Here in Atlanta, Metrocom reported that it took 4 times the average number of nodes to provide coverage. Technology has changed a good deal since then, but then again they were also using 900Mhz, which has a lot more success with our pine trees than 2.4Ghz.

-Matt

Brad Larson wrote:

BTW, this is what gets lots of people in trouble. Quoting 16-18 mesh nodes
per square mile may be a correct number in AZ or TX. You may need 3 times
that in my neck of the woods here in NE USA. Even more where interference
shrinks cell sizes. Be cautious John. Brad



-----Original Message-----
From: John J. Thomas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 2:22 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment


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....

John


-----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

Tom,

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" <wireless@wispa.org>
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  www.ask-wi.com



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
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  www.ask-wi.com



--
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/

Reply via email to