You don't need connectorized backhauls. The sync functionality alone
allows you to densely colocate backhauls. We've had as many as 5
Canopy backhauls mounted within feet of each other all operating on
the same channel.
-Matt
On Jun 16, 2006, at 1:04 PM, Jon Langeler wrote:
It's theoretically possible to engineer up to 8 equally seperated
connectorized Canopy backhauls on a tower using alternating
polarizations and just one channel. Let's just say this is not
something you'll find in the Canopy manual :-)
Jon Langeler
Michwave Tech.
Travis Johnson wrote:
Matt,
How do you fit more than 10-12 of those type of dedicated links on
a single tower?
Travis
Microserv
Matt Liotta wrote:
We rarely use multi-point systems for customers and when we do
they are either small businesses with very little voice and data
needs or they are just data customers. All of our customers with
any significant amount of voice are running on dedicated radios.
I would say our average customer buys 12 lines of voice and
delivering that over a Canopy backhaul works just fine.
-Matt
Patrick Leary wrote:
So you agree then that being able to do VoIP is key. I'd like to
hear more
about your experiences with VoIP. Is your solution actually
doing it well or
is that your idea of doing VoIP well is 8 only concurrent calls
per sector
so long as the quality is decent for those few calls? We have
talked to many
very users of other common 5GHz brands these past few week and
we have been
consistently told that performance is just dandy until you bump
up against 8
calls. That is a less than 50 call per cell limit, which does
not seem like
enough to justify the investments needed on the NOC end for the
softswitch.
How do you define good VoIP performance Matt?
Patrick Leary
AVP Marketing
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243
-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Liotta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June
16, 2006 6:47 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] OT: about 70Mbps for under $6K
Patrick Leary wrote:
Matt, to further your comments that you see WISPs providing
layer 2
transort
for carriers.
We have multiple CLECs and non-CLECs buying layer 2 transport
from us now. All are used to buy alternative access from fiber
providers and therefore fixed wireless was a naturally next
step. Further, almost all indicated they would have done it
sooner, but the fixed wireless companies they approached weren't
willing to offer them layer 2 transport.
How about VoIP? How many of you consider VoIP to be an
important part of your service future as a WISP? If so, how do
you plan to
support since it cannot be done decently with the other popular
5GHz
solutions. That's not my opinion so much as the opinion of many
larger
Trango and Motorola WISPs I have been talking to lately.
We are doing a significant amount of VoIP now. We have VoIP
customers running on top of both Trango and Canopy radios.
Canopy is a significantly better solution for VoIP since we can
properly prioritize voice with Canopy, while we cannot with
Trango. We also wholesale VoIP to other operators and help them
--if they require it-- with getting their network ready to
support VoIP.
If a key goal of WISPs is growing ARPU, what are WISPs plans
for doing that
with whatever your current technology permits?
I believe VoIP is the number one way to grow ARPU and the fact
that we bundle VoIP is why I believe we have one of the highest
ARPUs in the industry.
-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/
