>-----Original Message-----
>From: George [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 07:40 AM
>To: 'WISPA General List'
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] Pioneering Wi-Fi City Sees Startup Woes
>I am doubting that wisps can actually accomadate the muni in most 
>situations, unless they are closely involved with the design of the 
>network, Talking spectrum use here.

First off, the WISPs have to have the guts to talk to the city. Many simply 
refuse to do so, and are probably going to get the Muni WiFi shoved down their 

Second, the cities are mostly going to use 2.4 GHz for access and 5.7-5.8 GHz 
for backhauls. WISP's will need to use 5.25-5.25 GHz and 900 MHz.

>As for going along with free muni wifi, How is a wisp going to operate 
>if a muni is offering for free or at cut rate pricing?

In a word, service. The city will only be offering WiFi access-period. They 
won't be going out to peoples houses and doing installs, fixing virii, doing 
firewalls, etc.

>And how are they going to expand if the spectrum is used up all over the 
>place with unlicensed omni's on every corner.
>Jack Unger wrote:
>> Unfortunately, this may be one of the first of many such muni problems 
>> that I've been forcasting for years. Muni wireless can be done correctly 
>> and WISPs (IMHO) should always try (when allowed) to play a positive 
>> role in proper network design and operation however most muni networks 
>> are incorrectly designed by people with limited wireless experience 
>> (yes, that even includes some mesh network vendors) which will lead to 
>> network failure, waste of taxpayer money, and possible loss of jobs on 
>> the part of the city IT folks (not to mention the elected officials) who 
>> backed the networks without first learning about how wireless technology 
>> really works.
>>               jack
>> George wrote:
>>> I am not a fan of muni wireless.
>>> George
>WISPA Wireless List:

WISPA Wireless List:



Reply via email to