Re: [WISPA] 5.8Ghz Multi-point radios

2006-01-04 Thread Mac Dearman
Be careful that you dont cut your nose off to spite your face on the Trango issue! I also know Trango is a better product than Moto is more ways than one and Trango is going to be releasing a lower priced 5.x SU that will be very competitive with Moto as they have made some changes in the

Re: [WISPA] 5.8Ghz Multi-point radios

2006-01-04 Thread Matt Liotta
A better product is nice and all, but there is more to product selection than just price/performance. We have to take into account availability. With distributors we can rely on them to stock a product, so that when we need it in a short time frame it is available. Distributors provide other

Re: [WISPA] 5.8Ghz Multi-point radios

2006-01-04 Thread John Seaman
Hi Matt, I just wanted to chime in here and let you know that although we are not using distributors any more we are committed to providing excellent customer service and are striving to have all products on hand at all times. Typically as long as we receive orders before 3 pm PST, we can

Re: [WISPA] 5.8Ghz Multi-point radios

2006-01-04 Thread Tom DeReggi
John, I want to add, there is one thing that Trango can't offer today with a direct model, and that is local availabilty. For example, when I need to rush an order in today, I'm going to need to eat some hefty Overnight shipping fees. So Trango forfets profit margins that could be theirs or

RE: [WISPA] VOIP / CommPartners -- big dumb pipe provider vs. end-to-end connectivity/content provider

2006-01-04 Thread Charles Wu
snip performance to their VOIP servers over our network. Think about it, do you think I'm going to allow the same performance to our competitive VOIP provider as I do to our own VOIP services? By getting us to be a Partner for them, we'd optimize them for our own benefit, and indirectly Comm

RE: [WISPA] 2.4GHz vs 5GHz

2006-01-04 Thread Brad Larson
John, Typically 4 sector base stations are built with either 5.3 or a licensed link as backhaul. With BreezeAccess VL, true data sector performance is 28 meg's in a 20 Mhz channel and half that in 10 Mhz Next firmware release is going to mid 30's in a 20 Mhz channel (again true data rates). I know

RE: [WISPA] 5.8Ghz Multi-point radios

2006-01-04 Thread Brad Larson
Matt, How much capacity do you need per 5.8 Ghz sector? Is this a business or residential rollout or both? How many subscribers per sector do you want to support? How large do you want to scale this network and is managment, batch firmware loads for radio updates, vlan tagging, voip support

Re: [WISPA] 5.8Ghz Multi-point radios

2006-01-04 Thread Matt Liotta
We want as much capacity as possible, but certainly 10Mbps minimum. This is for business customers only and we won't be oversubscribing the sectors, so there isn't a need to support many subscribers per sector. Not sure what you are asking in terms of scale, could you be more specific? VoIP

RE: [WISPA] 5.8Ghz Multi-point radios

2006-01-04 Thread Brad Larson
Will this network be scaling to 10 subscribers in one town or 1,000 or more subscribers over many square miles? The more you scale may mean that features such as batch processing for easy firmware upgrades and other management features will save you money in the long run. Ongoing costs and radio

Re: [WISPA] 5.8Ghz Multi-point radios

2006-01-04 Thread Matt Liotta
We mostly serve MTUs, so we don't have that many subscribers that aren't managed by our MPLS network. Radio management is important, but much less important than for the folks doing a more traditional fixed wireless network. -Matt Brad Larson wrote: Will this network be scaling to 10

RE: [WISPA] VOIP / CommPartners -- big dumb pipe provider vs. end-to-end connectivity/content provider

2006-01-04 Thread Butch Evans
On Wed, 4 Jan 2006, Charles Wu wrote: If you think about it, an argument can be made that preference of one's own traffic (or depreffing competition traffic) is not that much different than These are nowhere NEAR the same thing. Let me give an example. Let's say that my webserver is

[WISPA] Alvarion VL as a PtMP Platform

2006-01-04 Thread John Scrivner
Is there a firmware upgrade path for WiMAX through the VL product line or is it a hardware change? Feel free to have someone contact me offlist for pricing information. I have a need for a PtMP system with more capacity than I have now with my current system. I do not know of many systems that

RE: [WISPA] 2.4GHz vs 5GHz

2006-01-04 Thread Charles Wu
Trees are sponges -- there is no scatter with them That said, you're are causing yourself undue headache trying to do NLoS with 2.4 -- especially when 900 MHz is readily available -Charles --- CWLab Technology Architects http://www.cwlab.com

RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL as a PtMP Platform

2006-01-04 Thread Brad Larson
No firmware upgrade will be available and it's a different chipset on both base stations and cpe. But we'll support VL for a long time so you won't have to worry about a deployment getting canned. Brad -Original Message- From: John Scrivner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday,

RE: [WISPA] VOIP / CommPartners -- big dumb pipe provider vs.end-to-end connectivity/content provider

2006-01-04 Thread Charles Wu
snip Not sure how you see any kind of parallel between adding priority to one traffic and not another, vs blocking a certain class of traffic. /snip The second seems almost a natural progression of the first Take for example the CLEC/ILEC models Back in the 90s, the attitude amongst ILECs was

RE: [WISPA] VOIP / CommPartners -- big dumb pipe provider vs.end-to-end connectivity/content provider

2006-01-04 Thread Butch Evans
On Wed, 4 Jan 2006, Charles Wu wrote: If you take this line reasoning a few iterations further, it can easily become a that @[EMAIL PROTECTED] competitor is riding my network for free to access my customers, so I'm just gonna cut them off type of discussion Let me show you again what I

RE: [WISPA] VOIP / CommPartners -- big dumb pipe providervs.end-to-end connectivity/content provider (html formatted for easier reading)

2006-01-04 Thread Charles Wu
Title: Message snipYou seem to be taking this beyond what anyone has stated. There maybe those that say the things that you claim above, however what yousaid was that "...preference of one's own traffic...is not that muchdifferent than..." and you went on to show a link to a story thatwas

Re: [WISPA] Alvarion VL as a PtMP Platform

2006-01-04 Thread jeffrey thomas
The only product on the market today that will have backwards compatibility to wimax where a cpe can talk to a wimax base station is Aperto. Additionally, Alvarion will not be one of the first round products certified for wimax, Airspan and Aperto however, will be. - Jeff On Wed, 04 Jan

RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL as a PtMP Platform

2006-01-04 Thread Brad Larson
Jeff, In what Frequency? There is allot of BS out there in the first wave of testing for those that have yet to get a product to market. We can discuss if you would like? Brad -Original Message- From: jeffrey thomas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 8:29 PM To:

RE: [WISPA] Alvarion VL as a PtMP Platform

2006-01-04 Thread jeffrey thomas
3.5 / 2.5 / 5.8 Alvarion I believe from what I heard was waiting for the QOS revision to be agreed on. - Jeff On Wed, 4 Jan 2006 17:34:42 -0800 , Brad Larson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Jeff, In what Frequency? There is allot of BS out there in the first wave of testing for those that have

Re: [WISPA] VOIP / CommPartners -- big dumb pipe providervs.end-to-end connectivity/content provider (html formatted for easier reading)

2006-01-04 Thread Mac Dearman
The way I see it is this: (automatic insertion of my .o2 cents) If Bell South can charge people extra for added services I can too. You pay extra for call waiting, call forwarding, call blocking...etc - - - you pay extra on my internet service to have me give your VoIP packets

RE: [WISPA] VOIP / CommPartners -- big dumbpipe providervs.end-to-endconnectivity/content provider (html formatted for easier reading)

2006-01-04 Thread Charles Wu
snip The way I see it is this: (automatic insertion of my .o2 cents) If Bell South can charge people extra for added services I can too. You pay extra for call waiting, call forwarding, call blocking...etc - - - you pay extra on my internet service to have me give your VoIP packets

Re: [WISPA] big dumb pipe provider

2006-01-04 Thread Peter R.
Charles, I see the point you are making. And I say this: The ILECs can (and will) get away with it. I'm not so sure that any other operator can or will. I'd like to point out that the language used in any public discussion or marketing should be careful Vonage started us all on the FCC

Re: [WISPA] VOIP / CommPartners -- big dumb pipeprovidervs.end-to-endconnectivity/content provider (html formatted for easier reading)

2006-01-04 Thread John Scrivner
I am not too concerned. It is only about $40K a month in recurring monthly revenues off the SBC network! :-)I do worry what the phone company will do but I am nearly making as much off of wireless now as I am off the ILEC copper so in a year or so I could snip snip the little copper

Re: [WISPA] VOIP / CommPartners -- big dumb pipeprovidervs.end-to-endconnectivity/content provider (html formatted for easier reading)

2006-01-04 Thread George
John Scrivner wrote: I am not too concerned. It is only about $40K a month in recurring monthly revenues off the SBC network! :-)I do worry what the phone company will do but I am nearly making as much off of wireless now as I am off the ILEC copper so in a year or so I could snip snip

Re: [WISPA] 5.8Ghz Multi-point radios

2006-01-04 Thread Matt Larsen - Lists
Matt, I've talked to quite a few people who are looking at Tranzeo CPE/StarOS APs for 5.3/5.8Ghz multipoint deployments and have had good luck myself so far. The combination of StarOS AP units and Tranzeo CPE units seems to work fairly well. Within a 5 mile radius, you will probably be able