Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
Fully agree John. All this does was reproduce the Wmux/tsunami problem that plaqued 2.4 and 5.8 WISPs. Important that when we pitch lite licensed like 3650, that we are only talking about the AP registration, and part90, and NOT the power level rules. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 1:47 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > The FCC must have been asleep when they set the rule this way. The rule > should have been the opposite. If you want high power then use narrow > channels and become more spectrally efficient. I am going to try to get a > little face time with Julie Knapp and see if he can explain to me how they > got this so backward. Maximum channel sizes would have been a good thing > also to stop someone from building a radio which could squash everyone out > of the band in one sector or omni alone. I am scared sometimes when I see > what comes from those who are supposed to be the leaders of our country > involving spectrum policy. > Scriv > > > On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 8:47 AM, Mike Hammett > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > >> It's 1 watt per MHz of channel width. It's up to the FCC to certify >> something for more than 20 MHz of channel space. >> >> >> -- >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions >> http://www.ics-il.com >> >> >> ----- Original Message - >> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "'WISPA General List'" >> Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2008 3:09 AM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field >> >> >> Sorry to Hijack this but what was the final EIRP determined by the FCC on >> 3.65? I remember they were talking about allowing 24 watts I believe I >> read >> on the site somewhere. Lastly where on the fcc site do you register your >> base stations? What about searching the site for deployed base stations >> in >> your area? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Michiana Wireless, Inc. >> John Buwa, President >> >> http://WWW.MichianaWireless.Com >> 574-233-7170 >> >> "Lose the wires, discover the speed, enjoy the freedom!" >> >> *US Distributor for www.itelite.net Antennas* >> >> >> > -Original Message- >> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >> > Behalf Of Charles Wu >> > Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 2:04 PM >> > To: WISPA General List >> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field >> > >> > That's a lot easier *SAID* than done... >> > >> > Especially when you factor in frame rates / etc (as one configures >> > those depending on the type of traffic) >> > >> > --- >> > WiNOG Wireless Roadshows >> > Coming to a City Near You >> > http://www.winog.com >> > >> > >> > -Original Message- >> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >> > Behalf Of Jeff Booher >> > Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2008 2:37 PM >> > To: 'WISPA General List' >> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field >> > >> > >> > >> > Having a competitor use the same upload and download ratios and similar >> > GPS >> > settings will yes, make it so operators can coexist without the issues >> > of >> > interference. >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > Jeff Booher >> > >> > Channel Manager, North America >> > www.apertonet.com >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > 24/7: 206-455-4950 >> > >> > This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or >> > work >> > product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, >> > reliance or >> > distribution by others without express permission is strictly >> > prohibited. If >> > you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and >> > delete all >> > copies. >> > >> > -Original Message- >> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >> > Behalf Of 3-dB Networks >> > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 8:51 PM >> > To: 'WISPA General List' >> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field >> > >> > John, >> > >> &g
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
Then could someone explain how this works out in real life? The problem I have here, is that it appears that if we deploy some 3 or 5 mhz channels, we're going to be severely hampered EIRP-wise, from reaching any distance at all. Now, the UBNT XR3's are certified for a 5, 10, and 20 mzh channel, but according to them, the 20 is really 17, due to the low power transmitted at the edge. So, a 10 would be 8.5, for instance. But, the cards are certified for one set of antennas and one power output for all three sizes. It just isn't very high, backhauls would need to be under 15 miles to keep the signal level up. - Original Message - From: "Harold Bledsoe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 1:11 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > Right, Mike. The FCC's thinking appears to be power density and not > just straight power. This is why, with the same power, you will see > roughly a 3dB RX increase from cutting the channel size in half. > > -Hal > > -Original Message- > From: Mike Hammett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: WISPA General List > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2008 14:33:56 -0500 > > I'm not an engineer, but from what I understand when you apply 20 dBm to > channels of different widths, the same gross power is spread out. Each Hz > receives less power in a wider channel. This rule allows the larger > channels to not face the power punishment. > > Spectral efficiency has little to do with the channel width and more with > the technology. You can use an Atheros chipset to produce channel widths > of > 5, 10, 20, and 40 MHz, but they all traffic roughly the same bits/Hz. > > Squashing the entire band is something that'll happen when you're given > such > small bands and attempting to push big data over it. That's where the > contention requirements and synch of some kind come in to play. > > > -- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > ----- Original Message - > From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 1:47 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > >> The FCC must have been asleep when they set the rule this way. The rule >> should have been the opposite. If you want high power then use narrow >> channels and become more spectrally efficient. I am going to try to get a >> little face time with Julie Knapp and see if he can explain to me how >> they >> got this so backward. Maximum channel sizes would have been a good thing >> also to stop someone from building a radio which could squash everyone >> out >> of the band in one sector or omni alone. I am scared sometimes when I >> see >> what comes from those who are supposed to be the leaders of our country >> involving spectrum policy. >> Scriv >> >> >> On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 8:47 AM, Mike Hammett >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: >> >>> It's 1 watt per MHz of channel width. It's up to the FCC to certify >>> something for more than 20 MHz of channel space. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Mike Hammett >>> Intelligent Computing Solutions >>> http://www.ics-il.com >>> >>> >>> - Original Message - >>> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "'WISPA General List'" >>> Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2008 3:09 AM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field >>> >>> >>> Sorry to Hijack this but what was the final EIRP determined by the FCC >>> on >>> 3.65? I remember they were talking about allowing 24 watts I believe I >>> read >>> on the site somewhere. Lastly where on the fcc site do you register your >>> base stations? What about searching the site for deployed base stations >>> in >>> your area? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Michiana Wireless, Inc. >>> John Buwa, President >>> >>> http://WWW.MichianaWireless.Com >>> 574-233-7170 >>> >>> "Lose the wires, discover the speed, enjoy the freedom!" >>> >>> *US Distributor for www.itelite.net Antennas* >>> >>> >>> > -Original Message- >>> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> > On >>> > Behalf Of Charles Wu >>>
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
Shannon theorm states that a channel capacity is constrained by the following equation: C=B log(2)(1+S/N) Where the capacity of the channel is C, B is the bandwidth of the channel, S is signal and N is noise. Rearranging terms and holding some things constant. Lets consider noise and signal =1 (constant power) then Channel capacity is directly proportional to bandwidth. Or if we make B = 1 and noise =1 then Channel capacity is log proportional to signal level. So, want more channel capacity; use more signal strength or a wider bandwidth. But expanding either one will give you more capacity. The number you will actually get for C if you compute it is much more than you really do get with real radios. That says to me that there is a lot of room for improvement in radio technology. But if you try wider bandwidths alone, that method will allow more noise in the channel. P=kTBr Where T is temperature and B is bandwidth and P is noise power (I think k is boltsmans constantant and r is resistance). No free lunch there. So going to a wider bandwidth alone will cause the S/N ratio to lower reducing capacity. So, you gotta increase the signal a certain amount to overcome the noise. - Original Message - From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 1:33 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > I'm not an engineer, but from what I understand when you apply 20 dBm to > channels of different widths, the same gross power is spread out. Each Hz > receives less power in a wider channel. This rule allows the larger > channels to not face the power punishment.e > > Spectral efficiency has little to do with the channel width and more with > the technology. You can use an Atheros chipset to produce channel widths > of > 5, 10, 20, and 40 MHz, but they all traffic roughly the same bits/Hz. > > Squashing the entire band is something that'll happen when you're given > such > small bands and attempting to push big data over it. That's where the > contention requirements and synch of some kind come in to play. > > > -- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > - Original Message - > From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 1:47 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > >> The FCC must have been asleep when they set the rule this way. The rule >> should have been the opposite. If you want high power then use narrow >> channels and become more spectrally efficient. I am going to try to get a >> little face time with Julie Knapp and see if he can explain to me how >> they >> got this so backward. Maximum channel sizes would have been a good thing >> also to stop someone from building a radio which could squash everyone >> out >> of the band in one sector or omni alone. I am scared sometimes when I >> see >> what comes from those who are supposed to be the leaders of our country >> involving spectrum policy. >> Scriv >> >> >> On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 8:47 AM, Mike Hammett >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: >> >>> It's 1 watt per MHz of channel width. It's up to the FCC to certify >>> something for more than 20 MHz of channel space. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Mike Hammett >>> Intelligent Computing Solutions >>> http://www.ics-il.com >>> >>> >>> - Original Message - >>> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "'WISPA General List'" >>> Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2008 3:09 AM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field >>> >>> >>> Sorry to Hijack this but what was the final EIRP determined by the FCC >>> on >>> 3.65? I remember they were talking about allowing 24 watts I believe I >>> read >>> on the site somewhere. Lastly where on the fcc site do you register your >>> base stations? What about searching the site for deployed base stations >>> in >>> your area? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Michiana Wireless, Inc. >>> John Buwa, President >>> >>> http://WWW.MichianaWireless.Com >>> 574-233-7170 >>> >>> "Lose the wires, discover the speed, enjoy the freedom!" >>> >>> *US Distributor for www.itelite.net Antennas* >>> >>> >>> > -Original Message- >>> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> > O
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
Right, Mike. The FCC's thinking appears to be power density and not just straight power. This is why, with the same power, you will see roughly a 3dB RX increase from cutting the channel size in half. -Hal -Original Message- From: Mike Hammett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: WISPA General List To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2008 14:33:56 -0500 I'm not an engineer, but from what I understand when you apply 20 dBm to channels of different widths, the same gross power is spread out. Each Hz receives less power in a wider channel. This rule allows the larger channels to not face the power punishment. Spectral efficiency has little to do with the channel width and more with the technology. You can use an Atheros chipset to produce channel widths of 5, 10, 20, and 40 MHz, but they all traffic roughly the same bits/Hz. Squashing the entire band is something that'll happen when you're given such small bands and attempting to push big data over it. That's where the contention requirements and synch of some kind come in to play. -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 1:47 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > The FCC must have been asleep when they set the rule this way. The rule > should have been the opposite. If you want high power then use narrow > channels and become more spectrally efficient. I am going to try to get a > little face time with Julie Knapp and see if he can explain to me how they > got this so backward. Maximum channel sizes would have been a good thing > also to stop someone from building a radio which could squash everyone out > of the band in one sector or omni alone. I am scared sometimes when I see > what comes from those who are supposed to be the leaders of our country > involving spectrum policy. > Scriv > > > On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 8:47 AM, Mike Hammett > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > >> It's 1 watt per MHz of channel width. It's up to the FCC to certify >> something for more than 20 MHz of channel space. >> >> >> -- >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions >> http://www.ics-il.com >> >> >> - Original Message - >> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "'WISPA General List'" >> Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2008 3:09 AM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field >> >> >> Sorry to Hijack this but what was the final EIRP determined by the FCC on >> 3.65? I remember they were talking about allowing 24 watts I believe I >> read >> on the site somewhere. Lastly where on the fcc site do you register your >> base stations? What about searching the site for deployed base stations >> in >> your area? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Michiana Wireless, Inc. >> John Buwa, President >> >> http://WWW.MichianaWireless.Com >> 574-233-7170 >> >> "Lose the wires, discover the speed, enjoy the freedom!" >> >> *US Distributor for www.itelite.net Antennas* >> >> >> > -Original Message- >> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >> > Behalf Of Charles Wu >> > Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 2:04 PM >> > To: WISPA General List >> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field >> > >> > That's a lot easier *SAID* than done... >> > >> > Especially when you factor in frame rates / etc (as one configures >> > those depending on the type of traffic) >> > >> > --- >> > WiNOG Wireless Roadshows >> > Coming to a City Near You >> > http://www.winog.com >> > >> > >> > -Original Message- >> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >> > Behalf Of Jeff Booher >> > Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2008 2:37 PM >> > To: 'WISPA General List' >> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field >> > >> > >> > >> > Having a competitor use the same upload and download ratios and similar >> > GPS >> > settings will yes, make it so operators can coexist without the issues >> > of >> > interference. >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > Jeff Booher >> > >> > Channel Manager, North America >> > www.apertonet.com >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
I'm not an engineer, but from what I understand when you apply 20 dBm to channels of different widths, the same gross power is spread out. Each Hz receives less power in a wider channel. This rule allows the larger channels to not face the power punishment. Spectral efficiency has little to do with the channel width and more with the technology. You can use an Atheros chipset to produce channel widths of 5, 10, 20, and 40 MHz, but they all traffic roughly the same bits/Hz. Squashing the entire band is something that'll happen when you're given such small bands and attempting to push big data over it. That's where the contention requirements and synch of some kind come in to play. -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 1:47 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > The FCC must have been asleep when they set the rule this way. The rule > should have been the opposite. If you want high power then use narrow > channels and become more spectrally efficient. I am going to try to get a > little face time with Julie Knapp and see if he can explain to me how they > got this so backward. Maximum channel sizes would have been a good thing > also to stop someone from building a radio which could squash everyone out > of the band in one sector or omni alone. I am scared sometimes when I see > what comes from those who are supposed to be the leaders of our country > involving spectrum policy. > Scriv > > > On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 8:47 AM, Mike Hammett > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > >> It's 1 watt per MHz of channel width. It's up to the FCC to certify >> something for more than 20 MHz of channel space. >> >> >> -- >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions >> http://www.ics-il.com >> >> >> - Original Message - >> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "'WISPA General List'" >> Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2008 3:09 AM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field >> >> >> Sorry to Hijack this but what was the final EIRP determined by the FCC on >> 3.65? I remember they were talking about allowing 24 watts I believe I >> read >> on the site somewhere. Lastly where on the fcc site do you register your >> base stations? What about searching the site for deployed base stations >> in >> your area? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Michiana Wireless, Inc. >> John Buwa, President >> >> http://WWW.MichianaWireless.Com >> 574-233-7170 >> >> "Lose the wires, discover the speed, enjoy the freedom!" >> >> *US Distributor for www.itelite.net Antennas* >> >> >> > -Original Message- >> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >> > Behalf Of Charles Wu >> > Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 2:04 PM >> > To: WISPA General List >> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field >> > >> > That's a lot easier *SAID* than done... >> > >> > Especially when you factor in frame rates / etc (as one configures >> > those depending on the type of traffic) >> > >> > --- >> > WiNOG Wireless Roadshows >> > Coming to a City Near You >> > http://www.winog.com >> > >> > >> > -Original Message- >> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >> > Behalf Of Jeff Booher >> > Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2008 2:37 PM >> > To: 'WISPA General List' >> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field >> > >> > >> > >> > Having a competitor use the same upload and download ratios and similar >> > GPS >> > settings will yes, make it so operators can coexist without the issues >> > of >> > interference. >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > Jeff Booher >> > >> > Channel Manager, North America >> > www.apertonet.com >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > 24/7: 206-455-4950 >> > >> > This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or >> > work >> > product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, >> > reliance or >> > distribution by others without express permission is strictly >> > prohibited. If >> > you are not the inte
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
My same way of thinking, what the fcc was thinking? gino -Original Message- From: John Scrivner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 2:49 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field The FCC must have been asleep when they set the rule this way. The rule should have been the opposite. If you want high power then use narrow channels and become more spectrally efficient. I am going to try to get a little face time with Julie Knapp and see if he can explain to me how they got this so backward. Maximum channel sizes would have been a good thing also to stop someone from building a radio which could squash everyone out of the band in one sector or omni alone. I am scared sometimes when I see what comes from those who are supposed to be the leaders of our country involving spectrum policy. Scriv On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 8:47 AM, Mike Hammett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > It's 1 watt per MHz of channel width. It's up to the FCC to certify > something for more than 20 MHz of channel space. > > > -- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > - Original Message - > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'WISPA General List'" > Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2008 3:09 AM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > > Sorry to Hijack this but what was the final EIRP determined by the FCC on > 3.65? I remember they were talking about allowing 24 watts I believe I read > on the site somewhere. Lastly where on the fcc site do you register your > base stations? What about searching the site for deployed base stations in > your area? > > Thanks, > > Michiana Wireless, Inc. > John Buwa, President > > http://WWW.MichianaWireless.Com > 574-233-7170 > > "Lose the wires, discover the speed, enjoy the freedom!" > > *US Distributor for www.itelite.net Antennas* > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > Behalf Of Charles Wu > > Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 2:04 PM > > To: WISPA General List > > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > > > That's a lot easier *SAID* than done... > > > > Especially when you factor in frame rates / etc (as one configures > > those depending on the type of traffic) > > > > --- > > WiNOG Wireless Roadshows > > Coming to a City Near You > > http://www.winog.com > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > Behalf Of Jeff Booher > > Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2008 2:37 PM > > To: 'WISPA General List' > > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > > > > > > > Having a competitor use the same upload and download ratios and similar > > GPS > > settings will yes, make it so operators can coexist without the issues > > of > > interference. > > > > > > > > > > Jeff Booher > > > > Channel Manager, North America > > www.apertonet.com > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 24/7: 206-455-4950 > > > > This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or > > work > > product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, > > reliance or > > distribution by others without express permission is strictly > > prohibited. If > > you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and > > delete all > > copies. > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > Behalf Of 3-dB Networks > > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 8:51 PM > > To: 'WISPA General List' > > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > > > John, > > > > >From what I understand all manufactures are required to use the same > > >GPS > > sync, so all WiMax gear with the appropriate timing settings equal can > > be > > timed together. Apparently the FCC is requiring it for the equipment > > to be > > certified. > > > > Daniel White > > 3-dB Networks > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > Behalf Of John Rock > > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:37 PM > > To: WISPA General List > > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > > > I would disagree. WiMAX should be a goal for most WISPs to get into > > their > > networks over the next 1-3 years. > > Why?
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
The FCC must have been asleep when they set the rule this way. The rule should have been the opposite. If you want high power then use narrow channels and become more spectrally efficient. I am going to try to get a little face time with Julie Knapp and see if he can explain to me how they got this so backward. Maximum channel sizes would have been a good thing also to stop someone from building a radio which could squash everyone out of the band in one sector or omni alone. I am scared sometimes when I see what comes from those who are supposed to be the leaders of our country involving spectrum policy. Scriv On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 8:47 AM, Mike Hammett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > It's 1 watt per MHz of channel width. It's up to the FCC to certify > something for more than 20 MHz of channel space. > > > -- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > - Original Message - > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'WISPA General List'" > Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2008 3:09 AM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > > Sorry to Hijack this but what was the final EIRP determined by the FCC on > 3.65? I remember they were talking about allowing 24 watts I believe I read > on the site somewhere. Lastly where on the fcc site do you register your > base stations? What about searching the site for deployed base stations in > your area? > > Thanks, > > Michiana Wireless, Inc. > John Buwa, President > > http://WWW.MichianaWireless.Com > 574-233-7170 > > "Lose the wires, discover the speed, enjoy the freedom!" > > *US Distributor for www.itelite.net Antennas* > > > > -Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > Behalf Of Charles Wu > > Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 2:04 PM > > To: WISPA General List > > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > > > That's a lot easier *SAID* than done... > > > > Especially when you factor in frame rates / etc (as one configures > > those depending on the type of traffic) > > > > --- > > WiNOG Wireless Roadshows > > Coming to a City Near You > > http://www.winog.com > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > Behalf Of Jeff Booher > > Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2008 2:37 PM > > To: 'WISPA General List' > > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > > > > > > > Having a competitor use the same upload and download ratios and similar > > GPS > > settings will yes, make it so operators can coexist without the issues > > of > > interference. > > > > > > > > > > Jeff Booher > > > > Channel Manager, North America > > www.apertonet.com > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 24/7: 206-455-4950 > > > > This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or > > work > > product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, > > reliance or > > distribution by others without express permission is strictly > > prohibited. If > > you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and > > delete all > > copies. > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > Behalf Of 3-dB Networks > > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 8:51 PM > > To: 'WISPA General List' > > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > > > John, > > > > >From what I understand all manufactures are required to use the same > > >GPS > > sync, so all WiMax gear with the appropriate timing settings equal can > > be > > timed together. Apparently the FCC is requiring it for the equipment > > to be > > certified. > > > > Daniel White > > 3-dB Networks > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > Behalf Of John Rock > > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:37 PM > > To: WISPA General List > > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > > > I would disagree. WiMAX should be a goal for most WISPs to get into > > their > > networks over the next 1-3 years. > > Why??? Roaming!!! It will be the real deal and the WISP market, if they > > do > > the right things, will be able to setup roaming agreements to exist > > with > > each other all over the USA. > > CPE will be availab
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
Can anyone explain why the rule would encourage spectrum hogging?Use wider channel = get more eirp??? - Original Message - From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 6:47 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > It's 1 watt per MHz of channel width. It's up to the FCC to certify > something for more than 20 MHz of channel space. > > > -- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > - Original Message - > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'WISPA General List'" > Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2008 3:09 AM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > > Sorry to Hijack this but what was the final EIRP determined by the FCC on > 3.65? I remember they were talking about allowing 24 watts I believe I > read > on the site somewhere. Lastly where on the fcc site do you register your > base stations? What about searching the site for deployed base stations in > your area? > > Thanks, > > Michiana Wireless, Inc. > John Buwa, President > > http://WWW.MichianaWireless.Com > 574-233-7170 > > "Lose the wires, discover the speed, enjoy the freedom!" > > *US Distributor for www.itelite.net Antennas* > > >> -Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >> Behalf Of Charles Wu >> Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 2:04 PM >> To: WISPA General List >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field >> >> That's a lot easier *SAID* than done... >> >> Especially when you factor in frame rates / etc (as one configures >> those depending on the type of traffic) >> >> --- >> WiNOG Wireless Roadshows >> Coming to a City Near You >> http://www.winog.com >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >> Behalf Of Jeff Booher >> Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2008 2:37 PM >> To: 'WISPA General List' >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field >> >> >> >> Having a competitor use the same upload and download ratios and similar >> GPS >> settings will yes, make it so operators can coexist without the issues >> of >> interference. >> >> >> >> >> Jeff Booher >> >> Channel Manager, North America >> www.apertonet.com >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> 24/7: 206-455-4950 >> >> This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or >> work >> product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, >> reliance or >> distribution by others without express permission is strictly >> prohibited. If >> you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and >> delete all >> copies. >> >> -Original Message- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >> Behalf Of 3-dB Networks >> Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 8:51 PM >> To: 'WISPA General List' >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field >> >> John, >> >> >From what I understand all manufactures are required to use the same >> >GPS >> sync, so all WiMax gear with the appropriate timing settings equal can >> be >> timed together. Apparently the FCC is requiring it for the equipment >> to be >> certified. >> >> Daniel White >> 3-dB Networks >> >> -Original Message- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >> Behalf Of John Rock >> Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:37 PM >> To: WISPA General List >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field >> >> I would disagree. WiMAX should be a goal for most WISPs to get into >> their >> networks over the next 1-3 years. >> Why??? Roaming!!! It will be the real deal and the WISP market, if they >> do >> the right things, will be able to setup roaming agreements to exist >> with >> each other all over the USA. >> CPE will be available in all sorts of devices between 2.3 and 3.8 GHz >> and >> yes 3.65 falls in that window. Device frequency scanning will be >> dictated by >> >> availabilty. So if the WISP Market, small and large, build compatable >> 3.65 >> networks with viable roaming agreements with the right service flows >> everyone could be happy. Keep in mind the right things need to fall in >&
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
It's 1 watt per MHz of channel width. It's up to the FCC to certify something for more than 20 MHz of channel space. -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2008 3:09 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field Sorry to Hijack this but what was the final EIRP determined by the FCC on 3.65? I remember they were talking about allowing 24 watts I believe I read on the site somewhere. Lastly where on the fcc site do you register your base stations? What about searching the site for deployed base stations in your area? Thanks, Michiana Wireless, Inc. John Buwa, President http://WWW.MichianaWireless.Com 574-233-7170 "Lose the wires, discover the speed, enjoy the freedom!" *US Distributor for www.itelite.net Antennas* > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Charles Wu > Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 2:04 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > That's a lot easier *SAID* than done... > > Especially when you factor in frame rates / etc (as one configures > those depending on the type of traffic) > > --- > WiNOG Wireless Roadshows > Coming to a City Near You > http://www.winog.com > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Jeff Booher > Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2008 2:37 PM > To: 'WISPA General List' > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > > > Having a competitor use the same upload and download ratios and similar > GPS > settings will yes, make it so operators can coexist without the issues > of > interference. > > > > > Jeff Booher > > Channel Manager, North America > www.apertonet.com > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 24/7: 206-455-4950 > > This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or > work > product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, > reliance or > distribution by others without express permission is strictly > prohibited. If > you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and > delete all > copies. > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of 3-dB Networks > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 8:51 PM > To: 'WISPA General List' > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > John, > > >From what I understand all manufactures are required to use the same > >GPS > sync, so all WiMax gear with the appropriate timing settings equal can > be > timed together. Apparently the FCC is requiring it for the equipment > to be > certified. > > Daniel White > 3-dB Networks > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of John Rock > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:37 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > I would disagree. WiMAX should be a goal for most WISPs to get into > their > networks over the next 1-3 years. > Why??? Roaming!!! It will be the real deal and the WISP market, if they > do > the right things, will be able to setup roaming agreements to exist > with > each other all over the USA. > CPE will be available in all sorts of devices between 2.3 and 3.8 GHz > and > yes 3.65 falls in that window. Device frequency scanning will be > dictated by > > availabilty. So if the WISP Market, small and large, build compatable > 3.65 > networks with viable roaming agreements with the right service flows > everyone could be happy. Keep in mind the right things need to fall in > place > > for this to happen. > > Hurdles... > -CPE that really are interoperable and in many types of devices. > -Base Station RF in a cellular sence. That equals build outs with > competitive priced Base stations in mobile mind set. > -Base stations from different manufactureers that can GPS sync with > each > other so UL/DL ratios can co exist in a given area. To my knowledge > this > does not exist yet but would be critical to help with interference in > the > 3.65 GHz band. The WiMAX forum needs to make sure this does exist > between > base stations along with the interoperability standards they are > developing. > > The GPS peice may exist but I have yet to see in in the standerds. > > Thanks, > > John Rock > Wireless Connections > Director of Operations - Senior Engineer ACCessing the Future Today!! > ofc. 419.660.610
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
Sorry to Hijack this but what was the final EIRP determined by the FCC on 3.65? I remember they were talking about allowing 24 watts I believe I read on the site somewhere. Lastly where on the fcc site do you register your base stations? What about searching the site for deployed base stations in your area? Thanks, Michiana Wireless, Inc. John Buwa, President http://WWW.MichianaWireless.Com 574-233-7170 "Lose the wires, discover the speed, enjoy the freedom!" *US Distributor for www.itelite.net Antennas* > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Charles Wu > Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 2:04 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > That's a lot easier *SAID* than done... > > Especially when you factor in frame rates / etc (as one configures > those depending on the type of traffic) > > --- > WiNOG Wireless Roadshows > Coming to a City Near You > http://www.winog.com > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Jeff Booher > Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2008 2:37 PM > To: 'WISPA General List' > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > > > Having a competitor use the same upload and download ratios and similar > GPS > settings will yes, make it so operators can coexist without the issues > of > interference. > > > > > Jeff Booher > > Channel Manager, North America > www.apertonet.com > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 24/7: 206-455-4950 > > This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or > work > product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, > reliance or > distribution by others without express permission is strictly > prohibited. If > you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and > delete all > copies. > > -Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of 3-dB Networks > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 8:51 PM > To: 'WISPA General List' > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > John, > > >From what I understand all manufactures are required to use the same > >GPS > sync, so all WiMax gear with the appropriate timing settings equal can > be > timed together. Apparently the FCC is requiring it for the equipment > to be > certified. > > Daniel White > 3-dB Networks > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of John Rock > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:37 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > I would disagree. WiMAX should be a goal for most WISPs to get into > their > networks over the next 1-3 years. > Why??? Roaming!!! It will be the real deal and the WISP market, if they > do > the right things, will be able to setup roaming agreements to exist > with > each other all over the USA. > CPE will be available in all sorts of devices between 2.3 and 3.8 GHz > and > yes 3.65 falls in that window. Device frequency scanning will be > dictated by > > availabilty. So if the WISP Market, small and large, build compatable > 3.65 > networks with viable roaming agreements with the right service flows > everyone could be happy. Keep in mind the right things need to fall in > place > > for this to happen. > > Hurdles... > -CPE that really are interoperable and in many types of devices. > -Base Station RF in a cellular sence. That equals build outs with > competitive priced Base stations in mobile mind set. > -Base stations from different manufactureers that can GPS sync with > each > other so UL/DL ratios can co exist in a given area. To my knowledge > this > does not exist yet but would be critical to help with interference in > the > 3.65 GHz band. The WiMAX forum needs to make sure this does exist > between > base stations along with the interoperability standards they are > developing. > > The GPS peice may exist but I have yet to see in in the standerds. > > Thanks, > > John Rock > Wireless Connections > Director of Operations - Senior Engineer ACCessing the Future Today!! > ofc. 419.660.6100 > cell 419-706-7356 > fax 419-668-4077 > http://www.wirelessconnections.net > This transmission and any files attached to it, may contain > confidential > and/or privileged information and intended only for the named > recipient. If > you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any > disclosure, reproduction, retransmission,
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
That's a lot easier *SAID* than done... Especially when you factor in frame rates / etc (as one configures those depending on the type of traffic) --- WiNOG Wireless Roadshows Coming to a City Near You http://www.winog.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Booher Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2008 2:37 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field Having a competitor use the same upload and download ratios and similar GPS settings will yes, make it so operators can coexist without the issues of interference. Jeff Booher Channel Manager, North America www.apertonet.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 24/7: 206-455-4950 This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or work product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution by others without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 3-dB Networks Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 8:51 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field John, >From what I understand all manufactures are required to use the same >GPS sync, so all WiMax gear with the appropriate timing settings equal can be timed together. Apparently the FCC is requiring it for the equipment to be certified. Daniel White 3-dB Networks -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Rock Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field I would disagree. WiMAX should be a goal for most WISPs to get into their networks over the next 1-3 years. Why??? Roaming!!! It will be the real deal and the WISP market, if they do the right things, will be able to setup roaming agreements to exist with each other all over the USA. CPE will be available in all sorts of devices between 2.3 and 3.8 GHz and yes 3.65 falls in that window. Device frequency scanning will be dictated by availabilty. So if the WISP Market, small and large, build compatable 3.65 networks with viable roaming agreements with the right service flows everyone could be happy. Keep in mind the right things need to fall in place for this to happen. Hurdles... -CPE that really are interoperable and in many types of devices. -Base Station RF in a cellular sence. That equals build outs with competitive priced Base stations in mobile mind set. -Base stations from different manufactureers that can GPS sync with each other so UL/DL ratios can co exist in a given area. To my knowledge this does not exist yet but would be critical to help with interference in the 3.65 GHz band. The WiMAX forum needs to make sure this does exist between base stations along with the interoperability standards they are developing. The GPS peice may exist but I have yet to see in in the standerds. Thanks, John Rock Wireless Connections Director of Operations - Senior Engineer ACCessing the Future Today!! ofc. 419.660.6100 cell 419-706-7356 fax 419-668-4077 http://www.wirelessconnections.net This transmission and any files attached to it, may contain confidential and/or privileged information and intended only for the named recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction, retransmission, dissemination, disclosure, copying or any use of the information or files contained is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply transmission and delete this electronic mail. - Original Message - From: "3-dB Networks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:30 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > Mike I hate to say it but I don't think WiMax is intended for the > average WISP... lots of carrier grade functionality that the WISP > market doesn't need, but really drives up the price (I think its > supposed to do 6 9's for > availability?) > > It sucks that its going to limit the WISP's with small customers bases > > Daniel White > 3-dB Networks > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of Mike Hammett > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 6:36 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > Which is not your average WISP... > > > -- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > - Original Message - > From: "Jeff Booher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'WISPA General Lis
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
I think we should give Jeff some credit...he is sorta trolling...but at least he is giving us the information we need! I respect that when I am looking at 3.65 stuff. I have not heard many other 3.65 MFG's chime in. I am really undecided in the matter...but a coexistent of MFG's would solve my dilemma really fast! Scottie -- Original Message -- From: "Jeff Booher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], WISPA General List Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 12:40:21 -0700 >Also I forgot- frame size should be the same as well. For example, 10msec >frames vs 5msec > > >Jeff Booher > >Channel Manager, North America >www.apertonet.com >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >24/7: 206-455-4950 > >This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or work >product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or >distribution by others without express permission is strictly prohibited. If >you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all >copies. > >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of Jeff Booher >Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2008 12:37 PM >To: 'WISPA General List' >Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > > >Having a competitor use the same upload and download ratios and similar GPS >settings will yes, make it so operators can coexist without the issues of >interference. > > > > >Jeff Booher > >Channel Manager, North America >www.apertonet.com >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >24/7: 206-455-4950 > >This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or work >product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or >distribution by others without express permission is strictly prohibited. If >you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all >copies. > >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of 3-dB Networks >Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 8:51 PM >To: 'WISPA General List' >Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > >John, > >>From what I understand all manufactures are required to use the same >>GPS >sync, so all WiMax gear with the appropriate timing settings equal can be >timed together. Apparently the FCC is requiring it for the equipment to be >certified. > >Daniel White >3-dB Networks > >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >Behalf Of John Rock >Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:37 PM >To: WISPA General List >Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > >I would disagree. WiMAX should be a goal for most WISPs to get into their >networks over the next 1-3 years. >Why??? Roaming!!! It will be the real deal and the WISP market, if they do >the right things, will be able to setup roaming agreements to exist with >each other all over the USA. >CPE will be available in all sorts of devices between 2.3 and 3.8 GHz and >yes 3.65 falls in that window. Device frequency scanning will be dictated by > >availabilty. So if the WISP Market, small and large, build compatable 3.65 >networks with viable roaming agreements with the right service flows >everyone could be happy. Keep in mind the right things need to fall in place > >for this to happen. > >Hurdles... >-CPE that really are interoperable and in many types of devices. >-Base Station RF in a cellular sence. That equals build outs with >competitive priced Base stations in mobile mind set. >-Base stations from different manufactureers that can GPS sync with each >other so UL/DL ratios can co exist in a given area. To my knowledge this >does not exist yet but would be critical to help with interference in the >3.65 GHz band. The WiMAX forum needs to make sure this does exist between >base stations along with the interoperability standards they are developing. > >The GPS peice may exist but I have yet to see in in the standerds. > >Thanks, > >John Rock >Wireless Connections >Director of Operations - Senior Engineer ACCessing the Future Today!! >ofc. 419.660.6100 >cell 419-706-7356 >fax 419-668-4077 >http://www.wirelessconnections.net >This transmission and any files attached to it, may contain confidential >and/or privileged information and intended only for the named recipient. If >you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any >disclosure, reproduction, retransmission, dissemination, disclosure, copying > >or any use of the information or files contained is strictly prohibited. If >you have received this transmis
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
Also I forgot- frame size should be the same as well. For example, 10msec frames vs 5msec Jeff Booher Channel Manager, North America www.apertonet.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 24/7: 206-455-4950 This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or work product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution by others without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Booher Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2008 12:37 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field Having a competitor use the same upload and download ratios and similar GPS settings will yes, make it so operators can coexist without the issues of interference. Jeff Booher Channel Manager, North America www.apertonet.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 24/7: 206-455-4950 This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or work product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution by others without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 3-dB Networks Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 8:51 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field John, >From what I understand all manufactures are required to use the same >GPS sync, so all WiMax gear with the appropriate timing settings equal can be timed together. Apparently the FCC is requiring it for the equipment to be certified. Daniel White 3-dB Networks -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Rock Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field I would disagree. WiMAX should be a goal for most WISPs to get into their networks over the next 1-3 years. Why??? Roaming!!! It will be the real deal and the WISP market, if they do the right things, will be able to setup roaming agreements to exist with each other all over the USA. CPE will be available in all sorts of devices between 2.3 and 3.8 GHz and yes 3.65 falls in that window. Device frequency scanning will be dictated by availabilty. So if the WISP Market, small and large, build compatable 3.65 networks with viable roaming agreements with the right service flows everyone could be happy. Keep in mind the right things need to fall in place for this to happen. Hurdles... -CPE that really are interoperable and in many types of devices. -Base Station RF in a cellular sence. That equals build outs with competitive priced Base stations in mobile mind set. -Base stations from different manufactureers that can GPS sync with each other so UL/DL ratios can co exist in a given area. To my knowledge this does not exist yet but would be critical to help with interference in the 3.65 GHz band. The WiMAX forum needs to make sure this does exist between base stations along with the interoperability standards they are developing. The GPS peice may exist but I have yet to see in in the standerds. Thanks, John Rock Wireless Connections Director of Operations - Senior Engineer ACCessing the Future Today!! ofc. 419.660.6100 cell 419-706-7356 fax 419-668-4077 http://www.wirelessconnections.net This transmission and any files attached to it, may contain confidential and/or privileged information and intended only for the named recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction, retransmission, dissemination, disclosure, copying or any use of the information or files contained is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply transmission and delete this electronic mail. - Original Message - From: "3-dB Networks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:30 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > Mike I hate to say it but I don't think WiMax is intended for the > average WISP... lots of carrier grade functionality that the WISP > market doesn't need, but really drives up the price (I think its > supposed to do 6 9's for > availability?) > > It sucks that its going to limit the WISP's with small customers bases > > Daniel White > 3-dB Networks > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of Mike Hammett > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 6:36 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > Which is not you
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
Having a competitor use the same upload and download ratios and similar GPS settings will yes, make it so operators can coexist without the issues of interference. Jeff Booher Channel Manager, North America www.apertonet.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 24/7: 206-455-4950 This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or work product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution by others without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 3-dB Networks Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 8:51 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field John, >From what I understand all manufactures are required to use the same >GPS sync, so all WiMax gear with the appropriate timing settings equal can be timed together. Apparently the FCC is requiring it for the equipment to be certified. Daniel White 3-dB Networks -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Rock Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field I would disagree. WiMAX should be a goal for most WISPs to get into their networks over the next 1-3 years. Why??? Roaming!!! It will be the real deal and the WISP market, if they do the right things, will be able to setup roaming agreements to exist with each other all over the USA. CPE will be available in all sorts of devices between 2.3 and 3.8 GHz and yes 3.65 falls in that window. Device frequency scanning will be dictated by availabilty. So if the WISP Market, small and large, build compatable 3.65 networks with viable roaming agreements with the right service flows everyone could be happy. Keep in mind the right things need to fall in place for this to happen. Hurdles... -CPE that really are interoperable and in many types of devices. -Base Station RF in a cellular sence. That equals build outs with competitive priced Base stations in mobile mind set. -Base stations from different manufactureers that can GPS sync with each other so UL/DL ratios can co exist in a given area. To my knowledge this does not exist yet but would be critical to help with interference in the 3.65 GHz band. The WiMAX forum needs to make sure this does exist between base stations along with the interoperability standards they are developing. The GPS peice may exist but I have yet to see in in the standerds. Thanks, John Rock Wireless Connections Director of Operations - Senior Engineer ACCessing the Future Today!! ofc. 419.660.6100 cell 419-706-7356 fax 419-668-4077 http://www.wirelessconnections.net This transmission and any files attached to it, may contain confidential and/or privileged information and intended only for the named recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction, retransmission, dissemination, disclosure, copying or any use of the information or files contained is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply transmission and delete this electronic mail. - Original Message - From: "3-dB Networks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:30 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > Mike I hate to say it but I don't think WiMax is intended for the > average WISP... lots of carrier grade functionality that the WISP > market doesn't need, but really drives up the price (I think its > supposed to do 6 9's for > availability?) > > It sucks that its going to limit the WISP's with small customers bases > > Daniel White > 3-dB Networks > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Behalf Of Mike Hammett > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 6:36 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > Which is not your average WISP... > > > -- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jeff Booher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'WISPA General List'" > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 5:42 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > >> Brian, >> >> >> Depends on many factors. The price point of 10k per sector is usually >> assuming you are talking about purchasing 1-6 sectors. Most of the >> MFR's are able to and willing to come down in price considerably when >> frame orders or larger deployments are taken into consideration. >> >>
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
I agree with you. Being a small WISP, we really took a risk investing in RedMax gear for the simple fact that we are so rural. Selling Business Internet and Voip bundles with a small PBX phone system is the only way we're really going to see a decent return on this system in the near future. The equipment is incredible. I can't complain at all about the equipment or the support, and it is definitely Carrier Grade. I just hope at some point the equipment costs go down for us all to enjoy the benefits of WiMax. Having said that, I hope the equipment stays just expensive enough to keep the spectrum clean, if you know what I mean. On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 10:49 PM, 3-dB Networks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I agree 100%... every WISP should really look at 3.65. The problem is the > base station cost... I don't know many small WISP's that will be able to > afford a 10k base station. Many have a hard time deploying say Canopy AP's > that cost $1200 or so. > > My point is, unlike Canopy, Tranzeo, Ubquity, Trango, etc. etc. the > equipment is not being built for the WISP. WISP's should be on board with > it, but don't confuse that with the equipment being built and marketed for > the average WISP (at least as what I think the average WISP is). > > Daniel White > 3-dB Networks > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of John Rock > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:37 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > I would disagree. WiMAX should be a goal for most WISPs to get into their > networks over the next 1-3 years. > Why??? Roaming!!! It will be the real deal and the WISP market, if they do > the right things, will be able to setup roaming agreements to exist with > each other all over the USA. > CPE will be available in all sorts of devices between 2.3 and 3.8 GHz and > yes 3.65 falls in that window. Device frequency scanning will be dictated > by > > availabilty. So if the WISP Market, small and large, build compatable 3.65 > networks with viable roaming agreements with the right service flows > everyone could be happy. Keep in mind the right things need to fall in > place > > for this to happen. > > Hurdles... > -CPE that really are interoperable and in many types of devices. > -Base Station RF in a cellular sence. That equals build outs with > competitive priced Base stations in mobile mind set. > -Base stations from different manufactureers that can GPS sync with each > other so UL/DL ratios can co exist in a given area. To my knowledge this > does not exist yet but would be critical to help with interference in the > 3.65 GHz band. The WiMAX forum needs to make sure this does exist between > base stations along with the interoperability standards they are > developing. > > The GPS peice may exist but I have yet to see in in the standerds. > > Thanks, > > John Rock > Wireless Connections > Director of Operations - Senior Engineer > ACCessing the Future Today!! > ofc. 419.660.6100 > cell 419-706-7356 > fax 419-668-4077 > http://www.wirelessconnections.net > This transmission and any files attached to it, may contain confidential > and/or privileged information and intended only for the named recipient. If > you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any > disclosure, reproduction, retransmission, dissemination, disclosure, > copying > > or any use of the information or files contained is strictly prohibited. If > you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by > reply transmission and delete this electronic mail. > - Original Message - > From: "3-dB Networks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'WISPA General List'" > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:30 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > > > Mike I hate to say it but I don't think WiMax is intended for the average > > WISP... lots of carrier grade functionality that the WISP market doesn't > > need, but really drives up the price (I think its supposed to do 6 9's > for > > availability?) > > > > It sucks that its going to limit the WISP's with small customers bases > > > > Daniel White > > 3-dB Networks > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > Behalf Of Mike Hammett > > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 6:36 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List > > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > > > Which is not your average WISP... > > > > > > -- > > Mike Hammett > > Intelligent Compu
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
John, >From what I understand all manufactures are required to use the same GPS sync, so all WiMax gear with the appropriate timing settings equal can be timed together. Apparently the FCC is requiring it for the equipment to be certified. Daniel White 3-dB Networks -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Rock Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field I would disagree. WiMAX should be a goal for most WISPs to get into their networks over the next 1-3 years. Why??? Roaming!!! It will be the real deal and the WISP market, if they do the right things, will be able to setup roaming agreements to exist with each other all over the USA. CPE will be available in all sorts of devices between 2.3 and 3.8 GHz and yes 3.65 falls in that window. Device frequency scanning will be dictated by availabilty. So if the WISP Market, small and large, build compatable 3.65 networks with viable roaming agreements with the right service flows everyone could be happy. Keep in mind the right things need to fall in place for this to happen. Hurdles... -CPE that really are interoperable and in many types of devices. -Base Station RF in a cellular sence. That equals build outs with competitive priced Base stations in mobile mind set. -Base stations from different manufactureers that can GPS sync with each other so UL/DL ratios can co exist in a given area. To my knowledge this does not exist yet but would be critical to help with interference in the 3.65 GHz band. The WiMAX forum needs to make sure this does exist between base stations along with the interoperability standards they are developing. The GPS peice may exist but I have yet to see in in the standerds. Thanks, John Rock Wireless Connections Director of Operations - Senior Engineer ACCessing the Future Today!! ofc. 419.660.6100 cell 419-706-7356 fax 419-668-4077 http://www.wirelessconnections.net This transmission and any files attached to it, may contain confidential and/or privileged information and intended only for the named recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction, retransmission, dissemination, disclosure, copying or any use of the information or files contained is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply transmission and delete this electronic mail. - Original Message - From: "3-dB Networks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:30 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > Mike I hate to say it but I don't think WiMax is intended for the average > WISP... lots of carrier grade functionality that the WISP market doesn't > need, but really drives up the price (I think its supposed to do 6 9's for > availability?) > > It sucks that its going to limit the WISP's with small customers bases > > Daniel White > 3-dB Networks > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Mike Hammett > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 6:36 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > Which is not your average WISP... > > > -- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > - Original Message ----- > From: "Jeff Booher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'WISPA General List'" > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 5:42 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > >> Brian, >> >> >> Depends on many factors. The price point of 10k per sector is usually >> assuming you are talking about purchasing 1-6 sectors. Most of the MFR's >> are >> able to and willing to come down in price considerably when frame orders >> or >> larger deployments are taken into consideration. >> >> >> Best Regards, >> >> >> Jeff Booher >> >> Channel Manager, North America >> www.apertonet.com <http://www.apertonet.com/> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> 24/7: 206-455-4950 >> >> This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or >> work >> product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance >> or >> distribution by others without express permission is strictly prohibited. >> If >> you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete >> all >> copies. >> >> >> _ >> >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >> Behalf Of Brian Rohrbacher >>
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
I agree 100%... every WISP should really look at 3.65. The problem is the base station cost... I don't know many small WISP's that will be able to afford a 10k base station. Many have a hard time deploying say Canopy AP's that cost $1200 or so. My point is, unlike Canopy, Tranzeo, Ubquity, Trango, etc. etc. the equipment is not being built for the WISP. WISP's should be on board with it, but don't confuse that with the equipment being built and marketed for the average WISP (at least as what I think the average WISP is). Daniel White 3-dB Networks -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Rock Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field I would disagree. WiMAX should be a goal for most WISPs to get into their networks over the next 1-3 years. Why??? Roaming!!! It will be the real deal and the WISP market, if they do the right things, will be able to setup roaming agreements to exist with each other all over the USA. CPE will be available in all sorts of devices between 2.3 and 3.8 GHz and yes 3.65 falls in that window. Device frequency scanning will be dictated by availabilty. So if the WISP Market, small and large, build compatable 3.65 networks with viable roaming agreements with the right service flows everyone could be happy. Keep in mind the right things need to fall in place for this to happen. Hurdles... -CPE that really are interoperable and in many types of devices. -Base Station RF in a cellular sence. That equals build outs with competitive priced Base stations in mobile mind set. -Base stations from different manufactureers that can GPS sync with each other so UL/DL ratios can co exist in a given area. To my knowledge this does not exist yet but would be critical to help with interference in the 3.65 GHz band. The WiMAX forum needs to make sure this does exist between base stations along with the interoperability standards they are developing. The GPS peice may exist but I have yet to see in in the standerds. Thanks, John Rock Wireless Connections Director of Operations - Senior Engineer ACCessing the Future Today!! ofc. 419.660.6100 cell 419-706-7356 fax 419-668-4077 http://www.wirelessconnections.net This transmission and any files attached to it, may contain confidential and/or privileged information and intended only for the named recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction, retransmission, dissemination, disclosure, copying or any use of the information or files contained is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply transmission and delete this electronic mail. - Original Message - From: "3-dB Networks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:30 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > Mike I hate to say it but I don't think WiMax is intended for the average > WISP... lots of carrier grade functionality that the WISP market doesn't > need, but really drives up the price (I think its supposed to do 6 9's for > availability?) > > It sucks that its going to limit the WISP's with small customers bases > > Daniel White > 3-dB Networks > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Mike Hammett > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 6:36 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > Which is not your average WISP... > > > -- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > ----- Original Message - > From: "Jeff Booher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'WISPA General List'" > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 5:42 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > >> Brian, >> >> >> Depends on many factors. The price point of 10k per sector is usually >> assuming you are talking about purchasing 1-6 sectors. Most of the MFR's >> are >> able to and willing to come down in price considerably when frame orders >> or >> larger deployments are taken into consideration. >> >> >> Best Regards, >> >> >> Jeff Booher >> >> Channel Manager, North America >> www.apertonet.com <http://www.apertonet.com/> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> 24/7: 206-455-4950 >> >> This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or >> work >> product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance >> or >> distribution by others without express
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
I would disagree. WiMAX should be a goal for most WISPs to get into their networks over the next 1-3 years. Why??? Roaming!!! It will be the real deal and the WISP market, if they do the right things, will be able to setup roaming agreements to exist with each other all over the USA. CPE will be available in all sorts of devices between 2.3 and 3.8 GHz and yes 3.65 falls in that window. Device frequency scanning will be dictated by availabilty. So if the WISP Market, small and large, build compatable 3.65 networks with viable roaming agreements with the right service flows everyone could be happy. Keep in mind the right things need to fall in place for this to happen. Hurdles... -CPE that really are interoperable and in many types of devices. -Base Station RF in a cellular sence. That equals build outs with competitive priced Base stations in mobile mind set. -Base stations from different manufactureers that can GPS sync with each other so UL/DL ratios can co exist in a given area. To my knowledge this does not exist yet but would be critical to help with interference in the 3.65 GHz band. The WiMAX forum needs to make sure this does exist between base stations along with the interoperability standards they are developing. The GPS peice may exist but I have yet to see in in the standerds. Thanks, John Rock Wireless Connections Director of Operations - Senior Engineer ACCessing the Future Today!! ofc. 419.660.6100 cell 419-706-7356 fax 419-668-4077 http://www.wirelessconnections.net This transmission and any files attached to it, may contain confidential and/or privileged information and intended only for the named recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction, retransmission, dissemination, disclosure, copying or any use of the information or files contained is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply transmission and delete this electronic mail. - Original Message - From: "3-dB Networks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:30 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > Mike I hate to say it but I don't think WiMax is intended for the average > WISP... lots of carrier grade functionality that the WISP market doesn't > need, but really drives up the price (I think its supposed to do 6 9's for > availability?) > > It sucks that its going to limit the WISP's with small customers bases > > Daniel White > 3-dB Networks > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Mike Hammett > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 6:36 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > Which is not your average WISP... > > > -- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > - Original Message - > From: "Jeff Booher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'WISPA General List'" > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 5:42 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > >> Brian, >> >> >> Depends on many factors. The price point of 10k per sector is usually >> assuming you are talking about purchasing 1-6 sectors. Most of the MFR's >> are >> able to and willing to come down in price considerably when frame orders >> or >> larger deployments are taken into consideration. >> >> >> Best Regards, >> >> >> Jeff Booher >> >> Channel Manager, North America >> www.apertonet.com <http://www.apertonet.com/> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> 24/7: 206-455-4950 >> >> This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or >> work >> product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance >> or >> distribution by others without express permission is strictly prohibited. >> If >> you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete >> all >> copies. >> >> >> _ >> >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >> Behalf Of Brian Rohrbacher >> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 6:06 PM >> To: WISPA General List >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field >> >> >> So, how much does this stuff cost? >> >> Brian >> >> John McDowell wrote: >> >> I believe it. >> >> >> >> Today we had a 1.5 mile shot through dense trees using Redline Redmax >> 3.65. >> >> Customer was getting close to 500k upload. Signal held steady
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
A 4-5 dBi antenna gets you to 10 watts which would be legal in theory with a 10 MHz wide channel ;-) Wind load would be very small for that sized sector --- heeehhe John Rock Wireless Connections Director of Operations - Senior Engineer ACCessing the Future Today!! ofc. 419.660.6100 cell 419-706-7356 fax 419-668-4077 http://www.wirelessconnections.net This transmission and any files attached to it, may contain confidential and/or privileged information and intended only for the named recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction, retransmission, dissemination, disclosure, copying or any use of the information or files contained is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply transmission and delete this electronic mail. - Original Message - From: "Jeff Booher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 6:46 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > Eric, > > How can it be possibly legal to use a 36dbm sector in 3.65ghz, unless you > are talking about using a 3dbi antenna at the base? > > > > > Jeff Booher > > Channel Manager, North America > www.apertonet.com > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 24/7: 206-455-4950 > > This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or > work > product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance > or > distribution by others without express permission is strictly prohibited. > If > you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete > all > copies. > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Eric Muehleisen > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 12:06 AM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > Redmax 100U - Lower power (23dbm) basesation $10k with sector antenna. > > Redmax 100UX - Certified last week, higher powered (36dbm) basestation > $14k > with sector antenna. > > -Eric > > John McDowell wrote: >> I hear RedMax is coming down in price on CPEs when you buy a pallet of >> 72. >> Sub $400. >> >> Mike, I'm interested to know what Alvarion is pricing the 3.65 gear >> now that it is available. Have they come down at all? >> >> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:05 PM, Brian Rohrbacher >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >> >>> So, how much does this stuff cost? >>> >>> Brian >>> >>> >>> John McDowell wrote: >>> >>> I believe it. >>> >>> Today we had a 1.5 mile shot through dense trees using Redline Redmax > 3.65. >>> Customer was getting close to 500k upload. Signal held steady at 88db >>> on a 1-story house. >>> >>> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:01 PM, Mike Cowan >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Many of you have known me for years, some wish they didn't :-). I am >>> the doubting Thomas type and have to test myself before I recommend >>> products to a client. Lets just say that Thomas was satisfied. Now >>> the clients are echoing the same and that is what drives my wagon. >>> Message-Id: >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> >>> Mike >>> >>> >>> At 08:52 PM 7/21/2008, you wrote: >>> >>> >>> Same here, I thought it was all marketing hype, if it works like the >>> poster mentioned, we will need to consider moving up our timetable >>> for evaluating wimax, 10k a basestation suddenly isn't that bad with >>> the performance described. >>> >>> Regards >>> Michael Baird >>> >>> >>> >>> Now this is a 180* of what others have told me, even others offering >>> traditional, D, and E products. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Mike Hammett >>> Intelligent Computing Solutionshttp://www.ics-il.com >>> >>> Mike Cowan >>> Wireless Connections >>> A Division of ACC >>> 166 Milan Ave >>> Norwalk, OH 44857 >>> 419-660-6100 >>> 419-706-7348 >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> - >>> --- WISPA Wants You! Join today!http://signup.wispa.org/ >>> >>> --
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
Mike I hate to say it but I don't think WiMax is intended for the average WISP... lots of carrier grade functionality that the WISP market doesn't need, but really drives up the price (I think its supposed to do 6 9's for availability?) It sucks that its going to limit the WISP's with small customers bases Daniel White 3-dB Networks -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 6:36 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field Which is not your average WISP... -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Jeff Booher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 5:42 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > Brian, > > > Depends on many factors. The price point of 10k per sector is usually > assuming you are talking about purchasing 1-6 sectors. Most of the MFR's > are > able to and willing to come down in price considerably when frame orders > or > larger deployments are taken into consideration. > > > Best Regards, > > > Jeff Booher > > Channel Manager, North America > www.apertonet.com <http://www.apertonet.com/> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 24/7: 206-455-4950 > > This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or > work > product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance > or > distribution by others without express permission is strictly prohibited. > If > you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete > all > copies. > > > _____ > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Brian Rohrbacher > Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 6:06 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > > So, how much does this stuff cost? > > Brian > > John McDowell wrote: > > I believe it. > > > > Today we had a 1.5 mile shot through dense trees using Redline Redmax > 3.65. > > Customer was getting close to 500k upload. Signal held steady at 88db on a > > 1-story house. > > > > On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:01 PM, Mike Cowan > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > > > Many of you have known me for years, some wish they didn't :-). I am > > the doubting Thomas type and have to test myself before I recommend > > products to a client. Lets just say that Thomas was satisfied. Now > > the clients are echoing the same and that is what drives my wagon. > > Message-Id: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Mike > > > > > > At 08:52 PM 7/21/2008, you wrote: > > > > Same here, I thought it was all marketing hype, if it works like the > > poster mentioned, we will need to consider moving up our timetable for > > evaluating wimax, 10k a basestation suddenly isn't that bad with the > > performance described. > > > > Regards > > Michael Baird > > > > > > Now this is a 180* of what others have told me, even others offering > > traditional, D, and E products. > > > > > > -- > > Mike Hammett > > Intelligent Computing Solutions > > http://www.ics-il.com > > > > > > Mike Cowan > > Wireless Connections > > A Division of ACC > > 166 Milan Ave > > Norwalk, OH 44857 > > 419-660-6100 > > 419-706-7348 Cell > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > www.wirelessconnections.net > > > > > > > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > > > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archive
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
That's probably EIRP, not radio power. -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Eric Muehleisen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "WISPA General List" Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 5:54 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > You are correct. Don't shoot the messenger. > > -Eric > > Jeff Booher wrote: >> Eric, >> >> How can it be possibly legal to use a 36dbm sector in 3.65ghz, unless you >> are talking about using a 3dbi antenna at the base? >> >> >> >> >> Jeff Booher >> >> Channel Manager, North America >> www.apertonet.com >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> 24/7: 206-455-4950 >> >> This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or >> work >> product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance >> or >> distribution by others without express permission is strictly prohibited. >> If >> you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete >> all >> copies. >> >> -----Original Message- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >> Behalf Of Eric Muehleisen >> Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 12:06 AM >> To: WISPA General List >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field >> >> Redmax 100U - Lower power (23dbm) basesation $10k with sector antenna. >> >> Redmax 100UX - Certified last week, higher powered (36dbm) basestation >> $14k >> with sector antenna. >> >> -Eric >> >> John McDowell wrote: >> >>> I hear RedMax is coming down in price on CPEs when you buy a pallet of >>> 72. >>> Sub $400. >>> >>> Mike, I'm interested to know what Alvarion is pricing the 3.65 gear >>> now that it is available. Have they come down at all? >>> >>> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:05 PM, Brian Rohrbacher >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> So, how much does this stuff cost? >>>> >>>> Brian >>>> >>>> >>>> John McDowell wrote: >>>> >>>> I believe it. >>>> >>>> Today we had a 1.5 mile shot through dense trees using Redline Redmax >>>> >> 3.65. >> >>>> Customer was getting close to 500k upload. Signal held steady at 88db >>>> on a 1-story house. >>>> >>>> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:01 PM, Mike Cowan >>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Many of you have known me for years, some wish they didn't :-). I am >>>> the doubting Thomas type and have to test myself before I recommend >>>> products to a client. Lets just say that Thomas was satisfied. Now >>>> the clients are echoing the same and that is what drives my wagon. >>>> Message-Id: >>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> >>>> Mike >>>> >>>> >>>> At 08:52 PM 7/21/2008, you wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Same here, I thought it was all marketing hype, if it works like the >>>> poster mentioned, we will need to consider moving up our timetable >>>> for evaluating wimax, 10k a basestation suddenly isn't that bad with >>>> the performance described. >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> Michael Baird >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Now this is a 180* of what others have told me, even others offering >>>> traditional, D, and E products. >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Mike Hammett >>>> Intelligent Computing Solutionshttp://www.ics-il.com >>>> >>>> Mike Cowan >>>> Wireless Connections >>>> A Division of ACC >>>> 166 Milan Ave >>>> Norwalk, OH 44857 >>>> 419-660-6100 >>>> 419-706-7348 >>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> - >>>> --- WISPA Wants You! Join today!http://signup.wispa.org/ >>>> >>>> -
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
Which is not your average WISP... -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Jeff Booher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 5:42 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > Brian, > > > Depends on many factors. The price point of 10k per sector is usually > assuming you are talking about purchasing 1-6 sectors. Most of the MFR's > are > able to and willing to come down in price considerably when frame orders > or > larger deployments are taken into consideration. > > > Best Regards, > > > Jeff Booher > > Channel Manager, North America > www.apertonet.com <http://www.apertonet.com/> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 24/7: 206-455-4950 > > This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or > work > product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance > or > distribution by others without express permission is strictly prohibited. > If > you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete > all > copies. > > > _ > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Brian Rohrbacher > Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 6:06 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > > So, how much does this stuff cost? > > Brian > > John McDowell wrote: > > I believe it. > > > > Today we had a 1.5 mile shot through dense trees using Redline Redmax > 3.65. > > Customer was getting close to 500k upload. Signal held steady at 88db on a > > 1-story house. > > > > On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:01 PM, Mike Cowan > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > > > Many of you have known me for years, some wish they didn't :-). I am > > the doubting Thomas type and have to test myself before I recommend > > products to a client. Lets just say that Thomas was satisfied. Now > > the clients are echoing the same and that is what drives my wagon. > > Message-Id: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Mike > > > > > > At 08:52 PM 7/21/2008, you wrote: > > > > Same here, I thought it was all marketing hype, if it works like the > > poster mentioned, we will need to consider moving up our timetable for > > evaluating wimax, 10k a basestation suddenly isn't that bad with the > > performance described. > > > > Regards > > Michael Baird > > > > > > Now this is a 180* of what others have told me, even others offering > > traditional, D, and E products. > > > > > > -- > > Mike Hammett > > Intelligent Computing Solutions > > http://www.ics-il.com > > > > > > Mike Cowan > > Wireless Connections > > A Division of ACC > > 166 Milan Ave > > Norwalk, OH 44857 > > 419-660-6100 > > 419-706-7348 Cell > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > www.wirelessconnections.net > > > > > > > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > > > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
John Valenti wrote: Mike, This does seem to good to be true. Could you provide more details on these links (for instance, tower heights, or maybe even coordinates that I can look over the path)? I was at a roadshow earlier this year. A Redline rep was there, he said that 3650 wasn't all that great thru trees. Maybe a kilometer. And Ball State U did a research study using 3.5GHz, they had spotty results starting at 3/4s of a of mile. You say these tests were in Ohio, that would seem to be pretty close to Michigan in tree foliage and perhaps topography. I drove down to Eldora Speedway (from Michigan) over a month ago and was pretty amazed and how far I could see. It was my first time down there and it was treeless and flat compared to Michigan. The people riding with me didn't have a clue what I was talking about but I kept telling them how I wish I was a WISP down there. :) These are the sorts of results I've dreamed about, but can't really believe are possible. I was pinning my hopes on whitespaces radios. If you arrange a demo, I would love to drive down and look things over. Also, you mention a PC card ... is someone making a wimax card in 3.65? -John On July 21, at 7:06 PM July 21, Mike Cowan wrote: With some of the Wimax discussions going on I thought I would throw my hat into the ring. 3.650 Wimax using 802.16d only products provides decent connectivity, at a higher cost than traditional unlicensed gear. Performance/coverage is on par, or better than 2.4 that most of are used to. Pay a little extra for product, gain access to cleaner spectrum and hopefully a rule set that helps keep it cleaner than our wild wild west unlicensed world. Now deploy 3.650 using 802.16e upgradeable products. The coverage difference when using diversity options goes up significantly. Now 3.650 begins to act and feel more like a 900Mhz product with NLOS coverage capability. Actually our customers, and our field tests are showing that it exceeds 900Mhz often by a large margin. Here are a couple recent field examples all 2nd order diversity: Customer 1- 8.4 mile NLOS location. blocked by heavy trees . 1.5MB download holding CPE in their hand on the ground! Decided to test 5.8 at this location and @ 50' AGL the CPE got a link. 5.8 mounted on the same tower, same height as 3.650. The 5.8 system could not pass data and could just barely maintain association. Customer 2- 12.4 miles away at the owners home. 1.0mb on the ground. This location could not be serviced by 2.4 or 5.8 at 40' above the ground previously. The owner is going to mount Wimax on the roof and I expect he will se 10-12MB at that height. Customer 2- 12.6 miles on the ground. Completely obstructed 6MB down 3MB up. Customer 3- This is one of the most telling. Canopy 900 operator. 3.650 2nd order diversity mounted 10' below Canopy. 100% coverage at 3.650 of a small city. It takes 2 tower locations with 900 here to serve the same area. They gave up field testing because "it works everywhere". They the said "lets try to break it". We drove to a part of town that is challenged with 900 coverage. They found a traditionally bad coverage spot and drove up to a big tree, took the CPE out of the vehicle and buried it in the tree. -101 signal. They then picked up their VOIP phone and called the NOC and did a "can you hear me now"? Toll quality voice call. Our internal testing is showing similar results. Using 4th order diversity is showing even better results than above. When you do the upgrade to 16e and add Wave II CPE, Katy bar the door. That coverage is nothing less than jaw dropping. 2.5 miles obstructed with a PC card! Same PC card 1 mile away entering a commercial building, no signal change. Not possible with a traditional system. In this case the wall measured a 25db loss, however STC and MRC diversity gains completely made up for the attenuation once the paths became uncorrelated. Bottom line is diversity is the place to be with Wimax. It is more expensive, so find a way to afford it. Push your vendor for price breaks and don't be bashful. Alvarion for example is willing to work to earn business as well as the others. CPE costs for D and E systems are the same today, E will be much cheaper in the near future. Not all Wimax is the same, so test a site or visit one, you will walk away amazed. My two cents, and we carry all D and E products. Each has its place. Mike Mike Cowan Wireless Connections A Division of ACC 166 Milan Ave Norwalk, OH 44857 419-660-6100 419-706-7348 Cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.wirelessconnections.net -- -- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -- -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archive
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
Mike, This does seem to good to be true. Could you provide more details on these links (for instance, tower heights, or maybe even coordinates that I can look over the path)? I was at a roadshow earlier this year. A Redline rep was there, he said that 3650 wasn't all that great thru trees. Maybe a kilometer. And Ball State U did a research study using 3.5GHz, they had spotty results starting at 3/4s of a of mile. You say these tests were in Ohio, that would seem to be pretty close to Michigan in tree foliage and perhaps topography. These are the sorts of results I've dreamed about, but can't really believe are possible. I was pinning my hopes on whitespaces radios. If you arrange a demo, I would love to drive down and look things over. Also, you mention a PC card ... is someone making a wimax card in 3.65? -John On July 21, at 7:06 PM July 21, Mike Cowan wrote: > With some of the Wimax discussions going on I thought I would throw > my hat into the ring. > > 3.650 Wimax using 802.16d only products provides decent connectivity, > at a higher cost than traditional unlicensed > gear. Performance/coverage is on par, or better than 2.4 that most > of are used to. Pay a little extra for product, gain access to > cleaner spectrum and hopefully a rule set that helps keep it cleaner > than our wild wild west unlicensed world. > > Now deploy 3.650 using 802.16e upgradeable products. The coverage > difference when using diversity options goes up significantly. Now > 3.650 begins to act and feel more like a 900Mhz product with NLOS > coverage capability. Actually our customers, and our field tests are > showing that it exceeds 900Mhz often by a large margin. Here are a > couple recent field examples all 2nd order diversity: > > Customer 1- 8.4 mile NLOS location. blocked by heavy trees . 1.5MB > download holding CPE in their hand on the ground! Decided to test > 5.8 at this location and @ 50' AGL the CPE got a link. 5.8 mounted > on the same tower, same height as 3.650. The 5.8 system could not > pass data and could just barely maintain association. > > Customer 2- 12.4 miles away at the owners home. 1.0mb on the > ground. This location could not be serviced by 2.4 or 5.8 at 40' > above the ground previously. The owner is going to mount Wimax on > the roof and I expect he will se 10-12MB at that height. > > Customer 2- 12.6 miles on the ground. Completely obstructed 6MB > down 3MB up. > > Customer 3- This is one of the most telling. Canopy 900 > operator. 3.650 2nd order diversity mounted 10' below Canopy. 100% > coverage at 3.650 of a small city. It takes 2 tower locations > with 900 here to serve the same area. They gave up field testing > because "it works everywhere". They the said "lets try to break > it". We drove to a part of town that is challenged with 900 > coverage. They found a traditionally bad coverage spot and drove up > to a big tree, took the CPE out of the vehicle and buried it in the > tree. -101 signal. They then picked up their VOIP phone and called > the NOC and did a "can you hear me now"? Toll quality voice call. > > Our internal testing is showing similar results. Using 4th order > diversity is showing even better results than above. When you do the > upgrade to 16e and add Wave II CPE, Katy bar the door. That coverage > is nothing less than jaw dropping. 2.5 miles obstructed with a PC > card! Same PC card 1 mile away entering a commercial building, no > signal change. Not possible with a traditional system. In this case > the wall measured a 25db loss, however STC and MRC diversity gains > completely made up for the attenuation once the paths became > uncorrelated. > > Bottom line is diversity is the place to be with Wimax. It is more > expensive, so find a way to afford it. Push your vendor for price > breaks and don't be bashful. Alvarion for example is willing to work > to earn business as well as the others. CPE costs for D and E > systems are the same today, E will be much cheaper in the near > future. Not all Wimax is the same, so test a site or visit one, you > will walk away amazed. > > My two cents, and we carry all D and E products. Each has its place. > > Mike > > > > > > Mike Cowan > Wireless Connections > A Division of ACC > 166 Milan Ave > Norwalk, OH 44857 > 419-660-6100 > 419-706-7348 Cell > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > www.wirelessconnections.net > > > -- > -- > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > -- > -- > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
You are correct. Don't shoot the messenger. -Eric Jeff Booher wrote: > Eric, > > How can it be possibly legal to use a 36dbm sector in 3.65ghz, unless you > are talking about using a 3dbi antenna at the base? > > > > > Jeff Booher > > Channel Manager, North America > www.apertonet.com > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 24/7: 206-455-4950 > > This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or work > product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or > distribution by others without express permission is strictly prohibited. If > you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all > copies. > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Eric Muehleisen > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 12:06 AM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > Redmax 100U - Lower power (23dbm) basesation $10k with sector antenna. > > Redmax 100UX - Certified last week, higher powered (36dbm) basestation $14k > with sector antenna. > > -Eric > > John McDowell wrote: > >> I hear RedMax is coming down in price on CPEs when you buy a pallet of 72. >> Sub $400. >> >> Mike, I'm interested to know what Alvarion is pricing the 3.65 gear >> now that it is available. Have they come down at all? >> >> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:05 PM, Brian Rohrbacher >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> So, how much does this stuff cost? >>> >>> Brian >>> >>> >>> John McDowell wrote: >>> >>> I believe it. >>> >>> Today we had a 1.5 mile shot through dense trees using Redline Redmax >>> > 3.65. > >>> Customer was getting close to 500k upload. Signal held steady at 88db >>> on a 1-story house. >>> >>> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:01 PM, Mike Cowan >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Many of you have known me for years, some wish they didn't :-). I am >>> the doubting Thomas type and have to test myself before I recommend >>> products to a client. Lets just say that Thomas was satisfied. Now >>> the clients are echoing the same and that is what drives my wagon. >>> Message-Id: >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> >>> Mike >>> >>> >>> At 08:52 PM 7/21/2008, you wrote: >>> >>> >>> Same here, I thought it was all marketing hype, if it works like the >>> poster mentioned, we will need to consider moving up our timetable >>> for evaluating wimax, 10k a basestation suddenly isn't that bad with >>> the performance described. >>> >>> Regards >>> Michael Baird >>> >>> >>> >>> Now this is a 180* of what others have told me, even others offering >>> traditional, D, and E products. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Mike Hammett >>> Intelligent Computing Solutionshttp://www.ics-il.com >>> >>> Mike Cowan >>> Wireless Connections >>> A Division of ACC >>> 166 Milan Ave >>> Norwalk, OH 44857 >>> 419-660-6100 >>> 419-706-7348 >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> - >>> --- WISPA Wants You! Join today!http://signup.wispa.org/ >>> >>> - >>> --- >>> >>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>> >>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireles >>> s >>> >>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> - >>> --- >>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>> >>> - >>> --- >>> >>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>> >>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>> >>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >&
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
Eric, How can it be possibly legal to use a 36dbm sector in 3.65ghz, unless you are talking about using a 3dbi antenna at the base? Jeff Booher Channel Manager, North America www.apertonet.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 24/7: 206-455-4950 This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or work product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution by others without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eric Muehleisen Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 12:06 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field Redmax 100U - Lower power (23dbm) basesation $10k with sector antenna. Redmax 100UX - Certified last week, higher powered (36dbm) basestation $14k with sector antenna. -Eric John McDowell wrote: > I hear RedMax is coming down in price on CPEs when you buy a pallet of 72. > Sub $400. > > Mike, I'm interested to know what Alvarion is pricing the 3.65 gear > now that it is available. Have they come down at all? > > On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:05 PM, Brian Rohrbacher > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > >> So, how much does this stuff cost? >> >> Brian >> >> >> John McDowell wrote: >> >> I believe it. >> >> Today we had a 1.5 mile shot through dense trees using Redline Redmax 3.65. >> Customer was getting close to 500k upload. Signal held steady at 88db >> on a 1-story house. >> >> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:01 PM, Mike Cowan >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> Many of you have known me for years, some wish they didn't :-). I am >> the doubting Thomas type and have to test myself before I recommend >> products to a client. Lets just say that Thomas was satisfied. Now >> the clients are echoing the same and that is what drives my wagon. >> Message-Id: >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> Mike >> >> >> At 08:52 PM 7/21/2008, you wrote: >> >> >> Same here, I thought it was all marketing hype, if it works like the >> poster mentioned, we will need to consider moving up our timetable >> for evaluating wimax, 10k a basestation suddenly isn't that bad with >> the performance described. >> >> Regards >> Michael Baird >> >> >> >> Now this is a 180* of what others have told me, even others offering >> traditional, D, and E products. >> >> >> -- >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutionshttp://www.ics-il.com >> >> Mike Cowan >> Wireless Connections >> A Division of ACC >> 166 Milan Ave >> Norwalk, OH 44857 >> 419-660-6100 >> 419-706-7348 >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> >> >> - >> --- WISPA Wants You! Join today!http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> - >> --- >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireles >> s >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> >> >> >> >> >> - >> --- >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> - >> --- >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> >> > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
Brian, Depends on many factors. The price point of 10k per sector is usually assuming you are talking about purchasing 1-6 sectors. Most of the MFR's are able to and willing to come down in price considerably when frame orders or larger deployments are taken into consideration. Best Regards, Jeff Booher Channel Manager, North America www.apertonet.com <http://www.apertonet.com/> [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 24/7: 206-455-4950 This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or work product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution by others without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Rohrbacher Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 6:06 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field So, how much does this stuff cost? Brian John McDowell wrote: I believe it. Today we had a 1.5 mile shot through dense trees using Redline Redmax 3.65. Customer was getting close to 500k upload. Signal held steady at 88db on a 1-story house. On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:01 PM, Mike Cowan <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Many of you have known me for years, some wish they didn't :-). I am the doubting Thomas type and have to test myself before I recommend products to a client. Lets just say that Thomas was satisfied. Now the clients are echoing the same and that is what drives my wagon. Message-Id: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mike At 08:52 PM 7/21/2008, you wrote: Same here, I thought it was all marketing hype, if it works like the poster mentioned, we will need to consider moving up our timetable for evaluating wimax, 10k a basestation suddenly isn't that bad with the performance described. Regards Michael Baird Now this is a 180* of what others have told me, even others offering traditional, D, and E products. -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Mike Cowan Wireless Connections A Division of ACC 166 Milan Ave Norwalk, OH 44857 419-660-6100 419-706-7348 Cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.wirelessconnections.net WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
10k is NOT the price for an 802.16e solution- Try closer to 20-40k per sector Jeff Booher Channel Manager, North America www.apertonet.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 24/7: 206-455-4950 This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or work product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution by others without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Baird Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 5:52 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field Same here, I thought it was all marketing hype, if it works like the poster mentioned, we will need to consider moving up our timetable for evaluating wimax, 10k a basestation suddenly isn't that bad with the performance described. Regards Michael Baird > Now this is a 180* of what others have told me, even others offering > traditional, D, and E products. > > > -- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > - Original Message - > From: "Mike Cowan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 6:06 PM > Subject: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > > > With some of the Wimax discussions going on I thought I would throw > > my hat into the ring. > > > > 3.650 Wimax using 802.16d only products provides decent > > connectivity, at a higher cost than traditional unlicensed gear. > > Performance/coverage is on par, or better than 2.4 that most of are > > used to. Pay a little extra for product, gain access to cleaner > > spectrum and hopefully a rule set that helps keep it cleaner than > > our wild wild west unlicensed world. > > > > Now deploy 3.650 using 802.16e upgradeable products. The coverage > > difference when using diversity options goes up significantly. Now > > 3.650 begins to act and feel more like a 900Mhz product with NLOS > > coverage capability. Actually our customers, and our field tests > > are showing that it exceeds 900Mhz often by a large margin. Here > > are a couple recent field examples all 2nd order diversity: > > > > Customer 1- 8.4 mile NLOS location. blocked by heavy trees . 1.5MB > > download holding CPE in their hand on the ground! Decided to test > > 5.8 at this location and @ 50' AGL the CPE got a link. 5.8 mounted > > on the same tower, same height as 3.650. The 5.8 system could not > > pass data and could just barely maintain association. > > > > Customer 2- 12.4 miles away at the owners home. 1.0mb on the > > ground. This location could not be serviced by 2.4 or 5.8 at 40' > > above the ground previously. The owner is going to mount Wimax on > > the roof and I expect he will se 10-12MB at that height. > > > > Customer 2- 12.6 miles on the ground. Completely obstructed 6MB > > down 3MB up. > > > > Customer 3- This is one of the most telling. Canopy 900 operator. > > 3.650 2nd order diversity mounted 10' below Canopy. 100% coverage > > at 3.650 of a small city. It takes 2 tower locations with 900 here > > to serve the same area. They gave up field testing because "it > > works everywhere". They the said "lets try to break it". We drove > > to a part of town that is challenged with 900 coverage. They found > > a traditionally bad coverage spot and drove up to a big tree, took > > the CPE out of the vehicle and buried it in the tree. -101 signal. > > They then picked up their VOIP phone and called the NOC and did a > > "can you hear me now"? Toll quality voice call. > > > > Our internal testing is showing similar results. Using 4th order > > diversity is showing even better results than above. When you do > > the upgrade to 16e and add Wave II CPE, Katy bar the door. That > > coverage is nothing less than jaw dropping. 2.5 miles obstructed > > with a PC card! Same PC card 1 mile away entering a commercial > > building, no signal change. Not possible with a traditional system. > > In this case the wall measured a 25db loss, however STC and MRC > > diversity gains completely made up for the attenuation once the paths became uncorrelated. > > > > Bottom line is diversity is the place to be with Wimax. It is more > > expensive, so find a way to afford it. Push your vendor for price > > breaks and don't be bashful. Alvarion for example is willing to > &g
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
They are made by the same company along with a Moto wimax cpe and a few others... -Hal -Original Message- From: John McDowell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: WISPA General List To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 14:54:18 -0500 The 300 looks like the Redline cpe On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 2:44 PM, Harold Bledsoe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Which picture matches? > > http://www.apertonet.com/products/pmax_subscriberunits.html > > -Hal > > -Original Message- > From: 3-dB Networks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: WISPA General List > To: 'WISPA General List' > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 11:22:18 -0600 > > Tranzeo and Aperto are not collaborating at all (actually Tranzeo wanted to > rebrand the product their own). > > What is going on is they are using the same manufacturer. The PS and Case > are the same, beyond that everything on the inside is Aperto. > > Trust me, I was very concerned about this when I was meeting with them. > > Daniel White > 3-dB Networks > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Randy Cosby > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 10:59 AM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > Anyone know how extensive the Tranzeo / Aperto collaboration is? > > http://www.tranzeo.com/investors/press.php?id=82 > > I wonder if that WAS a Tranzeo CPE you used? > > > Randy > > > 3-dB Networks wrote: > > I think I mentioned last week that we were going to be doing testing with > > Aperto gear. We were so impressed that we are finishing up the paperwork > to > > become a VAR for them (not sure if any of the other VAR's on the list > are). > > > > I've been a skeptic of 3.65 WiMAX since the day it was mentioned too > me... > > basically the too good to be true type thing. Everyone else in the > company > > thought really the same thing. Field testing, while not nearly as > extensive > > as others have done on this list (we are limited by the "tower location" > > i.e. the roof of the building, we had to play with) but 5 miles near line > of > > sight at full modulation was no problem. We were even getting 6Mb or so > > through our metal roof, with the sector pointing 180 degrees away. When > I > > try that with a 5.2GHz Canopy SM we are lucky if it connects! > > > > We were sold on Aperto by CPE cost, the EMS management system, and the > > company background (Aperto is one of the big players on the international > > market). I'd be happy to shoot a quote to anyone that is interested. > > > > I'll be attending the technical training along with Dave Kennedy on Aug > 6th > > to really grasp what this equipment can do. So far I have been really > > impressed (but the Tranzeo looking CPE case has to go, which they are > > promising me is on its way out) > > > > Anyways my 2 cents... another critic convinced > > > > Daniel White > > 3-dB Networks > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > Behalf Of John McDowell > > Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 8:30 PM > > To: WISPA General List > > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > > > Depends, sub $10,000. Boun Senekham at CTI can help you with a quote if > > you're interested: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:38 PM, Brian Rohrbacher > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > > >> What about APs? > >> > >> John McDowell wrote: > >> > >> I hear RedMax is coming down in price on CPEs when you buy a pallet of > 72. > >> Sub $400. > >> > >> Mike, I'm interested to know what Alvarion is pricing the 3.65 gear now > >> > > that > > > >> it is available. Have they come down at all? > >> > >> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:05 PM, Brian Rohrbacher > >> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> So, how much does this stuff cost? > >> > >> Brian > >> > >> > >> John McDowell wrote: > >> > >> I believe it. > >> > >> Today we had a 1.5 mile shot through dense trees using Redline Redmax > >> > > 3.65. > > > >> Customer was getting close to 500k upload. Signal held stead
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
The 300 looks like the Redline cpe On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 2:44 PM, Harold Bledsoe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Which picture matches? > > http://www.apertonet.com/products/pmax_subscriberunits.html > > -Hal > > -Original Message- > From: 3-dB Networks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: WISPA General List > To: 'WISPA General List' > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 11:22:18 -0600 > > Tranzeo and Aperto are not collaborating at all (actually Tranzeo wanted to > rebrand the product their own). > > What is going on is they are using the same manufacturer. The PS and Case > are the same, beyond that everything on the inside is Aperto. > > Trust me, I was very concerned about this when I was meeting with them. > > Daniel White > 3-dB Networks > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Randy Cosby > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 10:59 AM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > Anyone know how extensive the Tranzeo / Aperto collaboration is? > > http://www.tranzeo.com/investors/press.php?id=82 > > I wonder if that WAS a Tranzeo CPE you used? > > > Randy > > > 3-dB Networks wrote: > > I think I mentioned last week that we were going to be doing testing with > > Aperto gear. We were so impressed that we are finishing up the paperwork > to > > become a VAR for them (not sure if any of the other VAR's on the list > are). > > > > I've been a skeptic of 3.65 WiMAX since the day it was mentioned too > me... > > basically the too good to be true type thing. Everyone else in the > company > > thought really the same thing. Field testing, while not nearly as > extensive > > as others have done on this list (we are limited by the "tower location" > > i.e. the roof of the building, we had to play with) but 5 miles near line > of > > sight at full modulation was no problem. We were even getting 6Mb or so > > through our metal roof, with the sector pointing 180 degrees away. When > I > > try that with a 5.2GHz Canopy SM we are lucky if it connects! > > > > We were sold on Aperto by CPE cost, the EMS management system, and the > > company background (Aperto is one of the big players on the international > > market). I'd be happy to shoot a quote to anyone that is interested. > > > > I'll be attending the technical training along with Dave Kennedy on Aug > 6th > > to really grasp what this equipment can do. So far I have been really > > impressed (but the Tranzeo looking CPE case has to go, which they are > > promising me is on its way out) > > > > Anyways my 2 cents... another critic convinced > > > > Daniel White > > 3-dB Networks > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > Behalf Of John McDowell > > Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 8:30 PM > > To: WISPA General List > > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > > > Depends, sub $10,000. Boun Senekham at CTI can help you with a quote if > > you're interested: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:38 PM, Brian Rohrbacher > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > > >> What about APs? > >> > >> John McDowell wrote: > >> > >> I hear RedMax is coming down in price on CPEs when you buy a pallet of > 72. > >> Sub $400. > >> > >> Mike, I'm interested to know what Alvarion is pricing the 3.65 gear now > >> > > that > > > >> it is available. Have they come down at all? > >> > >> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:05 PM, Brian Rohrbacher > >> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> So, how much does this stuff cost? > >> > >> Brian > >> > >> > >> John McDowell wrote: > >> > >> I believe it. > >> > >> Today we had a 1.5 mile shot through dense trees using Redline Redmax > >> > > 3.65. > > > >> Customer was getting close to 500k upload. Signal held steady at 88db on > a > >> 1-story house. > >> > >> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:01 PM, Mike Cowan > >> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >> wrote: > >>
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
The packetmax 100... it looks very similar... the PoE's are identical (not sure if the power output is the same but they look exactly the same) The case instead of being flat on the panel does have something of a raise, but if you have seen a Tranzeo before, the first thing you are going to think of when you see one of these is Tranzeo. Apparently though there has been enough negative feedback on that that they are going to change it hopefully to more of a Canopy Integrated 900 form factor Daniel White 3-dB Networks -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Harold Bledsoe Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 1:44 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field Which picture matches? http://www.apertonet.com/products/pmax_subscriberunits.html -Hal -Original Message- From: 3-dB Networks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: WISPA General List To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 11:22:18 -0600 Tranzeo and Aperto are not collaborating at all (actually Tranzeo wanted to rebrand the product their own). What is going on is they are using the same manufacturer. The PS and Case are the same, beyond that everything on the inside is Aperto. Trust me, I was very concerned about this when I was meeting with them. Daniel White 3-dB Networks -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Randy Cosby Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 10:59 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field Anyone know how extensive the Tranzeo / Aperto collaboration is? http://www.tranzeo.com/investors/press.php?id=82 I wonder if that WAS a Tranzeo CPE you used? Randy 3-dB Networks wrote: > I think I mentioned last week that we were going to be doing testing with > Aperto gear. We were so impressed that we are finishing up the paperwork to > become a VAR for them (not sure if any of the other VAR's on the list are). > > I've been a skeptic of 3.65 WiMAX since the day it was mentioned too me... > basically the too good to be true type thing. Everyone else in the company > thought really the same thing. Field testing, while not nearly as extensive > as others have done on this list (we are limited by the "tower location" > i.e. the roof of the building, we had to play with) but 5 miles near line of > sight at full modulation was no problem. We were even getting 6Mb or so > through our metal roof, with the sector pointing 180 degrees away. When I > try that with a 5.2GHz Canopy SM we are lucky if it connects! > > We were sold on Aperto by CPE cost, the EMS management system, and the > company background (Aperto is one of the big players on the international > market). I'd be happy to shoot a quote to anyone that is interested. > > I'll be attending the technical training along with Dave Kennedy on Aug 6th > to really grasp what this equipment can do. So far I have been really > impressed (but the Tranzeo looking CPE case has to go, which they are > promising me is on its way out) > > Anyways my 2 cents... another critic convinced > > Daniel White > 3-dB Networks > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of John McDowell > Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 8:30 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > Depends, sub $10,000. Boun Senekham at CTI can help you with a quote if > you're interested: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:38 PM, Brian Rohrbacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > >> What about APs? >> >> John McDowell wrote: >> >> I hear RedMax is coming down in price on CPEs when you buy a pallet of 72. >> Sub $400. >> >> Mike, I'm interested to know what Alvarion is pricing the 3.65 gear now >> > that > >> it is available. Have they come down at all? >> >> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:05 PM, Brian Rohrbacher >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> wrote: >> >> >> >> So, how much does this stuff cost? >> >> Brian >> >> >> John McDowell wrote: >> >> I believe it. >> >> Today we had a 1.5 mile shot through dense trees using Redline Redmax >> > 3.65. > >> Customer was getting close to 500k upload. Signal held steady at 88db on a >> 1-story house. >> >> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:01 PM, Mike Cowan >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> wrote: >> >> >> >>
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
Which picture matches? http://www.apertonet.com/products/pmax_subscriberunits.html -Hal -Original Message- From: 3-dB Networks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: WISPA General List To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 11:22:18 -0600 Tranzeo and Aperto are not collaborating at all (actually Tranzeo wanted to rebrand the product their own). What is going on is they are using the same manufacturer. The PS and Case are the same, beyond that everything on the inside is Aperto. Trust me, I was very concerned about this when I was meeting with them. Daniel White 3-dB Networks -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Randy Cosby Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 10:59 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field Anyone know how extensive the Tranzeo / Aperto collaboration is? http://www.tranzeo.com/investors/press.php?id=82 I wonder if that WAS a Tranzeo CPE you used? Randy 3-dB Networks wrote: > I think I mentioned last week that we were going to be doing testing with > Aperto gear. We were so impressed that we are finishing up the paperwork to > become a VAR for them (not sure if any of the other VAR's on the list are). > > I've been a skeptic of 3.65 WiMAX since the day it was mentioned too me... > basically the too good to be true type thing. Everyone else in the company > thought really the same thing. Field testing, while not nearly as extensive > as others have done on this list (we are limited by the "tower location" > i.e. the roof of the building, we had to play with) but 5 miles near line of > sight at full modulation was no problem. We were even getting 6Mb or so > through our metal roof, with the sector pointing 180 degrees away. When I > try that with a 5.2GHz Canopy SM we are lucky if it connects! > > We were sold on Aperto by CPE cost, the EMS management system, and the > company background (Aperto is one of the big players on the international > market). I'd be happy to shoot a quote to anyone that is interested. > > I'll be attending the technical training along with Dave Kennedy on Aug 6th > to really grasp what this equipment can do. So far I have been really > impressed (but the Tranzeo looking CPE case has to go, which they are > promising me is on its way out) > > Anyways my 2 cents... another critic convinced > > Daniel White > 3-dB Networks > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of John McDowell > Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 8:30 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > Depends, sub $10,000. Boun Senekham at CTI can help you with a quote if > you're interested: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:38 PM, Brian Rohrbacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > >> What about APs? >> >> John McDowell wrote: >> >> I hear RedMax is coming down in price on CPEs when you buy a pallet of 72. >> Sub $400. >> >> Mike, I'm interested to know what Alvarion is pricing the 3.65 gear now >> > that > >> it is available. Have they come down at all? >> >> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:05 PM, Brian Rohrbacher >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> wrote: >> >> >> >> So, how much does this stuff cost? >> >> Brian >> >> >> John McDowell wrote: >> >> I believe it. >> >> Today we had a 1.5 mile shot through dense trees using Redline Redmax >> > 3.65. > >> Customer was getting close to 500k upload. Signal held steady at 88db on a >> 1-story house. >> >> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:01 PM, Mike Cowan >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> wrote: >> >> >> >> Many of you have known me for years, some wish they didn't :-). I am >> the doubting Thomas type and have to test myself before I recommend >> products to a client. Lets just say that Thomas was satisfied. Now >> the clients are echoing the same and that is what drives my wagon. >> Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> Mike >> >> >> At 08:52 PM 7/21/2008, you wrote: >> >> >> Same here, I thought it was all marketing hype, if it works like the >> poster mentioned, we will need to consider moving up our timetable for >> evaluating wimax
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
Tranzeo and Aperto are not collaborating at all (actually Tranzeo wanted to rebrand the product their own). What is going on is they are using the same manufacturer. The PS and Case are the same, beyond that everything on the inside is Aperto. Trust me, I was very concerned about this when I was meeting with them. Daniel White 3-dB Networks -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Randy Cosby Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 10:59 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field Anyone know how extensive the Tranzeo / Aperto collaboration is? http://www.tranzeo.com/investors/press.php?id=82 I wonder if that WAS a Tranzeo CPE you used? Randy 3-dB Networks wrote: > I think I mentioned last week that we were going to be doing testing with > Aperto gear. We were so impressed that we are finishing up the paperwork to > become a VAR for them (not sure if any of the other VAR's on the list are). > > I've been a skeptic of 3.65 WiMAX since the day it was mentioned too me... > basically the too good to be true type thing. Everyone else in the company > thought really the same thing. Field testing, while not nearly as extensive > as others have done on this list (we are limited by the "tower location" > i.e. the roof of the building, we had to play with) but 5 miles near line of > sight at full modulation was no problem. We were even getting 6Mb or so > through our metal roof, with the sector pointing 180 degrees away. When I > try that with a 5.2GHz Canopy SM we are lucky if it connects! > > We were sold on Aperto by CPE cost, the EMS management system, and the > company background (Aperto is one of the big players on the international > market). I'd be happy to shoot a quote to anyone that is interested. > > I'll be attending the technical training along with Dave Kennedy on Aug 6th > to really grasp what this equipment can do. So far I have been really > impressed (but the Tranzeo looking CPE case has to go, which they are > promising me is on its way out) > > Anyways my 2 cents... another critic convinced > > Daniel White > 3-dB Networks > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of John McDowell > Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 8:30 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > Depends, sub $10,000. Boun Senekham at CTI can help you with a quote if > you're interested: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:38 PM, Brian Rohrbacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > >> What about APs? >> >> John McDowell wrote: >> >> I hear RedMax is coming down in price on CPEs when you buy a pallet of 72. >> Sub $400. >> >> Mike, I'm interested to know what Alvarion is pricing the 3.65 gear now >> > that > >> it is available. Have they come down at all? >> >> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:05 PM, Brian Rohrbacher >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> wrote: >> >> >> >> So, how much does this stuff cost? >> >> Brian >> >> >> John McDowell wrote: >> >> I believe it. >> >> Today we had a 1.5 mile shot through dense trees using Redline Redmax >> > 3.65. > >> Customer was getting close to 500k upload. Signal held steady at 88db on a >> 1-story house. >> >> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:01 PM, Mike Cowan >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> wrote: >> >> >> >> Many of you have known me for years, some wish they didn't :-). I am >> the doubting Thomas type and have to test myself before I recommend >> products to a client. Lets just say that Thomas was satisfied. Now >> the clients are echoing the same and that is what drives my wagon. >> Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> Mike >> >> >> At 08:52 PM 7/21/2008, you wrote: >> >> >> Same here, I thought it was all marketing hype, if it works like the >> poster mentioned, we will need to consider moving up our timetable for >> evaluating wimax, 10k a basestation suddenly isn't that bad with the >> performance described. >> >> Regards >> Michael Baird >> >> >> >> Now this is a 180* of what others have told me, even others offering >> traditional, D, and E products. >> >> >> -
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
Anyone know how extensive the Tranzeo / Aperto collaboration is? http://www.tranzeo.com/investors/press.php?id=82 I wonder if that WAS a Tranzeo CPE you used? Randy 3-dB Networks wrote: > I think I mentioned last week that we were going to be doing testing with > Aperto gear. We were so impressed that we are finishing up the paperwork to > become a VAR for them (not sure if any of the other VAR's on the list are). > > I've been a skeptic of 3.65 WiMAX since the day it was mentioned too me... > basically the too good to be true type thing. Everyone else in the company > thought really the same thing. Field testing, while not nearly as extensive > as others have done on this list (we are limited by the "tower location" > i.e. the roof of the building, we had to play with) but 5 miles near line of > sight at full modulation was no problem. We were even getting 6Mb or so > through our metal roof, with the sector pointing 180 degrees away. When I > try that with a 5.2GHz Canopy SM we are lucky if it connects! > > We were sold on Aperto by CPE cost, the EMS management system, and the > company background (Aperto is one of the big players on the international > market). I'd be happy to shoot a quote to anyone that is interested. > > I'll be attending the technical training along with Dave Kennedy on Aug 6th > to really grasp what this equipment can do. So far I have been really > impressed (but the Tranzeo looking CPE case has to go, which they are > promising me is on its way out) > > Anyways my 2 cents... another critic convinced > > Daniel White > 3-dB Networks > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of John McDowell > Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 8:30 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > Depends, sub $10,000. Boun Senekham at CTI can help you with a quote if > you're interested: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:38 PM, Brian Rohrbacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > >> What about APs? >> >> John McDowell wrote: >> >> I hear RedMax is coming down in price on CPEs when you buy a pallet of 72. >> Sub $400. >> >> Mike, I'm interested to know what Alvarion is pricing the 3.65 gear now >> > that > >> it is available. Have they come down at all? >> >> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:05 PM, Brian Rohrbacher >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> wrote: >> >> >> >> So, how much does this stuff cost? >> >> Brian >> >> >> John McDowell wrote: >> >> I believe it. >> >> Today we had a 1.5 mile shot through dense trees using Redline Redmax >> > 3.65. > >> Customer was getting close to 500k upload. Signal held steady at 88db on a >> 1-story house. >> >> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:01 PM, Mike Cowan >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> wrote: >> >> >> >> Many of you have known me for years, some wish they didn't :-). I am >> the doubting Thomas type and have to test myself before I recommend >> products to a client. Lets just say that Thomas was satisfied. Now >> the clients are echoing the same and that is what drives my wagon. >> Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> Mike >> >> >> At 08:52 PM 7/21/2008, you wrote: >> >> >> Same here, I thought it was all marketing hype, if it works like the >> poster mentioned, we will need to consider moving up our timetable for >> evaluating wimax, 10k a basestation suddenly isn't that bad with the >> performance described. >> >> Regards >> Michael Baird >> >> >> >> Now this is a 180* of what others have told me, even others offering >> traditional, D, and E products. >> >> >> -- >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutionshttp://www.ics-il.com >> >> Mike Cowan >> Wireless Connections >> A Division of ACC >> 166 Milan Ave >> Norwalk, OH 44857 >> 419-660-6100 >> 419-706-7348 [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > >> WISPA Want
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
I believe we were at 37dbm EIRP at both ends of the link. I agree that we can't change physics and I expected the same letdown that we all had when OFDM hit the scenes for 5.8ghz. All the tests I mentioned were using Alvarions base station with 2nd order diversity. 2nd order nets a 3db increase in transmit power and 12 db increase in uplink. 4th order is a 6db and 19 db increase on rx! Add subchannelization on top of this and I begin to see where the manufacturers R & D money went. We are trying to better characterize how 3.650 propogates with no diversity, 2nd order, and 4th order as well as comparing same to 900Mhz. To that end we have installed 3.650 and 900 on the same tower, same AGL at 37 and 36 EIRP. Initial results within 1/2 mile show that 900 bests 3.650 from a signal strength perspective, but 3.650 normally has better thruput. However there is a section northeast of the tower that is a forest very close to the tower and behind that forest 3.650 coverage is spotty and 900 is fair. 3.650 apparently does not like its nearfield impacted. Out at the 2 mile range is where this begins to get interesting. 3.650 bests 900 on an RSSI measurement at all points tested. Of course 3.650 bested on performance at those locations as well. Scottie had asked about hilly terrain and I want to test in that environment. My gut tells me no go through a hill but I have seen so many good links at locations non wimax gear couldn't go that I am not ready to follow my gut and say no way to hills. We are going to put Wimax into a large coal mine application which is no tress and BIG holes in the ground. Propogation analysis shows we will need 5 base stations to cover the target area. I am betting that 2 or 3 bases will actually do the job once we begin the field testing. We also just completed field measurements of a 3.650 install. In this project we created a 2 meter High resolution Propogation study to predict coverage. Once these studies are tuned with real world field measurements we expect to see a predicted vs actual RSSI variance of less than 3db. We will also then begin to understand what real world attenuation values an oak vs a maple tree represent. These 1 or 2 meter studies are flat awesome. Through our in house process we generate trees and buildings as clutter + anything else of value to the prediction. Now the application knows about every tree, even the one in the curblawn. We are doing a high res extraction for our test site and will do an analysis at 900, and 3.650 using each variant of diversity. This data will be correlated and tuned for actual field results. I will make that data available once it is complete and that will tell a black and white story of what one can expect from the tested configurations. I am seeing that Wimax is a little harder to predict coverage as accurately as a traditional radio. What we are seeing is the prop model shows no coverage, field experience tells us that the model is correct. Field testing shows that we have Wimax coverage where we believe we should not. We may need to move to a 3D Ray Tracing model to more accurately predict Wimax, but this increases our processing time by a factor of 3 :-(. Luckily we have the best software available and it allows us considerable flexibility, not for the faint of heart though, I think at last tally we have over 500K invested :-(. Mike At 03:33 AM 7/22/2008, you wrote: > > > >- Original Message - >From: "Mike Cowan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "WISPA General List" >Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 4:06 PM >Subject: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > > > > > Customer 1- 8.4 mile NLOS location. blocked by heavy trees . 1.5MB > > download holding CPE in their hand on the ground! Decided to test > > 5.8 at this location and @ 50' AGL the CPE got a link. 5.8 mounted > > on the same tower, same height as 3.650. The 5.8 system could not > > pass data and could just barely maintain association. > >I'm aware of the attenuation of trees on 5 ghz. It's deadly serious :) > >But the question I have is... Exactly what EIRP at the acess point, and >what at the client? > >Adjusting the MAC does not magically change the physics of how or why RF >does or does not get attenuated by trees or dirt or buildings, or whatever. >I realize you can improve signal propagation and decoding reliability with >OFDM, but it does not violate the law of RF and attenuation. > >On hte other hand, if you build a good enough front end, you can use >extraordinary sensitivity to hear and decode the RF signals at very low >levels. So, that all being said, What was the EIRP at the AP and CPE end? > >Does anyone here have solid information on the attentuation of 3.65 ghz t >hrough trees? A random guess would put it between 2.4 ghz and 5 ghz, but >perahps wavelenth at that frequency is amenable to penetration of foliage - >lower than I would expe
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
- Original Message - From: "Mike Cowan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 4:06 PM Subject: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > Customer 1- 8.4 mile NLOS location. blocked by heavy trees . 1.5MB > download holding CPE in their hand on the ground! Decided to test > 5.8 at this location and @ 50' AGL the CPE got a link. 5.8 mounted > on the same tower, same height as 3.650. The 5.8 system could not > pass data and could just barely maintain association. I'm aware of the attenuation of trees on 5 ghz. It's deadly serious :) But the question I have is... Exactly what EIRP at the acess point, and what at the client? Adjusting the MAC does not magically change the physics of how or why RF does or does not get attenuated by trees or dirt or buildings, or whatever. I realize you can improve signal propagation and decoding reliability with OFDM, but it does not violate the law of RF and attenuation. On hte other hand, if you build a good enough front end, you can use extraordinary sensitivity to hear and decode the RF signals at very low levels. So, that all being said, What was the EIRP at the AP and CPE end? Does anyone here have solid information on the attentuation of 3.65 ghz t hrough trees? A random guess would put it between 2.4 ghz and 5 ghz, but perahps wavelenth at that frequency is amenable to penetration of foliage - lower than I would expect, perhaps? In any case, your post reminds me that I doubt any of us are familiar with 3.65 ghz propagation and we need to get familiar... Your posting and experience gives hope that it might be better than hoped for, and that would be serendipity defined and if so, we should all be grateful. Anyway, the further information would certainly be helpful in estimating actual performance, spectrum-wise.. > > > > > > Mike Cowan > Wireless Connections > A Division of ACC > 166 Milan Ave > Norwalk, OH 44857 > 419-660-6100 > 419-706-7348 Cell > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > www.wirelessconnections.net > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
Redmax 100U - Lower power (23dbm) basesation $10k with sector antenna. Redmax 100UX - Certified last week, higher powered (36dbm) basestation $14k with sector antenna. -Eric John McDowell wrote: > I hear RedMax is coming down in price on CPEs when you buy a pallet of 72. > Sub $400. > > Mike, I'm interested to know what Alvarion is pricing the 3.65 gear now that > it is available. Have they come down at all? > > On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:05 PM, Brian Rohrbacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > >> So, how much does this stuff cost? >> >> Brian >> >> >> John McDowell wrote: >> >> I believe it. >> >> Today we had a 1.5 mile shot through dense trees using Redline Redmax 3.65. >> Customer was getting close to 500k upload. Signal held steady at 88db on a >> 1-story house. >> >> On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:01 PM, Mike Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL >> PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> Many of you have known me for years, some wish they didn't :-). I am >> the doubting Thomas type and have to test myself before I recommend >> products to a client. Lets just say that Thomas was satisfied. Now >> the clients are echoing the same and that is what drives my wagon. >> Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> Mike >> >> >> At 08:52 PM 7/21/2008, you wrote: >> >> >> Same here, I thought it was all marketing hype, if it works like the >> poster mentioned, we will need to consider moving up our timetable for >> evaluating wimax, 10k a basestation suddenly isn't that bad with the >> performance described. >> >> Regards >> Michael Baird >> >> >> >> Now this is a 180* of what others have told me, even others offering >> traditional, D, and E products. >> >> >> -- >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutionshttp://www.ics-il.com >> >> Mike Cowan >> Wireless Connections >> A Division of ACC >> 166 Milan Ave >> Norwalk, OH 44857 >> 419-660-6100 >> 419-706-7348 [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> >> >> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today!http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> >> >> >> >> >> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> >> > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
I think I mentioned last week that we were going to be doing testing with Aperto gear. We were so impressed that we are finishing up the paperwork to become a VAR for them (not sure if any of the other VAR's on the list are). I've been a skeptic of 3.65 WiMAX since the day it was mentioned too me... basically the too good to be true type thing. Everyone else in the company thought really the same thing. Field testing, while not nearly as extensive as others have done on this list (we are limited by the "tower location" i.e. the roof of the building, we had to play with) but 5 miles near line of sight at full modulation was no problem. We were even getting 6Mb or so through our metal roof, with the sector pointing 180 degrees away. When I try that with a 5.2GHz Canopy SM we are lucky if it connects! We were sold on Aperto by CPE cost, the EMS management system, and the company background (Aperto is one of the big players on the international market). I'd be happy to shoot a quote to anyone that is interested. I'll be attending the technical training along with Dave Kennedy on Aug 6th to really grasp what this equipment can do. So far I have been really impressed (but the Tranzeo looking CPE case has to go, which they are promising me is on its way out) Anyways my 2 cents... another critic convinced Daniel White 3-dB Networks -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John McDowell Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 8:30 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field Depends, sub $10,000. Boun Senekham at CTI can help you with a quote if you're interested: [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:38 PM, Brian Rohrbacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What about APs? > > John McDowell wrote: > > I hear RedMax is coming down in price on CPEs when you buy a pallet of 72. > Sub $400. > > Mike, I'm interested to know what Alvarion is pricing the 3.65 gear now that > it is available. Have they come down at all? > > On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:05 PM, Brian Rohrbacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > So, how much does this stuff cost? > > Brian > > > John McDowell wrote: > > I believe it. > > Today we had a 1.5 mile shot through dense trees using Redline Redmax 3.65. > Customer was getting close to 500k upload. Signal held steady at 88db on a > 1-story house. > > On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:01 PM, Mike Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > Many of you have known me for years, some wish they didn't :-). I am > the doubting Thomas type and have to test myself before I recommend > products to a client. Lets just say that Thomas was satisfied. Now > the clients are echoing the same and that is what drives my wagon. > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Mike > > > At 08:52 PM 7/21/2008, you wrote: > > > Same here, I thought it was all marketing hype, if it works like the > poster mentioned, we will need to consider moving up our timetable for > evaluating wimax, 10k a basestation suddenly isn't that bad with the > performance described. > > Regards > Michael Baird > > > > Now this is a 180* of what others have told me, even others offering > traditional, D, and E products. > > > -- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutionshttp://www.ics-il.com > > Mike Cowan > Wireless Connections > A Division of ACC > 166 Milan Ave > Norwalk, OH 44857 > 419-660-6100 > 419-706-7348 [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today!http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today!http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wi
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
Depends, sub $10,000. Boun Senekham at CTI can help you with a quote if you're interested: [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:38 PM, Brian Rohrbacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What about APs? > > John McDowell wrote: > > I hear RedMax is coming down in price on CPEs when you buy a pallet of 72. > Sub $400. > > Mike, I'm interested to know what Alvarion is pricing the 3.65 gear now that > it is available. Have they come down at all? > > On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:05 PM, Brian Rohrbacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL > PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > So, how much does this stuff cost? > > Brian > > > John McDowell wrote: > > I believe it. > > Today we had a 1.5 mile shot through dense trees using Redline Redmax 3.65. > Customer was getting close to 500k upload. Signal held steady at 88db on a > 1-story house. > > On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:01 PM, Mike Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL > PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > Many of you have known me for years, some wish they didn't :-). I am > the doubting Thomas type and have to test myself before I recommend > products to a client. Lets just say that Thomas was satisfied. Now > the clients are echoing the same and that is what drives my wagon. > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Mike > > > At 08:52 PM 7/21/2008, you wrote: > > > Same here, I thought it was all marketing hype, if it works like the > poster mentioned, we will need to consider moving up our timetable for > evaluating wimax, 10k a basestation suddenly isn't that bad with the > performance described. > > Regards > Michael Baird > > > > Now this is a 180* of what others have told me, even others offering > traditional, D, and E products. > > > -- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutionshttp://www.ics-il.com > > Mike Cowan > Wireless Connections > A Division of ACC > 166 Milan Ave > Norwalk, OH 44857 > 419-660-6100 > 419-706-7348 [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today!http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today!http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > -- John M. McDowell Boonlink Communications 307 Grand Ave NW Fort Payne, AL 35967 256.844.9932 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.boonlink.com This message contains information which may be confidential and privileged. Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive for the addressee), you may not use, copy, re-transmit, or disclose to anyone the message or any information contained in the message. If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED], and delete the message. E-mail communication is highly susceptible to spoofing, spamming, and other tampering, some of which may be harmful to your computer. If you are concerned about the authenticity of the message or the source, please contact the sender directly. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
What about APs? John McDowell wrote: I hear RedMax is coming down in price on CPEs when you buy a pallet of 72. Sub $400. Mike, I'm interested to know what Alvarion is pricing the 3.65 gear now that it is available. Have they come down at all? On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:05 PM, Brian Rohrbacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: So, how much does this stuff cost? Brian John McDowell wrote: I believe it. Today we had a 1.5 mile shot through dense trees using Redline Redmax 3.65. Customer was getting close to 500k upload. Signal held steady at 88db on a 1-story house. On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:01 PM, Mike Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Many of you have known me for years, some wish they didn't :-). I am the doubting Thomas type and have to test myself before I recommend products to a client. Lets just say that Thomas was satisfied. Now the clients are echoing the same and that is what drives my wagon. Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mike At 08:52 PM 7/21/2008, you wrote: Same here, I thought it was all marketing hype, if it works like the poster mentioned, we will need to consider moving up our timetable for evaluating wimax, 10k a basestation suddenly isn't that bad with the performance described. Regards Michael Baird Now this is a 180* of what others have told me, even others offering traditional, D, and E products. -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutionshttp://www.ics-il.com Mike Cowan Wireless Connections A Division of ACC 166 Milan Ave Norwalk, OH 44857 419-660-6100 419-706-7348 [EMAIL PROTECTED] WISPA Wants You! Join today!http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
I hear RedMax is coming down in price on CPEs when you buy a pallet of 72. Sub $400. Mike, I'm interested to know what Alvarion is pricing the 3.65 gear now that it is available. Have they come down at all? On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:05 PM, Brian Rohrbacher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So, how much does this stuff cost? > > Brian > > > John McDowell wrote: > > I believe it. > > Today we had a 1.5 mile shot through dense trees using Redline Redmax 3.65. > Customer was getting close to 500k upload. Signal held steady at 88db on a > 1-story house. > > On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:01 PM, Mike Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL > PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > Many of you have known me for years, some wish they didn't :-). I am > the doubting Thomas type and have to test myself before I recommend > products to a client. Lets just say that Thomas was satisfied. Now > the clients are echoing the same and that is what drives my wagon. > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Mike > > > At 08:52 PM 7/21/2008, you wrote: > > > Same here, I thought it was all marketing hype, if it works like the > poster mentioned, we will need to consider moving up our timetable for > evaluating wimax, 10k a basestation suddenly isn't that bad with the > performance described. > > Regards > Michael Baird > > > > Now this is a 180* of what others have told me, even others offering > traditional, D, and E products. > > > -- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutionshttp://www.ics-il.com > > Mike Cowan > Wireless Connections > A Division of ACC > 166 Milan Ave > Norwalk, OH 44857 > 419-660-6100 > 419-706-7348 [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today!http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > -- John M. McDowell Boonlink Communications 307 Grand Ave NW Fort Payne, AL 35967 256.844.9932 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.boonlink.com This message contains information which may be confidential and privileged. Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive for the addressee), you may not use, copy, re-transmit, or disclose to anyone the message or any information contained in the message. If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED], and delete the message. E-mail communication is highly susceptible to spoofing, spamming, and other tampering, some of which may be harmful to your computer. If you are concerned about the authenticity of the message or the source, please contact the sender directly. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
So, how much does this stuff cost? Brian John McDowell wrote: I believe it. Today we had a 1.5 mile shot through dense trees using Redline Redmax 3.65. Customer was getting close to 500k upload. Signal held steady at 88db on a 1-story house. On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:01 PM, Mike Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Many of you have known me for years, some wish they didn't :-). I am the doubting Thomas type and have to test myself before I recommend products to a client. Lets just say that Thomas was satisfied. Now the clients are echoing the same and that is what drives my wagon. Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mike At 08:52 PM 7/21/2008, you wrote: Same here, I thought it was all marketing hype, if it works like the poster mentioned, we will need to consider moving up our timetable for evaluating wimax, 10k a basestation suddenly isn't that bad with the performance described. Regards Michael Baird Now this is a 180* of what others have told me, even others offering traditional, D, and E products. -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Mike Cowan Wireless Connections A Division of ACC 166 Milan Ave Norwalk, OH 44857 419-660-6100 419-706-7348 Cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.wirelessconnections.net WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
I believe it. Today we had a 1.5 mile shot through dense trees using Redline Redmax 3.65. Customer was getting close to 500k upload. Signal held steady at 88db on a 1-story house. On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:01 PM, Mike Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Many of you have known me for years, some wish they didn't :-). I am > the doubting Thomas type and have to test myself before I recommend > products to a client. Lets just say that Thomas was satisfied. Now > the clients are echoing the same and that is what drives my wagon. > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Mike > > > At 08:52 PM 7/21/2008, you wrote: > >Same here, I thought it was all marketing hype, if it works like the > >poster mentioned, we will need to consider moving up our timetable for > >evaluating wimax, 10k a basestation suddenly isn't that bad with the > >performance described. > > > >Regards > >Michael Baird > > > > > Now this is a 180* of what others have told me, even others offering > > > traditional, D, and E products. > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Mike Hammett > > > Intelligent Computing Solutions > > > http://www.ics-il.com > > > > > Mike Cowan > Wireless Connections > A Division of ACC > 166 Milan Ave > Norwalk, OH 44857 > 419-660-6100 > 419-706-7348 Cell > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > www.wirelessconnections.net > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > -- John M. McDowell Boonlink Communications 307 Grand Ave NW Fort Payne, AL 35967 256.844.9932 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.boonlink.com This message contains information which may be confidential and privileged. Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive for the addressee), you may not use, copy, re-transmit, or disclose to anyone the message or any information contained in the message. If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED], and delete the message. E-mail communication is highly susceptible to spoofing, spamming, and other tampering, some of which may be harmful to your computer. If you are concerned about the authenticity of the message or the source, please contact the sender directly. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
Many of you have known me for years, some wish they didn't :-). I am the doubting Thomas type and have to test myself before I recommend products to a client. Lets just say that Thomas was satisfied. Now the clients are echoing the same and that is what drives my wagon. Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mike At 08:52 PM 7/21/2008, you wrote: >Same here, I thought it was all marketing hype, if it works like the >poster mentioned, we will need to consider moving up our timetable for >evaluating wimax, 10k a basestation suddenly isn't that bad with the >performance described. > >Regards >Michael Baird > > > Now this is a 180* of what others have told me, even others offering > > traditional, D, and E products. > > > > > > -- > > Mike Hammett > > Intelligent Computing Solutions > > http://www.ics-il.com > > Mike Cowan Wireless Connections A Division of ACC 166 Milan Ave Norwalk, OH 44857 419-660-6100 419-706-7348 Cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.wirelessconnections.net WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
Same here, I thought it was all marketing hype, if it works like the poster mentioned, we will need to consider moving up our timetable for evaluating wimax, 10k a basestation suddenly isn't that bad with the performance described. Regards Michael Baird > Now this is a 180* of what others have told me, even others offering > traditional, D, and E products. > > > -- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > - Original Message - > From: "Mike Cowan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 6:06 PM > Subject: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > > > > With some of the Wimax discussions going on I thought I would throw > > my hat into the ring. > > > > 3.650 Wimax using 802.16d only products provides decent connectivity, > > at a higher cost than traditional unlicensed > > gear. Performance/coverage is on par, or better than 2.4 that most > > of are used to. Pay a little extra for product, gain access to > > cleaner spectrum and hopefully a rule set that helps keep it cleaner > > than our wild wild west unlicensed world. > > > > Now deploy 3.650 using 802.16e upgradeable products. The coverage > > difference when using diversity options goes up significantly. Now > > 3.650 begins to act and feel more like a 900Mhz product with NLOS > > coverage capability. Actually our customers, and our field tests are > > showing that it exceeds 900Mhz often by a large margin. Here are a > > couple recent field examples all 2nd order diversity: > > > > Customer 1- 8.4 mile NLOS location. blocked by heavy trees . 1.5MB > > download holding CPE in their hand on the ground! Decided to test > > 5.8 at this location and @ 50' AGL the CPE got a link. 5.8 mounted > > on the same tower, same height as 3.650. The 5.8 system could not > > pass data and could just barely maintain association. > > > > Customer 2- 12.4 miles away at the owners home. 1.0mb on the > > ground. This location could not be serviced by 2.4 or 5.8 at 40' > > above the ground previously. The owner is going to mount Wimax on > > the roof and I expect he will se 10-12MB at that height. > > > > Customer 2- 12.6 miles on the ground. Completely obstructed 6MB down 3MB > > up. > > > > Customer 3- This is one of the most telling. Canopy 900 > > operator. 3.650 2nd order diversity mounted 10' below Canopy. 100% > > coverage at 3.650 of a small city. It takes 2 tower locations > > with 900 here to serve the same area. They gave up field testing > > because "it works everywhere". They the said "lets try to break > > it". We drove to a part of town that is challenged with 900 > > coverage. They found a traditionally bad coverage spot and drove up > > to a big tree, took the CPE out of the vehicle and buried it in the > > tree. -101 signal. They then picked up their VOIP phone and called > > the NOC and did a "can you hear me now"? Toll quality voice call. > > > > Our internal testing is showing similar results. Using 4th order > > diversity is showing even better results than above. When you do the > > upgrade to 16e and add Wave II CPE, Katy bar the door. That coverage > > is nothing less than jaw dropping. 2.5 miles obstructed with a PC > > card! Same PC card 1 mile away entering a commercial building, no > > signal change. Not possible with a traditional system. In this case > > the wall measured a 25db loss, however STC and MRC diversity gains > > completely made up for the attenuation once the paths became uncorrelated. > > > > Bottom line is diversity is the place to be with Wimax. It is more > > expensive, so find a way to afford it. Push your vendor for price > > breaks and don't be bashful. Alvarion for example is willing to work > > to earn business as well as the others. CPE costs for D and E > > systems are the same today, E will be much cheaper in the near > > future. Not all Wimax is the same, so test a site or visit one, you > > will walk away amazed. > > > > My two cents, and we carry all D and E products. Each has its place. > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > > > Mike Cowan > > Wireless Connections > > A Division of ACC > > 166 Milan Ave > > Norwalk, OH 44857 > > 419-660-6100 > > 419-706-7348 Cell > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > www.wirelessconnections.net > > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wir
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
Now this is a 180* of what others have told me, even others offering traditional, D, and E products. -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: "Mike Cowan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 6:06 PM Subject: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field > With some of the Wimax discussions going on I thought I would throw > my hat into the ring. > > 3.650 Wimax using 802.16d only products provides decent connectivity, > at a higher cost than traditional unlicensed > gear. Performance/coverage is on par, or better than 2.4 that most > of are used to. Pay a little extra for product, gain access to > cleaner spectrum and hopefully a rule set that helps keep it cleaner > than our wild wild west unlicensed world. > > Now deploy 3.650 using 802.16e upgradeable products. The coverage > difference when using diversity options goes up significantly. Now > 3.650 begins to act and feel more like a 900Mhz product with NLOS > coverage capability. Actually our customers, and our field tests are > showing that it exceeds 900Mhz often by a large margin. Here are a > couple recent field examples all 2nd order diversity: > > Customer 1- 8.4 mile NLOS location. blocked by heavy trees . 1.5MB > download holding CPE in their hand on the ground! Decided to test > 5.8 at this location and @ 50' AGL the CPE got a link. 5.8 mounted > on the same tower, same height as 3.650. The 5.8 system could not > pass data and could just barely maintain association. > > Customer 2- 12.4 miles away at the owners home. 1.0mb on the > ground. This location could not be serviced by 2.4 or 5.8 at 40' > above the ground previously. The owner is going to mount Wimax on > the roof and I expect he will se 10-12MB at that height. > > Customer 2- 12.6 miles on the ground. Completely obstructed 6MB down 3MB > up. > > Customer 3- This is one of the most telling. Canopy 900 > operator. 3.650 2nd order diversity mounted 10' below Canopy. 100% > coverage at 3.650 of a small city. It takes 2 tower locations > with 900 here to serve the same area. They gave up field testing > because "it works everywhere". They the said "lets try to break > it". We drove to a part of town that is challenged with 900 > coverage. They found a traditionally bad coverage spot and drove up > to a big tree, took the CPE out of the vehicle and buried it in the > tree. -101 signal. They then picked up their VOIP phone and called > the NOC and did a "can you hear me now"? Toll quality voice call. > > Our internal testing is showing similar results. Using 4th order > diversity is showing even better results than above. When you do the > upgrade to 16e and add Wave II CPE, Katy bar the door. That coverage > is nothing less than jaw dropping. 2.5 miles obstructed with a PC > card! Same PC card 1 mile away entering a commercial building, no > signal change. Not possible with a traditional system. In this case > the wall measured a 25db loss, however STC and MRC diversity gains > completely made up for the attenuation once the paths became uncorrelated. > > Bottom line is diversity is the place to be with Wimax. It is more > expensive, so find a way to afford it. Push your vendor for price > breaks and don't be bashful. Alvarion for example is willing to work > to earn business as well as the others. CPE costs for D and E > systems are the same today, E will be much cheaper in the near > future. Not all Wimax is the same, so test a site or visit one, you > will walk away amazed. > > My two cents, and we carry all D and E products. Each has its place. > > Mike > > > > > > Mike Cowan > Wireless Connections > A Division of ACC > 166 Milan Ave > Norwalk, OH 44857 > 419-660-6100 > 419-706-7348 Cell > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > www.wirelessconnections.net > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
Hi Scottie, No, all flat ground but Midwest trees. Your scenario would be an interesting test. Mike At 07:59 PM 7/21/2008, you wrote: >Mike you have peaked my interest with the 900Mhz against the 3.65. >Were any of these tests done with hills? My problem is we have >hills, and lots of them and trees too. You can't drive much more >than a mile without going up a hill with a change of 100 - 150 ft in >elevation. Anyone tested or used 3.65 under these circumstances that >care to chime in? > >Scottie Mike Cowan Wireless Connections A Division of ACC 166 Milan Ave Norwalk, OH 44857 419-660-6100 419-706-7348 Cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.wirelessconnections.net WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3.650 Wimax in the field
Mike you have peaked my interest with the 900Mhz against the 3.65. Were any of these tests done with hills? My problem is we have hills, and lots of them and trees too. You can't drive much more than a mile without going up a hill with a change of 100 - 150 ft in elevation. Anyone tested or used 3.65 under these circumstances that care to chime in? Scottie -- Original Message -- From: Mike Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: WISPA General List Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 19:06:59 -0400 >With some of the Wimax discussions going on I thought I would throw >my hat into the ring. > >3.650 Wimax using 802.16d only products provides decent connectivity, >at a higher cost than traditional unlicensed >gear. Performance/coverage is on par, or better than 2.4 that most >of are used to. Pay a little extra for product, gain access to >cleaner spectrum and hopefully a rule set that helps keep it cleaner >than our wild wild west unlicensed world. > >Now deploy 3.650 using 802.16e upgradeable products. The coverage >difference when using diversity options goes up significantly. Now >3.650 begins to act and feel more like a 900Mhz product with NLOS >coverage capability. Actually our customers, and our field tests are >showing that it exceeds 900Mhz often by a large margin. Here are a >couple recent field examples all 2nd order diversity: > >Customer 1- 8.4 mile NLOS location. blocked by heavy trees . 1.5MB >download holding CPE in their hand on the ground! Decided to test >5.8 at this location and @ 50' AGL the CPE got a link. 5.8 mounted >on the same tower, same height as 3.650. The 5.8 system could not >pass data and could just barely maintain association. > >Customer 2- 12.4 miles away at the owners home. 1.0mb on the >ground. This location could not be serviced by 2.4 or 5.8 at 40' >above the ground previously. The owner is going to mount Wimax on >the roof and I expect he will se 10-12MB at that height. > >Customer 2- 12.6 miles on the ground. Completely obstructed 6MB down 3MB up. > >Customer 3- This is one of the most telling. Canopy 900 >operator. 3.650 2nd order diversity mounted 10' below Canopy. 100% >coverage at 3.650 of a small city. It takes 2 tower locations >with 900 here to serve the same area. They gave up field testing >because "it works everywhere". They the said "lets try to break >it". We drove to a part of town that is challenged with 900 >coverage. They found a traditionally bad coverage spot and drove up >to a big tree, took the CPE out of the vehicle and buried it in the >tree. -101 signal. They then picked up their VOIP phone and called >the NOC and did a "can you hear me now"? Toll quality voice call. > >Our internal testing is showing similar results. Using 4th order >diversity is showing even better results than above. When you do the >upgrade to 16e and add Wave II CPE, Katy bar the door. That coverage >is nothing less than jaw dropping. 2.5 miles obstructed with a PC >card! Same PC card 1 mile away entering a commercial building, no >signal change. Not possible with a traditional system. In this case >the wall measured a 25db loss, however STC and MRC diversity gains >completely made up for the attenuation once the paths became uncorrelated. > >Bottom line is diversity is the place to be with Wimax. It is more >expensive, so find a way to afford it. Push your vendor for price >breaks and don't be bashful. Alvarion for example is willing to work >to earn business as well as the others. CPE costs for D and E >systems are the same today, E will be much cheaper in the near >future. Not all Wimax is the same, so test a site or visit one, you >will walk away amazed. > >My two cents, and we carry all D and E products. Each has its place. > >Mike > > > > > >Mike Cowan >Wireless Connections >A Division of ACC >166 Milan Ave >Norwalk, OH 44857 >419-660-6100 >419-706-7348 Cell >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >www.wirelessconnections.net > > > >WISPA Wants You! Join today! >http://signup.wispa.org/ > > >WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > >Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > >Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >--- >[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] > > Dial-Up Internet service from Info-Ed, Inc. as low as $9.99/mth. Check out www.info-ed.com for information. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
