How much detail do you want? Those not familiar with Alvarion are generally shocked at the level of what can be done in terms of features. Makes Trango and Canopy look like a kindergartener's product. But to be candid, that level of detail is also Achilles' heel.
I'll try to find a way to abbreviate some of the things while still giving examples of the depth of features. Other radios have some of the features, but usually they are much more rudimentary implementations, a good example is CIR/MIR. Read how ours is done and you'll see what I mean. I'll get specific on the next post. 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 Anthony Will Sent: Saturday, September 23, 2006 8:47 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] vendor specs So does anyone out there use the Alvarion VL and willing to give real pricing and feature set? I am interested in how it stacks up for a BH solution. Anthony Will Broadband Crop. 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 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 can't be the last man >>> standing. Its that when the battle happens the customer sees it, and >>> the customer does not tolerate it. IF a Canopy and Trango went to >>> war, one might survive a little better than the other, but >>> ultimately both customers would feel the interference the majority >>> of the time. >>> >>> Tom DeReggi >>> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc >>> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband >> >> -- 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/
