Yes, unfortunately, the Cisco mesh is only using 5.8 for backhaul right now. 
Since they recommend 16-18 mesh boxes per square mile, 5.25 GHz and up would be 
a much better choice....


>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jack Unger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 08:41 PM
>To: 'WISPA General List'
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
>You make a very good point that 5.3 GHz should be used wherever possible 
>while reserving 5.8 for longer-distance backhauling and supercell use. 
>We should all be thinking in terms of using 5.3 whenever we can and 
>reserving the higher-power 5.8 authorization for those situations where 
>we really, really need it.
>                            jack
>Tom DeReggi wrote:
>> Or realize that everyone in the world is using the precious 5.8Ghz 
>> spectrum already for long critical links, that are limited to 5.8Ghz for 
>> PtP rule higher SU antenna, or long distance.
>> 5.3Ghz is an ideal backhaul channel for MESH, up to 7 miles (with 2 ft 
>> dish), and avoid the interference headaches.  There is now a HUGE range 
>> of spectrum available at 1 watt, the 5.3G and 5.4Ghz newly allocated 
>> 255Mhzspectrum usable as if this past January.  Design mesh networks to 
>> utilize these many channel options, avoid interference, and don't 
>> destroy the industry by unnecessisarilly using the precious 5.8Ghz.  In 
>> a MESH design its rare to need to go distances longer than 2 miles, all 
>> within the realm of possibility with low power 5.3G and 5.4G and Omnis 
>> and relatively small panel antennas.
>> Likewise, reserve the precious 2.4Ghz for the link to consumer, the 
>> spectrum supported by their laptops.  I hope to see the industry smart 
>> enough to use the new 5.4Ghz for MESH type systems, which is one of the 
>> reasons it was allocated for.
>> One of the most important tasks for WISPs is to conserve the 5.8Ghz 
>> spectrum and only use it when needed.  It is in shortage most compared 
>> to the other ranges. I had hoped and lobbied hard that half of the 
>> 5.4Ghz range would be allowed for higher power and PtP rules, but it had 
>> not. Its still perfect for mesh and OFDM. Don;t be fooled into believing 
>> high power is the secret weapon for mesh, as it is not, LOW power is.  
>> Interference and noise is accumulative and travels for miles around 
>> corners and obstructions, unlike good RSSI and quality signal.  Get 
>> better RSSI in MESH, by Reducing self interference and noise, by using a 
>> wider range of channel selections and lower power.  5.3 and 5.4 gives 
>> you 350Mhz to select channels from, of equal specification/propertied 
>> RF.  Design it into your MESH design.  If you can't transport it in 
>> 1watt, redesign radio install locations and density.  Every single 
>> additional non-inteferring channel selection, drastically logrithmically 
>> increases the odds of getting a non-interfering channel selection.  5.4G 
>> is the best thinng that happened to MESH. Unfortuneately, worthless for 
>> super cell design.  But if MESH embrases 5.4 like it should, it leaves 
>> 5.8Ghz for Super cell.  Otherwise the MESH designer is destined to fail, 
>> because it will become a battle that the Super Cell guy won't be able to 
>> give up on until his death, as he has no other option but the range he 
>> is using.  The mesh provider has options.
>> Tom DeReggi
>> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
>> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jack Unger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: "WISPA General List" <>
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 6:29 PM
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment
>>> Unless you expect to handle only very low levels of traffic, avoid 
>>> mesh nodes with only one radio. Choose nodes that have one radio on 
>>> 2.4 GHz for customer connections and one radio on 5.8 GHz for 
>>> backhauling. In other words, separate the "access" traffic from the 
>>> "backhaul" traffic. Your overall throughput capability will be many 
>>> times greater.
>>> jack
>>> ISPlists wrote:
>>>> Does anyone have a good recommendation on some Mesh equipment.  I 
>>>> have a small town that wants to provide Internet access to the entire 
>>>> town and I'm thinking of using mesh technology.  Any ideas would be 
>>>> great.
>>>>  Thanks,
>>>> Steve
>>> -- 
>>> Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
>>> Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993
>>> Author of the WISP Handbook - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs"
>>> True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting
>>> Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220
>>> -- 
>>> WISPA Wireless List:
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> Archives: 
>Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
>Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993
>Author of the WISP Handbook - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs"
>True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting
>Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220
>WISPA Wireless List:

WISPA Wireless List:



Reply via email to