animal farm.

 www.linktechs.net/AF2011_Bakeoff.pdf

 Jim

 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
 On
 Behalf Of Akinlolu C. Ajayi-Obe
 Sent: Friday, September 23, 2011 12:05 PM
 To: wireless@wispa.org
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] UBNT

 Which UBNT 2.4 or 5.7 radios will do 45MB duplex over two miles.
 Thanks
 Akinlolu C. Ajayi-Obe
 AS Technologies Ltd
 Tel. 234(0)8023258027


 ---
 ---
 --
 
 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 message.
 Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
 Version: 10.0.1410 / Virus Database: 1520/3914 - Release Date:
 09/23/11


 ---
 ---
 ---
 ---
 
 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] Seasickness guaranteed

2011-08-01 Thread Sam Tetherow

Login creds required.

On 08/01/2011 06:36 PM, Tom Sharples wrote:

http://69.96.154.17/control/userimage.html
Our latest Cellcam installation, currently working its way toward 
Diamondhead. This is a totally autonomous wave and solar-powered raft. 
Pretty neat stuff.

Tom 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/

Re: [WISPA] Router Redundancy and /30 Ip address

2011-07-28 Thread Sam Tetherow

It's been a while since I have done anything with VRRP...

Is the issue that you don't have a 3rd IP for the real interface on the 
second router?  If so add a private network (/29 or better) so you can 
assign 3 IPs and then use that for the VRRP IPs.  Use a script to handle 
switching the actual /30 IPs when vrrp1 goes down.



On 7/28/11 2:36 PM, Gino Villarini wrote:


Anyone have a way of having Router Redundancy with /30 ip address... 
all methods that I have researched (VRRP,HSRP) call for various IP 
addresses and are suitable for /26 or larger IP blocks... How could I 
have a Router Backup with multiple /30 ip addresses facing our customers?


Gino A. Villarini

g...@aeronetpr.com mailto:g...@aeronetpr.com

Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.

787.273.4143





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] Router Redundancy and /30 Ip address

2011-07-28 Thread Sam Tetherow

A much better explanation of what I was getting at...

On 7/28/11 2:58 PM, David Sovereen wrote:


Hi Gino,

It can be done.  It isn't well-documented, however.

On Mikrotik, for example, you put a management IP address on each 
router's ethernet interface, used for speaking vrrp only, and then put 
the IP address(es) that deal with customers on the vrrp subinterface.  
For example:


rtr-1

ether1 assigned 172.16.1.1/30 (management IP used to negotiate vrrp only)

  vrrp1 = master

   24.5.20.17/30 - 24.5.20.18/30 = cust-rtr-1

   24.5.21.1/30 - 24.5.21.1/30 = cust-rtr-2

   etc


rtr-2

ether1 assigned 172.16.1.2/30 (management IP used to negotiate vrrp only)

  vrrp1 = backup, configure same IP addresses as found on rtr-1's 
vrrp1 interface


In this configuration, the two rtr's use 172.16.1.0/30 to negotiate 
vrrp master/backup only.


While rtr-1 is up, only the vrrp1 interface on rtr-1 is active and the 
/30s that are assigned between you and your customers are active only 
on rtr-1's vrrp1 interface.  The vrrp1 interface on rtr-2 is not 
active, and the IP addresses configured there aren't doing anything.  
If rtr-1 fails, then the vrrp1 interface configured on rtr-2 becomes 
active and rtr-2 begins responding to the IP addresses that were 
previously being responded to on rtr-1's vrrp interface.  You do need 
to configure the same IPs on both router's vrrp1 interfaces.


I use this as my preferred setup on Mikrotiks, as the documented way 
of having traffic go out the ether1 interface and in the vrrp1 
interface can make firewall configs and troubleshooting unnecessarily 
complicated.  In this way, all traffic goes through the vrrp1 
interfaces and the ether1 interfaces are used exclusively for 
management/vrrp traffic.


Hope this helps,


Dave

*From:*wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] 
*On Behalf Of *Gino Villarini

*Sent:* Thursday, July 28, 2011 3:36 PM
*To:* motor...@afmug.com; WISPA General List (wireless@wispa.org)
*Subject:* [WISPA] Router Redundancy and /30 Ip address

Anyone have a way of having Router Redundancy with /30 ip address... 
all methods that I have researched (VRRP,HSRP) call for various IP 
addresses and are suitable for /26 or larger IP blocks... How could I 
have a Router Backup with multiple /30 ip addresses facing our customers?


Gino A. Villarini

g...@aeronetpr.com mailto:g...@aeronetpr.com

Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.

787.273.4143





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


WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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





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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

2011-07-20 Thread Sam Tetherow
But the issue is not that we can't compete in the market, but that the 
government is making it more lucrative for the bigger players to compete 
in our markets (and not providing those incentives to the smaller 
players).  I currently compete against DSL, cable and cellular for over 
80% of my subs, I don't need the government making it even easier for them.



On 7/20/11 10:28 AM, Mark Nash wrote:
I honestly don't think we're working with the government so much as 
we're working with the market.


We are a bunch of Davids trying to play in a game that is dominated by 
Goliaths.  I know how that bible fable goes so we don't need to get 
sidetracked on a lecture about how that story ended...  My point is 
that our market has huge players affecting change and us small guys 
have been able to succeed to varying degrees BECAUSE we haven't been 
on the radar.


Our government fully believes that the best-suited companies to 
deliver broadband to the masses are these bigger players, and I tend 
to agree with them.  I've always considered myself a niche provider, 
and as soon as the nice becomes attractive to a company with real 
money, slow or fast, I will realize the inevitable decline of my 
wireless business.  Not because of the government, but because of the 
market.


For myself, this uphill battle is stress better left up to someone 
else.  My business plans are to ride the wireless wave as long as I 
can, and venture into other businesses and make them valuable with the 
revenues generated by the wireless business.  I just released the 
first version of my first iPhone/iPad game on Apple's App Store, for 
instance.  I'm thinking of starting a landscaping business (not 
WORKING it, just owning it).  I think a music/movie studio is in my 
future.  Eggs in several baskets.  That kind of thing.  In the 
meantime, the wireless business has to be tended to and made 
everything it can be.


On 7/19/2011 7:20 PM, RickG wrote:

Mark,

You just made my point, it appears to me that WISPA, many WISP's, and 
small business owners in general have done their best to work with 
the system. And what rewards do we get for it? I dont know about 
you but the system is killing me! Mark my words, unless things 
change, the system that is beginning to fail us now will eventually 
totally fail us. Sorry for sounding so pessimistic but after watching 
our government at work after 35 years, the only thing positive is 
that it can change if we want it to but it's gonna be a long, hard 
fight.


On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 11:56 AM, Mark Nash markl...@uwol.net 
mailto:markl...@uwol.net wrote:


You absolutely have a right to chase your dreams in this country,
as opposed to other countries.  But you have to temper yourself
with the absolute fact that you belong to a system.  Successful
business owners either work within the system, or find a way
around it.  Do what you can, when you can, to affect change, but
to try to wholesale uproot the system is going to cause you
persistent pain and anguish.


On 7/19/2011 8:15 AM, Andy Trimmell wrote:


+1

*From:*wireless-boun...@wispa.org
mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org
[mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] *On Behalf Of *RickG
*Sent:* Saturday, July 16, 2011 9:04 PM
*To:* fai...@snappydsl.net mailto:fai...@snappydsl.net; WISPA
General List
*Subject:* Re: [WISPA] The Legislative Situation Is Dire

it is Regulation (1996 Telecom Act) that
allowed us (ISP's) to be able to go into the business of providing
internet access and other communication services

*With all due respect, it's exactly the mindset that government
allows us to be in business that IS the problem. Telecom Act
or no, regulation or no, there should be no question that we are
allowed to make a living the way we want to regardless.*

On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Faisal Imtiaz
fai...@snappydsl.net mailto:fai...@snappydsl.net wrote:

I am going to address your points backwards:-

You wrote ---

And lastly, about the FCC, the last administration's appointees were
advocates for free markets and for competition and deregulation. Not
particularly effective ones, but at least they were not our
enemy. The
current administration's people at the FCC are IN NO WAY our
friend, for
any way, manner, or purpose, and everything they want is bad for
us and
the country. STop talking political party talking points, and
get some
reality.

-

We have been wireline ISP's first, since 2000, if you really believe
what you wrote (above) then you are truly mis-informed...
The simple facts are ... it is Regulation (1996 Telecom Act) that
allowed us (ISP's) to be able to go into the business of providing
internet access and other communication services . and it is THE
DEREGULATION over the past 5 years, that has been KILLING the
   

Re: [WISPA] Authentication for WISP's

2011-07-13 Thread Sam Tetherow
How do you get it to provide rate limits and ip addresses outside of 
PPPoE, last time I looked if you were doing MAC Auth out of radius you 
couldn't pass IP and queues, it has been a while though so this may have 
changed.


On 7/13/11 4:46 PM, Cameron Crum wrote:
Radius can do authentication and provisioning...keep poeple off the 
network who don't belong, set up queues, assign IP's, set up rules to 
redirect non-paying customers, etc. It can be a fantastic tool when 
used properly. It's not jsut for PPPOE.


Cameron

On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 4:42 PM, Josh Luthman 
j...@imaginenetworksllc.com mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com wrote:


What do you want Radius to do if you're not using PPPOE (assuming
it's all wireless customers)?

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



On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 5:39 PM, Josh Bowsher
jbows...@midwaynet.net mailto:jbows...@midwaynet.net wrote:

I like radius I am just having some random issues with pppoe.
I do not want to get away from radius. I use Platypus ISP
billing and Vircom Radius.

Joshua S. Bowsher

Director of Internet Services
Midwaynet.net

Midway Electronics

NWIIS a division of MidwayNet, LLC
1250 N McKinley Ave
Rensselaer, IN 47978
Office 219-866-7946 ext: 212 tel:219-866-7946%20ext%3A%20212

Cell 219-863-0678 tel:219-863-0678

www.midwaynet.net http://www.midwaynet.net/

jbows...@midwaynet.net mailto:jbows...@midwaynet.net

*From:*wireless-boun...@wispa.org
mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org
[mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org
mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] *On Behalf Of *Cameron Crum
*Sent:* Wednesday, July 13, 2011 4:37 PM
*To:* WISPA General List
*Subject:* Re: [WISPA] Authentication for WISP's

What don't you like about radius? MT can do straight MAC auth
through radius on the wireless interface. I'm not real sure
how your radius server is going to provision anything if it
isn't doing the authentication. What are you using as a
billing/provisioning platform?

Cameron

Cameron

On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Josh Bowsher
jbows...@midwaynet.net mailto:jbows...@midwaynet.net wrote:

I am interested in finding an alternative way to authenticate
all of my wireless customers. Currently we use pppoe and I
would like to get away from it. I use mikrotik AP’s and my
network is OSPF routed. I tried using hotspot mac auth and it
worked and still works in some of my AP’s but some of the more
crowded locations fell on their face. I am looking for either
a way to improve that method or I need a centralized box that
would control authentication and let my billing server and
radius server still provision speeds and determine that a
customer has paid their bill. Currently I am open to
suggestions of what authentication options are available with
my mikrotik equipment and I am willing to pay consultation
fees if necessary when I get an Idea that will work like I
want it to. Also, I hand out both private IP’s and public IP’s
only when the customer requests them, and currently if a
customer requests a public static I create a custom profile in
radius and they get the only IP in a custom pool setup for
that profile. Thank you in advance for any and all advice and
ideas.

Regards,

Joshua S. Bowsher

Director of Internet Services
Midwaynet.net

Midway Electronics

NWIIS a division of MidwayNet, LLC
1250 N McKinley Ave
Rensselaer, IN 47978
Office 219-866-7946 ext: 212 tel:219-866-7946%20ext%3A%20212

Cell 219-863-0678 tel:219-863-0678

www.midwaynet.net http://www.midwaynet.net/

jbows...@midwaynet.net mailto:jbows...@midwaynet.net






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



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

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

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






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



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

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:

[WISPA] Shelden IA

2011-07-01 Thread Sam Tetherow
Does anyone on the list offer service in Sheldon IA?



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] Strange Issue

2011-05-02 Thread Sam Tetherow
I know it should be roughly the same, but what does testing the 
powerbridge to the rocket show using ubiquiti's internal speed test, and 
what does the quality and capacity numbers look like while running the 
bandwidth from the customer side to the various towers?


On 5/2/11 4:20 PM, Nick Olsen wrote:
Have a strange issue that is showing up in a few places. Was wondering 
what peoples thoughts are on this


Here is how things are setup.
Every tower has a Mikrotik router on it. And is OSPF Routed.

Route to the customer is (Tower ATower BTower CTower DCustomer)
Tower A is where we have fiber, And our colo for the purpose of this 
issue.
Tower A and Tower B connect via Licenced Backhaul and will do 200+Mb/s 
Full Duplex.
Tower B and Tower C connect via Licenced Backhaul and will do 200+Mb/s 
Full Duplex.
Tower C and Tower D connect via un-licenced Backhaul and will do about 
80Mb/s.
Customer Connects to Tower D. AP is a 5ghz Rocket with a sector. SU is 
a Power Bridge.


Now, Here is the bandwidth tests. Using the Mikrotik Bandwidth test to 
get these results.
Testing over each Backhaul from each tower will always max out 
whatever backhaul I'm testing.

IE. Tower ATower B will do ~250Mb/s
BC ~250Mb/s
CD ~80Mb/s
Then Testing End to End Tower ATower D ~80Mb/s (Maxes out the weakest 
link, The BH between C and D. This is expected)


Now, The Strange Part.
Testing from the customers Mikrotik Router on site.
Testing from CustomerTower D I get about 45Mb/s Down, And 30Mb/s Up.
Testing from CustomerTower C I get about 45Mb/s Down, And 30Mb/s Up
Testing from CustomerTower B I get about 15Mb/s Down and 30Mb/s up.
Testing End to End Customer to Tower A I get about 15Mb/s Down And 
30Mb/s Up.


I don't get what is causing the customer location to show such slow 
speeds. I've tested multiple times, And Confirmed tons of free 
bandwidth on every Backhaul in the path. And testing Tower to Tower 
shows great speeds. We have the same problem in a few places. And in 
each case, We see a drop in speed as soon as it hits one of the 
licenced Backhauls. However, Each one of these backhauls regularly 
carries over 100Mb/s and have been tested to over 200Mb/s each time.


Anyone have any ideas?

Nick Olsen
Network Operations
(855) FLSPEED  x106





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] My day is now dedicated to UBB research. You should too.

2011-05-02 Thread Sam Tetherow
Haven't run the numbers, but it doesn't look like this number is taking 
into consideration staff cost, other overhead such administrative cost, 
insurance, non-wireless gear and most importantly a reasonable profit 
margin.

Looking at it from the other direction,  I currently spend about 20% of 
opex on bandwidth.  Granted an user increasing bandwidth doesn't cost me 
more in administrative (once we account for UBB), insurance and other 
non-transport costs, but you do have to remember there is a significant 
cost to running the network outside of gear and bandwidth so if you 
figure out the cost per GB to deliver to the customer and all of a 
sudden the majority start nearing their cap consistently it will be 
eating into your paycheck.

On 5/2/11 4:48 PM, Matt wrote:
 What is cost per megabit from your upstream?
 Divide your cost per megabit by 120 to get a good idea of your cost
 per gigabit at the NOC.  If your paying $20 per megabit you would be
 at 0.17$ per GByte.

 Figuring your cost on the wireless network is nearly impossible.  I am
 considering:

 Total cost of AP and BH wireless gear at site and used to feed site.
 Divided by 24 months.  Add any rental.  Divided by your total max
 available bandwidth.  Divided by 2.  Gives cost Mbps.

 A site could be six canopy 2.4 AP's and a CMM.  Total max available
 bandwidth would be 60Mbps.  Guessing prices.  Bandwidth is 20$ Mbps.
 Price per GByte is 0.18$  I think that's too low but I did not
 figure/guess any BH gear cost.


 
 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/


  1   2   3   4   >