We should all be complaining, vociferously, about LTE-U. I've seen the tests and as it exists today LTE-U completely creams WiFi and is only usable by someone who owns a LTE license. WiFi APs will cohabitate fairly well, even if they share the same channel, because WiFi is a listen before transmitting protocol. LTE and LTE-U is a centrally scheduled protocol and doesn't have a back off mechanism. Scott Helms Vice President of Technology ZCorum (678) 507-5000 -------------------------------- http://twitter.com/kscotthelms -------------------------------- On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Yury Shefer <shefys@gmail.com> wrote:
And the same guys (NCTA) complain about LTE-U - how dangerous it is for their s/business/WiFi
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/08/verizon-and-t-mobile-j...
On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 8:00 AM, Scott Helms <khelms@zcorum.com> wrote:
This sounds like a hypothetical complaint, AFAIK none of the members of the CableWiFi consortium are deploying APs outside of their footprint. Since most of the APs use a cable modem for their backhaul it's not really feasible to be without at least one broadband option (the cable MSO) and be impaired by the CableWiFi APs.
Now, there is one potential exception to this I'm aware of which is Comcast's Xfinity on Campus service, but I'd expect the number of colleges they're servicing that aren't already getting cable broadband service to approach zero.
http://www.philly.com/philly/business/20150909_Comcast_streams_onto_college_...
https://xfinityoncampus.com/login
Having said all of that, I'd agree that a good radio resource management approach would benefit all of us, including the CableWiFi guys.
http://www.cablelabs.com/wi-fi-radio-resource-management-rrm/
Scott Helms Vice President of Technology ZCorum (678) 507-5000 -------------------------------- http://twitter.com/kscotthelms --------------------------------
On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 10:52 AM, Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net> wrote:
On Sep 10, 2015, at 9:00 AM, Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net> wrote:
5 GHz noise levels affecting people whose primary means of Internet access is via fixed wireless .
This is a huge deal for those people like myself that depend on fixed wireless for access at home because there is no broadband available
incentives given by cities and states and the federal government.
The local WISPs are good at coordinating access in these ISM bands amongst themselves but when someone appears with a SSID without doing a peek at
despite the
spectrum (note: not a site survey, but actual spectrum view w/ waterfall, as site survey only checks for the channel width that the client radio is configured for, not al the 10, 15, 8, 30mhz wide variants).
It’s just poor practice to show up and break something else because you can’t be bothered to notice the interference or noise floor you created. I suspect the hardware that Comcast is using doesn’t notice this interference or adjacent channel issues. With the FCC aiming to let cell carriers also clog the 5ghz ISM band it’s only going to get worse.
- Jared
-- Best regards, Yury.