Lots of people talk about dragon wave, exalt, trango, SAF etc PTP radios on
the list here.
I rarely here anyone mention or compare Motorola PTP800 systems... why?
Scott Carullo
Technical Operations
877-804-3001 x102
Scott,
Hit me offlist if your interested in a quote, we are a disti
Gino A. Villarini
g...@aeronetpr.com mailto:g...@aeronetpr.com
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
787.273.4143
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Scott Carullo
Sent:
Not unless you own the BRS/EBS (formerly MMDS/ITFS) licenses for your area.
We own them in a specific region of AZ, but not everywhere. =)
Hit me off list for more info. I'm at the Phoenix MUM if you're here.
--
Blake Covarrubias
On Sep 30, 2010, at 22:56, Scott Carullo
We have a few Moto PTP, but primarily use Trango GigaLink for standardization,
TDM interfaces, and licensed backhaul. Works well.
We're phasing out other vendors due to price features, and not the ability to
provide a particular advertised service.
--
Blake Covarrubias
On Sep 30, 2010, at
Phone contract with Time Warner is about up and looking for some cheaper
options. Anyone using a VoIP provider for business phones? Thought about
doing VoIP myself but too much on my plate as it is.
Thanks!
Robert West
Just Micro Digital Services Inc.
740-335-7020
Logo5
Vox voice quality is very good. I only sell to business and no complaints.
Sent from my iPhone4
On Oct 1, 2010, at 7:51 AM, Robert West robert.w...@just-micro.com wrote:
Phone contract with Time Warner is about up and looking for some cheaper
options. Anyone using a VoIP provider for
I use our own. Couldn't survive without it being so busy.
Let me know if you'd like a quote.
On Oct 1, 2010 8:51 AM, Robert West robert.w...@just-micro.com wrote:
Phone contract with Time Warner is about up and looking for some cheaper
options. Anyone using a VoIP provider for business phones?
At 10/1/2010 12:33 AM, you wrote:
Fred, I think were saying the same thing?
I wrote mine before receiving yours, but in any case, we were giving
different information relevant to the topic. You gave a good link
for a site to compute the HAAT of a given location. I went a bit
deeper into
OK, first thought: This makes the higher speeds of wireless look great as I
could easily beat the DSL upload time.
Second thought, carrier pigeons average abut 30mph (
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_fast_can_a_pigeon_fly). So, 132km=82 miles.
That 80mph! Did I miss something?
***
Since it's
I'm not a complete idiot -- Some parts are just missing. :-})
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of RickG
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 9:39 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Anything is faster than DSL in Australia
OK, first
What are the headings for your chart? I don't
understand it
On 09/30/2010 08:13 PM, Fred Goldstein wrote:
At 9/30/2010 10:37 PM, Jack Unger wrote:
Fred,
I'm sorry to seem dense but I don't understand your explanation below.
I'd appreciate it if you would re-explain. The FCC said:
At 10/1/2010 02:27 PM, Matt Jenkins wrote:
What are the headings for your chart? I don't understand it
Eudora had trouble with cut-and-paste of the original document.
The first column is height above average terrain, from x to y meters
(10 but less than 30, from 30 but less than 50...).
Thanks for the explanation. I think I understand it. I
have a couple more quick questions.
What is the difference between co-channel and adjacent channel?
Does that mean if I am more than 68 km from a station I can operate a
fixed TVWS Base station at up to 600 meters HAAT?
- Matt
On
At 10/1/2010 03:18 PM, Matt Jenkins wrote:
Thanks for the explanation. I think I understand it. I have a couple
more quick questions.
What is the difference between co-channel and adjacent channel?
Co-channel means the same frequency, so if you're on channel 31,
you're protecting a channel
Does that
mean if I
am more than 68 km from a station I can operate a fixed TVWS Base
station
at up to 600 meters HAAT?
No. This was what IEEE 802 proposed. The FCC's Order
referenced it, and then simply said that the maximum ground HAAT was 75
meters, full stop. Such is the
Eudora! Now there is a program I havent seen in years!
On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 2:56 PM, Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.comwrote:
At 10/1/2010 02:27 PM, Matt Jenkins wrote:
What are the headings for your chart? I don't understand it
Eudora had trouble with cut-and-paste of the
Just had to deal with a brute force attack on a MT router acting as a
gateway.
Came from these two IP addresses..
59.42.10.38
61.155.5.247
Looked them up, they turn out to be pretty common for this sort of thing.
Added a firewall rule to drop them and they are no longer filling
At 10/1/2010 05:47 PM, you wrote:
Eudora! Now there is a program I havent seen in years!
Four years discontinued, there's still nothing as good out there to
replace it (on Windows).
On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 2:56 PM, Fred Goldstein
mailto:fgoldst...@ionary.comfgoldst...@ionary.com wrote:
At
Two options you may want to consider:
a) automatic blacklist scripts:
http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Bruteforce_login_prevention
b) firewalling off external access to your network management services
On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 4:57 PM, Robert West robert.w...@just-micro.com wrote:
Just had to deal
Yep, I'll be a lookin' at all that. Need to rework it all anyhow. Been
reading some scripts that Butch has posted as well.
Bob-
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf
Of Jon Auer
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 6:00 PM
To:
Are you not using the brute force protection from the wiki? I use it on the
ports I must keep open. Three strikes they're out.
Greg
On Oct 1, 2010, at 5:27 PM, Robert West wrote:
Just had to deal with a brute force attack on a MT router acting as a
gateway.
Came from these two IP
I've often wondered, is it legal for the receipient of this sort of thing, to
retailiate with e.g. ping or curl storms?
Tom S.
- Original Message -
From: Robert West
To: 'WISPA General List'
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 2:57 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Brute Force Attack on
How about an 'interactive script' that detects such attacks and
automatically black lists them... ?
Now, now now.. what would you do with all that free time ?
-
http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Bruteforce_login_prevention
-
Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet Telecom
On 10/1/2010 5:57
I like it but what if the ip is being masqueraded?
On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Tom Sharples tsharp...@qorvus.com wrote:
I've often wondered, is it legal for the receipient of this sort of
thing, to retailiate with e.g. ping or curl storms?
Tom S.
- Original Message -
why not just block china (and other countries) from access unless it is
something opened first from inside the network ?
Would make a big difference
:-)
On Oct 1, 2010, at 9:28 PM, RickG wrote:
61.155.5.247
Bob,
If memory serves me correct - you do not have a central network - is that right?
instead your just using multiple pops via cable modems?
If that is the case - it might be a bit more difficult - on the other hand - if
you have switched to a central network (or have this in some places)
I've been migrating everything to a central location. Not done yet but boy,
have had a mess the past 3 weeks with the reconfiguring and moving of
stuff. As well as one major gateway out of the solar status to real
grid power. Finally!
Was interesting to watch the log, though. I blocked
Oh, we do have fiber but it's not used in all AP's. Not yet anyhow. But
the cable modems on top of a box in a field are primo, man!
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Glenn Kelley
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 10:00 PM
To: WISPA General
Yeah? Send me that link, dude!
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Greg Ihnen
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 6:06 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Brute Force Attack on Mikrotik Gateway
Are you not using the brute force
Why not?! Who would prevail if it ever came to a court?!
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Tom Sharples
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 7:00 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Brute Force Attack on Mikrotik Gateway
I've often
I'd sleep.
I Just need to script it to add to the drop list if an IP fails with the
login x number of times. Should work.
Bob-
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Faisal Imtiaz
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010
Then we'll just send the pigeons over to poop on them.
Easy.
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of RickG
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 9:29 PM
To: Tom Sharples; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Brute Force Attack on Mikrotik Gateway
Compliments of Butch Evans
/ip firewal filt
add action=accept chain=forward comment=drop ssh brute forcers disabled=\
no dst-port=22 protocol=tcp src-address-list=ssh_blacklist
add action=add-src-to-address-list address-list=ssh_blacklist \
address-list-timeout=1w3d chain=forward comment=
I change the address-list to just blacklist and duplicate the script for
other ports I want to block as well. That way if they get blacklisted on ssh
they're blacklisted for what ever else you're protecting (telnet, ftp, etc). I
only keep SSH and WinBox ports open, I use SSH to reboot if it
I was going to but I see others already did and someone sent Butch's script.
Greg
On Oct 1, 2010, at 9:55 PM, Robert West wrote:
Yeah? Send me that link, dude!
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Greg Ihnen
Sent: Friday, October 01,
Ok who uses FTP and telnet?!
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 10:46 PM, Greg Ihnen os10ru...@gmail.com wrote:
I was going to but I see others already did and someone sent Butch's
script.
Greg
On Oct 1,
hackers?
On Oct 1, 2010, at 10:21 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
Ok who uses FTP and telnet?!
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 10:46 PM, Greg Ihnen os10ru...@gmail.com wrote:
I was going to but I see
I disable them on any important routers...they're useless.
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 11:01 PM, Greg Ihnen os10ru...@gmail.com wrote:
hackers?
On Oct 1, 2010, at 10:21 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
Ok who
Thats faster than sending poop via dsl!
On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 10:28 PM, Robert West robert.w...@just-micro.comwrote:
Then we’ll just send the pigeons over to poop on them.
Easy.
*From:* wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] *On
Behalf Of *RickG
*Sent:*
And it aint even Christmas yet!
On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 10:38 PM, Josh Luthman
j...@imaginenetworksllc.comwrote:
Compliments of Butch Evans
/ip firewal filt
add action=accept chain=forward comment=drop ssh brute forcers disabled=\
no dst-port=22 protocol=tcp
I'm not sure how many of your are on the NANOG list, but there's a very
interesting thread going on about RIP vs other routing protocols. Figured some
people may want to read this.
http://www.mail-archive.com/na...@nanog.org/msg26990.html
--
Blake Covarrubias
On Sep 2, 2010, at 11:21 PM,
But thinking back on it, imagine the “Damn it!” looks on their faces if
they DID get in only to find a nothing Mikrotik routerboard!
LOL, it would be funny to have something connected that did nothing. Better
yet, just reroute them to fbi.gov!
On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 10:22 PM, Robert West
Blake, thanks for passing this on. It appears to be split on whether they
would use RIP or not. Of course, it really depends on a number of factors
with size being one of those. My network is relatively small and I just use
RIP to keep the static routes clean. I could see updating to another
Very nice! Thanks, dude!
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 10:38 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Brute Force Attack on Mikrotik Gateway
Compliments of Butch Evans
/ip firewal
Is RIP solid? It's been around for decades, and I used it extensively in
the beginning years when I was doing everything. But it seems that we have
many problems lately and RIP is being blamed for it. It's a very easy
protocol to administer configure, not too complicated, so I can't
45 matches
Mail list logo
