Re: [WISPA] question of the day

[Mark Radabaugh]

I guess my answer remains the same - you can and already do the things that 
AT&T can’t or isn’t willing to do.   The reason we are able to use inexpensive 
spectrum so efficiently is that we are careful in how and where we place 
equipment and use high gain antennas to accomplish efficient use of the 
spectrum. AT&T isn’t going to be willing to build a system the way we do.  
They want to have no physical contact with the customer location - if they 
can’t mail the CPE to the customer and have the customer install it I don’t see 
them sticking with the model in the long term.   Their labor cost is simply too 
high.   The way around that for the mobile carriers is to have enough spectrum 
and RF power to be able to accomplish a self install - but that takes far more 
spectrum than they have, smaller cell sites, and isn’t very spectrally 
efficient - meaning they have to spend even more money acquiring the spectrum 
(or buying off the regulators).  

I see Centurylink and Frontier being pushed into fixed wireless simply to meet 
the CAF obligations they took with no real idea of how they were going to meet 
them.  I still don’t see them having the work force and making the investment 
to compete long term in this space.They will do the minimum they have to do 
in order to meet the obligations they took on with CAF while looking for the 
next bailout.

Mark


> On Oct 30, 2017, at 12:44 PM, Joe Miller  wrote:
> 
> Mark,
>  
> AT&T and others like them are getting into the LTE space which does have an 
> impact on our customer base. 
>  
> I guess my question should have been…. “What did it take you to establish a 
> profitable Fixed Wireless system and how have you been able to compete with 
> AT&T’s  of the world?”
>  
> Joe
>  
> From: Mark Radabaugh [mailto:m...@amplex.net <mailto:m...@amplex.net>] 
> Sent: Monday, October 30, 2017 11:23 AM
> To: joe.mil...@dslbyair.com <mailto:joe.mil...@dslbyair.com>; WISPA General 
> List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] question of the day
>  
> Kind of an open ended question - do you have any more specifics of what they 
> are looking for?
>  
> I think you already know most of this - access to capital, spectrum, 
> competent employees and management, vertical assets, and bandwidth, all at 
> reasonable rates are the keys to a profitable fixed wireless service.   
> Everything after that is just standard business.   
>  
> You compete and win against AT&T by avoiding many of the fixed costs that 
> AT&T has, and by doing things that generally don’t work well in large 
> corporations - having local knowledge and decision making, ability to use 
> non-standardized sites, localized marketing and sales.  You also use 
> inexpensive spectrum that you do not have to pay billions of dollars for in 
> upfront costs.  You can use unlicensed spectrum because you have local 
> installers who are able to optimize the signal to customer locations, 
> something that AT&T is not prepared or particularly interested in doing.
>  
> The challenge isn’t competing with AT&T for a small to midsize WISP.   The 
> real challenge is competing with small to midsize WISP’s when you get to be 
> the size of AT&T.
>  
> Turn the question around on them.   How can a company the size of AT&T, with 
> little interest in serving rural areas, compete with the people who live here 
> and have a real interest in making this business succeed?   If AT&T makes a 
> hash of it they still get a paycheck next Friday.   If you screw it up it’s a 
> different story.
>  
> Mark
>  
>  
>  
>> On Oct 30, 2017, at 11:46 AM, Joe Miller > <mailto:joe.mil...@dslbyair.com>> wrote:
>>  
>> I am trying to make forward progress in the state government in MS and this 
>> question was raised:
>>  
>> “What does it take to establish a profitable Fixed Wireless system and how 
>> this can compete with AT&T?”
>>  
>>  
>>   
>> I could use some input on the different ways you have done this.
>>  
>> Regards,
>>  
>> Joe Miller
>> www.dslbyair.com <http://www.dslbyair.com/>
>> www.facebook.com/dslbyair <http://www.facebook.com/dslbyair>
>> 228-831-8881
>>  
>> "We believe that everyone has a right to high speed Internet. It should not 
>> matter where you work or live. We do this one customer at a time".
>>  
>> ___
>> Wireless mailing list
>> Wireless@wispa.org <mailto:Wireless@wispa.org>
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless 
>> <http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless>
___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] question of the day

[Joe Miller]

Mark,

 

AT&T and others like them are getting into the LTE space which does have an 
impact on our customer base. 

 

I guess my question should have been…. “What did it take you to establish a 
profitable Fixed Wireless system and how have you been able to compete with 
AT&T’s  of the world?”

 

Joe

 

From: Mark Radabaugh [mailto:m...@amplex.net] 
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2017 11:23 AM
To: joe.mil...@dslbyair.com; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] question of the day

 

Kind of an open ended question - do you have any more specifics of what they 
are looking for?

 

I think you already know most of this - access to capital, spectrum, competent 
employees and management, vertical assets, and bandwidth, all at reasonable 
rates are the keys to a profitable fixed wireless service.   Everything after 
that is just standard business.   

 

You compete and win against AT&T by avoiding many of the fixed costs that AT&T 
has, and by doing things that generally don’t work well in large corporations - 
having local knowledge and decision making, ability to use non-standardized 
sites, localized marketing and sales.  You also use inexpensive spectrum that 
you do not have to pay billions of dollars for in upfront costs.  You can use 
unlicensed spectrum because you have local installers who are able to optimize 
the signal to customer locations, something that AT&T is not prepared or 
particularly interested in doing.

 

The challenge isn’t competing with AT&T for a small to midsize WISP.   The real 
challenge is competing with small to midsize WISP’s when you get to be the size 
of AT&T.

 

Turn the question around on them.   How can a company the size of AT&T, with 
little interest in serving rural areas, compete with the people who live here 
and have a real interest in making this business succeed?   If AT&T makes a 
hash of it they still get a paycheck next Friday.   If you screw it up it’s a 
different story.

 

Mark

 

 

 

On Oct 30, 2017, at 11:46 AM, Joe Miller  wrote:

 

I am trying to make forward progress in the state government in MS and this 
question was raised:

 

“What does it take to establish a profitable Fixed Wireless system and how this 
can compete with AT&T?”





I could use some input on the different ways you have done this.

 

Regards,

 

Joe Miller

 <http://www.dslbyair.com/> www.dslbyair.com

 <http://www.facebook.com/dslbyair> www.facebook.com/dslbyair

228-831-8881

 

"We believe that everyone has a right to high speed Internet. It should not 
matter where you work or live. We do this one customer at a time".

 

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

 

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

Re: [WISPA] question of the day

[Mark Radabaugh]

Kind of an open ended question - do you have any more specifics of what they 
are looking for?

I think you already know most of this - access to capital, spectrum, competent 
employees and management, vertical assets, and bandwidth, all at reasonable 
rates are the keys to a profitable fixed wireless service.   Everything after 
that is just standard business.   

You compete and win against AT&T by avoiding many of the fixed costs that AT&T 
has, and by doing things that generally don’t work well in large corporations - 
having local knowledge and decision making, ability to use non-standardized 
sites, localized marketing and sales.  You also use inexpensive spectrum that 
you do not have to pay billions of dollars for in upfront costs.  You can use 
unlicensed spectrum because you have local installers who are able to optimize 
the signal to customer locations, something that AT&T is not prepared or 
particularly interested in doing.

The challenge isn’t competing with AT&T for a small to midsize WISP.   The real 
challenge is competing with small to midsize WISP’s when you get to be the size 
of AT&T.

Turn the question around on them.   How can a company the size of AT&T, with 
little interest in serving rural areas, compete with the people who live here 
and have a real interest in making this business succeed?   If AT&T makes a 
hash of it they still get a paycheck next Friday.   If you screw it up it’s a 
different story.

Mark



> On Oct 30, 2017, at 11:46 AM, Joe Miller  wrote:
> 
> I am trying to make forward progress in the state government in MS and this 
> question was raised:
>  
> “What does it take to establish a profitable Fixed Wireless system and how 
> this can compete with AT&T?”
>   
>   
> 
> I could use some input on the different ways you have done this.
>  
> Regards,
>  
> Joe Miller
> www.dslbyair.com 
> www.facebook.com/dslbyair 
> 228-831-8881
>  
> "We believe that everyone has a right to high speed Internet. It should not 
> matter where you work or live. We do this one customer at a time".
>  
> ___
> Wireless mailing list
> Wireless@wispa.org 
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless 
> 
___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

[WISPA] question of the day

[Joe Miller]

I am trying to make forward progress in the state government in MS and this
question was raised:

 

"What does it take to establish a profitable Fixed Wireless system and how
this can compete with AT&T?"

 


I could use some input on the different ways you have done this.

 

Regards,

 

Joe Miller

www.dslbyair.com

www.facebook.com/dslbyair

228-831-8881

 

"We believe that everyone has a right to high speed Internet. It should not
matter where you work or live. We do this one customer at a time".

 

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

Re: [WISPA] question for the group

[Daniel White]

Not that I am aware of.

There are a lot of challenges besides range.  Sector antennas become very 
narrow for instance.  A 2ft parabola at this frequency band has a 0.6 degree 
main lobe.

And as Josh said, 80GHz is licensed under Part 101 regulations in the US for 
PtP applications only, so you wouldn’t be able to deploy even if you found the 
gear.

But there are some countries where the bands are legal (just 70GHz, or say 
70/80 in Mexico) for PtMP use.

60GHz is much more likely long term.

[cid:image001.jpg@01CE2975.BD4B6370]

Daniel White | Managing Director
SAF North America LLC

Cell:


(303) 746-3590

Skype:

danieldwhite

E-mail:

daniel.wh...@saftehnika.com<mailto:daniel.wh...@saftehnika.com>




From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf 
Of Chris Stradtman
Sent: Monday, June 30, 2014 12:11 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] question for the group

Hi all,

Is anybody aware of any manufacturers making PtMP gear in the 70/80/90 ghz 
ranges?  All I can seem to find is PtP

Thanks,

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

Re: [WISPA] question for the group

[Chris Stradtman]

I hadn't heard that, but that might explain why I can't find any then  :-)

Thx

Chris

sent from my moto-X
On Jun 30, 2014 12:13 PM, "Josh Luthman" 
wrote:

> I could be wrong, but I thought I read someone saying those bands are not
> allowed to be used for ptmp purposes in FCC land.
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 12:10 PM, Chris Stradtman <
> cstradt...@greenpointcommunications.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Is anybody aware of any manufacturers making PtMP gear in the 70/80/90
>> ghz ranges?  All I can seem to find is PtP
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Chris
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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] question for the group

[Josh Luthman]

I could be wrong, but I thought I read someone saying those bands are not
allowed to be used for ptmp purposes in FCC land.


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


On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 12:10 PM, Chris Stradtman <
cstradt...@greenpointcommunications.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Is anybody aware of any manufacturers making PtMP gear in the 70/80/90 ghz
> ranges?  All I can seem to find is PtP
>
> Thanks,
>
> Chris
>
>
> ___
> Wireless mailing list
> Wireless@wispa.org
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
>
___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

[WISPA] question for the group

[Chris Stradtman]

Hi all,

Is anybody aware of any manufacturers making PtMP gear in the 70/80/90 ghz
ranges?  All I can seem to find is PtP

Thanks,

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

Re: [WISPA] question for the group

[TJ Trout]

If you have to ask this question, you might be better suited to hire
someone to complete this install, just being honest...


On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 5:35 AM, Bret Clark wrote:

>  That of course would imply that the FCC themselves were professionals
> and in my dealings with them I haven't found that to be the case!
>
> On 09/19/2013 11:06 PM, Blair Davis wrote:
>
> Oh boy!
>
> IANAL...  That phrase 'Professional Installer' is likely the single most
> contentious thing the FCC has done in the last 20 years...
>
> In general, it seems that as long as you follow the EIRP and frequency
> rules and don't cause interference to a licensed user, all is good.
>
> OTOH, if you run way over the power limits, *operate out of band** *or 
> *interfere
> with licensed users*, they will, sooner or later, come find you.
>
> Others have other opinions.
>
> My opinion is that the terms 'Professional Installer' and ' Professionally
> Installed', have no real meaning as the FCC has, to the best of my
> knowledge, failed to define either term.
>
> YMMV
>
> --
>
>
> On 9/19/2013 10:53 PM, Chris Stradtman wrote:
>
>  Hi all,
>
>  Most of my work is done inside so I don't really deal with most of the
> WISP issues.
>
>  However I'm being asked by a client to do an outside install.  This is
> likely to be in the 5Ghz range.
>
>  I've found a reference to
>
>  "Devices must be professionally installed when operating in the 5470 –
> 5725 MHz band"
>
>
>  I'm aware of avoidance of TDWR systems and the allowed and disallowed
> frequencies in that band.
>
>  However, I can't find reference to what is meant by a "Professional
> Installer".
>
>  Is there a licensing program that I can't seem to find by googling??
>
>  Thanks in advance,
>
>  Chris Stradtman
>
>
> ___
> Wireless mailing 
> listWireless@wispa.orghttp://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
>
> --
> West Michigan Wireless ISP
> Allegan, Michigan  49010269-686-8648
>
> A Division of:
> Camp Communication Services, INC
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] question for the group

[Bret Clark]

That of course would imply that the FCC themselves were professionals 
and in my dealings with them I haven't found that to be the case!


On 09/19/2013 11:06 PM, Blair Davis wrote:

Oh boy!

IANAL...  That phrase 'Professional Installer' is likely the single 
most contentious thing the FCC has done in the last 20 years...


In general, it seems that as long as you follow the EIRP and frequency 
rules and don't cause interference to a licensed user, all is good.


OTOH, if you run way over the power limits, _/operate out of 
band/___or /_interfere with licensed users_/, they will, sooner or 
later, come find you.


Others have other opinions.

My opinion is that the terms 'Professional Installer' and ' 
Professionally Installed', have no real meaning as the FCC has, to the 
best of my knowledge, failed to define either term.


YMMV

--


On 9/19/2013 10:53 PM, Chris Stradtman wrote:

Hi all,

Most of my work is done inside so I don't really deal with most of 
the WISP issues.


However I'm being asked by a client to do an outside install.  This 
is likely to be in the 5Ghz range.


I've found a reference to

"Devices must be professionally installed when operating in the 5470 
– 5725 MHz band"



I'm aware of avoidance of TDWR systems and the allowed and disallowed 
frequencies in that band.


However, I can't find reference to what is meant by a "Professional 
Installer".


Is there a licensing program that I can't seem to find by googling??

Thanks in advance,

Chris Stradtman


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


--
West Michigan Wireless ISP
Allegan, Michigan  49010
269-686-8648

A Division of:
Camp Communication Services, INC


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

Re: [WISPA] question for the group

[Blair Davis]

  
  
Oh boy!

IANAL...  That phrase 'Professional Installer' is likely the single
most contentious thing the FCC has done in the last 20 years...

In general, it seems that as long as you follow the EIRP and
frequency rules and don't cause interference to a licensed user, all
is good.

OTOH, if you run way over the power limits, operate out of
band or interfere with licensed users,
they will, sooner or later, come find you.

Others have other opinions.

My opinion is that the terms 'Professional Installer' and '
Professionally Installed', have no real meaning as the FCC has, to
the best of my knowledge, failed to define either term.

YMMV

--


On 9/19/2013 10:53 PM, Chris Stradtman
  wrote:


  
Hi all,


Most of my work is done inside so I don't really deal with most
of the WISP issues.


However I'm being asked by a client to do an outside
  install.  This is likely to be in the 5Ghz range.


I've found a reference to 


"Devices must be professionally installed when operating in
  the 5470 – 5725 MHz band"





I'm aware of avoidance of TDWR systems and the allowed and
  disallowed frequencies in that band.


However, I can't find reference to what is meant by a
  "Professional Installer".


Is there a licensing program that I can't seem to find by
  googling??

  

Thanks in advance,


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



-- 
West Michigan Wireless ISP
Allegan, Michigan  49010
269-686-8648

A Division of:
Camp Communication Services, INC

  

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

Re: [WISPA] question for the group

[D. Ryan Spott]

I have never seen this enforced in my limited experience. Most 
manufacturers have classes you can attend to become a 'professional'.




ryan


On 9/19/13 7:53 PM, Chris Stradtman wrote:

Hi all,

Most of my work is done inside so I don't really deal with most of the 
WISP issues.


However I'm being asked by a client to do an outside install.  This is 
likely to be in the 5Ghz range.


I've found a reference to

"Devices must be professionally installed when operating in the 5470 
-- 5725 MHz band"



I'm aware of avoidance of TDWR systems and the allowed and disallowed 
frequencies in that band.


However, I can't find reference to what is meant by a "Professional 
Installer".


Is there a licensing program that I can't seem to find by googling??

Thanks in advance,

Chris Stradtman


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


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

[WISPA] question for the group

[Chris Stradtman]

Hi all,

Most of my work is done inside so I don't really deal with most of the WISP
issues.

However I'm being asked by a client to do an outside install.  This is
likely to be in the 5Ghz range.

I've found a reference to

"Devices must be professionally installed when operating in the 5470 – 5725
MHz band"


I'm aware of avoidance of TDWR systems and the allowed and disallowed
frequencies in that band.

However, I can't find reference to what is meant by a "Professional
Installer".

Is there a licensing program that I can't seem to find by googling??

Thanks in advance,

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

Re: [WISPA] Question about ISM and UNII

[Gary Garrett]

Light them up through the windows from across the street.
We have done this to hotels that have rules like that.
They are not in control of radio waves coming in, just physical access 
to the building.




On 8/22/2012 9:44 AM, Chris Stradtman wrote:
> this is actually inside a structure not on top… but I guess that still 
> applies…
>
> Thanks,
>
>

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

Re: [WISPA] Question about ISM and UNII

[Chris Stradtman]

Interestingly the property management company was  caught caught by the all RF 
line in the contract as they wanted to sell wifi and was told they couldn't as 
per the contract
They didn't understand the repercussions of the phrase "all RF" when they 
signed the contract.
It's also like a 20 or 25 year contract as well

Chris


On Aug 22, 2012, at 1:24 PM, Brough Turner  wrote:

> It's certainly the case that a building owner can control whether radios or 
> other wireless gear are   installed on their property and they can lease 
> any or all of those rights to anyone they please.  However, they can't 
> control the RF signals going into and through their building from elsewhere.
> 
> Also, if they lease space in their building, under OTARD rules and precedents 
> (http://www.fcc.gov/guides/over-air-reception-devices-rule) they can't 
> prevent their tenants from deploying legal wireless gear within their leased 
> premises for various listed purposes, one of which is "broadband."
> 
> If you want to use the building as a tower, the landlord will have to figure 
> out whether he's already contracted away all those rights.
> 
> But if you want to serve a customer who leases space in the building, you 
> might think about mounting a radio indoors near a window that has a view of 
> your tower.  A Nanostation M5 mounted horizontally to the ceiling is very 
> unobtrusive and ordinary window glass is only 1-2 dB insertion loss.  
> (Caution, some kinds of low-emissivity glass are really bad for all wireless, 
> including cellular - check first).
> 
> Thanks,
> Brough
>  
> Brough Turner
> netBlazr Inc. – Free your Broadband!
> Website | Google+ | Twitter | LinkedIn | Facebook | Blog | netBlazr Inc.
>  
> On 8/22/12 12:44 PM, Chris Stradtman wrote:
>> this is actually inside a structure not on top… but I guess that still 
>> applies…
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Chris
>> 
>> On Aug 22, 2012, at 12:42 PM, Matt Hoppes  wrote:
>> 
>>> Yes,
>>> They can contract that with the building/tower owner.   All it means is 
>>> if you want to go on the tower you can't use those frequencies.  You can 
>>> erect a structure on the next available land plot and use them.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Matt Hoppes
>>> Director of Information Technology
>>> Indigo Wireless
>>> +1 (570) 723-7312
>>> 
>>> On 8/22/12 12:38 PM, Chris Stradtman wrote:
 Folks,
 
 I'm dealing with a situation in a structure where an incumbent cell
 carrier is claiming full control of the
 RF spectrum (if I understand correctly from  3 kHz
  to 300 GHz
 ). This claim is based on a
 contract with
 the buildings management company.  Currently they are not offering any
 services in the ISM or UNII ranges,
 however they claim that no other vendor can offer services in that range
 without the express permission (
 and a healthy chunk of all the revenues).  Has anybody dealt with this
 before?? I realize that they are probably (one of) the
 license holder(s) on record for the regulated cellular spectrum, but I
 wonder if a contract with the venue can actually override
 the FCCs licensing ( or lack thereof ) on the ISM and UNII spectrums space?
 
 Anybody have any wisdom on this ??
 
 Thanks,
 
 Chris
 
 
 ___
 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
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Thanks,
> Brough
>  
> Brough Turner
> netBlazr Inc. – Free your Broadband!
> Mobile:  617-285-0433   Skype:  brough
> netBlazr Inc. | Google+ | Twitter | LinkedIn | Facebook | Blog | Personal 
> website 
>  
> ___
> 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] Question about ISM and UNII

[Brough Turner]

It's certainly the case that a building owner can control whether radios 
or other wireless gear are installed on their property and they can 
lease any or all of those rights to anyone they please.  However, they 
can't control the RF signals going into and through their building from 
elsewhere.


Also, if they lease space in their building, under OTARD rules and 
precedents (http://www.fcc.gov/guides/over-air-reception-devices-rule) 
they can't prevent their tenants from deploying legal wireless gear 
within their leased premises for various listed purposes, one of which 
is "broadband."


If you want to use the building as a tower, the landlord will have to 
figure out whether he's already contracted away all those rights.


But if you want to serve a customer who leases space in the building, 
you might think about mounting a radio indoors near a window that has a 
view of your tower.  A Nanostation M5 mounted horizontally to the 
ceiling is very unobtrusive and ordinary window glass is only 1-2 dB 
insertion loss.  (Caution, some kinds of low-emissivity glass are really 
bad for all wireless, including cellular - check first).


Thanks,

Brough

Brough Turner

netBlazr Inc. – Free your Broadband!

Website  | Google+ 
 | Twitter 
 | LinkedIn 
 | Facebook 
 | Blog 
 | netBlazr Inc. 


On 8/22/12 12:44 PM, Chris Stradtman wrote:

this is actually inside a structure not on top… but I guess that still applies…

Thanks,

Chris

On Aug 22, 2012, at 12:42 PM, Matt Hoppes  wrote:


Yes,
They can contract that with the building/tower owner.   All it means is
if you want to go on the tower you can't use those frequencies.  You can
erect a structure on the next available land plot and use them.


Matt Hoppes
Director of Information Technology
Indigo Wireless
+1 (570) 723-7312

On 8/22/12 12:38 PM, Chris Stradtman wrote:

Folks,

I'm dealing with a situation in a structure where an incumbent cell
carrier is claiming full control of the
RF spectrum (if I understand correctly from  3 kHz
 to 300 GHz
). This claim is based on a
contract with
the buildings management company.  Currently they are not offering any
services in the ISM or UNII ranges,
however they claim that no other vendor can offer services in that range
without the express permission (
and a healthy chunk of all the revenues).  Has anybody dealt with this
before?? I realize that they are probably (one of) the
license holder(s) on record for the regulated cellular spectrum, but I
wonder if a contract with the venue can actually override
the FCCs licensing ( or lack thereof ) on the ISM and UNII spectrums space?

Anybody have any wisdom on this ??

Thanks,

Chris


___
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





--

Thanks,

Brough

Brough Turner

netBlazr Inc. – Free your Broadband!

Mobile:617-285-0433 Skype:brough

netBlazr Inc. | Google+ 
 | Twitter 
 | LinkedIn 
 | Facebook 
 | Blog 
 | Personal website 



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

Re: [WISPA] Question about ISM and UNII

[Bob Moldashel]

The Commission had a real problem with exclusivity arrangements by 
carriers similar to this that prevented co-location a few years back.  I 
don't know what the outcome was. Same situation where carriers were 
saying other landline carriers could not enter a location because they 
had exclusive rights to risers.  The Commission spanked them for that one.

What is obvious is that the finances to fight something like this is 
prohibitive.  Just build on the next available.

-B-



On 8/22/2012 12:44 PM, Chris Stradtman wrote:
> this is actually inside a structure not on top… but I guess that still 
> applies…
>
> Thanks,
>
> Chris
>
> On Aug 22, 2012, at 12:42 PM, Matt Hoppes  wrote:
>
>> Yes,
>> They can contract that with the building/tower owner.   All it means is
>> if you want to go on the tower you can't use those frequencies.  You can
>> erect a structure on the next available land plot and use them.
>>
>>
>> Matt Hoppes
>> Director of Information Technology
>> Indigo Wireless
>> +1 (570) 723-7312
>>
>> On 8/22/12 12:38 PM, Chris Stradtman wrote:
>>> Folks,
>>>
>>> I'm dealing with a situation in a structure where an incumbent cell
>>> carrier is claiming full control of the
>>> RF spectrum (if I understand correctly from  3 kHz
>>>  to 300 GHz
>>> ). This claim is based on a
>>> contract with
>>> the buildings management company.  Currently they are not offering any
>>> services in the ISM or UNII ranges,
>>> however they claim that no other vendor can offer services in that range
>>> without the express permission (
>>> and a healthy chunk of all the revenues).  Has anybody dealt with this
>>> before?? I realize that they are probably (one of) the
>>> license holder(s) on record for the regulated cellular spectrum, but I
>>> wonder if a contract with the venue can actually override
>>> the FCCs licensing ( or lack thereof ) on the ISM and UNII spectrums space?
>>>
>>> Anybody have any wisdom on this ??
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Chris
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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] Question about ISM and UNII

[Chris Stradtman]

this is actually inside a structure not on top… but I guess that still applies…

Thanks,

Chris

On Aug 22, 2012, at 12:42 PM, Matt Hoppes  wrote:

> Yes,
> They can contract that with the building/tower owner.   All it means is 
> if you want to go on the tower you can't use those frequencies.  You can 
> erect a structure on the next available land plot and use them.
> 
> 
> Matt Hoppes
> Director of Information Technology
> Indigo Wireless
> +1 (570) 723-7312
> 
> On 8/22/12 12:38 PM, Chris Stradtman wrote:
>> Folks,
>> 
>> I'm dealing with a situation in a structure where an incumbent cell
>> carrier is claiming full control of the
>> RF spectrum (if I understand correctly from  3 kHz
>>  to 300 GHz
>> ). This claim is based on a
>> contract with
>> the buildings management company.  Currently they are not offering any
>> services in the ISM or UNII ranges,
>> however they claim that no other vendor can offer services in that range
>> without the express permission (
>> and a healthy chunk of all the revenues).  Has anybody dealt with this
>> before?? I realize that they are probably (one of) the
>> license holder(s) on record for the regulated cellular spectrum, but I
>> wonder if a contract with the venue can actually override
>> the FCCs licensing ( or lack thereof ) on the ISM and UNII spectrums space?
>> 
>> Anybody have any wisdom on this ??
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Chris
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> 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] Question about ISM and UNII

[Matt Hoppes]

Yes,
They can contract that with the building/tower owner.   All it means is 
if you want to go on the tower you can't use those frequencies.  You can 
erect a structure on the next available land plot and use them.


Matt Hoppes
Director of Information Technology
Indigo Wireless
+1 (570) 723-7312

On 8/22/12 12:38 PM, Chris Stradtman wrote:
> Folks,
>
> I'm dealing with a situation in a structure where an incumbent cell
> carrier is claiming full control of the
> RF spectrum (if I understand correctly from  3 kHz
>  to 300 GHz
> ). This claim is based on a
> contract with
> the buildings management company.  Currently they are not offering any
> services in the ISM or UNII ranges,
> however they claim that no other vendor can offer services in that range
> without the express permission (
> and a healthy chunk of all the revenues).  Has anybody dealt with this
> before?? I realize that they are probably (one of) the
> license holder(s) on record for the regulated cellular spectrum, but I
> wonder if a contract with the venue can actually override
> the FCCs licensing ( or lack thereof ) on the ISM and UNII spectrums space?
>
> Anybody have any wisdom on this ??
>
> Thanks,
>
> Chris
>
>
> ___
> Wireless mailing list
> Wireless@wispa.org
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

[WISPA] Question about ISM and UNII

[Chris Stradtman]

Folks,

I'm dealing with a situation in a structure where an incumbent cell carrier
is claiming full control of the
RF spectrum (if I understand correctly from  3
kHz to
300 GHz ). This claim is based on a
contract with
the buildings management company.  Currently they are not offering any
services in the ISM or UNII ranges,
however they claim that no other vendor can offer services in that range
without the express permission (
and a healthy chunk of all the revenues).  Has anybody dealt with this
before?? I realize that they are probably (one of) the
license holder(s) on record for the regulated cellular spectrum, but I
wonder if a contract with the venue can actually override
the FCCs licensing ( or lack thereof ) on the ISM and UNII spectrums space?

Anybody have any wisdom on this ??

Thanks,

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

Re: [WISPA] Question about hosting client's POS merchant account for credit card processing

[Ben West]

Faisal,

Thank you especially for the response that the network-aware CC readers
(should) encrypt their traffic.  I was having difficulty finding
non-ambiguous information about that.

I'm still looking at options for possible lightweight VPN solutions, whether
to add another layer of security to the CC readers and assuage paranoia, or
other applications where a VPN may make sense.

On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 1:41 PM, Faisal Imtiaz  wrote:

>  Hi Ben,
>
> You can slice this in as many ways as you like... However if you want to
> keep it simple and effective...
>
> Here is the rundown
> If they are using  the correct processor, who is able to do these
> transactions over IP / via the Internet, then you don't have to worry about
> any of this..(all communication is encrypted).
>
> And here another interesting gem.  Out of all the different ways to do
> this, and all the different processors / merchant account / transaction
> clearing house etc.etc.
> the Best one for ISP's  & WISP's are the folks at IP Pay... because the
> take care of the transaction end to end, and actually keep life simple for
> everyone involved, the Merchant as well as the ISP.
>
> The nice un-recognized bonus is all of this is that, typically IP Pay will
> reduce a Merchant's Credit Card Processing fees and charges (nice bonus for
> Merchants) and they are willing to 'share' a portion of the Credit Card
> Processing fees / charges they make with the ISP/NSP Partner. Which is a
> extra bonus for the ISP/WISP.
>
> Let's put it to you this way.. it is not un-common that the, recurring
> 'commissions' from the Credit Card Processing account is significantly more
> than that that Merchant is paying for ISP recurring  Services
>
> :)
>
> Regards.
>
> 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
>
>
> On 4/13/2011 2:30 PM, Ben West wrote:
>
> Thanks everyone for your responses re: serving clients' credit card
> readers; they were very helpful.
>
>  A related question I asked on another listserv: does anyone use
> lightweight VPN solutions in their CPE to create tunnels from the client's
> location, thru your backhaul, back to your wired/fibered uplink?
>
>  That is, if you indulge some paranoia and not trust sending potentially
> plaintext credit card traffic as-is over the same wireless link as other
> clients' traffic, and/or you don't fully trust WPA2 to keep out snooping by
> 3rd parties, do you build a VPN tunnel from the card reader back to whatever
> box manages your fiber link?
>
>  I received some interesting suggestions for very lightweight VPN,
> specifically tinc and N2N, which both work on OpenWRT.  N2N is apparently
> lightweight enough (tho can't support large bandwidth) that folks reported
> it running it directly on access points like Ubnt Nanostation M's.
>
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 7:14 PM, Ben West  wrote:
>
>> I am curious if anyone has experience providing wireless service to small
>> businesses who use a POS credit card system.
>>
>>  My own chats with various small biz owners here in St. Louis suggests
>> that their merchant account providers tend to expect a twisted-pair phone
>> line and/or dedicated DSL/cable, no wireless.
>>
>>  I imagine this may vary depending on who actually provides the merchant
>> account, but has anyone received feedback from such providers about their
>> expectations for serving the credit card machines wireless?  E.g. must you
>> use dedicated, encrypted wireless links (as common sense would suggest),
>> and/or VPNs, or must the POS machine sit on a dedicated LAN, etc?
>>
>>  Thanks.
>>
>>  P.S. By POS I mean Point of Sale, to avoid any confusion. ;)
>>
>> --
>> Ben West
>> http://gowasabi.net
>> b...@gowasabi.net
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Ben West
> http://gowasabi.net
> 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/
>



-- 
Ben West
http://gowasabi.net
b...@gowasabi.net



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

 
W

Re: [WISPA] Question about hosting client's POS merchant account for credit card processing

[Faisal Imtiaz]

Hi Ben,

You can slice this in as many ways as you like... However if you want to 
keep it simple and effective...


Here is the rundown
If they are using  the correct processor, who is able to do these 
transactions over IP / via the Internet, then you don't have to worry 
about any of this..(all communication is encrypted).


And here another interesting gem.  Out of all the different ways to 
do this, and all the different processors / merchant account / 
transaction clearing house etc.etc.
the Best one for ISP's & WISP's are the folks at IP Pay... because the 
take care of the transaction end to end, and actually keep life simple 
for everyone involved, the Merchant as well as the ISP.


The nice un-recognized bonus is all of this is that, typically IP Pay 
will reduce a Merchant's Credit Card Processing fees and charges (nice 
bonus for Merchants) and they are willing to 'share' a portion of the 
Credit Card Processing fees / charges they make with the ISP/NSP 
Partner. Which is a extra bonus for the ISP/WISP.


Let's put it to you this way.. it is not un-common that the, recurring  
'commissions' from the Credit Card Processing account is significantly 
more than that that Merchant is paying for ISP recurring  Services


:)

Regards.

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


On 4/13/2011 2:30 PM, Ben West wrote:
Thanks everyone for your responses re: serving clients' credit card 
readers; they were very helpful.


A related question I asked on another listserv: does anyone use 
lightweight VPN solutions in their CPE to create tunnels from the 
client's location, thru your backhaul, back to your wired/fibered uplink?


That is, if you indulge some paranoia and not trust sending 
potentially plaintext credit card traffic as-is over the same wireless 
link as other clients' traffic, and/or you don't fully trust WPA2 to 
keep out snooping by 3rd parties, do you build a VPN tunnel from the 
card reader back to whatever box manages your fiber link?


I received some interesting suggestions for very lightweight VPN, 
specifically tinc and N2N, which both work on OpenWRT.  N2N is 
apparently lightweight enough (tho can't support large bandwidth) that 
folks reported it running it directly on access points like Ubnt 
Nanostation M's.


On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 7:14 PM, Ben West > wrote:


I am curious if anyone has experience providing wireless service
to small businesses who use a POS credit card system.

My own chats with various small biz owners here in St. Louis
suggests that their merchant account providers tend to expect a
twisted-pair phone line and/or dedicated DSL/cable, no wireless.

I imagine this may vary depending on who actually provides the
merchant account, but has anyone received feedback from such
providers about their expectations for serving the credit card
machines wireless?  E.g. must you use dedicated, encrypted
wireless links (as common sense would suggest), and/or VPNs, or
must the POS machine sit on a dedicated LAN, etc?

Thanks.

P.S. By POS I mean Point of Sale, to avoid any confusion. ;)

-- 
Ben West

http://gowasabi.net
b...@gowasabi.net 




--
Ben West
http://gowasabi.net
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] Question about hosting client's POS merchant account for credit card processing

[Jerry Richardson]

MikroTik RB750's at the client and maybe a RB493 at the head end? Instant VPN 
tunnel.

- Jerry

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf 
Of Ben West
Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2011 11:31 AM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question about hosting client's POS merchant account for 
credit card processing

Thanks everyone for your responses re: serving clients' credit card readers; 
they were very helpful.

A related question I asked on another listserv: does anyone use lightweight VPN 
solutions in their CPE to create tunnels from the client's location, thru your 
backhaul, back to your wired/fibered uplink?

That is, if you indulge some paranoia and not trust sending potentially 
plaintext credit card traffic as-is over the same wireless link as other 
clients' traffic, and/or you don't fully trust WPA2 to keep out snooping by 3rd 
parties, do you build a VPN tunnel from the card reader back to whatever box 
manages your fiber link?

I received some interesting suggestions for very lightweight VPN, specifically 
tinc and N2N, which both work on OpenWRT.  N2N is apparently lightweight enough 
(tho can't support large bandwidth) that folks reported it running it directly 
on access points like Ubnt Nanostation M's.

On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 7:14 PM, Ben West 
mailto:b...@gowasabi.net>> wrote:
I am curious if anyone has experience providing wireless service to small 
businesses who use a POS credit card system.

My own chats with various small biz owners here in St. Louis suggests that 
their merchant account providers tend to expect a twisted-pair phone line 
and/or dedicated DSL/cable, no wireless.

I imagine this may vary depending on who actually provides the merchant 
account, but has anyone received feedback from such providers about their 
expectations for serving the credit card machines wireless?  E.g. must you use 
dedicated, encrypted wireless links (as common sense would suggest), and/or 
VPNs, or must the POS machine sit on a dedicated LAN, etc?

Thanks.

P.S. By POS I mean Point of Sale, to avoid any confusion. ;)

--
Ben West
http://gowasabi.net
b...@gowasabi.net<mailto:b...@gowasabi.net>




--
Ben West
http://gowasabi.net
b...@gowasabi.net<mailto:b...@gowasabi.net>



No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com>
Version: 10.0.1209 / Virus Database: 1500/3571 - Release Date: 04/13/11



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/

Re: [WISPA] Question about hosting client's POS merchant account for credit card processing

[Sam Tetherow]

network aware CC terminals do not encrypt their own traffic?

On 4/13/11 1:30 PM, Ben West wrote:
Thanks everyone for your responses re: serving clients' credit card 
readers; they were very helpful.


A related question I asked on another listserv: does anyone use 
lightweight VPN solutions in their CPE to create tunnels from the 
client's location, thru your backhaul, back to your wired/fibered uplink?


That is, if you indulge some paranoia and not trust sending 
potentially plaintext credit card traffic as-is over the same wireless 
link as other clients' traffic, and/or you don't fully trust WPA2 to 
keep out snooping by 3rd parties, do you build a VPN tunnel from the 
card reader back to whatever box manages your fiber link?


I received some interesting suggestions for very lightweight VPN, 
specifically tinc and N2N, which both work on OpenWRT.  N2N is 
apparently lightweight enough (tho can't support large bandwidth) that 
folks reported it running it directly on access points like Ubnt 
Nanostation M's.


On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 7:14 PM, Ben West > wrote:


I am curious if anyone has experience providing wireless service
to small businesses who use a POS credit card system.

My own chats with various small biz owners here in St. Louis
suggests that their merchant account providers tend to expect a
twisted-pair phone line and/or dedicated DSL/cable, no wireless.

I imagine this may vary depending on who actually provides the
merchant account, but has anyone received feedback from such
providers about their expectations for serving the credit card
machines wireless?  E.g. must you use dedicated, encrypted
wireless links (as common sense would suggest), and/or VPNs, or
must the POS machine sit on a dedicated LAN, etc?

Thanks.

P.S. By POS I mean Point of Sale, to avoid any confusion. ;)

-- 
Ben West

http://gowasabi.net
b...@gowasabi.net 




--
Ben West
http://gowasabi.net
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] Question about hosting client's POS merchant account for credit card processing

[Ben West]

Thanks everyone for your responses re: serving clients' credit card readers;
they were very helpful.

A related question I asked on another listserv: does anyone use lightweight
VPN solutions in their CPE to create tunnels from the client's location,
thru your backhaul, back to your wired/fibered uplink?

That is, if you indulge some paranoia and not trust sending potentially
plaintext credit card traffic as-is over the same wireless link as other
clients' traffic, and/or you don't fully trust WPA2 to keep out snooping by
3rd parties, do you build a VPN tunnel from the card reader back to whatever
box manages your fiber link?

I received some interesting suggestions for very lightweight VPN,
specifically tinc and N2N, which both work on OpenWRT.  N2N is apparently
lightweight enough (tho can't support large bandwidth) that folks reported
it running it directly on access points like Ubnt Nanostation M's.

On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 7:14 PM, Ben West  wrote:

> I am curious if anyone has experience providing wireless service to small
> businesses who use a POS credit card system.
>
> My own chats with various small biz owners here in St. Louis suggests that
> their merchant account providers tend to expect a twisted-pair phone line
> and/or dedicated DSL/cable, no wireless.
>
> I imagine this may vary depending on who actually provides the merchant
> account, but has anyone received feedback from such providers about their
> expectations for serving the credit card machines wireless?  E.g. must you
> use dedicated, encrypted wireless links (as common sense would suggest),
> and/or VPNs, or must the POS machine sit on a dedicated LAN, etc?
>
> Thanks.
>
> P.S. By POS I mean Point of Sale, to avoid any confusion. ;)
>
> --
> Ben West
> http://gowasabi.net
> b...@gowasabi.net
>
>


-- 
Ben West
http://gowasabi.net
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/

Re: [WISPA] Question about hosting client's POS merchant account for credit card processing

[Charles Wu]

Those that are "enlightened" have figured out that there's enough money in the 
credit card processing that you shouldn't support it for free

Alex Goldman wrote a story on this a few years ago: 
http://www.ippay.com/index.php?q=ispcon_ippay_08

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf 
Of Ben West
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 7:15 PM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] Question about hosting client's POS merchant account for 
credit card processing

I am curious if anyone has experience providing wireless service to small 
businesses who use a POS credit card system.

My own chats with various small biz owners here in St. Louis suggests that 
their merchant account providers tend to expect a twisted-pair phone line 
and/or dedicated DSL/cable, no wireless.

I imagine this may vary depending on who actually provides the merchant 
account, but has anyone received feedback from such providers about their 
expectations for serving the credit card machines wireless?  E.g. must you use 
dedicated, encrypted wireless links (as common sense would suggest), and/or 
VPNs, or must the POS machine sit on a dedicated LAN, etc?

Thanks.

P.S. By POS I mean Point of Sale, to avoid any confusion. ;)

--
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/

Re: [WISPA] Question about hosting client's POS merchant account for credit card processing

[Scott Reed]

I have at least one that got the connection specifically for the POS.  
No questions about how delivered.  POS devices are on the store-wide LAN.

I would suspect I have others that do POS that I don't know about.
And lots of places use HughesNet, etc.  How would we be any worse?

On 4/11/2011 8:14 PM, Ben West wrote:
I am curious if anyone has experience providing wireless service to 
small businesses who use a POS credit card system.


My own chats with various small biz owners here in St. Louis suggests 
that their merchant account providers tend to expect a twisted-pair 
phone line and/or dedicated DSL/cable, no wireless.


I imagine this may vary depending on who actually provides the 
merchant account, but has anyone received feedback from such providers 
about their expectations for serving the credit card machines 
wireless?  E.g. must you use dedicated, encrypted wireless links (as 
common sense would suggest), and/or VPNs, or must the POS machine sit 
on a dedicated LAN, etc?


Thanks.

P.S. By POS I mean Point of Sale, to avoid any confusion. ;)

--
Ben West
http://gowasabi.net
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/


--
Scott Reed
Owner
NewWays Networking, LLC
Wireless Networking
Network Design, Installation and Administration
Mikrotik Advanced Certified
www.nwwnet.net
(765) 855-1060




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question about QMailToaster and Powercode

[Cameron Crum]

I don't know about Powercode, but Wispmon can ;). In all truthfullness,
toaster is easy to script and should be easy to do with anything that can
run scripts through ssh or cgi. I've done it both ways using perl scripts on
the qmt box.

Cameron

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 9:41 AM, Patrick D. Nix, Jr <
pni...@cnetworksolutions.com> wrote:

> Anyone know if there is a way to integrate qmailtoaster into powercode so
> that email accounts can be managed from within PC?  Also is there a way to
> allow users to add their own accounts into QMT without having to call us.
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance
>
>
>
> Patrick Nix, Jr.,
> Computer Network Solutions
> CSWEB.NET Internet Services
> IT Manager
>
> http://www.cnetworksolutions.com
> http://www.csweb.net
>
> (918) 235-0414
>
>
> --
>
> Attention: This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and
> privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify
> the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail and destroy any
> copies. Any dissemination or use of this information by a person other than
> the intended recipient is unauthorized and may be illegal.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

[WISPA] Question about QMailToaster and Powercode

[Patrick D. Nix, Jr]

Anyone know if there is a way to integrate qmailtoaster into powercode
so that email accounts can be managed from within PC?  Also is there a
way to allow users to add their own accounts into QMT without having to
call us.

 

Thanks in advance

 

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

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

(918) 235-0414

 



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

 




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question about hosting client's POS merchant account for credit card processing

[Steve Barnes]

Contact Charles WU at CTI they would have about all info you need on PCI

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 Ben West
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 8:15 PM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] Question about hosting client's POS merchant account for 
credit card processing

I am curious if anyone has experience providing wireless service to small 
businesses who use a POS credit card system.

My own chats with various small biz owners here in St. Louis suggests that 
their merchant account providers tend to expect a twisted-pair phone line 
and/or dedicated DSL/cable, no wireless.

I imagine this may vary depending on who actually provides the merchant 
account, but has anyone received feedback from such providers about their 
expectations for serving the credit card machines wireless?  E.g. must you use 
dedicated, encrypted wireless links (as common sense would suggest), and/or 
VPNs, or must the POS machine sit on a dedicated LAN, etc?

Thanks.

P.S. By POS I mean Point of Sale, to avoid any confusion. ;)

--
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/

Re: [WISPA] Question about hosting client's POS merchant account for credit card processing

[Patrick Shoemaker]

Also keep in mind that most transactions done with these machines over 
POTS are unencrypted. So don't try to plug one into a VoIP ATA.



On 4/11/2011 20:20, Josh Luthman wrote:
All of my customers are through wireless medium.  There are a handful 
with the credit card processing machines you see everywhere (the blue 
thin ones).  No complaints.  90% of these units have a 10baseT (that's 
ten not one hundred) Ethernet port.  I have seen a couple that DO NOT 
have an Ethernet port.


Every provider I have ever talked to supported both mediums.  Every 
customer will thank you greatly for moving them to Ethernet instead of 
dial up - transactions are at least a tenth the time.  Call the 
merchant, say you want to use Ethernet instead of phone (you may need 
dial tone for this migration period!!!) and they'll tell you what to push.


http://www.floridamerchantunion.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/vx510_39.jpg

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


On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 8:14 PM, Ben West > wrote:


I am curious if anyone has experience providing wireless service
to small businesses who use a POS credit card system.

My own chats with various small biz owners here in St. Louis
suggests that their merchant account providers tend to expect a
twisted-pair phone line and/or dedicated DSL/cable, no wireless.

I imagine this may vary depending on who actually provides the
merchant account, but has anyone received feedback from such
providers about their expectations for serving the credit card
machines wireless?  E.g. must you use dedicated, encrypted
wireless links (as common sense would suggest), and/or VPNs, or
must the POS machine sit on a dedicated LAN, etc?

Thanks.

P.S. By POS I mean Point of Sale, to avoid any confusion. ;)

-- 
Ben West

http://gowasabi.net
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/



--
Patrick Shoemaker
Vector Data Systems LLC
shoemak...@vectordatasystems.com
office: (301) 358-1690 x36
http://www.vectordatasystems.com




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question about hosting client's POS merchant account for credit card processing

[Josh Luthman]

All of my customers are through wireless medium.  There are a handful with
the credit card processing machines you see everywhere (the blue thin
ones).  No complaints.  90% of these units have a 10baseT (that's ten not
one hundred) Ethernet port.  I have seen a couple that DO NOT have an
Ethernet port.

Every provider I have ever talked to supported both mediums.  Every customer
will thank you greatly for moving them to Ethernet instead of dial up -
transactions are at least a tenth the time.  Call the merchant, say you want
to use Ethernet instead of phone (you may need dial tone for this migration
period!!!) and they'll tell you what to push.

http://www.floridamerchantunion.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/vx510_39.jpg

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


On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 8:14 PM, Ben West  wrote:

> I am curious if anyone has experience providing wireless service to small
> businesses who use a POS credit card system.
>
> My own chats with various small biz owners here in St. Louis suggests that
> their merchant account providers tend to expect a twisted-pair phone line
> and/or dedicated DSL/cable, no wireless.
>
> I imagine this may vary depending on who actually provides the merchant
> account, but has anyone received feedback from such providers about their
> expectations for serving the credit card machines wireless?  E.g. must you
> use dedicated, encrypted wireless links (as common sense would suggest),
> and/or VPNs, or must the POS machine sit on a dedicated LAN, etc?
>
> Thanks.
>
> P.S. By POS I mean Point of Sale, to avoid any confusion. ;)
>
> --
> Ben West
> http://gowasabi.net
> 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/

[WISPA] Question about hosting client's POS merchant account for credit card processing

[Ben West]

I am curious if anyone has experience providing wireless service to small
businesses who use a POS credit card system.

My own chats with various small biz owners here in St. Louis suggests that
their merchant account providers tend to expect a twisted-pair phone line
and/or dedicated DSL/cable, no wireless.

I imagine this may vary depending on who actually provides the merchant
account, but has anyone received feedback from such providers about their
expectations for serving the credit card machines wireless?  E.g. must you
use dedicated, encrypted wireless links (as common sense would suggest),
and/or VPNs, or must the POS machine sit on a dedicated LAN, etc?

Thanks.

P.S. By POS I mean Point of Sale, to avoid any confusion. ;)

-- 
Ben West
http://gowasabi.net
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/

Re: [WISPA] Question about FCC Form 499-A Telecommunications Reporting Work Sheet.

[Christopher Hair]

Thanks,  I will give Stephen a call.

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Chuck Hogg
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2011 4:47 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question about FCC Form 499-A Telecommunications
Reporting Work Sheet.

 

Stephen Coran a WISPA member is also someone to use.


Regards,

Chuck



On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Josh Luthman 
wrote:

Ours...

From: "Law Offices of Thomas K. Crowe" 
Date: Nov 30, 2010 6:10 PM
Subject: LEGAL ALERT; Important FCC Deadlines
To: "Clients & Interested Parties"  

LAW OFFICES OF THOMAS K. CROWE, P.C.

 

LEGAL ALERT

 

Clients and Interested Parties:

The information below represents a non-exhaustive list of FCC regulatory
assessment and reporting requirements coming due January 1, 2011 through
March 1, 2011.  The filing deadlines generally apply to diverse types of
service providers, including interexchange or long distance
telecommunications service providers, prepaid calling card providers,
wireless providers and MVNOs, interconnected VoIP providers, as well as
other types of providers.  If your company holds an FCC 214 authorization or
files FCC Forms 499, chances are that one or more of the requirements
covered in this Alert may apply to your company.  Interest on late payments
and/or other penalties may apply if filings or payments are not submitted on
time.

FCC Form 499-Q - Due February 1. 

Prepaid Card Provider PIU Report - Due February 14. 

 

Annual CPNI Certification - Due March 1.  All telecommunications carriers,
including resellers and interconnected VoIP providers, are required by the
FCC's rules to have an officer sign a compliance certificate every March 1st
affirming the officer's personal knowledge that the company has established
operating procedures that ensure compliance with the FCC's CPNI rules, an
accompanying statement describing how respective operating procedures ensure
compliance, and a description of all actions taken against data brokers
during the prior year.

 

FCC Form 477 - Due by March 1.  Required of all Interconnected VoIP
providers, CLECs, and facilities-based broadband providers, among others. 

If you need assistance in submitting any of these reports or filings, or
would like to retain us to handle your FCC filing obligations, please do not
hesitate to contact us.

Lauren M. Jarrell "f...@tkcrowe.com"

Legal Assistant
Law Offices of Thomas K. Crowe, P.C.
1250 24th Street, N.W.
Suite 300
Washington, D.C. 20037
(202) 263-3640 (voice)
(202) 263-3641 (fax)
www.tkcrowe.com <http://www.tkcrowe.com/> 

 


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



On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 3:18 PM, Christopher Hair 
wrote:

Trying to fill  out the application to get our FCC 499 Filer ID Number and
one of the sections is for "DC Agent for Service Process".  I've done a
little research and made a few phone calls and from what I understand I must
hire a Law firm in Washington DC that the FCC will contact me through if
need be.  Gotta love it! 

 

Anyone got a good recommendation?  Or should I just pick one from the
hundred or so that a Google search returns? LOL!

 

 


.
http://www.ntinet.com/TigerPaw_images/ntinet_logo.gif

Christopher Hair 
NTInet Inc. 
2033 St. Matthews Road
Orangeburg, SC 29118
Tel: 803.533-1660 
Web:  <http://www.ntinet.com> www.ntinet.com
Email:  <mailto:%20ch...@ntinet.com> ch...@ntinet.com 

 

 

 







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



WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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







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



WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

 

<>


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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question about FCC Form 499-A Telecommunications Reporting Work Sheet.

[Chuck Hogg]

Stephen Coran a WISPA member is also someone to use.

Regards,

Chuck


On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

> Ours...
>
> From: "Law Offices of Thomas K. Crowe" 
> Date: Nov 30, 2010 6:10 PM
> Subject: LEGAL ALERT; Important FCC Deadlines
> To: "Clients & Interested Parties" 
>
> LAW OFFICES OF THOMAS K. CROWE, P.C.
>
>
>
> LEGAL ALERT
>
>
>
> Clients and Interested Parties:
>
> The information below represents a non-exhaustive list of FCC regulatory
> assessment and reporting requirements coming due January 1, 2011 through
> March 1, 2011.  The filing deadlines generally apply to diverse types of
> service providers, including interexchange or long
> distance telecommunications service providers, prepaid calling card
> providers, wireless providers and MVNOs, interconnected VoIP providers, as
> well as other types of providers.  If your company holds an FCC 214
> authorization or files FCC Forms 499, chances are that one or more of the
> requirements covered in this Alert may apply to your company.  Interest on
> late payments and/or other penalties may apply if filings or payments are
> not submitted on time.
>
> FCC Form 499-Q – Due February 1.
>
> Prepaid Card Provider PIU Report – Due February 14.
>
>
>
> Annual CPNI Certification - Due March 1.  All telecommunications carriers,
> including resellers and interconnected VoIP providers, are required by the
> FCC’s rules to have an officer sign a compliance certificate every March 1st
> affirming the officer's personal knowledge that the company has established
> operating procedures that ensure compliance with the FCC's CPNI rules, an
> accompanying statement describing how respective operating procedures ensure
> compliance, and a description of all actions taken against data brokers
> during the prior year.
>
>
>
> FCC Form 477 – Due by March 1.  Required of all Interconnected VoIP
> providers, CLECs, and facilities-based broadband providers, among others.
>
> If you need assistance in submitting any of these reports or filings, or
> would like to retain us to handle your FCC filing obligations, please do not
> hesitate to contact us.
>
> Lauren M. Jarrell "f...@tkcrowe.com"
>
> Legal Assistant
> Law Offices of Thomas K. Crowe, P.C.
> 1250 24th Street, N.W.
> Suite 300
> Washington, D.C. 20037
> (202) 263-3640 (voice)
> (202) 263-3641 (fax)
> www.tkcrowe.com
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 3:18 PM, Christopher Hair wrote:
>
>> Trying to fill  out the application to get our FCC 499 Filer ID Number and
>> one of the sections is for “DC Agent for Service Process”.  I’ve done a
>> little research and made a few phone calls and from what I understand I must
>> hire a Law firm in Washington DC that the FCC will contact me through if
>> need be.  Gotta love it!
>>
>>
>>
>> Anyone got a good recommendation?  Or should I just pick one from the
>> hundred or so that a Google search returns? LOL!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> .
>> [image: http://www.ntinet.com/TigerPaw_images/ntinet_logo.gif]
>>
>> Christopher Hair
>> NTInet Inc.
>> 2033 St. Matthews Road
>> Orangeburg, SC 29118
>> Tel: 803.533-1660
>> Web: www.ntinet.com
>> Email: ch...@ntinet.com <%20ch...@ntinet.com>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
<>


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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question about FCC Form 499-A Telecommunications Reporting Work Sheet.

[Josh Luthman]

Ours...

From: "Law Offices of Thomas K. Crowe" 
Date: Nov 30, 2010 6:10 PM
Subject: LEGAL ALERT; Important FCC Deadlines
To: "Clients & Interested Parties" 

LAW OFFICES OF THOMAS K. CROWE, P.C.



LEGAL ALERT



Clients and Interested Parties:

The information below represents a non-exhaustive list of FCC regulatory
assessment and reporting requirements coming due January 1, 2011 through
March 1, 2011.  The filing deadlines generally apply to diverse types of
service providers, including interexchange or long
distance telecommunications service providers, prepaid calling card
providers, wireless providers and MVNOs, interconnected VoIP providers, as
well as other types of providers.  If your company holds an FCC 214
authorization or files FCC Forms 499, chances are that one or more of the
requirements covered in this Alert may apply to your company.  Interest on
late payments and/or other penalties may apply if filings or payments are
not submitted on time.

FCC Form 499-Q – Due February 1.

Prepaid Card Provider PIU Report – Due February 14.



Annual CPNI Certification - Due March 1.  All telecommunications carriers,
including resellers and interconnected VoIP providers, are required by the
FCC’s rules to have an officer sign a compliance certificate every March 1st
affirming the officer's personal knowledge that the company has established
operating procedures that ensure compliance with the FCC's CPNI rules, an
accompanying statement describing how respective operating procedures ensure
compliance, and a description of all actions taken against data brokers
during the prior year.



FCC Form 477 – Due by March 1.  Required of all Interconnected VoIP
providers, CLECs, and facilities-based broadband providers, among others.

If you need assistance in submitting any of these reports or filings, or
would like to retain us to handle your FCC filing obligations, please do not
hesitate to contact us.

Lauren M. Jarrell "f...@tkcrowe.com"

Legal Assistant
Law Offices of Thomas K. Crowe, P.C.
1250 24th Street, N.W.
Suite 300
Washington, D.C. 20037
(202) 263-3640 (voice)
(202) 263-3641 (fax)
www.tkcrowe.com



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


On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 3:18 PM, Christopher Hair wrote:

> Trying to fill  out the application to get our FCC 499 Filer ID Number and
> one of the sections is for “DC Agent for Service Process”.  I’ve done a
> little research and made a few phone calls and from what I understand I must
> hire a Law firm in Washington DC that the FCC will contact me through if
> need be.  Gotta love it!
>
>
>
> Anyone got a good recommendation?  Or should I just pick one from the
> hundred or so that a Google search returns? LOL!
>
>
>
>
>
>
> .
> [image: http://www.ntinet.com/TigerPaw_images/ntinet_logo.gif]
>
> Christopher Hair
> NTInet Inc.
> 2033 St. Matthews Road
> Orangeburg, SC 29118
> Tel: 803.533-1660
> Web: www.ntinet.com
> Email: ch...@ntinet.com <%20ch...@ntinet.com>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
<>


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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

[WISPA] Question about FCC Form 499-A Telecommunications Reporting Work Sheet.

[Christopher Hair]

Trying to fill  out the application to get our FCC 499 Filer ID Number and
one of the sections is for "DC Agent for Service Process".  I've done a
little research and made a few phone calls and from what I understand I must
hire a Law firm in Washington DC that the FCC will contact me through if
need be.  Gotta love it! 

 

Anyone got a good recommendation?  Or should I just pick one from the
hundred or so that a Google search returns? LOL!

 

 


.
http://www.ntinet.com/TigerPaw_images/ntinet_logo.gif

Christopher Hair 
NTInet Inc. 
2033 St. Matthews Road
Orangeburg, SC 29118
Tel: 803.533-1660 
Web:   www.ntinet.com
Email:   ch...@ntinet.com 

 

 

 

<>


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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question about beacon lights rules on a tower

[jp]

In our area, there are a good number of used towers installed. This 
could be a used tower that came from an area where it needed painting 
and lighting. Obviously lights are a lot easier to remove than paint.

Many municipal towers are hand-me-down used towers from war surplus, all 
installed before I was born, with civil defense earmarks.

It might need paint to prevent corrosion and they painted it white when 
it was due for it or because that was a convenient time.

On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 05:22:38PM -0800, Forbes Mercy wrote:
> I have a 100 foot guyed tower on top of a hill, it was previously an FM 
> Radio station, they moved their site,  sold us the site, but continue to 
> use this site for STL's.  Since then I've added the Fire Department and a 
> low power radio station plus my own equipment.  The tower was never lighted 
> but was red and white paint.  When the FM moved off it they painted it 
> white.  Can you tell me the purpose of why they painted it and how, 
> especially being <10 miles from an approach why we don't have to light it?
>
> Thanks,
> Forbes
>

-- 
/*
Jason Philbrook   |   Midcoast Internet Solutions - Wireless and DSL
KB1IOJ|   Broadband Internet Access, Dialup, and Hosting 
 http://f64.nu/   |   for Midcoast Mainehttp://www.midcoast.com/
*/



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question about beacon lights rules on a tower

[Cameron Crum]

It all has to do with the slope of the approach and take-off from a runway.
If you were directly in the path of the runway, then you'd probably need a
study to determine if the tower presents a hazard to air navigation, but at
10 miles, even if you were in-line, at 100 feet, I'd say you are probably
not going to be required to light and mark. The radio station probably
painted the red and white as a CYA measure, or they just didn't know the
regs. As for painting all white...who the hell knows.

Cameron

On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 7:22 PM, Forbes Mercy
wrote:

>  I have a 100 foot guyed tower on top of a hill, it was previously an FM
> Radio station, they moved their site,  sold us the site, but continue to use
> this site for STL's.  Since then I've added the Fire Department and a low
> power radio station plus my own equipment.  The tower was never lighted but
> was red and white paint.  When the FM moved off it they painted it white.
> Can you tell me the purpose of why they painted it and how, especially being
> <10 miles from an approach why we don't have to light it?
>
> Thanks,
> Forbes
>
>
> On 12/3/2010 4:42 PM, Christopher Hair wrote:
>
>  Thanks for all the input.   I found this document on the FAA website
> about Obstruction Marking and Lighting if anyone is interested for future
> reference . Its dated 2007.
>
>
>
>
>
> *53. POLES, TOWERS, AND SIMILAR SKELETAL*
>
> *STRUCTURES*
>
> The following standards apply to radio and television
>
> towers, supporting structures for overhead
>
> transmission lines, and similar structures.
>
> *a**. Top Mounted Obstruction Light.*
>
> *1. Structures 150 Feet (46m) AGL or Less**. *Two
>
> or more steady burning (L-810) lights should be
>
> installed in a manner to ensure an unobstructed view of
>
> one or more lights by a pilot.
>
> *2**. Structures Exceeding 150 Feet (46m) AGL.*
>
> At least one red flashing (L-864) beacon should be
>
> installed in a manner to ensure an unobstructed view of
>
> one or more lights by a pilot.
>
> *3**. Appurtenances 40 Feet (12m) or Less. *If a
>
> rod, antenna, or other appurtenance 40 feet (12m) or
>
> less in height is incapable of supporting a red flashing
>
> beacon, then it may be placed at the base of the
>
> appurtenance. If the mounting location does not allow
>
> unobstructed viewing of the beacon by a pilot, then
>
> additional beacons should be added.
>
> *4**. Appurtenances Exceeding 40 Feet (12m). *If a
>
> rod, antenna, or other appurtenance exceeding 40 feet
>
> (12m) in height is incapable of supporting a red
>
> flashing beacon, a supporting mast with one or more
>
> beacons should be installed adjacent to the
>
> appurtenance. Adjacent installations should not
>
> exceed the height of the appurtenance and be within 40
>
> feet (12m) of the tip to allow the pilot an unobstructed
>
> view of at least one beacon.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* wireless-boun...@wispa.org 
> [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
> *On Behalf Of *Brian Webster
> *Sent:* Friday, December 03, 2010 12:43 PM
> *To:* 'WISPA General List'
> *Subject:* Re: [WISPA] Question about beacon lights rules on a tower
>
>
>
> Helicopters fly at night and in the worst visibility conditions. They fly
> slow and hover. If there is a particular vector or direction that an antenna
> blocks the visibility of the beacon light it can cause these types of
> accidents. A helicopter would linger in a blind spot of the obstructed tower
> light much longer than a plane would and depending on their direction of
> flight could be in the blind spot for their whole flight.
>
>
>
> I too was a lighting compliance expert for a tower company. I filed
> hundreds of these applications and had the software to do advanced studies
> near airports that had precision instrument approaches.  Many people do not
> realize that when they construct a 190 or so  tower that the crane will be
> taller than 200ft during construction. You are required to file for a
> clearance for that crane to exceed the 200ft height even if it is temporary.
> While they can’t do anything to you if you don’t file, your insurance
> carrier will not touch any payout on a claim if it is discovered you did not
> do the proper paperwork. For liability reasons people want to see that
> letter from the FAA saying that it is not a hazard to navigation.
>
>
>
> Another big topic that most people do not realize is that you are also
> required to run your towers through your state DOT office (They all have an
> airspace group). They also have the authority to require you to light a
> tower. Normally the FAA wi

Re: [WISPA] Question about beacon lights rules on a tower

[Forbes Mercy]

I have a 100 foot guyed tower on top of a hill, it was previously an FM 
Radio station, they moved their site,  sold us the site, but continue to 
use this site for STL's.  Since then I've added the Fire Department and 
a low power radio station plus my own equipment.  The tower was never 
lighted but was red and white paint.  When the FM moved off it they 
painted it white.  Can you tell me the purpose of why they painted it 
and how, especially being <10 miles from an approach why we don't have 
to light it?


Thanks,
Forbes

On 12/3/2010 4:42 PM, Christopher Hair wrote:


Thanks for all the input.   I found this document on the FAA website 
about Obstruction Marking and Lighting if anyone is interested for 
future reference . Its dated 2007.


*53. POLES, TOWERS, AND SIMILAR SKELETAL*

*STRUCTURES*

The following standards apply to radio and television

towers, supporting structures for overhead

transmission lines, and similar structures.

*a*/. *Top Mounted Obstruction Light.*/

*1/. Structures 150 Feet (46m) AGL or Less/*/. /Two

or more steady burning (L-810) lights should be

installed in a manner to ensure an unobstructed view of

one or more lights by a pilot.

*2*/. *Structures Exceeding 150 Feet (46m) AGL*./

At least one red flashing (L-864) beacon should be

installed in a manner to ensure an unobstructed view of

one or more lights by a pilot.

*3*/. *Appurtenances 40 Feet (12m) or Less*. /If a

rod, antenna, or other appurtenance 40 feet (12m) or

less in height is incapable of supporting a red flashing

beacon, then it may be placed at the base of the

appurtenance. If the mounting location does not allow

unobstructed viewing of the beacon by a pilot, then

additional beacons should be added.

*4*/. *Appurtenances Exceeding 40 Feet (12m*). /If a

rod, antenna, or other appurtenance exceeding 40 feet

(12m) in height is incapable of supporting a red

flashing beacon, a supporting mast with one or more

beacons should be installed adjacent to the

appurtenance. Adjacent installations should not

exceed the height of the appurtenance and be within 40

feet (12m) of the tip to allow the pilot an unobstructed

view of at least one beacon.

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

*Sent:* Friday, December 03, 2010 12:43 PM
*To:* 'WISPA General List'
*Subject:* Re: [WISPA] Question about beacon lights rules on a tower

Helicopters fly at night and in the worst visibility conditions. They 
fly slow and hover. If there is a particular vector or direction that 
an antenna blocks the visibility of the beacon light it can cause 
these types of accidents. A helicopter would linger in a blind spot of 
the obstructed tower light much longer than a plane would and 
depending on their direction of flight could be in the blind spot for 
their whole flight.


I too was a lighting compliance expert for a tower company. I filed 
hundreds of these applications and had the software to do advanced 
studies near airports that had precision instrument approaches.  Many 
people do not realize that when they construct a 190 or so  tower that 
the crane will be taller than 200ft during construction. You are 
required to file for a clearance for that crane to exceed the 200ft 
height even if it is temporary. While they can't do anything to you if 
you don't file, your insurance carrier will not touch any payout on a 
claim if it is discovered you did not do the proper paperwork. For 
liability reasons people want to see that letter from the FAA saying 
that it is not a hazard to navigation.


Another big topic that most people do not realize is that you are also 
required to run your towers through your state DOT office (They all 
have an airspace group). They also have the authority to require you 
to light a tower. Normally the FAA will notify the proper state when 
you file for a site, but that does not absolve you of your requirement 
to make sure it has been done. I had a tower in the state of 
Washington where the FAA said no problem but the state DOT required us 
to light it. It was in a mountain pass along I-90. Their reasoning was 
that planes will fly below the cloud cover and follow the valley often 
with low clearances. They felt the tower should be lit for those 
circumstances. We had no choice but to light it.


It does not cost much time or money to have a tower studied and then 
file with the FAA. To eliminate the risk of making a mistake and not 
meeting the proper criteria I think it's foolish not to go through the 
process for every new structure you build just to cover your butt. 
Relying solely on the TOWAIR tool on the FCC web site and/or the tool 
on the FAA web site makes me nervous, many times I found them to be 
wrong in situations where you are close to a public airfield or in the 
path of an instrument procedure. Instrument approaches can have an 
effect up to 10 nautical miles from the 

Re: [WISPA] Question about beacon lights rules on a tower

[Brian Webster]

Helicopters fly at night and in the worst visibility conditions. They fly
slow and hover. If there is a particular vector or direction that an antenna
blocks the visibility of the beacon light it can cause these types of
accidents. A helicopter would linger in a blind spot of the obstructed tower
light much longer than a plane would and depending on their direction of
flight could be in the blind spot for their whole flight.

 

I too was a lighting compliance expert for a tower company. I filed hundreds
of these applications and had the software to do advanced studies near
airports that had precision instrument approaches.  Many people do not
realize that when they construct a 190 or so  tower that the crane will be
taller than 200ft during construction. You are required to file for a
clearance for that crane to exceed the 200ft height even if it is temporary.
While they can't do anything to you if you don't file, your insurance
carrier will not touch any payout on a claim if it is discovered you did not
do the proper paperwork. For liability reasons people want to see that
letter from the FAA saying that it is not a hazard to navigation.

 

Another big topic that most people do not realize is that you are also
required to run your towers through your state DOT office (They all have an
airspace group). They also have the authority to require you to light a
tower. Normally the FAA will notify the proper state when you file for a
site, but that does not absolve you of your requirement to make sure it has
been done. I had a tower in the state of Washington where the FAA said no
problem but the state DOT required us to light it. It was in a mountain pass
along I-90. Their reasoning was that planes will fly below the cloud cover
and follow the valley often with low clearances. They felt the tower should
be lit for those circumstances. We had no choice but to light it.

 

It does not cost much time or money to have a tower studied and then file
with the FAA. To eliminate the risk of making a mistake and not meeting the
proper criteria I think it's foolish not to go through the process for every
new structure you build just to cover your butt. Relying solely on the
TOWAIR tool on the FCC web site and/or the tool on the FAA web site makes me
nervous, many times I found them to be wrong in situations where you are
close to a public airfield or in the path of an instrument procedure.
Instrument approaches can have an effect up to 10 nautical miles from the
end of a runway.  www.airspaceusa.com has an excellent team who can help
especially in difficult situations. I have no financial interest in the
company but did work with them in the past and found them to be top notch.
Their President is a retired FAA airspace expert.

 



Thank You,

Brian Webster
Skype: Radiowebst

www.wirelessmapping.com

www.Broadband-Mapping.com

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of RickG
Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 11:45 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question about beacon lights rules on a tower

 

I'm not surprised but what I find interesting is this: How does a few feet
make a difference to a helicopter or airplane? Why would you be that close
to a tower either way?

On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 10:39 AM, Cameron Crum  wrote:

My first job out of college was working as an RF engineer for Sprint
Cellular. One of the joyful tasks I had to do as a very junior engineer was
audit FCC and FAA filings for about 500 cell sites along the eastern
seaboard. The regulations then, and I believe still, are that nothing is
supposed to be higher than the top light and that anything that does exceed
that height requires a submission of a notice of proposed change, an
approval for such change, and then a notice of completion once the change
has been made. In addition, if you do exceed that height, you must raise the
light so that it is at least even with the highest point of any attachments
that protrude from the top of the tower. All that being said, if the tower
does not require lighting, then you can do whatever you want. Some cities
light every water tower even though there is no requirement to do so. If the
tower is not registered with the FAA, and your attachments don't exceed a
height that requires you to register, then bolt away. Otherwise, it is best
to stay in compliance. I forgot to mention that the reason I had to do the
audit, was because Sprint failed to temporarily light a tower under
construction. A care flight helicopter transporting a crash victim smacked
it and everyone died. 


Cameron 

On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 10:11 PM, RickG  wrote:

If you cant then every government emergency service agency around here is in
trouble!

On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Josh Luthman 
wrote:

I know you can mount above it.  Tons of towers around here do.

On Dec 2, 2010 9:24 PM, "Christopher Hair"  wrote:
> At what height must a beacon light be placed

Re: [WISPA] Question about beacon lights rules on a tower

[RickG]

Good answer. I dont fly which is why I asked. Thanks!

On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 11:49 AM, Aaron D. Osgood <
aosg...@streamline-solutions.net> wrote:

> Because the obstruction MAY block the light from the pilot’s view from
> certain angles. As for why are they close anyway? They may not know the
> tower is there – EXAMPLE: EMS Helo’s often fly into strange areas at the
> request of local public safety. Another reason is that weather related
> visibility may take a sudden drastic change – which is one of the primary
> reason’s why strobes/beacons are required on many objects of certain heights
> AGL or ASL
>
>
>
> Aaron D. Osgood
>
> Streamline Solutions L.L.C
>
> P.O. Box 6115
> Falmouth, ME 04105
>
> TEL: 207-781-5561
> MOBILE: 207-831-5829
> ICQ: 206889374
>
> GVoice: 207.518.8455
> GTalk: aaron.osgood
> aosg...@streamline-solutions.net
> http://www.streamline-solutions.net
>
> Introducing Efficiency to Business since 1986.
>
>
>
> *From:* wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] *On
> Behalf Of *RickG
> *Sent:* Friday, December 03, 2010 11:45 AM
> *To:* WISPA General List
> *Subject:* Re: [WISPA] Question about beacon lights rules on a tower
>
>
>
> I'm not surprised but what I find interesting is this: How does a few feet
> make a difference to a helicopter or airplane? Why would you be that close
> to a tower either way?
>
> On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 10:39 AM, Cameron Crum  wrote:
>
> My first job out of college was working as an RF engineer for Sprint
> Cellular. One of the joyful tasks I had to do as a very junior engineer was
> audit FCC and FAA filings for about 500 cell sites along the eastern
> seaboard. The regulations then, and I believe still, are that nothing is
> supposed to be higher than the top light and that anything that does exceed
> that height requires a submission of a notice of proposed change, an
> approval for such change, and then a notice of completion once the change
> has been made. In addition, if you do exceed that height, you must raise the
> light so that it is at least even with the highest point of any attachments
> that protrude from the top of the tower. All that being said, if the tower
> does not require lighting, then you can do whatever you want. Some cities
> light every water tower even though there is no requirement to do so. If the
> tower is not registered with the FAA, and your attachments don't exceed a
> height that requires you to register, then bolt away. Otherwise, it is best
> to stay in compliance. I forgot to mention that the reason I had to do the
> audit, was because Sprint failed to temporarily light a tower under
> construction. A care flight helicopter transporting a crash victim smacked
> it and everyone died.
>
>
> Cameron
>
> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 10:11 PM, RickG  wrote:
>
> If you cant then every government emergency service agency around here is
> in trouble!
>
> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Josh Luthman 
> wrote:
>
> I know you can mount above it.  Tons of towers around here do.
>
> On Dec 2, 2010 9:24 PM, "Christopher Hair"  wrote:
> > At what height must a beacon light be placed on a tower. Can anything be
> > mounted above the beacon light? Or must the beacon be at the highest
> point
> > on the tower? I have done several searches an cannot find a sound answer?
> > Need to mount 4 PMP 320 sector antennas that would be 6' to 8' above a
> > beacon light on a water tower. Tower is 185' tall. See attached photo.
> >
> >
> >
> > -Chris
> >
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>
> --
> -RickG
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.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!

Re: [WISPA] Question about beacon lights rules on a tower

[Aaron D. Osgood]

Because the obstruction MAY block the light from the pilot's view from
certain angles. As for why are they close anyway? They may not know the
tower is there - EXAMPLE: EMS Helo's often fly into strange areas at the
request of local public safety. Another reason is that weather related
visibility may take a sudden drastic change - which is one of the primary
reason's why strobes/beacons are required on many objects of certain heights
AGL or ASL

 

Aaron D. Osgood 

Streamline Solutions L.L.C

P.O. Box 6115
Falmouth, ME 04105

TEL: 207-781-5561
MOBILE: 207-831-5829
ICQ: 206889374

GVoice: 207.518.8455
GTalk: aaron.osgood
aosg...@streamline-solutions.net 
http://www.streamline-solutions.net <http://www.streamline-solutions.net/> 

Introducing Efficiency to Business since 1986. 

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of RickG
Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 11:45 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question about beacon lights rules on a tower

 

I'm not surprised but what I find interesting is this: How does a few feet
make a difference to a helicopter or airplane? Why would you be that close
to a tower either way?

On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 10:39 AM, Cameron Crum  wrote:

My first job out of college was working as an RF engineer for Sprint
Cellular. One of the joyful tasks I had to do as a very junior engineer was
audit FCC and FAA filings for about 500 cell sites along the eastern
seaboard. The regulations then, and I believe still, are that nothing is
supposed to be higher than the top light and that anything that does exceed
that height requires a submission of a notice of proposed change, an
approval for such change, and then a notice of completion once the change
has been made. In addition, if you do exceed that height, you must raise the
light so that it is at least even with the highest point of any attachments
that protrude from the top of the tower. All that being said, if the tower
does not require lighting, then you can do whatever you want. Some cities
light every water tower even though there is no requirement to do so. If the
tower is not registered with the FAA, and your attachments don't exceed a
height that requires you to register, then bolt away. Otherwise, it is best
to stay in compliance. I forgot to mention that the reason I had to do the
audit, was because Sprint failed to temporarily light a tower under
construction. A care flight helicopter transporting a crash victim smacked
it and everyone died. 


Cameron 

On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 10:11 PM, RickG  wrote:

If you cant then every government emergency service agency around here is in
trouble!

On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Josh Luthman 
wrote:

I know you can mount above it.  Tons of towers around here do.

On Dec 2, 2010 9:24 PM, "Christopher Hair"  wrote:
> At what height must a beacon light be placed on a tower. Can anything be
> mounted above the beacon light? Or must the beacon be at the highest point
> on the tower? I have done several searches an cannot find a sound answer?
> Need to mount 4 PMP 320 sector antennas that would be 6' to 8' above a
> beacon light on a water tower. Tower is 185' tall. See attached photo.
> 
> 
> 
> -Chris
> 







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



WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




-- 
-RickG





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




-- 
-RickG




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question about beacon lights rules on a tower

[RickG]

I'm not surprised but what I find interesting is this: How does a few feet
make a difference to a helicopter or airplane? Why would you be that close
to a tower either way?

On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 10:39 AM, Cameron Crum  wrote:

> My first job out of college was working as an RF engineer for Sprint
> Cellular. One of the joyful tasks I had to do as a very junior engineer was
> audit FCC and FAA filings for about 500 cell sites along the eastern
> seaboard. The regulations then, and I believe still, are that nothing is
> supposed to be higher than the top light and that anything that does exceed
> that height requires a submission of a notice of proposed change, an
> approval for such change, and then a notice of completion once the change
> has been made. In addition, if you do exceed that height, you must raise the
> light so that it is at least even with the highest point of any attachments
> that protrude from the top of the tower. All that being said, if the tower
> does not require lighting, then you can do whatever you want. Some cities
> light every water tower even though there is no requirement to do so. If the
> tower is not registered with the FAA, and your attachments don't exceed a
> height that requires you to register, then bolt away. Otherwise, it is best
> to stay in compliance. I forgot to mention that the reason I had to do the
> audit, was because Sprint failed to temporarily light a tower under
> construction. A care flight helicopter transporting a crash victim smacked
> it and everyone died.
>
>
> Cameron
>
> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 10:11 PM, RickG  wrote:
>
>> If you cant then every government emergency service agency around here is
>> in trouble!
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Josh Luthman > > wrote:
>>
>>> I know you can mount above it.  Tons of towers around here do.
>>>  On Dec 2, 2010 9:24 PM, "Christopher Hair" 
>>> wrote:
>>> > At what height must a beacon light be placed on a tower. Can anything
>>> be
>>> > mounted above the beacon light? Or must the beacon be at the highest
>>> point
>>> > on the tower? I have done several searches an cannot find a sound
>>> answer?
>>> > Need to mount 4 PMP 320 sector antennas that would be 6' to 8' above a
>>> > beacon light on a water tower. Tower is 185' tall. See attached photo.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > -Chris
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> -RickG
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.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/
>



-- 
-RickG



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question about beacon lights rules on a tower

[Cameron Crum]

My first job out of college was working as an RF engineer for Sprint
Cellular. One of the joyful tasks I had to do as a very junior engineer was
audit FCC and FAA filings for about 500 cell sites along the eastern
seaboard. The regulations then, and I believe still, are that nothing is
supposed to be higher than the top light and that anything that does exceed
that height requires a submission of a notice of proposed change, an
approval for such change, and then a notice of completion once the change
has been made. In addition, if you do exceed that height, you must raise the
light so that it is at least even with the highest point of any attachments
that protrude from the top of the tower. All that being said, if the tower
does not require lighting, then you can do whatever you want. Some cities
light every water tower even though there is no requirement to do so. If the
tower is not registered with the FAA, and your attachments don't exceed a
height that requires you to register, then bolt away. Otherwise, it is best
to stay in compliance. I forgot to mention that the reason I had to do the
audit, was because Sprint failed to temporarily light a tower under
construction. A care flight helicopter transporting a crash victim smacked
it and everyone died.


Cameron

On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 10:11 PM, RickG  wrote:

> If you cant then every government emergency service agency around here is
> in trouble!
>
> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Josh Luthman 
> wrote:
>
>> I know you can mount above it.  Tons of towers around here do.
>> On Dec 2, 2010 9:24 PM, "Christopher Hair"  wrote:
>> > At what height must a beacon light be placed on a tower. Can anything be
>> > mounted above the beacon light? Or must the beacon be at the highest
>> point
>> > on the tower? I have done several searches an cannot find a sound
>> answer?
>> > Need to mount 4 PMP 320 sector antennas that would be 6' to 8' above a
>> > beacon light on a water tower. Tower is 185' tall. See attached photo.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > -Chris
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>
>
>
> --
> -RickG
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question about beacon lights rules on a tower

[RickG]

If you cant then every government emergency service agency around here is in
trouble!

On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

> I know you can mount above it.  Tons of towers around here do.
> On Dec 2, 2010 9:24 PM, "Christopher Hair"  wrote:
> > At what height must a beacon light be placed on a tower. Can anything be
> > mounted above the beacon light? Or must the beacon be at the highest
> point
> > on the tower? I have done several searches an cannot find a sound answer?
> > Need to mount 4 PMP 320 sector antennas that would be 6' to 8' above a
> > beacon light on a water tower. Tower is 185' tall. See attached photo.
> >
> >
> >
> > -Chris
> >
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>



-- 
-RickG



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question about beacon lights rules on a tower

[Aaron D. Osgood]

Check with the FAA FSDO that covers the area 

Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone with Nextel Direct Connect

-Original Message-
From: "Christopher Hair" 
Sender: wireless-boun...@wispa.org
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 21:23:56 
To: ; 'WISPA General List'
Reply-To: WISPA General List 
Subject: [WISPA] Question about beacon lights rules on a  tower




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question about beacon lights rules on a tower

[Josh Luthman]

I know you can mount above it.  Tons of towers around here do.
On Dec 2, 2010 9:24 PM, "Christopher Hair"  wrote:
> At what height must a beacon light be placed on a tower. Can anything be
> mounted above the beacon light? Or must the beacon be at the highest point
> on the tower? I have done several searches an cannot find a sound answer?
> Need to mount 4 PMP 320 sector antennas that would be 6' to 8' above a
> beacon light on a water tower. Tower is 185' tall. See attached photo.
>
>
>
> -Chris
>



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question #1 of the Day

[Robert West]

I'm with you, pal.

Bob-


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
Sent: Friday, June 18, 2010 10:51 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question #1 of the Day

I'm not sure if it's related or not.

But we've always given free or deep discounts to libraries, fire stations,
city government etc.  Basically nearly any locally funded taxing authority.

That's always been our way to give back to the community.

It's also probably been helpful when we've gone to those same communities
and asked for tower locations.

Other than that we don't "partner" with government.  We stop at the teamwork
point and don't move to the next level of "partner".

It seems to me that there is, or at least used to be, a concept that
government is to set laws to protect the citizenry and enforce those laws. 
While business is to provide goods and services to the citizenry.  When the
two become co-mingled in any way, corruption, fraud, waste and abuse become
far too likely.  Whether it's government passing a law that unfairly
benefits one company over another or giving money to one company at the
expense of another.

shrug

Hope that helped at least a little bit :-) marlon

- Original Message -
From: "Rick Harnish" 
To: ; "'WISPA General List'" ;

Sent: Friday, June 18, 2010 4:40 AM
Subject: [WISPA] Question #1 of the Day


> Since rural broadband can be a tough proposition sometimes in terms of 
> making a profit, businesses that serve these areas may require some 
> creative thinking and partnerships. WISPs often partner with 
> municipalities to obtain an anchor tenant and get a break on site 
> rentals. Are there other interesting models that operators are 
> contemplating that accomplish the same sort of public/private 
> partnership?  ie healthcare, distance learning etc.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Rick Harnish
>
> President
>
> WISPA
>
> 260-307-4000 cell
>
> 866-317-2851 WISPA Office
>
> Skype: rick.harnish.
>
> rharn...@wispa.org
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> --
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> --
> --
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/





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


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question #1 of the Day

[ccrum]

Well to help stabilize our environment from an RF stand point, about 4 1/2
years ago eight providers in our area (we being one of them) whose
coverage either bordered on each other or overlapped a bit got together
and formed a co-op. We agreed not to build towers in each other's existing
coverage footprints and to share network resources. By that I mean any
company could sell service on any other companies network and split the
revenue on an agreed upon amount (I can't give out that number, but it was
fair to everyone). It eventually evolved into a centralized support center
and now most of the companies in it sell under a common brand name even
though the physical networks are still operated and maintained by the
owners of those networks. Although we recently split from the group and
sold our network, it seems to still be a good model for those involved. We
never did take full advantage of the support and common marketing for
several reasons, but it seems to be working well for those involved. It
was nice knowing that the other competent guys in the area were not going
to be causing trouble for me. I had enough jokers who didn't know anything
to worry about.

Cameron

> Since rural broadband can be a tough proposition sometimes in terms of
> making a profit, businesses that serve these areas may require some
> creative
> thinking and partnerships. WISPs often partner with municipalities to
> obtain
> an anchor tenant and get a break on site rentals. Are there other
> interesting models that operators are contemplating that accomplish the
> same
> sort of public/private partnership?  ie healthcare, distance learning etc.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Rick Harnish
>
> President
>
> WISPA
>
> 260-307-4000 cell
>
> 866-317-2851 WISPA Office
>
> Skype: rick.harnish.
>
> rharn...@wispa.org
>
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>





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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question #1 of the Day

[Marlon K. Schafer]

I'm not sure if it's related or not.

But we've always given free or deep discounts to libraries, fire stations, 
city government etc.  Basically nearly any locally funded taxing authority.

That's always been our way to give back to the community.

It's also probably been helpful when we've gone to those same communities 
and asked for tower locations.

Other than that we don't "partner" with government.  We stop at the teamwork 
point and don't move to the next level of "partner".

It seems to me that there is, or at least used to be, a concept that 
government is to set laws to protect the citizenry and enforce those laws. 
While business is to provide goods and services to the citizenry.  When the 
two become co-mingled in any way, corruption, fraud, waste and abuse become 
far too likely.  Whether it's government passing a law that unfairly 
benefits one company over another or giving money to one company at the 
expense of another.

shrug

Hope that helped at least a little bit :-)
marlon

- Original Message - 
From: "Rick Harnish" 
To: ; "'WISPA General List'" ; 

Sent: Friday, June 18, 2010 4:40 AM
Subject: [WISPA] Question #1 of the Day


> Since rural broadband can be a tough proposition sometimes in terms of
> making a profit, businesses that serve these areas may require some 
> creative
> thinking and partnerships. WISPs often partner with municipalities to 
> obtain
> an anchor tenant and get a break on site rentals. Are there other
> interesting models that operators are contemplating that accomplish the 
> same
> sort of public/private partnership?  ie healthcare, distance learning etc.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Rick Harnish
>
> President
>
> WISPA
>
> 260-307-4000 cell
>
> 866-317-2851 WISPA Office
>
> Skype: rick.harnish.
>
> rharn...@wispa.org
>
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.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] Question #1 of the Day

[Rick Harnish]

Since rural broadband can be a tough proposition sometimes in terms of
making a profit, businesses that serve these areas may require some creative
thinking and partnerships. WISPs often partner with municipalities to obtain
an anchor tenant and get a break on site rentals. Are there other
interesting models that operators are contemplating that accomplish the same
sort of public/private partnership?  ie healthcare, distance learning etc.

 

Thanks,

 

Rick Harnish

President

WISPA

260-307-4000 cell

866-317-2851 WISPA Office

Skype: rick.harnish.

rharn...@wispa.org

 




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale

[Josh Cheney]

If selling to an investor, you need to take in average returns. They can 
get 5% risk-free from a bank, 10% from a low-risk fund, and 15% from a 
high-risk fund (numbers for purposes of our discussion only; they bear 
little resemblance to the present reality). If this is the case, then 
your typical investor is going to want on the order of a 20% on their 
money when purchasing something as risky as a small business.

Given that, the maximum purchase price is going to be on the order of 5x 
annual *profit*. This is where having a well-kept set of books is very 
handy. While it is more convenient (and perhaps better for tax purposes) 
to list radios and other gear as an expense, that will mean that on 
paper a growing WISP will appear to never turn a profit, while you and I 
both know, intuitively, that it is. When you record them as an asset 
that is depreciated over time, your initial purchase of it doesn't have 
an impact on profitability, because it is an exchange of assets (cash 
for equipment). This approach takes a little bit more work on the 
accounting and bookkeeping side of things, and will result in a higher 
tax bill, but it also results in a more realistic view of profitability 
for the business.

Josh

Patrick D. Nix, Jr wrote:
> I apologize as I know this has been discussed on the list before.  We
> are entertaining the idea of selling out of our respectable size
> wireless ISP business in eastern Oklahoma.  We have about 500 (growing
> daily) subscribers.  Anyway, we are working on determining the net worth
> of the business.  Any thoughts or formulas for determining this?
> 
>  
> 
> Patrick Nix, Jr.,
> Computer Network Solutions
> CSWEB.NET Internet Services
> IT Manager
> 
> http://www.cnetworksolutions.com
> http://www.csweb.net
> 
> (918) 235-0414
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> Attention: This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and
> privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please
> notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail and
> destroy any copies. Any dissemination or use of this information by a
> person other than the intended recipient is unauthorized and may be
> illegal.
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


-- 
Josh Cheney
josh.che...@gmail.com
http://www.joshcheney.com



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale

[Marco Coelho]

What parts of Ok are you located in?

Marco
Argon Technologies

On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 7:25 PM, RickG wrote:
> In addition, tower rights (or lack thereof) is a big consideration.
> -RickG
>
> On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 5:15 PM, Tom DeReggi wrote:
>> I disagree with comments relating to X times annual revenue.
>> I think the issue is more that buyers are realizing that in this market and
>> economy X times revenue doesn't adequately valuate a company.
>> A 3-4X times annual could still be achieved if the most of the gross revenue
>> was actually monthly profit. Some businesses are in that situation.
>> They have their gear paid for, most of their reoccuring costs are in-kind
>> trade, etc.
>> The problem is that isn't usually the case, which is why they get 1X
>> valuations, if even that.. Usually what occurs is, a business has next to no
>> profit, poor cashflow, and leased out the kazu for 3-5 years, and thus is
>> tired out of working long hours for free.  Further the buyer has to consider
>> risk, and in this economy its uncertain whether business models will mature
>> to success.
>>
>> I think you need to really look at your business to determine its profile,
>> before you can begin to establish a worth or a method of valuating it.
>>
>> For example, Surely a company that owns a million dollars of gear outright
>> is not going to be valued the sam as a company that has 3 years of leases
>> remaining on their books for the same amount.
>>
>> You could also look at how to get rid of your primary costs. For example,
>> maybe backhaul is one of the large expenses? If so would a WISP that got a
>> middle mile infrastructure grant, benefit by your network?
>>
>> The biggest problem I see with getting a high valuation on a 500 sub network
>> is that there might not be enough subs to really cover the payroll of techs
>> on the street that buyer would have to obtain to manage it.
>>
>> Tom DeReggi
>> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
>> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>>
>>
>> - Original Message -
>> From: "3-dB Networks" 
>> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
>> Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 4:36 PM
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale
>>
>>
>>> Yeah don't expect over 2x annual revenue right now. 1x might be more
>>> realistic. depending on the network and what a new operator would have to
>>> do
>>> to bring it into theirs, etc.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Daniel White
>>>
>>> 3-dB Networks
>>>
>>> http://www.3dbnetworks.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>>> Behalf Of Brian Rohrbacher
>>> Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 1:30 PM
>>> To: WISPA General List
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I have heard .5-2 times annual many times on this list
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman wrote:
>>>
>>> One way I have heard it done:
>>>
>>> Take the annual gross revenue, times it by 3 (three years gross revenue)
>>> and
>>> that's the buy out cost starting point.  Seen this more so with telecom
>>> (voice) then data services, but it's a place to start.
>>>
>>> Josh Luthman
>>> Office: 937-552-2340
>>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>>> 1100 Wayne St
>>> Suite 1337
>>> Troy, OH 45373
>>>
>>> "When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however
>>> improbable, must be the truth."
>>> --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 3:21 PM, Patrick D. Nix, Jr <
>>> pni...@cnetworksolutions.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I apologize as I know this has been discussed on the list before.  We
>>> are entertaining the idea of selling out of our respectable size
>>> wireless ISP business in eastern Oklahoma.  We have about 500 (growing
>>> daily) subscribers.  Anyway, we are working on determining the net worth
>>> of the business.  Any thoughts or formulas for determining this?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Patrick Nix, Jr.,
>>> Computer Network Solutions
>>> CSWEB.NET Internet Services
>>> IT Manager
>>>
>>> http://www.cnetworksolutions.com
>>> http://www.cswe

Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale

[RickG]

In addition, tower rights (or lack thereof) is a big consideration.
-RickG

On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 5:15 PM, Tom DeReggi wrote:
> I disagree with comments relating to X times annual revenue.
> I think the issue is more that buyers are realizing that in this market and
> economy X times revenue doesn't adequately valuate a company.
> A 3-4X times annual could still be achieved if the most of the gross revenue
> was actually monthly profit. Some businesses are in that situation.
> They have their gear paid for, most of their reoccuring costs are in-kind
> trade, etc.
> The problem is that isn't usually the case, which is why they get 1X
> valuations, if even that.. Usually what occurs is, a business has next to no
> profit, poor cashflow, and leased out the kazu for 3-5 years, and thus is
> tired out of working long hours for free.  Further the buyer has to consider
> risk, and in this economy its uncertain whether business models will mature
> to success.
>
> I think you need to really look at your business to determine its profile,
> before you can begin to establish a worth or a method of valuating it.
>
> For example, Surely a company that owns a million dollars of gear outright
> is not going to be valued the sam as a company that has 3 years of leases
> remaining on their books for the same amount.
>
> You could also look at how to get rid of your primary costs. For example,
> maybe backhaul is one of the large expenses? If so would a WISP that got a
> middle mile infrastructure grant, benefit by your network?
>
> The biggest problem I see with getting a high valuation on a 500 sub network
> is that there might not be enough subs to really cover the payroll of techs
> on the street that buyer would have to obtain to manage it.
>
> Tom DeReggi
> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>
>
> - Original Message -----
> From: "3-dB Networks" 
> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
> Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 4:36 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale
>
>
>> Yeah don't expect over 2x annual revenue right now. 1x might be more
>> realistic. depending on the network and what a new operator would have to
>> do
>> to bring it into theirs, etc.
>>
>>
>>
>> Daniel White
>>
>> 3-dB Networks
>>
>> http://www.3dbnetworks.com
>>
>>
>>
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>> Behalf Of Brian Rohrbacher
>> Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 1:30 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale
>>
>>
>>
>> I have heard .5-2 times annual many times on this list
>>
>> Josh Luthman wrote:
>>
>> One way I have heard it done:
>>
>> Take the annual gross revenue, times it by 3 (three years gross revenue)
>> and
>> that's the buy out cost starting point.  Seen this more so with telecom
>> (voice) then data services, but it's a place to start.
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> "When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however
>> improbable, must be the truth."
>> --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 3:21 PM, Patrick D. Nix, Jr <
>> pni...@cnetworksolutions.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> I apologize as I know this has been discussed on the list before.  We
>> are entertaining the idea of selling out of our respectable size
>> wireless ISP business in eastern Oklahoma.  We have about 500 (growing
>> daily) subscribers.  Anyway, we are working on determining the net worth
>> of the business.  Any thoughts or formulas for determining this?
>>
>>
>>
>> Patrick Nix, Jr.,
>> Computer Network Solutions
>> CSWEB.NET Internet Services
>> IT Manager
>>
>> http://www.cnetworksolutions.com
>> http://www.csweb.net
>>
>> (918) 235-0414
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>> Attention: This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and
>> privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please
>> notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail and
>> destroy any copies. Any dissemination or use of this information by a
>> person other than the intended recipient is unauthorized and may be
>> illegal.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -

Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale

[Tom DeReggi]

Interesting perspective, Matt.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Matt Liotta" 
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 5:42 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale


> So it would seem, but that is not the case. There are plenty of
> companies looking to acquire operators right now that are EBITDA
> positive. Unfortunately, too many operators that would normally be
> interested in a deal are hoping for a windfall thanks to ARRA. This
> means that the supply of available companies is low.
>
> I think I am going to be stuck buying companies not interested in ARRA.
>
> -Matt
>
> On Jul 17, 2009, at 5:02 PM, Tom DeReggi wrote:
>
>> I'd point out that the best time to get a high valuation in a rural
>> area is
>> not likely going to be at the launch of a $7billion dollar grant
>> program.
>> Why buy other's outdated equipment when you can get the brand new
>> state of
>> the art for FREE?  You are probably going to have to rely more on
>> "cash
>> flow" related methods of valuation.
>>
>> Instead, you might want to look at your finances, and see if your
>> network
>> could be leveraged to be combined with another's RUS loan/grant.
>> For example, if the assets could be leveraged to make expanding from
>> it more
>> cost effective. Because then your value might be higher based on the
>> additional grants that are enabled because your infrastructure helps
>> qualify
>> it.
>>
>> Tom DeReggi
>> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
>> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>>
>>
>> - Original Message -
>> From: "Patrick D. Nix, Jr" 
>> To: 
>> Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 3:21 PM
>> Subject: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale
>>
>>
>>> I apologize as I know this has been discussed on the list before.  We
>>> are entertaining the idea of selling out of our respectable size
>>> wireless ISP business in eastern Oklahoma.  We have about 500
>>> (growing
>>> daily) subscribers.  Anyway, we are working on determining the net
>>> worth
>>> of the business.  Any thoughts or formulas for determining this?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Patrick Nix, Jr.,
>>> Computer Network Solutions
>>> CSWEB.NET Internet Services
>>> IT Manager
>>>
>>> http://www.cnetworksolutions.com
>>> http://www.csweb.net
>>>
>>> (918) 235-0414
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>> Attention: This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential
>>> and
>>> privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please
>>> notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail
>>> and
>>> destroy any copies. Any dissemination or use of this information by a
>>> person other than the intended recipient is unauthorized and may be
>>> illegal.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale

[Marlon K. Schafer]

I think it really needs to tie into the net you've seen (if any).

1 to 1.5 annual revenue seems to hold up pretty well.  More if you have a 
great customer base (lots of high dollar businesses) vs. the average (mix of 
business but mostly resi).

It's a business like most any other as far as profit margins and sales go. 
At least that's what we're seeing so far.  The big exception to that is when 
a guy is going broke or just wants to get out, no matter what.  Then these 
go for pennies on the dollar.  Again, just like any other business that I 
know of :-).

marlon

- Original Message - 
From: "Josh Luthman" 
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 12:27 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale


> One way I have heard it done:
>
> Take the annual gross revenue, times it by 3 (three years gross revenue) 
> and
> that's the buy out cost starting point.  Seen this more so with telecom
> (voice) then data services, but it's a place to start.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> "When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however
> improbable, must be the truth."
> --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 3:21 PM, Patrick D. Nix, Jr <
> pni...@cnetworksolutions.com> wrote:
>
>> I apologize as I know this has been discussed on the list before.  We
>> are entertaining the idea of selling out of our respectable size
>> wireless ISP business in eastern Oklahoma.  We have about 500 (growing
>> daily) subscribers.  Anyway, we are working on determining the net worth
>> of the business.  Any thoughts or formulas for determining this?
>>
>>
>>
>> Patrick Nix, Jr.,
>> Computer Network Solutions
>> CSWEB.NET Internet Services
>> IT Manager
>>
>> http://www.cnetworksolutions.com
>> http://www.csweb.net
>>
>> (918) 235-0414
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>> Attention: This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and
>> privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please
>> notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail and
>> destroy any copies. Any dissemination or use of this information by a
>> person other than the intended recipient is unauthorized and may be
>> illegal.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale

[Matt Liotta]

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

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

-Matt

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

> I'd point out that the best time to get a high valuation in a rural  
> area is
> not likely going to be at the launch of a $7billion dollar grant  
> program.
> Why buy other's outdated equipment when you can get the brand new  
> state of
> the art for FREE?  You are probably going to have to rely more on  
> "cash
> flow" related methods of valuation.
>
> Instead, you might want to look at your finances, and see if your  
> network
> could be leveraged to be combined with another's RUS loan/grant.
> For example, if the assets could be leveraged to make expanding from  
> it more
> cost effective. Because then your value might be higher based on the
> additional grants that are enabled because your infrastructure helps  
> qualify
> it.
>
> Tom DeReggi
> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Patrick D. Nix, Jr" 
> To: 
> Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 3:21 PM
> Subject: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale
>
>
>> I apologize as I know this has been discussed on the list before.  We
>> are entertaining the idea of selling out of our respectable size
>> wireless ISP business in eastern Oklahoma.  We have about 500  
>> (growing
>> daily) subscribers.  Anyway, we are working on determining the net  
>> worth
>> of the business.  Any thoughts or formulas for determining this?
>>
>>
>>
>> Patrick Nix, Jr.,
>> Computer Network Solutions
>> CSWEB.NET Internet Services
>> IT Manager
>>
>> http://www.cnetworksolutions.com
>> http://www.csweb.net
>>
>> (918) 235-0414
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>> Attention: This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential  
>> and
>> privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please
>> notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail  
>> and
>> destroy any copies. Any dissemination or use of this information by a
>> person other than the intended recipient is unauthorized and may be
>> illegal.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale

[Josh Luthman]

Well if you look at net profit that would show you are profitable,
making payroll, etc and show growth, correct?

On 7/17/09, Tom DeReggi  wrote:
> I disagree with comments relating to X times annual revenue.
> I think the issue is more that buyers are realizing that in this market and
> economy X times revenue doesn't adequately valuate a company.
> A 3-4X times annual could still be achieved if the most of the gross revenue
> was actually monthly profit. Some businesses are in that situation.
> They have their gear paid for, most of their reoccuring costs are in-kind
> trade, etc.
> The problem is that isn't usually the case, which is why they get 1X
> valuations, if even that.. Usually what occurs is, a business has next to no
> profit, poor cashflow, and leased out the kazu for 3-5 years, and thus is
> tired out of working long hours for free.  Further the buyer has to consider
> risk, and in this economy its uncertain whether business models will mature
> to success.
>
> I think you need to really look at your business to determine its profile,
> before you can begin to establish a worth or a method of valuating it.
>
> For example, Surely a company that owns a million dollars of gear outright
> is not going to be valued the sam as a company that has 3 years of leases
> remaining on their books for the same amount.
>
> You could also look at how to get rid of your primary costs. For example,
> maybe backhaul is one of the large expenses? If so would a WISP that got a
> middle mile infrastructure grant, benefit by your network?
>
> The biggest problem I see with getting a high valuation on a 500 sub network
> is that there might not be enough subs to really cover the payroll of techs
> on the street that buyer would have to obtain to manage it.
>
> Tom DeReggi
> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>
>
> - Original Message -----
> From: "3-dB Networks" 
> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
> Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 4:36 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale
>
>
>> Yeah don't expect over 2x annual revenue right now. 1x might be more
>> realistic. depending on the network and what a new operator would have to
>> do
>> to bring it into theirs, etc.
>>
>>
>>
>> Daniel White
>>
>> 3-dB Networks
>>
>> http://www.3dbnetworks.com
>>
>>
>>
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>> Behalf Of Brian Rohrbacher
>> Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 1:30 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale
>>
>>
>>
>> I have heard .5-2 times annual many times on this list
>>
>> Josh Luthman wrote:
>>
>> One way I have heard it done:
>>
>> Take the annual gross revenue, times it by 3 (three years gross revenue)
>> and
>> that's the buy out cost starting point.  Seen this more so with telecom
>> (voice) then data services, but it's a place to start.
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> "When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however
>> improbable, must be the truth."
>> --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 3:21 PM, Patrick D. Nix, Jr <
>> pni...@cnetworksolutions.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> I apologize as I know this has been discussed on the list before.  We
>> are entertaining the idea of selling out of our respectable size
>> wireless ISP business in eastern Oklahoma.  We have about 500 (growing
>> daily) subscribers.  Anyway, we are working on determining the net worth
>> of the business.  Any thoughts or formulas for determining this?
>>
>>
>>
>> Patrick Nix, Jr.,
>> Computer Network Solutions
>> CSWEB.NET Internet Services
>> IT Manager
>>
>> http://www.cnetworksolutions.com
>> http://www.csweb.net
>>
>> (918) 235-0414
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>> Attention: This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and
>> privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please
>> notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail and
>> destroy any copies. Any dissemination or use of this information by a
>> person other than the intended recipient is unauthorized and may be
>> illegal.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 

Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale

[Tom DeReggi]

I disagree with comments relating to X times annual revenue.
I think the issue is more that buyers are realizing that in this market and 
economy X times revenue doesn't adequately valuate a company.
A 3-4X times annual could still be achieved if the most of the gross revenue 
was actually monthly profit. Some businesses are in that situation.
They have their gear paid for, most of their reoccuring costs are in-kind 
trade, etc.
The problem is that isn't usually the case, which is why they get 1X 
valuations, if even that.. Usually what occurs is, a business has next to no 
profit, poor cashflow, and leased out the kazu for 3-5 years, and thus is 
tired out of working long hours for free.  Further the buyer has to consider 
risk, and in this economy its uncertain whether business models will mature 
to success.

I think you need to really look at your business to determine its profile, 
before you can begin to establish a worth or a method of valuating it.

For example, Surely a company that owns a million dollars of gear outright 
is not going to be valued the sam as a company that has 3 years of leases 
remaining on their books for the same amount.

You could also look at how to get rid of your primary costs. For example, 
maybe backhaul is one of the large expenses? If so would a WISP that got a 
middle mile infrastructure grant, benefit by your network?

The biggest problem I see with getting a high valuation on a 500 sub network 
is that there might not be enough subs to really cover the payroll of techs 
on the street that buyer would have to obtain to manage it.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "3-dB Networks" 
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 4:36 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale


> Yeah don't expect over 2x annual revenue right now. 1x might be more
> realistic. depending on the network and what a new operator would have to 
> do
> to bring it into theirs, etc.
>
>
>
> Daniel White
>
> 3-dB Networks
>
> http://www.3dbnetworks.com
>
>
>
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Brian Rohrbacher
> Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 1:30 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale
>
>
>
> I have heard .5-2 times annual many times on this list
>
> Josh Luthman wrote:
>
> One way I have heard it done:
>
> Take the annual gross revenue, times it by 3 (three years gross revenue) 
> and
> that's the buy out cost starting point.  Seen this more so with telecom
> (voice) then data services, but it's a place to start.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> "When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however
> improbable, must be the truth."
> --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 3:21 PM, Patrick D. Nix, Jr <
> pni...@cnetworksolutions.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> I apologize as I know this has been discussed on the list before.  We
> are entertaining the idea of selling out of our respectable size
> wireless ISP business in eastern Oklahoma.  We have about 500 (growing
> daily) subscribers.  Anyway, we are working on determining the net worth
> of the business.  Any thoughts or formulas for determining this?
>
>
>
> Patrick Nix, Jr.,
> Computer Network Solutions
> CSWEB.NET Internet Services
> IT Manager
>
> http://www.cnetworksolutions.com
> http://www.csweb.net
>
> (918) 235-0414
>
>
>
> 
>
> Attention: This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and
> privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please
> notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail and
> destroy any copies. Any dissemination or use of this information by a
> person other than the intended recipient is unauthorized and may be
> illegal.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>
> 
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>
>
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 

Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale

[Tom DeReggi]

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

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

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Patrick D. Nix, Jr" 
To: 
Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 3:21 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale


>I apologize as I know this has been discussed on the list before.  We
> are entertaining the idea of selling out of our respectable size
> wireless ISP business in eastern Oklahoma.  We have about 500 (growing
> daily) subscribers.  Anyway, we are working on determining the net worth
> of the business.  Any thoughts or formulas for determining this?
>
>
>
> Patrick Nix, Jr.,
> Computer Network Solutions
> CSWEB.NET Internet Services
> IT Manager
>
> http://www.cnetworksolutions.com
> http://www.csweb.net
>
> (918) 235-0414
>
>
>
> 
>
> Attention: This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and
> privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please
> notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail and
> destroy any copies. Any dissemination or use of this information by a
> person other than the intended recipient is unauthorized and may be
> illegal.
>
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale

[Brian Webster]

More than you could imagine :-) Sleep is a luxury right now. If things go
according to plan I will have the National Broadband map done in the next 20
days..at a fraction of the $350 million dollars.



Thank You,
Brian Webster
214 Eggleston Hill Rd.
Cooperstown, NY 13326
(607) 643-4055 Office
(607) 435-3988 Mobile
(208) 692-1898 Fax
www.wirelessmapping.com <http://www.wirelessmapping.com>


-Original Message-
From: Charles Wyble [mailto:char...@thewybles.com]
Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 4:03 PM
To: bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale


ROFL ... NTIA got you all tied up ? :)

Brian Webster wrote:
> I would certainly map out your network and show the total number of
> households able to be reached, not just base it on the number of
subscribers
> you have. I know someone who can do that type of work :-) But not until
> after August 14th.
>
>
>
> Thank You,
> Brian Webster
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]on
> Behalf Of Patrick D. Nix, Jr
> Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 3:21 PM
> To: wireless@wispa.org
> Subject: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale
>
>
> I apologize as I know this has been discussed on the list before.  We
> are entertaining the idea of selling out of our respectable size
> wireless ISP business in eastern Oklahoma.  We have about 500 (growing
> daily) subscribers.  Anyway, we are working on determining the net worth
> of the business.  Any thoughts or formulas for determining this?
>
>
>
> Patrick Nix, Jr.,
> Computer Network Solutions
> CSWEB.NET Internet Services
> IT Manager
>
> http://www.cnetworksolutions.com
> http://www.csweb.net
>
> (918) 235-0414
>
>
>
> 
>
> Attention: This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and
> privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please
> notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail and
> destroy any copies. Any dissemination or use of this information by a
> person other than the intended recipient is unauthorized and may be
> illegal.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
--
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> --
--
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
> --
--
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> --
--
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale

[3-dB Networks]

Yeah don't expect over 2x annual revenue right now. 1x might be more
realistic. depending on the network and what a new operator would have to do
to bring it into theirs, etc.

 

Daniel White

3-dB Networks

http://www.3dbnetworks.com

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Brian Rohrbacher
Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 1:30 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale

 

I have heard .5-2 times annual many times on this list

Josh Luthman wrote: 

One way I have heard it done:
 
Take the annual gross revenue, times it by 3 (three years gross revenue) and
that's the buy out cost starting point.  Seen this more so with telecom
(voice) then data services, but it's a place to start.
 
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
 
"When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however
improbable, must be the truth."
--- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
 
 
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 3:21 PM, Patrick D. Nix, Jr <
pni...@cnetworksolutions.com> wrote:
 
  

I apologize as I know this has been discussed on the list before.  We
are entertaining the idea of selling out of our respectable size
wireless ISP business in eastern Oklahoma.  We have about 500 (growing
daily) subscribers.  Anyway, we are working on determining the net worth
of the business.  Any thoughts or formulas for determining this?
 
 
 
Patrick Nix, Jr.,
Computer Network Solutions
CSWEB.NET Internet Services
IT Manager
 
http://www.cnetworksolutions.com
http://www.csweb.net
 
(918) 235-0414
 
 
 

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


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


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
 
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
 
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
 


 
 


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


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
 
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
 
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
 
  



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale

[Charles Wyble]

Actually that was addressed to Brian. :)

But I hear ya. :)

Patrick D. Nix, Jr wrote:
> No, actually we were awarded a RUS grant back in 2006 and we've completed 
> that project.  We're just tired out, and ready for a change. :-)
> 
> Patrick Nix, Jr.,
> Computer Network Solutions
> CSWEB.NET Internet Services
> IT Manager
> http://www.cnetworksolutions.com
> http://www.csweb.net
> (918) 235-0414
>  
> 
> Attention: This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and 
> privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify 
> the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail and destroy any 
> copies. Any dissemination or use of this information by a person other than 
> the intended recipient is unauthorized and may be illegal.
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
> Behalf Of Charles Wyble
> Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 3:03 PM
> To: bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com; WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale
> 
> ROFL ... NTIA got you all tied up ? :)
> 
> Brian Webster wrote:
>> I would certainly map out your network and show the total number of
>> households able to be reached, not just base it on the number of subscribers
>> you have. I know someone who can do that type of work :-) But not until
>> after August 14th.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thank You,
>> Brian Webster
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]on
>> Behalf Of Patrick D. Nix, Jr
>> Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 3:21 PM
>> To: wireless@wispa.org
>> Subject: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale
>>
>>
>> I apologize as I know this has been discussed on the list before.  We
>> are entertaining the idea of selling out of our respectable size
>> wireless ISP business in eastern Oklahoma.  We have about 500 (growing
>> daily) subscribers.  Anyway, we are working on determining the net worth
>> of the business.  Any thoughts or formulas for determining this?
>>
>>
>>
>> Patrick Nix, Jr.,
>> Computer Network Solutions
>> CSWEB.NET Internet Services
>> IT Manager
>>
>> http://www.cnetworksolutions.com
>> http://www.csweb.net
>>
>> (918) 235-0414
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>> Attention: This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and
>> privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please
>> notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail and
>> destroy any copies. Any dissemination or use of this information by a
>> person other than the intended recipient is unauthorized and may be
>> illegal.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>  
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
> 
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale

[Patrick D. Nix, Jr]

No, actually we were awarded a RUS grant back in 2006 and we've completed that 
project.  We're just tired out, and ready for a change. :-)

Patrick Nix, Jr.,
Computer Network Solutions
CSWEB.NET Internet Services
IT Manager
http://www.cnetworksolutions.com
http://www.csweb.net
(918) 235-0414
 

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


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf 
Of Charles Wyble
Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 3:03 PM
To: bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale

ROFL ... NTIA got you all tied up ? :)

Brian Webster wrote:
> I would certainly map out your network and show the total number of
> households able to be reached, not just base it on the number of subscribers
> you have. I know someone who can do that type of work :-) But not until
> after August 14th.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank You,
> Brian Webster
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]on
> Behalf Of Patrick D. Nix, Jr
> Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 3:21 PM
> To: wireless@wispa.org
> Subject: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale
> 
> 
> I apologize as I know this has been discussed on the list before.  We
> are entertaining the idea of selling out of our respectable size
> wireless ISP business in eastern Oklahoma.  We have about 500 (growing
> daily) subscribers.  Anyway, we are working on determining the net worth
> of the business.  Any thoughts or formulas for determining this?
> 
> 
> 
> Patrick Nix, Jr.,
> Computer Network Solutions
> CSWEB.NET Internet Services
> IT Manager
> 
> http://www.cnetworksolutions.com
> http://www.csweb.net
> 
> (918) 235-0414
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Attention: This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and
> privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please
> notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail and
> destroy any copies. Any dissemination or use of this information by a
> person other than the intended recipient is unauthorized and may be
> illegal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
> 
> 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale

[Matt Liotta]

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

-Matt

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

> 3x gross annual was a very nice number... but not realistic any  
> longer.
>
> 1.5x is the last number I heard for an actual sale that went through.
>
> Travis
>
>
> Josh Luthman wrote:
>>
>> One way I have heard it done:
>>
>> Take the annual gross revenue, times it by 3 (three years gross  
>> revenue) and
>> that's the buy out cost starting point.  Seen this more so with  
>> telecom
>> (voice) then data services, but it's a place to start.
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> "When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however
>> improbable, must be the truth."
>> --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 3:21 PM, Patrick D. Nix, Jr <
>> pni...@cnetworksolutions.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I apologize as I know this has been discussed on the list before.   
>>> We
>>> are entertaining the idea of selling out of our respectable size
>>> wireless ISP business in eastern Oklahoma.  We have about 500  
>>> (growing
>>> daily) subscribers.  Anyway, we are working on determining the net  
>>> worth
>>> of the business.  Any thoughts or formulas for determining this?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Patrick Nix, Jr.,
>>> Computer Network Solutions
>>> CSWEB.NET Internet Services
>>> IT Manager
>>>
>>> http://www.cnetworksolutions.com
>>> http://www.csweb.net
>>>
>>> (918) 235-0414
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>> Attention: This e-mail and any attachments may contain  
>>> confidential and
>>> privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient,  
>>> please
>>> notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail  
>>> and
>>> destroy any copies. Any dissemination or use of this information  
>>> by a
>>> person other than the intended recipient is unauthorized and may be
>>> illegal.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale

[Charles Wyble]

ROFL ... NTIA got you all tied up ? :)

Brian Webster wrote:
> I would certainly map out your network and show the total number of
> households able to be reached, not just base it on the number of subscribers
> you have. I know someone who can do that type of work :-) But not until
> after August 14th.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank You,
> Brian Webster
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]on
> Behalf Of Patrick D. Nix, Jr
> Sent: Friday, July 17, 2009 3:21 PM
> To: wireless@wispa.org
> Subject: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale
> 
> 
> I apologize as I know this has been discussed on the list before.  We
> are entertaining the idea of selling out of our respectable size
> wireless ISP business in eastern Oklahoma.  We have about 500 (growing
> daily) subscribers.  Anyway, we are working on determining the net worth
> of the business.  Any thoughts or formulas for determining this?
> 
> 
> 
> Patrick Nix, Jr.,
> Computer Network Solutions
> CSWEB.NET Internet Services
> IT Manager
> 
> http://www.cnetworksolutions.com
> http://www.csweb.net
> 
> (918) 235-0414
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Attention: This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and
> privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please
> notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail and
> destroy any copies. Any dissemination or use of this information by a
> person other than the intended recipient is unauthorized and may be
> illegal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
> 
> 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale

[Travis Johnson]

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

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

Travis


Josh Luthman wrote:

  One way I have heard it done:

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

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

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


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

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



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

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

(918) 235-0414





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







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



WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


  
  


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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

  






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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale

[Brian Webster]

I would certainly map out your network and show the total number of
households able to be reached, not just base it on the number of subscribers
you have. I know someone who can do that type of work :-) But not until
after August 14th.



Thank You,
Brian Webster

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


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



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

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

(918) 235-0414





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







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



WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale

[Brian Rohrbacher]

I have heard .5-2 times annual many times on this list

Josh Luthman wrote:

  One way I have heard it done:

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

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

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


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

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



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

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

(918) 235-0414





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







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



WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


  
  


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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

  






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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale

[Josh Luthman]

I also wanted to throw this in..

If the owner does not have the resources to operate and maintain the
customers (there for the revenue) then one can offer the price it would cost
for that owner to remove the equipment from the towers (where leasing) and
sell the towers and cut their losses.  Or just a bit less then that.

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

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


On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 3:27 PM, Josh Luthman
wrote:

> One way I have heard it done:
>
> Take the annual gross revenue, times it by 3 (three years gross revenue)
> and that's the buy out cost starting point.  Seen this more so with telecom
> (voice) then data services, but it's a place to start.
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> "When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however
> improbable, must be the truth."
> --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 3:21 PM, Patrick D. Nix, Jr <
> pni...@cnetworksolutions.com> wrote:
>
>> I apologize as I know this has been discussed on the list before.  We
>> are entertaining the idea of selling out of our respectable size
>> wireless ISP business in eastern Oklahoma.  We have about 500 (growing
>> daily) subscribers.  Anyway, we are working on determining the net worth
>> of the business.  Any thoughts or formulas for determining this?
>>
>>
>>
>> Patrick Nix, Jr.,
>> Computer Network Solutions
>> CSWEB.NET Internet Services
>> IT Manager
>>
>> http://www.cnetworksolutions.com
>> http://www.csweb.net
>>
>> (918) 235-0414
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>> Attention: This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and
>> privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please
>> notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail and
>> destroy any copies. Any dissemination or use of this information by a
>> person other than the intended recipient is unauthorized and may be
>> illegal.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>
>



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale

[Josh Luthman]

One way I have heard it done:

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

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

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


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

> I apologize as I know this has been discussed on the list before.  We
> are entertaining the idea of selling out of our respectable size
> wireless ISP business in eastern Oklahoma.  We have about 500 (growing
> daily) subscribers.  Anyway, we are working on determining the net worth
> of the business.  Any thoughts or formulas for determining this?
>
>
>
> Patrick Nix, Jr.,
> Computer Network Solutions
> CSWEB.NET Internet Services
> IT Manager
>
> http://www.cnetworksolutions.com
> http://www.csweb.net
>
> (918) 235-0414
>
>
>
> 
>
> Attention: This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and
> privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please
> notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail and
> destroy any copies. Any dissemination or use of this information by a
> person other than the intended recipient is unauthorized and may be
> illegal.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

[WISPA] Question re: WISP for sale

[Patrick D. Nix, Jr]

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

 

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

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

(918) 235-0414

 



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

 




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question about BGP + Mikrotik

[Dennis Burgess]

Anything with 2 gig of ram should be able to handle 1+ million routes. 

* ---
Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
WISPA Board Member - wispa.org <http://www.wispa.org/>
Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
WISPA Vendor Member*
*Office*: 314-735-0270 *Website*: http://www.linktechs.net 
<http://www.linktechs.net/>
*/LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training/* 
<http://www.linktechs.net/onlinetraining.asp>

The information transmitted (including attachments) is covered by the 
Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is intended only 
for the person(s) or entity/entities to which 
it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any 
review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action 
in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the 
intended recipient(s) is prohibited, If you 
received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from 
any computer.

 



Paul Hendry wrote:
> Lots of memory. Do you redistribute the partial routes into your igp?
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Gino Villarini [mailto:g...@aeronetpr.com] 
> Sent: 18 April 2009 15:45
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: [WISPA] Question about BGP + Mikrotik
>
> List
>  
> Im running 3.15 on our Core Router to our upstream, I have 3 circuits
> running BGP to the same provider.  Im only receving rartial routes.  All
> is well
>  
> We just sold a circuit to anothe ISP, thy want full bGP support.  I
> assume we must change to full routes,
>  
> any tips on the changes needed?
>  
>
> Gino A. Villarini 
> g...@aeronetpr.com 
> Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. 
> tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145 
>
>  
>
>
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>   



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question about BGP + Mikrotik

[Gino Villarini]

1- Yes correct, 

2- Wea lready have a BGP session between us and the new customer/isp for
internal traffic xchange, Do I need to provide Sprint with My customer
AS number or just their IP space for Filtering purposes?.

3- Any changes on my Tik box to accept Full routes from Sprint?  


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

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Brad Belton
Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 1:49 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question about BGP + Mikrotik

A quick check looks like you have your own ASN, have one upstream peer
(Sprint) and are advertising IPs reassigned to you from Sprint.  Is that
correct?

You should be able to setup a BGP session between you and your new
client and simply pass on any routes you are currently pulling from
Sprint to your BGP client.  You'll also need to let Sprint know that you
have a new client that will be advertising their IP space so they can
adjust their filters.
Of course you'll need to adjust your outgoing BGP filters as well.

You should have plenty of RAM to pull a full routing table from Sprint.
I do not believe passing the routing table downstream takes any notable
additional memory or CPU utilization.  Our BGP MikroTiks are Quad Core
machines with 2GB of RAM.  A little overkill on the RAM, but having the
Quad Core CPU really makes a difference when working with full tables.

I'm a firm believer of "don't fix it if it isn't broken", but you also
may want to upgrade to v3.18 or v3.22 if you experience any BGP
problems.

Best,


Brad

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Gino Villarini
Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 11:50 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question about BGP + Mikrotik

Ill add that the isp has its own AS # 


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

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Paul Hendry
Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 11:51 AM
To: wireless
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question about BGP + Mikrotik

Lots of memory. Do you redistribute the partial routes into your igp?

-Original Message-
From: Gino Villarini [mailto:g...@aeronetpr.com]
Sent: 18 April 2009 15:45
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Question about BGP + Mikrotik

List
 
Im running 3.15 on our Core Router to our upstream, I have 3 circuits
running BGP to the same provider.  Im only receving rartial routes.  All
is well
 
We just sold a circuit to anothe ISP, thy want full bGP support.  I
assume we must change to full routes,
 
any tips on the changes needed?
 

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

 




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


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

--
This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by
MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.







WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.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/listin

Re: [WISPA] Question about BGP + Mikrotik

[Gino Villarini]

Travis

Thanks, thats very basic and easy.  My new customer is an ISP and they
have their own AS number, any new config on my Tik box?  We arleady have
a BGP session between both for internal traffic.   


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

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 6:21 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question about BGP + Mikrotik

Make sure your MT router has at least 512MB of RAM (1GB preferred) and
tell your upstreams to start sending full routes. That's it.

Travis
Microserv

Gino Villarini wrote:
> List
>  
> Im running 3.15 on our Core Router to our upstream, I have 3 circuits 
> running BGP to the same provider.  Im only receving rartial routes.  
> All is well
>  
> We just sold a circuit to anothe ISP, thy want full bGP support.  I 
> assume we must change to full routes,
>  
> any tips on the changes needed?
>  
>
> Gino A. Villarini
> g...@aeronetpr.com
> Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. 
> tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145 
>
>  
>
>
> --
> --
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> --
> --
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>   




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


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question about BGP + Mikrotik

[Travis Johnson]

Make sure your MT router has at least 512MB of RAM (1GB preferred) and 
tell your upstreams to start sending full routes. That's it.

Travis
Microserv

Gino Villarini wrote:
> List
>  
> Im running 3.15 on our Core Router to our upstream, I have 3 circuits
> running BGP to the same provider.  Im only receving rartial routes.  All
> is well
>  
> We just sold a circuit to anothe ISP, thy want full bGP support.  I
> assume we must change to full routes,
>  
> any tips on the changes needed?
>  
>
> Gino A. Villarini 
> g...@aeronetpr.com 
> Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. 
> tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145 
>
>  
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>   



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question about BGP + Mikrotik

[Brad Belton]

A quick check looks like you have your own ASN, have one upstream peer
(Sprint) and are advertising IPs reassigned to you from Sprint.  Is that
correct?

You should be able to setup a BGP session between you and your new client
and simply pass on any routes you are currently pulling from Sprint to your
BGP client.  You'll also need to let Sprint know that you have a new client
that will be advertising their IP space so they can adjust their filters.
Of course you'll need to adjust your outgoing BGP filters as well.

You should have plenty of RAM to pull a full routing table from Sprint.  I
do not believe passing the routing table downstream takes any notable
additional memory or CPU utilization.  Our BGP MikroTiks are Quad Core
machines with 2GB of RAM.  A little overkill on the RAM, but having the Quad
Core CPU really makes a difference when working with full tables.

I'm a firm believer of "don't fix it if it isn't broken", but you also may
want to upgrade to v3.18 or v3.22 if you experience any BGP problems.

Best,


Brad

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Gino Villarini
Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 11:50 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question about BGP + Mikrotik

Ill add that the isp has its own AS # 


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

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Paul Hendry
Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 11:51 AM
To: wireless
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question about BGP + Mikrotik

Lots of memory. Do you redistribute the partial routes into your igp?

-Original Message-
From: Gino Villarini [mailto:g...@aeronetpr.com]
Sent: 18 April 2009 15:45
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Question about BGP + Mikrotik

List
 
Im running 3.15 on our Core Router to our upstream, I have 3 circuits
running BGP to the same provider.  Im only receving rartial routes.  All
is well
 
We just sold a circuit to anothe ISP, thy want full bGP support.  I
assume we must change to full routes,
 
any tips on the changes needed?
 

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

 




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


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.







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


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




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


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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





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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question about BGP + Mikrotik

[Gino Villarini]

Ill add that the isp has its own AS # 


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

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Paul Hendry
Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 11:51 AM
To: wireless
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question about BGP + Mikrotik

Lots of memory. Do you redistribute the partial routes into your igp?

-Original Message-
From: Gino Villarini [mailto:g...@aeronetpr.com]
Sent: 18 April 2009 15:45
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Question about BGP + Mikrotik

List
 
Im running 3.15 on our Core Router to our upstream, I have 3 circuits
running BGP to the same provider.  Im only receving rartial routes.  All
is well
 
We just sold a circuit to anothe ISP, thy want full bGP support.  I
assume we must change to full routes,
 
any tips on the changes needed?
 

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

 




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


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.







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


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question about BGP + Mikrotik

[Gino Villarini]

The Router has 900 mb of free memmory ...the routes are only
redistributed to the nexhop (Core distributio Router) But the ISP will
not be connected to the 2nd Router on ly to the Core facing the upstream
... Makes sense? 


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

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Paul Hendry
Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 11:51 AM
To: wireless
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question about BGP + Mikrotik

Lots of memory. Do you redistribute the partial routes into your igp?

-Original Message-
From: Gino Villarini [mailto:g...@aeronetpr.com]
Sent: 18 April 2009 15:45
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Question about BGP + Mikrotik

List
 
Im running 3.15 on our Core Router to our upstream, I have 3 circuits
running BGP to the same provider.  Im only receving rartial routes.  All
is well
 
We just sold a circuit to anothe ISP, thy want full bGP support.  I
assume we must change to full routes,
 
any tips on the changes needed?
 

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

 




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


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.







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


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question about BGP + Mikrotik

[Paul Hendry]

Lots of memory. Do you redistribute the partial routes into your igp?

-Original Message-
From: Gino Villarini [mailto:g...@aeronetpr.com] 
Sent: 18 April 2009 15:45
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Question about BGP + Mikrotik

List
 
Im running 3.15 on our Core Router to our upstream, I have 3 circuits
running BGP to the same provider.  Im only receving rartial routes.  All
is well
 
We just sold a circuit to anothe ISP, thy want full bGP support.  I
assume we must change to full routes,
 
any tips on the changes needed?
 

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

 




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


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.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] Question about BGP + Mikrotik

[Gino Villarini]

List
 
Im running 3.15 on our Core Router to our upstream, I have 3 circuits
running BGP to the same provider.  Im only receving rartial routes.  All
is well
 
We just sold a circuit to anothe ISP, thy want full bGP support.  I
assume we must change to full routes,
 
any tips on the changes needed?
 

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

 



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema

[Mike Hammett]

I don't know.  It seems others have answered, but I haven't read them yet. 
It is open source, so you can technically do anything you want.


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


- Original Message - 
From: "Cameron Kilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 7:20 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema


>I want to you use Freeside badly for a while now, but the Billing
> Manager is nervous transferring data? Does anybody know if you can set a
> single billing day within Freeside? IE? The 17th of every month.
>
> -Cameron
> Midcoast Internet
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
> Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 5:58 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema
>
> Freeside is the new interface.
>
> I only use Mikrotik devices (including CPE, which are the customer's
> router).
>
>
> --
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Cameron Kilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
> Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 7:41 AM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema
>
>
>> What are you using for web interface. We are using radius for our
> PPPoE.
>> One of the problems we have noticed with PPPoE using MikroTik to pass
>> the data to the radius server is some routers have a hard time
>> connecting through it. Computers directly work fine, but some of the
>> cheaper routers struggle as well as Apple Airports.
>>
>> -Cameron
>> Midcoast Internet
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On
>> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
>> Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 8:30 AM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema
>>
>> It has similar ease of address distribution as DHCP, but also carries
>> rate
>> limiting information as well.  I'm switching to having the PPPoE
> backed
>> by
>> RADIUS, so my new management system will be a web interface where I
> can
>> change anything relating to the customer from a central interface.
>>
>> There are no special steps in setting up any customer side equipment.
>> My
>> CPE also do NATing and LAN side DHCP.  If it didn't, every router sold
>> today
>> has a setup process required for installation and have a PPPoE route.
> I
>> am
>> 100% against a broadband client's PC directly on the network.  It
> should
>>
>> only be done during special circumstances, and the user would then be
>> more
>> than intelligent enough to configure PPPoE.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>> - Original Message - 
>> From: "David E. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 10:18 PM
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema
>>
>>
>>>> PPPoE
>>>
>>> Y'know, I've never understood why many ISPs are so fond of PPPOE. The
>> only
>>> benefits anyone has ever articulated to me are an alleged improvement
>> in
>>> ease of tracking customer-IP associations, and your DHCP server and
>> tower
>>> logs should take care of that for you just as easily. In the
> meantime,
>> you
>>> risk annoying your customers, because they have to take special steps
>> to
>>> set up a new computer or router, whereas with a DHCP server things
>> will
>>> "just work" 90% of the time.
>>>
>>> Not meaning to troll, I'm genuinely curious.
>>>
>>> David Smith
>>> MVN.net
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
> 
>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>>
>>
> 
>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wis

Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema

[Cameron Kilton]

Sweet, baby steps.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jory Privett
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 9:49 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema

Yes  you can

Jory Privett
WCCS

- Original Message - 
From: "Cameron Kilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 7:20 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema


>I want to you use Freeside badly for a while now, but the Billing
> Manager is nervous transferring data? Does anybody know if you can set
a
> single billing day within Freeside? IE? The 17th of every month.
>
> -Cameron
> Midcoast Internet
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
> Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 5:58 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema
>
> Freeside is the new interface.
>
> I only use Mikrotik devices (including CPE, which are the customer's
> router).
>
>
> --
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Cameron Kilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
> Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 7:41 AM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema
>
>
>> What are you using for web interface. We are using radius for our
> PPPoE.
>> One of the problems we have noticed with PPPoE using MikroTik to pass
>> the data to the radius server is some routers have a hard time
>> connecting through it. Computers directly work fine, but some of the
>> cheaper routers struggle as well as Apple Airports.
>>
>> -Cameron
>> Midcoast Internet
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On
>> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
>> Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 8:30 AM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema
>>
>> It has similar ease of address distribution as DHCP, but also carries
>> rate
>> limiting information as well.  I'm switching to having the PPPoE
> backed
>> by
>> RADIUS, so my new management system will be a web interface where I
> can
>> change anything relating to the customer from a central interface.
>>
>> There are no special steps in setting up any customer side equipment.
>> My
>> CPE also do NATing and LAN side DHCP.  If it didn't, every router
sold
>> today
>> has a setup process required for installation and have a PPPoE route.
> I
>> am
>> 100% against a broadband client's PC directly on the network.  It
> should
>>
>> only be done during special circumstances, and the user would then be
>> more
>> than intelligent enough to configure PPPoE.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>> - Original Message - 
>> From: "David E. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 10:18 PM
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema
>>
>>
>>>> PPPoE
>>>
>>> Y'know, I've never understood why many ISPs are so fond of PPPOE.
The
>> only
>>> benefits anyone has ever articulated to me are an alleged
improvement
>> in
>>> ease of tracking customer-IP associations, and your DHCP server and
>> tower
>>> logs should take care of that for you just as easily. In the
> meantime,
>> you
>>> risk annoying your customers, because they have to take special
steps
>> to
>>> set up a new computer or router, whereas with a DHCP server things
>> will
>>> "just work" 90% of the time.
>>>
>>> Not meaning to troll, I'm genuinely curious.
>>>
>>> David Smith
>>> MVN.net
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

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

>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pip

Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema

[Jory Privett]

Yes  you can

Jory Privett
WCCS

- Original Message - 
From: "Cameron Kilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 7:20 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema


>I want to you use Freeside badly for a while now, but the Billing
> Manager is nervous transferring data? Does anybody know if you can set a
> single billing day within Freeside? IE? The 17th of every month.
>
> -Cameron
> Midcoast Internet
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
> Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 5:58 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema
>
> Freeside is the new interface.
>
> I only use Mikrotik devices (including CPE, which are the customer's
> router).
>
>
> --
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Cameron Kilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
> Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 7:41 AM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema
>
>
>> What are you using for web interface. We are using radius for our
> PPPoE.
>> One of the problems we have noticed with PPPoE using MikroTik to pass
>> the data to the radius server is some routers have a hard time
>> connecting through it. Computers directly work fine, but some of the
>> cheaper routers struggle as well as Apple Airports.
>>
>> -Cameron
>> Midcoast Internet
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On
>> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
>> Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 8:30 AM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema
>>
>> It has similar ease of address distribution as DHCP, but also carries
>> rate
>> limiting information as well.  I'm switching to having the PPPoE
> backed
>> by
>> RADIUS, so my new management system will be a web interface where I
> can
>> change anything relating to the customer from a central interface.
>>
>> There are no special steps in setting up any customer side equipment.
>> My
>> CPE also do NATing and LAN side DHCP.  If it didn't, every router sold
>> today
>> has a setup process required for installation and have a PPPoE route.
> I
>> am
>> 100% against a broadband client's PC directly on the network.  It
> should
>>
>> only be done during special circumstances, and the user would then be
>> more
>> than intelligent enough to configure PPPoE.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>> - Original Message - 
>> From: "David E. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 10:18 PM
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema
>>
>>
>>>> PPPoE
>>>
>>> Y'know, I've never understood why many ISPs are so fond of PPPOE. The
>> only
>>> benefits anyone has ever articulated to me are an alleged improvement
>> in
>>> ease of tracking customer-IP associations, and your DHCP server and
>> tower
>>> logs should take care of that for you just as easily. In the
> meantime,
>> you
>>> risk annoying your customers, because they have to take special steps
>> to
>>> set up a new computer or router, whereas with a DHCP server things
>> will
>>> "just work" 90% of the time.
>>>
>>> Not meaning to troll, I'm genuinely curious.
>>>
>>> David Smith
>>> MVN.net
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
> 
>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>>
>>
> 
>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> 
>> 

Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema

[Cameron Kilton]

I want to you use Freeside badly for a while now, but the Billing
Manager is nervous transferring data? Does anybody know if you can set a
single billing day within Freeside? IE? The 17th of every month.

-Cameron
Midcoast Internet

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 5:58 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema

Freeside is the new interface.

I only use Mikrotik devices (including CPE, which are the customer's 
router).


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


- Original Message - 
From: "Cameron Kilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 7:41 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema


> What are you using for web interface. We are using radius for our
PPPoE.
> One of the problems we have noticed with PPPoE using MikroTik to pass
> the data to the radius server is some routers have a hard time
> connecting through it. Computers directly work fine, but some of the
> cheaper routers struggle as well as Apple Airports.
>
> -Cameron
> Midcoast Internet
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
> Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 8:30 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema
>
> It has similar ease of address distribution as DHCP, but also carries
> rate
> limiting information as well.  I'm switching to having the PPPoE
backed
> by
> RADIUS, so my new management system will be a web interface where I
can
> change anything relating to the customer from a central interface.
>
> There are no special steps in setting up any customer side equipment.
> My
> CPE also do NATing and LAN side DHCP.  If it didn't, every router sold
> today
> has a setup process required for installation and have a PPPoE route.
I
> am
> 100% against a broadband client's PC directly on the network.  It
should
>
> only be done during special circumstances, and the user would then be
> more
> than intelligent enough to configure PPPoE.
>
>
> --
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "David E. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 10:18 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema
>
>
>>> PPPoE
>>
>> Y'know, I've never understood why many ISPs are so fond of PPPOE. The
> only
>> benefits anyone has ever articulated to me are an alleged improvement
> in
>> ease of tracking customer-IP associations, and your DHCP server and
> tower
>> logs should take care of that for you just as easily. In the
meantime,
> you
>> risk annoying your customers, because they have to take special steps
> to
>> set up a new computer or router, whereas with a DHCP server things
> will
>> "just work" 90% of the time.
>>
>> Not meaning to troll, I'm genuinely curious.
>>
>> David Smith
>> MVN.net
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

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

> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>
>
>
>

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

> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>


> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.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!

Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema

[Mike Hammett]

Freeside is the new interface.

I only use Mikrotik devices (including CPE, which are the customer's 
router).


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


- Original Message - 
From: "Cameron Kilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 7:41 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema


> What are you using for web interface. We are using radius for our PPPoE.
> One of the problems we have noticed with PPPoE using MikroTik to pass
> the data to the radius server is some routers have a hard time
> connecting through it. Computers directly work fine, but some of the
> cheaper routers struggle as well as Apple Airports.
>
> -Cameron
> Midcoast Internet
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
> Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 8:30 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema
>
> It has similar ease of address distribution as DHCP, but also carries
> rate
> limiting information as well.  I'm switching to having the PPPoE backed
> by
> RADIUS, so my new management system will be a web interface where I can
> change anything relating to the customer from a central interface.
>
> There are no special steps in setting up any customer side equipment.
> My
> CPE also do NATing and LAN side DHCP.  If it didn't, every router sold
> today
> has a setup process required for installation and have a PPPoE route.  I
> am
> 100% against a broadband client's PC directly on the network.  It should
>
> only be done during special circumstances, and the user would then be
> more
> than intelligent enough to configure PPPoE.
>
>
> --
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "David E. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 10:18 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema
>
>
>>> PPPoE
>>
>> Y'know, I've never understood why many ISPs are so fond of PPPOE. The
> only
>> benefits anyone has ever articulated to me are an alleged improvement
> in
>> ease of tracking customer-IP associations, and your DHCP server and
> tower
>> logs should take care of that for you just as easily. In the meantime,
> you
>> risk annoying your customers, because they have to take special steps
> to
>> set up a new computer or router, whereas with a DHCP server things
> will
>> "just work" 90% of the time.
>>
>> Not meaning to troll, I'm genuinely curious.
>>
>> David Smith
>> MVN.net
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>
> 
> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>
>
>
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema

[Mike Hammett]

Right.  Manual is the only bad answer.
DHCP isn't bad, but I just like PPPoE better.

It has rate limiting abilities based on the individual user's profile.

It requires a username\password to get an IP.


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


- Original Message - 
From: "David E. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 9:16 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema


> Mike Hammett wrote:
>
> [ on the benefits of PPPoE ]
>> It has similar ease of address distribution as DHCP, but also carries 
>> rate
>> limiting information as well.  I'm switching to having the PPPoE backed 
>> by
>> RADIUS, so my new management system will be a web interface where I can
>> change anything relating to the customer from a central interface.
>
> You can tie RADIUS into DHCP just as easily, and I still think DHCP
> makes life easier for the subscriber than PPPoE.
>
> That said, we only have DHCP for some of the newer ends of our network.
> Many of our older locations have static IP addressing, which we track in
> an in-house database. We're moving away from that because it was rapidly
> becoming impossible to keep the database current, with a half-dozen
> people making changes for different reasons. (Also because it was
> basically a glorified spreadsheet, and not really connected to our
> billing system, so there are tens if not hundreds of entries in there
> for customers that have been moved to different towers, or to different
> towns, or changed to different equipment, or...) Humans occasionally
> forget to make these updates, whereas PPPoE or DHCP or any
> mostly-automated system, built properly, should handle these details for
> you.
>
> I think the real object lesson here is that trying to manage everything
> by hand is the only "bad" answer :P
>
> David Smith
> MVN.net
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema

[D. Ryan Spott]

I do this with my tranzeo's cpe as well I don't want to know or have any cotrol 
over what happens on the customer's side of the cpe.

This gives me a clear demark between the customer's network and mine. It also 
helps limit the amount of client machine broadcasts my network needs to hear.

I bill for time spent fixing my customers home networks.


ryan

-Original Message-
From: Mark Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 10:43 AM
To: WISPA General List 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema

We have always given a public IP address to every connection.  We have done
both DHCP and Static.  DHCP was done purely on DHCP reservation.  In other
words, we had 0 IP addresses in a dynamic pool, then would put in DHCP
reservations for our customers CPE.

At one point, I started buying Tranzeo TR-CPQ's (which I'm now ebaying in
favor of StarOS units), which can be routers, but I had them in bridge mode



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema

[Mark Nash]

We have always given a public IP address to every connection.  We have done
both DHCP and Static.  DHCP was done purely on DHCP reservation.  In other
words, we had 0 IP addresses in a dynamic pool, then would put in DHCP
reservations for our customers CPE.

At one point, I started buying Tranzeo TR-CPQ's (which I'm now ebaying in
favor of StarOS units), which can be routers, but I had them in bridge mode.
This meant that I either had to statically assign the IP address to the
customer's computer or router, or deliver via DHCP or PPPoE.  I wasn't
interested AT ALL in having people program their routers or worse yet,
install PPPoE software on their computers or configure Windows in any way
(we have enjoyed a 'hands-off' approach to people's computers...in that if
we don't install software we could not have caused a problem and therefore
are not required to fully support their computer).

Anyway, we initially installed the Tranzeo CPEs in bridge mode with a
private IP address, and gave a public to the customer's computer/router via
DHCP reservation.  We talked people through giving us their MAC address.
For the most part, this was/is easy.  It was a pain once in awhile, but it
allowed us to give statically-assigned IP addresses for accountability.  Now
we only do this for the CPEs that cannot go into router mode (older
BreezeComs and Turbocell bridges...which we will also be ebaying to replace
them with StarOS CPEs).

We turned the Tranzeos into NAT routers, put a static public IP on them, and
man our life became easier.  Routers and computers come online so easily.

If a customer needs something trickier than what the Tranzeo can give them,
we put a StarOS CPE there and we can do whatever routing scenario we want
to.

Mark Nash
UnwiredWest
78 Centennial Loop
Suite E
Eugene, OR 97401
541-998-
541-998-5599 fax
http://www.unwiredwest.com
- Original Message - 
From: "Cameron Kilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 5:31 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema


> We use a mix. Everybody gets a static per say. But we assign those IP
> via PPPoE. Some areas we do DHCP but it will not hand out a DHCP
> addresses until we add the Mac address of that device into the DHCP
> server. This was kind of neat, but can be a pain walking certain
> customers to providing a mac address.
>
> Cameron
> Midcoast Internet
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Chuck McCown - 2
> Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 11:40 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema
>
> If you have ever renumbered your entire network due to changing upstream
> providers or running out of IP, you will wish you had used DHCP
> everywhere.
>   - Original Message ----- 
>   From: Travis Johnson
>   To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; WISPA General List
>   Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 9:37 PM
>   Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema
>
>
>   And to take it one step further, I've never understood using DHCP for
> customers. It makes it 10x easier for a rogue client to get on your
> network if you run DHCP instead of just static. You don't have to
> maintain any logs, or worry about your DHCP server having problems, etc.
> It seems one step easier than DHCP.
>
>   Travis
>   Microserv
>
>   David E. Smith wrote:
> PPPoE
>
> Y'know, I've never understood why many ISPs are so fond of PPPOE. The
> only
> benefits anyone has ever articulated to me are an alleged improvement in
> ease of tracking customer-IP associations, and your DHCP server and
> tower
> logs should take care of that for you just as easily. In the meantime,
> you
> risk annoying your customers, because they have to take special steps to
> set up a new computer or router, whereas with a DHCP server things will
> "just work" 90% of the time.
>
> Not meaning to troll, I'm genuinely curious.
>
> David Smith
> MVN.net
>
>
>
>
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>
> 
> --
>
>
>
>
>
> -

Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema

[David E. Smith]

Mike Hammett wrote:

[ on the benefits of PPPoE ]
> It has similar ease of address distribution as DHCP, but also carries rate 
> limiting information as well.  I'm switching to having the PPPoE backed by 
> RADIUS, so my new management system will be a web interface where I can 
> change anything relating to the customer from a central interface.

You can tie RADIUS into DHCP just as easily, and I still think DHCP 
makes life easier for the subscriber than PPPoE.

That said, we only have DHCP for some of the newer ends of our network. 
Many of our older locations have static IP addressing, which we track in 
an in-house database. We're moving away from that because it was rapidly 
becoming impossible to keep the database current, with a half-dozen 
people making changes for different reasons. (Also because it was 
basically a glorified spreadsheet, and not really connected to our 
billing system, so there are tens if not hundreds of entries in there 
for customers that have been moved to different towers, or to different 
towns, or changed to different equipment, or...) Humans occasionally 
forget to make these updates, whereas PPPoE or DHCP or any 
mostly-automated system, built properly, should handle these details for 
you.

I think the real object lesson here is that trying to manage everything 
by hand is the only "bad" answer :P

David Smith
MVN.net




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema

[Cameron Kilton]

What are you using for web interface. We are using radius for our PPPoE.
One of the problems we have noticed with PPPoE using MikroTik to pass
the data to the radius server is some routers have a hard time
connecting through it. Computers directly work fine, but some of the
cheaper routers struggle as well as Apple Airports.

-Cameron
Midcoast Internet

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 8:30 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema

It has similar ease of address distribution as DHCP, but also carries
rate 
limiting information as well.  I'm switching to having the PPPoE backed
by 
RADIUS, so my new management system will be a web interface where I can 
change anything relating to the customer from a central interface.

There are no special steps in setting up any customer side equipment.
My 
CPE also do NATing and LAN side DHCP.  If it didn't, every router sold
today 
has a setup process required for installation and have a PPPoE route.  I
am 
100% against a broadband client's PC directly on the network.  It should

only be done during special circumstances, and the user would then be
more 
than intelligent enough to configure PPPoE.


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


- Original Message - 
From: "David E. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 10:18 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema


>> PPPoE
>
> Y'know, I've never understood why many ISPs are so fond of PPPOE. The
only
> benefits anyone has ever articulated to me are an alleged improvement
in
> ease of tracking customer-IP associations, and your DHCP server and
tower
> logs should take care of that for you just as easily. In the meantime,
you
> risk annoying your customers, because they have to take special steps
to
> set up a new computer or router, whereas with a DHCP server things
will
> "just work" 90% of the time.
>
> Not meaning to troll, I'm genuinely curious.
>
> David Smith
> MVN.net
>
>
>
>
>


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


>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 





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


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema

[Mike Hammett]

It has similar ease of address distribution as DHCP, but also carries rate 
limiting information as well.  I'm switching to having the PPPoE backed by 
RADIUS, so my new management system will be a web interface where I can 
change anything relating to the customer from a central interface.

There are no special steps in setting up any customer side equipment.  My 
CPE also do NATing and LAN side DHCP.  If it didn't, every router sold today 
has a setup process required for installation and have a PPPoE route.  I am 
100% against a broadband client's PC directly on the network.  It should 
only be done during special circumstances, and the user would then be more 
than intelligent enough to configure PPPoE.


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


- Original Message - 
From: "David E. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 10:18 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema


>> PPPoE
>
> Y'know, I've never understood why many ISPs are so fond of PPPOE. The only
> benefits anyone has ever articulated to me are an alleged improvement in
> ease of tracking customer-IP associations, and your DHCP server and tower
> logs should take care of that for you just as easily. In the meantime, you
> risk annoying your customers, because they have to take special steps to
> set up a new computer or router, whereas with a DHCP server things will
> "just work" 90% of the time.
>
> Not meaning to troll, I'm genuinely curious.
>
> David Smith
> MVN.net
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema

[Cameron Kilton]

We use a mix. Everybody gets a static per say. But we assign those IP
via PPPoE. Some areas we do DHCP but it will not hand out a DHCP
addresses until we add the Mac address of that device into the DHCP
server. This was kind of neat, but can be a pain walking certain
customers to providing a mac address. 

Cameron
Midcoast Internet

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Chuck McCown - 2
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 11:40 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema

If you have ever renumbered your entire network due to changing upstream
providers or running out of IP, you will wish you had used DHCP
everywhere.
  - Original Message - 
  From: Travis Johnson 
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; WISPA General List 
  Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 9:37 PM
  Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema


  And to take it one step further, I've never understood using DHCP for
customers. It makes it 10x easier for a rogue client to get on your
network if you run DHCP instead of just static. You don't have to
maintain any logs, or worry about your DHCP server having problems, etc.
It seems one step easier than DHCP.

  Travis
  Microserv

  David E. Smith wrote: 
PPPoE

Y'know, I've never understood why many ISPs are so fond of PPPOE. The
only
benefits anyone has ever articulated to me are an alleged improvement in
ease of tracking customer-IP associations, and your DHCP server and
tower
logs should take care of that for you just as easily. In the meantime,
you
risk annoying your customers, because they have to take special steps to
set up a new computer or router, whereas with a DHCP server things will
"just work" 90% of the time.

Not meaning to troll, I'm genuinely curious.

David Smith
MVN.net






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


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


  


--




 


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


   
  WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




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


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema

[reader]

There's a couple of nicely elegant options here...  One is that you NAT only 
at your core point(s), and at that point you do a 1:1 IP translation.  You 
can then choose who has direct IP connection and who doesn't at your core 
points, without any additional routing.  For those who don't, you merely 
masq...

I have chosen to use all public addressing for every device, from the CPE to 
backhauls, etc.   But my CPE does NAT.   If my customer needs a public IP, I 
route him a small subnet for his use.

This DOES suck up a lot of IP's.   My 2.4 AP's have a /27 assigned to them, 
and the 5 ghz have a /26 assigned wherever I expect to fully load the AP. 
So far, I've managed to get about 90 clients for every /24 I put in use. 
Perhaps not efficient, but I do have IP growth room in most places still. 
I expect to put around 45 clients for each 5 ghz using 20 mhz channels and 
20 or so for one with 10 mhz channels and about 10 clients at most for a 5 
mhz channel (900 mhz for instance).

My 2.4's are definitely fully loaded at 29 clients per AP - and they run in 
B mode.







- Original Message - 
From: "Patrick Nix Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 2:19 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema


> Just curious to NAT or not to NAT,
>
>
>
> We have been operating with NATed addresses out to our customers on a
> 10.x.x.x private network, the trouble is more and more customers are
> wanting to use services that require a public IP, such as remote
> security camera monitoring, etc... we currently have been offering a
> static public IP for $30/mo in addition to subscription, but this is not
> so popular.  Is anyone offering public IPs out to customers and how do
> you do so when you have more customers than IP addresses.  FYI, we are
> using MT routers to handle DHCP and NATing.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> __
>
>
>
> Patrick Nix, Jr.,
>
> csweb.net
>
> (800) 638-2614
>
> http://www.csweb.net <http://www.csweb.net/>
>
> E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
> 
>
> ATTENTION: This e-mail may contain information that is confidential in
> nature. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this e-mail
> and notify the sender immediately. Thank you.
>
> 
>
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema

[Travis Johnson]

We've renumbered our entire network once, when we got our own IP space. 
It took us about 30 days from start to finish... that was 6 years ago. 
Have never had an issue since then... but we have our own /18 block 
now... ;)

Travis
Microserv

Chuck McCown - 2 wrote:
> If you have ever renumbered your entire network due to changing upstream 
> providers or running out of IP, you will wish you had used DHCP everywhere.
>   - Original Message - 
>   From: Travis Johnson 
>   To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; WISPA General List 
>   Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 9:37 PM
>   Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema
>
>
>   And to take it one step further, I've never understood using DHCP for 
> customers. It makes it 10x easier for a rogue client to get on your network 
> if you run DHCP instead of just static. You don't have to maintain any logs, 
> or worry about your DHCP server having problems, etc. It seems one step 
> easier than DHCP.
>
>   Travis
>   Microserv
>
>   David E. Smith wrote: 
> PPPoE
> 
> Y'know, I've never understood why many ISPs are so fond of PPPOE. The only
> benefits anyone has ever articulated to me are an alleged improvement in
> ease of tracking customer-IP associations, and your DHCP server and tower
> logs should take care of that for you just as easily. In the meantime, you
> risk annoying your customers, because they have to take special steps to
> set up a new computer or router, whereas with a DHCP server things will
> "just work" 90% of the time.
>
> Not meaning to troll, I'm genuinely curious.
>
> David Smith
> MVN.net
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>   
>
> --
>
>
>
>
>   
> 
>   WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>   http://signup.wispa.org/
>   
> 
>
>   WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
>   Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>   http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
>   Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>   



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema

[Bryan Scott]

Travis Johnson wrote:
> And to take it one step further, I've never understood using DHCP for 
> customers. It makes it 10x easier for a rogue client to get on your 
> network if you run DHCP instead of just static. You don't have to 
> maintain any logs, or worry about your DHCP server having problems, etc. 
> It seems one step easier than DHCP.

We control what radios are allowed to connect to our AP's, the router 
built into the radio can be enabled (customer has no access to radio 
interface) as can MAC address masquerading, and DHCP servers can be 
configured to only accept or ignore specific MAC addresses, so the rogue 
client argument is a moot point for us.

Our DHCP server has been humming along as-is for 5 years with occasional 
reboots for reasons unassociated with DHCP (boss shutting down circuit 
breaker, techs tripping on power cords, accidental reset button 
depression).  Another non-issue.

The situation we run into, in addition to what Chuck mentioned about 
renumbering, is adding, moving, or changing network segments, or moving 
customers from one segment to another without having access to the gear 
inside (i.e. re-aim to different tower while customer's at work).  Short 
DHCP leases also make it harder to host services.  (Those who want to 
though simply ask for a static IP, which we assign via DHCP to their 
router or computer. Statics come from different pools making other IP 
management tasks easier.)

If everything is hard-coded, that's one more step to walk 
customers/installers through when installing, configuring, 
troubleshooting, etc.  Since we don't own/maintain any CPE beyond the 
radio itself, DHCP is the best fit for us.

-- Bryan



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema

[Jonathan Schmidt]

MAC/modem cloning is a real problem for cable Internet companies.  Modern
DOCSIS 1.1 and above cable modems have MD5 hashing the firmware with the
MAC but somehow the clones get stolen MAC addresses and there are
successful thieves.   Perhaps it's downgrading the firmware to DOCSIS 1.0
where it is possible without the hash...I don't know how they do it.

However, MAC cloning for less secure equipment in customer hands seems
like an invitation to a theft of service.  Any device, PC or router, can
switcheroo the old MAC.

. . . J o n a t h a n



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Belton
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 11:04 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema

I think it's fair to say that any ISP of size has in fact done this once
if not twice.  It's not the end of the world unless there was little
planning done beforehand.  I've experienced both.  

We do not use DHCP anywhere, but within the client LAN environment.
However, I don't see where running DHCP and reserving IP's for specific
MAC addresses would be of much risk.  The additional headache of the
occasional client replacing their router (hence requiring you to update
your DHCP MAC
table) might be worth it in some cases.

Everyone is going to have their own opinion as to what they feel is going
to be the best solution for their network and their target market.  Ours
has been to own and manage a CPE router for every client connection.  This
gives us a clear demarcation point where our network ends and the client
network begins.

Regarding the original poster's question as to whether to assign public IP
space vs. NAT'd IP space to end clients, I think the resounding opinion is
to use public IP space.

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Chuck McCown - 2
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 10:40 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema

If you have ever renumbered your entire network due to changing upstream
providers or running out of IP, you will wish you had used DHCP
everywhere.
  - Original Message -
  From: Travis Johnson
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; WISPA General List
  Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 9:37 PM
  Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema


  And to take it one step further, I've never understood using DHCP for
customers. It makes it 10x easier for a rogue client to get on your
network if you run DHCP instead of just static. You don't have to maintain
any logs, or worry about your DHCP server having problems, etc. It seems
one step easier than DHCP.

  Travis
  Microserv

  David E. Smith wrote: 
PPPoE

Y'know, I've never understood why many ISPs are so fond of PPPOE. The only
benefits anyone has ever articulated to me are an alleged improvement in
ease of tracking customer-IP associations, and your DHCP server and tower
logs should take care of that for you just as easily. In the meantime, you
risk annoying your customers, because they have to take special steps to
set up a new computer or router, whereas with a DHCP server things will
"just work" 90% of the time.

Not meaning to troll, I'm genuinely curious.

David Smith
MVN.net




--
--

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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


  

--
--
--




 
--
--

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

   
  WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


--
--

WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.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://list

Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema

[Brad Belton]

I think it's fair to say that any ISP of size has in fact done this once if
not twice.  It's not the end of the world unless there was little planning
done beforehand.  I've experienced both.  

We do not use DHCP anywhere, but within the client LAN environment.
However, I don't see where running DHCP and reserving IP's for specific MAC
addresses would be of much risk.  The additional headache of the occasional
client replacing their router (hence requiring you to update your DHCP MAC
table) might be worth it in some cases.

Everyone is going to have their own opinion as to what they feel is going to
be the best solution for their network and their target market.  Ours has
been to own and manage a CPE router for every client connection.  This gives
us a clear demarcation point where our network ends and the client network
begins.

Regarding the original poster's question as to whether to assign public IP
space vs. NAT'd IP space to end clients, I think the resounding opinion is
to use public IP space.

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Chuck McCown - 2
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 10:40 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema

If you have ever renumbered your entire network due to changing upstream
providers or running out of IP, you will wish you had used DHCP everywhere.
  - Original Message - 
  From: Travis Johnson 
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; WISPA General List 
  Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 9:37 PM
  Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema


  And to take it one step further, I've never understood using DHCP for
customers. It makes it 10x easier for a rogue client to get on your network
if you run DHCP instead of just static. You don't have to maintain any logs,
or worry about your DHCP server having problems, etc. It seems one step
easier than DHCP.

  Travis
  Microserv

  David E. Smith wrote: 
PPPoE

Y'know, I've never understood why many ISPs are so fond of PPPOE. The only
benefits anyone has ever articulated to me are an alleged improvement in
ease of tracking customer-IP associations, and your DHCP server and tower
logs should take care of that for you just as easily. In the meantime, you
risk annoying your customers, because they have to take special steps to
set up a new computer or router, whereas with a DHCP server things will
"just work" 90% of the time.

Not meaning to troll, I'm genuinely curious.

David Smith
MVN.net






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


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


  


--




 


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


   
  WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




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


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema

[Chuck McCown - 2]

If you have ever renumbered your entire network due to changing upstream 
providers or running out of IP, you will wish you had used DHCP everywhere.
  - Original Message - 
  From: Travis Johnson 
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; WISPA General List 
  Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 9:37 PM
  Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question concerning IP Schema


  And to take it one step further, I've never understood using DHCP for 
customers. It makes it 10x easier for a rogue client to get on your network if 
you run DHCP instead of just static. You don't have to maintain any logs, or 
worry about your DHCP server having problems, etc. It seems one step easier 
than DHCP.

  Travis
  Microserv

  David E. Smith wrote: 
PPPoE

Y'know, I've never understood why many ISPs are so fond of PPPOE. The only
benefits anyone has ever articulated to me are an alleged improvement in
ease of tracking customer-IP associations, and your DHCP server and tower
logs should take care of that for you just as easily. In the meantime, you
risk annoying your customers, because they have to take special steps to
set up a new computer or router, whereas with a DHCP server things will
"just work" 90% of the time.

Not meaning to troll, I'm genuinely curious.

David Smith
MVN.net





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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


  

--




  

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

   
  WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



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

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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