Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

2006-10-04 Thread Travis Johnson
So the AP will deliver 14Mbps of bandwidth even if all the SM's are only 
running at 1x rate?


Travis
Microserv

Mike Bushard, Jr wrote:


Run Advantage AP's and Legacy SM's.

With the Advantage AP's and legacy SM's you get the Latency, and High
Priority Channel all the time, and can burst to full 2X Rate. If you need
the full 2x Rate Sustained, buy an Advantage SM.


To answer your question, yes the Advantage AP will deliver the full 14Mb
Aggregate.

Mike Bushard, Jr
Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 11:51 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

Another quick question...

If you are running a Canopy Advantage AP and you use regular Canopy 
SM's, can the AP still deliver the 14Mbps of bandwidth, or will it be 
limited to 7Mbps (like the SM's)?


Trying to decide if I want to use Advantage SM's or just regular?

Travis
Microserv

Anthony Will wrote:

 

Well I have had 2.4ghz radio's link up at -89db (not very well mind 
you but...) so I don't know what to tell you other then Moto has 
traditionally understated there spec sheets.  The GPS is what sets the 
timing for the AP's.  The AP's coordinate the timing slots for all 
SM's registered to them.  So how it works is that all AP's on channel 
1 across the world all transmit at the same time, and all SM's synced 
to a AP on channel 1 with GPS timing from the AP listen at the same 
time.  Distance is not relevant unless you are utilizing the feature 
set of the SM to retransmit a GPS sync pulse that it receives from and 
AP to a BH or AP.  The lag that is introduced by having to transmit 
that pulse info across the wireless link to the SM retransmitting is 
the only time that distance can come into play.  The application this 
is used for is for a cheap repeater system so that you dont have to 
have a GPS synchronizing device at every tower.

   /SM
GPS --AP#1 /
  \
\SM (retransmitting GPS sync pulse) --AP#2 
--SM (retransmitting GPS sync pulse) --AP#3 (this AP will be out of 
sync with AP#1)


Basically the timing is measured in nano seconds so it takes to long 
for RF to transmit the data across the wireless links to continue to 
propagate the timing signal.  But if you put a GPS sync generating 
device at AP#3 it would be in perfect time with AP#1 and close enough 
timing with AP#2 that they all would get along.


One thing to keep in mind is if you are the only Canopy shop in the 
area you can have your AP's generate the sync pulse and avoid the cost 
of the GPS synchronizing items.  Also again as for the distance 
statement.  6 AP's in a cluster sharing 3 channels have to be synced.  
believe me the messy antenna on the Canopy units dont have a good 
enough F/B ratio to not hear another AP 6 away from it.  The two AP's 
that are back to back share the same channel so that when they 
transmit the SM's that are listening are as far away from each other 
as possible and thus reduce any chance of talking over each other.  
The largest benefit that GPS sync allows is to add additional capacity 
to area's by allowing for more towers to be in a smaller area without 
self interference.  If long range rural deployments are the plan then 
GPS sync will only benefit you if you have competitors utilizing the 
same equipment and configuration in the area.  So a Moto advantage 
cluster has about 84mb total (Classic Canopy would be 42mb) FTP 
bandwidth available to it.  If more is needed you can place the towers 
with in a few miles and divide a cell into two micro cells each with a 
possible 84mb of total bandwidth for a total of 168mb serviced to a 
given area. One last note, GPS timing will not allow for two separate 
clusters of the same type ( two 2.4ghz clusters) to be on the same 
tower.  I can't write out whats in my head on this getting a 
little late in the night but if you wanted to I could talk to you over 
the phone and explain it.  Send me an email to anthonyw (at) 
broadband-mn.com and Ill give you my cell phone number or give you a 
call.


Anthony Will
Broadband Corp.

Travis Johnson wrote:

   


Hi,

First, the spec sheet on Motorola's website says -86 RSSI.

What happens when you have more than 3 towers outside of the 8 mile 
range of GPS sync? The 2.4ghz signal will definately travel that far, 
causing self-interference, correct?


Travis
Microserv

Anthony Will wrote:

 


Answers in-line

Travis Johnson wrote:

   


Hi,

I'd like to go back to the specs on different radios just so I can 
compare for myself...


Trango 2.4ghz:
5Mbps auto ratio
8 non-overlapping channels
10mhz spectrum per channel
-90 Receive level
15 mile range (without a grid)
External connector and dual-pol integrated antenna
$879 AP (WISP price)
$479 SU (WISP price)

Canopy 2.4ghz (regular):
7Mbps fixed ratio
3 non-overlapping channels

RE: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

2006-10-04 Thread Gino A. Villarini
Not the case, 14 mbps is 2x mode, but the only reason for all your Sm's
would be a 1x would be cause they are old radios (p7,p8) or you have very
poor links ...

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 7:03 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

So the AP will deliver 14Mbps of bandwidth even if all the SM's are only 
running at 1x rate?

Travis
Microserv

Mike Bushard, Jr wrote:

Run Advantage AP's and Legacy SM's.

With the Advantage AP's and legacy SM's you get the Latency, and High
Priority Channel all the time, and can burst to full 2X Rate. If you need
the full 2x Rate Sustained, buy an Advantage SM.


To answer your question, yes the Advantage AP will deliver the full 14Mb
Aggregate.

Mike Bushard, Jr
Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 11:51 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

Another quick question...

If you are running a Canopy Advantage AP and you use regular Canopy 
SM's, can the AP still deliver the 14Mbps of bandwidth, or will it be 
limited to 7Mbps (like the SM's)?

Trying to decide if I want to use Advantage SM's or just regular?

Travis
Microserv

Anthony Will wrote:

  

Well I have had 2.4ghz radio's link up at -89db (not very well mind 
you but...) so I don't know what to tell you other then Moto has 
traditionally understated there spec sheets.  The GPS is what sets the 
timing for the AP's.  The AP's coordinate the timing slots for all 
SM's registered to them.  So how it works is that all AP's on channel 
1 across the world all transmit at the same time, and all SM's synced 
to a AP on channel 1 with GPS timing from the AP listen at the same 
time.  Distance is not relevant unless you are utilizing the feature 
set of the SM to retransmit a GPS sync pulse that it receives from and 
AP to a BH or AP.  The lag that is introduced by having to transmit 
that pulse info across the wireless link to the SM retransmitting is 
the only time that distance can come into play.  The application this 
is used for is for a cheap repeater system so that you dont have to 
have a GPS synchronizing device at every tower.
/SM
GPS --AP#1 /
   \
 \SM (retransmitting GPS sync pulse) --AP#2 
--SM (retransmitting GPS sync pulse) --AP#3 (this AP will be out of 
sync with AP#1)

Basically the timing is measured in nano seconds so it takes to long 
for RF to transmit the data across the wireless links to continue to 
propagate the timing signal.  But if you put a GPS sync generating 
device at AP#3 it would be in perfect time with AP#1 and close enough 
timing with AP#2 that they all would get along.

One thing to keep in mind is if you are the only Canopy shop in the 
area you can have your AP's generate the sync pulse and avoid the cost 
of the GPS synchronizing items.  Also again as for the distance 
statement.  6 AP's in a cluster sharing 3 channels have to be synced.  
believe me the messy antenna on the Canopy units dont have a good 
enough F/B ratio to not hear another AP 6 away from it.  The two AP's 
that are back to back share the same channel so that when they 
transmit the SM's that are listening are as far away from each other 
as possible and thus reduce any chance of talking over each other.  
The largest benefit that GPS sync allows is to add additional capacity 
to area's by allowing for more towers to be in a smaller area without 
self interference.  If long range rural deployments are the plan then 
GPS sync will only benefit you if you have competitors utilizing the 
same equipment and configuration in the area.  So a Moto advantage 
cluster has about 84mb total (Classic Canopy would be 42mb) FTP 
bandwidth available to it.  If more is needed you can place the towers 
with in a few miles and divide a cell into two micro cells each with a 
possible 84mb of total bandwidth for a total of 168mb serviced to a 
given area. One last note, GPS timing will not allow for two separate 
clusters of the same type ( two 2.4ghz clusters) to be on the same 
tower.  I can't write out whats in my head on this getting a 
little late in the night but if you wanted to I could talk to you over 
the phone and explain it.  Send me an email to anthonyw (at) 
broadband-mn.com and Ill give you my cell phone number or give you a 
call.

Anthony Will
Broadband Corp.

Travis Johnson wrote:



Hi,

First, the spec sheet on Motorola's website says -86 RSSI.

What happens when you have more than 3 towers outside of the 8 mile 
range of GPS sync? The 2.4ghz signal will definately travel that far, 
causing self-interference, correct?

Travis

Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

2006-10-04 Thread Travis Johnson

Hi,

Don't you have to have like a -65 or better signal to get 2x rate?

Travis
Microserv

Gino A. Villarini wrote:


Not the case, 14 mbps is 2x mode, but the only reason for all your Sm's
would be a 1x would be cause they are old radios (p7,p8) or you have very
poor links ...

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 7:03 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

So the AP will deliver 14Mbps of bandwidth even if all the SM's are only 
running at 1x rate?


Travis
Microserv

Mike Bushard, Jr wrote:

 


Run Advantage AP's and Legacy SM's.

With the Advantage AP's and legacy SM's you get the Latency, and High
Priority Channel all the time, and can burst to full 2X Rate. If you need
the full 2x Rate Sustained, buy an Advantage SM.


To answer your question, yes the Advantage AP will deliver the full 14Mb
Aggregate.

Mike Bushard, Jr
Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 11:51 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

Another quick question...

If you are running a Canopy Advantage AP and you use regular Canopy 
SM's, can the AP still deliver the 14Mbps of bandwidth, or will it be 
limited to 7Mbps (like the SM's)?


Trying to decide if I want to use Advantage SM's or just regular?

Travis
Microserv

Anthony Will wrote:



   

Well I have had 2.4ghz radio's link up at -89db (not very well mind 
you but...) so I don't know what to tell you other then Moto has 
traditionally understated there spec sheets.  The GPS is what sets the 
timing for the AP's.  The AP's coordinate the timing slots for all 
SM's registered to them.  So how it works is that all AP's on channel 
1 across the world all transmit at the same time, and all SM's synced 
to a AP on channel 1 with GPS timing from the AP listen at the same 
time.  Distance is not relevant unless you are utilizing the feature 
set of the SM to retransmit a GPS sync pulse that it receives from and 
AP to a BH or AP.  The lag that is introduced by having to transmit 
that pulse info across the wireless link to the SM retransmitting is 
the only time that distance can come into play.  The application this 
is used for is for a cheap repeater system so that you dont have to 
have a GPS synchronizing device at every tower.

  /SM
GPS --AP#1 /
 \
   \SM (retransmitting GPS sync pulse) --AP#2 
--SM (retransmitting GPS sync pulse) --AP#3 (this AP will be out of 
sync with AP#1)


Basically the timing is measured in nano seconds so it takes to long 
for RF to transmit the data across the wireless links to continue to 
propagate the timing signal.  But if you put a GPS sync generating 
device at AP#3 it would be in perfect time with AP#1 and close enough 
timing with AP#2 that they all would get along.


One thing to keep in mind is if you are the only Canopy shop in the 
area you can have your AP's generate the sync pulse and avoid the cost 
of the GPS synchronizing items.  Also again as for the distance 
statement.  6 AP's in a cluster sharing 3 channels have to be synced.  
believe me the messy antenna on the Canopy units dont have a good 
enough F/B ratio to not hear another AP 6 away from it.  The two AP's 
that are back to back share the same channel so that when they 
transmit the SM's that are listening are as far away from each other 
as possible and thus reduce any chance of talking over each other.  
The largest benefit that GPS sync allows is to add additional capacity 
to area's by allowing for more towers to be in a smaller area without 
self interference.  If long range rural deployments are the plan then 
GPS sync will only benefit you if you have competitors utilizing the 
same equipment and configuration in the area.  So a Moto advantage 
cluster has about 84mb total (Classic Canopy would be 42mb) FTP 
bandwidth available to it.  If more is needed you can place the towers 
with in a few miles and divide a cell into two micro cells each with a 
possible 84mb of total bandwidth for a total of 168mb serviced to a 
given area. One last note, GPS timing will not allow for two separate 
clusters of the same type ( two 2.4ghz clusters) to be on the same 
tower.  I can't write out whats in my head on this getting a 
little late in the night but if you wanted to I could talk to you over 
the phone and explain it.  Send me an email to anthonyw (at) 
broadband-mn.com and Ill give you my cell phone number or give you a 
call.


Anthony Will
Broadband Corp.

Travis Johnson wrote:

  

 


Hi,

First, the spec sheet on Motorola's website says -86 RSSI.

What happens when you have more than 3 towers outside

RE: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

2006-10-04 Thread Gino A. Villarini
I have 2x links at -78 and so

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 7:22 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

Hi,

Don't you have to have like a -65 or better signal to get 2x rate?

Travis
Microserv

Gino A. Villarini wrote:

Not the case, 14 mbps is 2x mode, but the only reason for all your Sm's
would be a 1x would be cause they are old radios (p7,p8) or you have very
poor links ...

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 7:03 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

So the AP will deliver 14Mbps of bandwidth even if all the SM's are only 
running at 1x rate?

Travis
Microserv

Mike Bushard, Jr wrote:

  

Run Advantage AP's and Legacy SM's.

With the Advantage AP's and legacy SM's you get the Latency, and High
Priority Channel all the time, and can burst to full 2X Rate. If you need
the full 2x Rate Sustained, buy an Advantage SM.


To answer your question, yes the Advantage AP will deliver the full 14Mb
Aggregate.

Mike Bushard, Jr
Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 11:51 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

Another quick question...

If you are running a Canopy Advantage AP and you use regular Canopy 
SM's, can the AP still deliver the 14Mbps of bandwidth, or will it be 
limited to 7Mbps (like the SM's)?

Trying to decide if I want to use Advantage SM's or just regular?

Travis
Microserv

Anthony Will wrote:

 



Well I have had 2.4ghz radio's link up at -89db (not very well mind 
you but...) so I don't know what to tell you other then Moto has 
traditionally understated there spec sheets.  The GPS is what sets the 
timing for the AP's.  The AP's coordinate the timing slots for all 
SM's registered to them.  So how it works is that all AP's on channel 
1 across the world all transmit at the same time, and all SM's synced 
to a AP on channel 1 with GPS timing from the AP listen at the same 
time.  Distance is not relevant unless you are utilizing the feature 
set of the SM to retransmit a GPS sync pulse that it receives from and 
AP to a BH or AP.  The lag that is introduced by having to transmit 
that pulse info across the wireless link to the SM retransmitting is 
the only time that distance can come into play.  The application this 
is used for is for a cheap repeater system so that you dont have to 
have a GPS synchronizing device at every tower.
   /SM
GPS --AP#1 /
  \
\SM (retransmitting GPS sync pulse) --AP#2 
--SM (retransmitting GPS sync pulse) --AP#3 (this AP will be out of 
sync with AP#1)

Basically the timing is measured in nano seconds so it takes to long 
for RF to transmit the data across the wireless links to continue to 
propagate the timing signal.  But if you put a GPS sync generating 
device at AP#3 it would be in perfect time with AP#1 and close enough 
timing with AP#2 that they all would get along.

One thing to keep in mind is if you are the only Canopy shop in the 
area you can have your AP's generate the sync pulse and avoid the cost 
of the GPS synchronizing items.  Also again as for the distance 
statement.  6 AP's in a cluster sharing 3 channels have to be synced.  
believe me the messy antenna on the Canopy units dont have a good 
enough F/B ratio to not hear another AP 6 away from it.  The two AP's 
that are back to back share the same channel so that when they 
transmit the SM's that are listening are as far away from each other 
as possible and thus reduce any chance of talking over each other.  
The largest benefit that GPS sync allows is to add additional capacity 
to area's by allowing for more towers to be in a smaller area without 
self interference.  If long range rural deployments are the plan then 
GPS sync will only benefit you if you have competitors utilizing the 
same equipment and configuration in the area.  So a Moto advantage 
cluster has about 84mb total (Classic Canopy would be 42mb) FTP 
bandwidth available to it.  If more is needed you can place the towers 
with in a few miles and divide a cell into two micro cells each with a 
possible 84mb of total bandwidth for a total of 168mb serviced to a 
given area. One last note, GPS timing will not allow for two separate 
clusters of the same type ( two 2.4ghz clusters) to be on the same 
tower.  I can't write out whats in my head on this getting a 
little late in the night but if you wanted to I

Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

2006-10-04 Thread Travis Johnson

Ok. thanks for the information.

Travis
Microserv

Gino A. Villarini wrote:


I have 2x links at -78 and so

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 7:22 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

Hi,

Don't you have to have like a -65 or better signal to get 2x rate?

Travis
Microserv

Gino A. Villarini wrote:

 


Not the case, 14 mbps is 2x mode, but the only reason for all your Sm's
would be a 1x would be cause they are old radios (p7,p8) or you have very
poor links ...

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 7:03 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

So the AP will deliver 14Mbps of bandwidth even if all the SM's are only 
running at 1x rate?


Travis
Microserv

Mike Bushard, Jr wrote:



   


Run Advantage AP's and Legacy SM's.

With the Advantage AP's and legacy SM's you get the Latency, and High
Priority Channel all the time, and can burst to full 2X Rate. If you need
the full 2x Rate Sustained, buy an Advantage SM.


To answer your question, yes the Advantage AP will deliver the full 14Mb
Aggregate.

Mike Bushard, Jr
Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 11:51 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

Another quick question...

If you are running a Canopy Advantage AP and you use regular Canopy 
SM's, can the AP still deliver the 14Mbps of bandwidth, or will it be 
limited to 7Mbps (like the SM's)?


Trying to decide if I want to use Advantage SM's or just regular?

Travis
Microserv

Anthony Will wrote:



  

 

Well I have had 2.4ghz radio's link up at -89db (not very well mind 
you but...) so I don't know what to tell you other then Moto has 
traditionally understated there spec sheets.  The GPS is what sets the 
timing for the AP's.  The AP's coordinate the timing slots for all 
SM's registered to them.  So how it works is that all AP's on channel 
1 across the world all transmit at the same time, and all SM's synced 
to a AP on channel 1 with GPS timing from the AP listen at the same 
time.  Distance is not relevant unless you are utilizing the feature 
set of the SM to retransmit a GPS sync pulse that it receives from and 
AP to a BH or AP.  The lag that is introduced by having to transmit 
that pulse info across the wireless link to the SM retransmitting is 
the only time that distance can come into play.  The application this 
is used for is for a cheap repeater system so that you dont have to 
have a GPS synchronizing device at every tower.

 /SM
GPS --AP#1 /
\
  \SM (retransmitting GPS sync pulse) --AP#2 
--SM (retransmitting GPS sync pulse) --AP#3 (this AP will be out of 
sync with AP#1)


Basically the timing is measured in nano seconds so it takes to long 
for RF to transmit the data across the wireless links to continue to 
propagate the timing signal.  But if you put a GPS sync generating 
device at AP#3 it would be in perfect time with AP#1 and close enough 
timing with AP#2 that they all would get along.


One thing to keep in mind is if you are the only Canopy shop in the 
area you can have your AP's generate the sync pulse and avoid the cost 
of the GPS synchronizing items.  Also again as for the distance 
statement.  6 AP's in a cluster sharing 3 channels have to be synced.  
believe me the messy antenna on the Canopy units dont have a good 
enough F/B ratio to not hear another AP 6 away from it.  The two AP's 
that are back to back share the same channel so that when they 
transmit the SM's that are listening are as far away from each other 
as possible and thus reduce any chance of talking over each other.  
The largest benefit that GPS sync allows is to add additional capacity 
to area's by allowing for more towers to be in a smaller area without 
self interference.  If long range rural deployments are the plan then 
GPS sync will only benefit you if you have competitors utilizing the 
same equipment and configuration in the area.  So a Moto advantage 
cluster has about 84mb total (Classic Canopy would be 42mb) FTP 
bandwidth available to it.  If more is needed you can place the towers 
with in a few miles and divide a cell into two micro cells each with a 
possible 84mb of total bandwidth for a total of 168mb serviced to a 
given area. One last note, GPS timing will not allow for two separate 
clusters of the same type ( two 2.4ghz clusters) to be on the same 
tower.  I can't write out

RE: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

2006-10-04 Thread Mike Bushard, Jr
If you are buying all new hardware (P9) it will all do 2X rate (14Mbps). We
run Advantage AP's and Legacy SM's, here's why:

With the Advantage AP you it will fun full 2X 14Mbps all the time. Legacy
SM's will run Full 2x Rate for the duration of the burst setting in the SM,
alter the Burt bucket is expended it will rate limit itself to a max 7Mbps,
Still run in 2x rate but it limits the Ethernet port throughput.

It is kind of confusing at first.


Mike Bushard, Jr
Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 6:03 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

So the AP will deliver 14Mbps of bandwidth even if all the SM's are only 
running at 1x rate?

Travis
Microserv

Mike Bushard, Jr wrote:

Run Advantage AP's and Legacy SM's.

With the Advantage AP's and legacy SM's you get the Latency, and High
Priority Channel all the time, and can burst to full 2X Rate. If you need
the full 2x Rate Sustained, buy an Advantage SM.


To answer your question, yes the Advantage AP will deliver the full 14Mb
Aggregate.

Mike Bushard, Jr
Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 11:51 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

Another quick question...

If you are running a Canopy Advantage AP and you use regular Canopy 
SM's, can the AP still deliver the 14Mbps of bandwidth, or will it be 
limited to 7Mbps (like the SM's)?

Trying to decide if I want to use Advantage SM's or just regular?

Travis
Microserv

Anthony Will wrote:

  

Well I have had 2.4ghz radio's link up at -89db (not very well mind 
you but...) so I don't know what to tell you other then Moto has 
traditionally understated there spec sheets.  The GPS is what sets the 
timing for the AP's.  The AP's coordinate the timing slots for all 
SM's registered to them.  So how it works is that all AP's on channel 
1 across the world all transmit at the same time, and all SM's synced 
to a AP on channel 1 with GPS timing from the AP listen at the same 
time.  Distance is not relevant unless you are utilizing the feature 
set of the SM to retransmit a GPS sync pulse that it receives from and 
AP to a BH or AP.  The lag that is introduced by having to transmit 
that pulse info across the wireless link to the SM retransmitting is 
the only time that distance can come into play.  The application this 
is used for is for a cheap repeater system so that you dont have to 
have a GPS synchronizing device at every tower.
/SM
GPS --AP#1 /
   \
 \SM (retransmitting GPS sync pulse) --AP#2 
--SM (retransmitting GPS sync pulse) --AP#3 (this AP will be out of 
sync with AP#1)

Basically the timing is measured in nano seconds so it takes to long 
for RF to transmit the data across the wireless links to continue to 
propagate the timing signal.  But if you put a GPS sync generating 
device at AP#3 it would be in perfect time with AP#1 and close enough 
timing with AP#2 that they all would get along.

One thing to keep in mind is if you are the only Canopy shop in the 
area you can have your AP's generate the sync pulse and avoid the cost 
of the GPS synchronizing items.  Also again as for the distance 
statement.  6 AP's in a cluster sharing 3 channels have to be synced.  
believe me the messy antenna on the Canopy units dont have a good 
enough F/B ratio to not hear another AP 6 away from it.  The two AP's 
that are back to back share the same channel so that when they 
transmit the SM's that are listening are as far away from each other 
as possible and thus reduce any chance of talking over each other.  
The largest benefit that GPS sync allows is to add additional capacity 
to area's by allowing for more towers to be in a smaller area without 
self interference.  If long range rural deployments are the plan then 
GPS sync will only benefit you if you have competitors utilizing the 
same equipment and configuration in the area.  So a Moto advantage 
cluster has about 84mb total (Classic Canopy would be 42mb) FTP 
bandwidth available to it.  If more is needed you can place the towers 
with in a few miles and divide a cell into two micro cells each with a 
possible 84mb of total bandwidth for a total of 168mb serviced to a 
given area. One last note, GPS timing will not allow for two separate 
clusters of the same type ( two 2.4ghz clusters) to be on the same 
tower.  I can't write out whats in my head on this getting a 
little late in the night but if you wanted to I could talk to you over 
the phone and explain it.  Send me an email to anthonyw (at) 
broadband-mn.com and Ill give you my cell phone number or give you a 
call.

Anthony Will
Broadband Corp.

Travis Johnson wrote:



Hi,

First, the spec

RE: Motorola membership (Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon)

2006-09-29 Thread Dustin Jurman








Don, you talking about the AZ
event? 



DSJ











From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Renner
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006
10:58 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: Motorola membership
(Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon)





I will be in meetings with Motorola next
week. Will see if can get done. 



What level did Alvarion commit to?
Might help get them to make bigger outlay.



Don Renner

NetsurfUSA, Inc.

812-936-4514

[EMAIL PROTECTED]











From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick Harnish
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006
8:44 AM
To: 'WISPA
 General List'
Subject: RE: Motorola membership
(Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon)





Im not sure whether they have
yet. I think they were last year but I dont recall right now.
Anyone who is a valuable Motorola customer want to take this on? 





Rick Harnish

President

OnlyInternet Broadband  Wireless,
Inc.

260-827-2482

Founding Member of WISPA











From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dylan Oliver
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006
9:16 AM
To: WISPA
 General List
Subject: Motorola membership (Re:
[WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon)





On 9/28/06, Rick Harnish
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:









If we can get Motorola to become a WISPA vendor member, we
will gladly start a list here without those restrictions. 









How has Motorola been approached?

Best,
-- 
Dylan Oliver
Primaverity, LLC 






-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: Motorola membership (Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon)

2006-09-29 Thread Charles Wu
As one of Canopy's largest ACSPs in the US, I know all the people at Canopy
We have been talking about WISPA -- and are putting something together for a
sponsorship

Stay tuned...

-Charles

---
Operating Manager - CTI
I'm back...

WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.com 



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 9:37 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: Motorola membership (Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon)


I have a few phone numbers. The tech support has gotten better, but I only
call them with Prizm/BAM problems.

I really don't know that they have a Patrick but the area rep is helpful.
He has always gotten me to the right person.

Mike Rosedale Cell 847.722.1047



Mike Bushard, Jr
Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brian Rohrbacher
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 9:20 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: Motorola membership (Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon)

Partial hijack here.  On a related subject, is there anyone at Motorola 
that is really good with WISPs.  Someone who I can call and talk to as 
a Canopy user.  Not a script reader.  I admit I have never called them.  
I rely on vendors, and other WISPs for all Canopy related info and 
support.  Moto is so big, I'm scared that I'd get the hold music for 
an hour and them some dude that I can't understand..Ok..what I 
want to know is what moto # do I call to talk to their Patrick Leary.  
:)*Patrick suddenly feels warm and fuzzy inside...*  So I guess this 
isn't too much of a hijack.  :)  How do we contact their Patrick.  
After we know that we can talk to him about joining.

Brian


Dylan Oliver wrote:

 On 9/28/06, *Rick Harnish* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 If we can get Motorola to become a WISPA vendor member, we will
 gladly start a list here without those restrictions.

 How has Motorola been approached?

 Best,
 --
 Dylan Oliver
 Primaverity, LLC 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: Motorola membership (Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon)

2006-09-29 Thread Rick Harnish
Thanks Charles, I figured you were on top of it.

Rick Harnish
President
OnlyInternet Broadband  Wireless, Inc.
260-827-2482
Founding Member of WISPA

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Charles Wu
Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 12:28 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: Motorola membership (Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon)

As one of Canopy's largest ACSPs in the US, I know all the people at Canopy
We have been talking about WISPA -- and are putting something together for a
sponsorship

Stay tuned...

-Charles

---
Operating Manager - CTI
I'm back...

WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.com 



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mike Bushard, Jr
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 9:37 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: Motorola membership (Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon)


I have a few phone numbers. The tech support has gotten better, but I only
call them with Prizm/BAM problems.

I really don't know that they have a Patrick but the area rep is helpful.
He has always gotten me to the right person.

Mike Rosedale Cell 847.722.1047



Mike Bushard, Jr
Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brian Rohrbacher
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 9:20 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: Motorola membership (Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon)

Partial hijack here.  On a related subject, is there anyone at Motorola 
that is really good with WISPs.  Someone who I can call and talk to as 
a Canopy user.  Not a script reader.  I admit I have never called them.  
I rely on vendors, and other WISPs for all Canopy related info and 
support.  Moto is so big, I'm scared that I'd get the hold music for 
an hour and them some dude that I can't understand..Ok..what I 
want to know is what moto # do I call to talk to their Patrick Leary.  
:)*Patrick suddenly feels warm and fuzzy inside...*  So I guess this 
isn't too much of a hijack.  :)  How do we contact their Patrick.  
After we know that we can talk to him about joining.

Brian


Dylan Oliver wrote:

 On 9/28/06, *Rick Harnish* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 If we can get Motorola to become a WISPA vendor member, we will
 gladly start a list here without those restrictions.

 How has Motorola been approached?

 Best,
 --
 Dylan Oliver
 Primaverity, LLC 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

2006-09-29 Thread Ralph Fowler
I was told a couple of days ago that the regular SMs are going away soon.
 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Gino A. Villarini
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 12:26 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

You can have the cake and eat it too!!

Advantage AP to Classic SM can achieve 14 mbps to the Classic SM, not
sustained, only burstable.

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: Motorola membership (Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon)

2006-09-29 Thread Ron Wallace
Charles,

I know this is a duh question, but what is an ACSP??
Ron Wallace Hahnron, Inc. 220 S. Jackson Dt. Addison, MI 49220 Phone: (517)547-8410 Mobile: (517)605-4542 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]-Original Message-From: Charles Wu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 12:27 PMTo: ''WISPA General List''Subject: RE: Motorola membership (Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon)As one of Canopy's largest ACSPs in the US, I know all the people at CanopyWe have been talking about WISPA -- and are putting something together for asponsorshipStay tuned...-Charles---Operating Manager - CTII'm back...WiNOG Wireless RoadshowsComing to a City Near Youhttp://www.winog.com -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] OnBehalf Of Mike Bushard, JrSent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 9:37 AMTo: 'WISPA General List'Subject: RE: Motorola membership (Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon)I have a few phone numbers. The tech support has gotten better, but I onlycall them with Prizm/BAM problems.I really don't know that they have a "Patrick" but the area rep is helpful.He has always gotten me to the right person.Mike Rosedale Cell 847.722.1047Mike Bushard, JrWisper Wireless Solutions, LLC-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] OnBehalf Of Brian RohrbacherSent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 9:20 AMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: Re: Motorola membership (Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon)Partial hijack here. On a related subject, is there anyone at Motorola that is "really good with WISPs". Someone who I can call and talk to as a Canopy user. Not a script reader. I admit I have never called them. I rely on vendors, and other WISPs for all Canopy related info and support. Moto is so big, I'm scared that I'd get the "hold music" for an hour and them some dude that I can't understand..Ok..what I want to know is what moto # do I call to talk to their "Patrick Leary". :) *Patrick suddenly feels warm and fuzzy inside...* So I guess this isn't too much of a hijack. :) How do we contact their "Patrick". After we know that we can talk to him about joining.BrianDylan Oliver wrote: On 9/28/06, *Rick Harnish* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If we can get Motorola to become a WISPA vendor member, we will gladly start a list here without those restrictions. How has Motorola been approached? Best, -- Dylan Oliver Primaverity, LLC -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.orgSubscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wirelessArchives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/-- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.orgSubscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wirelessArchives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/-- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.orgSubscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wirelessArchives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: Motorola membership (Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon)

2006-09-29 Thread Dylan Oliver
On 9/29/06, Ron Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Charles,

I know this is a duh question, but what is an ACSP??
DUH. Google is your friend. It's *obviously* the Australasian College of Sports Physicians.;)-- Dylan OliverPrimaverity, LLC
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: Motorola membership (Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon)

2006-09-29 Thread Cliff Leboeuf
Title: Re: Motorola membership (Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon)



Association of Closet and Storage Professionals
http://www.closets.org/

Humm... Is Charles trying to tell us something :)



On 9/29/06 4:22 PM, Dylan Oliver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 http://www.acsp.org.au/ On 9/29/06, Ron Wallace [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Charles,

I know this is a duh question, but what is an ACSP??

DUH. Google is your friend. It's *obviously* the Australasian College of Sports Physicians. http://www.acsp.org.au/ 

;)





-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

2006-09-29 Thread Mike Bushard, Jr
So everything will be Advantage I wont complain.

I wonder if the AP prices will drop then?

Mike Bushard, Jr
Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Ralph Fowler
Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 2:53 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

I was told a couple of days ago that the regular SMs are going away soon.
 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Gino A. Villarini
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 12:26 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

You can have the cake and eat it too!!

Advantage AP to Classic SM can achieve 14 mbps to the Classic SM, not
sustained, only burstable.

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Motorola membership (Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon)

2006-09-28 Thread Dylan Oliver
On 9/28/06, Rick Harnish [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

















If we can get Motorola to become a WISPA
vendor member, we will gladly start a list here without those restrictions.
How has Motorola been approached?Best,-- Dylan OliverPrimaverity, LLC
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: Motorola membership (Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon)

2006-09-28 Thread Rick Harnish








Im not sure whether they have yet.
I think they were last year but I dont recall right now. Anyone who is
a valuable Motorola customer want to take this on? 





Rick Harnish

President

OnlyInternet Broadband  Wireless,
Inc.

260-827-2482

Founding Member of WISPA











From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dylan Oliver
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006
9:16 AM
To: WISPA
 General List
Subject: Motorola membership (Re:
[WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon)





On 9/28/06, Rick Harnish
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:









If we can get Motorola to become a WISPA vendor member, we
will gladly start a list here without those restrictions. 









How has Motorola been approached?

Best,
-- 
Dylan Oliver
Primaverity, LLC 






-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: Motorola membership (Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon)

2006-09-28 Thread Don Renner








I will be in meetings with Motorola next
week. Will see if can get done. 



What level did Alvarion commit to?
Might help get them to make bigger outlay.



Don Renner

NetsurfUSA, Inc.

812-936-4514

[EMAIL PROTECTED]











From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick Harnish
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006
8:44 AM
To: 'WISPA
 General List'
Subject: RE: Motorola membership
(Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon)





Im not sure whether they have
yet. I think they were last year but I dont recall right
now. Anyone who is a valuable Motorola customer want to take this
on? 





Rick Harnish

President

OnlyInternet Broadband  Wireless,
Inc.

260-827-2482

Founding Member of WISPA











From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dylan Oliver
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006
9:16 AM
To: WISPA
 General List
Subject: Motorola membership (Re:
[WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon)





On 9/28/06, Rick Harnish
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:









If we can get Motorola to become a WISPA vendor member, we will
gladly start a list here without those restrictions. 









How has Motorola been approached?

Best,
-- 
Dylan Oliver
Primaverity, LLC 








smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: Motorola membership (Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon)

2006-09-28 Thread Dylan Oliver
Just looked at the webpage to gather statistics like WISPA membership and mailing list subscription, but did not see it at http://www.wispa.org/?page_id=2. What audience will they reach by becoming a vendor member?
The WISPA Vendor Members text in the left column should be a link to either section 7.6.B on the Dues/Elections page or, better, another page detailing the benefits of Vendor Membership.
Have Alvarion, Optivon, and Deliberant all ponied up =$5k for advertising space on wispa.org? Are these the only Vendor Members?Best,-- Dylan OliverPrimaverity, LLC
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: Motorola membership (Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon)

2006-09-28 Thread Brian Rohrbacher
Partial hijack here.  On a related subject, is there anyone at Motorola 
that is really good with WISPs.  Someone who I can call and talk to as 
a Canopy user.  Not a script reader.  I admit I have never called them.  
I rely on vendors, and other WISPs for all Canopy related info and 
support.  Moto is so big, I'm scared that I'd get the hold music for 
an hour and them some dude that I can't understand..Ok..what I 
want to know is what moto # do I call to talk to their Patrick Leary.  
:)*Patrick suddenly feels warm and fuzzy inside...*  So I guess this 
isn't too much of a hijack.  :)  How do we contact their Patrick.  
After we know that we can talk to him about joining.


Brian


Dylan Oliver wrote:

On 9/28/06, *Rick Harnish* [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


If we can get Motorola to become a WISPA vendor member, we will
gladly start a list here without those restrictions. 


How has Motorola been approached?

Best,
--
Dylan Oliver
Primaverity, LLC 


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: Motorola membership (Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon)

2006-09-28 Thread Peter R.

You might want to take this discussion over to the Member list.

Dylan Oliver wrote:

Just looked at the webpage to gather statistics like WISPA membership 
and mailing list subscription, but did not see it at 
http://www.wispa.org/?page_id=2. What audience will they reach by 
becoming a vendor member?


The WISPA Vendor Members text in the left column should be a link to 
either section 7.6.B on the Dues/Elections page or, better, another 
page detailing the benefits of Vendor Membership.


Have Alvarion, Optivon, and Deliberant all ponied up =$5k for 
advertising space on wispa.org http://wispa.org? Are these the only 
Vendor Members?


Best,
--
Dylan Oliver
Primaverity, LLC 



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: Motorola membership (Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon)

2006-09-28 Thread Mike Bushard, Jr
I have a few phone numbers. The tech support has gotten better, but I only
call them with Prizm/BAM problems.

I really don't know that they have a Patrick but the area rep is helpful.
He has always gotten me to the right person.

Mike Rosedale Cell 847.722.1047



Mike Bushard, Jr
Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brian Rohrbacher
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 9:20 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: Motorola membership (Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon)

Partial hijack here.  On a related subject, is there anyone at Motorola 
that is really good with WISPs.  Someone who I can call and talk to as 
a Canopy user.  Not a script reader.  I admit I have never called them.  
I rely on vendors, and other WISPs for all Canopy related info and 
support.  Moto is so big, I'm scared that I'd get the hold music for 
an hour and them some dude that I can't understand..Ok..what I 
want to know is what moto # do I call to talk to their Patrick Leary.  
:)*Patrick suddenly feels warm and fuzzy inside...*  So I guess this 
isn't too much of a hijack.  :)  How do we contact their Patrick.  
After we know that we can talk to him about joining.

Brian


Dylan Oliver wrote:

 On 9/28/06, *Rick Harnish* [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 If we can get Motorola to become a WISPA vendor member, we will
 gladly start a list here without those restrictions. 

 How has Motorola been approached?

 Best,
 -- 
 Dylan Oliver
 Primaverity, LLC 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: Motorola membership (Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon)

2006-09-28 Thread Brian Rohrbacher

Dylan Oliver wrote:

Just looked at the webpage to gather statistics like WISPA membership 
and mailing list subscription, but did not see it at 
http://www.wispa.org/?page_id=2. What audience will they reach by 
becoming a vendor member?


The WISPA Vendor Members text in the left column should be a link to 
either section 7.6.B on the Dues/Elections page or, better, another 
page detailing the benefits of Vendor Membership.


Have Alvarion, Optivon, and Deliberant all ponied up =$5k for 
advertising space on wispa.org http://wispa.org? Are these the only 
Vendor Members?


I know these three are Vendor Members.  I dunno what was ponied up.

Brian
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

2006-09-28 Thread Travis Johnson
 a unit with a 60* pattern (Trango or 
Canopy).  Just include the$50 for a reflector or stinger from 
http://www.wirelessbehive.com





Based on the information from Mike, I could not use Canopy. In 
several areas, I have 4-5 towers located within 5 miles of each 
other how do I do that with Canopy? With Trango, I use a 
different channel for the sector pointing toward another tower 
(frequency planning and coordination is very important) and 
everything works great. Is there a solution for this with Canopy?



This is where GPS sync comes in.  You can point two different tower 
locations on the same frequency at each other and they will not 
interfere with each other.  This is how it is possible to do a 6 AP 
cluster on one tower with only 3 non overlapping channels.




Also, by using only a 10mhz spectrum per channel, Trango's channel 
1 and channel 8 are actually outside the reach of Canopy and 802.11 
(for the most part) and thus can almost always be used in a noisy 
environment.



Remember with Canopy you generally don't have to avoid 
interference.  Find the cleanest channel and 90% of the time you 
will be the few db louder then the noise that you need to make a 
viable link.


Anthony Will
Broadband Corp



Travis
Microserv

Mike Bushard, Jr wrote:

Well, so far as we can tell the only thing that can kill canopy, 
IS CANOPY.
We have put it up against WaveRider, Alvarion, and 802.11b. They 
all fell of

the face of the earth.
We have 16 tower sites deployed, all 900Mhz and 2.4, over 1000 CPE 
and more

on the way. (I realize there are many people bigger than us.)

We use a mix of MTI Omni's, MTI or Tiltek 120deg Sectors (MTI for 
Horizontal
and Tiltek for Vertical) and integrated 60deg sectors (I really 
wish someone
would come out with a descent H-pol as I don't like the integrated 
antenna)

with 900. Cyclone Omni's or 120deg sectors on 2.4.

Here is what I have found with GPS Sourced Sync vs. Generate Sync:

If you want channel reuse you need GPS sourced sync.
If you have a tower more than 8 miles away, you need to use different
channels no matter what, even with GPS sourced sync you still have 
speed of

light issues from tower to tower.

Can you Generate sync and deploy multiple AP's in a given area, 
yes. You
just need to make sure you have Frequency separation. Does this 
mean I

recommend it, NO.

Also even with every site GPS Synced, you still can only put so 
many AP's in
a given area be for you need to go to a different polarity. At 
least we know

there will never be another 900Mhz based ISP in one of our towns.

Also on a side note, I have never found a problem with 2.4, it is 
900 that
will give you problems, it just carries so far. If the noise floor 
was
lower, and Canopy could run at -90 we would have coverage for a 
long ways.

It seems like we can always pick up a AP at -80.

YMMV.

Mike Bushard, Jr
Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On

Behalf Of Matt Liotta
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 5:07 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

Patrick Leary wrote:
 

I'm speaking about multipoint matt, not ptp. The dedicated ptp 
you are
doing is by far the exception. Canopy is designed, built, and 
sold to be
primarily a pmp system. I've never met or heard of a Canopy pmp 
network

of any scale that did not require GPS.

  



I'd be interested in further explanation on this topic. We have 
some Canopy pmp and haven't found the lack of GPS a problem. 
Granted we don't have a large amount of pmp, but I would certainly 
like to understand any future pain before we experience it.


-Matt

  




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

2006-09-28 Thread Mike Bushard, Jr
Run Advantage AP's and Legacy SM's.

With the Advantage AP's and legacy SM's you get the Latency, and High
Priority Channel all the time, and can burst to full 2X Rate. If you need
the full 2x Rate Sustained, buy an Advantage SM.


To answer your question, yes the Advantage AP will deliver the full 14Mb
Aggregate.

Mike Bushard, Jr
Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 11:51 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

Another quick question...

If you are running a Canopy Advantage AP and you use regular Canopy 
SM's, can the AP still deliver the 14Mbps of bandwidth, or will it be 
limited to 7Mbps (like the SM's)?

Trying to decide if I want to use Advantage SM's or just regular?

Travis
Microserv

Anthony Will wrote:

 Well I have had 2.4ghz radio's link up at -89db (not very well mind 
 you but...) so I don't know what to tell you other then Moto has 
 traditionally understated there spec sheets.  The GPS is what sets the 
 timing for the AP's.  The AP's coordinate the timing slots for all 
 SM's registered to them.  So how it works is that all AP's on channel 
 1 across the world all transmit at the same time, and all SM's synced 
 to a AP on channel 1 with GPS timing from the AP listen at the same 
 time.  Distance is not relevant unless you are utilizing the feature 
 set of the SM to retransmit a GPS sync pulse that it receives from and 
 AP to a BH or AP.  The lag that is introduced by having to transmit 
 that pulse info across the wireless link to the SM retransmitting is 
 the only time that distance can come into play.  The application this 
 is used for is for a cheap repeater system so that you dont have to 
 have a GPS synchronizing device at every tower.
 /SM
 GPS --AP#1 /
\
  \SM (retransmitting GPS sync pulse) --AP#2 
 --SM (retransmitting GPS sync pulse) --AP#3 (this AP will be out of 
 sync with AP#1)

 Basically the timing is measured in nano seconds so it takes to long 
 for RF to transmit the data across the wireless links to continue to 
 propagate the timing signal.  But if you put a GPS sync generating 
 device at AP#3 it would be in perfect time with AP#1 and close enough 
 timing with AP#2 that they all would get along.

 One thing to keep in mind is if you are the only Canopy shop in the 
 area you can have your AP's generate the sync pulse and avoid the cost 
 of the GPS synchronizing items.  Also again as for the distance 
 statement.  6 AP's in a cluster sharing 3 channels have to be synced.  
 believe me the messy antenna on the Canopy units dont have a good 
 enough F/B ratio to not hear another AP 6 away from it.  The two AP's 
 that are back to back share the same channel so that when they 
 transmit the SM's that are listening are as far away from each other 
 as possible and thus reduce any chance of talking over each other.  
 The largest benefit that GPS sync allows is to add additional capacity 
 to area's by allowing for more towers to be in a smaller area without 
 self interference.  If long range rural deployments are the plan then 
 GPS sync will only benefit you if you have competitors utilizing the 
 same equipment and configuration in the area.  So a Moto advantage 
 cluster has about 84mb total (Classic Canopy would be 42mb) FTP 
 bandwidth available to it.  If more is needed you can place the towers 
 with in a few miles and divide a cell into two micro cells each with a 
 possible 84mb of total bandwidth for a total of 168mb serviced to a 
 given area. One last note, GPS timing will not allow for two separate 
 clusters of the same type ( two 2.4ghz clusters) to be on the same 
 tower.  I can't write out whats in my head on this getting a 
 little late in the night but if you wanted to I could talk to you over 
 the phone and explain it.  Send me an email to anthonyw (at) 
 broadband-mn.com and Ill give you my cell phone number or give you a 
 call.

 Anthony Will
 Broadband Corp.

 Travis Johnson wrote:

 Hi,

 First, the spec sheet on Motorola's website says -86 RSSI.

 What happens when you have more than 3 towers outside of the 8 mile 
 range of GPS sync? The 2.4ghz signal will definately travel that far, 
 causing self-interference, correct?

 Travis
 Microserv

 Anthony Will wrote:

 Answers in-line

 Travis Johnson wrote:

 Hi,

 I'd like to go back to the specs on different radios just so I can 
 compare for myself...

 Trango 2.4ghz:
 5Mbps auto ratio
 8 non-overlapping channels
 10mhz spectrum per channel
 -90 Receive level
 15 mile range (without a grid)
 External connector and dual-pol integrated antenna
 $879 AP (WISP price)
 $479 SU (WISP price)

 Canopy 2.4ghz (regular):
 7Mbps fixed ratio
 3 non-overlapping channels
 20mhz spectrum per channel
 -86 Receive level


 2.4 canopy has a -89 receive level

 5 mile

RE: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

2006-09-28 Thread Gino A. Villarini
You can have the cake and eat it too!!

Advantage AP to Classic SM can achieve 14 mbps to the Classic SM, not
sustained, only burstable.

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 12:51 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

Another quick question...

If you are running a Canopy Advantage AP and you use regular Canopy 
SM's, can the AP still deliver the 14Mbps of bandwidth, or will it be 
limited to 7Mbps (like the SM's)?

Trying to decide if I want to use Advantage SM's or just regular?

Travis
Microserv

Anthony Will wrote:

 Well I have had 2.4ghz radio's link up at -89db (not very well mind 
 you but...) so I don't know what to tell you other then Moto has 
 traditionally understated there spec sheets.  The GPS is what sets the 
 timing for the AP's.  The AP's coordinate the timing slots for all 
 SM's registered to them.  So how it works is that all AP's on channel 
 1 across the world all transmit at the same time, and all SM's synced 
 to a AP on channel 1 with GPS timing from the AP listen at the same 
 time.  Distance is not relevant unless you are utilizing the feature 
 set of the SM to retransmit a GPS sync pulse that it receives from and 
 AP to a BH or AP.  The lag that is introduced by having to transmit 
 that pulse info across the wireless link to the SM retransmitting is 
 the only time that distance can come into play.  The application this 
 is used for is for a cheap repeater system so that you dont have to 
 have a GPS synchronizing device at every tower.
 /SM
 GPS --AP#1 /
\
  \SM (retransmitting GPS sync pulse) --AP#2 
 --SM (retransmitting GPS sync pulse) --AP#3 (this AP will be out of 
 sync with AP#1)

 Basically the timing is measured in nano seconds so it takes to long 
 for RF to transmit the data across the wireless links to continue to 
 propagate the timing signal.  But if you put a GPS sync generating 
 device at AP#3 it would be in perfect time with AP#1 and close enough 
 timing with AP#2 that they all would get along.

 One thing to keep in mind is if you are the only Canopy shop in the 
 area you can have your AP's generate the sync pulse and avoid the cost 
 of the GPS synchronizing items.  Also again as for the distance 
 statement.  6 AP's in a cluster sharing 3 channels have to be synced.  
 believe me the messy antenna on the Canopy units dont have a good 
 enough F/B ratio to not hear another AP 6 away from it.  The two AP's 
 that are back to back share the same channel so that when they 
 transmit the SM's that are listening are as far away from each other 
 as possible and thus reduce any chance of talking over each other.  
 The largest benefit that GPS sync allows is to add additional capacity 
 to area's by allowing for more towers to be in a smaller area without 
 self interference.  If long range rural deployments are the plan then 
 GPS sync will only benefit you if you have competitors utilizing the 
 same equipment and configuration in the area.  So a Moto advantage 
 cluster has about 84mb total (Classic Canopy would be 42mb) FTP 
 bandwidth available to it.  If more is needed you can place the towers 
 with in a few miles and divide a cell into two micro cells each with a 
 possible 84mb of total bandwidth for a total of 168mb serviced to a 
 given area. One last note, GPS timing will not allow for two separate 
 clusters of the same type ( two 2.4ghz clusters) to be on the same 
 tower.  I can't write out whats in my head on this getting a 
 little late in the night but if you wanted to I could talk to you over 
 the phone and explain it.  Send me an email to anthonyw (at) 
 broadband-mn.com and Ill give you my cell phone number or give you a 
 call.

 Anthony Will
 Broadband Corp.

 Travis Johnson wrote:

 Hi,

 First, the spec sheet on Motorola's website says -86 RSSI.

 What happens when you have more than 3 towers outside of the 8 mile 
 range of GPS sync? The 2.4ghz signal will definately travel that far, 
 causing self-interference, correct?

 Travis
 Microserv

 Anthony Will wrote:

 Answers in-line

 Travis Johnson wrote:

 Hi,

 I'd like to go back to the specs on different radios just so I can 
 compare for myself...

 Trango 2.4ghz:
 5Mbps auto ratio
 8 non-overlapping channels
 10mhz spectrum per channel
 -90 Receive level
 15 mile range (without a grid)
 External connector and dual-pol integrated antenna
 $879 AP (WISP price)
 $479 SU (WISP price)

 Canopy 2.4ghz (regular):
 7Mbps fixed ratio
 3 non-overlapping channels
 20mhz spectrum per channel
 -86 Receive level


 2.4 canopy has a -89 receive level

 5 mile range (without a dish)
 $902 AP (reseller price online)
 $490 SU (reseller price online)


 I am guessing your quoting

Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

2006-09-28 Thread Travis Johnson
Someone posted a 3rd party GPS sync module (around $300 I think?). Can 
someone share that info with me again, please? :)


Travis
Microserv

Mike Bushard, Jr wrote:


Run Advantage AP's and Legacy SM's.

With the Advantage AP's and legacy SM's you get the Latency, and High
Priority Channel all the time, and can burst to full 2X Rate. If you need
the full 2x Rate Sustained, buy an Advantage SM.


To answer your question, yes the Advantage AP will deliver the full 14Mb
Aggregate.

Mike Bushard, Jr
Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 11:51 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

Another quick question...

If you are running a Canopy Advantage AP and you use regular Canopy 
SM's, can the AP still deliver the 14Mbps of bandwidth, or will it be 
limited to 7Mbps (like the SM's)?


Trying to decide if I want to use Advantage SM's or just regular?

Travis
Microserv

Anthony Will wrote:

 

Well I have had 2.4ghz radio's link up at -89db (not very well mind 
you but...) so I don't know what to tell you other then Moto has 
traditionally understated there spec sheets.  The GPS is what sets the 
timing for the AP's.  The AP's coordinate the timing slots for all 
SM's registered to them.  So how it works is that all AP's on channel 
1 across the world all transmit at the same time, and all SM's synced 
to a AP on channel 1 with GPS timing from the AP listen at the same 
time.  Distance is not relevant unless you are utilizing the feature 
set of the SM to retransmit a GPS sync pulse that it receives from and 
AP to a BH or AP.  The lag that is introduced by having to transmit 
that pulse info across the wireless link to the SM retransmitting is 
the only time that distance can come into play.  The application this 
is used for is for a cheap repeater system so that you dont have to 
have a GPS synchronizing device at every tower.

   /SM
GPS --AP#1 /
  \
\SM (retransmitting GPS sync pulse) --AP#2 
--SM (retransmitting GPS sync pulse) --AP#3 (this AP will be out of 
sync with AP#1)


Basically the timing is measured in nano seconds so it takes to long 
for RF to transmit the data across the wireless links to continue to 
propagate the timing signal.  But if you put a GPS sync generating 
device at AP#3 it would be in perfect time with AP#1 and close enough 
timing with AP#2 that they all would get along.


One thing to keep in mind is if you are the only Canopy shop in the 
area you can have your AP's generate the sync pulse and avoid the cost 
of the GPS synchronizing items.  Also again as for the distance 
statement.  6 AP's in a cluster sharing 3 channels have to be synced.  
believe me the messy antenna on the Canopy units dont have a good 
enough F/B ratio to not hear another AP 6 away from it.  The two AP's 
that are back to back share the same channel so that when they 
transmit the SM's that are listening are as far away from each other 
as possible and thus reduce any chance of talking over each other.  
The largest benefit that GPS sync allows is to add additional capacity 
to area's by allowing for more towers to be in a smaller area without 
self interference.  If long range rural deployments are the plan then 
GPS sync will only benefit you if you have competitors utilizing the 
same equipment and configuration in the area.  So a Moto advantage 
cluster has about 84mb total (Classic Canopy would be 42mb) FTP 
bandwidth available to it.  If more is needed you can place the towers 
with in a few miles and divide a cell into two micro cells each with a 
possible 84mb of total bandwidth for a total of 168mb serviced to a 
given area. One last note, GPS timing will not allow for two separate 
clusters of the same type ( two 2.4ghz clusters) to be on the same 
tower.  I can't write out whats in my head on this getting a 
little late in the night but if you wanted to I could talk to you over 
the phone and explain it.  Send me an email to anthonyw (at) 
broadband-mn.com and Ill give you my cell phone number or give you a 
call.


Anthony Will
Broadband Corp.

Travis Johnson wrote:

   


Hi,

First, the spec sheet on Motorola's website says -86 RSSI.

What happens when you have more than 3 towers outside of the 8 mile 
range of GPS sync? The 2.4ghz signal will definately travel that far, 
causing self-interference, correct?


Travis
Microserv

Anthony Will wrote:

 


Answers in-line

Travis Johnson wrote:

   


Hi,

I'd like to go back to the specs on different radios just so I can 
compare for myself...


Trango 2.4ghz:
5Mbps auto ratio
8 non-overlapping channels
10mhz spectrum per channel
-90 Receive level
15 mile range (without a grid)
External connector and dual-pol integrated antenna
$879 AP (WISP price)
$479 SU (WISP price)

Canopy 2.4ghz (regular):
7Mbps fixed ratio

RE: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

2006-09-28 Thread Mike Delp
Sync Pipe from Forrest.  I have three of them that just came in today.

www.packetflux.com

Mike

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 5:06 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

Someone posted a 3rd party GPS sync module (around $300 I think?). Can 
someone share that info with me again, please? :)

Travis
Microserv

Mike Bushard, Jr wrote:

Run Advantage AP's and Legacy SM's.

With the Advantage AP's and legacy SM's you get the Latency, and High
Priority Channel all the time, and can burst to full 2X Rate. If you need
the full 2x Rate Sustained, buy an Advantage SM.


To answer your question, yes the Advantage AP will deliver the full 14Mb
Aggregate.

Mike Bushard, Jr
Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 11:51 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

Another quick question...

If you are running a Canopy Advantage AP and you use regular Canopy 
SM's, can the AP still deliver the 14Mbps of bandwidth, or will it be 
limited to 7Mbps (like the SM's)?

Trying to decide if I want to use Advantage SM's or just regular?

Travis
Microserv

Anthony Will wrote:

  

Well I have had 2.4ghz radio's link up at -89db (not very well mind 
you but...) so I don't know what to tell you other then Moto has 
traditionally understated there spec sheets.  The GPS is what sets the 
timing for the AP's.  The AP's coordinate the timing slots for all 
SM's registered to them.  So how it works is that all AP's on channel 
1 across the world all transmit at the same time, and all SM's synced 
to a AP on channel 1 with GPS timing from the AP listen at the same 
time.  Distance is not relevant unless you are utilizing the feature 
set of the SM to retransmit a GPS sync pulse that it receives from and 
AP to a BH or AP.  The lag that is introduced by having to transmit 
that pulse info across the wireless link to the SM retransmitting is 
the only time that distance can come into play.  The application this 
is used for is for a cheap repeater system so that you dont have to 
have a GPS synchronizing device at every tower.
/SM
GPS --AP#1 /
   \
 \SM (retransmitting GPS sync pulse) --AP#2 
--SM (retransmitting GPS sync pulse) --AP#3 (this AP will be out of 
sync with AP#1)

Basically the timing is measured in nano seconds so it takes to long 
for RF to transmit the data across the wireless links to continue to 
propagate the timing signal.  But if you put a GPS sync generating 
device at AP#3 it would be in perfect time with AP#1 and close enough 
timing with AP#2 that they all would get along.

One thing to keep in mind is if you are the only Canopy shop in the 
area you can have your AP's generate the sync pulse and avoid the cost 
of the GPS synchronizing items.  Also again as for the distance 
statement.  6 AP's in a cluster sharing 3 channels have to be synced.  
believe me the messy antenna on the Canopy units dont have a good 
enough F/B ratio to not hear another AP 6 away from it.  The two AP's 
that are back to back share the same channel so that when they 
transmit the SM's that are listening are as far away from each other 
as possible and thus reduce any chance of talking over each other.  
The largest benefit that GPS sync allows is to add additional capacity 
to area's by allowing for more towers to be in a smaller area without 
self interference.  If long range rural deployments are the plan then 
GPS sync will only benefit you if you have competitors utilizing the 
same equipment and configuration in the area.  So a Moto advantage 
cluster has about 84mb total (Classic Canopy would be 42mb) FTP 
bandwidth available to it.  If more is needed you can place the towers 
with in a few miles and divide a cell into two micro cells each with a 
possible 84mb of total bandwidth for a total of 168mb serviced to a 
given area. One last note, GPS timing will not allow for two separate 
clusters of the same type ( two 2.4ghz clusters) to be on the same 
tower.  I can't write out whats in my head on this getting a 
little late in the night but if you wanted to I could talk to you over 
the phone and explain it.  Send me an email to anthonyw (at) 
broadband-mn.com and Ill give you my cell phone number or give you a 
call.

Anthony Will
Broadband Corp.

Travis Johnson wrote:



Hi,

First, the spec sheet on Motorola's website says -86 RSSI.

What happens when you have more than 3 towers outside of the 8 mile 
range of GPS sync? The 2.4ghz signal will definately travel that far, 
causing self-interference, correct?

Travis
Microserv

Anthony Will wrote:

  

Answers in-line

Travis Johnson wrote:



Hi,

I'd like to go back to the specs on different radios

RE: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

2006-09-28 Thread Gino A. Villarini
www.packetflux.com

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 6:06 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

Someone posted a 3rd party GPS sync module (around $300 I think?). Can 
someone share that info with me again, please? :)

Travis
Microserv

Mike Bushard, Jr wrote:

Run Advantage AP's and Legacy SM's.

With the Advantage AP's and legacy SM's you get the Latency, and High
Priority Channel all the time, and can burst to full 2X Rate. If you need
the full 2x Rate Sustained, buy an Advantage SM.


To answer your question, yes the Advantage AP will deliver the full 14Mb
Aggregate.

Mike Bushard, Jr
Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 11:51 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

Another quick question...

If you are running a Canopy Advantage AP and you use regular Canopy 
SM's, can the AP still deliver the 14Mbps of bandwidth, or will it be 
limited to 7Mbps (like the SM's)?

Trying to decide if I want to use Advantage SM's or just regular?

Travis
Microserv

Anthony Will wrote:

  

Well I have had 2.4ghz radio's link up at -89db (not very well mind 
you but...) so I don't know what to tell you other then Moto has 
traditionally understated there spec sheets.  The GPS is what sets the 
timing for the AP's.  The AP's coordinate the timing slots for all 
SM's registered to them.  So how it works is that all AP's on channel 
1 across the world all transmit at the same time, and all SM's synced 
to a AP on channel 1 with GPS timing from the AP listen at the same 
time.  Distance is not relevant unless you are utilizing the feature 
set of the SM to retransmit a GPS sync pulse that it receives from and 
AP to a BH or AP.  The lag that is introduced by having to transmit 
that pulse info across the wireless link to the SM retransmitting is 
the only time that distance can come into play.  The application this 
is used for is for a cheap repeater system so that you dont have to 
have a GPS synchronizing device at every tower.
/SM
GPS --AP#1 /
   \
 \SM (retransmitting GPS sync pulse) --AP#2 
--SM (retransmitting GPS sync pulse) --AP#3 (this AP will be out of 
sync with AP#1)

Basically the timing is measured in nano seconds so it takes to long 
for RF to transmit the data across the wireless links to continue to 
propagate the timing signal.  But if you put a GPS sync generating 
device at AP#3 it would be in perfect time with AP#1 and close enough 
timing with AP#2 that they all would get along.

One thing to keep in mind is if you are the only Canopy shop in the 
area you can have your AP's generate the sync pulse and avoid the cost 
of the GPS synchronizing items.  Also again as for the distance 
statement.  6 AP's in a cluster sharing 3 channels have to be synced.  
believe me the messy antenna on the Canopy units dont have a good 
enough F/B ratio to not hear another AP 6 away from it.  The two AP's 
that are back to back share the same channel so that when they 
transmit the SM's that are listening are as far away from each other 
as possible and thus reduce any chance of talking over each other.  
The largest benefit that GPS sync allows is to add additional capacity 
to area's by allowing for more towers to be in a smaller area without 
self interference.  If long range rural deployments are the plan then 
GPS sync will only benefit you if you have competitors utilizing the 
same equipment and configuration in the area.  So a Moto advantage 
cluster has about 84mb total (Classic Canopy would be 42mb) FTP 
bandwidth available to it.  If more is needed you can place the towers 
with in a few miles and divide a cell into two micro cells each with a 
possible 84mb of total bandwidth for a total of 168mb serviced to a 
given area. One last note, GPS timing will not allow for two separate 
clusters of the same type ( two 2.4ghz clusters) to be on the same 
tower.  I can't write out whats in my head on this getting a 
little late in the night but if you wanted to I could talk to you over 
the phone and explain it.  Send me an email to anthonyw (at) 
broadband-mn.com and Ill give you my cell phone number or give you a 
call.

Anthony Will
Broadband Corp.

Travis Johnson wrote:



Hi,

First, the spec sheet on Motorola's website says -86 RSSI.

What happens when you have more than 3 towers outside of the 8 mile 
range of GPS sync? The 2.4ghz signal will definately travel that far, 
causing self-interference, correct?

Travis
Microserv

Anthony Will wrote:

  

Answers in-line

Travis Johnson wrote:



Hi,

I'd like to go back

Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

2006-09-27 Thread Travis Johnson




Is there a Canopy mailing list that is active?

Travis
Microserv


Mike Bushard, Jr wrote:

  Here is a crude picture of one of our areas. 

Aside from the one site everything works great. 18 Canopy 900 Sectors in a 6
mile radius. Plus 2 Vertical that are not in the image. Need less to say
that town is pretty well smoked.

Mike Bushard, Jr
Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On
Behalf Of Anthony Will
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 1:12 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

Well I have had 2.4ghz radio's link up at -89db (not very well mind you 
but...) so I don't know what to tell you other then Moto has 
traditionally understated there spec sheets.  The GPS is what sets the 
timing for the AP's.  The AP's coordinate the timing slots for all SM's 
registered to them.  So how it works is that all AP's on channel 1 
across the world all transmit at the same time, and all SM's synced to a 
AP on channel 1 with GPS timing from the AP listen at the same time.  
Distance is not relevant unless you are utilizing the feature set of the 
SM to retransmit a GPS sync pulse that it receives from and AP to a BH 
or AP.  The lag that is introduced by having to transmit that pulse info 
across the wireless link to the SM retransmitting is the only time that 
distance can come into play.  The application this is used for is for a 
cheap repeater system so that you dont have to have a GPS synchronizing 
device at every tower.
 /SM
GPS --AP#1 /
\
  \SM (retransmitting GPS sync pulse) --AP#2 
--SM (retransmitting GPS sync pulse) --AP#3 (this AP will be out of 
sync with AP#1)

Basically the timing is measured in nano seconds so it takes to long for 
RF to transmit the data across the wireless links to continue to 
propagate the timing signal.  But if you put a GPS sync generating 
device at AP#3 it would be in perfect time with AP#1 and close enough 
timing with AP#2 that they all would get along.

One thing to keep in mind is if you are the only Canopy shop in the area 
you can have your AP's generate the sync pulse and avoid the cost of the 
GPS synchronizing items.  Also again as for the distance statement.  6 
AP's in a cluster sharing 3 channels have to be synced.  believe me the 
messy antenna on the Canopy units dont have a good enough F/B ratio to 
not hear another AP 6" away from it.  The two AP's that are back to back 
share the same channel so that when they transmit the SM's that are 
listening are as far away from each other as possible and thus reduce 
any chance of talking over each other.  The largest benefit that GPS 
sync allows is to add additional capacity to area's by allowing for more 
towers to be in a smaller area without self interference.  If long range 
rural deployments are the plan then GPS sync will only benefit you if 
you have competitors utilizing the same equipment and configuration in 
the area.  So a Moto advantage cluster has about 84mb total (Classic 
Canopy would be 42mb) FTP bandwidth available to it.  If more is needed 
you can place the towers with in a few miles and divide a cell into two 
micro cells each with a possible 84mb of total bandwidth for a total of 
168mb serviced to a given area. 
One last note, GPS timing will not allow for two separate clusters of 
the same type ( two 2.4ghz clusters) to be on the same tower.  I can't 
write out whats in my head on this getting a little late in the 
night but if you wanted to I could talk to you over the phone and 
explain it.  Send me an email to anthonyw (at) broadband-mn.com and Ill 
give you my cell phone number or give you a call.

Anthony Will
Broadband Corp.

Travis Johnson wrote:
  
  
Hi,

First, the spec sheet on Motorola's website says -86 RSSI.

What happens when you have more than 3 towers outside of the 8 mile 
range of GPS sync? The 2.4ghz signal will definately travel that far, 
causing self-interference, correct?

Travis
Microserv

Anthony Will wrote:



  Answers in-line

Travis Johnson wrote:

  
  
Hi,

I'd like to go back to the specs on different radios just so I can 
compare for myself...

Trango 2.4ghz:
5Mbps auto ratio
8 non-overlapping channels
10mhz spectrum per channel
-90 Receive level
15 mile range (without a grid)
External connector and dual-pol integrated antenna
$879 AP (WISP price)
$479 SU (WISP price)

Canopy 2.4ghz (regular):
7Mbps fixed ratio
3 non-overlapping channels
20mhz spectrum per channel
-86 Receive level

  
  2.4 canopy has a -89 receive level

  
  
5 mile range (without a dish)
$902 AP (reseller price online)
$490 SU (reseller price online)

  
  I am guessing your quoting single prices here.  Now that maybe viable 
for this discussion but realistically if a WISP is not financially 
able to purchase in 25 packs they l

Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

2006-09-27 Thread Anthony Will
part-15.org but I seem to remember that they removed access to the 
archives unless you are a member.  bullit might have changed that since.


Anthony

Travis Johnson wrote:

Is there a Canopy mailing list that is active?

Travis
Microserv


Mike Bushard, Jr wrote:
Here is a crude picture of one of our areas. 


Aside from the one site everything works great. 18 Canopy 900 Sectors in a 6
mile radius. Plus 2 Vertical that are not in the image. Need less to say
that town is pretty well smoked.

Mike Bushard, Jr
Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Anthony Will
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 1:12 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

Well I have had 2.4ghz radio's link up at -89db (not very well mind you 
but...) so I don't know what to tell you other then Moto has 
traditionally understated there spec sheets.  The GPS is what sets the 
timing for the AP's.  The AP's coordinate the timing slots for all SM's 
registered to them.  So how it works is that all AP's on channel 1 
across the world all transmit at the same time, and all SM's synced to a 
AP on channel 1 with GPS timing from the AP listen at the same time.  
Distance is not relevant unless you are utilizing the feature set of the 
SM to retransmit a GPS sync pulse that it receives from and AP to a BH 
or AP.  The lag that is introduced by having to transmit that pulse info 
across the wireless link to the SM retransmitting is the only time that 
distance can come into play.  The application this is used for is for a 
cheap repeater system so that you dont have to have a GPS synchronizing 
device at every tower.

 /SM
GPS --AP#1 /
\
  \SM (retransmitting GPS sync pulse) --AP#2 
--SM (retransmitting GPS sync pulse) --AP#3 (this AP will be out of 
sync with AP#1)


Basically the timing is measured in nano seconds so it takes to long for 
RF to transmit the data across the wireless links to continue to 
propagate the timing signal.  But if you put a GPS sync generating 
device at AP#3 it would be in perfect time with AP#1 and close enough 
timing with AP#2 that they all would get along.


One thing to keep in mind is if you are the only Canopy shop in the area 
you can have your AP's generate the sync pulse and avoid the cost of the 
GPS synchronizing items.  Also again as for the distance statement.  6 
AP's in a cluster sharing 3 channels have to be synced.  believe me the 
messy antenna on the Canopy units dont have a good enough F/B ratio to 
not hear another AP 6 away from it.  The two AP's that are back to back 
share the same channel so that when they transmit the SM's that are 
listening are as far away from each other as possible and thus reduce 
any chance of talking over each other.  The largest benefit that GPS 
sync allows is to add additional capacity to area's by allowing for more 
towers to be in a smaller area without self interference.  If long range 
rural deployments are the plan then GPS sync will only benefit you if 
you have competitors utilizing the same equipment and configuration in 
the area.  So a Moto advantage cluster has about 84mb total (Classic 
Canopy would be 42mb) FTP bandwidth available to it.  If more is needed 
you can place the towers with in a few miles and divide a cell into two 
micro cells each with a possible 84mb of total bandwidth for a total of 
168mb serviced to a given area. 
One last note, GPS timing will not allow for two separate clusters of 
the same type ( two 2.4ghz clusters) to be on the same tower.  I can't 
write out whats in my head on this getting a little late in the 
night but if you wanted to I could talk to you over the phone and 
explain it.  Send me an email to anthonyw (at) broadband-mn.com and Ill 
give you my cell phone number or give you a call.


Anthony Will
Broadband Corp.

Travis Johnson wrote:
  

Hi,

First, the spec sheet on Motorola's website says -86 RSSI.

What happens when you have more than 3 towers outside of the 8 mile 
range of GPS sync? The 2.4ghz signal will definately travel that far, 
causing self-interference, correct?


Travis
Microserv

Anthony Will wrote:



Answers in-line

Travis Johnson wrote:

  

Hi,

I'd like to go back to the specs on different radios just so I can 
compare for myself...


Trango 2.4ghz:
5Mbps auto ratio
8 non-overlapping channels
10mhz spectrum per channel
-90 Receive level
15 mile range (without a grid)
External connector and dual-pol integrated antenna
$879 AP (WISP price)
$479 SU (WISP price)

Canopy 2.4ghz (regular):
7Mbps fixed ratio
3 non-overlapping channels
20mhz spectrum per channel
-86 Receive level


2.4 canopy has a -89 receive level

  

5 mile range (without a dish)
$902 AP (reseller price online)
$490 SU (reseller price online)

I am guessing your quoting single prices here.  Now that maybe viable

Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

2006-09-26 Thread Anthony Will
? With Trango, I use a 
different channel for the sector pointing toward another tower 
(frequency planning and coordination is very important) and 
everything works great. Is there a solution for this with Canopy?


This is where GPS sync comes in.  You can point two different tower 
locations on the same frequency at each other and they will not 
interfere with each other.  This is how it is possible to do a 6 AP 
cluster on one tower with only 3 non overlapping channels.




Also, by using only a 10mhz spectrum per channel, Trango's channel 1 
and channel 8 are actually outside the reach of Canopy and 802.11 
(for the most part) and thus can almost always be used in a noisy 
environment.


Remember with Canopy you generally don't have to avoid interference.  
Find the cleanest channel and 90% of the time you will be the few db 
louder then the noise that you need to make a viable link.


Anthony Will
Broadband Corp



Travis
Microserv

Mike Bushard, Jr wrote:

Well, so far as we can tell the only thing that can kill canopy, IS 
CANOPY.
We have put it up against WaveRider, Alvarion, and 802.11b. They 
all fell of

the face of the earth.
We have 16 tower sites deployed, all 900Mhz and 2.4, over 1000 CPE 
and more

on the way. (I realize there are many people bigger than us.)

We use a mix of MTI Omni's, MTI or Tiltek 120deg Sectors (MTI for 
Horizontal
and Tiltek for Vertical) and integrated 60deg sectors (I really 
wish someone
would come out with a descent H-pol as I don't like the integrated 
antenna)

with 900. Cyclone Omni's or 120deg sectors on 2.4.

Here is what I have found with GPS Sourced Sync vs. Generate Sync:

If you want channel reuse you need GPS sourced sync.
If you have a tower more than 8 miles away, you need to use different
channels no matter what, even with GPS sourced sync you still have 
speed of

light issues from tower to tower.

Can you Generate sync and deploy multiple AP's in a given area, 
yes. You

just need to make sure you have Frequency separation. Does this mean I
recommend it, NO.

Also even with every site GPS Synced, you still can only put so 
many AP's in
a given area be for you need to go to a different polarity. At 
least we know

there will never be another 900Mhz based ISP in one of our towns.

Also on a side note, I have never found a problem with 2.4, it is 
900 that

will give you problems, it just carries so far. If the noise floor was
lower, and Canopy could run at -90 we would have coverage for a 
long ways.

It seems like we can always pick up a AP at -80.

YMMV.

Mike Bushard, Jr
Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On

Behalf Of Matt Liotta
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 5:07 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

Patrick Leary wrote:
 

I'm speaking about multipoint matt, not ptp. The dedicated ptp you 
are
doing is by far the exception. Canopy is designed, built, and sold 
to be
primarily a pmp system. I've never met or heard of a Canopy pmp 
network

of any scale that did not require GPS.

  


I'd be interested in further explanation on this topic. We have 
some Canopy pmp and haven't found the lack of GPS a problem. 
Granted we don't have a large amount of pmp, but I would certainly 
like to understand any future pain before we experience it.


-Matt

  



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

2006-09-26 Thread Mike Bushard, Jr
Here is a crude picture of one of our areas. 

Aside from the one site everything works great. 18 Canopy 900 Sectors in a 6
mile radius. Plus 2 Vertical that are not in the image. Need less to say
that town is pretty well smoked.

Mike Bushard, Jr
Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Anthony Will
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 1:12 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

Well I have had 2.4ghz radio's link up at -89db (not very well mind you 
but...) so I don't know what to tell you other then Moto has 
traditionally understated there spec sheets.  The GPS is what sets the 
timing for the AP's.  The AP's coordinate the timing slots for all SM's 
registered to them.  So how it works is that all AP's on channel 1 
across the world all transmit at the same time, and all SM's synced to a 
AP on channel 1 with GPS timing from the AP listen at the same time.  
Distance is not relevant unless you are utilizing the feature set of the 
SM to retransmit a GPS sync pulse that it receives from and AP to a BH 
or AP.  The lag that is introduced by having to transmit that pulse info 
across the wireless link to the SM retransmitting is the only time that 
distance can come into play.  The application this is used for is for a 
cheap repeater system so that you dont have to have a GPS synchronizing 
device at every tower.
 /SM
GPS --AP#1 /
\
  \SM (retransmitting GPS sync pulse) --AP#2 
--SM (retransmitting GPS sync pulse) --AP#3 (this AP will be out of 
sync with AP#1)

Basically the timing is measured in nano seconds so it takes to long for 
RF to transmit the data across the wireless links to continue to 
propagate the timing signal.  But if you put a GPS sync generating 
device at AP#3 it would be in perfect time with AP#1 and close enough 
timing with AP#2 that they all would get along.

One thing to keep in mind is if you are the only Canopy shop in the area 
you can have your AP's generate the sync pulse and avoid the cost of the 
GPS synchronizing items.  Also again as for the distance statement.  6 
AP's in a cluster sharing 3 channels have to be synced.  believe me the 
messy antenna on the Canopy units dont have a good enough F/B ratio to 
not hear another AP 6 away from it.  The two AP's that are back to back 
share the same channel so that when they transmit the SM's that are 
listening are as far away from each other as possible and thus reduce 
any chance of talking over each other.  The largest benefit that GPS 
sync allows is to add additional capacity to area's by allowing for more 
towers to be in a smaller area without self interference.  If long range 
rural deployments are the plan then GPS sync will only benefit you if 
you have competitors utilizing the same equipment and configuration in 
the area.  So a Moto advantage cluster has about 84mb total (Classic 
Canopy would be 42mb) FTP bandwidth available to it.  If more is needed 
you can place the towers with in a few miles and divide a cell into two 
micro cells each with a possible 84mb of total bandwidth for a total of 
168mb serviced to a given area. 
One last note, GPS timing will not allow for two separate clusters of 
the same type ( two 2.4ghz clusters) to be on the same tower.  I can't 
write out whats in my head on this getting a little late in the 
night but if you wanted to I could talk to you over the phone and 
explain it.  Send me an email to anthonyw (at) broadband-mn.com and Ill 
give you my cell phone number or give you a call.

Anthony Will
Broadband Corp.

Travis Johnson wrote:
 Hi,

 First, the spec sheet on Motorola's website says -86 RSSI.

 What happens when you have more than 3 towers outside of the 8 mile 
 range of GPS sync? The 2.4ghz signal will definately travel that far, 
 causing self-interference, correct?

 Travis
 Microserv

 Anthony Will wrote:

 Answers in-line

 Travis Johnson wrote:

 Hi,

 I'd like to go back to the specs on different radios just so I can 
 compare for myself...

 Trango 2.4ghz:
 5Mbps auto ratio
 8 non-overlapping channels
 10mhz spectrum per channel
 -90 Receive level
 15 mile range (without a grid)
 External connector and dual-pol integrated antenna
 $879 AP (WISP price)
 $479 SU (WISP price)

 Canopy 2.4ghz (regular):
 7Mbps fixed ratio
 3 non-overlapping channels
 20mhz spectrum per channel
 -86 Receive level

 2.4 canopy has a -89 receive level

 5 mile range (without a dish)
 $902 AP (reseller price online)
 $490 SU (reseller price online)

 I am guessing your quoting single prices here.  Now that maybe viable 
 for this discussion but realistically if a WISP is not financially 
 able to purchase in 25 packs they likely are very underfunded.  So 
 that the information is available a 25 pack of the Classic 2.4 ghz 
 Canopy units is $6709 so if you break that down to single price that 
 is about

RE: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

2006-09-26 Thread Mike Bushard, Jr
We have never saw a problem with 2.4 self interfering. Only 900Mhz, and that
is easily fixed. 

Mike Bushard, Jr
Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 11:40 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

Hi,

First, the spec sheet on Motorola's website says -86 RSSI.

What happens when you have more than 3 towers outside of the 8 mile 
range of GPS sync? The 2.4ghz signal will definately travel that far, 
causing self-interference, correct?

Travis
Microserv

Anthony Will wrote:

 Answers in-line

 Travis Johnson wrote:

 Hi,

 I'd like to go back to the specs on different radios just so I can 
 compare for myself..

 Trango 2.4ghz:
 5Mbps auto ratio
 8 non-overlapping channels
 10mhz spectrum per channel
 -90 Receive level
 15 mile range (without a grid)
 External connector and dual-pol integrated antenna
 $879 AP (WISP price)
 $479 SU (WISP price)

 Canopy 2.4ghz (regular):
 7Mbps fixed ratio
 3 non-overlapping channels
 20mhz spectrum per channel
 -86 Receive level

 2.4 canopy has a -89 receive level

 5 mile range (without a dish)
 $902 AP (reseller price online)
 $490 SU (reseller price online)

 I am guessing your quoting single prices here.  Now that maybe viable 
 for this discussion but realistically if a WISP is not financially 
 able to purchase in 25 packs they likely are very underfunded.  So 
 that the information is available a 25 pack of the Classic 2.4 ghz 
 Canopy units is $6709 so if you break that down to single price that 
 is about $269ea + $50 for reflector for a total of $319ea.  
 http://www.doubleradius.com   It is possible to get them cheaper then 
 this but you will have to deal with co-op's or ebay.com
 Also I would never install a unit with a 60* pattern (Trango or 
 Canopy).  Just include the$50 for a reflector or stinger from 
 http://www.wirelessbehive.com



 Based on the information from Mike, I could not use Canopy. In 
 several areas, I have 4-5 towers located within 5 miles of each 
 other how do I do that with Canopy? With Trango, I use a 
 different channel for the sector pointing toward another tower 
 (frequency planning and coordination is very important) and 
 everything works great. Is there a solution for this with Canopy?

 This is where GPS sync comes in.  You can point two different tower 
 locations on the same frequency at each other and they will not 
 interfere with each other.  This is how it is possible to do a 6 AP 
 cluster on one tower with only 3 non overlapping channels.


 Also, by using only a 10mhz spectrum per channel, Trango's channel 1 
 and channel 8 are actually outside the reach of Canopy and 802.11 
 (for the most part) and thus can almost always be used in a noisy 
 environment.

 Remember with Canopy you generally don't have to avoid interference.  
 Find the cleanest channel and 90% of the time you will be the few db 
 louder then the noise that you need to make a viable link.

 Anthony Will
 Broadband Corp


 Travis
 Microserv

 Mike Bushard, Jr wrote:

 Well, so far as we can tell the only thing that can kill canopy, IS 
 CANOPY.
 We have put it up against WaveRider, Alvarion, and 802.11b. They all 
 fell of
 the face of the earth.
 We have 16 tower sites deployed, all 900Mhz and 2.4, over 1000 CPE 
 and more
 on the way. (I realize there are many people bigger than us.)

 We use a mix of MTI Omni's, MTI or Tiltek 120deg Sectors (MTI for 
 Horizontal
 and Tiltek for Vertical) and integrated 60deg sectors (I really wish 
 someone
 would come out with a descent H-pol as I don't like the integrated 
 antenna)
 with 900. Cyclone Omni's or 120deg sectors on 2.4.

 Here is what I have found with GPS Sourced Sync vs. Generate Sync:

 If you want channel reuse you need GPS sourced sync.
 If you have a tower more than 8 miles away, you need to use different
 channels no matter what, even with GPS sourced sync you still have 
 speed of
 light issues from tower to tower.

 Can you Generate sync and deploy multiple AP's in a given area, yes. 
 You
 just need to make sure you have Frequency separation. Does this mean I
 recommend it, NO.

 Also even with every site GPS Synced, you still can only put so many 
 AP's in
 a given area be for you need to go to a different polarity. At least 
 we know
 there will never be another 900Mhz based ISP in one of our towns.

 Also on a side note, I have never found a problem with 2.4, it is 
 900 that
 will give you problems, it just carries so far. If the noise floor was
 lower, and Canopy could run at -90 we would have coverage for a long 
 ways.
 It seems like we can always pick up a AP at -80.

 YMMV.

 Mike Bushard, Jr
 Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC


 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Matt Liotta
 Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 5:07 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA

RE: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

2006-09-26 Thread Patrick Leary
Jon,

For sure I'm all over GPS for all licensed (world of small channels) and
when there is a small amount of spectrum to work with in UL. For
example, in the coming 3650MHz band, GPS should be a must for PMP. Same
with scaled 900 (we offer it there). It is just not needed with VL. What
for? It already gives massive capacity without any re-use. Even with GPS
and re-use I do not think Canopy can get close to the amount of capacity
VL can offer. Frankly, even if we had it for VL no one would buy it.

No argument from me on the scheduled MAC front, except to the extent
that in UL it needs to come with good interference mitigation (not
talking about self-inflicted interference) techniques to make it useful.

Patrick 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jon Langeler
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 10:37 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

Hey Patrick, GPS...there's many reasons and it's not a canopy vs 
alvarion debate from my standpoint, more so a scheduled mac(canopy, 
wimax, 3G...) vs unscheduled(wifi, VL, currently Trango). I'd predict 
that as wisp education progresses, they will realize the power of 
scheduled mac and GPS support. By then maybe the rest of the BreezeMAX 
code will have made way to the VL engineers and everyone can be happy
:-)

Jon Langeler
Michwave Tech.

Patrick Leary wrote:

Jon,

Why is that the case? You really think GPS on Canopy is some cool
feature? Canopy must have GPS to function. Without it, it kills itself.
It is all to prevent self-inflicted interference (remember, Canopy does
not even have ATPC) and to allow for channel re-use. Other systems,
like
VL, do not need it. It provides far more capacity than Canopy, so it
does not need to re-use channels and with basic channel planning you
don't have issues with self-interference.

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243
  


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals 
computer viruses(192).








 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals 
computer viruses(42).











This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals  computer 
viruses.




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-26 Thread Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181


- Original Message - 
From: Patrick Leary [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 8:32 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs


Brad,

Software controlled dual polarity might be nice. Not sure why you
consistently harp on us though since no one else has it either other
than your longtime preferred vendor.

mks:  I have Trango and over a dozen other brands of gear.  That software 
polarity thing is the bomb.  I can fix interference issues, almost any of 
them, from the office!  Very very nice feature.


I am not as convinced about your complaint about RSSI. Is it just used
to RSSI like being used to feet in stead of meters. But also, isn't RSSI
less sophisticated and a less useful number than SNR since it is only an
indication of receive signal without discounting noise? SNR provides a
more accurate representation of wanted signal since it discounts for
unwanted noise.

mks:  rssi is critical to me.  I make do without it but I hate to.  It's 
impossible to troubleshoot the signal level that should be there  We can 
calculate the value if we have it.  SNR also helps, but I'd rather have rssi 
and noise in dB.  If you want to do like lucent did 100 years ago and give 
us rssi, noise, AND snr in db AND/OR as a graph, that was very good stuff.


mks:  FYI, I've found that most radios massively misreport the true noise 
levels.


Not sure of your complaint about the RJ45. No one else remarks about it
and we don't have issues with water intrusion. In other words, it works
well. If the opening was enlarged you increase the potential for water
intrusion.

mks:  If you are gonna use a standard connector, use a standard connection.

Following the color code? Yes, as an old cabling guy, I would agree. But
I am pleased to note that one is really running out of things to harp
about when one continually highlights this a major deficiency.

So now that I have responded here to your public mail, will you please
admit that even if the VL came to life and saved your kid from a flood
you complain that it was not fast enough and that it ripped the kid's
clothes. I wish some day you'd accept that your customer chose VL and
you should take the opportunity to learn about it instead of still
trying to make it fail so you can get them to switch to Trango. Even the
best radios will have room for improvement and every decent brand should
have something special that differentiates it. You work so hard to find
fault you miss opportunities to become proficient in more than one
brand. So accept our invitations to allow engineer visits and accept our
invitations to be trained. Know what I mean?

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243







This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals  computer 
viruses.





--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-26 Thread Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181



Again, Patrick, it's a troubleshooting too. 
If we have poor link quality but good signal, that's usually interference. 
If we have poor signal but good quality that can mean a bad antenna, tree in the 
path, multipath etc.

Both are important.
Marlon(509) 
982-2181 
Equipment sales(408) 907-6910 
(Vonage) 
Consulting services42846865 
(icq) 
And I run my own wisp!64.146.146.12 (net meeting)www.odessaoffice.com/wirelesswww.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Patrick Leary 
  To: WISPA General List 
  Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 9:36 
  AM
  Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs
  
  
  I should have also 
  noted that per the info below, most Alvarion operators simply have a policy 
  that they will only connect subscribers for whom a minimum number of the green 
  LEDs will fire and hold. For example, having 4 for of the 8 green LEDs light 
  should get you a link with the best mod level, but 5 will do that plus give 
  you a margin of about 8dB. It is a simple thing once you get used to it, which 
  does not take long. Remember, there is no standard way to show these things, 
  but I’d argue that what we show is more complete and real in terms of link 
  quality. Just showing RSSI would dump it down, wouldn’t 
  it?
  
  
  Patrick 
  Leary 
  AVP WISP 
  Markets 
  Alvarion, Inc. o: 
  650.314.2628 
  c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 
  650.641.1243 
  
  
  
  
  
  From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick LearySent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 9:24 
  AMTo: WISPA General 
  ListSubject: RE: [WISPA] 
  vendor specs
  
  Right, but the LED bar on the CPE can be used to do 
  that. I mean, isn't SNR more complete than just RSSI, meaning if your SNR is 
  good than the RSSI is by default good. Anyway, I have never heard of any 
  moderately experienced VL user say the units did not convey enough info to 
  easily establish a link and understand the quality of the connection. Consider 
  that with the CPE VL radio the LEDs will show:
  
  WLAN link light-
  · 
  Solid Green – Unit is associated 
  with an AU, no wireless link activity
  · 
  Blinking Green – Data received or 
  transmitted on the wireless link, blinking rate is proportional to 
  wireless
  traffic rate
  · 
  Off – Wireless link is 
  disabled
  
  Status light –
  · 
  Solid Green – Power is available 
  and self-test passed
  · 
  Blinking Amber – Testing (not 
  ready for operation)
  · 
  Red – Self-test failed – fatal 
  error
  
  Ethernet light –
  · 
  Solid Green – Ethernet link 
  between the indoor and outdoor units is detected, no activity
  · 
  Blinking Green – Ethernet 
  connectivity is OK, with traffic on the port. Blinking rate proportional to 
  traffic rate
  · 
  Red – No Ethernet connectivity 
  between the indoor and outdoor units
  
  SNR bar –
  · 
  Red LED: Signal is too low 
  (SNR4 dB)
  · 
  Orange LED: Signal is too high 
  (SNR  50 dB)
  · 
  8 green LEDs: Quality of the 
  received signal (green LEDs translate per below)
  LED 1 (red) is On - Signal is too low 
  (SNR  4 dB)
  LED 2 (green) is On - SNR  4 
  dB
  LEDs 2 to 3 (green) are On - SNR  8 
  dB
  LEDs 2 to 4 (green) are On - SNR  13 
  dB
  LEDs 2 to 5 (green) are On - SNR  19 
  dB
  LEDs 2 to 6 (green) are On - SNR  26 
  dB
  LEDs 2 to 7 (green) are On - SNR  31 
  dB
  LEDs 2 to 8 (green) are On - SNR  38 
  dB
  LEDs 2 to 9 (green) are On - SNR  44 
  dB
  LEDs 2 to 9 (green) and 10 (orange) are 
  On Signal is too high (SNR  50 dB)
  
  Mod level : Sensitivity : Min. SNR (this 
  chart for 20MHz channel)
  1 : -89 dBm : 6 
  dB
  2 : -88 dBm : 7 
  dB
  3 : -86 dBm : 9 
  dB
  4 : -84 dBm : 11 
  dB
  5 : -81 dBm : 14 
  dB
  6 : -77 dBm : 18 
  dB
  7 : -73 dBm : 22 
  dB
  8 : -71 dBm : 23 
  dB
  
  
  Patrick Leary
  AVP WISP Markets
  Alvarion, Inc.
  o: 650.314.2628
  c: 760.580.0080
  Vonage: 650.641.1243
  
  -Original Message-From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of G. 
  villariniSent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 8:48 AMTo: 
  wireless@wispa.orgSubject: RE: [WISPA] vendor 
  specs
  
  Patrick,
  
  Rssi is very important to determine if a link is 
  properly aligned and its achieving its link 
  budget.
  
  Altough we don’t use alvarion(yet), we are currently 
  researching backhaul options and the way we comission ptp links here is that 
  we run the calcs on radio mobile and spreedsheet to determine the link budget 
  in advance to implementation. Snr won’t help much 
  there...
  
  Gino
  
  -Original 
Message-
   From: "Patrick 
  Leary"[EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Sent: 9/24/06 11:32:47 
  AM
   To: "WISPA General 
  List"wireless@wispa.org
   Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor 
  specs
   
  Brad,
   
   Software controlled dual polarity 
  might be nice. Not sure why you
   consistently harp on us though 
  since no one else has it either other
   than your longtime preferred 
  vendor.
   
   I am not as 

RE: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

2006-09-26 Thread isplists

Patrick, ditto on the 3650 band. However the reality is that self and external
interference in the UL world is all too common. You say UL bands or at  
least VL doesn't need GPS capability because of so much capacity. If  
you want I can get you a list of wifi/trango/etc.-to-Canopy 'converts'  
that will tell you otherwise.

Licensed carriers use GPS to greatly diminish what we experience as common day
interference problems. IMO I can't blame the FCC for not giving more  
spectrum than they have as we've already trashed what we've been given.
Lastly, what Moto did was brought GPS sync to the UL world however as  
standard option and in very economical form factor, not expensive  
chassis and such. If you haven't already, get your VL guys with your  
WIMAX guys and you could have a clear winner down the road! :)


Jon Langeler
Michwave Tech.

Quoting Patrick Leary [EMAIL PROTECTED]:


Jon,

For sure I'm all over GPS for all licensed (world of small channels) and
when there is a small amount of spectrum to work with in UL. For
example, in the coming 3650MHz band, GPS should be a must for PMP. Same
with scaled 900 (we offer it there). It is just not needed with VL. What
for? It already gives massive capacity without any re-use. Even with GPS
and re-use I do not think Canopy can get close to the amount of capacity
VL can offer. Frankly, even if we had it for VL no one would buy it.

No argument from me on the scheduled MAC front, except to the extent
that in UL it needs to come with good interference mitigation (not
talking about self-inflicted interference) techniques to make it useful.

Patrick

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jon Langeler
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 10:37 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

Hey Patrick, GPS...there's many reasons and it's not a canopy vs
alvarion debate from my standpoint, more so a scheduled mac(canopy,
wimax, 3G...) vs unscheduled(wifi, VL, currently Trango). I'd predict
that as wisp education progresses, they will realize the power of
scheduled mac and GPS support. By then maybe the rest of the BreezeMAX
code will have made way to the VL engineers and everyone can be happy
:-)

Jon Langeler
Michwave Tech.

Patrick Leary wrote:


Jon,

Why is that the case? You really think GPS on Canopy is some cool
feature? Canopy must have GPS to function. Without it, it kills itself.
It is all to prevent self-inflicted interference (remember, Canopy does
not even have ATPC) and to allow for channel re-use. Other systems,

like

VL, do not need it. It provides far more capacity than Canopy, so it
does not need to re-use channels and with basic channel planning you
don't have issues with self-interference.

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/







This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals 
computer viruses(192).












This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals 
computer viruses(42).











This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals
computer viruses.





--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/





--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-25 Thread Jon Langeler
I'm sure most know that was a 'play' and basically secured Moto's 
position to sell WIMAX gear to the 2nd largest 2.5GHz spectrum holder. 
It would have been interesting if Alvarion had been in their place...not 
sure if you guys have that kind of change sitting around.


Jon Langeler
Michwave Tech.

Patrick Leary wrote:


Speaking of Clearwire, folks here are aware that Motorola now owns
NextNet, the hardware supplier to Clearwire (that once was part of
Clearwire, at least in ownership terms), right? The purchase was IN
ADDITION to the $300M investment Motorola made into Clearwire
http://telephonyonline.com/wireless/finance/motorola_clearwire_nextnet_0
70606/

To give you an idea of how much that Moto investment is relative to your
Canopy businessthat is more than Canopy makes for Motorola worldwide
over 2 years. 


Patrick

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 7:57 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

Ahhh... there's always a catch... so now Motorola has your customer's 
address and can use that for their own marketing, etc. without you ever 
knowing. They could possibly even sell the list to someone (ClearWire) 
down the road and you would never know.


Travis
Microserv

Anthony Will wrote:
 



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-25 Thread Gino A. Villarini
I have always questioned why Motorola bought Nextnet, Nexnet it's a
proprietary system with no upgrade path to Wimax... But my theory is based
on them buying Nexnet to clear them out and offer Clearwire a Wimax upgrade
path using the Wi4 Wimax plataform ...

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jon Langeler
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 2:00 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

I'm sure most know that was a 'play' and basically secured Moto's 
position to sell WIMAX gear to the 2nd largest 2.5GHz spectrum holder. 
It would have been interesting if Alvarion had been in their place...not 
sure if you guys have that kind of change sitting around.

Jon Langeler
Michwave Tech.

Patrick Leary wrote:

Speaking of Clearwire, folks here are aware that Motorola now owns
NextNet, the hardware supplier to Clearwire (that once was part of
Clearwire, at least in ownership terms), right? The purchase was IN
ADDITION to the $300M investment Motorola made into Clearwire
http://telephonyonline.com/wireless/finance/motorola_clearwire_nextnet_0
70606/

To give you an idea of how much that Moto investment is relative to your
Canopy businessthat is more than Canopy makes for Motorola worldwide
over 2 years. 

Patrick

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 7:57 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

Ahhh... there's always a catch... so now Motorola has your customer's 
address and can use that for their own marketing, etc. without you ever 
knowing. They could possibly even sell the list to someone (ClearWire) 
down the road and you would never know.

Travis
Microserv

Anthony Will wrote:
  


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-25 Thread Brad Larson
Gino, I have to admit Alvarion has some work to do for the smaller wisp's
out there. Patrick will have his hands full on this one. But for wisps
buying 100 packs on a bi or monthly plan the pricing below just doesn't seem
like such a deal breaker anymore when you add up the feature sets. For a few
more months on an ROI model you can buy Alvarion.

The whole point of this thread has been the fact that many (including Scriv)
have found out Trango still wins, because Trango is less expensive or
Canopy for that matter. may not exactly be the case. The ongoing costs
of truck rolls, tech support issues, and shorter coverage modeling can kill
an ROI model faster than the cost of cpe. 

Add in voip coverage modeling and the dynamics change once again. I have
seen several advanced studies of building data/voip wireless networks where
BreezeAccess VL used half the tower/base station sites (therefore less
leases and operational expenses), gave twice the throughput per cell site,
and can handle more than 10X's the amount of voip traffic. Throw in the
addition of maintaining twice the amount of gear and once again we come out
ahead. This was really driven home on a few backhauling for mesh projects
with drive testing of different technologies and the findings REALLY blew me
away. No kidding folks the differences are like night and day and you'll be
hearing about some of these networks this year.

I first saw the differences several years ago where a project out for bid
was installing 2,500 cpe's in a seven square mile area with trees and
rolling hills. With a $125 premium on cpe the total network costs with
operational expenses was less expensive than a Canopy solution and we gave
100% coverage. Alvarion CPE installation was eave mount on 1 square mile
centers vs high rooftop with more towers needed (again saving the service
provider money). Brad

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 6:44 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Trango Atlas CPE with dish  $250?
Canopy with dish $275

Canopy Advantage Cluster:
6 Ap's @ $1500 each = $9k (you can start your pop with a fcc certified omni
unit for $2.7k and evolve to a full sector later)
CMM Micro for Power and Sync = $1.5k *optional
BAM - Prizm = $2k *optional

The CMM Micro is optional component for GPS Sync, you can achieve sync among
the cluster with 10 ft of cat 5 and 6 rj11 connectors

BAM - Prizm is a NMS for Management but is NOT a required component, you can
manage all your settings from the web interface on each unit including
bandwidth and such.  I would only recommend the Prizm NMS for big WISP's
(200+ units )

About the Third Party:

There are a couple on 3rd party improvements for canopy, almost all were
created on a cost savings stand point, Example:

Motorola reflector dish for 10 mile + links $100
Beehive Wireless reflector dish for 10 mile links $49.95 (fcc certified)

Motorola CMM GPS Sync System $1.5k
PacketFLux GPS Sync $300

Any other questions ?

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 4:53 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

So what is the onesy-twosy price of a Trango Atlas with an extended
range antenna? What is the price for a Canopy Advantage CPE with
extended range? I have plenty of data I've found, but there seems to be
some wide discrepancy here among you folks.

How about total cost for a Canopy cluster with the BAM, GPS synch, and
other little extra things you need for it to be complete?

Also, I've heard a number of you talk about availability of third party
improvements like it is a benefit of the Canopy system. Seriously, isn't
that more a reflection of the glaring gaps in Canopy that have led smart
WISP entrepreneurs to capitalize?

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 1:13 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

Trango is no where near $400 for Atlas Foxes.  Trango's Atlas Fox's
distance 
without dish is just about the same as the standard Canopy CPE (same DBI

antenna).
Remember that Trango lists retail on their site to protest the WISP.
Low 
volume WISP special pricing is granted to any WISP.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Anthony Will [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 11:17 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs


 Your numbers are a bit off on the canopy and when i looked on the
trango 
 site it looks more in the range of $400 per unit at 30 pack pricing

RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-25 Thread Brad Belton
Price is always a factor, but we would gladly pay a premium for VL with the
sorely needed HARDWARE improvements:

(1)  Dual Polarity via software
(2)  Dual Band 5.3GHz and 5.8GHz

These are time tested proven valuable HARDWARE features that VL is lacking.
With these features added to VL there would not be a comparable product on
the market other than home-brew's like StarOS  MikroTik.

Without these HARDWARE improvements the VL product is too susceptible to
noise and therefore not a viable solution for committed rate business
offerings.

Best,


Brad




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Larson
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 9:31 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Gino, I have to admit Alvarion has some work to do for the smaller wisp's
out there. Patrick will have his hands full on this one. But for wisps
buying 100 packs on a bi or monthly plan the pricing below just doesn't seem
like such a deal breaker anymore when you add up the feature sets. For a few
more months on an ROI model you can buy Alvarion.

The whole point of this thread has been the fact that many (including Scriv)
have found out Trango still wins, because Trango is less expensive or
Canopy for that matter. may not exactly be the case. The ongoing costs
of truck rolls, tech support issues, and shorter coverage modeling can kill
an ROI model faster than the cost of cpe. 

Add in voip coverage modeling and the dynamics change once again. I have
seen several advanced studies of building data/voip wireless networks where
BreezeAccess VL used half the tower/base station sites (therefore less
leases and operational expenses), gave twice the throughput per cell site,
and can handle more than 10X's the amount of voip traffic. Throw in the
addition of maintaining twice the amount of gear and once again we come out
ahead. This was really driven home on a few backhauling for mesh projects
with drive testing of different technologies and the findings REALLY blew me
away. No kidding folks the differences are like night and day and you'll be
hearing about some of these networks this year.

I first saw the differences several years ago where a project out for bid
was installing 2,500 cpe's in a seven square mile area with trees and
rolling hills. With a $125 premium on cpe the total network costs with
operational expenses was less expensive than a Canopy solution and we gave
100% coverage. Alvarion CPE installation was eave mount on 1 square mile
centers vs high rooftop with more towers needed (again saving the service
provider money). Brad

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 6:44 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Trango Atlas CPE with dish  $250?
Canopy with dish $275

Canopy Advantage Cluster:
6 Ap's @ $1500 each = $9k (you can start your pop with a fcc certified omni
unit for $2.7k and evolve to a full sector later)
CMM Micro for Power and Sync = $1.5k *optional
BAM - Prizm = $2k *optional

The CMM Micro is optional component for GPS Sync, you can achieve sync among
the cluster with 10 ft of cat 5 and 6 rj11 connectors

BAM - Prizm is a NMS for Management but is NOT a required component, you can
manage all your settings from the web interface on each unit including
bandwidth and such.  I would only recommend the Prizm NMS for big WISP's
(200+ units )

About the Third Party:

There are a couple on 3rd party improvements for canopy, almost all were
created on a cost savings stand point, Example:

Motorola reflector dish for 10 mile + links $100
Beehive Wireless reflector dish for 10 mile links $49.95 (fcc certified)

Motorola CMM GPS Sync System $1.5k
PacketFLux GPS Sync $300

Any other questions ?

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 4:53 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

So what is the onesy-twosy price of a Trango Atlas with an extended
range antenna? What is the price for a Canopy Advantage CPE with
extended range? I have plenty of data I've found, but there seems to be
some wide discrepancy here among you folks.

How about total cost for a Canopy cluster with the BAM, GPS synch, and
other little extra things you need for it to be complete?

Also, I've heard a number of you talk about availability of third party
improvements like it is a benefit of the Canopy system. Seriously, isn't
that more a reflection of the glaring gaps in Canopy that have led smart
WISP entrepreneurs to capitalize?

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Sunday, September 24

RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-25 Thread Brad Larson
From my understanding the business is up for grabs. Moto got a foot hold on
current cell sites and deployments. It remains to be seen what happens to
new cell/city rollouts. Brad

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 2:00 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

I'm sure most know that was a 'play' and basically secured Moto's 
position to sell WIMAX gear to the 2nd largest 2.5GHz spectrum holder. 
It would have been interesting if Alvarion had been in their place...not 
sure if you guys have that kind of change sitting around.

Jon Langeler
Michwave Tech.

Patrick Leary wrote:

Speaking of Clearwire, folks here are aware that Motorola now owns
NextNet, the hardware supplier to Clearwire (that once was part of
Clearwire, at least in ownership terms), right? The purchase was IN
ADDITION to the $300M investment Motorola made into Clearwire
http://telephonyonline.com/wireless/finance/motorola_clearwire_nextnet_0
70606/

To give you an idea of how much that Moto investment is relative to your
Canopy businessthat is more than Canopy makes for Motorola worldwide
over 2 years. 

Patrick

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 7:57 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

Ahhh... there's always a catch... so now Motorola has your customer's 
address and can use that for their own marketing, etc. without you ever 
knowing. They could possibly even sell the list to someone (ClearWire) 
down the road and you would never know.

Travis
Microserv

Anthony Will wrote:
  


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals  computer
viruses(191).








 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals  computer
viruses(43).





-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-25 Thread Brian Rohrbacher

inline

Brad Belton wrote:


Price is always a factor, but we would gladly pay a premium for VL with the
sorely needed HARDWARE improvements:

(1)  Dual Polarity via software
(2)  Dual Band 5.3GHz and 5.8GHz
 


I know trango does dual polarity, but who does dual band?


These are time tested proven valuable HARDWARE features that VL is lacking.
With these features added to VL there would not be a comparable product on
the market other than home-brew's like StarOS  MikroTik.

Without these HARDWARE improvements the VL product is too susceptible to
noise and therefore not a viable solution for committed rate business
offerings.

Best,


Brad




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Larson
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 9:31 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Gino, I have to admit Alvarion has some work to do for the smaller wisp's
out there. Patrick will have his hands full on this one. But for wisps
buying 100 packs on a bi or monthly plan the pricing below just doesn't seem
like such a deal breaker anymore when you add up the feature sets. For a few
more months on an ROI model you can buy Alvarion.

The whole point of this thread has been the fact that many (including Scriv)
have found out Trango still wins, because Trango is less expensive or
Canopy for that matter. may not exactly be the case. The ongoing costs
of truck rolls, tech support issues, and shorter coverage modeling can kill
an ROI model faster than the cost of cpe. 


Add in voip coverage modeling and the dynamics change once again. I have
seen several advanced studies of building data/voip wireless networks where
BreezeAccess VL used half the tower/base station sites (therefore less
leases and operational expenses), gave twice the throughput per cell site,
and can handle more than 10X's the amount of voip traffic. Throw in the
addition of maintaining twice the amount of gear and once again we come out
ahead. This was really driven home on a few backhauling for mesh projects
with drive testing of different technologies and the findings REALLY blew me
away. No kidding folks the differences are like night and day and you'll be
hearing about some of these networks this year.

I first saw the differences several years ago where a project out for bid
was installing 2,500 cpe's in a seven square mile area with trees and
rolling hills. With a $125 premium on cpe the total network costs with
operational expenses was less expensive than a Canopy solution and we gave
100% coverage. Alvarion CPE installation was eave mount on 1 square mile
centers vs high rooftop with more towers needed (again saving the service
provider money). Brad

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 6:44 PM

To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Trango Atlas CPE with dish  $250?
Canopy with dish $275

Canopy Advantage Cluster:
6 Ap's @ $1500 each = $9k (you can start your pop with a fcc certified omni
unit for $2.7k and evolve to a full sector later)
CMM Micro for Power and Sync = $1.5k *optional
BAM - Prizm = $2k *optional

The CMM Micro is optional component for GPS Sync, you can achieve sync among
the cluster with 10 ft of cat 5 and 6 rj11 connectors

BAM - Prizm is a NMS for Management but is NOT a required component, you can
manage all your settings from the web interface on each unit including
bandwidth and such.  I would only recommend the Prizm NMS for big WISP's
(200+ units )

About the Third Party:

There are a couple on 3rd party improvements for canopy, almost all were
created on a cost savings stand point, Example:

Motorola reflector dish for 10 mile + links $100
Beehive Wireless reflector dish for 10 mile links $49.95 (fcc certified)

Motorola CMM GPS Sync System $1.5k
PacketFLux GPS Sync $300

Any other questions ?

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 4:53 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

So what is the onesy-twosy price of a Trango Atlas with an extended
range antenna? What is the price for a Canopy Advantage CPE with
extended range? I have plenty of data I've found, but there seems to be
some wide discrepancy here among you folks.

How about total cost for a Canopy cluster with the BAM, GPS synch, and
other little extra things you need for it to be complete?

Also, I've heard a number of you talk about availability of third party
improvements like it is a benefit of the Canopy system. Seriously, isn't
that more a reflection of the glaring gaps in Canopy that have led smart
WISP entrepreneurs to capitalize?

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From

RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-25 Thread Brad Larson
Brad Belton, Respectfully, there are 100's of wisp's proving you wrong. OFDM
in UL has its place and making blanket statements to the contrary makes
little sense. There is great debate in the industry of what value Dual
Polarity via software offers an OFDM UL system. There is also considerable
data on the fact that dual frequency solutions are not optimal. You keep
harping on these same two issues yet we have a substantial installed base
that grows by the day. There will never be a perfect solution for everyone
and I understand that VL may not be a fit for your current situation. 

BreezeAccess VL is a viable solution that is being heavily deployed and we
continue to replace dual polarity via software and dual band 5.3/5.8
solutions with great results (and they speak for themselves). I think this
thread was started by one such replacement, an upgrade from Trango that got
the provider faster data rates, better support, etc. etc. They'll be many
more testimonials in the coming 12 months. Scriv said it best, It's like
the difference between night and day. We have zero downtime on our backhaul
now. We were getting countless reports of downtime from our network
monitoring system before. Now it just works. I don't think I can overstate
the impact Alvarion VL has had on my network. Oh and lets not forget the
fact that Scriv is probably sleeping better at night without the outages he
used to have. 

Brad

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 11:30 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Price is always a factor, but we would gladly pay a premium for VL with the
sorely needed HARDWARE improvements:

(1)  Dual Polarity via software
(2)  Dual Band 5.3GHz and 5.8GHz

These are time tested proven valuable HARDWARE features that VL is lacking.
With these features added to VL there would not be a comparable product on
the market other than home-brew's like StarOS  MikroTik.

Without these HARDWARE improvements the VL product is too susceptible to
noise and therefore not a viable solution for committed rate business
offerings.

Best,


Brad




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Larson
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 9:31 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Gino, I have to admit Alvarion has some work to do for the smaller wisp's
out there. Patrick will have his hands full on this one. But for wisps
buying 100 packs on a bi or monthly plan the pricing below just doesn't seem
like such a deal breaker anymore when you add up the feature sets. For a few
more months on an ROI model you can buy Alvarion.

The whole point of this thread has been the fact that many (including Scriv)
have found out Trango still wins, because Trango is less expensive or
Canopy for that matter. may not exactly be the case. The ongoing costs
of truck rolls, tech support issues, and shorter coverage modeling can kill
an ROI model faster than the cost of cpe. 

Add in voip coverage modeling and the dynamics change once again. I have
seen several advanced studies of building data/voip wireless networks where
BreezeAccess VL used half the tower/base station sites (therefore less
leases and operational expenses), gave twice the throughput per cell site,
and can handle more than 10X's the amount of voip traffic. Throw in the
addition of maintaining twice the amount of gear and once again we come out
ahead. This was really driven home on a few backhauling for mesh projects
with drive testing of different technologies and the findings REALLY blew me
away. No kidding folks the differences are like night and day and you'll be
hearing about some of these networks this year.

I first saw the differences several years ago where a project out for bid
was installing 2,500 cpe's in a seven square mile area with trees and
rolling hills. With a $125 premium on cpe the total network costs with
operational expenses was less expensive than a Canopy solution and we gave
100% coverage. Alvarion CPE installation was eave mount on 1 square mile
centers vs high rooftop with more towers needed (again saving the service
provider money). Brad

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 6:44 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Trango Atlas CPE with dish  $250?
Canopy with dish $275

Canopy Advantage Cluster:
6 Ap's @ $1500 each = $9k (you can start your pop with a fcc certified omni
unit for $2.7k and evolve to a full sector later)
CMM Micro for Power and Sync = $1.5k *optional
BAM - Prizm = $2k *optional

The CMM Micro is optional component for GPS Sync, you can achieve sync among
the cluster with 10 ft of cat 5 and 6 rj11 connectors

BAM - Prizm is a NMS for Management but is NOT a required component, you can
manage all your settings from the web interface on each unit including
bandwidth

Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-25 Thread John Scrivner
For the record, my use of Alvarion is to feed high-end business 
customers and towers only at this time. I still cannot make a business 
case for Alvarion for SoHo and Resi. I do not plan to make that move 
until I see Alvarion has a way to make that pay. A 24 to 36 month ROI 
does not work for resi and soho. If it does not pay in 6 to 12 months 
then you are building yourself a dead business plan. Is Alvarion going 
to make a move to fill this need?


Here is the breakdown as I see it. It costs me an average of $350.00 to 
put a SoHo or Resi customer online. I have about $275.00 average 
equipment cost and average of $75.00 install costs total. The systems I 
use work for the job intended. I am open for suggestions on why Alvarion 
would be a better fit for soho or resi but I do not see that at this 
time. For backhaul and enterprise customers Alvarion is the product to 
use without a doubt.

Scriv


Brad Larson wrote:


Gino, I have to admit Alvarion has some work to do for the smaller wisp's
out there. Patrick will have his hands full on this one. But for wisps
buying 100 packs on a bi or monthly plan the pricing below just doesn't seem
like such a deal breaker anymore when you add up the feature sets. For a few
more months on an ROI model you can buy Alvarion.

The whole point of this thread has been the fact that many (including Scriv)
have found out Trango still wins, because Trango is less expensive or
Canopy for that matter. may not exactly be the case. The ongoing costs
of truck rolls, tech support issues, and shorter coverage modeling can kill
an ROI model faster than the cost of cpe. 


Add in voip coverage modeling and the dynamics change once again. I have
seen several advanced studies of building data/voip wireless networks where
BreezeAccess VL used half the tower/base station sites (therefore less
leases and operational expenses), gave twice the throughput per cell site,
and can handle more than 10X's the amount of voip traffic. Throw in the
addition of maintaining twice the amount of gear and once again we come out
ahead. This was really driven home on a few backhauling for mesh projects
with drive testing of different technologies and the findings REALLY blew me
away. No kidding folks the differences are like night and day and you'll be
hearing about some of these networks this year.

I first saw the differences several years ago where a project out for bid
was installing 2,500 cpe's in a seven square mile area with trees and
rolling hills. With a $125 premium on cpe the total network costs with
operational expenses was less expensive than a Canopy solution and we gave
100% coverage. Alvarion CPE installation was eave mount on 1 square mile
centers vs high rooftop with more towers needed (again saving the service
provider money). Brad

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 6:44 PM

To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Trango Atlas CPE with dish  $250?
Canopy with dish $275

Canopy Advantage Cluster:
6 Ap's @ $1500 each = $9k (you can start your pop with a fcc certified omni
unit for $2.7k and evolve to a full sector later)
CMM Micro for Power and Sync = $1.5k *optional
BAM - Prizm = $2k *optional

The CMM Micro is optional component for GPS Sync, you can achieve sync among
the cluster with 10 ft of cat 5 and 6 rj11 connectors

BAM - Prizm is a NMS for Management but is NOT a required component, you can
manage all your settings from the web interface on each unit including
bandwidth and such.  I would only recommend the Prizm NMS for big WISP's
(200+ units )

About the Third Party:

There are a couple on 3rd party improvements for canopy, almost all were
created on a cost savings stand point, Example:

Motorola reflector dish for 10 mile + links $100
Beehive Wireless reflector dish for 10 mile links $49.95 (fcc certified)

Motorola CMM GPS Sync System $1.5k
PacketFLux GPS Sync $300

Any other questions ?

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 4:53 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

So what is the onesy-twosy price of a Trango Atlas with an extended
range antenna? What is the price for a Canopy Advantage CPE with
extended range? I have plenty of data I've found, but there seems to be
some wide discrepancy here among you folks.

How about total cost for a Canopy cluster with the BAM, GPS synch, and
other little extra things you need for it to be complete?

Also, I've heard a number of you talk about availability of third party
improvements like it is a benefit of the Canopy system. Seriously, isn't
that more a reflection of the glaring gaps in Canopy that have led smart
WISP entrepreneurs to capitalize?

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o

RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-25 Thread Brad Belton
Hello Brad,

I think you are missing the point of the thread here.  The point is to offer
up constructive criticism of the VL product and how end users feel it could
be improved upon.

Are you saying adding a RSSI reading, adding dual polarity and adding dual
band ability would not further improve the VL product?  I think you are
sorely mistaken.

Certainly the VL product is working for thousands of end users.  Where in
any of my posts do I claim it is not?  However, clearly a product that
auto-rates itself down to a slower speed in the face of noise is not a
product that we can use to support committed rate clients.  Sure, we can
fudge it for a short time and if the VL offered software polarity  software
band agility fix the problem fairly quickly.  

With the current VL product we are forced to truck roll to every client site
and rotate polarity or in the event of an internal SU have to replace it
with a horizontal solution.  That simply isn't an option for us, but maybe
other operations find the truck rolls enjoyable...grin

The operators given to me by Alvarion as references using VL clearly state
on their websites they are offering up to bandwidth packages.  Not
committed rate packages as we do.  This is not to disparage them in any
way...many of the references are many times larger than us and I applaud
their success, however our target market is different than theirs.

I want to use the VL product as it can offer the additional capacity we
need, but without a few basic hardware features I don't see it as a fit for
us.  Again, that's what discussion is for...I'm here to discuss improvements
I'd like to see in the VL product.  What is wrong with that?

Best,


Brad





-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Larson
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 10:50 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Brad Belton, Respectfully, there are 100's of wisp's proving you wrong. OFDM
in UL has its place and making blanket statements to the contrary makes
little sense. There is great debate in the industry of what value Dual
Polarity via software offers an OFDM UL system. There is also considerable
data on the fact that dual frequency solutions are not optimal. You keep
harping on these same two issues yet we have a substantial installed base
that grows by the day. There will never be a perfect solution for everyone
and I understand that VL may not be a fit for your current situation. 

BreezeAccess VL is a viable solution that is being heavily deployed and we
continue to replace dual polarity via software and dual band 5.3/5.8
solutions with great results (and they speak for themselves). I think this
thread was started by one such replacement, an upgrade from Trango that got
the provider faster data rates, better support, etc. etc. They'll be many
more testimonials in the coming 12 months. Scriv said it best, It's like
the difference between night and day. We have zero downtime on our backhaul
now. We were getting countless reports of downtime from our network
monitoring system before. Now it just works. I don't think I can overstate
the impact Alvarion VL has had on my network. Oh and lets not forget the
fact that Scriv is probably sleeping better at night without the outages he
used to have. 

Brad

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 11:30 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Price is always a factor, but we would gladly pay a premium for VL with the
sorely needed HARDWARE improvements:

(1)  Dual Polarity via software
(2)  Dual Band 5.3GHz and 5.8GHz

These are time tested proven valuable HARDWARE features that VL is lacking.
With these features added to VL there would not be a comparable product on
the market other than home-brew's like StarOS  MikroTik.

Without these HARDWARE improvements the VL product is too susceptible to
noise and therefore not a viable solution for committed rate business
offerings.

Best,


Brad




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Larson
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 9:31 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Gino, I have to admit Alvarion has some work to do for the smaller wisp's
out there. Patrick will have his hands full on this one. But for wisps
buying 100 packs on a bi or monthly plan the pricing below just doesn't seem
like such a deal breaker anymore when you add up the feature sets. For a few
more months on an ROI model you can buy Alvarion.

The whole point of this thread has been the fact that many (including Scriv)
have found out Trango still wins, because Trango is less expensive or
Canopy for that matter. may not exactly be the case. The ongoing costs
of truck rolls, tech support issues, and shorter coverage modeling can kill
an ROI model faster than the cost of cpe. 

Add in voip coverage modeling

Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-25 Thread John Scrivner
I think maybe this thread is getting unproductive. Let's either move on 
to other vendor specific issues that are new or move on to another thread.

Scriv


Brad Larson wrote:


Brad Belton, Respectfully, there are 100's of wisp's proving you wrong. OFDM
in UL has its place and making blanket statements to the contrary makes
little sense. There is great debate in the industry of what value Dual
Polarity via software offers an OFDM UL system. There is also considerable
data on the fact that dual frequency solutions are not optimal. You keep
harping on these same two issues yet we have a substantial installed base
that grows by the day. There will never be a perfect solution for everyone
and I understand that VL may not be a fit for your current situation. 


BreezeAccess VL is a viable solution that is being heavily deployed and we
continue to replace dual polarity via software and dual band 5.3/5.8
solutions with great results (and they speak for themselves). I think this
thread was started by one such replacement, an upgrade from Trango that got
the provider faster data rates, better support, etc. etc. They'll be many
more testimonials in the coming 12 months. Scriv said it best, It's like
the difference between night and day. We have zero downtime on our backhaul
now. We were getting countless reports of downtime from our network
monitoring system before. Now it just works. I don't think I can overstate
the impact Alvarion VL has had on my network. Oh and lets not forget the
fact that Scriv is probably sleeping better at night without the outages he
used to have. 


Brad

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 11:30 AM

To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Price is always a factor, but we would gladly pay a premium for VL with the
sorely needed HARDWARE improvements:

(1)  Dual Polarity via software
(2)  Dual Band 5.3GHz and 5.8GHz

These are time tested proven valuable HARDWARE features that VL is lacking.
With these features added to VL there would not be a comparable product on
the market other than home-brew's like StarOS  MikroTik.

Without these HARDWARE improvements the VL product is too susceptible to
noise and therefore not a viable solution for committed rate business
offerings.

Best,


Brad




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Larson
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 9:31 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Gino, I have to admit Alvarion has some work to do for the smaller wisp's
out there. Patrick will have his hands full on this one. But for wisps
buying 100 packs on a bi or monthly plan the pricing below just doesn't seem
like such a deal breaker anymore when you add up the feature sets. For a few
more months on an ROI model you can buy Alvarion.

The whole point of this thread has been the fact that many (including Scriv)
have found out Trango still wins, because Trango is less expensive or
Canopy for that matter. may not exactly be the case. The ongoing costs
of truck rolls, tech support issues, and shorter coverage modeling can kill
an ROI model faster than the cost of cpe. 


Add in voip coverage modeling and the dynamics change once again. I have
seen several advanced studies of building data/voip wireless networks where
BreezeAccess VL used half the tower/base station sites (therefore less
leases and operational expenses), gave twice the throughput per cell site,
and can handle more than 10X's the amount of voip traffic. Throw in the
addition of maintaining twice the amount of gear and once again we come out
ahead. This was really driven home on a few backhauling for mesh projects
with drive testing of different technologies and the findings REALLY blew me
away. No kidding folks the differences are like night and day and you'll be
hearing about some of these networks this year.

I first saw the differences several years ago where a project out for bid
was installing 2,500 cpe's in a seven square mile area with trees and
rolling hills. With a $125 premium on cpe the total network costs with
operational expenses was less expensive than a Canopy solution and we gave
100% coverage. Alvarion CPE installation was eave mount on 1 square mile
centers vs high rooftop with more towers needed (again saving the service
provider money). Brad

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 6:44 PM

To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Trango Atlas CPE with dish  $250?
Canopy with dish $275

Canopy Advantage Cluster:
6 Ap's @ $1500 each = $9k (you can start your pop with a fcc certified omni
unit for $2.7k and evolve to a full sector later)
CMM Micro for Power and Sync = $1.5k *optional
BAM - Prizm = $2k *optional

The CMM Micro is optional component for GPS Sync, you can achieve sync among
the cluster with 10 ft of cat 5 and 6

Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-25 Thread Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181
Man, that must be nice!  I've got residential customers that get all bent 
out of shape when their tests drop below one meg, either way.


We have resi customers that get 3+ megs.  BOTH ways.

sigh.  I'm in the wrong dang market out here!

But what the heck, we also get recommended by many of the computer shops, 
college IT guys etc.  And we've got a few more loans to pay off then we'll 
start making some good money too.


Here's the part that's funniest to me.  We're still doing it all (250 dialup 
subs, 50 fiber to the home, and around 325 wireless subs) with 1.75 people! 
Sure I pay more than I'd like to people like Butch and Keith to take care of 
my network.  But I don't pay them for sitting around either.


Once we get the debt paid off we'll be looking at a nearly 50% margin! 
Gotta love a business model like that.

Marlon
(509) 982-2181   Equipment sales
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp!
64.146.146.12 (net meeting)
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



- Original Message - 
From: Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Saturday, September 23, 2006 1:03 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs



Travis,

WE provide Symetrical Business service with Canopy, why you couldn't ?

A Regular AP has 7 Mbps if you split 75/25 that translates to : 5.25 / 
1.75


Why can you sell a 512/512 over that type of AP split ?

We use Advantage and have 10/4 MBps of capacity.  My biggest Symetrical 
Plan

is 3 Mbps, any other Customer that needs 5 , 6 10 symetrical gets a
dedicated ptp link ...

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Saturday, September 23, 2006 12:11 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

The biggest reason we use Trango is because we sell our wireless service
as symmetrical. Even on the residential level, if they purchase 512k
they get 512k down and 512k up. So, if I use Canopy, I have to do a
50/50 split, which means even the Advantage product only provides 7Mbps
of usable bandwidth.

I would estimate 15% of our new signups for wireless are because of the
symmetrical speed (even though 99% of them never use it). Another 15%
comes from offering a real static IP address.

Travis
Microserv

Matt Liotta wrote:


Gino A. Villarini wrote:


GPS sync is extra $$.




Of course you can also just string sync cables between radios for free.


True, but this is truly what makes canopy works and you have nice 3rd
party
options like www.lastmilegear.com and www.packetflux.com for the gps
sync
units that start @ less than $300 for a 4 port Sync unit




Thanks for the reference to third party sync devices. I am not at all
happy with the CMM. I looked at the devices from the respective
vendors you shared. While they do look more in line with our needs
than the CMM I was wondering if you have seen any third party sync
devices that are rack mount and can handle 10+ radios. In fact,
handling 24 radios would be awesome for us.

-Matt


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-25 Thread Tom DeReggi

Patrick,


At this point, our company has made the decision that the loss in
performance is not worth the benefits


I agree that a wider spectrum product has RF trade offs compared to designed 
for a narrower band, when done via a simplistic design, and I understand 
Alvarion's position not to compromise optimal RF.  What one is not realizing 
is that in order to support Dual Freq, it  does not need to compromise RF 
integrity, with a clever Electric engineer's design.  The fact is, the CHIP 
already supports it.  A clever designer could easilly create seperate 
circuits internally that applied appropriate filters based on which freq was 
selected.   Sure it costs a few dollars more, but when you buy a premium 
radio, what's a few more dollars?


The facts are, having seperate model's means more different gear to stock, 
per VAN.  When you buy a $500 radio thats not that big of a deal, but it is 
when you are paying $3000 a link.  The truth is, Alvarion could easilly 
design their gear as 1 shell, that got flashed based on what freq and 
purpose you wanted the radio for.  I believe Alvarion's reasons not to 
support Dual Freq are marketing/sales reasons, not technical.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Patrick Leary [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 4:42 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs


There are arguments against dual band support, as we have discussed
before, though you ridicule our sincere reasoning and call it BS (which
is why I am cautious about discussing these things with you in public).

As I said to you, our RD folks tell me that RF components that span a
broad frequency range have poorer performance than those designed for
more narrow frequency ranges. I don't have a Ph.D in EE or other science
disciplines, so I'm not going to argue with them. And as I have further
explained, that poorer edge performance may or may not be worth giving
up to get the benefit of dual band. That part is an economic question,
not a technical one.

At this point, our company has made the decision that the loss in
performance is not worth the benefits. And yes, our RD DO tend to be RF
purists (another thing you ridicule). That reality has its good and bad
points.

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Belton
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 12:24 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Agreed, VL does have more niche features and some of those can be the
sole
reason VL makes the cut and other products do not.  As you know VLAN
support
was the key feature in this particular case, but simply placing a CPE
router
on site will also fill that need.

I'm a believer in the VL product, but there are currently a few too many
basic pitfalls with the product.  If I didn't care I wouldn't be posting
about the VL.  Let's face it this is some of the best exposure a
manufacturer can ask for: users expressing improvements they would like
to
see implemented.

The improvement requests here aren't without merit.  Dual polarity and
dual
band capability are good ideas.  There isn't any argument against it, so
why
not implement it?  I guarantee it will result in additional VL sales.

Trango has many features that VL does not currently offer in addition to
the
extremely important Dual Polarity ability:

(1)  Rx Threshold to maintain full payload capacity in noisy areas
(2)  Far fewer commands that require a reboot
(3)  Much faster reboot
(4)  Dual band 5.3GHz and 5.8GHz in one product
(5)  RSSI reading local and remote side
(6)  Ability to locate noise at AU or SU without interrupting traffic

Considering Alvarion has a tech in the local area I wouldn't expect
anything
less than a free visit.  Scanning the numerous emails between all of
us on
this topic I'm unable to find the offer.  Could you forward me the
exchange
you are referring to?

Trango offered to fly a tech out to us from across the country for
free.
Free is in quotations because I don't believe anything is free...you're
paying for it somewhere in this case by purchasing product. grin

There is more, but it's Sunday and I've got yet another 4 or 5yr old
birthday party to attend!

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 12:34 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Re dual polarity via software, I and others have always said it would be
nice. You've never heard me argue against it and you have heard me
acknowledge that this is Trango's key Trango only differentiator. But
we all understand that and have acknowledged it many times. Lots of
things are nice, some just have higher priority than others. For every 1
thing VL may not have

Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-25 Thread Tom DeReggi



I was referring to On-the-Fly Dual Pol,Dual 
Freq, Dual Radio, Dual Ethernet. Or improved manufacturering 
methods,allowing lower costs of production. But you've answered that 
point in pastposts of this thread already. I guess all I was trying to say was, why not take the same pride that 
Alvarion has with innovating theirsoftware, and put the same effort into 
hardware features.I admit, the hardwareis really well built, 
and does not have a lot of room to improve, but I'm not sure their has been a 
significant hardware advancement since the product line was first developed (4 
years ago?), as far as adding new features.

Alvarion may actually have Dual port/radio models, 
but its a hefty aditional cost, not something just thrown in as standard. 
A second Ethernet port for example, only has a manufacturer's cost of less than 
$15, and is something that should be thrown in for low cost,such as 
Tranzeo has done with their second Ethernet POE out port model.

So to summerize, I am not challenging the quality 
of hardware, just advancement of new features. Each year I like to see the cost 
keep come down or the features keep getting added.

Tom DeReggiRapidDSL  Wireless, IncIntAirNet- Fixed Wireless 
Broadband



  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Patrick Leary 
  To: WISPA General List 
  Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 6:02 
  PM
  Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs
  
  
  Hi Tom. What hardware 
  features are you referring to?
  
  
PatrickThis 
  footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned byPineApp 
  Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals  computer 
  viruses(191).This 
  footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned byPineApp 
  Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals  computer 
  viruses(43).This 
  footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned byPineApp 
  Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals  computer 
  viruses.
  
  

  -- WISPA Wireless List: 
  wireless@wispa.orgSubscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wirelessArchives: 
  http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
  
  

  No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG Free 
  Edition.Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.8/455 - Release Date: 
  9/22/2006
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-25 Thread Tom DeReggi



Again, is the goal to get the best link, or the 
strongest signal? Although I get the arguement, that RSSI allows you the best 
alignment, I'd rather know the SNR, because it helps me determine where the 
noise is without having to do another time consuming step of testing for noise 
before aligning. They way to rule on this, is compare what the average 
install times are for each product line. Our surveying had showed that 
installers generally completed installs faster when using Alvarion 
products. 

Again, I'm not saying I prefer Alvarion over the 
product that we use more commonly, but I give credit where credit is 
due.

Tom DeReggiRapidDSL  Wireless, IncIntAirNet- Fixed Wireless 
Broadband



  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Brad Belton 

  To: 'WISPA General List' 
  Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 12:59 
  PM
  Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs
  
  
  Exactly, and this is 
  can be compounded on a new installation as you might be seeing noise or could 
  it be you are just misaligned?
  
  Techs are creatures 
  of habit. They may think 4 LED bars is all that is ever needed because 
  that’s what they typically see. The next install they throw up a radio 
  and get their usual 4 LED bars and don’t realize 5 or more is 
  obtainable. Then a rainstorm comes in along with a 20F drop in 
  temperature and the link goes to crap because in fact they aligned the radio 
  on a side lobe.
  
  
  
  Brad
  
  -Original 
  Message-From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gino A. 
  VillariniSent: Sunday, 
  September 24, 2006 11:48 AMTo: 'WISPA General List'Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor 
  specs
  
  The 
  problem with SNR for alignment purposes is that you are dealing with a 
  variable in noise, with rssi you work with fixed numbers. I’m not 
  dissing SNR, it is extremely important, But for example, in order to trouble 
  shoot a link … let say I install a Link and Im seeing a a SNR of 6 on this 
  link,how the heck can I determine if the antenna is miss aligned or the noise 
  floor is very high ???
  
  
  Gino A. 
  Villarini 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aeronet Wireless 
  Broadband Corp. 
  tel 
  787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145 
  
  
  
  
  From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick LearySent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 12:24 
  PMTo: WISPA General 
  ListSubject: RE: [WISPA] 
  vendor specs
  
  Right, but the LED bar on the CPE can be 
  used to do that. I mean, isn't SNR more complete than just RSSI, meaning if 
  your SNR is good than the RSSI is by default good. Anyway, I have never heard 
  of any moderately experienced VL user say the units did not convey enough info 
  to easily establish a link and understand the quality of the connection. 
  Consider that with the CPE VL radio the LEDs will show:
  
  WLAN link light-
  · 
  Solid Green – Unit is associated with an AU, no 
  wireless link activity
  · 
  Blinking Green – Data received or transmitted on 
  the wireless link, blinking rate is proportional to wireless
  traffic rate
  · 
  Off – Wireless link is disabled
  
  Status light –
  · 
  Solid Green – Power is available and self-test 
  passed
  · 
  Blinking Amber – Testing (not ready for 
  operation)
  · 
  Red – Self-test failed – fatal error
  
  Ethernet light –
  · 
  Solid Green – Ethernet link between the indoor and 
  outdoor units is detected, no activity
  · 
  Blinking Green – Ethernet connectivity is OK, with 
  traffic on the port. Blinking rate proportional to traffic rate
  · 
  Red – No Ethernet connectivity between the indoor 
  and outdoor units
  
  SNR bar –
  · 
  Red LED: Signal is too low (SNR4 dB)
  · 
  Orange LED: Signal is too high (SNR  50 
dB)
  · 
  8 green LEDs: Quality of the received signal 
  (green LEDs translate per below)
  LED 1 (red) is On - Signal is too low 
  (SNR  4 dB)
  LED 2 (green) is On - SNR  4 
  dB
  LEDs 2 to 3 (green) are On - SNR  8 
  dB
  LEDs 2 to 4 (green) are On - SNR  13 
  dB
  LEDs 2 to 5 (green) are On - SNR  19 
  dB
  LEDs 2 to 6 (green) are On - SNR  26 
  dB
  LEDs 2 to 7 (green) are On - SNR  31 
  dB
  LEDs 2 to 8 (green) are On - SNR  38 
  dB
  LEDs 2 to 9 (green) are On - SNR  44 
  dB
  LEDs 2 to 9 (green) and 10 (orange) are 
  On Signal is too high (SNR  50 dB)
  
  Mod level : Sensitivity : Min. SNR (this 
  chart for 20MHz channel)
  1 : -89 dBm : 6 dB
  2 : -88 dBm : 7 dB
  3 : -86 dBm : 9 dB
  4 : -84 dBm : 11 dB
  5 : -81 dBm : 14 dB
  6 : -77 dBm : 18 dB
  7 : -73 dBm : 22 dB
  8 : -71 dBm : 23 dB
  
  
  Patrick Leary
  AVP WISP Markets
  Alvarion, Inc.
  o: 650.314.2628
  c: 760.580.0080
  Vonage: 650.641.1243
  
  -Original Message-From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of G. 
  villariniSent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 8:48 AMTo: 
  wireless@wispa.orgSubject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs
  
  Patrick,
  
  Rssi is very important to determine if a 
  link is properly aligned and its achieving its

Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-25 Thread Travis Johnson
Trango has dual polarity and dual band all in the same radio (5830SU). 
Granted these are not the $149 CPE, but rather $700.


Travis
Microserv

Brian Rohrbacher wrote:


inline

Brad Belton wrote:

Price is always a factor, but we would gladly pay a premium for VL 
with the

sorely needed HARDWARE improvements:

(1)  Dual Polarity via software
(2)  Dual Band 5.3GHz and 5.8GHz
 


I know trango does dual polarity, but who does dual band?

These are time tested proven valuable HARDWARE features that VL is 
lacking.
With these features added to VL there would not be a comparable 
product on

the market other than home-brew's like StarOS  MikroTik.

Without these HARDWARE improvements the VL product is too susceptible to
noise and therefore not a viable solution for committed rate business
offerings.

Best,


Brad




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Larson
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 9:31 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Gino, I have to admit Alvarion has some work to do for the smaller 
wisp's

out there. Patrick will have his hands full on this one. But for wisps
buying 100 packs on a bi or monthly plan the pricing below just 
doesn't seem
like such a deal breaker anymore when you add up the feature sets. 
For a few

more months on an ROI model you can buy Alvarion.

The whole point of this thread has been the fact that many (including 
Scriv)

have found out Trango still wins, because Trango is less expensive or
Canopy for that matter. may not exactly be the case. The ongoing 
costs
of truck rolls, tech support issues, and shorter coverage modeling 
can kill

an ROI model faster than the cost of cpe.
Add in voip coverage modeling and the dynamics change once again. I have
seen several advanced studies of building data/voip wireless networks 
where

BreezeAccess VL used half the tower/base station sites (therefore less
leases and operational expenses), gave twice the throughput per cell 
site,

and can handle more than 10X's the amount of voip traffic. Throw in the
addition of maintaining twice the amount of gear and once again we 
come out
ahead. This was really driven home on a few backhauling for mesh 
projects
with drive testing of different technologies and the findings REALLY 
blew me
away. No kidding folks the differences are like night and day and 
you'll be

hearing about some of these networks this year.

I first saw the differences several years ago where a project out for 
bid

was installing 2,500 cpe's in a seven square mile area with trees and
rolling hills. With a $125 premium on cpe the total network costs with
operational expenses was less expensive than a Canopy solution and we 
gave

100% coverage. Alvarion CPE installation was eave mount on 1 square mile
centers vs high rooftop with more towers needed (again saving the 
service

provider money). Brad

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 6:44 PM

To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Trango Atlas CPE with dish  $250?
Canopy with dish $275

Canopy Advantage Cluster:
6 Ap's @ $1500 each = $9k (you can start your pop with a fcc 
certified omni

unit for $2.7k and evolve to a full sector later)
CMM Micro for Power and Sync = $1.5k *optional
BAM - Prizm = $2k *optional

The CMM Micro is optional component for GPS Sync, you can achieve 
sync among

the cluster with 10 ft of cat 5 and 6 rj11 connectors

BAM - Prizm is a NMS for Management but is NOT a required component, 
you can

manage all your settings from the web interface on each unit including
bandwidth and such.  I would only recommend the Prizm NMS for big WISP's
(200+ units )

About the Third Party:

There are a couple on 3rd party improvements for canopy, almost all were
created on a cost savings stand point, Example:

Motorola reflector dish for 10 mile + links $100
Beehive Wireless reflector dish for 10 mile links $49.95 (fcc certified)

Motorola CMM GPS Sync System $1.5k
PacketFLux GPS Sync $300

Any other questions ?

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 4:53 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

So what is the onesy-twosy price of a Trango Atlas with an extended
range antenna? What is the price for a Canopy Advantage CPE with
extended range? I have plenty of data I've found, but there seems to be
some wide discrepancy here among you folks.

How about total cost for a Canopy cluster with the BAM, GPS synch, and
other little extra things you need for it to be complete?

Also, I've heard a number of you talk about availability of third party
improvements like it is a benefit of the Canopy system. Seriously, isn't
that more a reflection of the glaring gaps

Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-25 Thread Tom DeReggi



It took me a while to get this. But doing it by SNR 
actually is a big time saver during installtion. With alternate brands, we need 
to do several tests to determine if a radio is optimally aligned.
Meaning alternate brands, judging by lights, only 
gave us a signal strength, but we still had to plug in a laptop to test if the 
link was good, before finally locking down the radio. This made many 
installs difficult to do with one person. Alvarion's SNR method, makes the 
LEDs more useful to complete a job.

Tom DeReggiRapidDSL  Wireless, IncIntAirNet- Fixed Wireless 
Broadband



  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Patrick Leary 
  To: WISPA General List 
  Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 12:36 
  PM
  Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs
  
  
  I should have also 
  noted that per the info below, most Alvarion operators simply have a policy 
  that they will only connect subscribers for whom a minimum number of the green 
  LEDs will fire and hold. For example, having 4 for of the 8 green LEDs light 
  should get you a link with the best mod level, but 5 will do that plus give 
  you a margin of about 8dB. It is a simple thing once you get used to it, which 
  does not take long. Remember, there is no standard way to show these things, 
  but I’d argue that what we show is more complete and real in terms of link 
  quality. Just showing RSSI would dump it down, wouldn’t 
  it?
  
  
  Patrick 
  Leary 
  AVP WISP 
  Markets 
  Alvarion, Inc. o: 
  650.314.2628 
  c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 
  650.641.1243 
  
  
  
  
  
  From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick LearySent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 9:24 
  AMTo: WISPA General 
  ListSubject: RE: [WISPA] 
  vendor specs
  
  Right, but the LED bar on the CPE can be used to do 
  that. I mean, isn't SNR more complete than just RSSI, meaning if your SNR is 
  good than the RSSI is by default good. Anyway, I have never heard of any 
  moderately experienced VL user say the units did not convey enough info to 
  easily establish a link and understand the quality of the connection. Consider 
  that with the CPE VL radio the LEDs will show:
  
  WLAN link light-
  · 
  Solid Green – Unit is associated 
  with an AU, no wireless link activity
  · 
  Blinking Green – Data received or 
  transmitted on the wireless link, blinking rate is proportional to 
  wireless
  traffic rate
  · 
  Off – Wireless link is 
  disabled
  
  Status light –
  · 
  Solid Green – Power is available 
  and self-test passed
  · 
  Blinking Amber – Testing (not 
  ready for operation)
  · 
  Red – Self-test failed – fatal 
  error
  
  Ethernet light –
  · 
  Solid Green – Ethernet link 
  between the indoor and outdoor units is detected, no activity
  · 
  Blinking Green – Ethernet 
  connectivity is OK, with traffic on the port. Blinking rate proportional to 
  traffic rate
  · 
  Red – No Ethernet connectivity 
  between the indoor and outdoor units
  
  SNR bar –
  · 
  Red LED: Signal is too low 
  (SNR4 dB)
  · 
  Orange LED: Signal is too high 
  (SNR  50 dB)
  · 
  8 green LEDs: Quality of the 
  received signal (green LEDs translate per below)
  LED 1 (red) is On - Signal is too low 
  (SNR  4 dB)
  LED 2 (green) is On - SNR  4 
  dB
  LEDs 2 to 3 (green) are On - SNR  8 
  dB
  LEDs 2 to 4 (green) are On - SNR  13 
  dB
  LEDs 2 to 5 (green) are On - SNR  19 
  dB
  LEDs 2 to 6 (green) are On - SNR  26 
  dB
  LEDs 2 to 7 (green) are On - SNR  31 
  dB
  LEDs 2 to 8 (green) are On - SNR  38 
  dB
  LEDs 2 to 9 (green) are On - SNR  44 
  dB
  LEDs 2 to 9 (green) and 10 (orange) are 
  On Signal is too high (SNR  50 dB)
  
  Mod level : Sensitivity : Min. SNR (this 
  chart for 20MHz channel)
  1 : -89 dBm : 6 
  dB
  2 : -88 dBm : 7 
  dB
  3 : -86 dBm : 9 
  dB
  4 : -84 dBm : 11 
  dB
  5 : -81 dBm : 14 
  dB
  6 : -77 dBm : 18 
  dB
  7 : -73 dBm : 22 
  dB
  8 : -71 dBm : 23 
  dB
  
  
  Patrick Leary
  AVP WISP Markets
  Alvarion, Inc.
  o: 650.314.2628
  c: 760.580.0080
  Vonage: 650.641.1243
  
  -Original Message-From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of G. 
  villariniSent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 8:48 AMTo: 
  wireless@wispa.orgSubject: RE: [WISPA] vendor 
  specs
  
  Patrick,
  
  Rssi is very important to determine if a link is 
  properly aligned and its achieving its link 
  budget.
  
  Altough we don’t use alvarion(yet), we are currently 
  researching backhaul options and the way we comission ptp links here is that 
  we run the calcs on radio mobile and spreedsheet to determine the link budget 
  in advance to implementation. Snr won’t help much 
  there...
  
  Gino
  
  -Original 
Message-
   From: "Patrick 
  Leary"[EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Sent: 9/24/06 11:32:47 
  AM
   To: "WISPA General 
  List"wireless@wispa.org
   Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor 
  specs
   
  Brad,
   
   Software controlled dual polarity 
  might be nice. Not sure why you
   con

Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-25 Thread Tom DeReggi
I agree with that statement.  (except you made a typo, should be without 
dish).


But isn't the Canopy CPE without a dish also useless?

Canopy CPE and Trango CPE, I believe both have 8 dbi antennas, and the 
Trango Atlas CPE performs within spec of what a 8 dbi antenna is expected to 
deliver.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 6:28 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs



Tom,

I can give you some Canopy buying tips off line ...

Also I would like to add that the $150 Trango fox is basically useless 
with

the Dish, putting its true price to $250 or so ...

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 4:10 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

Gino,

The prices you state seem way low.  I've only see nthat on temporar or 
Ebay

type buying.
Is their a CONSISTENT source for $225 and $550 pricing in less than 25 
qty?


I believe that anyone that is required to buy in qty higher than 25 to get
best price is getting overly burdened and likely loosing their savings 
after


looking at all cash flow costs.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 11:05 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs



Let me comment on this 

#Canopy 5.7 AP - $970 (Advantage $1,974)

is this MRSP ? you can buy this the AP for $800 +/- , Advantage for $1500

#C/I advantage
#Fixed up/down ratio

Add GPS Sync, Feature rich firmware, NMS Software, Strong support, Good
promos, Only Manufacturer to offer price conscious upgrade program, third
party products (dishes , gps syncs) ect ect ect

#$490 CPE ($737 advantage) .. yikes with CPE you have 3 options :

Canopy Lite (1mbps) $170 +/- 25 packs
Canopy (14 Mbps Burst) $225 +/-
Canopy Advantage (14 Mbps sustained ) $550 ( way over priced IMHO )



Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 10:31 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] vendor specs

Hi,

I changed the subject line to reflect more the direction of this
discussion (Trango vs. Canopy vs. Alvarion)... ;)

This is just off the top of my head, and I would love to see more data
on any of these radios:

Trango 5830AP - $1,079 retail
Dual polarity
10Mbps (auto up/down ratio)
Easy management (CLI and web)
$149 CPE ($199 up to 10 miles)

Canopy 5.7 AP - $970 (Advantage $1,974)
C/I advantage
Fixed up/down ratio
$490 CPE ($737 advantage)

Alvarion VL AP - $4,500 (rough retail)
36Mbps and 40,000pps
$1,000 CPE

For whatever it's worth, we have over 2,500 CPE in the air and over
2,000 are Trango (900mhz, 2.4ghz, 5.8ghz). The Trango product has worked
very well for us, and we are located on some mountaintop repeater
locations that literally have over 100 antennas (paging, HAM, WISPs,
etc.) within 100 yards of each other.

Our biggest problem is frequency availability at all (regardless of
radio choice)... we have a 2.4ghz AP at a repeater station that is
full. We attempted to install a second sector today and ran a site
survey at this location across the entire 2.4ghz band, the average
signals ranged from -25 to -55 at the best. :(

Travis
Microserv

Jon Langeler wrote:


Tom, I have nothing to gain or lose by telling you what we've not only
extensivley tested but also experienced over 6 years. We started using
canopy since it began shipping and at least 100 trango SU between 3
different towers since beta. I just hate to see fellow wisp protest
that there isn't a good product and struggle when their actually is a
pretty darn good one...and on top of that has an upgrade path in it's
vision, it keeps getting better.

ARQ does not affect C/I like FEC does for example. When you say ARQ is
fixing any resiliance problems that may be true. But you'll also
suffer from increased latency and less throughput during those
retransmissions. Not good if you want to support VOIP and keep
customers happy. Having a low C/I means the system will be stable more
often and maintain a lower retrans. Trango's ARQ is not even an option
in the 5800 model which is what you and I probably have a decent
percentage of in our Trango networks. Having a low C/I requirement
affects other things like increases the range of a product. I'm laying
out facts, you can convince yourself of whatever you want...

Jon Langeler
Michwave Tech.

Tom DeReggi wrote:


Nice try, but I've found

Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-25 Thread Eric Muehleisen

Patrick Leary wrote:

I have a very interesting new (this month) pdf about this topic that
compares Canopy Advantage and BreezeACCESS VL in a variety of ways, from
a coverage modeling example using high end propagation software to VoIP
stats using company documents from both companies. 


We think it makes a clear case for BreezeACCESS VL, far beyond the
simple front end cost discussions. 


It is 189k in size and would be great fodder for discussion here. If you
want a copy, e-mail me offlist.

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243
  


Patrick,
I would be very interested in obtaining this doc. My wireless department 
is comprised of roughly 90% Canopy gear (4,000 subs), which we are very 
happy with. However, we are always looking for greener pastures.


Thank you,

Eric Muehleisen
Internet Technology Specialist
Nex-Tech http://www.nex-tech.com
785.625.7070
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

2006-09-25 Thread Patrick Leary
Jon,

Why is that the case? You really think GPS on Canopy is some cool
feature? Canopy must have GPS to function. Without it, it kills itself.
It is all to prevent self-inflicted interference (remember, Canopy does
not even have ATPC) and to allow for channel re-use. Other systems, like
VL, do not need it. It provides far more capacity than Canopy, so it
does not need to re-use channels and with basic channel planning you
don't have issues with self-interference.

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jon Langeler
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 9:20 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

My problem with VL is that it doesn't offer a scheduled mac...no 
syncronization capability. Now if this get's incorporated down the line 
I would be interested? We've used it all, you name it, and at this point

if it doesn't have GPS sync I'm hesitant to even touch it. That is one 
advantage that WIMAX will be bringing...

Jon Langeler
Michwave Tech.

Patrick Leary wrote:

I have a very interesting new (this month) pdf about this topic that
compares Canopy Advantage and BreezeACCESS VL in a variety of ways,
from
a coverage modeling example using high end propagation software to VoIP
stats using company documents from both companies. 

We think it makes a clear case for BreezeACCESS VL, far beyond the
simple front end cost discussions. 

It is 189k in size and would be great fodder for discussion here. If
you
want a copy, e-mail me offlist.

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals 
computer viruses(192).








 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals 
computer viruses(42).











This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals  computer 
viruses.




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-25 Thread Brad Belton
Hello again Patrick,

I see I failed to respond to a couple questions you had in the last
paragraph of your post and wanted to respond now that I have a little time.


By the way, training does not have to be $1,000 a head, as you know. We
offer people to pay for the whole class than they can sell their own
seats for whatever they want. We actually have some customers that use
this as a profit center. Also, respectfully, isn't one's willingness to
get trained a good measure of one's seriousness? And what professional
training have you had for free that was wroth anything?


Is there really ever anything for free?  I think not.  You're paying for it
somewhere.  grin

While our partnership has been entrepreneurial at heart (as was our father
and grandfather's partnerships), we also recognize the importance of keeping
a company's direction focused at what it does best.  In this case it is
providing committed rate broadband solutions.  The idea of organizing and
profiting from a training seminar really doesn't excite us and would be a
distraction from our focus.

I believe our seriousness or commitment is far better measured by our
failures and accomplishments than whether we pay $1000 a head for a product
training class or not.  

Dad used to say you only need to make more right decisions than wrong to be
successful.  That's a pretty simplistic way of looking at life, but every
day I keep his words in the back of my mind.  I may never reach the level of
success he enjoyed, but I will always continue to strive to be the best at
whatever I do.  Focus is a key element in achieving success.

Best,


Brad



 




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Belton
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 2:24 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Agreed, VL does have more niche features and some of those can be the sole
reason VL makes the cut and other products do not.  As you know VLAN support
was the key feature in this particular case, but simply placing a CPE router
on site will also fill that need.

I'm a believer in the VL product, but there are currently a few too many
basic pitfalls with the product.  If I didn't care I wouldn't be posting
about the VL.  Let's face it this is some of the best exposure a
manufacturer can ask for: users expressing improvements they would like to
see implemented.

The improvement requests here aren't without merit.  Dual polarity and dual
band capability are good ideas.  There isn't any argument against it, so why
not implement it?  I guarantee it will result in additional VL sales.

Trango has many features that VL does not currently offer in addition to the
extremely important Dual Polarity ability:

(1)  Rx Threshold to maintain full payload capacity in noisy areas
(2)  Far fewer commands that require a reboot
(3)  Much faster reboot
(4)  Dual band 5.3GHz and 5.8GHz in one product
(5)  RSSI reading local and remote side
(6)  Ability to locate noise at AU or SU without interrupting traffic

Considering Alvarion has a tech in the local area I wouldn't expect anything
less than a free visit.  Scanning the numerous emails between all of us on
this topic I'm unable to find the offer.  Could you forward me the exchange
you are referring to?

Trango offered to fly a tech out to us from across the country for free.
Free is in quotations because I don't believe anything is free...you're
paying for it somewhere in this case by purchasing product. grin

There is more, but it's Sunday and I've got yet another 4 or 5yr old
birthday party to attend!

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 12:34 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Re dual polarity via software, I and others have always said it would be
nice. You've never heard me argue against it and you have heard me
acknowledge that this is Trango's key Trango only differentiator. But
we all understand that and have acknowledged it many times. Lots of
things are nice, some just have higher priority than others. For every 1
thing VL may not have relative to Trango, we can probably find 10 things
VL can do that Trango cannot, each of equal importance maybe to dual
polarity. The ability to do VoIP well would be such a thing. Those with
multipoint networks using Trango or Canopy are entirely stranded in
terms of being able to do VoIP to any reasonable scale. 

Come on Brad. I was personally involved in some of the threads where
I've seen my people (or me) attempt to answer every question you have
had. I know Keith's management has offered to send him out there
numerous times for free. I was pleased to be able to visit to understand
what your customer was wanting to do.
 
By the way, training does not have to be $1,000 a head, as you know. We
offer people to pay for the whole class than they can sell their own
seats for whatever

RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-25 Thread Brad Larson
I'm not missing the point at all. There is a debate and the findings aren't
there yet whether OFDM and antenna polarity have a true benefit in outdoor
UL PTMP systems and a 5.3/5.8 offering takes away from the current products
spec's which is not a trade off were willing to do at this time. OK?

However, Adding RSSI readings is on the other hand a key benefit that could
be considered. Nothing is wrong with your questions as long as you
understand the answers.

And BTW, You can sell committed packages with Alvarion BreezeAccess VL. Just
because many of our operators oversubscribe doesn't mean you have to. Brad


 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 1:34 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Hello Brad,

I think you are missing the point of the thread here.  The point is to offer
up constructive criticism of the VL product and how end users feel it could
be improved upon.

Are you saying adding a RSSI reading, adding dual polarity and adding dual
band ability would not further improve the VL product?  I think you are
sorely mistaken.

Certainly the VL product is working for thousands of end users.  Where in
any of my posts do I claim it is not?  However, clearly a product that
auto-rates itself down to a slower speed in the face of noise is not a
product that we can use to support committed rate clients.  Sure, we can
fudge it for a short time and if the VL offered software polarity  software
band agility fix the problem fairly quickly.  

With the current VL product we are forced to truck roll to every client site
and rotate polarity or in the event of an internal SU have to replace it
with a horizontal solution.  That simply isn't an option for us, but maybe
other operations find the truck rolls enjoyable...grin

The operators given to me by Alvarion as references using VL clearly state
on their websites they are offering up to bandwidth packages.  Not
committed rate packages as we do.  This is not to disparage them in any
way...many of the references are many times larger than us and I applaud
their success, however our target market is different than theirs.

I want to use the VL product as it can offer the additional capacity we
need, but without a few basic hardware features I don't see it as a fit for
us.  Again, that's what discussion is for...I'm here to discuss improvements
I'd like to see in the VL product.  What is wrong with that?

Best,


Brad





-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Larson
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 10:50 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Brad Belton, Respectfully, there are 100's of wisp's proving you wrong. OFDM
in UL has its place and making blanket statements to the contrary makes
little sense. There is great debate in the industry of what value Dual
Polarity via software offers an OFDM UL system. There is also considerable
data on the fact that dual frequency solutions are not optimal. You keep
harping on these same two issues yet we have a substantial installed base
that grows by the day. There will never be a perfect solution for everyone
and I understand that VL may not be a fit for your current situation. 

BreezeAccess VL is a viable solution that is being heavily deployed and we
continue to replace dual polarity via software and dual band 5.3/5.8
solutions with great results (and they speak for themselves). I think this
thread was started by one such replacement, an upgrade from Trango that got
the provider faster data rates, better support, etc. etc. They'll be many
more testimonials in the coming 12 months. Scriv said it best, It's like
the difference between night and day. We have zero downtime on our backhaul
now. We were getting countless reports of downtime from our network
monitoring system before. Now it just works. I don't think I can overstate
the impact Alvarion VL has had on my network. Oh and lets not forget the
fact that Scriv is probably sleeping better at night without the outages he
used to have. 

Brad

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 11:30 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Price is always a factor, but we would gladly pay a premium for VL with the
sorely needed HARDWARE improvements:

(1)  Dual Polarity via software
(2)  Dual Band 5.3GHz and 5.8GHz

These are time tested proven valuable HARDWARE features that VL is lacking.
With these features added to VL there would not be a comparable product on
the market other than home-brew's like StarOS  MikroTik.

Without these HARDWARE improvements the VL product is too susceptible to
noise and therefore not a viable solution for committed rate business
offerings.

Best,


Brad




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Larson
Sent: Monday, September

Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-25 Thread Tom DeReggi

Brad,

All good arguements.  Its an issue of whether a WISP has the cash available 
upfront or not, to reap the long term savings of the investment.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Brad Larson [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 10:30 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs



Gino, I have to admit Alvarion has some work to do for the smaller wisp's
out there. Patrick will have his hands full on this one. But for wisps
buying 100 packs on a bi or monthly plan the pricing below just doesn't 
seem
like such a deal breaker anymore when you add up the feature sets. For a 
few

more months on an ROI model you can buy Alvarion.

The whole point of this thread has been the fact that many (including 
Scriv)

have found out Trango still wins, because Trango is less expensive or
Canopy for that matter. may not exactly be the case. The ongoing 
costs
of truck rolls, tech support issues, and shorter coverage modeling can 
kill

an ROI model faster than the cost of cpe.

Add in voip coverage modeling and the dynamics change once again. I have
seen several advanced studies of building data/voip wireless networks 
where

BreezeAccess VL used half the tower/base station sites (therefore less
leases and operational expenses), gave twice the throughput per cell site,
and can handle more than 10X's the amount of voip traffic. Throw in the
addition of maintaining twice the amount of gear and once again we come 
out

ahead. This was really driven home on a few backhauling for mesh projects
with drive testing of different technologies and the findings REALLY blew 
me
away. No kidding folks the differences are like night and day and you'll 
be

hearing about some of these networks this year.

I first saw the differences several years ago where a project out for bid
was installing 2,500 cpe's in a seven square mile area with trees and
rolling hills. With a $125 premium on cpe the total network costs with
operational expenses was less expensive than a Canopy solution and we gave
100% coverage. Alvarion CPE installation was eave mount on 1 square mile
centers vs high rooftop with more towers needed (again saving the service
provider money). Brad

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 6:44 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Trango Atlas CPE with dish  $250?
Canopy with dish $275

Canopy Advantage Cluster:
6 Ap's @ $1500 each = $9k (you can start your pop with a fcc certified 
omni

unit for $2.7k and evolve to a full sector later)
CMM Micro for Power and Sync = $1.5k *optional
BAM - Prizm = $2k *optional

The CMM Micro is optional component for GPS Sync, you can achieve sync 
among

the cluster with 10 ft of cat 5 and 6 rj11 connectors

BAM - Prizm is a NMS for Management but is NOT a required component, you 
can

manage all your settings from the web interface on each unit including
bandwidth and such.  I would only recommend the Prizm NMS for big WISP's
(200+ units )

About the Third Party:

There are a couple on 3rd party improvements for canopy, almost all were
created on a cost savings stand point, Example:

Motorola reflector dish for 10 mile + links $100
Beehive Wireless reflector dish for 10 mile links $49.95 (fcc certified)

Motorola CMM GPS Sync System $1.5k
PacketFLux GPS Sync $300

Any other questions ?

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 4:53 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

So what is the onesy-twosy price of a Trango Atlas with an extended
range antenna? What is the price for a Canopy Advantage CPE with
extended range? I have plenty of data I've found, but there seems to be
some wide discrepancy here among you folks.

How about total cost for a Canopy cluster with the BAM, GPS synch, and
other little extra things you need for it to be complete?

Also, I've heard a number of you talk about availability of third party
improvements like it is a benefit of the Canopy system. Seriously, isn't
that more a reflection of the glaring gaps in Canopy that have led smart
WISP entrepreneurs to capitalize?

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 1:13 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

Trango is no where near $400 for Atlas Foxes.  Trango's Atlas Fox's
distance
without dish is just about the same as the standard Canopy CPE (same DBI

antenna).
Remember that Trango lists retail on their site to protest the WISP.
Low
volume WISP special pricing

RE: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

2006-09-25 Thread Rick Smith
channel planning.  hah!  as if everyone worked nicely together.

I rather like Canopy with its GPS.  It makes it a competition killer. :)
And yes, even Alvarion EQ can't handle it...

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 3:17 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

Jon,

Why is that the case? You really think GPS on Canopy is some cool feature?
Canopy must have GPS to function. Without it, it kills itself.
It is all to prevent self-inflicted interference (remember, Canopy does not
even have ATPC) and to allow for channel re-use. Other systems, like VL, do
not need it. It provides far more capacity than Canopy, so it does not need
to re-use channels and with basic channel planning you don't have issues
with self-interference.

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jon Langeler
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 9:20 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

My problem with VL is that it doesn't offer a scheduled mac...no
syncronization capability. Now if this get's incorporated down the line I
would be interested? We've used it all, you name it, and at this point

if it doesn't have GPS sync I'm hesitant to even touch it. That is one
advantage that WIMAX will be bringing...

Jon Langeler
Michwave Tech.

Patrick Leary wrote:

I have a very interesting new (this month) pdf about this topic that 
compares Canopy Advantage and BreezeACCESS VL in a variety of ways,
from
a coverage modeling example using high end propagation software to VoIP 
stats using company documents from both companies.

We think it makes a clear case for BreezeACCESS VL, far beyond the 
simple front end cost discussions.

It is 189k in size and would be great fodder for discussion here. If
you
want a copy, e-mail me offlist.

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp
Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals  computer
viruses(192).








 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp
Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals  computer
viruses(42).








 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp
Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals  computer viruses.





--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

2006-09-25 Thread Matt Liotta

Patrick Leary wrote:

Why is that the case? You really think GPS on Canopy is some cool
feature? Canopy must have GPS to function. Without it, it kills itself.
It is all to prevent self-inflicted interference (remember, Canopy does
not even have ATPC) and to allow for channel re-use. Other systems, like
VL, do not need it. It provides far more capacity than Canopy, so it
does not need to re-use channels and with basic channel planning you
don't have issues with self-interference.

  
This thread is really turning into a mess. The above statement is simply 
wrong. We operate a number of Canopy base stations without GPS. In fact, 
for all the Canopy radios we own we only have two CMMs. Mostly because 
the CMM doesn't fit in well with our network. Regardless, Canopy does 
not need GPS to function.


-Matt
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-25 Thread Patrick Leary
Overall, Motorola corporate has made excellent decisions and executed
very well when it comes to this total space of wireless and I know every
one of them. From the launch of Canopy to the latest buy of Symbol, for
sure arguably the best end-to-end strategic decision making in the
business. They now compete with us on every front, every niche and macro
market. That, combined with their size, wealth and power makes them
really the only competitor worth worrying about in the total sense of
the market. 

So, for the record, I have nothing but respect for them. That does not
mean they field the best products. But, it does mean they carry a damn
big stick.

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jon Langeler
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 11:00 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

I'm sure most know that was a 'play' and basically secured Moto's 
position to sell WIMAX gear to the 2nd largest 2.5GHz spectrum holder. 
It would have been interesting if Alvarion had been in their place...not

sure if you guys have that kind of change sitting around.

Jon Langeler
Michwave Tech.

Patrick Leary wrote:

Speaking of Clearwire, folks here are aware that Motorola now owns
NextNet, the hardware supplier to Clearwire (that once was part of
Clearwire, at least in ownership terms), right? The purchase was IN
ADDITION to the $300M investment Motorola made into Clearwire
http://telephonyonline.com/wireless/finance/motorola_clearwire_nextnet_
0
70606/

To give you an idea of how much that Moto investment is relative to
your
Canopy businessthat is more than Canopy makes for Motorola
worldwide
over 2 years. 

Patrick

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 7:57 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

Ahhh... there's always a catch... so now Motorola has your customer's 
address and can use that for their own marketing, etc. without you ever

knowing. They could possibly even sell the list to someone (ClearWire) 
down the road and you would never know.

Travis
Microserv

Anthony Will wrote:
  


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals 
computer viruses(192).








 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals 
computer viruses(42).











This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals  computer 
viruses.




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-25 Thread Brad Belton
Hello Brad,

Forgive me as I just now realized you are with Alvarion and not an end user.
Refresh my memory; did we speak on the phone a few weeks ago regarding our
initial VL deployment?  If so, I want to publicly thank you for your time
and expertise.  Your input is/was valuable and I appreciate it.

Regarding the findings I think dual band and dual polarity have been
proven beneficial for many years and long before wISPs even existed.  

Dual polarity agility can help in issues unrelated to noise.  Thermal
ducting is one scenario where simply flipping polarity can in some cases
improve a link suffering.  Why suffer when you could flip a switch and get
your client back up and running?

Dual band goes without saying as a benefit to the product.  If Alvarion
engineers are concerned about loosing sensitivity simply add a separate
radio for the 5.3GHz band.  I think you, Tom, me and others know this is a
copout by Alvarion RD engineers and one radio can be made to support both
bands with insignificant drawbacks.

Over subscription hasn't been the issue with the VL we have deployed.  Noise
and the lack of tools in the VL toolbox due to hardware limitations has been
the Achilles heel.

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Larson
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 12:59 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

I'm not missing the point at all. There is a debate and the findings aren't
there yet whether OFDM and antenna polarity have a true benefit in outdoor
UL PTMP systems and a 5.3/5.8 offering takes away from the current products
spec's which is not a trade off were willing to do at this time. OK?

However, Adding RSSI readings is on the other hand a key benefit that could
be considered. Nothing is wrong with your questions as long as you
understand the answers.

And BTW, You can sell committed packages with Alvarion BreezeAccess VL. Just
because many of our operators oversubscribe doesn't mean you have to. Brad


 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 1:34 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Hello Brad,

I think you are missing the point of the thread here.  The point is to offer
up constructive criticism of the VL product and how end users feel it could
be improved upon.

Are you saying adding a RSSI reading, adding dual polarity and adding dual
band ability would not further improve the VL product?  I think you are
sorely mistaken.

Certainly the VL product is working for thousands of end users.  Where in
any of my posts do I claim it is not?  However, clearly a product that
auto-rates itself down to a slower speed in the face of noise is not a
product that we can use to support committed rate clients.  Sure, we can
fudge it for a short time and if the VL offered software polarity  software
band agility fix the problem fairly quickly.  

With the current VL product we are forced to truck roll to every client site
and rotate polarity or in the event of an internal SU have to replace it
with a horizontal solution.  That simply isn't an option for us, but maybe
other operations find the truck rolls enjoyable...grin

The operators given to me by Alvarion as references using VL clearly state
on their websites they are offering up to bandwidth packages.  Not
committed rate packages as we do.  This is not to disparage them in any
way...many of the references are many times larger than us and I applaud
their success, however our target market is different than theirs.

I want to use the VL product as it can offer the additional capacity we
need, but without a few basic hardware features I don't see it as a fit for
us.  Again, that's what discussion is for...I'm here to discuss improvements
I'd like to see in the VL product.  What is wrong with that?

Best,


Brad





-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Larson
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 10:50 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Brad Belton, Respectfully, there are 100's of wisp's proving you wrong. OFDM
in UL has its place and making blanket statements to the contrary makes
little sense. There is great debate in the industry of what value Dual
Polarity via software offers an OFDM UL system. There is also considerable
data on the fact that dual frequency solutions are not optimal. You keep
harping on these same two issues yet we have a substantial installed base
that grows by the day. There will never be a perfect solution for everyone
and I understand that VL may not be a fit for your current situation. 

BreezeAccess VL is a viable solution that is being heavily deployed and we
continue to replace dual polarity via software and dual band 5.3/5.8
solutions with great results (and they speak for themselves). I think this
thread was started by one such replacement, an upgrade from

RE: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

2006-09-25 Thread Patrick Leary
I'm speaking about multipoint matt, not ptp. The dedicated ptp you are
doing is by far the exception. Canopy is designed, built, and sold to be
primarily a pmp system. I've never met or heard of a Canopy pmp network
of any scale that did not require GPS.

If I am wrong, I am happy to eat crow.

Patrick 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt Liotta
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 1:01 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

Patrick Leary wrote:
 Why is that the case? You really think GPS on Canopy is some cool
 feature? Canopy must have GPS to function. Without it, it kills
itself.
 It is all to prevent self-inflicted interference (remember, Canopy
does
 not even have ATPC) and to allow for channel re-use. Other systems,
like
 VL, do not need it. It provides far more capacity than Canopy, so it
 does not need to re-use channels and with basic channel planning you
 don't have issues with self-interference.

   
This thread is really turning into a mess. The above statement is simply

wrong. We operate a number of Canopy base stations without GPS. In fact,

for all the Canopy radios we own we only have two CMMs. Mostly because 
the CMM doesn't fit in well with our network. Regardless, Canopy does 
not need GPS to function.

-Matt
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals 
computer viruses(191).








 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals 
computer viruses(43).











This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals  computer 
viruses.




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-25 Thread Brad Larson
Comments inline:

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 4:49 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Hello Brad,

Forgive me as I just now realized you are with Alvarion and not an end user.
Refresh my memory; did we speak on the phone a few weeks ago regarding our
initial VL deployment?  If so, I want to publicly thank you for your time
and expertise.  Your input is/was valuable and I appreciate it.

:No it wasn't me.

Regarding the findings I think dual band and dual polarity have been
proven beneficial for many years and long before wISPs even existed. 

:No not at all. Not for Unlicensed OFDM PTMP gear-send me the study or
authority who has done the research.
 

Dual polarity agility can help in issues unrelated to noise.  Thermal
ducting is one scenario where simply flipping polarity can in some cases
improve a link suffering.  Why suffer when you could flip a switch and get
your client back up and running?

:answered above.

Dual band goes without saying as a benefit to the product.  If Alvarion
engineers are concerned about loosing sensitivity simply add a separate
radio for the 5.3GHz band.  I think you, Tom, me and others know this is a
copout by Alvarion RD engineers and one radio can be made to support both
bands with insignificant drawbacks.

:No, I don't have a single customer in NE USA asking for a dual radio
design. Not one. There is no groundswell of customers asking so at the
moment it would be a waste of resources. 

Over subscription hasn't been the issue with the VL we have deployed.  Noise
and the lack of tools in the VL toolbox due to hardware limitations has been
the Achilles heel.

:OK, and I wonder how full a tool box is really needed? I only experienced a
5 mile PTMP VL scenario in a tier one city that had such a noise issue.
Shorter links would have worked just fine and do. Every city is different. 
This may very well be the case with your network and your tastes but at the
same time were delivering a product that a crap load of people are happy
about in it's current state.  

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Larson
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 12:59 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

I'm not missing the point at all. There is a debate and the findings aren't
there yet whether OFDM and antenna polarity have a true benefit in outdoor
UL PTMP systems and a 5.3/5.8 offering takes away from the current products
spec's which is not a trade off were willing to do at this time. OK?

However, Adding RSSI readings is on the other hand a key benefit that could
be considered. Nothing is wrong with your questions as long as you
understand the answers.

And BTW, You can sell committed packages with Alvarion BreezeAccess VL. Just
because many of our operators oversubscribe doesn't mean you have to. Brad


 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 1:34 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Hello Brad,

I think you are missing the point of the thread here.  The point is to offer
up constructive criticism of the VL product and how end users feel it could
be improved upon.

Are you saying adding a RSSI reading, adding dual polarity and adding dual
band ability would not further improve the VL product?  I think you are
sorely mistaken.

Certainly the VL product is working for thousands of end users.  Where in
any of my posts do I claim it is not?  However, clearly a product that
auto-rates itself down to a slower speed in the face of noise is not a
product that we can use to support committed rate clients.  Sure, we can
fudge it for a short time and if the VL offered software polarity  software
band agility fix the problem fairly quickly.  

With the current VL product we are forced to truck roll to every client site
and rotate polarity or in the event of an internal SU have to replace it
with a horizontal solution.  That simply isn't an option for us, but maybe
other operations find the truck rolls enjoyable...grin

The operators given to me by Alvarion as references using VL clearly state
on their websites they are offering up to bandwidth packages.  Not
committed rate packages as we do.  This is not to disparage them in any
way...many of the references are many times larger than us and I applaud
their success, however our target market is different than theirs.

I want to use the VL product as it can offer the additional capacity we
need, but without a few basic hardware features I don't see it as a fit for
us.  Again, that's what discussion is for...I'm here to discuss improvements
I'd like to see in the VL product.  What is wrong with that?

Best,


Brad





-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Larson
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 10

RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-25 Thread Brad Belton
Hello Brian,

Sure it does.  Trango M5830 is a dual polarity and dual band product.  It
can operate in the 5.8GHz or 5.3GHz bands in either horizontal or vertical
polarity on the fly all via software commands.

The M5830 has been a solid workhorse for years for us.  The only drawback to
the product today is purely a capacity issue.  8-9Mbps HDX is just not
enough anymore.  However, this is a good problem to have!

Best,


Brad

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brian Rohrbacher
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 10:44 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

inline

Brad Belton wrote:

Price is always a factor, but we would gladly pay a premium for VL with the
sorely needed HARDWARE improvements:

(1)  Dual Polarity via software
(2)  Dual Band 5.3GHz and 5.8GHz
  

I know trango does dual polarity, but who does dual band?

These are time tested proven valuable HARDWARE features that VL is lacking.
With these features added to VL there would not be a comparable product on
the market other than home-brew's like StarOS  MikroTik.

Without these HARDWARE improvements the VL product is too susceptible to
noise and therefore not a viable solution for committed rate business
offerings.

Best,


Brad




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Larson
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 9:31 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Gino, I have to admit Alvarion has some work to do for the smaller wisp's
out there. Patrick will have his hands full on this one. But for wisps
buying 100 packs on a bi or monthly plan the pricing below just doesn't
seem
like such a deal breaker anymore when you add up the feature sets. For a
few
more months on an ROI model you can buy Alvarion.

The whole point of this thread has been the fact that many (including
Scriv)
have found out Trango still wins, because Trango is less expensive or
Canopy for that matter. may not exactly be the case. The ongoing costs
of truck rolls, tech support issues, and shorter coverage modeling can kill
an ROI model faster than the cost of cpe. 

Add in voip coverage modeling and the dynamics change once again. I have
seen several advanced studies of building data/voip wireless networks where
BreezeAccess VL used half the tower/base station sites (therefore less
leases and operational expenses), gave twice the throughput per cell site,
and can handle more than 10X's the amount of voip traffic. Throw in the
addition of maintaining twice the amount of gear and once again we come out
ahead. This was really driven home on a few backhauling for mesh projects
with drive testing of different technologies and the findings REALLY blew
me
away. No kidding folks the differences are like night and day and you'll be
hearing about some of these networks this year.

I first saw the differences several years ago where a project out for bid
was installing 2,500 cpe's in a seven square mile area with trees and
rolling hills. With a $125 premium on cpe the total network costs with
operational expenses was less expensive than a Canopy solution and we gave
100% coverage. Alvarion CPE installation was eave mount on 1 square mile
centers vs high rooftop with more towers needed (again saving the service
provider money). Brad

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 6:44 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Trango Atlas CPE with dish  $250?
Canopy with dish $275

Canopy Advantage Cluster:
6 Ap's @ $1500 each = $9k (you can start your pop with a fcc certified omni
unit for $2.7k and evolve to a full sector later)
CMM Micro for Power and Sync = $1.5k *optional
BAM - Prizm = $2k *optional

The CMM Micro is optional component for GPS Sync, you can achieve sync
among
the cluster with 10 ft of cat 5 and 6 rj11 connectors

BAM - Prizm is a NMS for Management but is NOT a required component, you
can
manage all your settings from the web interface on each unit including
bandwidth and such.  I would only recommend the Prizm NMS for big WISP's
(200+ units )

About the Third Party:

There are a couple on 3rd party improvements for canopy, almost all were
created on a cost savings stand point, Example:

Motorola reflector dish for 10 mile + links $100
Beehive Wireless reflector dish for 10 mile links $49.95 (fcc certified)

Motorola CMM GPS Sync System $1.5k
PacketFLux GPS Sync $300

Any other questions ?

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 4:53 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

So what is the onesy-twosy price of a Trango Atlas with an extended
range antenna? What is the price for a Canopy Advantage CPE

RE: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

2006-09-25 Thread Patrick Leary
For sure I am no expert there. Plenty of skilled Canopy users here and I
believe to a WISP here each one that is scaled uses the GPS sync. I
leave it to them to chime in. Some already have, like Jon L., Rick S.,
Gino,  Mike B.

I just know we get no requests for it from VL users an there would be
little benefit. The system simply does not require it. I mean, we only
need 3 sectors of 20MHz to net out over 90mbps of capacity. And then
there is the 10MHz channel options. So there are plenty of channels to
work with. Also, our system uses an intelligent ATPC and cell distance
learning so the gear isn't driving power beyond what it needs to sustain
links at whatever mod level the operator selects.

Patrick

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt Liotta
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 3:07 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

Patrick Leary wrote:
 I'm speaking about multipoint matt, not ptp. The dedicated ptp you are
 doing is by far the exception. Canopy is designed, built, and sold to
be
 primarily a pmp system. I've never met or heard of a Canopy pmp
network
 of any scale that did not require GPS.

   
I'd be interested in further explanation on this topic. We have some 
Canopy pmp and haven't found the lack of GPS a problem. Granted we don't

have a large amount of pmp, but I would certainly like to understand any

future pain before we experience it.

-Matt

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals 
computer viruses(191).








 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals 
computer viruses(42).











This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals  computer 
viruses.




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

2006-09-25 Thread Gino A. Villarini
C'mon Patrick .. GPS is not a must on Canopy, I have half of my pops without
it ... I don't really like when people make statements like this, you sound
like you have years of hands on Canopy experience... 
 

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 3:17 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

Jon,

Why is that the case? You really think GPS on Canopy is some cool
feature? Canopy must have GPS to function. Without it, it kills itself.
It is all to prevent self-inflicted interference (remember, Canopy does
not even have ATPC) and to allow for channel re-use. Other systems, like
VL, do not need it. It provides far more capacity than Canopy, so it
does not need to re-use channels and with basic channel planning you
don't have issues with self-interference.

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jon Langeler
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 9:20 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

My problem with VL is that it doesn't offer a scheduled mac...no 
syncronization capability. Now if this get's incorporated down the line 
I would be interested? We've used it all, you name it, and at this point

if it doesn't have GPS sync I'm hesitant to even touch it. That is one 
advantage that WIMAX will be bringing...

Jon Langeler
Michwave Tech.

Patrick Leary wrote:

I have a very interesting new (this month) pdf about this topic that
compares Canopy Advantage and BreezeACCESS VL in a variety of ways,
from
a coverage modeling example using high end propagation software to VoIP
stats using company documents from both companies. 

We think it makes a clear case for BreezeACCESS VL, far beyond the
simple front end cost discussions. 

It is 189k in size and would be great fodder for discussion here. If
you
want a copy, e-mail me offlist.

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals 
computer viruses(192).








 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals 
computer viruses(42).








 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals  computer
viruses.





-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-25 Thread Brad Belton
Hello Scriv,

Sorry to bore you...certainly not our intent.  You last attempt to end the
thread was met with others posting not Brad or me.

Regardless, I agree we're done with it.

Best,


Brad


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 8:18 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

Brad and Brad. You guys are getting boringsaying the same drivel 
over and over. PLEASE either take your broken record off line or say 
something original.
Scriv


Brad Belton wrote:

Hello Brad,

I think you are missing the point of the thread here.  The point is to
offer
up constructive criticism of the VL product and how end users feel it could
be improved upon.

Are you saying adding a RSSI reading, adding dual polarity and adding dual
band ability would not further improve the VL product?  I think you are
sorely mistaken.

Certainly the VL product is working for thousands of end users.  Where in
any of my posts do I claim it is not?  However, clearly a product that
auto-rates itself down to a slower speed in the face of noise is not a
product that we can use to support committed rate clients.  Sure, we can
fudge it for a short time and if the VL offered software polarity 
software
band agility fix the problem fairly quickly.  

With the current VL product we are forced to truck roll to every client
site
and rotate polarity or in the event of an internal SU have to replace it
with a horizontal solution.  That simply isn't an option for us, but maybe
other operations find the truck rolls enjoyable...grin

The operators given to me by Alvarion as references using VL clearly state
on their websites they are offering up to bandwidth packages.  Not
committed rate packages as we do.  This is not to disparage them in any
way...many of the references are many times larger than us and I applaud
their success, however our target market is different than theirs.

I want to use the VL product as it can offer the additional capacity we
need, but without a few basic hardware features I don't see it as a fit for
us.  Again, that's what discussion is for...I'm here to discuss
improvements
I'd like to see in the VL product.  What is wrong with that?

Best,


Brad





-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Larson
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 10:50 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Brad Belton, Respectfully, there are 100's of wisp's proving you wrong.
OFDM
in UL has its place and making blanket statements to the contrary makes
little sense. There is great debate in the industry of what value Dual
Polarity via software offers an OFDM UL system. There is also considerable
data on the fact that dual frequency solutions are not optimal. You keep
harping on these same two issues yet we have a substantial installed base
that grows by the day. There will never be a perfect solution for everyone
and I understand that VL may not be a fit for your current situation. 

BreezeAccess VL is a viable solution that is being heavily deployed and we
continue to replace dual polarity via software and dual band 5.3/5.8
solutions with great results (and they speak for themselves). I think this
thread was started by one such replacement, an upgrade from Trango that got
the provider faster data rates, better support, etc. etc. They'll be many
more testimonials in the coming 12 months. Scriv said it best, It's like
the difference between night and day. We have zero downtime on our backhaul
now. We were getting countless reports of downtime from our network
monitoring system before. Now it just works. I don't think I can overstate
the impact Alvarion VL has had on my network. Oh and lets not forget the
fact that Scriv is probably sleeping better at night without the outages he
used to have. 

Brad

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 11:30 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Price is always a factor, but we would gladly pay a premium for VL with the
sorely needed HARDWARE improvements:

(1)  Dual Polarity via software
(2)  Dual Band 5.3GHz and 5.8GHz

These are time tested proven valuable HARDWARE features that VL is lacking.
With these features added to VL there would not be a comparable product on
the market other than home-brew's like StarOS  MikroTik.

Without these HARDWARE improvements the VL product is too susceptible to
noise and therefore not a viable solution for committed rate business
offerings.

Best,


Brad




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Larson
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 9:31 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Gino, I have to admit Alvarion has some work to do for the smaller wisp's
out there. Patrick will have his hands full on this one

RE: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

2006-09-25 Thread Mike Bushard, Jr
Well, so far as we can tell the only thing that can kill canopy, IS CANOPY.
We have put it up against WaveRider, Alvarion, and 802.11b. They all fell of
the face of the earth. 

We have 16 tower sites deployed, all 900Mhz and 2.4, over 1000 CPE and more
on the way. (I realize there are many people bigger than us.)

We use a mix of MTI Omni's, MTI or Tiltek 120deg Sectors (MTI for Horizontal
and Tiltek for Vertical) and integrated 60deg sectors (I really wish someone
would come out with a descent H-pol as I don't like the integrated antenna)
with 900. Cyclone Omni's or 120deg sectors on 2.4.

Here is what I have found with GPS Sourced Sync vs. Generate Sync:

If you want channel reuse you need GPS sourced sync.
If you have a tower more than 8 miles away, you need to use different
channels no matter what, even with GPS sourced sync you still have speed of
light issues from tower to tower.

Can you Generate sync and deploy multiple AP's in a given area, yes. You
just need to make sure you have Frequency separation. Does this mean I
recommend it, NO.

Also even with every site GPS Synced, you still can only put so many AP's in
a given area be for you need to go to a different polarity. At least we know
there will never be another 900Mhz based ISP in one of our towns.

Also on a side note, I have never found a problem with 2.4, it is 900 that
will give you problems, it just carries so far. If the noise floor was
lower, and Canopy could run at -90 we would have coverage for a long ways.
It seems like we can always pick up a AP at -80.

YMMV.

Mike Bushard, Jr
Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt Liotta
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 5:07 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

Patrick Leary wrote:
 I'm speaking about multipoint matt, not ptp. The dedicated ptp you are
 doing is by far the exception. Canopy is designed, built, and sold to be
 primarily a pmp system. I've never met or heard of a Canopy pmp network
 of any scale that did not require GPS.

   
I'd be interested in further explanation on this topic. We have some 
Canopy pmp and haven't found the lack of GPS a problem. Granted we don't 
have a large amount of pmp, but I would certainly like to understand any 
future pain before we experience it.

-Matt

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-25 Thread John Scrivner
Please forgive my outburst of rude, brash behavior here. I had a bad day 
and I should know better than to type while I am mad!

Scriv


John Scrivner wrote:

Brad and Brad. You guys are getting boringsaying the same drivel 
over and over. PLEASE either take your broken record off line or say 
something original.

Scriv


Brad Belton wrote:


Hello Brad,

I think you are missing the point of the thread here.  The point is 
to offer
up constructive criticism of the VL product and how end users feel it 
could

be improved upon.

Are you saying adding a RSSI reading, adding dual polarity and adding 
dual

band ability would not further improve the VL product?  I think you are
sorely mistaken.

Certainly the VL product is working for thousands of end users.  
Where in

any of my posts do I claim it is not?  However, clearly a product that
auto-rates itself down to a slower speed in the face of noise is not a
product that we can use to support committed rate clients.  Sure, we can
fudge it for a short time and if the VL offered software polarity  
software
band agility fix the problem fairly quickly. 
With the current VL product we are forced to truck roll to every 
client site

and rotate polarity or in the event of an internal SU have to replace it
with a horizontal solution.  That simply isn't an option for us, but 
maybe

other operations find the truck rolls enjoyable...grin

The operators given to me by Alvarion as references using VL clearly 
state

on their websites they are offering up to bandwidth packages.  Not
committed rate packages as we do.  This is not to disparage them in any
way...many of the references are many times larger than us and I applaud
their success, however our target market is different than theirs.

I want to use the VL product as it can offer the additional capacity we
need, but without a few basic hardware features I don't see it as a 
fit for
us.  Again, that's what discussion is for...I'm here to discuss 
improvements

I'd like to see in the VL product.  What is wrong with that?

Best,


Brad





-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Larson
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 10:50 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Brad Belton, Respectfully, there are 100's of wisp's proving you 
wrong. OFDM

in UL has its place and making blanket statements to the contrary makes
little sense. There is great debate in the industry of what value Dual
Polarity via software offers an OFDM UL system. There is also 
considerable

data on the fact that dual frequency solutions are not optimal. You keep
harping on these same two issues yet we have a substantial installed 
base
that grows by the day. There will never be a perfect solution for 
everyone

and I understand that VL may not be a fit for your current situation.
BreezeAccess VL is a viable solution that is being heavily deployed 
and we

continue to replace dual polarity via software and dual band 5.3/5.8
solutions with great results (and they speak for themselves). I 
think this
thread was started by one such replacement, an upgrade from Trango 
that got
the provider faster data rates, better support, etc. etc. They'll be 
many
more testimonials in the coming 12 months. Scriv said it best, It's 
like
the difference between night and day. We have zero downtime on our 
backhaul

now. We were getting countless reports of downtime from our network
monitoring system before. Now it just works. I don't think I can 
overstate
the impact Alvarion VL has had on my network. Oh and lets not forget 
the
fact that Scriv is probably sleeping better at night without the 
outages he

used to have.
Brad

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 11:30 AM

To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Price is always a factor, but we would gladly pay a premium for VL 
with the

sorely needed HARDWARE improvements:

(1)  Dual Polarity via software
(2)  Dual Band 5.3GHz and 5.8GHz

These are time tested proven valuable HARDWARE features that VL is 
lacking.
With these features added to VL there would not be a comparable 
product on

the market other than home-brew's like StarOS  MikroTik.

Without these HARDWARE improvements the VL product is too susceptible to
noise and therefore not a viable solution for committed rate business
offerings.

Best,


Brad




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Larson
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 9:31 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Gino, I have to admit Alvarion has some work to do for the smaller 
wisp's

out there. Patrick will have his hands full on this one. But for wisps
buying 100 packs on a bi or monthly plan the pricing below just 
doesn't seem
like such a deal breaker anymore when you add up the feature sets. 
For a few

more months on an ROI model you can

Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

2006-09-25 Thread Travis Johnson

Hi,

First, the spec sheet on Motorola's website says -86 RSSI.

What happens when you have more than 3 towers outside of the 8 mile 
range of GPS sync? The 2.4ghz signal will definately travel that far, 
causing self-interference, correct?


Travis
Microserv

Anthony Will wrote:


Answers in-line

Travis Johnson wrote:


Hi,

I'd like to go back to the specs on different radios just so I can 
compare for myself...


Trango 2.4ghz:
5Mbps auto ratio
8 non-overlapping channels
10mhz spectrum per channel
-90 Receive level
15 mile range (without a grid)
External connector and dual-pol integrated antenna
$879 AP (WISP price)
$479 SU (WISP price)

Canopy 2.4ghz (regular):
7Mbps fixed ratio
3 non-overlapping channels
20mhz spectrum per channel
-86 Receive level


2.4 canopy has a -89 receive level


5 mile range (without a dish)
$902 AP (reseller price online)
$490 SU (reseller price online)


I am guessing your quoting single prices here.  Now that maybe viable 
for this discussion but realistically if a WISP is not financially 
able to purchase in 25 packs they likely are very underfunded.  So 
that the information is available a 25 pack of the Classic 2.4 ghz 
Canopy units is $6709 so if you break that down to single price that 
is about $269ea + $50 for reflector for a total of $319ea.  
http://www.doubleradius.com   It is possible to get them cheaper then 
this but you will have to deal with co-op's or ebay.com
Also I would never install a unit with a 60* pattern (Trango or 
Canopy).  Just include the$50 for a reflector or stinger from 
http://www.wirelessbehive.com





Based on the information from Mike, I could not use Canopy. In 
several areas, I have 4-5 towers located within 5 miles of each 
other how do I do that with Canopy? With Trango, I use a 
different channel for the sector pointing toward another tower 
(frequency planning and coordination is very important) and 
everything works great. Is there a solution for this with Canopy?


This is where GPS sync comes in.  You can point two different tower 
locations on the same frequency at each other and they will not 
interfere with each other.  This is how it is possible to do a 6 AP 
cluster on one tower with only 3 non overlapping channels.




Also, by using only a 10mhz spectrum per channel, Trango's channel 1 
and channel 8 are actually outside the reach of Canopy and 802.11 
(for the most part) and thus can almost always be used in a noisy 
environment.


Remember with Canopy you generally don't have to avoid interference.  
Find the cleanest channel and 90% of the time you will be the few db 
louder then the noise that you need to make a viable link.


Anthony Will
Broadband Corp



Travis
Microserv

Mike Bushard, Jr wrote:

Well, so far as we can tell the only thing that can kill canopy, IS 
CANOPY.
We have put it up against WaveRider, Alvarion, and 802.11b. They all 
fell of

the face of the earth.
We have 16 tower sites deployed, all 900Mhz and 2.4, over 1000 CPE 
and more

on the way. (I realize there are many people bigger than us.)

We use a mix of MTI Omni's, MTI or Tiltek 120deg Sectors (MTI for 
Horizontal
and Tiltek for Vertical) and integrated 60deg sectors (I really wish 
someone
would come out with a descent H-pol as I don't like the integrated 
antenna)

with 900. Cyclone Omni's or 120deg sectors on 2.4.

Here is what I have found with GPS Sourced Sync vs. Generate Sync:

If you want channel reuse you need GPS sourced sync.
If you have a tower more than 8 miles away, you need to use different
channels no matter what, even with GPS sourced sync you still have 
speed of

light issues from tower to tower.

Can you Generate sync and deploy multiple AP's in a given area, yes. 
You

just need to make sure you have Frequency separation. Does this mean I
recommend it, NO.

Also even with every site GPS Synced, you still can only put so many 
AP's in
a given area be for you need to go to a different polarity. At least 
we know

there will never be another 900Mhz based ISP in one of our towns.

Also on a side note, I have never found a problem with 2.4, it is 
900 that

will give you problems, it just carries so far. If the noise floor was
lower, and Canopy could run at -90 we would have coverage for a long 
ways.

It seems like we can always pick up a AP at -80.

YMMV.

Mike Bushard, Jr
Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt Liotta
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 5:07 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

Patrick Leary wrote:
 


I'm speaking about multipoint matt, not ptp. The dedicated ptp you are
doing is by far the exception. Canopy is designed, built, and sold 
to be
primarily a pmp system. I've never met or heard of a Canopy pmp 
network

of any scale that did not require GPS.

  


I'd be interested in further explanation on this topic. We have some 
Canopy pmp and haven't found the lack of GPS

Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

2006-09-25 Thread Jon Langeler
The timing or range is a configurable setting in canopy, you set them at 
20 miles and the AP's as far as 20 miles and under will all be in sync. 
If you have 2 AP past 20 miles but LOS to each other, you can calulate 
to see if the RSSI on the AP's is close to the reciever sensitivity(or 
noise floor) of either AP. If it is above the sensitivity or noise, that 
AP could cause small amount of extra interference(self interference) but 
again this is very rare until you get to the 900MHz freq. In that 
scenario canopy advertises 40 miles LOS(no noise), so that should give 
you an idea of how much self interference may be occuring in 
un-syncronized networks.


Jon Langeler
Michwave Tech.

Travis Johnson wrote:


Hi,

First, the spec sheet on Motorola's website says -86 RSSI.

What happens when you have more than 3 towers outside of the 8 mile 
range of GPS sync? The 2.4ghz signal will definately travel that far, 
causing self-interference, correct?


Travis
Microserv



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] vendor specs -- Jon

2006-09-25 Thread Jon Langeler
Hey Patrick, GPS...there's many reasons and it's not a canopy vs 
alvarion debate from my standpoint, more so a scheduled mac(canopy, 
wimax, 3G...) vs unscheduled(wifi, VL, currently Trango). I'd predict 
that as wisp education progresses, they will realize the power of 
scheduled mac and GPS support. By then maybe the rest of the BreezeMAX 
code will have made way to the VL engineers and everyone can be happy :-)


Jon Langeler
Michwave Tech.

Patrick Leary wrote:


Jon,

Why is that the case? You really think GPS on Canopy is some cool
feature? Canopy must have GPS to function. Without it, it kills itself.
It is all to prevent self-inflicted interference (remember, Canopy does
not even have ATPC) and to allow for channel re-use. Other systems, like
VL, do not need it. It provides far more capacity than Canopy, so it
does not need to re-use channels and with basic channel planning you
don't have issues with self-interference.

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243
 



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-24 Thread Matt Larsen - Lists

Geez Patrick, go to bed!!! Get some rest

Seriously, this is a great list. Definitely shows how the VL is a 
completely different animal than the other options out there.


Matt Larsen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Patrick Leary wrote:


I believe most if not all of the below are features not found among 
Trango or Canopy. I list a few of the advanced features. A few of 
these (probably some you have never heard of before or even thought 
of) I show in detail. Maybe this post will also explain why the VL is 
not simply an Atheros chipset in a case and why it is not simply some 
basic CSMA/CA. This is just a small sampling. The manual, with lots of 
tables, drawings, etc., is 277 pages of which most relate to things 
that can be configured/optimized. (I can send the pdf to any who want 
it.)


· Chassis-based or stand alone AUs with multiple LEDs on the chassi 
blade versions, including current consumption


· Redundant power supplies with status LEDs, including over 
temperature warning


· GPS-sync module (for hoppers) also can be used for VL for their 
alarm capabilities


· 110vAC or -48vDC power options

· Built-in Ethernet repeater in the chassis blades to support over 600 
feet from network switch/router to ODUs


· AUs with antenna options, including built-in 60, 90, or 120 degree 
sectors plus options with external connector


· OFDM (with FEQ) for NLOS ability to enable connection of more of the 
potential subscriber population


· Adaptive modulation with configurable minimum modulation

· Up to 40Mbps net (ftp) per sector

· Over 40,000pps with small packets

· No loss in capacity with varying frame size (all other UL gear 
capacity is dramatically reduced when passing small packets


· FIPS 197 option. AES standard, no extra charge

· Virtual LANs based on IEEE 802.1Q with standard QinQ built-in support

· Layer-2 traffic prioritization based on IEEE 802.1p and layer-3 
traffic prioritization based on either IP ToS Precedence (RFC791) or 
DSCP (RFC2474). It also supports traffic prioritization based on UDP 
and/or TCP port ranges. In addition, it may use the optional Wireless 
Link Prioritization (WLP) feature to fully support delay sensitive 
applications, enabling Multimedia Application Prioritization (MAP) for 
high performance voice and video. (MAP can increase VoIP capacity by 
as much as 500%)


· Built-in surge suppression in both ODU and IDU

· Full management of all components, from any point in the system.

· Components can be managed using standard management tools through 
SNMP agents that implement standard and proprietary MIBs for remote 
setting of operational modes and parameters. Security features 
incorporated in BreezeACCESS VL units restrict access for management 
purposes to specific IP addresses and/or directions, that is, from the 
Ethernet and/or wireless link.


· True toll quality VoIP (MOS of 4.1 or better)

· Upload new or updated configuration file to multiple (selectable) 
units simultaneously, thus radically reducing the time spent on unit 
configuration maintenance.


· Back up/shadow flash, can support two different versions of firmware

· 5MHz (4.9GHz version), 10MHz, or 20MHz channel options.

· SUs autorecognize and configure channel size

· SUs available with external connector or integrated 21dBi with 
10.5h/10.5v beamwidth


· Multilevel password, multi-layer ESSIDs

· Configuration of remote access direction (from Ethernet only, from 
wireless link only or from both)


· Configuration of IP addresses of authorized stations

· Numerous LEDs detailing advanced status information, plus tri-color 
10-bar alignment LEDs that directly corresponds to SNR, including 
amber for warning signal is too strong (SNR 50dB)


· Pole mount or band strap mounting options, hardware included

· Power supply included, with reset feature and integrated surge 
suppression


· Specialty Cat 5 connector

· Industrial grade waterproof seal with O rings

· Auto or configurable maximum cell distance

· Automatic distance learning. Per SU Distance Learning mechanism 
controlled by the AU enables each SU to adapt its Acknowledge timeout 
to its actual distance from the AU, minimizing delays in the wireless 
link


· Low Priority Traffic Minimum Percent feature ensures a selectable 
certain amount of the traffic is reserved to low priority packets to 
prevent starvation of low priority traffic when there is a high demand 
for high priority traffic.


· MAC address deny and allow list

· Able to configure size of concatenated frames (enables 
customization/optimization based on expected applications)


· Best AU and preferred AU options in the SUs. (Best AU explanation: 
each of the AUs can be given a quality mark based on the level at 
which it is received by the SU. The SU scans for a configured number 
of cycles, gathering information from all the AUs with which it can 
communicate. At the end of the scanning period, the SU reaches a Best 
AU decision according to the information 

RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-24 Thread Brad Belton
No, no...stay up!  grin

Good to see Patrick decided to engage the pros and cons of the VL product!
Now maybe we can get some traction on offering up the improvements the VL
product sorely needs.  Surely Alvarion wants to improve the product right?

The pros Patrick lists are certainly impressive, but all the wizardry in the
world won't do you much good if the radio lacks fundamental RF abilities to
block or avoid noise.  Additionally many features Patrick lists below are
found in other products albeit called something else.


What can be improved?  That's what we're here for...to offer suggestions to
IMPROVE a product, right?

(1)  Dual polarity AU and SU via software control

(2)  RSSI reading

(3)  Quicker reboots and fewer of them for basic changes ipconfig etc.

(4)  Adhere to standard 568A or 568B CAT5 color code

(5)  Add Rx threshold to enable radio to maintain higher modulations in
noisy environments

(6)  Increase size of weather seal opening to allow RJ45 connector to pass
through


I should mention many of these points have been long standing requests from
long time VL clients.  Patrick himself gave me a number of VL customers to
contact as references and these points were brought up by them as well as
me.  Even Keith Edmonds a tech who works for Alvarion agreed there should be
a RSSI reading (not just a SNR reading) and dual polarity would be
beneficial.

Additionally all of the references Patrick provided were not selling
committed rate business packages, but rather up to or best effort
packages.  This is important to note as the VL will auto-rate itself down to
a low modulation and slower speed in noisy environments.  This is not a good
feature if you are offering committed bandwidth packages and not best effort
packages.

Best,

Brad




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt Larsen - Lists
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 1:05 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

Geez Patrick, go to bed!!! Get some rest

Seriously, this is a great list. Definitely shows how the VL is a 
completely different animal than the other options out there.

Matt Larsen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Patrick Leary wrote:

 I believe most if not all of the below are features not found among 
 Trango or Canopy. I list a few of the advanced features. A few of 
 these (probably some you have never heard of before or even thought 
 of) I show in detail. Maybe this post will also explain why the VL is 
 not simply an Atheros chipset in a case and why it is not simply some 
 basic CSMA/CA. This is just a small sampling. The manual, with lots of 
 tables, drawings, etc., is 277 pages of which most relate to things 
 that can be configured/optimized. (I can send the pdf to any who want 
 it.)

 . Chassis-based or stand alone AUs with multiple LEDs on the chassi 
 blade versions, including current consumption

 . Redundant power supplies with status LEDs, including over 
 temperature warning

 . GPS-sync module (for hoppers) also can be used for VL for their 
 alarm capabilities

 . 110vAC or -48vDC power options

 . Built-in Ethernet repeater in the chassis blades to support over 600 
 feet from network switch/router to ODUs

 . AUs with antenna options, including built-in 60, 90, or 120 degree 
 sectors plus options with external connector

 . OFDM (with FEQ) for NLOS ability to enable connection of more of the 
 potential subscriber population

 . Adaptive modulation with configurable minimum modulation

 . Up to 40Mbps net (ftp) per sector

 . Over 40,000pps with small packets

 . No loss in capacity with varying frame size (all other UL gear 
 capacity is dramatically reduced when passing small packets

 . FIPS 197 option. AES standard, no extra charge

 . Virtual LANs based on IEEE 802.1Q with standard QinQ built-in support

 . Layer-2 traffic prioritization based on IEEE 802.1p and layer-3 
 traffic prioritization based on either IP ToS Precedence (RFC791) or 
 DSCP (RFC2474). It also supports traffic prioritization based on UDP 
 and/or TCP port ranges. In addition, it may use the optional Wireless 
 Link Prioritization (WLP) feature to fully support delay sensitive 
 applications, enabling Multimedia Application Prioritization (MAP) for 
 high performance voice and video. (MAP can increase VoIP capacity by 
 as much as 500%)

 . Built-in surge suppression in both ODU and IDU

 . Full management of all components, from any point in the system.

 . Components can be managed using standard management tools through 
 SNMP agents that implement standard and proprietary MIBs for remote 
 setting of operational modes and parameters. Security features 
 incorporated in BreezeACCESS VL units restrict access for management 
 purposes to specific IP addresses and/or directions, that is, from the 
 Ethernet and/or wireless link.

 . True toll quality VoIP (MOS of 4.1 or better)

 . Upload new or updated configuration file to multiple (selectable) 
 units

RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-24 Thread Patrick Leary
Brad,

Software controlled dual polarity might be nice. Not sure why you
consistently harp on us though since no one else has it either other
than your longtime preferred vendor.

I am not as convinced about your complaint about RSSI. Is it just used
to RSSI like being used to feet in stead of meters. But also, isn't RSSI
less sophisticated and a less useful number than SNR since it is only an
indication of receive signal without discounting noise? SNR provides a
more accurate representation of wanted signal since it discounts for
unwanted noise.

Not sure of your complaint about the RJ45. No one else remarks about it
and we don't have issues with water intrusion. In other words, it works
well. If the opening was enlarged you increase the potential for water
intrusion.

Following the color code? Yes, as an old cabling guy, I would agree. But
I am pleased to note that one is really running out of things to harp
about when one continually highlights this a major deficiency.

So now that I have responded here to your public mail, will you please
admit that even if the VL came to life and saved your kid from a flood
you complain that it was not fast enough and that it ripped the kid's
clothes. I wish some day you'd accept that your customer chose VL and
you should take the opportunity to learn about it instead of still
trying to make it fail so you can get them to switch to Trango. Even the
best radios will have room for improvement and every decent brand should
have something special that differentiates it. You work so hard to find
fault you miss opportunities to become proficient in more than one
brand. So accept our invitations to allow engineer visits and accept our
invitations to be trained. Know what I mean?

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243







This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals  computer 
viruses.




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-24 Thread G. villarini
Patrick,

Rssi is very important to determine if a link is properly aligned and its 
achieving its link budget.

Altough we don’t use alvarion(yet), we are currently researching backhaul 
options and the way we comission ptp links here is that we run the calcs on 
radio mobile and spreedsheet to determine the link budget in advance to 
implementation.  Snr won’t help much there...

Gino

-Original Message-
From: Patrick Leary[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 9/24/06 11:32:47 AM
To: WISPA General Listwireless@wispa.org
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs
  Brad,

Software controlled dual polarity might be nice. Not sure why you
consistently harp on us though since no one else has it either other
than your longtime preferred vendor.

I am not as convinced about your complaint about RSSI. Is it just used
to RSSI like being used to feet in stead of meters. But also, isn't RSSI
less sophisticated and a less useful number than SNR since it is only an
indication of receive signal without discounting noise? SNR provides a
more accurate representation of wanted signal since it discounts for
unwanted noise.

Not sure of your complaint about the RJ45. No one else remarks about it
and we don't have issues with water intrusion. In other words, it works
well. If the opening was enlarged you increase the potential for water
intrusion.

Following the color code? Yes, as an old cabling guy, I would agree. But
I am pleased to note that one is really running out of things to harp
about when one continually highlights this a major deficiency.

So now that I have responded here to your public mail, will you please
admit that even if the VL came to life and saved your kid from a flood
you complain that it was not fast enough and that it ripped the kid's
clothes. I wish some day you'd accept that your customer chose VL and
you should take the opportunity to learn about it instead of still
trying to make it fail so you can get them to switch to Trango. Even the
best radios will have room for improvement and every decent brand should
have something special that differentiates it. You work so hard to find
fault you miss opportunities to become proficient in more than one
brand. So accept our invitations to allow engineer visits and accept our
invitations to be trained. Know what I mean?

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243




 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals  computer 
viruses.





-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-24 Thread Matt Liotta
I have yet to use an Alvarion radio or for that matter one without RSSI. 
However, I would think that using SNR is a perfectly reasonable way to 
align a link.


-Matt

G. villarini wrote:

Patrick,

Rssi is very important to determine if a link is properly aligned and its 
achieving its link budget.

Altough we don’t use alvarion(yet), we are currently researching backhaul 
options and the way we comission ptp links here is that we run the calcs on 
radio mobile and spreedsheet to determine the link budget in advance to 
implementation.  Snr won’t help much there...

Gino

-Original Message-
From: Patrick Leary[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 9/24/06 11:32:47 AM
To: WISPA General Listwireless@wispa.org
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs
  Brad,

Software controlled dual polarity might be nice. Not sure why you

consistently harp on us though since no one else has it either other
than your longtime preferred vendor.

I am not as convinced about your complaint about RSSI. Is it just used

to RSSI like being used to feet in stead of meters. But also, isn't RSSI
less sophisticated and a less useful number than SNR since it is only an
indication of receive signal without discounting noise? SNR provides a
more accurate representation of wanted signal since it discounts for
unwanted noise.

Not sure of your complaint about the RJ45. No one else remarks about it

and we don't have issues with water intrusion. In other words, it works
well. If the opening was enlarged you increase the potential for water
intrusion.

Following the color code? Yes, as an old cabling guy, I would agree. But

I am pleased to note that one is really running out of things to harp
about when one continually highlights this a major deficiency.

So now that I have responded here to your public mail, will you please

admit that even if the VL came to life and saved your kid from a flood
you complain that it was not fast enough and that it ripped the kid's
clothes. I wish some day you'd accept that your customer chose VL and
you should take the opportunity to learn about it instead of still
trying to make it fail so you can get them to switch to Trango. Even the
best radios will have room for improvement and every decent brand should
have something special that differentiates it. You work so hard to find
fault you miss opportunities to become proficient in more than one
brand. So accept our invitations to allow engineer visits and accept our
invitations to be trained. Know what I mean?

Patrick Leary

AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243




 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals  computer 
viruses.





-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:

http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


  


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-24 Thread Patrick Leary








I should have also noted that per the info
below, most Alvarion operators simply have a policy that they will only connect
subscribers for whom a minimum number of the green LEDs will fire and hold. For
example, having 4 for of the 8 green LEDs light should get you a link with the
best mod level, but 5 will do that plus give you a margin of about 8dB. It is a
simple thing once you get used to it, which does not take long. Remember, there
is no standard way to show these things, but Id argue that what we show
is more complete and real in terms of link quality. Just showing RSSI would
dump it down, wouldnt it?





Patrick Leary 
AVP WISP Markets 
Alvarion, Inc. 
o: 650.314.2628 
c: 760.580.0080 
Vonage: 650.641.1243 











From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006
9:24 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs





Right, but the LED bar on the CPE can be used to do that. I mean, isn't
SNR more complete than just RSSI, meaning if your SNR is good than the RSSI is
by default good. Anyway, I have never heard of any moderately experienced VL
user say the units did not convey enough info to easily establish a link and
understand the quality of the connection. Consider that with the CPE VL radio
the LEDs will show:



WLAN link light-


Solid Green  Unit is
associated with an AU, no wireless link activity


Blinking Green  Data
received or transmitted on the wireless link, blinking rate is proportional to
wireless

traffic rate


Off  Wireless link is
disabled



Status light 


Solid Green  Power is
available and self-test passed


Blinking Amber  Testing
(not ready for operation)


Red  Self-test failed
 fatal error



Ethernet light 


Solid Green  Ethernet link
between the indoor and outdoor units is detected, no activity


Blinking Green  Ethernet
connectivity is OK, with traffic on the port. Blinking rate proportional to
traffic rate


Red  No Ethernet
connectivity between the indoor and outdoor units



SNR bar 


Red LED: Signal is too low
(SNR4 dB)


Orange LED: Signal is too high
(SNR  50 dB)


8 green LEDs: Quality of the
received signal (green LEDs translate per below)

LED 1 (red) is On - Signal is too low (SNR  4 dB)

LED 2 (green) is On - SNR  4 dB

LEDs 2 to 3 (green) are On - SNR  8 dB

LEDs 2 to 4 (green) are On - SNR  13 dB

LEDs 2 to 5 (green) are On - SNR  19 dB

LEDs 2 to 6 (green) are On - SNR  26 dB

LEDs 2 to 7 (green) are On - SNR  31 dB

LEDs 2 to 8 (green) are On - SNR  38 dB

LEDs 2 to 9 (green) are On - SNR  44 dB

LEDs 2 to 9 (green) and 10 (orange) are On Signal is
too high (SNR  50 dB)



Mod level : Sensitivity : Min. SNR (this chart for
20MHz channel)

1 : -89 dBm : 6 dB

2 : -88 dBm : 7 dB

3 : -86 dBm : 9 dB

4 : -84 dBm : 11 dB

5 : -81 dBm : 14 dB

6 : -77 dBm : 18 dB

7 : -73 dBm : 22 dB

8 : -71 dBm : 23 dB





Patrick Leary

AVP WISP Markets

Alvarion, Inc.

o: 650.314.2628

c: 760.580.0080

Vonage: 650.641.1243



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of G. villarini
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 8:48 AM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs



Patrick,



Rssi is very important to determine if a link is properly aligned and
its achieving its link budget.



Altough we dont use alvarion(yet), we are currently researching
backhaul options and the way we comission ptp links here is that we run the
calcs on radio mobile and spreedsheet to determine the link budget in advance
to implementation. Snr wont help much there...



Gino



-Original Message-

 From: Patrick
Leary[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 Sent: 9/24/06 11:32:47 AM

 To: WISPA General
Listwireless@wispa.org

 Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

 Brad,

 

 Software controlled dual polarity might be nice. Not
sure why you

 consistently harp on us though since no one else has
it either other

 than your longtime preferred vendor.

 

 I am not as convinced about your complaint about
RSSI. Is it just used

 to RSSI like being used to feet in stead of meters.
But also, isn't RSSI

 less sophisticated and a less useful number than SNR
since it is only an

 indication of receive signal without discounting
noise? SNR provides a

 more accurate representation of wanted signal since it
discounts for

 unwanted noise.

 

 Not sure of your complaint about the RJ45. No one
else remarks about it

 and we don't have issues with water intrusion. In
other words, it works

 well. If the opening was enlarged you increase the
potential for water

 intrusion.

 

 Following the color code? Yes, as an old cabling
guy, I would agree. But

 I am pleased to note that one is really running out
of things to harp

 about when one continually highlights this a major
deficiency.

 

 So now that I have responded here to your public
mail, will you please

 admit that even if the VL came to life and saved
your kid from a flood

 you complain that it was not fast enough

RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-24 Thread Gino A. Villarini








The problem with SNR for alignment
purposes is that you are dealing with a variable in noise, with rssi you work
with fixed numbers. Im not dissing SNR, it is extremely important,
But for example, in order to trouble shoot a link  let say I install a
Link and Im seeing a a SNR of 6 on this link,how the heck can I determine if
the antenna is miss aligned or the noise floor is very high ???





Gino A. Villarini 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. 
tel 787.273.4143
fax 787.273.4145 











From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006
12:24 PM
To: WISPA
 General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs





Right, but the LED bar on the CPE can be used to do that. I mean, isn't
SNR more complete than just RSSI, meaning if your SNR is good than the RSSI is
by default good. Anyway, I have never heard of any moderately experienced VL
user say the units did not convey enough info to easily establish a link and
understand the quality of the connection. Consider that with the CPE VL radio
the LEDs will show:



WLAN link light-


Solid Green  Unit is
associated with an AU, no wireless link activity


Blinking Green  Data
received or transmitted on the wireless link, blinking rate is proportional to
wireless

traffic rate


Off  Wireless link is
disabled



Status light 


Solid Green  Power is
available and self-test passed


Blinking Amber  Testing
(not ready for operation)


Red  Self-test failed
 fatal error



Ethernet light 


Solid Green  Ethernet link
between the indoor and outdoor units is detected, no activity


Blinking Green  Ethernet
connectivity is OK, with traffic on the port. Blinking rate proportional to
traffic rate


Red  No Ethernet
connectivity between the indoor and outdoor units



SNR bar 


Red LED: Signal is too low
(SNR4 dB)


Orange LED: Signal is too high
(SNR  50 dB)


8 green LEDs: Quality of the
received signal (green LEDs translate per below)

LED 1 (red) is On - Signal is too low (SNR  4 dB)

LED 2 (green) is On - SNR  4 dB

LEDs 2 to 3 (green) are On - SNR  8 dB

LEDs 2 to 4 (green) are On - SNR  13 dB

LEDs 2 to 5 (green) are On - SNR  19 dB

LEDs 2 to 6 (green) are On - SNR  26 dB

LEDs 2 to 7 (green) are On - SNR  31 dB

LEDs 2 to 8 (green) are On - SNR  38 dB

LEDs 2 to 9 (green) are On - SNR  44 dB

LEDs 2 to 9 (green) and 10 (orange) are On Signal is
too high (SNR  50 dB)



Mod level : Sensitivity : Min. SNR (this chart for
20MHz channel)

1 : -89 dBm : 6 dB

2 : -88 dBm : 7 dB

3 : -86 dBm : 9 dB

4 : -84 dBm : 11 dB

5 : -81 dBm : 14 dB

6 : -77 dBm : 18 dB

7 : -73 dBm : 22 dB

8 : -71 dBm : 23 dB





Patrick Leary

AVP WISP Markets

Alvarion, Inc.

o: 650.314.2628

c: 760.580.0080

Vonage: 650.641.1243



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of G. villarini
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 8:48 AM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs



Patrick,



Rssi is very important to determine if a link is properly aligned and
its achieving its link budget.



Altough we dont use alvarion(yet), we are currently researching
backhaul options and the way we comission ptp links here is that we run the
calcs on radio mobile and spreedsheet to determine the link budget in advance
to implementation. Snr wont help much there...



Gino



-Original Message-

 From: Patrick
Leary[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 Sent: 9/24/06 11:32:47 AM

 To: WISPA General
 Listwireless@wispa.org

 Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

 Brad,

 

 Software controlled dual polarity might be nice. Not
sure why you

 consistently harp on us though since no one else has
it either other

 than your longtime preferred vendor.

 

 I am not as convinced about your complaint about
RSSI. Is it just used

 to RSSI like being used to feet in stead of meters.
But also, isn't RSSI

 less sophisticated and a less useful number than SNR
since it is only an

 indication of receive signal without discounting noise?
SNR provides a

 more accurate representation of wanted signal since
it discounts for

 unwanted noise.

 

 Not sure of your complaint about the RJ45. No one
else remarks about it

 and we don't have issues with water intrusion. In
other words, it works

 well. If the opening was enlarged you increase the
potential for water

 intrusion.

 

 Following the color code? Yes, as an old cabling
guy, I would agree. But

 I am pleased to note that one is really running out
of things to harp

 about when one continually highlights this a major
deficiency.

 

 So now that I have responded here to your public
mail, will you please

 admit that even if the VL came to life and saved
your kid from a flood

 you complain that it was not fast enough and that it
ripped the kid's

 clothes. I wish some day you'd accept that your
customer chose VL and

 you should take the opportunity to learn about it
instead of still

 trying to make it fail so you can get them to switch

RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-24 Thread Brad Belton








Exactly, and this is can be compounded on
a new installation as you might be seeing noise or could it be you are just misaligned?



Techs are creatures of habit. They
may think 4 LED bars is all that is ever needed because thats what they
typically see. The next install they throw up a radio and get their usual
4 LED bars and dont realize 5 or more is obtainable. Then a
rainstorm comes in along with a 20F drop in temperature and the link goes to
crap because in fact they aligned the radio on a side lobe.







Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Gino A. Villarini
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006
11:48 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs



The problem with SNR for
alignment purposes is that you are dealing with a variable in noise, with rssi
you work with fixed numbers. Im not dissing SNR, it is extremely
important, But for example, in order to trouble shoot a link  let say I
install a Link and Im seeing a a SNR of 6 on this link,how the heck can I
determine if the antenna is miss aligned or the noise floor is very high ???





Gino A. Villarini 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. 
tel 787.273.4143
fax 787.273.4145 











From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006
12:24 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs





Right, but the LED bar on the CPE can be used to do
that. I mean, isn't SNR more complete than just RSSI, meaning if your SNR is
good than the RSSI is by default good. Anyway, I have never heard of any
moderately experienced VL user say the units did not convey enough info to
easily establish a link and understand the quality of the connection. Consider
that with the CPE VL radio the LEDs will show:



WLAN link light-


Solid Green  Unit is associated with an AU,
no wireless link activity


Blinking Green  Data received or transmitted
on the wireless link, blinking rate is proportional to wireless

traffic rate


Off  Wireless link is disabled



Status light 


Solid Green  Power is available and
self-test passed


Blinking Amber  Testing (not ready for
operation)


Red  Self-test failed  fatal error



Ethernet light 


Solid Green  Ethernet link between the
indoor and outdoor units is detected, no activity


Blinking Green  Ethernet connectivity is OK,
with traffic on the port. Blinking rate proportional to traffic rate


Red  No Ethernet connectivity between the
indoor and outdoor units



SNR bar 


Red LED: Signal is too low (SNR4 dB)


Orange LED: Signal is too high (SNR  50 dB)


8 green LEDs: Quality of the received signal (green
LEDs translate per below)

LED 1 (red) is On - Signal is too low (SNR  4 dB)

LED 2 (green) is On - SNR  4 dB

LEDs 2 to 3 (green) are On - SNR  8 dB

LEDs 2 to 4 (green) are On - SNR  13 dB

LEDs 2 to 5 (green) are On - SNR  19 dB

LEDs 2 to 6 (green) are On - SNR  26 dB

LEDs 2 to 7 (green) are On - SNR  31 dB

LEDs 2 to 8 (green) are On - SNR  38 dB

LEDs 2 to 9 (green) are On - SNR  44 dB

LEDs 2 to 9 (green) and 10 (orange) are On Signal is
too high (SNR  50 dB)



Mod level : Sensitivity : Min. SNR (this chart for
20MHz channel)

1 : -89 dBm : 6 dB

2 : -88 dBm : 7 dB

3 : -86 dBm : 9 dB

4 : -84 dBm : 11 dB

5 : -81 dBm : 14 dB

6 : -77 dBm : 18 dB

7 : -73 dBm : 22 dB

8 : -71 dBm : 23 dB





Patrick Leary

AVP WISP Markets

Alvarion, Inc.

o: 650.314.2628

c: 760.580.0080

Vonage: 650.641.1243



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of G. villarini
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 8:48 AM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs



Patrick,



Rssi is very important to determine if a link is
properly aligned and its achieving its link budget.



Altough we dont use alvarion(yet), we are
currently researching backhaul options and the way we comission ptp links here
is that we run the calcs on radio mobile and spreedsheet to determine the link
budget in advance to implementation. Snr wont help much there...



Gino



-Original Message-

 From: Patrick
Leary[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 Sent: 9/24/06 11:32:47 AM

 To: WISPA General
Listwireless@wispa.org

 Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

 Brad,

 

 Software controlled dual polarity
might be nice. Not sure why you

 consistently harp on us though
since no one else has it either other

 than your longtime preferred
vendor.

 

 I am not as convinced about your
complaint about RSSI. Is it just used

 to RSSI like being used to feet in
stead of meters. But also, isn't RSSI

 less sophisticated and a less
useful number than SNR since it is only an

 indication of receive signal
without discounting noise? SNR provides a

 more accurate representation of
wanted signal since it discounts for

 unwanted noise.

 

 Not sure of your complaint about
the RJ45. No one else remarks about it

 and we don't have issues with water
intrusion

RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-24 Thread Patrick Leary








If the general concensus is that RSSI is a
must, then I will try to convince PM to add such a reading.





Patrick Leary 
AVP WISP Markets 
Alvarion, Inc. 
o: 650.314.2628 
c: 760.580.0080 
Vonage: 650.641.1243 











From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gino A. Villarini
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006
9:48 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs





The problem with SNR for alignment
purposes is that you are dealing with a variable in noise, with rssi you work
with fixed numbers. Im not dissing SNR, it is extremely important,
But for example, in order to trouble shoot a link  let say I install a
Link and Im seeing a a SNR of 6 on this link,how the heck can I determine if
the antenna is miss aligned or the noise floor is very high ???





Gino A. Villarini 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. 
tel 787.273.4143
fax 787.273.4145 











From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006
12:24 PM
To: WISPA
 General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs





Right, but the LED bar on the CPE can be used to do that. I mean, isn't
SNR more complete than just RSSI, meaning if your SNR is good than the RSSI is
by default good. Anyway, I have never heard of any moderately experienced VL
user say the units did not convey enough info to easily establish a link and
understand the quality of the connection. Consider that with the CPE VL radio
the LEDs will show:



WLAN link light-


Solid Green  Unit is
associated with an AU, no wireless link activity


Blinking Green  Data
received or transmitted on the wireless link, blinking rate is proportional to
wireless

traffic rate


Off  Wireless link is
disabled



Status light 


Solid Green  Power is
available and self-test passed


Blinking Amber  Testing
(not ready for operation)


Red  Self-test failed
 fatal error



Ethernet light 


Solid Green  Ethernet link
between the indoor and outdoor units is detected, no activity


Blinking Green  Ethernet
connectivity is OK, with traffic on the port. Blinking rate proportional to
traffic rate


Red  No Ethernet
connectivity between the indoor and outdoor units



SNR bar 


Red LED: Signal is too low
(SNR4 dB)


Orange LED: Signal is too high
(SNR  50 dB)


8 green LEDs: Quality of the
received signal (green LEDs translate per below)

LED 1 (red) is On - Signal is too low (SNR  4 dB)

LED 2 (green) is On - SNR  4 dB

LEDs 2 to 3 (green) are On - SNR  8 dB

LEDs 2 to 4 (green) are On - SNR  13 dB

LEDs 2 to 5 (green) are On - SNR  19 dB

LEDs 2 to 6 (green) are On - SNR  26 dB

LEDs 2 to 7 (green) are On - SNR  31 dB

LEDs 2 to 8 (green) are On - SNR  38 dB

LEDs 2 to 9 (green) are On - SNR  44 dB

LEDs 2 to 9 (green) and 10 (orange) are On Signal is
too high (SNR  50 dB)



Mod level : Sensitivity : Min. SNR (this chart for
20MHz channel)

1 : -89 dBm : 6 dB

2 : -88 dBm : 7 dB

3 : -86 dBm : 9 dB

4 : -84 dBm : 11 dB

5 : -81 dBm : 14 dB

6 : -77 dBm : 18 dB

7 : -73 dBm : 22 dB

8 : -71 dBm : 23 dB





Patrick Leary

AVP WISP Markets

Alvarion, Inc.

o: 650.314.2628

c: 760.580.0080

Vonage: 650.641.1243



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of G. villarini
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 8:48 AM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs



Patrick,



Rssi is very important to determine if a link is properly aligned and
its achieving its link budget.



Altough we dont use alvarion(yet), we are currently researching
backhaul options and the way we comission ptp links here is that we run the
calcs on radio mobile and spreedsheet to determine the link budget in advance
to implementation. Snr wont help much there...



Gino



-Original Message-

 From: Patrick
Leary[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 Sent: 9/24/06 11:32:47 AM

 To: WISPA General
 Listwireless@wispa.org

 Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

 Brad,

 

 Software controlled dual polarity might be nice. Not
sure why you

 consistently harp on us though since no one else has
it either other

 than your longtime preferred vendor.

 

 I am not as convinced about your complaint about
RSSI. Is it just used

 to RSSI like being used to feet in stead of meters.
But also, isn't RSSI

 less sophisticated and a less useful number than SNR
since it is only an

 indication of receive signal without discounting
noise? SNR provides a

 more accurate representation of wanted signal since
it discounts for

 unwanted noise.

 

 Not sure of your complaint about the RJ45. No one
else remarks about it

 and we don't have issues with water intrusion. In
other words, it works

 well. If the opening was enlarged you increase the
potential for water

 intrusion.

 

 Following the color code? Yes, as an old cabling
guy, I would agree. But

 I am pleased to note that one is really running out
of things to harp

 about when one continually highlights this a major
deficiency

Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-24 Thread John Scrivner
Not to beat the horse here but I think having SNR, RSSI and Noise 
readings are all things people should have in an advanced platform. 
Granted if you have any two you can get the third but just having it all 
right there seems logical to me. I am guessing the system could easily 
derive all three as it has to know the RSSI and Noise level to get SNR 
to begin with. A person should use all three when peaking a link to see 
where potential noise sources are located, how much signal you can max 
out at and where the best SNR is. The only time more information is not 
better is when you have an installer who does not comprehend the 
differences in all three readings and could become confused. I would not 
want that guy dong my VL links to begin with though.


I do understand the differences and inter-relationships between SNR, 
RSSI and Noise level and I would like to see all three when I set a 
link. I am guessing this would take the Alvarion firmware writers about 
2 minutes to add that into the next firmware revision. I am not 
exaggerating here. I am sure the code to do this is already there to 
produce the SNR number and a checkbox in the build options will add RSSI 
and Noise levels to the next revision. I tell you what Patrick, if your 
firmware designers say it will take more than 15 minutes to add that 
code then I owe you dinner at ISPCON one night. Deal?

Scriv


Patrick Leary wrote:

If the general concensus is that RSSI is a must, then I will try to 
convince PM to add such a reading.


Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243



*From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
*On Behalf Of *Gino A. Villarini

*Sent:* Sunday, September 24, 2006 9:48 AM
*To:* 'WISPA General List'
*Subject:* RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

The problem with SNR for alignment purposes is that you are dealing 
with a variable in noise, with rssi you work with fixed numbers. I’m 
not dissing SNR, it is extremely important, But for example, in order 
to trouble shoot a link … let say I install a Link and Im seeing a a 
SNR of 6 on this link,how the heck can I determine if the antenna is 
miss aligned or the noise floor is very high ???


Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145



*From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
*On Behalf Of *Patrick Leary

*Sent:* Sunday, September 24, 2006 12:24 PM
*To:* WISPA General List
*Subject:* RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Right, but the LED bar on the CPE can be used to do that. I mean, 
isn't SNR more complete than just RSSI, meaning if your SNR is good 
than the RSSI is by default good. Anyway, I have never heard of any 
moderately experienced VL user say the units did not convey enough 
info to easily establish a link and understand the quality of the 
connection. Consider that with the CPE VL radio the LEDs will show:


WLAN link light-

· Solid Green – Unit is associated with an AU, no wireless link activity

· Blinking Green – Data received or transmitted on the wireless link, 
blinking rate is proportional to wireless


traffic rate

· Off – Wireless link is disabled

Status light –

· Solid Green – Power is available and self-test passed

· Blinking Amber – Testing (not ready for operation)

· Red – Self-test failed – fatal error

Ethernet light –

· Solid Green – Ethernet link between the indoor and outdoor units is 
detected, no activity


· Blinking Green – Ethernet connectivity is OK, with traffic on the 
port. Blinking rate proportional to traffic rate


· Red – No Ethernet connectivity between the indoor and outdoor units

SNR bar –

· Red LED: Signal is too low (SNR4 dB)

· Orange LED: Signal is too high (SNR  50 dB)

· 8 green LEDs: Quality of the received signal (green LEDs translate 
per below)


LED 1 (red) is On - Signal is too low (SNR  4 dB)

LED 2 (green) is On - SNR  4 dB

LEDs 2 to 3 (green) are On - SNR  8 dB

LEDs 2 to 4 (green) are On - SNR  13 dB

LEDs 2 to 5 (green) are On - SNR  19 dB

LEDs 2 to 6 (green) are On - SNR  26 dB

LEDs 2 to 7 (green) are On - SNR  31 dB

LEDs 2 to 8 (green) are On - SNR  38 dB

LEDs 2 to 9 (green) are On - SNR  44 dB

LEDs 2 to 9 (green) and 10 (orange) are On Signal is too high (SNR  
50 dB)


Mod level : Sensitivity : Min. SNR (this chart for 20MHz channel)

1 : -89 dBm : 6 dB

2 : -88 dBm : 7 dB

3 : -86 dBm : 9 dB

4 : -84 dBm : 11 dB

5 : -81 dBm : 14 dB

6 : -77 dBm : 18 dB

7 : -73 dBm : 22 dB

8 : -71 dBm : 23 dB

Patrick Leary

AVP WISP Markets

Alvarion, Inc.

o: 650.314.2628

c: 760.580.0080

Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
On Behalf Of G. villarini

Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 8:48 AM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Patrick,

Rssi is very important

RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-24 Thread Patrick Leary
Deal. For sure I will ask them to add the reading in the firmware.

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 11:14 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

Not to beat the horse here but I think having SNR, RSSI and Noise 
readings are all things people should have in an advanced platform. 
Granted if you have any two you can get the third but just having it all

right there seems logical to me. I am guessing the system could easily 
derive all three as it has to know the RSSI and Noise level to get SNR 
to begin with. A person should use all three when peaking a link to see 
where potential noise sources are located, how much signal you can max 
out at and where the best SNR is. The only time more information is not 
better is when you have an installer who does not comprehend the 
differences in all three readings and could become confused. I would not

want that guy dong my VL links to begin with though.

I do understand the differences and inter-relationships between SNR, 
RSSI and Noise level and I would like to see all three when I set a 
link. I am guessing this would take the Alvarion firmware writers about 
2 minutes to add that into the next firmware revision. I am not 
exaggerating here. I am sure the code to do this is already there to 
produce the SNR number and a checkbox in the build options will add RSSI

and Noise levels to the next revision. I tell you what Patrick, if your 
firmware designers say it will take more than 15 minutes to add that 
code then I owe you dinner at ISPCON one night. Deal?
Scriv


Patrick Leary wrote:

 If the general concensus is that RSSI is a must, then I will try to 
 convince PM to add such a reading.

 Patrick Leary
 AVP WISP Markets
 Alvarion, Inc.
 o: 650.314.2628
 c: 760.580.0080
 Vonage: 650.641.1243




 *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 *On Behalf Of *Gino A. Villarini
 *Sent:* Sunday, September 24, 2006 9:48 AM
 *To:* 'WISPA General List'
 *Subject:* RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

 The problem with SNR for alignment purposes is that you are dealing 
 with a variable in noise, with rssi you work with fixed numbers. I'm 
 not dissing SNR, it is extremely important, But for example, in order 
 to trouble shoot a link ... let say I install a Link and Im seeing a a

 SNR of 6 on this link,how the heck can I determine if the antenna is 
 miss aligned or the noise floor is very high ???

 Gino A. Villarini
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
 tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145




 *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 *On Behalf Of *Patrick Leary
 *Sent:* Sunday, September 24, 2006 12:24 PM
 *To:* WISPA General List
 *Subject:* RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

 Right, but the LED bar on the CPE can be used to do that. I mean, 
 isn't SNR more complete than just RSSI, meaning if your SNR is good 
 than the RSSI is by default good. Anyway, I have never heard of any 
 moderately experienced VL user say the units did not convey enough 
 info to easily establish a link and understand the quality of the 
 connection. Consider that with the CPE VL radio the LEDs will show:

 WLAN link light-

 * Solid Green - Unit is associated with an AU, no wireless link
activity

 * Blinking Green - Data received or transmitted on the wireless link, 
 blinking rate is proportional to wireless

 traffic rate

 * Off - Wireless link is disabled

 Status light -

 * Solid Green - Power is available and self-test passed

 * Blinking Amber - Testing (not ready for operation)

 * Red - Self-test failed - fatal error

 Ethernet light -

 * Solid Green - Ethernet link between the indoor and outdoor units is 
 detected, no activity

 * Blinking Green - Ethernet connectivity is OK, with traffic on the 
 port. Blinking rate proportional to traffic rate

 * Red - No Ethernet connectivity between the indoor and outdoor units

 SNR bar -

 * Red LED: Signal is too low (SNR4 dB)

 * Orange LED: Signal is too high (SNR  50 dB)

 * 8 green LEDs: Quality of the received signal (green LEDs translate 
 per below)

 LED 1 (red) is On - Signal is too low (SNR  4 dB)

 LED 2 (green) is On - SNR  4 dB

 LEDs 2 to 3 (green) are On - SNR  8 dB

 LEDs 2 to 4 (green) are On - SNR  13 dB

 LEDs 2 to 5 (green) are On - SNR  19 dB

 LEDs 2 to 6 (green) are On - SNR  26 dB

 LEDs 2 to 7 (green) are On - SNR  31 dB

 LEDs 2 to 8 (green) are On - SNR  38 dB

 LEDs 2 to 9 (green) are On - SNR  44 dB

 LEDs 2 to 9 (green) and 10 (orange) are On Signal is too high (SNR  
 50 dB)

 Mod level : Sensitivity : Min. SNR (this chart for 20MHz channel)

 1 : -89 dBm : 6 dB

 2 : -88 dBm : 7 dB

 3 : -86 dBm : 9 dB

 4 : -84 dBm

RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-24 Thread Brad Belton
Agreed, VL does have more niche features and some of those can be the sole
reason VL makes the cut and other products do not.  As you know VLAN support
was the key feature in this particular case, but simply placing a CPE router
on site will also fill that need.

I'm a believer in the VL product, but there are currently a few too many
basic pitfalls with the product.  If I didn't care I wouldn't be posting
about the VL.  Let's face it this is some of the best exposure a
manufacturer can ask for: users expressing improvements they would like to
see implemented.

The improvement requests here aren't without merit.  Dual polarity and dual
band capability are good ideas.  There isn't any argument against it, so why
not implement it?  I guarantee it will result in additional VL sales.

Trango has many features that VL does not currently offer in addition to the
extremely important Dual Polarity ability:

(1)  Rx Threshold to maintain full payload capacity in noisy areas
(2)  Far fewer commands that require a reboot
(3)  Much faster reboot
(4)  Dual band 5.3GHz and 5.8GHz in one product
(5)  RSSI reading local and remote side
(6)  Ability to locate noise at AU or SU without interrupting traffic

Considering Alvarion has a tech in the local area I wouldn't expect anything
less than a free visit.  Scanning the numerous emails between all of us on
this topic I'm unable to find the offer.  Could you forward me the exchange
you are referring to?

Trango offered to fly a tech out to us from across the country for free.
Free is in quotations because I don't believe anything is free...you're
paying for it somewhere in this case by purchasing product. grin

There is more, but it's Sunday and I've got yet another 4 or 5yr old
birthday party to attend!

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 12:34 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Re dual polarity via software, I and others have always said it would be
nice. You've never heard me argue against it and you have heard me
acknowledge that this is Trango's key Trango only differentiator. But
we all understand that and have acknowledged it many times. Lots of
things are nice, some just have higher priority than others. For every 1
thing VL may not have relative to Trango, we can probably find 10 things
VL can do that Trango cannot, each of equal importance maybe to dual
polarity. The ability to do VoIP well would be such a thing. Those with
multipoint networks using Trango or Canopy are entirely stranded in
terms of being able to do VoIP to any reasonable scale. 

Come on Brad. I was personally involved in some of the threads where
I've seen my people (or me) attempt to answer every question you have
had. I know Keith's management has offered to send him out there
numerous times for free. I was pleased to be able to visit to understand
what your customer was wanting to do.
 
By the way, training does not have to be $1,000 a head, as you know. We
offer people to pay for the whole class than they can sell their own
seats for whatever they want. We actually have some customers that use
this as a profit center. Also, respectfully, isn't one's willingness to
get trained a good measure of one's seriousness? And what professional
training have you had for free that was wroth anything?

Patrick

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Belton
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 9:53 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Wow Patrick, I'm surprised of your answer.  I think I've made it
abundantly
clear over the years I'm open source when it comes to equipment and
choose
the best solution for the application at hand regardless of brand.

I've certainly been more a critique of Trango and many other products
than I
have been of Alvarion VL.  That can't be disputed.  I'm just surprised
you
have such thin skin regarding constructive criticism.

Regardless of what you believe, SNR is NOT the same thing as a RSSI
reading.
RSSI is pretty much what makes the world go 'round in the radio
industry.
Not sure why Alvarion continues to dig in their heals over such a simple
item that even your own techs agree should be provided.

Holy cow Patrick admits software DP might be nice!  This is a first
and
shows progress is achievable...baby steps Patrick, baby steps.  Now
let's
put the idea front  center with the Alvarion design team and as they
say
git 'er done!

I think you know as well as I do the size of the weather seal was an
oversight in design.  The idea that 1 or 2 mm larger in size will make
the
weather seal less effective is ridiculous.  You can do better that that.

Not sure what you mean about my customer chose VL etc, etc.  The end
user
client is ours...the last thing I want to do is have it fail.  The sale
was
for 2MB/2MB FDX and frankly the VL can't do that every day all day

Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-24 Thread Tom DeReggi

Gino,

The prices you state seem way low.  I've only see nthat on temporar or Ebay 
type buying.

Is their a CONSISTENT source for $225 and $550 pricing in less than 25 qty?

I believe that anyone that is required to buy in qty higher than 25 to get 
best price is getting overly burdened and likely loosing their savings after 
looking at all cash flow costs.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 11:05 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs



Let me comment on this 

#Canopy 5.7 AP - $970 (Advantage $1,974)

is this MRSP ? you can buy this the AP for $800 +/- , Advantage for $1500

#C/I advantage
#Fixed up/down ratio

Add GPS Sync, Feature rich firmware, NMS Software, Strong support, Good
promos, Only Manufacturer to offer price conscious upgrade program, third
party products (dishes , gps syncs) ect ect ect

#$490 CPE ($737 advantage) .. yikes with CPE you have 3 options :

Canopy Lite (1mbps) $170 +/- 25 packs
Canopy (14 Mbps Burst) $225 +/-
Canopy Advantage (14 Mbps sustained ) $550 ( way over priced IMHO )



Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 10:31 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] vendor specs

Hi,

I changed the subject line to reflect more the direction of this
discussion (Trango vs. Canopy vs. Alvarion)... ;)

This is just off the top of my head, and I would love to see more data
on any of these radios:

Trango 5830AP - $1,079 retail
Dual polarity
10Mbps (auto up/down ratio)
Easy management (CLI and web)
$149 CPE ($199 up to 10 miles)

Canopy 5.7 AP - $970 (Advantage $1,974)
C/I advantage
Fixed up/down ratio
$490 CPE ($737 advantage)

Alvarion VL AP - $4,500 (rough retail)
36Mbps and 40,000pps
$1,000 CPE

For whatever it's worth, we have over 2,500 CPE in the air and over
2,000 are Trango (900mhz, 2.4ghz, 5.8ghz). The Trango product has worked
very well for us, and we are located on some mountaintop repeater
locations that literally have over 100 antennas (paging, HAM, WISPs,
etc.) within 100 yards of each other.

Our biggest problem is frequency availability at all (regardless of
radio choice)... we have a 2.4ghz AP at a repeater station that is
full. We attempted to install a second sector today and ran a site
survey at this location across the entire 2.4ghz band, the average
signals ranged from -25 to -55 at the best. :(

Travis
Microserv

Jon Langeler wrote:


Tom, I have nothing to gain or lose by telling you what we've not only
extensivley tested but also experienced over 6 years. We started using
canopy since it began shipping and at least 100 trango SU between 3
different towers since beta. I just hate to see fellow wisp protest
that there isn't a good product and struggle when their actually is a
pretty darn good one...and on top of that has an upgrade path in it's
vision, it keeps getting better.

ARQ does not affect C/I like FEC does for example. When you say ARQ is
fixing any resiliance problems that may be true. But you'll also
suffer from increased latency and less throughput during those
retransmissions. Not good if you want to support VOIP and keep
customers happy. Having a low C/I means the system will be stable more
often and maintain a lower retrans. Trango's ARQ is not even an option
in the 5800 model which is what you and I probably have a decent
percentage of in our Trango networks. Having a low C/I requirement
affects other things like increases the range of a product. I'm laying
out facts, you can convince yourself of whatever you want...

Jon Langeler
Michwave Tech.

Tom DeReggi wrote:


Nice try, but I've found that comment to be not at all true. I have
often chosen to avoid canopy user's channels, but because I am a good
WISP neighbor, not because I had to.  Why fight if you can
cooperate.  On a SPEC sheet Canopy does boast the lowest C/I.  But
Trango's specified C/I was reported before considering ARQ. And
Trango has always underspec'd their spec sheets.  C/I is not nearly
as relevant as SNR resilience anyway. With Arq, we've easilly ran
links as low as 4 db above the average noise floor, reliably.  There
is VERY little difference between the Trango and Canopy C/I in real
world usage.  The Trango just adds more polarities as more options to
work around it, when needed.  One of the reasons we like Trango is
its resilience to noise, that gives us the abilty to fight it out and
stand our ground.  The Foxes w/ DISH, have excellent ARQ and
resilience to Noise, within their range and LOS.

When we start to have trouble with Trango, is when we start to push
the limits of the technology.  Its a LOS technology that we attempt
NLOS with. My arguement is also not that we

Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-24 Thread Tom DeReggi
Trango is no where near $400 for Atlas Foxes.  Trango's Atlas Fox's distance 
without dish is just about the same as the standard Canopy CPE (same DBI 
antenna).
Remember that Trango lists retail on their site to protest the WISP.  Low 
volume WISP special pricing is granted to any WISP.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Anthony Will [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 11:17 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs


Your numbers are a bit off on the canopy and when i looked on the trango 
site it looks more in the range of $400 per unit at 30 pack pricing for 
trango's.  I believe your getting that price but at what qualities?
I have a couple hundred in the air and I have Midwest Wireless the 5th 
largest WISP in the country playing in my back yard using Alvarions junk 
BA2 system all over the place.  And I also have a local ILEC, Stonebridge 
and the remains of Xtratyme all over the rest of my coverage area.  My 
PtmP system is all 900mhz and 2.4 ghz using omni's and I dont have any 
issues with interference.  The longest customer link I have on 900mhz is 
18.5 miles and the longest 2.4 link is 12 miles.  I use omni's so that I 
dont completely destroy the airwaves for others that are playing in the 
same sand box.

Canopy pricing:
AP = $898  (Advantage $1554) Single pricing
CPE = $267 (Advantage $402 ) 25pack pricing  Add $40 a unit for 15 mile 
range (stinger or beehive dish all FCC certified)
CPE = $216 (Advantage $324) 100 pack pricing Add $25 a unit for 15 mile 
range (stinger or beehive dish all FCC certified)


Anthony Will
Broadband Corp.


Travis Johnson wrote:

Hi,

I changed the subject line to reflect more the direction of this 
discussion (Trango vs. Canopy vs. Alvarion)... ;)


This is just off the top of my head, and I would love to see more data on 
any of these radios:


Trango 5830AP - $1,079 retail
Dual polarity
10Mbps (auto up/down ratio)
Easy management (CLI and web)
$149 CPE ($199 up to 10 miles)

Canopy 5.7 AP - $970 (Advantage $1,974)
C/I advantage
Fixed up/down ratio
$490 CPE ($737 advantage)

Alvarion VL AP - $4,500 (rough retail)
36Mbps and 40,000pps
$1,000 CPE

For whatever it's worth, we have over 2,500 CPE in the air and over 2,000 
are Trango (900mhz, 2.4ghz, 5.8ghz). The Trango product has worked very 
well for us, and we are located on some mountaintop repeater locations 
that literally have over 100 antennas (paging, HAM, WISPs, etc.) within 
100 yards of each other.


Our biggest problem is frequency availability at all (regardless of radio 
choice)... we have a 2.4ghz AP at a repeater station that is full. We 
attempted to install a second sector today and ran a site survey at this 
location across the entire 2.4ghz band, the average signals ranged 
from -25 to -55 at the best. :(


Travis
Microserv

Jon Langeler wrote:

Tom, I have nothing to gain or lose by telling you what we've not only 
extensivley tested but also experienced over 6 years. We started using 
canopy since it began shipping and at least 100 trango SU between 3 
different towers since beta. I just hate to see fellow wisp protest that 
there isn't a good product and struggle when their actually is a pretty 
darn good one...and on top of that has an upgrade path in it's vision, 
it keeps getting better.


ARQ does not affect C/I like FEC does for example. When you say ARQ is 
fixing any resiliance problems that may be true. But you'll also suffer 
from increased latency and less throughput during those retransmissions. 
Not good if you want to support VOIP and keep customers happy. Having a 
low C/I means the system will be stable more often and maintain a lower 
retrans. Trango's ARQ is not even an option in the 5800 model which is 
what you and I probably have a decent percentage of in our Trango 
networks. Having a low C/I requirement affects other things like 
increases the range of a product. I'm laying out facts, you can convince 
yourself of whatever you want...


Jon Langeler
Michwave Tech.

Tom DeReggi wrote:

Nice try, but I've found that comment to be not at all true. I have 
often chosen to avoid canopy user's channels, but because I am a good 
WISP neighbor, not because I had to.  Why fight if you can cooperate. 
On a SPEC sheet Canopy does boast the lowest C/I.  But Trango's 
specified C/I was reported before considering ARQ. And Trango has 
always underspec'd their spec sheets.  C/I is not nearly as relevant as 
SNR resilience anyway. With Arq, we've easilly ran links as low as 4 db 
above the average noise floor, reliably.  There is VERY little 
difference between the Trango and Canopy C/I in real world usage.  The 
Trango just adds more polarities as more options to work around it, 
when needed.  One of the reasons we like Trango is its resilience to 
noise, that gives us the abilty to fight it out and stand our ground. 
The Foxes w/ DISH, have

RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-24 Thread Patrick Leary
There are arguments against dual band support, as we have discussed
before, though you ridicule our sincere reasoning and call it BS (which
is why I am cautious about discussing these things with you in public).

As I said to you, our RD folks tell me that RF components that span a
broad frequency range have poorer performance than those designed for
more narrow frequency ranges. I don't have a Ph.D in EE or other science
disciplines, so I'm not going to argue with them. And as I have further
explained, that poorer edge performance may or may not be worth giving
up to get the benefit of dual band. That part is an economic question,
not a technical one.

At this point, our company has made the decision that the loss in
performance is not worth the benefits. And yes, our RD DO tend to be RF
purists (another thing you ridicule). That reality has its good and bad
points.

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Belton
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 12:24 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Agreed, VL does have more niche features and some of those can be the
sole
reason VL makes the cut and other products do not.  As you know VLAN
support
was the key feature in this particular case, but simply placing a CPE
router
on site will also fill that need.

I'm a believer in the VL product, but there are currently a few too many
basic pitfalls with the product.  If I didn't care I wouldn't be posting
about the VL.  Let's face it this is some of the best exposure a
manufacturer can ask for: users expressing improvements they would like
to
see implemented.

The improvement requests here aren't without merit.  Dual polarity and
dual
band capability are good ideas.  There isn't any argument against it, so
why
not implement it?  I guarantee it will result in additional VL sales.

Trango has many features that VL does not currently offer in addition to
the
extremely important Dual Polarity ability:

(1)  Rx Threshold to maintain full payload capacity in noisy areas
(2)  Far fewer commands that require a reboot
(3)  Much faster reboot
(4)  Dual band 5.3GHz and 5.8GHz in one product
(5)  RSSI reading local and remote side
(6)  Ability to locate noise at AU or SU without interrupting traffic

Considering Alvarion has a tech in the local area I wouldn't expect
anything
less than a free visit.  Scanning the numerous emails between all of
us on
this topic I'm unable to find the offer.  Could you forward me the
exchange
you are referring to?

Trango offered to fly a tech out to us from across the country for
free.
Free is in quotations because I don't believe anything is free...you're
paying for it somewhere in this case by purchasing product. grin

There is more, but it's Sunday and I've got yet another 4 or 5yr old
birthday party to attend!

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 12:34 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Re dual polarity via software, I and others have always said it would be
nice. You've never heard me argue against it and you have heard me
acknowledge that this is Trango's key Trango only differentiator. But
we all understand that and have acknowledged it many times. Lots of
things are nice, some just have higher priority than others. For every 1
thing VL may not have relative to Trango, we can probably find 10 things
VL can do that Trango cannot, each of equal importance maybe to dual
polarity. The ability to do VoIP well would be such a thing. Those with
multipoint networks using Trango or Canopy are entirely stranded in
terms of being able to do VoIP to any reasonable scale. 

Come on Brad. I was personally involved in some of the threads where
I've seen my people (or me) attempt to answer every question you have
had. I know Keith's management has offered to send him out there
numerous times for free. I was pleased to be able to visit to understand
what your customer was wanting to do.
 
By the way, training does not have to be $1,000 a head, as you know. We
offer people to pay for the whole class than they can sell their own
seats for whatever they want. We actually have some customers that use
this as a profit center. Also, respectfully, isn't one's willingness to
get trained a good measure of one's seriousness? And what professional
training have you had for free that was wroth anything?

Patrick

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Belton
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 9:53 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Wow Patrick, I'm surprised of your answer.  I think I've made it
abundantly
clear over the years I'm open source when it comes to equipment and
choose
the best solution for the application

RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-24 Thread Patrick Leary
So what is the onesy-twosy price of a Trango Atlas with an extended
range antenna? What is the price for a Canopy Advantage CPE with
extended range? I have plenty of data I've found, but there seems to be
some wide discrepancy here among you folks.

How about total cost for a Canopy cluster with the BAM, GPS synch, and
other little extra things you need for it to be complete?

Also, I've heard a number of you talk about availability of third party
improvements like it is a benefit of the Canopy system. Seriously, isn't
that more a reflection of the glaring gaps in Canopy that have led smart
WISP entrepreneurs to capitalize?

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 1:13 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

Trango is no where near $400 for Atlas Foxes.  Trango's Atlas Fox's
distance 
without dish is just about the same as the standard Canopy CPE (same DBI

antenna).
Remember that Trango lists retail on their site to protest the WISP.
Low 
volume WISP special pricing is granted to any WISP.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Anthony Will [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 11:17 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs


 Your numbers are a bit off on the canopy and when i looked on the
trango 
 site it looks more in the range of $400 per unit at 30 pack pricing
for 
 trango's.  I believe your getting that price but at what qualities?
 I have a couple hundred in the air and I have Midwest Wireless the 5th

 largest WISP in the country playing in my back yard using Alvarions
junk 
 BA2 system all over the place.  And I also have a local ILEC,
Stonebridge 
 and the remains of Xtratyme all over the rest of my coverage area.  My

 PtmP system is all 900mhz and 2.4 ghz using omni's and I dont have any

 issues with interference.  The longest customer link I have on 900mhz
is 
 18.5 miles and the longest 2.4 link is 12 miles.  I use omni's so that
I 
 dont completely destroy the airwaves for others that are playing in
the 
 same sand box.
 Canopy pricing:
 AP = $898  (Advantage $1554) Single pricing
 CPE = $267 (Advantage $402 ) 25pack pricing  Add $40 a unit for 15
mile 
 range (stinger or beehive dish all FCC certified)
 CPE = $216 (Advantage $324) 100 pack pricing Add $25 a unit for 15
mile 
 range (stinger or beehive dish all FCC certified)

 Anthony Will
 Broadband Corp.


 Travis Johnson wrote:
 Hi,

 I changed the subject line to reflect more the direction of this 
 discussion (Trango vs. Canopy vs. Alvarion)... ;)

 This is just off the top of my head, and I would love to see more
data on 
 any of these radios:

 Trango 5830AP - $1,079 retail
 Dual polarity
 10Mbps (auto up/down ratio)
 Easy management (CLI and web)
 $149 CPE ($199 up to 10 miles)

 Canopy 5.7 AP - $970 (Advantage $1,974)
 C/I advantage
 Fixed up/down ratio
 $490 CPE ($737 advantage)

 Alvarion VL AP - $4,500 (rough retail)
 36Mbps and 40,000pps
 $1,000 CPE

 For whatever it's worth, we have over 2,500 CPE in the air and over
2,000 
 are Trango (900mhz, 2.4ghz, 5.8ghz). The Trango product has worked
very 
 well for us, and we are located on some mountaintop repeater
locations 
 that literally have over 100 antennas (paging, HAM, WISPs, etc.)
within 
 100 yards of each other.

 Our biggest problem is frequency availability at all (regardless of
radio 
 choice)... we have a 2.4ghz AP at a repeater station that is full.
We 
 attempted to install a second sector today and ran a site survey at
this 
 location across the entire 2.4ghz band, the average signals
ranged 
 from -25 to -55 at the best. :(

 Travis
 Microserv

 Jon Langeler wrote:

 Tom, I have nothing to gain or lose by telling you what we've not
only 
 extensivley tested but also experienced over 6 years. We started
using 
 canopy since it began shipping and at least 100 trango SU between 3 
 different towers since beta. I just hate to see fellow wisp protest
that 
 there isn't a good product and struggle when their actually is a
pretty 
 darn good one...and on top of that has an upgrade path in it's
vision, 
 it keeps getting better.

 ARQ does not affect C/I like FEC does for example. When you say ARQ
is 
 fixing any resiliance problems that may be true. But you'll also
suffer 
 from increased latency and less throughput during those
retransmissions. 
 Not good if you want to support VOIP and keep customers happy.
Having a 
 low C/I means the system will be stable more often and maintain a
lower 
 retrans. Trango's ARQ is not even an option in the 5800 model which
is 
 what you and I probably have a decent percentage of in our Trango 
 networks. Having a low C/I requirement affects other things like 
 increases the range of a product

Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-24 Thread Matt Liotta
A quick look at Trango's and Alvarion's data sheets seem to show that 
Alvarion has a higher receive sensitivity, which would seem to confirm 
your statement.


-Matt

Patrick Leary wrote:

There are arguments against dual band support, as we have discussed
before, though you ridicule our sincere reasoning and call it BS (which
is why I am cautious about discussing these things with you in public).

As I said to you, our RD folks tell me that RF components that span a
broad frequency range have poorer performance than those designed for
more narrow frequency ranges. I don't have a Ph.D in EE or other science
disciplines, so I'm not going to argue with them. And as I have further
explained, that poorer edge performance may or may not be worth giving
up to get the benefit of dual band. That part is an economic question,
not a technical one.

At this point, our company has made the decision that the loss in
performance is not worth the benefits. And yes, our RD DO tend to be RF
purists (another thing you ridicule). That reality has its good and bad
points.

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Belton
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 12:24 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Agreed, VL does have more niche features and some of those can be the
sole
reason VL makes the cut and other products do not.  As you know VLAN
support
was the key feature in this particular case, but simply placing a CPE
router
on site will also fill that need.

I'm a believer in the VL product, but there are currently a few too many
basic pitfalls with the product.  If I didn't care I wouldn't be posting
about the VL.  Let's face it this is some of the best exposure a
manufacturer can ask for: users expressing improvements they would like
to
see implemented.

The improvement requests here aren't without merit.  Dual polarity and
dual
band capability are good ideas.  There isn't any argument against it, so
why
not implement it?  I guarantee it will result in additional VL sales.

Trango has many features that VL does not currently offer in addition to
the
extremely important Dual Polarity ability:

(1)  Rx Threshold to maintain full payload capacity in noisy areas
(2)  Far fewer commands that require a reboot
(3)  Much faster reboot
(4)  Dual band 5.3GHz and 5.8GHz in one product
(5)  RSSI reading local and remote side
(6)  Ability to locate noise at AU or SU without interrupting traffic

Considering Alvarion has a tech in the local area I wouldn't expect
anything
less than a free visit.  Scanning the numerous emails between all of
us on
this topic I'm unable to find the offer.  Could you forward me the
exchange
you are referring to?

Trango offered to fly a tech out to us from across the country for
free.
Free is in quotations because I don't believe anything is free...you're
paying for it somewhere in this case by purchasing product. grin

There is more, but it's Sunday and I've got yet another 4 or 5yr old
birthday party to attend!

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 12:34 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Re dual polarity via software, I and others have always said it would be
nice. You've never heard me argue against it and you have heard me
acknowledge that this is Trango's key Trango only differentiator. But
we all understand that and have acknowledged it many times. Lots of
things are nice, some just have higher priority than others. For every 1
thing VL may not have relative to Trango, we can probably find 10 things
VL can do that Trango cannot, each of equal importance maybe to dual
polarity. The ability to do VoIP well would be such a thing. Those with
multipoint networks using Trango or Canopy are entirely stranded in
terms of being able to do VoIP to any reasonable scale. 


Come on Brad. I was personally involved in some of the threads where
I've seen my people (or me) attempt to answer every question you have
had. I know Keith's management has offered to send him out there
numerous times for free. I was pleased to be able to visit to understand
what your customer was wanting to do.
 
By the way, training does not have to be $1,000 a head, as you know. We

offer people to pay for the whole class than they can sell their own
seats for whatever they want. We actually have some customers that use
this as a profit center. Also, respectfully, isn't one's willingness to
get trained a good measure of one's seriousness? And what professional
training have you had for free that was wroth anything?

Patrick

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brad Belton
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 9:53 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-24 Thread Tom DeReggi
Easy to Manage
Smart firmware (but lean to WISP relevent features).
Impossible to misconfigure.
Best VOIP throughput.
Excellent channel to buy from

OEM offers:

Not technically legal
Many headaches (buying, availabilty, configuration and licensing quirks, 
etc)

Less consistent service (WiFi protocols)
Not the best firmware or troubleshooting tools, but.
Unbelievable Price!
Additional RF links from one unit, for just $50. (This is big, saving entire 
radio costs and labor costs, and preventing custom box connection systems 
that are expensive for relaying).
One of these OEM systems will allow a WISP to get to more subscribers 
quicker than any other system on the market. (higher speeds, and avoiding 
NLOS by relaying).


If I were Alvarion, I'd be offering radios with Dual Ethernet ports, and/or 
Dual radios, so WISPs had more flexibilty.  I'd argue that its harder to 
give up the benefits of OEM Flexibility than OEM price, for ambitious 
operators.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Saturday, September 23, 2006 12:10 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs


Trango offers many different CPE (5830, Fox, Fox Atlas, etc.). They have 
listed on their website the Fox Atlas CPE for $149 for a 30 pack pricing. 
This is a 10Mbps radio and with a $30 dish will reach up to 10 miles.


I currently have a 22 mile 900mhz link with Trango (using an omni on the 
AP) and a 30.1 mile link with 2.4ghz Trango (also using an omni).


The quantity discount pricing you have listed is very close to Trango's 
pricing on the 900mhz and 2.4ghz units... except Trango already has a dual 
polarity antenna AND an external antenna connector as part of that price. 
How much does the price go up on the Canopy (Cyclone?) to get the 
connector? Are your guys having to haul two different radios for each 
frequency just in case?


Travis
Microserv

Anthony Will wrote:

Your numbers are a bit off on the canopy and when i looked on the trango 
site it looks more in the range of $400 per unit at 30 pack pricing for 
trango's.  I believe your getting that price but at what qualities?
I have a couple hundred in the air and I have Midwest Wireless the 5th 
largest WISP in the country playing in my back yard using Alvarions junk 
BA2 system all over the place.  And I also have a local ILEC, Stonebridge 
and the remains of Xtratyme all over the rest of my coverage area.  My 
PtmP system is all 900mhz and 2.4 ghz using omni's and I dont have any 
issues with interference.  The longest customer link I have on 900mhz is 
18.5 miles and the longest 2.4 link is 12 miles.  I use omni's so that I 
dont completely destroy the airwaves for others that are playing in the 
same sand box.

Canopy pricing:
AP = $898  (Advantage $1554) Single pricing
CPE = $267 (Advantage $402 ) 25pack pricing  Add $40 a unit for 15 mile 
range (stinger or beehive dish all FCC certified)
CPE = $216 (Advantage $324) 100 pack pricing Add $25 a unit for 15 mile 
range (stinger or beehive dish all FCC certified)


Anthony Will
Broadband Corp.


Travis Johnson wrote:


Hi,

I changed the subject line to reflect more the direction of this 
discussion (Trango vs. Canopy vs. Alvarion)... ;)


This is just off the top of my head, and I would love to see more data 
on any of these radios:


Trango 5830AP - $1,079 retail
Dual polarity
10Mbps (auto up/down ratio)
Easy management (CLI and web)
$149 CPE ($199 up to 10 miles)

Canopy 5.7 AP - $970 (Advantage $1,974)
C/I advantage
Fixed up/down ratio
$490 CPE ($737 advantage)

Alvarion VL AP - $4,500 (rough retail)
36Mbps and 40,000pps
$1,000 CPE

For whatever it's worth, we have over 2,500 CPE in the air and over 
2,000 are Trango (900mhz, 2.4ghz, 5.8ghz). The Trango product has worked 
very well for us, and we are located on some mountaintop repeater 
locations that literally have over 100 antennas (paging, HAM, WISPs, 
etc.) within 100 yards of each other.


Our biggest problem is frequency availability at all (regardless of 
radio choice)... we have a 2.4ghz AP at a repeater station that is 
full. We attempted to install a second sector today and ran a site 
survey at this location across the entire 2.4ghz band, the average 
signals ranged from -25 to -55 at the best. :(


Travis
Microserv

Jon Langeler wrote:

Tom, I have nothing to gain or lose by telling you what we've not only 
extensivley tested but also experienced over 6 years. We started using 
canopy since it began shipping and at least 100 trango SU between 3 
different towers since beta. I just hate to see fellow wisp protest 
that there isn't a good product and struggle when their actually is a 
pretty darn good one...and on top of that has an upgrade path in it's 
vision, it keeps getting better.


ARQ does not affect C/I like FEC does for example. When you say ARQ is 
fixing any resiliance problems that may be true

Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-24 Thread Tom DeReggi

Are you saying that Motorola holds the financing?

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Charles Wu [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Saturday, September 23, 2006 11:18 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs


If you're serving the residential market, and price is the big concern, it's
worth noting that Canopy has a $40 / customer residential rebate program
that's been going on for almost 2 years now

It's also worth noting with Canopy that you need to add ~$10 / unit for
power supplies (they are sold separately)

Regarding pricing

snip
AP = $898  (Advantage $1554) Single pricing
CPE = $267 (Advantage $402 ) 25pack pricing  Add $40 a unit for 15 mile
range (stinger or beehive dish all FCC certified)
CPE = $216 (Advantage $324) 100 pack pricing Add $25 a unit for 15 mile
range (stinger or beehive dish all FCC certified)
/snip

CPE pricing (if you're focusing on residential), should be adjusted to

25 pack:
LITE: $129 NET ($149 - 40 + 10) -- (this is currently a promo that ends
December 31)
Normal: $237 NET ($267 - 40 + 10)

100 pack:
Normal: $186 NET ($216 - $40 + 10)

Additionally, there are companies out there with Motorola Approved 0%
Financing programs that will let you spread your larger pack CPE consumption
over a longer period of time and get you to the next tier bundle pack price,
so you don't tie up important your working capital in inventory / gear

-Charles

---
Operating Manager - CTI
Yes...I'm back

WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.com



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Anthony Will
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 10:17 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs


Your numbers are a bit off on the canopy and when i looked on the trango
site it looks more in the range of $400 per unit at 30 pack pricing for
trango's.  I believe your getting that price but at what qualities?

I have a couple hundred in the air and I have Midwest Wireless the 5th
largest WISP in the country playing in my back yard using Alvarions junk
BA2 system all over the place.  And I also have a local ILEC,
Stonebridge and the remains of Xtratyme all over the rest of my coverage
area.  My PtmP system is all 900mhz and 2.4 ghz using omni's and I dont
have any issues with interference.  The longest customer link I have on
900mhz is 18.5 miles and the longest 2.4 link is 12 miles.  I use omni's
so that I dont completely destroy the airwaves for others that are
playing in the same sand box.

Canopy pricing:
AP = $898  (Advantage $1554) Single pricing
CPE = $267 (Advantage $402 ) 25pack pricing  Add $40 a unit for 15 mile
range (stinger or beehive dish all FCC certified)
CPE = $216 (Advantage $324) 100 pack pricing Add $25 a unit for 15 mile
range (stinger or beehive dish all FCC certified)

Anthony Will
Broadband Corp.


Travis Johnson wrote:

Hi,

I changed the subject line to reflect more the direction of this
discussion (Trango vs. Canopy vs. Alvarion)... ;)

This is just off the top of my head, and I would love to see more data
on any of these radios:

Trango 5830AP - $1,079 retail
Dual polarity
10Mbps (auto up/down ratio)
Easy management (CLI and web)
$149 CPE ($199 up to 10 miles)

Canopy 5.7 AP - $970 (Advantage $1,974)
C/I advantage
Fixed up/down ratio
$490 CPE ($737 advantage)

Alvarion VL AP - $4,500 (rough retail)
36Mbps and 40,000pps
$1,000 CPE

For whatever it's worth, we have over 2,500 CPE in the air and over
2,000 are Trango (900mhz, 2.4ghz, 5.8ghz). The Trango product has
worked very well for us, and we are located on some mountaintop
repeater locations that literally have over 100 antennas (paging, HAM,
WISPs, etc.) within 100 yards of each other.

Our biggest problem is frequency availability at all (regardless of
radio choice)... we have a 2.4ghz AP at a repeater station that is
full. We attempted to install a second sector today and ran a site
survey at this location across the entire 2.4ghz band, the
average signals ranged from -25 to -55 at the best. :(

Travis
Microserv

Jon Langeler wrote:


Tom, I have nothing to gain or lose by telling you what we've not
only extensivley tested but also experienced over 6 years. We started
using canopy since it began shipping and at least 100 trango SU
between 3 different towers since beta. I just hate to see fellow wisp
protest that there isn't a good product and struggle when their
actually is a pretty darn good one...and on top of that has an
upgrade path in it's vision, it keeps getting better.

ARQ does not affect C/I like FEC does for example. When you say ARQ
is fixing any resiliance problems that may be true. But you'll also
suffer from increased latency and less throughput during those
retransmissions. Not good if you want to support VOIP and keep
customers happy. Having a low C/I means the system

Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-24 Thread Tom DeReggi
No it gives you 10 or 10 half duplex, which is a big difference. Symetrical 
does not necessarilly mean at the same time.


Comcast and Verizon use oversubscription the their advantage in marketing, 
we use Half Duplex.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Gino Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Saturday, September 23, 2006 8:07 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs


Advantage AP 14 Mbps will give you 7 / 7 Mbps, and thats at the same time, 
wheres with Trango you can only get 5 /5 ...


Gino

Travis Johnson wrote:


Hi,

Because you will run out of upload capacity and the sector will be 
full. We sell up to 2Mbps connections (2Mbps down and 2Mbps up)... so I 
would have to go to 50/50 split, meaning only 3.5Mbps download 
capacity... compared with 10Mbps for my Trango units.


Travis
Microserv

Gino A. Villarini wrote:


Travis,

WE provide Symetrical Business service with Canopy, why you couldn't ?

A Regular AP has 7 Mbps if you split 75/25 that translates to : 5.25 / 
1.75


Why can you sell a 512/512 over that type of AP split ?

We use Advantage and have 10/4 MBps of capacity.  My biggest Symetrical 
Plan

is 3 Mbps, any other Customer that needs 5 , 6 10 symetrical gets a
dedicated ptp link ...
Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Saturday, September 23, 2006 12:11 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

The biggest reason we use Trango is because we sell our wireless service 
as symmetrical. Even on the residential level, if they purchase 512k 
they get 512k down and 512k up. So, if I use Canopy, I have to do a 
50/50 split, which means even the Advantage product only provides 7Mbps 
of usable bandwidth.


I would estimate 15% of our new signups for wireless are because of the 
symmetrical speed (even though 99% of them never use it). Another 15% 
comes from offering a real static IP address.


Travis
Microserv

Matt Liotta wrote:



Gino A. Villarini wrote:



GPS sync is extra $$.




Of course you can also just string sync cables between radios for free.


True, but this is truly what makes canopy works and you have nice 3rd 
party
options like www.lastmilegear.com and www.packetflux.com for the gps 
sync

units that start @ less than $300 for a 4 port Sync unit




Thanks for the reference to third party sync devices. I am not at all 
happy with the CMM. I looked at the devices from the respective vendors 
you shared. While they do look more in line with our needs than the CMM 
I was wondering if you have seen any third party sync devices that are 
rack mount and can handle 10+ radios. In fact, handling 24 radios would 
be awesome for us.


-Matt






--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.8/455 - Release Date: 9/22/2006




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-24 Thread Patrick Leary
These are good and important questions Tom. I think StarOS and Mikrotik
offer tremendous value for some WISPs, but it really depends. One big
thing it depends on is the operator's exit strategy. Once that money is
spent on a home brew solution, I'm not sure it ever comes back.
BreezeACCESS VL is fully certified and manufactured in ISO-certified
plants and also uses ISO-certified components. I can tell you the MTBF
of VL is: 550,110 hours for the AU/SU ODU, 1,667,502 hours for the AU
IDU, and 169,929 for the SU IDU. 
Money spent on Alvarion is returned by increasing the equity value of
the network and making the network much more valuable to roll-ups. I do
not know anyone with a large homebrew network that was rolled up (I am
sure there are examples, I just don't know 'em). I do know several with
Alvarion networks that have been rolled up.

And even if you do don't want to get rolled up or sold, what is the
lifespan of a home brew solution? Can it carry you forward to additional
services? What's the OPEX environment look like -- is the gear cheap but
the ongoing maintenance and worry offset that? I don't pretend to know
that since I am only anecdotally familiar with what Lonnie's product
offers or what the guys in Latvia can really deliver.
 
Patrick 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 2:00 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

To be fair, you shouldn't leave out OEM products from the discussion 
(Mikrotik / StarOS)
These products are actually competitors to all the lines that were
listed 
herein.

I think the best decission, may be more relevant to what capacity that a

WISP intends to need, and finance ability for the size it intends to
grow.
For example, I believe having the first-in pick of a cell site, will 
guarantee better performance and reliabilty to the subscribers than the
type 
of Radio that is selected.
Thats one of the reasons that we chose Trango, we were able to deploy a
huge 
number of sites cost effectively and reliably with the product, with
limited 
financing and capitol.

Where product justification may come in, is when a WISP scales larger. 
There is a big benefit to be able to deliver 30 mbps to a sector. The
reason 
is that it allow oversubscription to high ARPU subs when doing PtMP.  I
can 
sell 5 mbps speeds and oversubscribe. Thats hard to do on a 10mbps
sector. 
Of course their is the arguement that there is little benefit to having
a 
fast sectors with a limited speed backhaul.  But many WISPs that would 
justify Alvarion, may have fiber at their cell sites or afford Licensed 
backhaul.

The question is, will your market support the higher vision? For
example, if 
we would have chosen Alvarion 5 years ago, we would have bankrupted, as 
their was not enough customer awareness to allow us to make enough sales

quickly enough to cost justify it.  It also depends on roof right fees.
When 
you are paying a premium, it helps to go after higher ARPU and VOIP
services 
to help jsutify the high lease fees.  Its harder to make it work for
just 
data revenue.  If you have good lease deals, this is not an issue.   So
part 
of it is the ratio of antenna lease fee to the capacity of teh radio 
(capcity including amount of voice it can do).

The point I'm making is that the winner is not necessarilly based on the

spec sheet, its based on the business plan.

I'm seeing a clear picture of when and where Alvarion would be the
preferred 
choice, and I see a clear picture of when and where Trango would be the 
clear choice, but I'm having a hard time homing in on any specific case 
where Canopy would be the Clear better choice.

I beleive Canopy, is now an adequate choice for just about any of the 
markets, but where is it the best choice?  Maybe Canopy is the product
that 
offers a good compromise to fit into each of the markets? Advantage
offers a 
lit more speed than Trango in some areas, and a little better cost than 
Alvarion, and although not the lowest or best, it offers affordable
products 
on the low end. I'm sure many Canopy users won't agree with that said 
statement. But considering price, and business plan, not just features, 
where would Canopy fit, as the best product for a specfic need?

About the only thing that I've homed in on would be, a location where 
Horizonatl noise is higher than verticle, and the provider has a large 
number of Verticle systems planned (GPS sync), and is worried about 
interfering with himself, and noise is high enough that C/I is a big 
concern, and the provider may outsource a lot of technical duties, so
wants 
to control high outsourced technical costs by choosing a more consistent

product that has less technical firmware issues?

For that reason, I may see where a large national company Canopy for
their 
lower volume sites, that Alvarion was not cost justified for.

For the record, the specfic cases that I feel trango

RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-24 Thread Patrick Leary








Hi Tom. What hardware features are you
referring to?





Patrick










 
 

This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses(191).







 
 

This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses(43).






 
 

This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses.



-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-24 Thread Gino A. Villarini
Tom,

I can give you some Canopy buying tips off line ...

Also I would like to add that the $150 Trango fox is basically useless with
the Dish, putting its true price to $250 or so ...

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 4:10 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

Gino,

The prices you state seem way low.  I've only see nthat on temporar or Ebay 
type buying.
Is their a CONSISTENT source for $225 and $550 pricing in less than 25 qty?

I believe that anyone that is required to buy in qty higher than 25 to get 
best price is getting overly burdened and likely loosing their savings after

looking at all cash flow costs.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Gino A. Villarini [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 11:05 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs


 Let me comment on this 

 #Canopy 5.7 AP - $970 (Advantage $1,974)

 is this MRSP ? you can buy this the AP for $800 +/- , Advantage for $1500

 #C/I advantage
 #Fixed up/down ratio

 Add GPS Sync, Feature rich firmware, NMS Software, Strong support, Good
 promos, Only Manufacturer to offer price conscious upgrade program, third
 party products (dishes , gps syncs) ect ect ect

 #$490 CPE ($737 advantage) .. yikes with CPE you have 3 options :

 Canopy Lite (1mbps) $170 +/- 25 packs
 Canopy (14 Mbps Burst) $225 +/-
 Canopy Advantage (14 Mbps sustained ) $550 ( way over priced IMHO )



 Gino A. Villarini
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
 tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Travis Johnson
 Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 10:31 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: [WISPA] vendor specs

 Hi,

 I changed the subject line to reflect more the direction of this
 discussion (Trango vs. Canopy vs. Alvarion)... ;)

 This is just off the top of my head, and I would love to see more data
 on any of these radios:

 Trango 5830AP - $1,079 retail
 Dual polarity
 10Mbps (auto up/down ratio)
 Easy management (CLI and web)
 $149 CPE ($199 up to 10 miles)

 Canopy 5.7 AP - $970 (Advantage $1,974)
 C/I advantage
 Fixed up/down ratio
 $490 CPE ($737 advantage)

 Alvarion VL AP - $4,500 (rough retail)
 36Mbps and 40,000pps
 $1,000 CPE

 For whatever it's worth, we have over 2,500 CPE in the air and over
 2,000 are Trango (900mhz, 2.4ghz, 5.8ghz). The Trango product has worked
 very well for us, and we are located on some mountaintop repeater
 locations that literally have over 100 antennas (paging, HAM, WISPs,
 etc.) within 100 yards of each other.

 Our biggest problem is frequency availability at all (regardless of
 radio choice)... we have a 2.4ghz AP at a repeater station that is
 full. We attempted to install a second sector today and ran a site
 survey at this location across the entire 2.4ghz band, the average
 signals ranged from -25 to -55 at the best. :(

 Travis
 Microserv

 Jon Langeler wrote:

 Tom, I have nothing to gain or lose by telling you what we've not only
 extensivley tested but also experienced over 6 years. We started using
 canopy since it began shipping and at least 100 trango SU between 3
 different towers since beta. I just hate to see fellow wisp protest
 that there isn't a good product and struggle when their actually is a
 pretty darn good one...and on top of that has an upgrade path in it's
 vision, it keeps getting better.

 ARQ does not affect C/I like FEC does for example. When you say ARQ is
 fixing any resiliance problems that may be true. But you'll also
 suffer from increased latency and less throughput during those
 retransmissions. Not good if you want to support VOIP and keep
 customers happy. Having a low C/I means the system will be stable more
 often and maintain a lower retrans. Trango's ARQ is not even an option
 in the 5800 model which is what you and I probably have a decent
 percentage of in our Trango networks. Having a low C/I requirement
 affects other things like increases the range of a product. I'm laying
 out facts, you can convince yourself of whatever you want...

 Jon Langeler
 Michwave Tech.

 Tom DeReggi wrote:

 Nice try, but I've found that comment to be not at all true. I have
 often chosen to avoid canopy user's channels, but because I am a good
 WISP neighbor, not because I had to.  Why fight if you can
 cooperate.  On a SPEC sheet Canopy does boast the lowest C/I.  But
 Trango's specified C/I was reported before considering ARQ. And
 Trango has always underspec'd their spec sheets.  C/I is not nearly
 as relevant as SNR resilience anyway. With Arq, we've easilly ran
 links as low as 4 db above the average noise floor, reliably

RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-24 Thread Gino A. Villarini
Tom, Can you achieve a solid link with the Trango Atals Fox for more than 1
mile ?

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 4:13 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

Trango is no where near $400 for Atlas Foxes.  Trango's Atlas Fox's distance

without dish is just about the same as the standard Canopy CPE (same DBI 
antenna).
Remember that Trango lists retail on their site to protest the WISP.  Low 
volume WISP special pricing is granted to any WISP.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Anthony Will [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 11:17 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs


 Your numbers are a bit off on the canopy and when i looked on the trango 
 site it looks more in the range of $400 per unit at 30 pack pricing for 
 trango's.  I believe your getting that price but at what qualities?
 I have a couple hundred in the air and I have Midwest Wireless the 5th 
 largest WISP in the country playing in my back yard using Alvarions junk 
 BA2 system all over the place.  And I also have a local ILEC, Stonebridge 
 and the remains of Xtratyme all over the rest of my coverage area.  My 
 PtmP system is all 900mhz and 2.4 ghz using omni's and I dont have any 
 issues with interference.  The longest customer link I have on 900mhz is 
 18.5 miles and the longest 2.4 link is 12 miles.  I use omni's so that I 
 dont completely destroy the airwaves for others that are playing in the 
 same sand box.
 Canopy pricing:
 AP = $898  (Advantage $1554) Single pricing
 CPE = $267 (Advantage $402 ) 25pack pricing  Add $40 a unit for 15 mile 
 range (stinger or beehive dish all FCC certified)
 CPE = $216 (Advantage $324) 100 pack pricing Add $25 a unit for 15 mile 
 range (stinger or beehive dish all FCC certified)

 Anthony Will
 Broadband Corp.


 Travis Johnson wrote:
 Hi,

 I changed the subject line to reflect more the direction of this 
 discussion (Trango vs. Canopy vs. Alvarion)... ;)

 This is just off the top of my head, and I would love to see more data on

 any of these radios:

 Trango 5830AP - $1,079 retail
 Dual polarity
 10Mbps (auto up/down ratio)
 Easy management (CLI and web)
 $149 CPE ($199 up to 10 miles)

 Canopy 5.7 AP - $970 (Advantage $1,974)
 C/I advantage
 Fixed up/down ratio
 $490 CPE ($737 advantage)

 Alvarion VL AP - $4,500 (rough retail)
 36Mbps and 40,000pps
 $1,000 CPE

 For whatever it's worth, we have over 2,500 CPE in the air and over 2,000

 are Trango (900mhz, 2.4ghz, 5.8ghz). The Trango product has worked very 
 well for us, and we are located on some mountaintop repeater locations 
 that literally have over 100 antennas (paging, HAM, WISPs, etc.) within 
 100 yards of each other.

 Our biggest problem is frequency availability at all (regardless of radio

 choice)... we have a 2.4ghz AP at a repeater station that is full. We 
 attempted to install a second sector today and ran a site survey at this 
 location across the entire 2.4ghz band, the average signals ranged 
 from -25 to -55 at the best. :(

 Travis
 Microserv

 Jon Langeler wrote:

 Tom, I have nothing to gain or lose by telling you what we've not only 
 extensivley tested but also experienced over 6 years. We started using 
 canopy since it began shipping and at least 100 trango SU between 3 
 different towers since beta. I just hate to see fellow wisp protest that

 there isn't a good product and struggle when their actually is a pretty 
 darn good one...and on top of that has an upgrade path in it's vision, 
 it keeps getting better.

 ARQ does not affect C/I like FEC does for example. When you say ARQ is 
 fixing any resiliance problems that may be true. But you'll also suffer 
 from increased latency and less throughput during those retransmissions.

 Not good if you want to support VOIP and keep customers happy. Having a 
 low C/I means the system will be stable more often and maintain a lower 
 retrans. Trango's ARQ is not even an option in the 5800 model which is 
 what you and I probably have a decent percentage of in our Trango 
 networks. Having a low C/I requirement affects other things like 
 increases the range of a product. I'm laying out facts, you can convince

 yourself of whatever you want...

 Jon Langeler
 Michwave Tech.

 Tom DeReggi wrote:

 Nice try, but I've found that comment to be not at all true. I have 
 often chosen to avoid canopy user's channels, but because I am a good 
 WISP neighbor, not because I had to.  Why fight if you can cooperate. 
 On a SPEC sheet Canopy does boast the lowest C/I.  But Trango's 
 specified C/I was reported before considering ARQ. And Trango has 
 always underspec'd their spec sheets.  C/I is not nearly

RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-24 Thread Gino A. Villarini
Trango Atlas CPE with dish  $250?
Canopy with dish $275

Canopy Advantage Cluster:
6 Ap's @ $1500 each = $9k (you can start your pop with a fcc certified omni
unit for $2.7k and evolve to a full sector later)
CMM Micro for Power and Sync = $1.5k *optional
BAM - Prizm = $2k *optional

The CMM Micro is optional component for GPS Sync, you can achieve sync among
the cluster with 10 ft of cat 5 and 6 rj11 connectors

BAM - Prizm is a NMS for Management but is NOT a required component, you can
manage all your settings from the web interface on each unit including
bandwidth and such.  I would only recommend the Prizm NMS for big WISP's
(200+ units )

About the Third Party:

There are a couple on 3rd party improvements for canopy, almost all were
created on a cost savings stand point, Example:

Motorola reflector dish for 10 mile + links $100
Beehive Wireless reflector dish for 10 mile links $49.95 (fcc certified)

Motorola CMM GPS Sync System $1.5k
PacketFLux GPS Sync $300

Any other questions ?

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 4:53 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

So what is the onesy-twosy price of a Trango Atlas with an extended
range antenna? What is the price for a Canopy Advantage CPE with
extended range? I have plenty of data I've found, but there seems to be
some wide discrepancy here among you folks.

How about total cost for a Canopy cluster with the BAM, GPS synch, and
other little extra things you need for it to be complete?

Also, I've heard a number of you talk about availability of third party
improvements like it is a benefit of the Canopy system. Seriously, isn't
that more a reflection of the glaring gaps in Canopy that have led smart
WISP entrepreneurs to capitalize?

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 1:13 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

Trango is no where near $400 for Atlas Foxes.  Trango's Atlas Fox's
distance 
without dish is just about the same as the standard Canopy CPE (same DBI

antenna).
Remember that Trango lists retail on their site to protest the WISP.
Low 
volume WISP special pricing is granted to any WISP.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Anthony Will [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 11:17 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs


 Your numbers are a bit off on the canopy and when i looked on the
trango 
 site it looks more in the range of $400 per unit at 30 pack pricing
for 
 trango's.  I believe your getting that price but at what qualities?
 I have a couple hundred in the air and I have Midwest Wireless the 5th

 largest WISP in the country playing in my back yard using Alvarions
junk 
 BA2 system all over the place.  And I also have a local ILEC,
Stonebridge 
 and the remains of Xtratyme all over the rest of my coverage area.  My

 PtmP system is all 900mhz and 2.4 ghz using omni's and I dont have any

 issues with interference.  The longest customer link I have on 900mhz
is 
 18.5 miles and the longest 2.4 link is 12 miles.  I use omni's so that
I 
 dont completely destroy the airwaves for others that are playing in
the 
 same sand box.
 Canopy pricing:
 AP = $898  (Advantage $1554) Single pricing
 CPE = $267 (Advantage $402 ) 25pack pricing  Add $40 a unit for 15
mile 
 range (stinger or beehive dish all FCC certified)
 CPE = $216 (Advantage $324) 100 pack pricing Add $25 a unit for 15
mile 
 range (stinger or beehive dish all FCC certified)

 Anthony Will
 Broadband Corp.


 Travis Johnson wrote:
 Hi,

 I changed the subject line to reflect more the direction of this 
 discussion (Trango vs. Canopy vs. Alvarion)... ;)

 This is just off the top of my head, and I would love to see more
data on 
 any of these radios:

 Trango 5830AP - $1,079 retail
 Dual polarity
 10Mbps (auto up/down ratio)
 Easy management (CLI and web)
 $149 CPE ($199 up to 10 miles)

 Canopy 5.7 AP - $970 (Advantage $1,974)
 C/I advantage
 Fixed up/down ratio
 $490 CPE ($737 advantage)

 Alvarion VL AP - $4,500 (rough retail)
 36Mbps and 40,000pps
 $1,000 CPE

 For whatever it's worth, we have over 2,500 CPE in the air and over
2,000 
 are Trango (900mhz, 2.4ghz, 5.8ghz). The Trango product has worked
very 
 well for us, and we are located on some mountaintop repeater
locations 
 that literally have over 100 antennas (paging, HAM, WISPs, etc.)
within 
 100 yards of each other.

 Our biggest problem is frequency availability at all (regardless of
radio 
 choice)... we have a 2.4ghz AP at a repeater station

***SPAM*** RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

2006-09-24 Thread Chuck


.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Gino A. Villarini
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 3:44 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

Trango Atlas CPE with dish  $250?
Canopy with dish $275

Canopy Advantage Cluster:
6 Ap's @ $1500 each = $9k (you can start your pop with a fcc certified omni
unit for $2.7k and evolve to a full sector later)
CMM Micro for Power and Sync = $1.5k *optional
BAM - Prizm = $2k *optional

The CMM Micro is optional component for GPS Sync, you can achieve sync among
the cluster with 10 ft of cat 5 and 6 rj11 connectors

BAM - Prizm is a NMS for Management but is NOT a required component, you can
manage all your settings from the web interface on each unit including
bandwidth and such.  I would only recommend the Prizm NMS for big WISP's
(200+ units )

About the Third Party:

There are a couple on 3rd party improvements for canopy, almost all were
created on a cost savings stand point, Example:

Motorola reflector dish for 10 mile + links $100
Beehive Wireless reflector dish for 10 mile links $49.95 (fcc certified)

Motorola CMM GPS Sync System $1.5k
PacketFLux GPS Sync $300

Any other questions ?

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 4:53 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] vendor specs

So what is the onesy-twosy price of a Trango Atlas with an extended
range antenna? What is the price for a Canopy Advantage CPE with
extended range? I have plenty of data I've found, but there seems to be
some wide discrepancy here among you folks.

How about total cost for a Canopy cluster with the BAM, GPS synch, and
other little extra things you need for it to be complete?

Also, I've heard a number of you talk about availability of third party
improvements like it is a benefit of the Canopy system. Seriously, isn't
that more a reflection of the glaring gaps in Canopy that have led smart
WISP entrepreneurs to capitalize?

Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 1:13 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs

Trango is no where near $400 for Atlas Foxes.  Trango's Atlas Fox's
distance 
without dish is just about the same as the standard Canopy CPE (same DBI

antenna).
Remember that Trango lists retail on their site to protest the WISP.
Low 
volume WISP special pricing is granted to any WISP.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Anthony Will [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 11:17 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs


 Your numbers are a bit off on the canopy and when i looked on the
trango 
 site it looks more in the range of $400 per unit at 30 pack pricing
for 
 trango's.  I believe your getting that price but at what qualities?
 I have a couple hundred in the air and I have Midwest Wireless the 5th

 largest WISP in the country playing in my back yard using Alvarions
junk 
 BA2 system all over the place.  And I also have a local ILEC,
Stonebridge 
 and the remains of Xtratyme all over the rest of my coverage area.  My

 PtmP system is all 900mhz and 2.4 ghz using omni's and I dont have any

 issues with interference.  The longest customer link I have on 900mhz
is 
 18.5 miles and the longest 2.4 link is 12 miles.  I use omni's so that
I 
 dont completely destroy the airwaves for others that are playing in
the 
 same sand box.
 Canopy pricing:
 AP = $898  (Advantage $1554) Single pricing
 CPE = $267 (Advantage $402 ) 25pack pricing  Add $40 a unit for 15
mile 
 range (stinger or beehive dish all FCC certified)
 CPE = $216 (Advantage $324) 100 pack pricing Add $25 a unit for 15
mile 
 range (stinger or beehive dish all FCC certified)

 Anthony Will
 Broadband Corp.


 Travis Johnson wrote:
 Hi,

 I changed the subject line to reflect more the direction of this 
 discussion (Trango vs. Canopy vs. Alvarion)... ;)

 This is just off the top of my head, and I would love to see more
data on 
 any of these radios:

 Trango 5830AP - $1,079 retail
 Dual polarity
 10Mbps (auto up/down ratio)
 Easy management (CLI and web)
 $149 CPE ($199 up to 10 miles)

 Canopy 5.7 AP - $970 (Advantage $1,974)
 C/I advantage
 Fixed up/down ratio
 $490 CPE ($737 advantage)

 Alvarion VL AP - $4,500 (rough retail)
 36Mbps and 40,000pps
 $1,000 CPE

 For whatever it's worth, we have over 2,500 CPE in the air and over
2,000 
 are Trango (900mhz, 2.4ghz, 5.8ghz). The Trango product has worked
very 
 well for us, and we are located on some mountaintop repeater
locations 
 that literally

  1   2   >