John,
It's now April 5th. How are you faring with the Cisco mesh gear?
On 3/1/06, John J. Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Cisco radios can do 4.9-5.8 GHz. I am assuming that 5.3-5.7 will be
available in a update, since 4.9 is available now. Cisco apparently only has
6-8 deployments so
to
post info shortly thereafter.
John
-Original Message-
From: Tom DeReggi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 04:14 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
It uses a 5.7-8 GHz radio for backhaul and 2.4 GHz for access.
Thats the first mistake
yet.
Just my 2 cents.
Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
- Original Message -
From: Lonnie Nunweiler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 12:02 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
Tom
Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
- Original Message -
From: John J. Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 2:17 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
We are still waiting to deply Cisco mesh, so I can't
- Original Message -
From: Lonnie Nunweiler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 12:02 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
Tom, what if you could take the Cell/Sector system and add some
routing that determined when a path had
-
From: Lonnie Nunweiler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 12:02 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
Tom, what if you could take the Cell/Sector system and add some
routing that determined when a path had stopped and chose another one
-
From: John J. Thomas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 2:22 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
Yes, unfortunately, the Cisco mesh is only using 5.8 for backhaul right now.
Since they recommend 16-18 mesh boxes per square mile, 5.25 GHz and up
J. Thomas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 2:22 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
Yes, unfortunately, the Cisco mesh is only using 5.8 for backhaul right now.
Since they recommend 16-18 mesh boxes per square mile, 5.25 GHz and up would
-
From: Lonnie Nunweiler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 12:02 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
Tom, what if you could take the Cell/Sector system and add some
routing that determined when a path had stopped and chose another one
To: isp-wireless@isp-wireless.com, ''WISPA General List''
Subject: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
Does anyone have a good recommendation on some Mesh equipment. I have a small
town that wants to provide Internet access to the entire town and I'm thinking
of using mesh technology. Any ideas would be great
08:41 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
Tom,
You make a very good point that 5.3 GHz should be used wherever possible
while reserving 5.8 for longer-distance backhauling and supercell use.
We should all be thinking in terms of using 5.3 whenever we can and
reserving
the
technology. Just my 2 cents.
Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
- Original Message -
From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 9:30 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
Tom DeReggi
Quoting Tom:
What often happens, is technical people
make these beautiful products from a technical point of view, but they are
worthless because they don't solve the problems that need to be solved for
its applications, which were the reasons for originally developing the
technology.
be construed as
broadband for the masses in any major metro area. Brad
-Original Message-
From: Tom DeReggi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 2:28 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
Matt,
I think you are misinterpretting my comments. Don't
www.customerconnects.com
613-253-0240 (w)
613-291-2884 (c)
BLOG: http://lindaleepond.blogspot.com/
- Original Message -
From: Brian Webster [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 2:56 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
Quoting Tom
appearing on the [Motorola] list.
Rich
- Original Message -
From: Brian Webster [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 1:56 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
Quoting Tom:
What often happens, is technical people
make
Tom DeReggi wrote:
No I am not. I am asking you to tell me what you know, so I don't have
to waste time replicating your research.
Thats the purpose of this list, to exchange knowledge and data. Not
just making claims, but disclosing why.
I recall in an earlier email you making claims
- Original Message -
From: Brad Larson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 2:49 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
Tom, IMHO mesh is great for lighting up downtown and city parks etc. but
it
has yet to prove itself
Matt,
I'm not competing; just waiting for the intelligent debate to begin.
I don't mind being challenged, I don't mind being out thought, and I don't
mind being beat.
I sometimes even purposely hypothetically support the minority side, to
spark intelligent debate on the other side.
But I do
' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 2:49 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
Tom, IMHO mesh is great for lighting up downtown and city parks etc. but
it
has yet to prove itself in a large deployment with 1,000's of customers or
1,000's of nodes deployed. I too have
; 'WISPA General
List'
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 2:32
PM
Subject: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
Does anyone have a good recommendation on some
Mesh equipment. I have a small town that wants to provide Internet
access to the entire town and I'm thinking of using mesh
Subject: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
Does anyone have a good recommendation on some Mesh equipment. I have a
small town that wants to provide Internet access to the entire town and I'm
thinking of using mesh technology. Any ideas would be great.
Thanks,
Steve
: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Lonnie Nunweiler
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 12:52 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
I guess you'll have to learn more about Mesh because if you did you
would not say that a dedicated backhaul and microcell
: ISPlists
To: isp-wireless@isp-wireless.com ; 'WISPA General List'
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 2:32 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
Does anyone have a good recommendation on some Mesh equipment. I have a
small town that wants to provide Internet access to the entire town and I'm
thinking
.
chris
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Lonnie Nunweiler
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 12:52 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
I guess you'll have to learn more about Mesh because if you did you
would
: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 2:32 PM
Subject:
[WISPA] Mesh Equipment
Does anyone have a good recommendation on some Mesh
equipment. I have a
small town that wants to provide Internet access to the
entire town and I'm
thinking of using mesh technology. Any ideas would be
great.
Thanks,
Steve
@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 12:51 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
I guess you'll have to learn more about Mesh because if you did you
would not say that a dedicated backhaul and microcell approach gives
the same functionality. Sure a dedicated backhaul and microcell are
fine
Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote:
First off, don't. Mesh is all the rage today. Just like hotspots
were a couple of years ago. Mesh and muni are often rolled out in the
same sentence. Show me ONE that's working correctly past the 6 to 12
month stage..
Come down and visit
Tom DeReggi wrote:
No the problem with Mesh is it adds many hops to the path, therefore
adding significant latency, and inability to control QOS, or identify
where the QOS lies. Self interference is impossible to avoid without
killing every other in town at the same time.
Mesh doesn't have
)
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam
-
Original Message -
From: ISPlists
To: isp-wireless@isp-wireless.com ;
'WISPA General List'
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 2:32 PM
Subject:
[WISPA] Mesh Equipment
Does
/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam
-
Original Message -
From: ISPlists
To: isp-wireless@isp-wireless.com ;
'WISPA General List'
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 2:32 PM
Subject:
[WISPA] Mesh Equipment
Does anyone have a good recommendation on some Mesh
equipment. I
:49 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
Tom DeReggi wrote:
No the problem with Mesh is it adds many hops to the path, therefore
adding significant latency, and inability to control QOS, or identify
where the QOS lies. Self interference is impossible to avoid without
killing every other
Does anyone have a good recommendation on some Mesh
equipment. I have a small town that wants to provide Internet access to
the entire town and I'm thinking of using mesh technology. Any ideas would
be great.
Thanks,
Steve
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
ISPlists wrote:
Does anyone have a good recommendation on some Mesh equipment. I have a
small town that wants to provide Internet access to the entire town and
I'm thinking of using mesh technology. Any ideas would be great.
Thanks,
Steve
Lonnie just released a beta mesh upgrade for
Unless you expect to handle only very low levels of traffic, avoid mesh
nodes with only one radio. Choose nodes that have one radio on 2.4 GHz
for customer connections and one radio on 5.8 GHz for backhauling. In
other words, separate the access traffic from the backhaul traffic.
Your overall
Hi Jack,
This is the way Lonnie described his version of mesh a few months back.
George
Jack Unger wrote:
Unless you expect to handle only very low levels of traffic, avoid mesh
nodes with only one radio. Choose nodes that have one radio on 2.4 GHz
for customer connections and one radio on
George,
I haven't seen his description but I'm glad to hear he's on the right
track. Do you recall a link to his information?
Thanks,
jack
George wrote:
Hi Jack,
This is the way Lonnie described his version of mesh a few months back.
George
Jack Unger wrote:
Unless you expect
This is from a post I made in the Summer. It runs very nicely on out
4 radio WAR boards. Pretty sweet actually.
Lonnie
*
I think you are basing your dislike on standard AdHoc mesh. Remember
I too have come out and said it is not worth our time. We have
@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 6:29 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
Unless you expect to handle only very low levels of traffic, avoid mesh
nodes with only one radio. Choose nodes that have one radio on 2.4 GHz for
customer connections and one radio on 5.8 GHz for backhauling
- From: Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 6:29 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
Unless you expect to handle only very low levels of traffic, avoid
mesh nodes with only one radio. Choose nodes that have one radio
options.
Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
- Original Message -
From: Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 6:29 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
Unless you expect
41 matches
Mail list logo
