Sadly, I have to agree. The incumbents want to own the pipe so that
they can control what goes over it and milk as much profit as possible
from their pipe. Supposedly it's done to benefit the stockholder but
everyone else will be getting screwed. That's the way business is done
in this day and
100 mbps UL = Motorola/Orthogon or Exalt
Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2008 12:41 AM
To:
Hold on there. I am an incumbent as in the I in ILEC. I have fiber
directly to Level 3, XO and the option of hitting all the rest. If there is
such a thing as the pipe I wish someone would point it out to me. We
don't control anything. If you are a wholesale customer, you are
essentially
The term to better describe the people who are feared is the term
RBOC, not the ILEC. I consider you and other smaller ILECs who are
WISPs to be sharing many common concerns with the rest of us. I try to
draw attention to the fact that RBOCs are generally the ones who are
using the bully tactics
Funny how on email, if the meaning of a note is not exceptionally clear, we
all seem to take the more negative options as to what it might mean. I
wonder why that is.
- Original Message -
From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, June
My posting was more along the lines of informational and sensitizing folks
to focusing their angst toward the appropriate parties. But even if the
RBOCs are truly the death stars of our universe, I still do not understand
why folks do not simply bypass them and go directly to the XOs and
Tom DeReggi wrote:
Its nice to see all the screen shots in one place for comparison.
In response to this same email, one of the users ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
in my Linux Group (SoCalLinux.org) posted the following URLs of screen
shots on his desktop
Chris Caputo wrote:
10,299.68 megabytes per day = 10.06 gigabytes per day
Yup, Chris is right. My math was really sloppy there; thanks for the
correction.
(Close enough for government work, though!)
WISPA Wants
Many people incorrectly interchange RBOC and ILEC though Qwest
technically is an RBOC, they're a pawn as well.
--
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
- Original Message -
From: Chuck McCown - 2 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List
Rogelio wrote:
Rogelio wrote:
I recently stumbled across this great iperf HOWTO (for calculating
throughput)
http://www.egee-npm.org/e2emonit/download/older/HOWTO-edg-iperf-1.2.4.txt
Ah, yet another great iperf toy, check_iperf for Nagios!
http://tinyurl.com/3uqlk8
(Haven't checked it out
I agree, the proper term is RBOC not ILEC. I as well often
inappropriately use the term ILEC.
Actually, Ironically, I think most any company, including WISPs would try to
immulate the tactics of the RBOC, if they had the power to.
I want to control my pipe, and my content if I can. Is it
The RBOCs really don't have any superior standing
or abilities if you can get to alternate upstream providers.
I think we can get confused on Consumers versus ISPs.
ISPs can get to XOs and LEvel3s. But ISPs can't get to consumers.
Consumers can't get to XOs and Level3s.
Daily, more incentives
David E. Smith wrote:
Unless you can know in advance exactly what kind of traffic the link
will be handling (which is rare but not impossible) it's all guesswork
anyway :D
True. In fact, much of the 20-25 Mbps (or whatever) pt-to-pt traffic
graphs I see often presuppose a certain mix of
Those wanting a lightweight surveying tool (as compared to, say,
Airmagnent) might check out Covera Zone (just started playing with it today)
http://www.celtrio.com/home/
They have a free version that lets you input maps, export survey points
into CVS file, sync with GPS, take iperf and ping
I am probably way more rural than Tom DeReggi on this, and I could not agree
with him more plus add to it as far as the so called gov't push to get
broadband to the real rural markets. I think their push is more of a
ghost as far as the FCC has ruled in the last 6 to 8 years. Just IMHO.
Scott
On Jun 20, 2008, at 8:23 PM, Scottie Arnett wrote:
I am probably way more rural than Tom DeReggi on this, and I could
not agree with him more plus add to it as far as the so called gov't
push to get broadband to the real rural markets. I think their
push is more of a ghost as far as
My nearest town(and most populated) that I serve has a population of 1600 in
TN. And that is a town, not a little subdivision, and the local co-op telco is
missing some of that providing the service beyond dialup along with us. I will
mark my calender, and bet you (if the FCC does not change
More populated?
Check out Grouse Creek, Utah. That is one of the towns that Bryan is
talking about.
Population about 75 people. And it will be GPON, not FIOS. Much better.
- Original Message -
From: Scottie Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent:
You really should get to be govt funded too. The RUS grant program is ideal
for guys like you.
- Original Message -
From: Scottie Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2008 10:06 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 2012 - The End of the Internet
19 matches
Mail list logo
