Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
If the radios are smart enough, you could use VLANs. John Travis Johnson wrote: My personal concern would be turning over my IP block to my competition. They would have to have enough control to allow BGP routes from their upstream. Technically they could misconfigure a router accidentally and take your entire network down. :( Travis Microserv Mike Hammett wrote: If they're network peering, they'd be connecting each other's networks together to exchange local traffic that way. They could also have an alliance where if someone's Internet feeds go out, they use another WISP's Internet feed until restoration. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Dawn DiPietro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 1:48 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Jory, I am not sure what you are trying to do with the other WISP's in your area. Can you a little more clear on what you are thinking of? Regards, Dawn DiPietro Jory Privett wrote: There are several WISP in my area I was wanting to talk to some of them about bandwidth peering. I know that most will not want anything to do with it since they refuse to co-operate in any other way but I wanted to make the effort. Has anyone else done this type of thing? What paperwork needs to be done to protect each company? How do you control throughput to and from each network and routing issues? Any help her would be greatly appreciated. Jory Privett WCCS -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
Jory, Talk to the other II4A members. Almost all of them are involved in Peering in some way. Peter -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] WISP Peering
Hi WiSPs, I think what is going on is one's dedication to thier customers (subscribers) and one's tremendous responsbility of running a large network. The juxtiposition of rural and urbane is also a factor. I will use me as an example. I come from very humble rural background - think Andy Griffith and Mayberry. Personal service, intimate relationships, and other customs learned in a rural environment. When I moved to the Silicon Valley/San Francisco what a surprise! I actually had to make an appointment see someone! And I had to learn how to handle over 100 large semiconductor customers at one time, with complex contracts, huge power quality issues (IEEE1159) and interaction with government agencies. My goodness was I naive. Thank goodness I had my education (MBA, BA, blah blah). But I still had my rural leanings which helped me with making human relationships with my giant customers. But I came to rely on my urbane network engineers to help me run a big system. Thank goodness they were around. I think that is what's going on. A balance of dedicated service to our customers verus running a complex network. Mother Nature solve this by enclosing a complex system in the human body, the cell, the mithochondrian, the nucleus. Felix MBA/BA-Bioscience 2 years towards MSEE IEEE Associate Member ARRL Member (but not a Ham yet) WiMax trained WiSP system background Power Distribution Background Reader of Ralph Waldo Emerson --- Brad Belton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > All, > > I really don't think Travis is trying to insult > anyone, but simply stating > the facts. > > Everyone here that has scaled to any level > understands the complexities of a > network and the business are compounded as it grows. > > Nothing against Marlon, but his argument of > comparing multiple upstream > providers in the same breath as servicing a client > on another's wireless > network is pretty ridiculous. > > > Best, > > > Brad > > > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Ty Carter > Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 8:54 AM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: RE: [WISPA] WISP Peering > > Travis: > > I think you are way out of line here... Just because > your network has > "x" number of clients does not mean that other > entities that have less > than you are not as capable to run a "large > network". > > I will tell you; here and now, I come from a > background of having > thousands of users on my network and the little guys > are just as > important, if not more important to talk to because > of the reason they > are willing to talk the issue through and not shove > SLA's. > > People that take your attitude and continually shove > SLA's in a > providers face often, at least in my case, take a > back seat because what > we as a service provider had a window of time to fix > for them what could > easily be fixed immediately; but because the little > guy was willing to > call and discuss the issue and was willing to work > with me, this put me > as a service provider in a better position to > isolate the problem and > bring it to a resolution. So what if my SLA window > was missed by a few > minutes; a little credit on the account for the > inconvience is all they > (Mr. SLA) were looking for anyway. > > So please don't insult the smaller provider with > that type of attitude > that you are or companies of size are more capable > of running a larger > network. The principals are all the same in this > type of arrangement > just the scale is larger. > > BTW...I'm not in any way invalidating the value of > an SLA... as a mater > a fact I very much advocate having them; but a > little reality check is > from time to time appropriate. > > Ty Carter > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Travis Johnson > Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 9:28 AM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering > > Marlon, > > When you hit 3,000 subs give me a call. I'd love to > chat with you then. > Until then, you really don't have a clue what it > takes to run a large > network. > > Travis > Microserv > > Marlon K. Schafer wrote: > > Oh brother. Now you're just being obstinate > Travis. > > > > I honestly thought you were smart enough to > substitute the appropriate > > > level technician for "some guys on cell phone". > > > > What you just said is that most (all) of your > peers, including > > your OWN techs, aren&#
RE: [WISPA] WISP Peering
All, I really don't think Travis is trying to insult anyone, but simply stating the facts. Everyone here that has scaled to any level understands the complexities of a network and the business are compounded as it grows. Nothing against Marlon, but his argument of comparing multiple upstream providers in the same breath as servicing a client on another's wireless network is pretty ridiculous. Best, Brad -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ty Carter Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 8:54 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: RE: [WISPA] WISP Peering Travis: I think you are way out of line here... Just because your network has "x" number of clients does not mean that other entities that have less than you are not as capable to run a "large network". I will tell you; here and now, I come from a background of having thousands of users on my network and the little guys are just as important, if not more important to talk to because of the reason they are willing to talk the issue through and not shove SLA's. People that take your attitude and continually shove SLA's in a providers face often, at least in my case, take a back seat because what we as a service provider had a window of time to fix for them what could easily be fixed immediately; but because the little guy was willing to call and discuss the issue and was willing to work with me, this put me as a service provider in a better position to isolate the problem and bring it to a resolution. So what if my SLA window was missed by a few minutes; a little credit on the account for the inconvience is all they (Mr. SLA) were looking for anyway. So please don't insult the smaller provider with that type of attitude that you are or companies of size are more capable of running a larger network. The principals are all the same in this type of arrangement just the scale is larger. BTW...I'm not in any way invalidating the value of an SLA... as a mater a fact I very much advocate having them; but a little reality check is from time to time appropriate. Ty Carter -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Travis Johnson Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 9:28 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Marlon, When you hit 3,000 subs give me a call. I'd love to chat with you then. Until then, you really don't have a clue what it takes to run a large network. Travis Microserv Marlon K. Schafer wrote: > Oh brother. Now you're just being obstinate Travis. > > I honestly thought you were smart enough to substitute the appropriate > level technician for "some guys on cell phone". > > What you just said is that most (all) of your peers, including > your OWN techs, aren't as smart or as capable of running their own > networks as the boys from Level3. > > Guess which part of my dialup network is usually the culprit when > something goes down? Not my "some guy on a cell phone" gear. It's > usually L3! 2 or 3 to one over the last couple of years. > marlon > > - Original Message ----- From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 9:43 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering > > >> I'm calling Qwest, AT&T or Level3. Places that have senior level BGP >> techs on staff 24x7. With a full SLA in place for outages. Not "some >> guys cell phone". >> >> Travis >> Microserv >> >> Marlon K. Schafer wrote: >>> Really? um, exactly WHO do you call when your upstream goes down? >>> >>> As ours did with a major fiber cut a couple of weeks ago? >>> >>> We're ALREADY, ALWAYS dependant on others. >>> >>> Teamwork! >>> marlon >>> >>> - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "WISPA General List" >>> Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 7:11 PM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering >>> >>> >>>> Except in Marlon's case that user will NEVER be on your own >>>> network. Roaming is the exception not the norm with cell companies. >>>> >>>> Personally I think a better solution (if you absolutely don't want >>>> to just put up your own towers) is to just refer the customer to >>>> the other provider and hope they do the same in the future. >>>> Honestly, in Marlon's model, you aren't any different than just >>>> reselling DSL or Cable service. You don't have control of the >>>> network and you don't ha
RE: [WISPA] WISP Peering
Travis: I think you are way out of line here... Just because your network has "x" number of clients does not mean that other entities that have less than you are not as capable to run a "large network". I will tell you; here and now, I come from a background of having thousands of users on my network and the little guys are just as important, if not more important to talk to because of the reason they are willing to talk the issue through and not shove SLA's. People that take your attitude and continually shove SLA's in a providers face often, at least in my case, take a back seat because what we as a service provider had a window of time to fix for them what could easily be fixed immediately; but because the little guy was willing to call and discuss the issue and was willing to work with me, this put me as a service provider in a better position to isolate the problem and bring it to a resolution. So what if my SLA window was missed by a few minutes; a little credit on the account for the inconvience is all they (Mr. SLA) were looking for anyway. So please don't insult the smaller provider with that type of attitude that you are or companies of size are more capable of running a larger network. The principals are all the same in this type of arrangement just the scale is larger. BTW...I'm not in any way invalidating the value of an SLA... as a mater a fact I very much advocate having them; but a little reality check is from time to time appropriate. Ty Carter -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Travis Johnson Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 9:28 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Marlon, When you hit 3,000 subs give me a call. I'd love to chat with you then. Until then, you really don't have a clue what it takes to run a large network. Travis Microserv Marlon K. Schafer wrote: > Oh brother. Now you're just being obstinate Travis. > > I honestly thought you were smart enough to substitute the appropriate > level technician for "some guys on cell phone". > > What you just said is that most (all) of your peers, including > your OWN techs, aren't as smart or as capable of running their own > networks as the boys from Level3. > > Guess which part of my dialup network is usually the culprit when > something goes down? Not my "some guy on a cell phone" gear. It's > usually L3! 2 or 3 to one over the last couple of years. > marlon > > - Original Message ----- From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 9:43 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering > > >> I'm calling Qwest, AT&T or Level3. Places that have senior level BGP >> techs on staff 24x7. With a full SLA in place for outages. Not "some >> guys cell phone". >> >> Travis >> Microserv >> >> Marlon K. Schafer wrote: >>> Really? um, exactly WHO do you call when your upstream goes down? >>> >>> As ours did with a major fiber cut a couple of weeks ago? >>> >>> We're ALREADY, ALWAYS dependant on others. >>> >>> Teamwork! >>> marlon >>> >>> - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "WISPA General List" >>> Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 7:11 PM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering >>> >>> >>>> Except in Marlon's case that user will NEVER be on your own >>>> network. Roaming is the exception not the norm with cell companies. >>>> >>>> Personally I think a better solution (if you absolutely don't want >>>> to just put up your own towers) is to just refer the customer to >>>> the other provider and hope they do the same in the future. >>>> Honestly, in Marlon's model, you aren't any different than just >>>> reselling DSL or Cable service. You don't have control of the >>>> network and you don't have control of the user's radio and/or >>>> router. And calling the other WISP's cell phone when a customer is >>>> down does NOT scale... especially to the levels Marlon is hoping to >>>> be at one day. >>>> >>>> Travis >>>> Microserv >>>> >>>> Mike Hammett wrote: >>>>> Roaming is the exact same thing as Marlon does, which is what >>>>> we're talking about. You collect the revenues from the user, but >>>>> the user is on someone else's equipment. You pay the other >
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
Marlon, When you hit 3,000 subs give me a call. I'd love to chat with you then. Until then, you really don't have a clue what it takes to run a large network. Travis Microserv Marlon K. Schafer wrote: Oh brother. Now you're just being obstinate Travis. I honestly thought you were smart enough to substitute the appropriate level technician for "some guys on cell phone". What you just said is that most (all) of your peers, including your OWN techs, aren't as smart or as capable of running their own networks as the boys from Level3. Guess which part of my dialup network is usually the culprit when something goes down? Not my "some guy on a cell phone" gear. It's usually L3! 2 or 3 to one over the last couple of years. marlon - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 9:43 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering I'm calling Qwest, AT&T or Level3. Places that have senior level BGP techs on staff 24x7. With a full SLA in place for outages. Not "some guys cell phone". Travis Microserv Marlon K. Schafer wrote: Really? um, exactly WHO do you call when your upstream goes down? As ours did with a major fiber cut a couple of weeks ago? We're ALREADY, ALWAYS dependant on others. Teamwork! marlon - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 7:11 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Except in Marlon's case that user will NEVER be on your own network. Roaming is the exception not the norm with cell companies. Personally I think a better solution (if you absolutely don't want to just put up your own towers) is to just refer the customer to the other provider and hope they do the same in the future. Honestly, in Marlon's model, you aren't any different than just reselling DSL or Cable service. You don't have control of the network and you don't have control of the user's radio and/or router. And calling the other WISP's cell phone when a customer is down does NOT scale... especially to the levels Marlon is hoping to be at one day. Travis Microserv Mike Hammett wrote: Roaming is the exact same thing as Marlon does, which is what we're talking about. You collect the revenues from the user, but the user is on someone else's equipment. You pay the other network for the use of it. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Jeromie Reeves" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 1:22 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Roaming is not the same as sending the Client Account to the other company. On 4/29/07, Mike Hammett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: It's called roaming. It happens with everyone but Nextel. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 11:38 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering > Marlon, > > Your comment that I was "short sighted" because I don't turn potential > customers over to my competition really hit a nerve. Sure we have made > some mistakes along the way, but being called short sighted because I > don't share networks and customers with competition is asinine. > > You talk about the cell companies and the values they get when they > sell, > etc. but I can tell you that the cell companies aren't turning > customers > over to each other people they may have poor coverage in an area. :) > > Travis > Microserv > > Marlon K. Schafer wrote: >> Travis, I think you've misunderstood me. >> >> I'm not saying you don't have a good company. Clearly you do. I also >> think you're a bright guy. >> >> There are likely two reasons for the size difference in out companies. >> The biggest would be market size. My whole COUNTY has 10,000 people >> in >> it. Probably less than that by now. The next county over probably has >> less than 50,000. I have DSL, cable, FTTH (basically GIVEN away by a >> PUD), and several other wisps as competition on this very rural area. >> >> I started my business as a copier sales and service company in '95 >> with >> no inventory, no customers, a few tools an $3000 in the bank. It's >> fair >> to say that I didn't exactly have an easy time of it when starting >> out. >> I started the ISP in '97, not cause I thought it a good business, but &
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
Oh brother. Now you're just being obstinate Travis. I honestly thought you were smart enough to substitute the appropriate level technician for "some guys on cell phone". What you just said is that most (all) of your peers, including your OWN techs, aren't as smart or as capable of running their own networks as the boys from Level3. Guess which part of my dialup network is usually the culprit when something goes down? Not my "some guy on a cell phone" gear. It's usually L3! 2 or 3 to one over the last couple of years. marlon - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 9:43 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering I'm calling Qwest, AT&T or Level3. Places that have senior level BGP techs on staff 24x7. With a full SLA in place for outages. Not "some guys cell phone". Travis Microserv Marlon K. Schafer wrote: Really? um, exactly WHO do you call when your upstream goes down? As ours did with a major fiber cut a couple of weeks ago? We're ALREADY, ALWAYS dependant on others. Teamwork! marlon - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 7:11 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Except in Marlon's case that user will NEVER be on your own network. Roaming is the exception not the norm with cell companies. Personally I think a better solution (if you absolutely don't want to just put up your own towers) is to just refer the customer to the other provider and hope they do the same in the future. Honestly, in Marlon's model, you aren't any different than just reselling DSL or Cable service. You don't have control of the network and you don't have control of the user's radio and/or router. And calling the other WISP's cell phone when a customer is down does NOT scale... especially to the levels Marlon is hoping to be at one day. Travis Microserv Mike Hammett wrote: Roaming is the exact same thing as Marlon does, which is what we're talking about. You collect the revenues from the user, but the user is on someone else's equipment. You pay the other network for the use of it. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com ----- Original Message - From: "Jeromie Reeves" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 1:22 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Roaming is not the same as sending the Client Account to the other company. On 4/29/07, Mike Hammett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: It's called roaming. It happens with everyone but Nextel. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 11:38 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering > Marlon, > > Your comment that I was "short sighted" because I don't turn potential > customers over to my competition really hit a nerve. Sure we have made > some mistakes along the way, but being called short sighted because I > don't share networks and customers with competition is asinine. > > You talk about the cell companies and the values they get when they > sell, > etc. but I can tell you that the cell companies aren't turning > customers > over to each other people they may have poor coverage in an area. :) > > Travis > Microserv > > Marlon K. Schafer wrote: >> Travis, I think you've misunderstood me. >> >> I'm not saying you don't have a good company. Clearly you do. I also >> think you're a bright guy. >> >> There are likely two reasons for the size difference in out companies. >> The biggest would be market size. My whole COUNTY has 10,000 people >> in >> it. Probably less than that by now. The next county over probably has >> less than 50,000. I have DSL, cable, FTTH (basically GIVEN away by a >> PUD), and several other wisps as competition on this very rural area. >> >> I started my business as a copier sales and service company in '95 >> with >> no inventory, no customers, a few tools an $3000 in the bank. It's >> fair >> to say that I didn't exactly have an easy time of it when starting >> out. >> I started the ISP in '97, not cause I thought it a good business, but >> because no one else would do it here. In '98 I started the homebrew >> DSL >> thing, and in '99 I started the wireless. >> >> In 2001 when we switched from mostly office equipm
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
I'm calling Qwest, AT&T or Level3. Places that have senior level BGP techs on staff 24x7. With a full SLA in place for outages. Not "some guys cell phone". Travis Microserv Marlon K. Schafer wrote: Really? um, exactly WHO do you call when your upstream goes down? As ours did with a major fiber cut a couple of weeks ago? We're ALREADY, ALWAYS dependant on others. Teamwork! marlon - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 7:11 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Except in Marlon's case that user will NEVER be on your own network. Roaming is the exception not the norm with cell companies. Personally I think a better solution (if you absolutely don't want to just put up your own towers) is to just refer the customer to the other provider and hope they do the same in the future. Honestly, in Marlon's model, you aren't any different than just reselling DSL or Cable service. You don't have control of the network and you don't have control of the user's radio and/or router. And calling the other WISP's cell phone when a customer is down does NOT scale... especially to the levels Marlon is hoping to be at one day. Travis Microserv Mike Hammett wrote: Roaming is the exact same thing as Marlon does, which is what we're talking about. You collect the revenues from the user, but the user is on someone else's equipment. You pay the other network for the use of it. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Jeromie Reeves" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 1:22 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Roaming is not the same as sending the Client Account to the other company. On 4/29/07, Mike Hammett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: It's called roaming. It happens with everyone but Nextel. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message ----- From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 11:38 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering > Marlon, > > Your comment that I was "short sighted" because I don't turn potential > customers over to my competition really hit a nerve. Sure we have made > some mistakes along the way, but being called short sighted because I > don't share networks and customers with competition is asinine. > > You talk about the cell companies and the values they get when they > sell, > etc. but I can tell you that the cell companies aren't turning > customers > over to each other people they may have poor coverage in an area. :) > > Travis > Microserv > > Marlon K. Schafer wrote: >> Travis, I think you've misunderstood me. >> >> I'm not saying you don't have a good company. Clearly you do. I also >> think you're a bright guy. >> >> There are likely two reasons for the size difference in out companies. >> The biggest would be market size. My whole COUNTY has 10,000 people >> in >> it. Probably less than that by now. The next county over probably has >> less than 50,000. I have DSL, cable, FTTH (basically GIVEN away by a >> PUD), and several other wisps as competition on this very rural area. >> >> I started my business as a copier sales and service company in '95 >> with >> no inventory, no customers, a few tools an $3000 in the bank. It's >> fair >> to say that I didn't exactly have an easy time of it when starting >> out. >> I started the ISP in '97, not cause I thought it a good business, but >> because no one else would do it here. In '98 I started the homebrew >> DSL >> thing, and in '99 I started the wireless. >> >> In 2001 when we switched from mostly office equipment work to only >> internet, we had a TON of debt. An ex service manager had spent a >> year >> setting up his own company and when he left me I lost 50%(!!!) of my >> revenue in 1 month. I'd just moved into a brand new big building etc. >> Had more space and a LOT more of a lease payment than I needed due to >> the >> reduced business. >> >> Two... We've grown much slower than some, but I'm very much a man of >> my >> word. I've been careful NOT to put myself in a position of possible >> bankruptsy etc. We've been late sometimes but other than the lease on >> that building, I've never walked away from a single bill. Even when >> many >> I k
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
Really? um, exactly WHO do you call when your upstream goes down? As ours did with a major fiber cut a couple of weeks ago? We're ALREADY, ALWAYS dependant on others. Teamwork! marlon - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 7:11 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Except in Marlon's case that user will NEVER be on your own network. Roaming is the exception not the norm with cell companies. Personally I think a better solution (if you absolutely don't want to just put up your own towers) is to just refer the customer to the other provider and hope they do the same in the future. Honestly, in Marlon's model, you aren't any different than just reselling DSL or Cable service. You don't have control of the network and you don't have control of the user's radio and/or router. And calling the other WISP's cell phone when a customer is down does NOT scale... especially to the levels Marlon is hoping to be at one day. Travis Microserv Mike Hammett wrote: Roaming is the exact same thing as Marlon does, which is what we're talking about. You collect the revenues from the user, but the user is on someone else's equipment. You pay the other network for the use of it. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Jeromie Reeves" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 1:22 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Roaming is not the same as sending the Client Account to the other company. On 4/29/07, Mike Hammett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: It's called roaming. It happens with everyone but Nextel. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 11:38 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering > Marlon, > > Your comment that I was "short sighted" because I don't turn potential > customers over to my competition really hit a nerve. Sure we have made > some mistakes along the way, but being called short sighted because I > don't share networks and customers with competition is asinine. > > You talk about the cell companies and the values they get when they > sell, > etc. but I can tell you that the cell companies aren't turning > customers > over to each other people they may have poor coverage in an area. :) > > Travis > Microserv > > Marlon K. Schafer wrote: >> Travis, I think you've misunderstood me. >> >> I'm not saying you don't have a good company. Clearly you do. I also >> think you're a bright guy. >> >> There are likely two reasons for the size difference in out companies. >> The biggest would be market size. My whole COUNTY has 10,000 people >> in >> it. Probably less than that by now. The next county over probably has >> less than 50,000. I have DSL, cable, FTTH (basically GIVEN away by a >> PUD), and several other wisps as competition on this very rural area. >> >> I started my business as a copier sales and service company in '95 >> with >> no inventory, no customers, a few tools an $3000 in the bank. It's >> fair >> to say that I didn't exactly have an easy time of it when starting >> out. >> I started the ISP in '97, not cause I thought it a good business, but >> because no one else would do it here. In '98 I started the homebrew >> DSL >> thing, and in '99 I started the wireless. >> >> In 2001 when we switched from mostly office equipment work to only >> internet, we had a TON of debt. An ex service manager had spent a >> year >> setting up his own company and when he left me I lost 50%(!!!) of my >> revenue in 1 month. I'd just moved into a brand new big building etc. >> Had more space and a LOT more of a lease payment than I needed due to >> the >> reduced business. >> >> Two... We've grown much slower than some, but I'm very much a man of >> my >> word. I've been careful NOT to put myself in a position of possible >> bankruptsy etc. We've been late sometimes but other than the lease on >> that building, I've never walked away from a single bill. Even when >> many >> I know have filed bankruptsy in far easier situations. Maybe that >> makes >> me a fool, but I'm a fool you know you can do honest business with. >> >> 3000 subs sounds great, till you think about co
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
Sure they are. I have an Inland Cellular account. A small local company. Guess where it works. Anywhere Verizon and 3 or 4 others have networks! Guess what, you can have a Verison account and it works here. Even if you don't have a clue who Inland Cellular is. What's wrong with one of MY customers working on your network? You get paid for an account you'll never likely get. Instead, I'll work with one of your competitors instead. Or hey, maybe I'll just build my own network there eh? After all, if I want to service that market there are three choices. Which one's best for you? marlon - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 9:38 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Marlon, Your comment that I was "short sighted" because I don't turn potential customers over to my competition really hit a nerve. Sure we have made some mistakes along the way, but being called short sighted because I don't share networks and customers with competition is asinine. You talk about the cell companies and the values they get when they sell, etc. but I can tell you that the cell companies aren't turning customers over to each other people they may have poor coverage in an area. :) Travis Microserv Marlon K. Schafer wrote: Travis, I think you've misunderstood me. I'm not saying you don't have a good company. Clearly you do. I also think you're a bright guy. There are likely two reasons for the size difference in out companies. The biggest would be market size. My whole COUNTY has 10,000 people in it. Probably less than that by now. The next county over probably has less than 50,000. I have DSL, cable, FTTH (basically GIVEN away by a PUD), and several other wisps as competition on this very rural area. I started my business as a copier sales and service company in '95 with no inventory, no customers, a few tools an $3000 in the bank. It's fair to say that I didn't exactly have an easy time of it when starting out. I started the ISP in '97, not cause I thought it a good business, but because no one else would do it here. In '98 I started the homebrew DSL thing, and in '99 I started the wireless. In 2001 when we switched from mostly office equipment work to only internet, we had a TON of debt. An ex service manager had spent a year setting up his own company and when he left me I lost 50%(!!!) of my revenue in 1 month. I'd just moved into a brand new big building etc. Had more space and a LOT more of a lease payment than I needed due to the reduced business. Two... We've grown much slower than some, but I'm very much a man of my word. I've been careful NOT to put myself in a position of possible bankruptsy etc. We've been late sometimes but other than the lease on that building, I've never walked away from a single bill. Even when many I know have filed bankruptsy in far easier situations. Maybe that makes me a fool, but I'm a fool you know you can do honest business with. 3000 subs sounds great, till you think about companies with 30,000 or 300,000 subs. THAT's where *I* want to be. Actually, I want that $10,000,000 cash payment for my company. grin. Look again, at the original OWNERS of all of those cell phone companies that used to exist. Or the ones that had the cable companies etc. Why were those sales so valuable? I believe because of cooperation and standardization. Make it as cheap and easy to take over your operations as it can be. BTW, 1% per year in growth? Plus a 10% drop in costs? That's nice. Our gross sales have increased by 15 to 16% per year for the last three years. We're still not advertising either. And this year, so far, we're running 96% ahead of last years growth. I may be in a very small market, but I'm a damned good operator! laters, marlon - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 9:19 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Well, I seem to be holding my own ground pretty well... and I DON'T turn customers over to my competition... over 65 towers in operation, over 3,000 wireless subs, hundreds of DSL subs, almost 50 fiber subs (banks, hospitals, insurance, etc.)... and NO outside investors, stock holders, or any long-term debt whatsoever. :) (OT: Our annual gross revenue has been within 1% of the previous year for the past 4 years. However, I have managed to decrease our expenses by 10% every year. While this doesn't seem like a lot, realize we are a multi-million dollar company. There is EASY money to be made by just cutting expenses. Things like shopping around for better CC rates, better insur
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
Except in Marlon's case that user will NEVER be on your own network. Roaming is the exception not the norm with cell companies. Personally I think a better solution (if you absolutely don't want to just put up your own towers) is to just refer the customer to the other provider and hope they do the same in the future. Honestly, in Marlon's model, you aren't any different than just reselling DSL or Cable service. You don't have control of the network and you don't have control of the user's radio and/or router. And calling the other WISP's cell phone when a customer is down does NOT scale... especially to the levels Marlon is hoping to be at one day. Travis Microserv Mike Hammett wrote: Roaming is the exact same thing as Marlon does, which is what we're talking about. You collect the revenues from the user, but the user is on someone else's equipment. You pay the other network for the use of it. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Jeromie Reeves" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 1:22 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Roaming is not the same as sending the Client Account to the other company. On 4/29/07, Mike Hammett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: It's called roaming. It happens with everyone but Nextel. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 11:38 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering > Marlon, > > Your comment that I was "short sighted" because I don't turn potential > customers over to my competition really hit a nerve. Sure we have made > some mistakes along the way, but being called short sighted because I > don't share networks and customers with competition is asinine. > > You talk about the cell companies and the values they get when they > sell, > etc. but I can tell you that the cell companies aren't turning > customers > over to each other people they may have poor coverage in an area. :) > > Travis > Microserv > > Marlon K. Schafer wrote: >> Travis, I think you've misunderstood me. >> >> I'm not saying you don't have a good company. Clearly you do. I also >> think you're a bright guy. >> >> There are likely two reasons for the size difference in out companies. >> The biggest would be market size. My whole COUNTY has 10,000 people >> in >> it. Probably less than that by now. The next county over probably has >> less than 50,000. I have DSL, cable, FTTH (basically GIVEN away by a >> PUD), and several other wisps as competition on this very rural area. >> >> I started my business as a copier sales and service company in '95 >> with >> no inventory, no customers, a few tools an $3000 in the bank. It's >> fair >> to say that I didn't exactly have an easy time of it when starting >> out. >> I started the ISP in '97, not cause I thought it a good business, but >> because no one else would do it here. In '98 I started the homebrew >> DSL >> thing, and in '99 I started the wireless. >> >> In 2001 when we switched from mostly office equipment work to only >> internet, we had a TON of debt. An ex service manager had spent a >> year >> setting up his own company and when he left me I lost 50%(!!!) of my >> revenue in 1 month. I'd just moved into a brand new big building etc. >> Had more space and a LOT more of a lease payment than I needed due to >> the >> reduced business. >> >> Two... We've grown much slower than some, but I'm very much a man of >> my >> word. I've been careful NOT to put myself in a position of possible >> bankruptsy etc. We've been late sometimes but other than the lease on >> that building, I've never walked away from a single bill. Even when >> many >> I know have filed bankruptsy in far easier situations. Maybe that >> makes >> me a fool, but I'm a fool you know you can do honest business with. >> >> 3000 subs sounds great, till you think about companies with 30,000 or >> 300,000 subs. THAT's where *I* want to be. Actually, I want that >> $10,000,000 cash payment for my company. grin. Look again, at the >> original OWNERS of all of those cell phone companies that used to >> exist. >> Or the ones that had the cable companies etc. Why were those sales so >> va
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
Roaming is the exact same thing as Marlon does, which is what we're talking about. You collect the revenues from the user, but the user is on someone else's equipment. You pay the other network for the use of it. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Jeromie Reeves" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 1:22 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Roaming is not the same as sending the Client Account to the other company. On 4/29/07, Mike Hammett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: It's called roaming. It happens with everyone but Nextel. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 11:38 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering > Marlon, > > Your comment that I was "short sighted" because I don't turn potential > customers over to my competition really hit a nerve. Sure we have made > some mistakes along the way, but being called short sighted because I > don't share networks and customers with competition is asinine. > > You talk about the cell companies and the values they get when they > sell, > etc. but I can tell you that the cell companies aren't turning > customers > over to each other people they may have poor coverage in an area. :) > > Travis > Microserv > > Marlon K. Schafer wrote: >> Travis, I think you've misunderstood me. >> >> I'm not saying you don't have a good company. Clearly you do. I also >> think you're a bright guy. >> >> There are likely two reasons for the size difference in out companies. >> The biggest would be market size. My whole COUNTY has 10,000 people >> in >> it. Probably less than that by now. The next county over probably has >> less than 50,000. I have DSL, cable, FTTH (basically GIVEN away by a >> PUD), and several other wisps as competition on this very rural area. >> >> I started my business as a copier sales and service company in '95 >> with >> no inventory, no customers, a few tools an $3000 in the bank. It's >> fair >> to say that I didn't exactly have an easy time of it when starting >> out. >> I started the ISP in '97, not cause I thought it a good business, but >> because no one else would do it here. In '98 I started the homebrew >> DSL >> thing, and in '99 I started the wireless. >> >> In 2001 when we switched from mostly office equipment work to only >> internet, we had a TON of debt. An ex service manager had spent a >> year >> setting up his own company and when he left me I lost 50%(!!!) of my >> revenue in 1 month. I'd just moved into a brand new big building etc. >> Had more space and a LOT more of a lease payment than I needed due to >> the >> reduced business. >> >> Two... We've grown much slower than some, but I'm very much a man of >> my >> word. I've been careful NOT to put myself in a position of possible >> bankruptsy etc. We've been late sometimes but other than the lease on >> that building, I've never walked away from a single bill. Even when >> many >> I know have filed bankruptsy in far easier situations. Maybe that >> makes >> me a fool, but I'm a fool you know you can do honest business with. >> >> 3000 subs sounds great, till you think about companies with 30,000 or >> 300,000 subs. THAT's where *I* want to be. Actually, I want that >> $10,000,000 cash payment for my company. grin. Look again, at the >> original OWNERS of all of those cell phone companies that used to >> exist. >> Or the ones that had the cable companies etc. Why were those sales so >> valuable? I believe because of cooperation and standardization. Make >> it >> as cheap and easy to take over your operations as it can be. >> >> BTW, 1% per year in growth? Plus a 10% drop in costs? That's nice. >> Our >> gross sales have increased by 15 to 16% per year for the last three >> years. We're still not advertising either. And this year, so far, >> we're >> running 96% ahead of last years growth. I may be in a very small >> market, >> but I'm a damned good operator! >> >> laters, >> marlon >> >> - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "WISPA General List&q
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
Roaming would be more closely compared with peering than wholesaling. The cell companies trade minutes back and forth each month, they don't "sell off" the customer. Travis Microserv Mike Hammett wrote: It's called roaming. It happens with everyone but Nextel. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 11:38 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Marlon, Your comment that I was "short sighted" because I don't turn potential customers over to my competition really hit a nerve. Sure we have made some mistakes along the way, but being called short sighted because I don't share networks and customers with competition is asinine. You talk about the cell companies and the values they get when they sell, etc. but I can tell you that the cell companies aren't turning customers over to each other people they may have poor coverage in an area. :) Travis Microserv Marlon K. Schafer wrote: Travis, I think you've misunderstood me. I'm not saying you don't have a good company. Clearly you do. I also think you're a bright guy. There are likely two reasons for the size difference in out companies. The biggest would be market size. My whole COUNTY has 10,000 people in it. Probably less than that by now. The next county over probably has less than 50,000. I have DSL, cable, FTTH (basically GIVEN away by a PUD), and several other wisps as competition on this very rural area. I started my business as a copier sales and service company in '95 with no inventory, no customers, a few tools an $3000 in the bank. It's fair to say that I didn't exactly have an easy time of it when starting out. I started the ISP in '97, not cause I thought it a good business, but because no one else would do it here. In '98 I started the homebrew DSL thing, and in '99 I started the wireless. In 2001 when we switched from mostly office equipment work to only internet, we had a TON of debt. An ex service manager had spent a year setting up his own company and when he left me I lost 50%(!!!) of my revenue in 1 month. I'd just moved into a brand new big building etc. Had more space and a LOT more of a lease payment than I needed due to the reduced business. Two... We've grown much slower than some, but I'm very much a man of my word. I've been careful NOT to put myself in a position of possible bankruptsy etc. We've been late sometimes but other than the lease on that building, I've never walked away from a single bill. Even when many I know have filed bankruptsy in far easier situations. Maybe that makes me a fool, but I'm a fool you know you can do honest business with. 3000 subs sounds great, till you think about companies with 30,000 or 300,000 subs. THAT's where *I* want to be. Actually, I want that $10,000,000 cash payment for my company. grin. Look again, at the original OWNERS of all of those cell phone companies that used to exist. Or the ones that had the cable companies etc. Why were those sales so valuable? I believe because of cooperation and standardization. Make it as cheap and easy to take over your operations as it can be. BTW, 1% per year in growth? Plus a 10% drop in costs? That's nice. Our gross sales have increased by 15 to 16% per year for the last three years. We're still not advertising either. And this year, so far, we're running 96% ahead of last years growth. I may be in a very small market, but I'm a damned good operator! laters, marlon - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 9:19 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Well, I seem to be holding my own ground pretty well... and I DON'T turn customers over to my competition... over 65 towers in operation, over 3,000 wireless subs, hundreds of DSL subs, almost 50 fiber subs (banks, hospitals, insurance, etc.)... and NO outside investors, stock holders, or any long-term debt whatsoever. :) (OT: Our annual gross revenue has been within 1% of the previous year for the past 4 years. However, I have managed to decrease our expenses by 10% every year. While this doesn't seem like a lot, realize we are a multi-million dollar company. There is EASY money to be made by just cutting expenses. Things like shopping around for better CC rates, better insurance rates, cheaper bandwidth, etc.) Also, if you leased your equipment, you could put the new tower up for less than $200 per month for EVERYTHING. ;) Call it what you will Marlon, but I believe you started your wireless operation around 1997 (going off your web
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
Roaming is not the same as sending the Client Account to the other company. On 4/29/07, Mike Hammett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: It's called roaming. It happens with everyone but Nextel. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 11:38 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering > Marlon, > > Your comment that I was "short sighted" because I don't turn potential > customers over to my competition really hit a nerve. Sure we have made > some mistakes along the way, but being called short sighted because I > don't share networks and customers with competition is asinine. > > You talk about the cell companies and the values they get when they sell, > etc. but I can tell you that the cell companies aren't turning customers > over to each other people they may have poor coverage in an area. :) > > Travis > Microserv > > Marlon K. Schafer wrote: >> Travis, I think you've misunderstood me. >> >> I'm not saying you don't have a good company. Clearly you do. I also >> think you're a bright guy. >> >> There are likely two reasons for the size difference in out companies. >> The biggest would be market size. My whole COUNTY has 10,000 people in >> it. Probably less than that by now. The next county over probably has >> less than 50,000. I have DSL, cable, FTTH (basically GIVEN away by a >> PUD), and several other wisps as competition on this very rural area. >> >> I started my business as a copier sales and service company in '95 with >> no inventory, no customers, a few tools an $3000 in the bank. It's fair >> to say that I didn't exactly have an easy time of it when starting out. >> I started the ISP in '97, not cause I thought it a good business, but >> because no one else would do it here. In '98 I started the homebrew DSL >> thing, and in '99 I started the wireless. >> >> In 2001 when we switched from mostly office equipment work to only >> internet, we had a TON of debt. An ex service manager had spent a year >> setting up his own company and when he left me I lost 50%(!!!) of my >> revenue in 1 month. I'd just moved into a brand new big building etc. >> Had more space and a LOT more of a lease payment than I needed due to the >> reduced business. >> >> Two... We've grown much slower than some, but I'm very much a man of my >> word. I've been careful NOT to put myself in a position of possible >> bankruptsy etc. We've been late sometimes but other than the lease on >> that building, I've never walked away from a single bill. Even when many >> I know have filed bankruptsy in far easier situations. Maybe that makes >> me a fool, but I'm a fool you know you can do honest business with. >> >> 3000 subs sounds great, till you think about companies with 30,000 or >> 300,000 subs. THAT's where *I* want to be. Actually, I want that >> $10,000,000 cash payment for my company. grin. Look again, at the >> original OWNERS of all of those cell phone companies that used to exist. >> Or the ones that had the cable companies etc. Why were those sales so >> valuable? I believe because of cooperation and standardization. Make it >> as cheap and easy to take over your operations as it can be. >> >> BTW, 1% per year in growth? Plus a 10% drop in costs? That's nice. Our >> gross sales have increased by 15 to 16% per year for the last three >> years. We're still not advertising either. And this year, so far, we're >> running 96% ahead of last years growth. I may be in a very small market, >> but I'm a damned good operator! >> >> laters, >> marlon >> >> - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "WISPA General List" >> Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 9:19 PM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering >> >> >>> Well, I seem to be holding my own ground pretty well... and I DON'T turn >>> customers over to my competition... over 65 towers in operation, over >>> 3,000 wireless subs, hundreds of DSL subs, almost 50 fiber subs (banks, >>> hospitals, insurance, etc.)... and NO outside investors, stock holders, >>> or any long-term debt whatsoever. :) >>> >>> (OT: Our annual gross revenue has been within 1% of the previous year >>> for the past 4 years. However, I have managed to decrease our
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
It's called roaming. It happens with everyone but Nextel. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 11:38 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Marlon, Your comment that I was "short sighted" because I don't turn potential customers over to my competition really hit a nerve. Sure we have made some mistakes along the way, but being called short sighted because I don't share networks and customers with competition is asinine. You talk about the cell companies and the values they get when they sell, etc. but I can tell you that the cell companies aren't turning customers over to each other people they may have poor coverage in an area. :) Travis Microserv Marlon K. Schafer wrote: Travis, I think you've misunderstood me. I'm not saying you don't have a good company. Clearly you do. I also think you're a bright guy. There are likely two reasons for the size difference in out companies. The biggest would be market size. My whole COUNTY has 10,000 people in it. Probably less than that by now. The next county over probably has less than 50,000. I have DSL, cable, FTTH (basically GIVEN away by a PUD), and several other wisps as competition on this very rural area. I started my business as a copier sales and service company in '95 with no inventory, no customers, a few tools an $3000 in the bank. It's fair to say that I didn't exactly have an easy time of it when starting out. I started the ISP in '97, not cause I thought it a good business, but because no one else would do it here. In '98 I started the homebrew DSL thing, and in '99 I started the wireless. In 2001 when we switched from mostly office equipment work to only internet, we had a TON of debt. An ex service manager had spent a year setting up his own company and when he left me I lost 50%(!!!) of my revenue in 1 month. I'd just moved into a brand new big building etc. Had more space and a LOT more of a lease payment than I needed due to the reduced business. Two... We've grown much slower than some, but I'm very much a man of my word. I've been careful NOT to put myself in a position of possible bankruptsy etc. We've been late sometimes but other than the lease on that building, I've never walked away from a single bill. Even when many I know have filed bankruptsy in far easier situations. Maybe that makes me a fool, but I'm a fool you know you can do honest business with. 3000 subs sounds great, till you think about companies with 30,000 or 300,000 subs. THAT's where *I* want to be. Actually, I want that $10,000,000 cash payment for my company. grin. Look again, at the original OWNERS of all of those cell phone companies that used to exist. Or the ones that had the cable companies etc. Why were those sales so valuable? I believe because of cooperation and standardization. Make it as cheap and easy to take over your operations as it can be. BTW, 1% per year in growth? Plus a 10% drop in costs? That's nice. Our gross sales have increased by 15 to 16% per year for the last three years. We're still not advertising either. And this year, so far, we're running 96% ahead of last years growth. I may be in a very small market, but I'm a damned good operator! laters, marlon ----- Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 9:19 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Well, I seem to be holding my own ground pretty well... and I DON'T turn customers over to my competition... over 65 towers in operation, over 3,000 wireless subs, hundreds of DSL subs, almost 50 fiber subs (banks, hospitals, insurance, etc.)... and NO outside investors, stock holders, or any long-term debt whatsoever. :) (OT: Our annual gross revenue has been within 1% of the previous year for the past 4 years. However, I have managed to decrease our expenses by 10% every year. While this doesn't seem like a lot, realize we are a multi-million dollar company. There is EASY money to be made by just cutting expenses. Things like shopping around for better CC rates, better insurance rates, cheaper bandwidth, etc.) Also, if you leased your equipment, you could put the new tower up for less than $200 per month for EVERYTHING. ;) Call it what you will Marlon, but I believe you started your wireless operation around 1997 (going off your website). In 1997 we started our wireless service as well. Today we have over 3,000 connected wireless subs and are growing at over 100 per month. We have been profitable since our first year in business. This will be _another_ rec
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
Marlon, Your comment that I was "short sighted" because I don't turn potential customers over to my competition really hit a nerve. Sure we have made some mistakes along the way, but being called short sighted because I don't share networks and customers with competition is asinine. You talk about the cell companies and the values they get when they sell, etc. but I can tell you that the cell companies aren't turning customers over to each other people they may have poor coverage in an area. :) Travis Microserv Marlon K. Schafer wrote: Travis, I think you've misunderstood me. I'm not saying you don't have a good company. Clearly you do. I also think you're a bright guy. There are likely two reasons for the size difference in out companies. The biggest would be market size. My whole COUNTY has 10,000 people in it. Probably less than that by now. The next county over probably has less than 50,000. I have DSL, cable, FTTH (basically GIVEN away by a PUD), and several other wisps as competition on this very rural area. I started my business as a copier sales and service company in '95 with no inventory, no customers, a few tools an $3000 in the bank. It's fair to say that I didn't exactly have an easy time of it when starting out. I started the ISP in '97, not cause I thought it a good business, but because no one else would do it here. In '98 I started the homebrew DSL thing, and in '99 I started the wireless. In 2001 when we switched from mostly office equipment work to only internet, we had a TON of debt. An ex service manager had spent a year setting up his own company and when he left me I lost 50%(!!!) of my revenue in 1 month. I'd just moved into a brand new big building etc. Had more space and a LOT more of a lease payment than I needed due to the reduced business. Two... We've grown much slower than some, but I'm very much a man of my word. I've been careful NOT to put myself in a position of possible bankruptsy etc. We've been late sometimes but other than the lease on that building, I've never walked away from a single bill. Even when many I know have filed bankruptsy in far easier situations. Maybe that makes me a fool, but I'm a fool you know you can do honest business with. 3000 subs sounds great, till you think about companies with 30,000 or 300,000 subs. THAT's where *I* want to be. Actually, I want that $10,000,000 cash payment for my company. grin. Look again, at the original OWNERS of all of those cell phone companies that used to exist. Or the ones that had the cable companies etc. Why were those sales so valuable? I believe because of cooperation and standardization. Make it as cheap and easy to take over your operations as it can be. BTW, 1% per year in growth? Plus a 10% drop in costs? That's nice. Our gross sales have increased by 15 to 16% per year for the last three years. We're still not advertising either. And this year, so far, we're running 96% ahead of last years growth. I may be in a very small market, but I'm a damned good operator! laters, marlon - Original Message ----- From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 9:19 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Well, I seem to be holding my own ground pretty well... and I DON'T turn customers over to my competition... over 65 towers in operation, over 3,000 wireless subs, hundreds of DSL subs, almost 50 fiber subs (banks, hospitals, insurance, etc.)... and NO outside investors, stock holders, or any long-term debt whatsoever. :) (OT: Our annual gross revenue has been within 1% of the previous year for the past 4 years. However, I have managed to decrease our expenses by 10% every year. While this doesn't seem like a lot, realize we are a multi-million dollar company. There is EASY money to be made by just cutting expenses. Things like shopping around for better CC rates, better insurance rates, cheaper bandwidth, etc.) Also, if you leased your equipment, you could put the new tower up for less than $200 per month for EVERYTHING. ;) Call it what you will Marlon, but I believe you started your wireless operation around 1997 (going off your website). In 1997 we started our wireless service as well. Today we have over 3,000 connected wireless subs and are growing at over 100 per month. We have been profitable since our first year in business. This will be _another_ record breaking year for us. We have a backbone uptime of 99.99% over the last 2 years (including scheduled maintenance). Our wireless subs see a 99.9% uptime (including maintenance, interferance issues, blown AP's, etc). We deliver over 150Mbps of internet traffic during business hours using three diverse providers (DS3 via Q
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
My friend Bob Kirkpatrick is in Spokane and has been more than 6 to 8 years. There are at least 4 or 6 others in the area already. Spokane has a muni network downtown. There are a LOT of trees and hills in town. WiFi coverage sucks in MOST places. It would take at least 5 hops to get form here to there, probably more. It's a 1.5 hour drive to even GET to Spokane. DSL and cable are well established and have been for a long time. You aren't the only smart guy out there Lucky for you, you started at a good time and in a good place. I think that's great. marlon - Original Message - From: Travis Johnson To: WISPA General List Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2007 6:22 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Marlon's main city is Odessa, WA. Within 65 miles is Spokane, WA that has hundreds of thousands of people, plus all the suburbs. It seems he is "short sighted" by not expanding into that market 6-8 years ago. Sixty miles is nothing... I have a single 73 mile shot that has been running 100% uptime for almost 2 years. Travis Microserv Mark Koskenmaki wrote: I have to come to Marlon's defense a bit here.The idaho falls / pocatello area has DRAMATICALLY more people than the central washington wasteland Marlon serves. You serve the populated areas of Bonneville, Bingham and Bannock Counties, if I estimate your coverage. This approaches a quarter million people, at least for the three counties, it does. Marlon's town is about 1000 people, Lincoln and Adams County together have less than 30K people, and his main competition is a utility which is using it's financial might to subsidize buried fiber to every home in Grant County. I have seen Marlon's territory, driven through it, and seen his "operation". It's a collection of small community markets. I would say that in spite of being small, he probably has considerably higher market share than you do, for the places he covers. None of this is to disparage anyone. But you can't compare apples and oranges like that and have it make any sense at all. I suspect you'd struggle mightily to adapt to marlon's situation... and vice versa. Let's not go off on each other here.. We have much better targets to aim at. - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 9:19 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Well, I seem to be holding my own ground pretty well... and I DON'T turn customers over to my competition... over 65 towers in operation, over 3,000 wireless subs, hundreds of DSL subs, almost 50 fiber subs (banks, hospitals, insurance, etc.)... and NO outside investors, stock holders, or any long-term debt whatsoever. :) (OT: Our annual gross revenue has been within 1% of the previous year for the past 4 years. However, I have managed to decrease our expenses by 10% every year. While this doesn't seem like a lot, realize we are a multi-million dollar company. There is EASY money to be made by just cutting expenses. Things like shopping around for better CC rates, better insurance rates, cheaper bandwidth, etc.) Also, if you leased your equipment, you could put the new tower up for less than $200 per month for EVERYTHING. ;) Call it what you will Marlon, but I believe you started your wireless operation around 1997 (going off your website). In 1997 we started our wireless service as well. Today we have over 3,000 connected wireless subs and are growing at over 100 per month. We have been profitable since our first year in business. This will be _another_ record breaking year for us. We have a backbone uptime of 99.99% over the last 2 years (including scheduled maintenance). Our wireless subs see a 99.9% uptime (including maintenance, interferance issues, blown AP's, etc). We deliver over 150Mbps of internet traffic during business hours using three diverse providers (DS3 via Qwest fiber, OC3 via seperate Qwest fiber, Level3 via fastethernet via seperate fiber via seperate NOC). We provide service to 8 entire school districts (out of a possible 10 in our entire 25,000 square mile coverage area). So, if I'm short sighted and you are not, why is my company 10x the size and making 10x the profit when both of us started at the same time? Travis Microserv Marlon K. Schafer wrote: - Original Message ----- From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 8:16 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Why wouldn't you just put up your own AP's and service the same area rather than give that customer away to the competition? Spectrum congestion. Cashflow Speed. Expanded coverage, very quickly, for no money. I would spend $5k and put up my own tower before I turn a "potential" c
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
We have less than 300 students in our school system here Rick. Our WHOLE school system! k-12 Fortunately, I've got 6000 square miles of coverage :-). marlon - Original Message - From: "Smith, Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2007 5:31 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] WISP Peering Travis, a little perspective...you're in a technology hot-bed area of the country! Marlon's not. MUCH tougher for Marlon, in perspective, to get where he's gotten to today. There's probably only one school / one high school in Marlon's coverage area ? Odessa ain't big. :) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Travis Johnson Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2007 12:20 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Well, I seem to be holding my own ground pretty well... and I DON'T turn customers over to my competition... over 65 towers in operation, over 3,000 wireless subs, hundreds of DSL subs, almost 50 fiber subs (banks, hospitals, insurance, etc.)... and NO outside investors, stock holders, or any long-term debt whatsoever. :) (OT: Our annual gross revenue has been within 1% of the previous year for the past 4 years. However, I have managed to decrease our expenses by 10% every year. While this doesn't seem like a lot, realize we are a multi-million dollar company. There is EASY money to be made by just cutting expenses. Things like shopping around for better CC rates, better insurance rates, cheaper bandwidth, etc.) Also, if you leased your equipment, you could put the new tower up for less than $200 per month for EVERYTHING. ;) Call it what you will Marlon, but I believe you started your wireless operation around 1997 (going off your website). In 1997 we started our wireless service as well. Today we have over 3,000 connected wireless subs and are growing at over 100 per month. We have been profitable since our first year in business. This will be _another_ record breaking year for us. We have a backbone uptime of 99.99% over the last 2 years (including scheduled maintenance). Our wireless subs see a 99.9% uptime (including maintenance, interferance issues, blown AP's, etc). We deliver over 150Mbps of internet traffic during business hours using three diverse providers (DS3 via Qwest fiber, OC3 via seperate Qwest fiber, Level3 via fastethernet via seperate fiber via seperate NOC). We provide service to 8 entire school districts (out of a possible 10 in our entire 25,000 square mile coverage area). So, if I'm short sighted and you are not, why is my company 10x the size and making 10x the profit when both of us started at the same time? Travis Microserv Marlon K. Schafer wrote: - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 8:16 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Why wouldn't you just put up your own AP's and service the same area rather than give that customer away to the competition? Spectrum congestion. Cashflow Speed. Expanded coverage, very quickly, for no money. I would spend $5k and put up my own tower before I turn a "potential" customer away to the competition. I've done it many times over the years and it has always paid off. Once one person is connected, they tell their neighbors about it. Pretty soon an AP that was put up for a single customer has 10 or 20 customers on it. Um, the competitors ALREADY have networks in place! Doesn't seem to make business sense to me. Plus when they need tech support, how do you troubleshoot the competitors AP's? How do you do RF link tests and packet loss tests at 10:00PM when the customer is on the phone? I call the competitor on his cell phone. Just like he does with me. Your attidude, while pretty typical, is very short sighted. The more we work together to keep the airways clean and maximize the investments, the better all of our networks run and the faster we can grow. It's that silly ol' "Together we stand" thing. I was watching a group of kids play Red Rover the other day. I had to wonder how that game would turn out if the kids all tried to stand there and hold their OWN ground instead of working as a team. Travis Microserv Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: - Original Message - From: "George Rogato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 6:42 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: Two of my competitors just sat down for lunch and worked out a network sharing agreement. It's a handshake deal at this point though. Basically we carved up a hilltop laying out coverage zones for each of us, and we set a price for using each other's ap&#
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
Travis, I think you've misunderstood me. I'm not saying you don't have a good company. Clearly you do. I also think you're a bright guy. There are likely two reasons for the size difference in out companies. The biggest would be market size. My whole COUNTY has 10,000 people in it. Probably less than that by now. The next county over probably has less than 50,000. I have DSL, cable, FTTH (basically GIVEN away by a PUD), and several other wisps as competition on this very rural area. I started my business as a copier sales and service company in '95 with no inventory, no customers, a few tools an $3000 in the bank. It's fair to say that I didn't exactly have an easy time of it when starting out. I started the ISP in '97, not cause I thought it a good business, but because no one else would do it here. In '98 I started the homebrew DSL thing, and in '99 I started the wireless. In 2001 when we switched from mostly office equipment work to only internet, we had a TON of debt. An ex service manager had spent a year setting up his own company and when he left me I lost 50%(!!!) of my revenue in 1 month. I'd just moved into a brand new big building etc. Had more space and a LOT more of a lease payment than I needed due to the reduced business. Two... We've grown much slower than some, but I'm very much a man of my word. I've been careful NOT to put myself in a position of possible bankruptsy etc. We've been late sometimes but other than the lease on that building, I've never walked away from a single bill. Even when many I know have filed bankruptsy in far easier situations. Maybe that makes me a fool, but I'm a fool you know you can do honest business with. 3000 subs sounds great, till you think about companies with 30,000 or 300,000 subs. THAT's where *I* want to be. Actually, I want that $10,000,000 cash payment for my company. grin. Look again, at the original OWNERS of all of those cell phone companies that used to exist. Or the ones that had the cable companies etc. Why were those sales so valuable? I believe because of cooperation and standardization. Make it as cheap and easy to take over your operations as it can be. BTW, 1% per year in growth? Plus a 10% drop in costs? That's nice. Our gross sales have increased by 15 to 16% per year for the last three years. We're still not advertising either. And this year, so far, we're running 96% ahead of last years growth. I may be in a very small market, but I'm a damned good operator! laters, marlon - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 9:19 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Well, I seem to be holding my own ground pretty well... and I DON'T turn customers over to my competition... over 65 towers in operation, over 3,000 wireless subs, hundreds of DSL subs, almost 50 fiber subs (banks, hospitals, insurance, etc.)... and NO outside investors, stock holders, or any long-term debt whatsoever. :) (OT: Our annual gross revenue has been within 1% of the previous year for the past 4 years. However, I have managed to decrease our expenses by 10% every year. While this doesn't seem like a lot, realize we are a multi-million dollar company. There is EASY money to be made by just cutting expenses. Things like shopping around for better CC rates, better insurance rates, cheaper bandwidth, etc.) Also, if you leased your equipment, you could put the new tower up for less than $200 per month for EVERYTHING. ;) Call it what you will Marlon, but I believe you started your wireless operation around 1997 (going off your website). In 1997 we started our wireless service as well. Today we have over 3,000 connected wireless subs and are growing at over 100 per month. We have been profitable since our first year in business. This will be _another_ record breaking year for us. We have a backbone uptime of 99.99% over the last 2 years (including scheduled maintenance). Our wireless subs see a 99.9% uptime (including maintenance, interferance issues, blown AP's, etc). We deliver over 150Mbps of internet traffic during business hours using three diverse providers (DS3 via Qwest fiber, OC3 via seperate Qwest fiber, Level3 via fastethernet via seperate fiber via seperate NOC). We provide service to 8 entire school districts (out of a possible 10 in our entire 25,000 square mile coverage area). So, if I'm short sighted and you are not, why is my company 10x the size and making 10x the profit when both of us started at the same time? Travis Microserv Marlon K. Schafer wrote: ----- Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, April 26, 200
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
Have you ever driven from Odessa to Spokane? - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2007 6:22 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering > Marlon's main city is Odessa, WA. Within 65 miles is Spokane, WA that has hundreds of thousands of people, plus all the suburbs. > > It seems he is "short sighted" by not expanding into that market 6-8 years ago. Sixty miles is nothing... I have a single 73 mile shot that has been running 100% uptime for almost 2 years. > > Travis > Microserv > > Mark Koskenmaki wrote: > I have to come to Marlon's defense a bit here.The idaho falls / > pocatello area has DRAMATICALLY more people than the central washington > wasteland Marlon serves. > > You serve the populated areas of Bonneville, Bingham and Bannock Counties, > if I estimate your coverage. This approaches a quarter million people, at > least for the three counties, it does. > > Marlon's town is about 1000 people, Lincoln and Adams County together have > less than 30K people, and his main competition is a utility which is using > it's financial might to subsidize buried fiber to every home in Grant > County. > > I have seen Marlon's territory, driven through it, and seen his "operation". > It's a collection of small community markets. I would say that in spite of > being small, he probably has considerably higher market share than you do, > for the places he covers. > > None of this is to disparage anyone. But you can't compare apples and > oranges like that and have it make any sense at all. I suspect you'd > struggle mightily to adapt to marlon's situation... and vice versa. > > Let's not go off on each other here.. We have much better targets to aim > at. > > - Original Message - > From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 9:19 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering > > > Well, I seem to be holding my own ground pretty well... and I DON'T turn > customers over to my competition... over 65 towers in operation, over > 3,000 wireless subs, hundreds of DSL subs, almost 50 fiber subs (banks, > hospitals, insurance, etc.)... and NO outside investors, stock holders, > or any long-term debt whatsoever. :) > > (OT: Our annual gross revenue has been within 1% of the previous year > for the past 4 years. However, I have managed to decrease our expenses > by 10% every year. While this doesn't seem like a lot, realize we are a > multi-million dollar company. There is EASY money to be made by just > cutting expenses. Things like shopping around for better CC rates, > better insurance rates, cheaper bandwidth, etc.) > > Also, if you leased your equipment, you could put the new tower up for > less than $200 per month for EVERYTHING. ;) > > > Call it what you will Marlon, but I believe you started your wireless > operation around 1997 (going off your website). In 1997 we started our > wireless service as well. Today we have over 3,000 connected wireless > subs and are growing at over 100 per month. We have been profitable > since our first year in business. This will be _another_ record breaking > year for us. We have a backbone uptime of 99.99% over the last 2 years > (including scheduled maintenance). Our wireless subs see a 99.9% uptime > (including maintenance, interferance issues, blown AP's, etc). We > deliver over 150Mbps of internet traffic during business hours using > three diverse providers (DS3 via Qwest fiber, OC3 via seperate Qwest > fiber, Level3 via fastethernet via seperate fiber via seperate NOC). We > provide service to 8 entire school districts (out of a possible 10 in > our entire 25,000 square mile coverage area). > > > So, if I'm short sighted and you are not, why is my company 10x the size > and making 10x the profit when both of us started at the same time? > > Travis > Microserv > > Marlon K. Schafer wrote: > - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 8:16 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering > > > Why wouldn't you just put up your own AP's and service the same area > rather than give that customer away to the competition? > Spectrum congestion. > > Cashflow > > Speed. > > Expanded coverage, very quickly, for no money. > > I would spend $5k and put up my own tower before I turn a "potential" > customer away to the competition. I've done it many times o
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
Travis, Congratulations on your immense prosperity, your unrivaled brilliance, your incredible talent and your uncanny business acumen. I think I also saw your picture recently in People Magazine's "World's Most Beautiful People - 2006" article. jack Travis Johnson wrote: Marlon's main city is Odessa, WA. Within 65 miles is Spokane, WA that has hundreds of thousands of people, plus all the suburbs. It seems he is "short sighted" by not expanding into that market 6-8 years ago. Sixty miles is nothing... I have a single 73 mile shot that has been running 100% uptime for almost 2 years. Travis Microserv Mark Koskenmaki wrote: I have to come to Marlon's defense a bit here.The idaho falls / pocatello area has DRAMATICALLY more people than the central washington wasteland Marlon serves. You serve the populated areas of Bonneville, Bingham and Bannock Counties, if I estimate your coverage. This approaches a quarter million people, at least for the three counties, it does. Marlon's town is about 1000 people, Lincoln and Adams County together have less than 30K people, and his main competition is a utility which is using it's financial might to subsidize buried fiber to every home in Grant County. I have seen Marlon's territory, driven through it, and seen his "operation". It's a collection of small community markets. I would say that in spite of being small, he probably has considerably higher market share than you do, for the places he covers. None of this is to disparage anyone. But you can't compare apples and oranges like that and have it make any sense at all. I suspect you'd struggle mightily to adapt to marlon's situation... and vice versa. Let's not go off on each other here.. We have much better targets to aim at. - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 9:19 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Well, I seem to be holding my own ground pretty well... and I DON'T turn customers over to my competition... over 65 towers in operation, over 3,000 wireless subs, hundreds of DSL subs, almost 50 fiber subs (banks, hospitals, insurance, etc.)... and NO outside investors, stock holders, or any long-term debt whatsoever. :) (OT: Our annual gross revenue has been within 1% of the previous year for the past 4 years. However, I have managed to decrease our expenses by 10% every year. While this doesn't seem like a lot, realize we are a multi-million dollar company. There is EASY money to be made by just cutting expenses. Things like shopping around for better CC rates, better insurance rates, cheaper bandwidth, etc.) Also, if you leased your equipment, you could put the new tower up for less than $200 per month for EVERYTHING. ;) Call it what you will Marlon, but I believe you started your wireless operation around 1997 (going off your website). In 1997 we started our wireless service as well. Today we have over 3,000 connected wireless subs and are growing at over 100 per month. We have been profitable since our first year in business. This will be _another_ record breaking year for us. We have a backbone uptime of 99.99% over the last 2 years (including scheduled maintenance). Our wireless subs see a 99.9% uptime (including maintenance, interferance issues, blown AP's, etc). We deliver over 150Mbps of internet traffic during business hours using three diverse providers (DS3 via Qwest fiber, OC3 via seperate Qwest fiber, Level3 via fastethernet via seperate fiber via seperate NOC). We provide service to 8 entire school districts (out of a possible 10 in our entire 25,000 square mile coverage area). So, if I'm short sighted and you are not, why is my company 10x the size and making 10x the profit when both of us started at the same time? Travis Microserv Marlon K. Schafer wrote: - Original Message ----- From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 8:16 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Why wouldn't you just put up your own AP's and service the same area rather than give that customer away to the competition? Spectrum congestion. Cashflow Speed. Expanded coverage, very quickly, for no money. I would spend $5k and put up my own tower before I turn a "potential" customer away to the competition. I've done it many times over the years and it has always paid off. Once one person is connected, they tell their neighbors about it. Pretty soon an AP that was put up for a single customer has 10 or 20 customers on it. Um, the competitors ALREADY have networks in place! Doesn't seem to make business sense to me. Plus when they need tech support, how do you troubleshoot the compet
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
Marlon's main city is Odessa, WA. Within 65 miles is Spokane, WA that has hundreds of thousands of people, plus all the suburbs. It seems he is "short sighted" by not expanding into that market 6-8 years ago. Sixty miles is nothing... I have a single 73 mile shot that has been running 100% uptime for almost 2 years. Travis Microserv Mark Koskenmaki wrote: I have to come to Marlon's defense a bit here.The idaho falls / pocatello area has DRAMATICALLY more people than the central washington wasteland Marlon serves. You serve the populated areas of Bonneville, Bingham and Bannock Counties, if I estimate your coverage. This approaches a quarter million people, at least for the three counties, it does. Marlon's town is about 1000 people, Lincoln and Adams County together have less than 30K people, and his main competition is a utility which is using it's financial might to subsidize buried fiber to every home in Grant County. I have seen Marlon's territory, driven through it, and seen his "operation". It's a collection of small community markets. I would say that in spite of being small, he probably has considerably higher market share than you do, for the places he covers. None of this is to disparage anyone. But you can't compare apples and oranges like that and have it make any sense at all. I suspect you'd struggle mightily to adapt to marlon's situation... and vice versa. Let's not go off on each other here.. We have much better targets to aim at. - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 9:19 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Well, I seem to be holding my own ground pretty well... and I DON'T turn customers over to my competition... over 65 towers in operation, over 3,000 wireless subs, hundreds of DSL subs, almost 50 fiber subs (banks, hospitals, insurance, etc.)... and NO outside investors, stock holders, or any long-term debt whatsoever. :) (OT: Our annual gross revenue has been within 1% of the previous year for the past 4 years. However, I have managed to decrease our expenses by 10% every year. While this doesn't seem like a lot, realize we are a multi-million dollar company. There is EASY money to be made by just cutting expenses. Things like shopping around for better CC rates, better insurance rates, cheaper bandwidth, etc.) Also, if you leased your equipment, you could put the new tower up for less than $200 per month for EVERYTHING. ;) Call it what you will Marlon, but I believe you started your wireless operation around 1997 (going off your website). In 1997 we started our wireless service as well. Today we have over 3,000 connected wireless subs and are growing at over 100 per month. We have been profitable since our first year in business. This will be _another_ record breaking year for us. We have a backbone uptime of 99.99% over the last 2 years (including scheduled maintenance). Our wireless subs see a 99.9% uptime (including maintenance, interferance issues, blown AP's, etc). We deliver over 150Mbps of internet traffic during business hours using three diverse providers (DS3 via Qwest fiber, OC3 via seperate Qwest fiber, Level3 via fastethernet via seperate fiber via seperate NOC). We provide service to 8 entire school districts (out of a possible 10 in our entire 25,000 square mile coverage area). So, if I'm short sighted and you are not, why is my company 10x the size and making 10x the profit when both of us started at the same time? Travis Microserv Marlon K. Schafer wrote: - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 8:16 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Why wouldn't you just put up your own AP's and service the same area rather than give that customer away to the competition? Spectrum congestion. Cashflow Speed. Expanded coverage, very quickly, for no money. I would spend $5k and put up my own tower before I turn a "potential" customer away to the competition. I've done it many times over the years and it has always paid off. Once one person is connected, they tell their neighbors about it. Pretty soon an AP that was put up for a single customer has 10 or 20 customers on it. Um, the competitors ALREADY have networks in place! Doesn't seem to make business sense to me. Plus when they need tech support, how do you troubleshoot the competitors AP's? How do you do RF link tests and packet loss tests at 10:00PM when the customer is on the phone? I call the competitor on his cell phone. Just like he does with me. Your attidude, whi
RE: [WISPA] WISP Peering
Travis, a little perspective...you're in a technology hot-bed area of the country! Marlon's not. MUCH tougher for Marlon, in perspective, to get where he's gotten to today. There's probably only one school / one high school in Marlon's coverage area ? Odessa ain't big. :) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Travis Johnson Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2007 12:20 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Well, I seem to be holding my own ground pretty well... and I DON'T turn customers over to my competition... over 65 towers in operation, over 3,000 wireless subs, hundreds of DSL subs, almost 50 fiber subs (banks, hospitals, insurance, etc.)... and NO outside investors, stock holders, or any long-term debt whatsoever. :) (OT: Our annual gross revenue has been within 1% of the previous year for the past 4 years. However, I have managed to decrease our expenses by 10% every year. While this doesn't seem like a lot, realize we are a multi-million dollar company. There is EASY money to be made by just cutting expenses. Things like shopping around for better CC rates, better insurance rates, cheaper bandwidth, etc.) Also, if you leased your equipment, you could put the new tower up for less than $200 per month for EVERYTHING. ;) Call it what you will Marlon, but I believe you started your wireless operation around 1997 (going off your website). In 1997 we started our wireless service as well. Today we have over 3,000 connected wireless subs and are growing at over 100 per month. We have been profitable since our first year in business. This will be _another_ record breaking year for us. We have a backbone uptime of 99.99% over the last 2 years (including scheduled maintenance). Our wireless subs see a 99.9% uptime (including maintenance, interferance issues, blown AP's, etc). We deliver over 150Mbps of internet traffic during business hours using three diverse providers (DS3 via Qwest fiber, OC3 via seperate Qwest fiber, Level3 via fastethernet via seperate fiber via seperate NOC). We provide service to 8 entire school districts (out of a possible 10 in our entire 25,000 square mile coverage area). So, if I'm short sighted and you are not, why is my company 10x the size and making 10x the profit when both of us started at the same time? Travis Microserv Marlon K. Schafer wrote: > > - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 8:16 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering > > >> Why wouldn't you just put up your own AP's and service the same area >> rather than give that customer away to the competition? > > Spectrum congestion. > > Cashflow > > Speed. > > Expanded coverage, very quickly, for no money. > >> >> I would spend $5k and put up my own tower before I turn a "potential" >> customer away to the competition. I've done it many times over the >> years and it has always paid off. Once one person is connected, they >> tell their neighbors about it. Pretty soon an AP that was put up for >> a single customer has 10 or 20 customers on it. > > Um, the competitors ALREADY have networks in place! > >> >> Doesn't seem to make business sense to me. Plus when they need tech >> support, how do you troubleshoot the competitors AP's? How do you do >> RF link tests and packet loss tests at 10:00PM when the customer is >> on the phone? > > I call the competitor on his cell phone. Just like he does with me. > > Your attidude, while pretty typical, is very short sighted. The more > we work together to keep the airways clean and maximize the > investments, the better all of our networks run and the faster we can > grow. > > It's that silly ol' "Together we stand" thing. > > I was watching a group of kids play Red Rover the other day. I had to > wonder how that game would turn out if the kids all tried to stand > there and hold their OWN ground instead of working as a team. > >> >> Travis >> Microserv >> >> Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: >>> >>> - Original Message - From: "George Rogato" >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "WISPA General List" >>> Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 6:42 PM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering >>> >>> >>>> Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: >>>>> Two of my competitors just sat down for lunch and worked out a >>>>> network sharing agreement. It's a handshake deal at this point >>>&g
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
I have to come to Marlon's defense a bit here.The idaho falls / pocatello area has DRAMATICALLY more people than the central washington wasteland Marlon serves. You serve the populated areas of Bonneville, Bingham and Bannock Counties, if I estimate your coverage. This approaches a quarter million people, at least for the three counties, it does. Marlon's town is about 1000 people, Lincoln and Adams County together have less than 30K people, and his main competition is a utility which is using it's financial might to subsidize buried fiber to every home in Grant County. I have seen Marlon's territory, driven through it, and seen his "operation". It's a collection of small community markets. I would say that in spite of being small, he probably has considerably higher market share than you do, for the places he covers. None of this is to disparage anyone. But you can't compare apples and oranges like that and have it make any sense at all. I suspect you'd struggle mightily to adapt to marlon's situation... and vice versa. Let's not go off on each other here.. We have much better targets to aim at. - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 9:19 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering > Well, I seem to be holding my own ground pretty well... and I DON'T turn > customers over to my competition... over 65 towers in operation, over > 3,000 wireless subs, hundreds of DSL subs, almost 50 fiber subs (banks, > hospitals, insurance, etc.)... and NO outside investors, stock holders, > or any long-term debt whatsoever. :) > > (OT: Our annual gross revenue has been within 1% of the previous year > for the past 4 years. However, I have managed to decrease our expenses > by 10% every year. While this doesn't seem like a lot, realize we are a > multi-million dollar company. There is EASY money to be made by just > cutting expenses. Things like shopping around for better CC rates, > better insurance rates, cheaper bandwidth, etc.) > > Also, if you leased your equipment, you could put the new tower up for > less than $200 per month for EVERYTHING. ;) > > > Call it what you will Marlon, but I believe you started your wireless > operation around 1997 (going off your website). In 1997 we started our > wireless service as well. Today we have over 3,000 connected wireless > subs and are growing at over 100 per month. We have been profitable > since our first year in business. This will be _another_ record breaking > year for us. We have a backbone uptime of 99.99% over the last 2 years > (including scheduled maintenance). Our wireless subs see a 99.9% uptime > (including maintenance, interferance issues, blown AP's, etc). We > deliver over 150Mbps of internet traffic during business hours using > three diverse providers (DS3 via Qwest fiber, OC3 via seperate Qwest > fiber, Level3 via fastethernet via seperate fiber via seperate NOC). We > provide service to 8 entire school districts (out of a possible 10 in > our entire 25,000 square mile coverage area). > > > So, if I'm short sighted and you are not, why is my company 10x the size > and making 10x the profit when both of us started at the same time? > > Travis > Microserv > > Marlon K. Schafer wrote: > > > > - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "WISPA General List" > > Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 8:16 PM > > Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering > > > > > >> Why wouldn't you just put up your own AP's and service the same area > >> rather than give that customer away to the competition? > > > > Spectrum congestion. > > > > Cashflow > > > > Speed. > > > > Expanded coverage, very quickly, for no money. > > > >> > >> I would spend $5k and put up my own tower before I turn a "potential" > >> customer away to the competition. I've done it many times over the > >> years and it has always paid off. Once one person is connected, they > >> tell their neighbors about it. Pretty soon an AP that was put up for > >> a single customer has 10 or 20 customers on it. > > > > Um, the competitors ALREADY have networks in place! > > > >> > >> Doesn't seem to make business sense to me. Plus when they need tech > >> support, how do you troubleshoot the competitors AP's? How do you do > >> RF link tests and packet loss tests at 10:00PM when the customer is > >> on the phone? > > > > I call the competitor on his cell phone.
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
Well, I seem to be holding my own ground pretty well... and I DON'T turn customers over to my competition... over 65 towers in operation, over 3,000 wireless subs, hundreds of DSL subs, almost 50 fiber subs (banks, hospitals, insurance, etc.)... and NO outside investors, stock holders, or any long-term debt whatsoever. :) (OT: Our annual gross revenue has been within 1% of the previous year for the past 4 years. However, I have managed to decrease our expenses by 10% every year. While this doesn't seem like a lot, realize we are a multi-million dollar company. There is EASY money to be made by just cutting expenses. Things like shopping around for better CC rates, better insurance rates, cheaper bandwidth, etc.) Also, if you leased your equipment, you could put the new tower up for less than $200 per month for EVERYTHING. ;) Call it what you will Marlon, but I believe you started your wireless operation around 1997 (going off your website). In 1997 we started our wireless service as well. Today we have over 3,000 connected wireless subs and are growing at over 100 per month. We have been profitable since our first year in business. This will be _another_ record breaking year for us. We have a backbone uptime of 99.99% over the last 2 years (including scheduled maintenance). Our wireless subs see a 99.9% uptime (including maintenance, interferance issues, blown AP's, etc). We deliver over 150Mbps of internet traffic during business hours using three diverse providers (DS3 via Qwest fiber, OC3 via seperate Qwest fiber, Level3 via fastethernet via seperate fiber via seperate NOC). We provide service to 8 entire school districts (out of a possible 10 in our entire 25,000 square mile coverage area). So, if I'm short sighted and you are not, why is my company 10x the size and making 10x the profit when both of us started at the same time? Travis Microserv Marlon K. Schafer wrote: - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 8:16 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Why wouldn't you just put up your own AP's and service the same area rather than give that customer away to the competition? Spectrum congestion. Cashflow Speed. Expanded coverage, very quickly, for no money. I would spend $5k and put up my own tower before I turn a "potential" customer away to the competition. I've done it many times over the years and it has always paid off. Once one person is connected, they tell their neighbors about it. Pretty soon an AP that was put up for a single customer has 10 or 20 customers on it. Um, the competitors ALREADY have networks in place! Doesn't seem to make business sense to me. Plus when they need tech support, how do you troubleshoot the competitors AP's? How do you do RF link tests and packet loss tests at 10:00PM when the customer is on the phone? I call the competitor on his cell phone. Just like he does with me. Your attidude, while pretty typical, is very short sighted. The more we work together to keep the airways clean and maximize the investments, the better all of our networks run and the faster we can grow. It's that silly ol' "Together we stand" thing. I was watching a group of kids play Red Rover the other day. I had to wonder how that game would turn out if the kids all tried to stand there and hold their OWN ground instead of working as a team. Travis Microserv Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: - Original Message - From: "George Rogato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 6:42 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: Two of my competitors just sat down for lunch and worked out a network sharing agreement. It's a handshake deal at this point though. Basically we carved up a hilltop laying out coverage zones for each of us, and we set a price for using each other's ap's. Marlon Hey I think thats a good thing you've done there Marlon, getting along and even doing business with your competitors. Yeah. It's something that the three of us have already been doing for a couple of years. We sell on each other's ap's at the same price. The only catch is that each of us has to live under the bw, and bit cap rules of the other guys network vs. our own. But that seems perfectly fair to me. We also handle all tech support for the cusotmer. The customer should NEVER contact the other isp. We have however, shown up together at problematic customers and worked jointly to fix any issues. But where do you think the line would be drawn in respect to anti competitive practices? I'm not sure. We've not had that come up yet. Did you have a specific
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
- Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 8:16 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Why wouldn't you just put up your own AP's and service the same area rather than give that customer away to the competition? Spectrum congestion. Cashflow Speed. Expanded coverage, very quickly, for no money. I would spend $5k and put up my own tower before I turn a "potential" customer away to the competition. I've done it many times over the years and it has always paid off. Once one person is connected, they tell their neighbors about it. Pretty soon an AP that was put up for a single customer has 10 or 20 customers on it. Um, the competitors ALREADY have networks in place! Doesn't seem to make business sense to me. Plus when they need tech support, how do you troubleshoot the competitors AP's? How do you do RF link tests and packet loss tests at 10:00PM when the customer is on the phone? I call the competitor on his cell phone. Just like he does with me. Your attidude, while pretty typical, is very short sighted. The more we work together to keep the airways clean and maximize the investments, the better all of our networks run and the faster we can grow. It's that silly ol' "Together we stand" thing. I was watching a group of kids play Red Rover the other day. I had to wonder how that game would turn out if the kids all tried to stand there and hold their OWN ground instead of working as a team. Travis Microserv Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: - Original Message - From: "George Rogato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 6:42 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: Two of my competitors just sat down for lunch and worked out a network sharing agreement. It's a handshake deal at this point though. Basically we carved up a hilltop laying out coverage zones for each of us, and we set a price for using each other's ap's. Marlon Hey I think thats a good thing you've done there Marlon, getting along and even doing business with your competitors. Yeah. It's something that the three of us have already been doing for a couple of years. We sell on each other's ap's at the same price. The only catch is that each of us has to live under the bw, and bit cap rules of the other guys network vs. our own. But that seems perfectly fair to me. We also handle all tech support for the cusotmer. The customer should NEVER contact the other isp. We have however, shown up together at problematic customers and worked jointly to fix any issues. But where do you think the line would be drawn in respect to anti competitive practices? I'm not sure. We've not had that come up yet. Did you have a specific situation in mind? -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
Yes, but my upstreams are people like AT&T, Qwest, Level3, etc. and I am dealing with trained and experienced engineers (especially once you mention BGP). Yes, mistakes happen all the time... but _intentional_ errors to cause outages could be a different thing. Travis Microserv Mike Hammett wrote: That could also happen anywhere on the net, though. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 12:24 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering This is not correct. Let's do an example: WISP-A is getting bandwidth from Provider A. They have a /20 network. Provider A has to allow that /20 in their BGP filters. WISP-B is getting bandwidth from Provider B. They have a /20 network. Provider B has to allow that /20 in their BGP fitlers. WISP-A and WISP-B setup a peering, but also to allow failover if either Provider goes down. Thus Provider A and Provider B both have to allow BOTH /20 networks in their BGP filters. Now, for some unknown reason, WISP-B decides to start announcing WISP-A's /20 network as local to their network. BGP will become very confused, and thus WISP-A will essentially be down. All of this with a single network entry by WISP-B... they just wiped out WISP-A. Travis Microserv Zack Kneisley wrote: On 4/26/07, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: My personal concern would be turning over my IP block to my competition. They would have to have enough control to allow BGP routes from their upstream. Technically they could misconfigure a router accidentally and take your entire network down. :( That is what BGP filtering and prefixes are about. Either you peer correctly or incorrectly and don't peer. No turning over blocks happen. Travis Microserv Mike Hammett wrote: > If they're network peering, they'd be connecting each other's networks > together to exchange local traffic that way. They could also have an > alliance where if someone's Internet feeds go out, they use another > WISP's Internet feed until restoration. > This is great and what a reliable network is made of. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
That could also happen anywhere on the net, though. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Travis Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 12:24 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering This is not correct. Let's do an example: WISP-A is getting bandwidth from Provider A. They have a /20 network. Provider A has to allow that /20 in their BGP filters. WISP-B is getting bandwidth from Provider B. They have a /20 network. Provider B has to allow that /20 in their BGP fitlers. WISP-A and WISP-B setup a peering, but also to allow failover if either Provider goes down. Thus Provider A and Provider B both have to allow BOTH /20 networks in their BGP filters. Now, for some unknown reason, WISP-B decides to start announcing WISP-A's /20 network as local to their network. BGP will become very confused, and thus WISP-A will essentially be down. All of this with a single network entry by WISP-B... they just wiped out WISP-A. Travis Microserv Zack Kneisley wrote: On 4/26/07, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: My personal concern would be turning over my IP block to my competition. They would have to have enough control to allow BGP routes from their upstream. Technically they could misconfigure a router accidentally and take your entire network down. :( That is what BGP filtering and prefixes are about. Either you peer correctly or incorrectly and don't peer. No turning over blocks happen. Travis Microserv Mike Hammett wrote: > If they're network peering, they'd be connecting each other's networks > together to exchange local traffic that way. They could also have an > alliance where if someone's Internet feeds go out, they use another > WISP's Internet feed until restoration. > This is great and what a reliable network is made of. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
It could also be argued that the direction of the traffic may not matter relating to fees, when it is all primarilly local traffic. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Mark Koskenmaki" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 2:58 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering At one time, a local operator here in the valley tried to set this up, not with BGP and classic peering, but simple static routing to route just that ISP's clients traffic to them.Thus, traffic bound for each other went through a dedicated pipe. of course, this was simple and cheap, back when everyone was connected via frame relay and adding a PVC wasn't expensive or difficult. It would be slightly more complex for WISP's to do this, but for some, it might save a bit of bandwidth through the provider. I don't really think there's all that much in terms of percentage, of traffic from residential or even SOHO customes to other residential / soho customers, so I don't see much value in that. instead, it might seem a bit more... useful?... to instead do classic peering with each other, all at a fixed per-gig transfer or per KByte flow charge for traffic. If we both have a lot of traffic, but it's equal to me from you and to you from me, then the charges cancel each other.It would also be a means of adding redundancy to your own network, and decreased downtime, better paths (lower hop counts). - Original Message - From: "Jeromie Reeves" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 12:22 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering You would classically arrange a peering agreement. You hand each other a equal amount of capacity (say 1mbit) and a BGP table. You each use the link like another upstream provider, balancing routes vs capacity vs (what ever else you want). Some peerages have a set cost per bit transfered and the groups settle up monthly. The main problem I see is one entity will be at a disadvantage then the other due to size. Say isp A has 2 peers, the other has 4. That means isp B will "need" isp A's links less then B needs A's. There is a very (in)famous case of exactly that (AOL and Cogent). How do you value your peering abilities vs those of someone else, with more or less peers and more or less capacity. On 4/26/07, Jory Privett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have two PoPs where I have bandwidth for my network. In the same area I > know of at least 4 other WISPs that have bandwidth also. I was just wanting > to establish a link to one or more of them and start routing (BGP most > likely) and pass traffic over each others network. This would allow each to > have more capacity and redundancy and not have to pay any large amount for > it. I know all of the big players do it and it is the basic fabric the > internet is made of. I was just wondering if any WISPs do it and how? > > Jory Privett > WCCS > > ----- Original Message - > From: "Dawn DiPietro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 1:48 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering > > > > Jory, > > > > I am not sure what you are trying to do with the other WISP's in your > > area. Can you a little more clear on what you are thinking of? > > > > Regards, > > Dawn DiPietro > > > > Jory Privett wrote: > >> There are several WISP in my area I was wanting to talk to some of them > >> about bandwidth peering. I know that most will not want anything to do > >> with it since they refuse to co-operate in any other way but I > >> wanted to > >> make the effort. Has anyone else done this type of thing? What > >> paperwork needs to be done to protect each company? How do you control > >> throughput to and from each network and routing issues? Any help > >> her > >> would be greatly appreciated. > >> > >> Jory Privett > >> WCCS > >> > > > > -- > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > -- > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
Take note that there is no need to use BGP to do peering. If the goal is to just peer to have an optimal single path to the other's network. It can be done with a Static Route on each side. (of course would use something liek OSPF to re-route it through your network, depending where the peer point is) I recommend seperating Peer traffic from shared transit traffic. Each having their own VLAN through your bandwidth tracking software. You then need routers or switches that can pass larger than 1500 packets to facilitate the transfer between you. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Jeromie Reeves" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 2:22 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering You would classically arrange a peering agreement. You hand each other a equal amount of capacity (say 1mbit) and a BGP table. You each use the link like another upstream provider, balancing routes vs capacity vs (what ever else you want). Some peerages have a set cost per bit transfered and the groups settle up monthly. The main problem I see is one entity will be at a disadvantage then the other due to size. Say isp A has 2 peers, the other has 4. That means isp B will "need" isp A's links less then B needs A's. There is a very (in)famous case of exactly that (AOL and Cogent). How do you value your peering abilities vs those of someone else, with more or less peers and more or less capacity. On 4/26/07, Jory Privett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I have two PoPs where I have bandwidth for my network. In the same area I know of at least 4 other WISPs that have bandwidth also. I was just wanting to establish a link to one or more of them and start routing (BGP most likely) and pass traffic over each others network. This would allow each to have more capacity and redundancy and not have to pay any large amount for it. I know all of the big players do it and it is the basic fabric the internet is made of. I was just wondering if any WISPs do it and how? Jory Privett WCCS - Original Message - From: "Dawn DiPietro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 1:48 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering > Jory, > > I am not sure what you are trying to do with the other WISP's in your > area. Can you a little more clear on what you are thinking of? > > Regards, > Dawn DiPietro > > Jory Privett wrote: >> There are several WISP in my area I was wanting to talk to some of >> them >> about bandwidth peering. I know that most will not want anything to >> do >> with it since they refuse to co-operate in any other way but I wanted >> to >> make the effort. Has anyone else done this type of thing? What >> paperwork needs to be done to protect each company? How do you control >> throughput to and from each network and routing issues? Any help her >> would be greatly appreciated. >> >> Jory Privett >> WCCS >> > > -- > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
Jory, One thing you'll learn if you haven't allready is that although this is a world of fiece competitors, but even the fireces of competitors will partner with their other competitors, if there is a mutual benefit and no risk. The problem when most ISPs attempt to work togeather is that one party will rarely be willing to give up their dominent upper hand in the deal. In other words, one party wants to be a vendor to the other, instead of it being a true partnership on level ground. Peering also has many technical considerations, and the best and cheapest path between WISPs is not always across their own network. Often the required micro management of the peering relationship does not make it cost justified for the limited benefit. For example, will the peer happen from the same place your transit is? The same place where you have QOS and Intrusion detections systems? Or do they need to be replicated for the peering relationship? Is it a Cross connect, or a sizable investment in infrastructure? Do both parties run a routed network to make sure your network is not doubly used bouncing ro reach your peer location? The first step is to identify a benefit for the peering, which is mutually and truely beneficial. Second identify wether it technically makes since, based on the anticipated traffic that would be transfered between you, and potential bottlenecks on your backbone. If so, its worth pursuing. Why would someone turn it down if the numbers work after being crunched? Peering is a great way to start to establish a better working relationship with your neighboring WISP. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "Jory Privett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 1:29 PM Subject: [WISPA] WISP Peering There are several WISP in my area I was wanting to talk to some of them about bandwidth peering. I know that most will not want anything to do with it since they refuse to co-operate in any other way but I wanted to make the effort. Has anyone else done this type of thing? What paperwork needs to be done to protect each company? How do you control throughput to and from each network and routing issues? Any help her would be greatly appreciated. Jory Privett WCCS -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
Yes... but this process takes 10-20 minutes or more. Our backbone (which also serves customers via redundant fiber lines) can't be down for that long or we have VERY upset customers requesting credits, refunds, etc. Travis Microserv Adam Kennedy wrote: That's where peering agreements come into play. Last case scenario you (WISP-A) just want to drop peering entirely but WISP-B doesn't stop advertising your route, then call up whoever their upstream is and talk to their NOC. If the /20 is your allocation from ARIN, and you aren't peering anymore, explain the situation to the NOC and they can stop accepting your /20 from WISP-B's advertisement. Easy as that. Travis Johnson wrote: This is not correct. Let's do an example: WISP-A is getting bandwidth from Provider A. They have a /20 network. Provider A has to allow that /20 in their BGP filters. WISP-B is getting bandwidth from Provider B. They have a /20 network. Provider B has to allow that /20 in their BGP fitlers. WISP-A and WISP-B setup a peering, but also to allow failover if either Provider goes down. Thus Provider A and Provider B both have to allow BOTH /20 networks in their BGP filters. Now, for some unknown reason, WISP-B decides to start announcing WISP-A's /20 network as local to their network. BGP will become very confused, and thus WISP-A will essentially be down. All of this with a single network entry by WISP-B... they just wiped out WISP-A. Travis Microserv Zack Kneisley wrote: On 4/26/07, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: My personal concern would be turning over my IP block to my competition. They would have to have enough control to allow BGP routes from their upstream. Technically they could misconfigure a router accidentally and take your entire network down. :( That is what BGP filtering and prefixes are about. Either you peer correctly or incorrectly and don't peer. No turning over blocks happen. Travis Microserv Mike Hammett wrote: > If they're network peering, they'd be connecting each other's networks > together to exchange local traffic that way. They could also have an > alliance where if someone's Internet feeds go out, they use another > WISP's Internet feed until restoration. > This is great and what a reliable network is made of. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] WISP Peering
Sometimes putting up your own tower isn't an option for a variety of reasons. However, I agree the idea of "hanging" a client of ours off of somebody else's system doesn't give me the warm and fuzzies either for obvious reasons. Sometimes it's best to just refer the potential client to the ISP that can best service them. We have done this countless times both directions and often there is a referral fee paid if the lead pans out. Best, Brad -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Travis Johnson Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 10:16 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Why wouldn't you just put up your own AP's and service the same area rather than give that customer away to the competition? I would spend $5k and put up my own tower before I turn a "potential" customer away to the competition. I've done it many times over the years and it has always paid off. Once one person is connected, they tell their neighbors about it. Pretty soon an AP that was put up for a single customer has 10 or 20 customers on it. Doesn't seem to make business sense to me. Plus when they need tech support, how do you troubleshoot the competitors AP's? How do you do RF link tests and packet loss tests at 10:00PM when the customer is on the phone? Travis Microserv Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: > > - Original Message - From: "George Rogato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 6:42 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering > > >> Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: >>> Two of my competitors just sat down for lunch and worked out a >>> network sharing agreement. It's a handshake deal at this point though. >>> >>> Basically we carved up a hilltop laying out coverage zones for each >>> of us, and we set a price for using each other's ap's. >>> >>> Marlon >> >> Hey I think thats a good thing you've done there Marlon, getting >> along and even doing business with your competitors. > > Yeah. It's something that the three of us have already been doing for > a couple of years. We sell on each other's ap's at the same price. > The only catch is that each of us has to live under the bw, and bit > cap rules of the other guys network vs. our own. But that seems > perfectly fair to me. > > We also handle all tech support for the cusotmer. The customer should > NEVER contact the other isp. We have however, shown up together at > problematic customers and worked jointly to fix any issues. > >> >> But where do you think the line would be drawn in respect to anti >> competitive practices? > > I'm not sure. We've not had that come up yet. > > Did you have a specific situation in mind? > >> >> -- >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] WISP Peering
You make it sound like that can happen in a matter of minutes or even seconds. Not likely the case. All the while your clients are getting hosed due to the negligence of another. Best, Brad -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Adam Kennedy Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 1:11 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering That's where peering agreements come into play. Last case scenario you (WISP-A) just want to drop peering entirely but WISP-B doesn't stop advertising your route, then call up whoever their upstream is and talk to their NOC. If the /20 is your allocation from ARIN, and you aren't peering anymore, explain the situation to the NOC and they can stop accepting your /20 from WISP-B's advertisement. Easy as that. Travis Johnson wrote: > This is not correct. Let's do an example: > > WISP-A is getting bandwidth from Provider A. They have a /20 network. > Provider A has to allow that /20 in their BGP filters. > WISP-B is getting bandwidth from Provider B. They have a /20 network. > Provider B has to allow that /20 in their BGP fitlers. > > WISP-A and WISP-B setup a peering, but also to allow failover if either > Provider goes down. Thus Provider A and Provider B both have to allow > BOTH /20 networks in their BGP filters. > > Now, for some unknown reason, WISP-B decides to start announcing > WISP-A's /20 network as local to their network. BGP will become very > confused, and thus WISP-A will essentially be down. All of this with a > single network entry by WISP-B... they just wiped out WISP-A. > > Travis > Microserv > > Zack Kneisley wrote: >> On 4/26/07, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> My personal concern would be turning over my IP block to my competition. >>> They would have to have enough control to allow BGP routes from their >>> upstream. Technically they could misconfigure a router accidentally and >>> take your entire network down. :( >> >> That is what BGP filtering and prefixes are about. Either you peer >> correctly or incorrectly and don't peer. No turning over blocks >> happen. >> >>> >>> Travis >>> Microserv >>> >>> Mike Hammett wrote: >>> > If they're network peering, they'd be connecting each other's networks >>> > together to exchange local traffic that way. They could also have an >>> > alliance where if someone's Internet feeds go out, they use another >>> > WISP's Internet feed until restoration. >>> > >> >> This is great and what a reliable network is made of. -- Adam Kennedy Network Administrator Cyberlink International Phone: 888-293-3693 Fax: 888-293-3995 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
That's where peering agreements come into play. Last case scenario you (WISP-A) just want to drop peering entirely but WISP-B doesn't stop advertising your route, then call up whoever their upstream is and talk to their NOC. If the /20 is your allocation from ARIN, and you aren't peering anymore, explain the situation to the NOC and they can stop accepting your /20 from WISP-B's advertisement. Easy as that. Travis Johnson wrote: This is not correct. Let's do an example: WISP-A is getting bandwidth from Provider A. They have a /20 network. Provider A has to allow that /20 in their BGP filters. WISP-B is getting bandwidth from Provider B. They have a /20 network. Provider B has to allow that /20 in their BGP fitlers. WISP-A and WISP-B setup a peering, but also to allow failover if either Provider goes down. Thus Provider A and Provider B both have to allow BOTH /20 networks in their BGP filters. Now, for some unknown reason, WISP-B decides to start announcing WISP-A's /20 network as local to their network. BGP will become very confused, and thus WISP-A will essentially be down. All of this with a single network entry by WISP-B... they just wiped out WISP-A. Travis Microserv Zack Kneisley wrote: On 4/26/07, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: My personal concern would be turning over my IP block to my competition. They would have to have enough control to allow BGP routes from their upstream. Technically they could misconfigure a router accidentally and take your entire network down. :( That is what BGP filtering and prefixes are about. Either you peer correctly or incorrectly and don't peer. No turning over blocks happen. Travis Microserv Mike Hammett wrote: > If they're network peering, they'd be connecting each other's networks > together to exchange local traffic that way. They could also have an > alliance where if someone's Internet feeds go out, they use another > WISP's Internet feed until restoration. > This is great and what a reliable network is made of. -- Adam Kennedy Network Administrator Cyberlink International Phone: 888-293-3693 Fax: 888-293-3995 -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
This is not correct. Let's do an example: WISP-A is getting bandwidth from Provider A. They have a /20 network. Provider A has to allow that /20 in their BGP filters. WISP-B is getting bandwidth from Provider B. They have a /20 network. Provider B has to allow that /20 in their BGP fitlers. WISP-A and WISP-B setup a peering, but also to allow failover if either Provider goes down. Thus Provider A and Provider B both have to allow BOTH /20 networks in their BGP filters. Now, for some unknown reason, WISP-B decides to start announcing WISP-A's /20 network as local to their network. BGP will become very confused, and thus WISP-A will essentially be down. All of this with a single network entry by WISP-B... they just wiped out WISP-A. Travis Microserv Zack Kneisley wrote: On 4/26/07, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: My personal concern would be turning over my IP block to my competition. They would have to have enough control to allow BGP routes from their upstream. Technically they could misconfigure a router accidentally and take your entire network down. :( That is what BGP filtering and prefixes are about. Either you peer correctly or incorrectly and don't peer. No turning over blocks happen. Travis Microserv Mike Hammett wrote: > If they're network peering, they'd be connecting each other's networks > together to exchange local traffic that way. They could also have an > alliance where if someone's Internet feeds go out, they use another > WISP's Internet feed until restoration. > This is great and what a reliable network is made of. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
On 4/26/07, Travis Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: My personal concern would be turning over my IP block to my competition. They would have to have enough control to allow BGP routes from their upstream. Technically they could misconfigure a router accidentally and take your entire network down. :( That is what BGP filtering and prefixes are about. Either you peer correctly or incorrectly and don't peer. No turning over blocks happen. Travis Microserv Mike Hammett wrote: > If they're network peering, they'd be connecting each other's networks > together to exchange local traffic that way. They could also have an > alliance where if someone's Internet feeds go out, they use another > WISP's Internet feed until restoration. > This is great and what a reliable network is made of. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
Why wouldn't you just put up your own AP's and service the same area rather than give that customer away to the competition? I would spend $5k and put up my own tower before I turn a "potential" customer away to the competition. I've done it many times over the years and it has always paid off. Once one person is connected, they tell their neighbors about it. Pretty soon an AP that was put up for a single customer has 10 or 20 customers on it. Doesn't seem to make business sense to me. Plus when they need tech support, how do you troubleshoot the competitors AP's? How do you do RF link tests and packet loss tests at 10:00PM when the customer is on the phone? Travis Microserv Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: - Original Message - From: "George Rogato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 6:42 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: Two of my competitors just sat down for lunch and worked out a network sharing agreement. It's a handshake deal at this point though. Basically we carved up a hilltop laying out coverage zones for each of us, and we set a price for using each other's ap's. Marlon Hey I think thats a good thing you've done there Marlon, getting along and even doing business with your competitors. Yeah. It's something that the three of us have already been doing for a couple of years. We sell on each other's ap's at the same price. The only catch is that each of us has to live under the bw, and bit cap rules of the other guys network vs. our own. But that seems perfectly fair to me. We also handle all tech support for the cusotmer. The customer should NEVER contact the other isp. We have however, shown up together at problematic customers and worked jointly to fix any issues. But where do you think the line would be drawn in respect to anti competitive practices? I'm not sure. We've not had that come up yet. Did you have a specific situation in mind? -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
No. I didn't say that. What I said is that we all charge each other the same price for the whole sale access to the network. What each guy charges his customers I have no idea. Don't really care. I'd rather make a couple of bucks on a connection per month and have no support duties than make $10 or $15 and have more ap's on the air. Marlon (509) 982-2181 (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: "George Rogato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 6:52 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Just dotting the "i" 's and crossing the "t" 's. If you guys all got together and set a price that you each would charge the consumer, then I believe you may have issues. Price fixing. As long as you guys really compete rather than slice up the pie, your probably clear. Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: - Original Message - From: "George Rogato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 6:42 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: Two of my competitors just sat down for lunch and worked out a network sharing agreement. It's a handshake deal at this point though. Basically we carved up a hilltop laying out coverage zones for each of us, and we set a price for using each other's ap's. Marlon Hey I think thats a good thing you've done there Marlon, getting along and even doing business with your competitors. Yeah. It's something that the three of us have already been doing for a couple of years. We sell on each other's ap's at the same price. The only catch is that each of us has to live under the bw, and bit cap rules of the other guys network vs. our own. But that seems perfectly fair to me. We also handle all tech support for the cusotmer. The customer should NEVER contact the other isp. We have however, shown up together at problematic customers and worked jointly to fix any issues. But where do you think the line would be drawn in respect to anti competitive practices? I'm not sure. We've not had that come up yet. Did you have a specific situation in mind? -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
Just dotting the "i" 's and crossing the "t" 's. If you guys all got together and set a price that you each would charge the consumer, then I believe you may have issues. Price fixing. As long as you guys really compete rather than slice up the pie, your probably clear. Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: - Original Message - From: "George Rogato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 6:42 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: Two of my competitors just sat down for lunch and worked out a network sharing agreement. It's a handshake deal at this point though. Basically we carved up a hilltop laying out coverage zones for each of us, and we set a price for using each other's ap's. Marlon Hey I think thats a good thing you've done there Marlon, getting along and even doing business with your competitors. Yeah. It's something that the three of us have already been doing for a couple of years. We sell on each other's ap's at the same price. The only catch is that each of us has to live under the bw, and bit cap rules of the other guys network vs. our own. But that seems perfectly fair to me. We also handle all tech support for the cusotmer. The customer should NEVER contact the other isp. We have however, shown up together at problematic customers and worked jointly to fix any issues. But where do you think the line would be drawn in respect to anti competitive practices? I'm not sure. We've not had that come up yet. Did you have a specific situation in mind? -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
- Original Message - From: "George Rogato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 6:42 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: Two of my competitors just sat down for lunch and worked out a network sharing agreement. It's a handshake deal at this point though. Basically we carved up a hilltop laying out coverage zones for each of us, and we set a price for using each other's ap's. Marlon Hey I think thats a good thing you've done there Marlon, getting along and even doing business with your competitors. Yeah. It's something that the three of us have already been doing for a couple of years. We sell on each other's ap's at the same price. The only catch is that each of us has to live under the bw, and bit cap rules of the other guys network vs. our own. But that seems perfectly fair to me. We also handle all tech support for the cusotmer. The customer should NEVER contact the other isp. We have however, shown up together at problematic customers and worked jointly to fix any issues. But where do you think the line would be drawn in respect to anti competitive practices? I'm not sure. We've not had that come up yet. Did you have a specific situation in mind? -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: Two of my competitors just sat down for lunch and worked out a network sharing agreement. It's a handshake deal at this point though. Basically we carved up a hilltop laying out coverage zones for each of us, and we set a price for using each other's ap's. Marlon Hey I think thats a good thing you've done there Marlon, getting along and even doing business with your competitors. But where do you think the line would be drawn in respect to anti competitive practices? -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
Two of my competitors just sat down for lunch and worked out a network sharing agreement. It's a handshake deal at this point though. Basically we carved up a hilltop laying out coverage zones for each of us, and we set a price for using each other's ap's. Marlon (509) 982-2181 (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: "Jory Privett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 11:29 AM Subject: [WISPA] WISP Peering There are several WISP in my area I was wanting to talk to some of them about bandwidth peering. I know that most will not want anything to do with it since they refuse to co-operate in any other way but I wanted to make the effort. Has anyone else done this type of thing? What paperwork needs to be done to protect each company? How do you control throughput to and from each network and routing issues? Any help her would be greatly appreciated. Jory Privett WCCS -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
Peering Point? Bandwidth would decrease if a good percentage of the traffic was to each other. Otherwise it is just a routing nightmare. - Peter Jory Privett wrote: I have two PoPs where I have bandwidth for my network. In the same area I know of at least 4 other WISPs that have bandwidth also. I was just wanting to establish a link to one or more of them and start routing (BGP most likely) and pass traffic over each others network. This would allow each to have more capacity and redundancy and not have to pay any large amount for it. I know all of the big players do it and it is the basic fabric the internet is made of. I was just wondering if any WISPs do it and how? Jory Privett WCCS -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] WISP Peering
This is exactly what we have done. We brought two DS3's out to a rural area and have broken off parts of that bandwidth to other ISPs. In fact as I type we have failed over part of one ISP's network over a geographically diverse third backhaul we have back into town. I believe we extended an offer to Jory last year or maybe even longer ago than that, but somewhere along the line the idea stalled. We are certainly interested in pursuing this again as long as there is a clear frequency and target market understanding. I think that might have been the stumbling block the last go around. As you've stated there are already several ISPs in the market and there isn't any reason they should need to step on each other's toes. There is plenty of business to go around as long as everyone is on the same page. I've slept since then, so I might be mistaken as to why the first attempt didn't play out. Jory, I'm out of the office right now, but feel free to contact be directly if you are interested. Best, Brad -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Travis Johnson Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 2:29 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering There are many issues involved... we used to peer with one of our competitors in the area. It worked pretty well, but honestly wasn't worth the extra time and efforts for what it actually saved in bandwidth, etc. Now, if you could find a neutral location to bring in a bigger pipe, and then everyone "share" from that location, you may have something. For me, I would never allow my IP block to be controlled by anyone other than me. Routing mistakes do happen, and it could cause you downtime or routing problems without your knowledge or control. Travis Microserv Jory Privett wrote: > I have two PoPs where I have bandwidth for my network. In the same > area I know of at least 4 other WISPs that have bandwidth also. I was > just wanting to establish a link to one or more of them and start > routing (BGP most likely) and pass traffic over each others network. > This would allow each to have more capacity and redundancy and not > have to pay any large amount for it. I know all of the big players do > it and it is the basic fabric the internet is made of. I was just > wondering if any WISPs do it and how? > > Jory Privett > WCCS > > - Original Message - From: "Dawn DiPietro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 1:48 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering > > >> Jory, >> >> I am not sure what you are trying to do with the other WISP's in your >> area. Can you a little more clear on what you are thinking of? >> >> Regards, >> Dawn DiPietro >> >> Jory Privett wrote: >>> There are several WISP in my area I was wanting to talk to some of >>> them about bandwidth peering. I know that most will not want >>> anything to do with it since they refuse to co-operate in any other >>> way but I wanted to make the effort. Has anyone else done this type >>> of thing? What paperwork needs to be done to protect each company? >>> How do you control throughput to and from each network and routing >>> issues? Any help her would be greatly appreciated. >>> >>> Jory Privett >>> WCCS >>> >> >> -- >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> > -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
At one time, a local operator here in the valley tried to set this up, not with BGP and classic peering, but simple static routing to route just that ISP's clients traffic to them.Thus, traffic bound for each other went through a dedicated pipe. of course, this was simple and cheap, back when everyone was connected via frame relay and adding a PVC wasn't expensive or difficult. It would be slightly more complex for WISP's to do this, but for some, it might save a bit of bandwidth through the provider. I don't really think there's all that much in terms of percentage, of traffic from residential or even SOHO customes to other residential / soho customers, so I don't see much value in that. instead, it might seem a bit more... useful?... to instead do classic peering with each other, all at a fixed per-gig transfer or per KByte flow charge for traffic. If we both have a lot of traffic, but it's equal to me from you and to you from me, then the charges cancel each other.It would also be a means of adding redundancy to your own network, and decreased downtime, better paths (lower hop counts). - Original Message - From: "Jeromie Reeves" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 12:22 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering > You would classically arrange a peering agreement. You hand each other > a equal amount of capacity (say 1mbit) and a BGP table. You each use > the link like another upstream provider, balancing routes vs capacity > vs (what ever else you want). Some peerages have a set cost per bit > transfered and the groups settle up monthly. The main problem I see is > one entity will be at a disadvantage then the other due to size. Say > isp A has 2 peers, the other has 4. That means isp B will "need" isp > A's links less then B needs A's. There is a very (in)famous case of > exactly that (AOL and Cogent). How do you value your peering abilities > vs those of someone else, with more or less peers and more or less > capacity. > > > On 4/26/07, Jory Privett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have two PoPs where I have bandwidth for my network. In the same area I > > know of at least 4 other WISPs that have bandwidth also. I was just wanting > > to establish a link to one or more of them and start routing (BGP most > > likely) and pass traffic over each others network. This would allow each to > > have more capacity and redundancy and not have to pay any large amount for > > it. I know all of the big players do it and it is the basic fabric the > > internet is made of. I was just wondering if any WISPs do it and how? > > > > Jory Privett > > WCCS > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Dawn DiPietro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "WISPA General List" > > Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 1:48 PM > > Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering > > > > > > > Jory, > > > > > > I am not sure what you are trying to do with the other WISP's in your > > > area. Can you a little more clear on what you are thinking of? > > > > > > Regards, > > > Dawn DiPietro > > > > > > Jory Privett wrote: > > >> There are several WISP in my area I was wanting to talk to some of them > > >> about bandwidth peering. I know that most will not want anything to do > > >> with it since they refuse to co-operate in any other way but I wanted to > > >> make the effort. Has anyone else done this type of thing? What > > >> paperwork needs to be done to protect each company? How do you control > > >> throughput to and from each network and routing issues? Any help her > > >> would be greatly appreciated. > > >> > > >> Jory Privett > > >> WCCS > > >> > > > > > > -- > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > > > > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > > > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > > > -- > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > -- > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
There are many issues involved... we used to peer with one of our competitors in the area. It worked pretty well, but honestly wasn't worth the extra time and efforts for what it actually saved in bandwidth, etc. Now, if you could find a neutral location to bring in a bigger pipe, and then everyone "share" from that location, you may have something. For me, I would never allow my IP block to be controlled by anyone other than me. Routing mistakes do happen, and it could cause you downtime or routing problems without your knowledge or control. Travis Microserv Jory Privett wrote: I have two PoPs where I have bandwidth for my network. In the same area I know of at least 4 other WISPs that have bandwidth also. I was just wanting to establish a link to one or more of them and start routing (BGP most likely) and pass traffic over each others network. This would allow each to have more capacity and redundancy and not have to pay any large amount for it. I know all of the big players do it and it is the basic fabric the internet is made of. I was just wondering if any WISPs do it and how? Jory Privett WCCS - Original Message - From: "Dawn DiPietro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 1:48 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Jory, I am not sure what you are trying to do with the other WISP's in your area. Can you a little more clear on what you are thinking of? Regards, Dawn DiPietro Jory Privett wrote: There are several WISP in my area I was wanting to talk to some of them about bandwidth peering. I know that most will not want anything to do with it since they refuse to co-operate in any other way but I wanted to make the effort. Has anyone else done this type of thing? What paperwork needs to be done to protect each company? How do you control throughput to and from each network and routing issues? Any help her would be greatly appreciated. Jory Privett WCCS -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
Is the issue one of cost where the WISP "A" does not have budget for additonal servers/network analytics tools, hardware infrastructure? What problem are you trying to solve? Felix --- Jeromie Reeves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You would classically arrange a peering agreement. > You hand each other > a equal amount of capacity (say 1mbit) and a BGP > table. You each use > the link like another upstream provider, balancing > routes vs capacity > vs (what ever else you want). Some peerages have a > set cost per bit > transfered and the groups settle up monthly. The > main problem I see is > one entity will be at a disadvantage then the other > due to size. Say > isp A has 2 peers, the other has 4. That means isp B > will "need" isp > A's links less then B needs A's. There is a very > (in)famous case of > exactly that (AOL and Cogent). How do you value your > peering abilities > vs those of someone else, with more or less peers > and more or less > capacity. > > > On 4/26/07, Jory Privett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have two PoPs where I have bandwidth for my > network. In the same area I > > know of at least 4 other WISPs that have bandwidth > also. I was just wanting > > to establish a link to one or more of them and > start routing (BGP most > > likely) and pass traffic over each others network. > This would allow each to > > have more capacity and redundancy and not have to > pay any large amount for > > it. I know all of the big players do it and it is > the basic fabric the > > internet is made of. I was just wondering if any > WISPs do it and how? > > > > Jory Privett > > WCCS > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Dawn DiPietro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "WISPA General List" > > Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 1:48 PM > > Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering > > > > > > > Jory, > > > > > > I am not sure what you are trying to do with the > other WISP's in your > > > area. Can you a little more clear on what you > are thinking of? > > > > > > Regards, > > > Dawn DiPietro > > > > > > Jory Privett wrote: > > >> There are several WISP in my area I was > wanting to talk to some of them > > >> about bandwidth peering. I know that most will > not want anything to do > > >> with it since they refuse to co-operate in any > other way but I wanted to > > >> make the effort. Has anyone else done this > type of thing? What > > >> paperwork needs to be done to protect each > company? How do you control > > >> throughput to and from each network and routing > issues? Any help her > > >> would be greatly appreciated. > > >> > > >> Jory Privett > > >> WCCS > > >> > > > > > > -- > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > > > > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > > > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > > > Archives: > http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > > > -- > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > Archives: > http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > -- > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
My personal concern would be turning over my IP block to my competition. They would have to have enough control to allow BGP routes from their upstream. Technically they could misconfigure a router accidentally and take your entire network down. :( Travis Microserv Mike Hammett wrote: If they're network peering, they'd be connecting each other's networks together to exchange local traffic that way. They could also have an alliance where if someone's Internet feeds go out, they use another WISP's Internet feed until restoration. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Dawn DiPietro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 1:48 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Jory, I am not sure what you are trying to do with the other WISP's in your area. Can you a little more clear on what you are thinking of? Regards, Dawn DiPietro Jory Privett wrote: There are several WISP in my area I was wanting to talk to some of them about bandwidth peering. I know that most will not want anything to do with it since they refuse to co-operate in any other way but I wanted to make the effort. Has anyone else done this type of thing? What paperwork needs to be done to protect each company? How do you control throughput to and from each network and routing issues? Any help her would be greatly appreciated. Jory Privett WCCS -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
You would classically arrange a peering agreement. You hand each other a equal amount of capacity (say 1mbit) and a BGP table. You each use the link like another upstream provider, balancing routes vs capacity vs (what ever else you want). Some peerages have a set cost per bit transfered and the groups settle up monthly. The main problem I see is one entity will be at a disadvantage then the other due to size. Say isp A has 2 peers, the other has 4. That means isp B will "need" isp A's links less then B needs A's. There is a very (in)famous case of exactly that (AOL and Cogent). How do you value your peering abilities vs those of someone else, with more or less peers and more or less capacity. On 4/26/07, Jory Privett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I have two PoPs where I have bandwidth for my network. In the same area I know of at least 4 other WISPs that have bandwidth also. I was just wanting to establish a link to one or more of them and start routing (BGP most likely) and pass traffic over each others network. This would allow each to have more capacity and redundancy and not have to pay any large amount for it. I know all of the big players do it and it is the basic fabric the internet is made of. I was just wondering if any WISPs do it and how? Jory Privett WCCS - Original Message - From: "Dawn DiPietro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 1:48 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering > Jory, > > I am not sure what you are trying to do with the other WISP's in your > area. Can you a little more clear on what you are thinking of? > > Regards, > Dawn DiPietro > > Jory Privett wrote: >> There are several WISP in my area I was wanting to talk to some of them >> about bandwidth peering. I know that most will not want anything to do >> with it since they refuse to co-operate in any other way but I wanted to >> make the effort. Has anyone else done this type of thing? What >> paperwork needs to be done to protect each company? How do you control >> throughput to and from each network and routing issues? Any help her >> would be greatly appreciated. >> >> Jory Privett >> WCCS >> > > -- > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
I have two PoPs where I have bandwidth for my network. In the same area I know of at least 4 other WISPs that have bandwidth also. I was just wanting to establish a link to one or more of them and start routing (BGP most likely) and pass traffic over each others network. This would allow each to have more capacity and redundancy and not have to pay any large amount for it. I know all of the big players do it and it is the basic fabric the internet is made of. I was just wondering if any WISPs do it and how? Jory Privett WCCS - Original Message - From: "Dawn DiPietro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 1:48 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Jory, I am not sure what you are trying to do with the other WISP's in your area. Can you a little more clear on what you are thinking of? Regards, Dawn DiPietro Jory Privett wrote: There are several WISP in my area I was wanting to talk to some of them about bandwidth peering. I know that most will not want anything to do with it since they refuse to co-operate in any other way but I wanted to make the effort. Has anyone else done this type of thing? What paperwork needs to be done to protect each company? How do you control throughput to and from each network and routing issues? Any help her would be greatly appreciated. Jory Privett WCCS -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
If they're network peering, they'd be connecting each other's networks together to exchange local traffic that way. They could also have an alliance where if someone's Internet feeds go out, they use another WISP's Internet feed until restoration. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Dawn DiPietro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 1:48 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering Jory, I am not sure what you are trying to do with the other WISP's in your area. Can you a little more clear on what you are thinking of? Regards, Dawn DiPietro Jory Privett wrote: There are several WISP in my area I was wanting to talk to some of them about bandwidth peering. I know that most will not want anything to do with it since they refuse to co-operate in any other way but I wanted to make the effort. Has anyone else done this type of thing? What paperwork needs to be done to protect each company? How do you control throughput to and from each network and routing issues? Any help her would be greatly appreciated. Jory Privett WCCS -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] WISP Peering
Jory, I am not sure what you are trying to do with the other WISP's in your area. Can you a little more clear on what you are thinking of? Regards, Dawn DiPietro Jory Privett wrote: There are several WISP in my area I was wanting to talk to some of them about bandwidth peering. I know that most will not want anything to do with it since they refuse to co-operate in any other way but I wanted to make the effort. Has anyone else done this type of thing? What paperwork needs to be done to protect each company? How do you control throughput to and from each network and routing issues? Any help her would be greatly appreciated. Jory Privett WCCS -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
