There are Comcast people on the list who may have more info, but it’s just expansion of their WiFi hotspot network and part of the CableWifi consortium. http://www.cablewifi.com, or you can go to http://wifi.xfinity.com to see Comcast’s specific deployment. Cable companies have thousands of strand-mount Wifi APs deployed at this point. Phil -----Original Message----- From: NANOG on behalf of "Michael T. Voity" Organization: University of Vermont and State Agricultural College Date: Wednesday, September 9, 2015 at 21:52 To: <nanog@nanog.org> Subject: Re: WiFI on utility poles

Sorry folks, attachment didn't work. Here is the link -

https://www.uvm.edu/~mvoity/pole.JPG

-Mike

Michael Voity University of Vermont

On 9/9/15 9:24 PM, Michael T. Voity wrote:

...

Hello,

Today another colleague and I discovered the famous 'xfinitywifi' ,'CableWIFi', 'CoxWiFi' and a new one 'XFINITY' on our University campus. After doing some poking around on campus we found these gems (attached picture) on 2 utility poles that pass by our east campus. Standing underneath it I got a -46 RSSI in both 5 and 2.4Ghz, maybe 75-100 yards away inside our hockey fieldhouse, through lots of brick, cinder blocks and metal, I was still picking the 2.4Ghz at -64.

Looks like the unit is getting power from the coax.

My question is, I've done a little poking around and have not found anything substantial to learn more information about this Comcast program.

Any insight would be nice!

Michael Voity University of Vermont

Usually terribly placed, like a shotgun blast instead of strategic locations. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Lyon" <mike.lyon@gmail.com> To: "Phil Bedard" <bedard.phil@gmail.com> Cc: "NANOG" <nanog@nanog.org> Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2015 9:23:46 PM Subject: Re: WiFI on utility poles And they are as annoying as f*&k! and litter the already noisy 5 Ghz unlicensed band, Hopefully, the sun will fry them dead over time. -Mike On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 7:19 PM, Phil Bedard <bedard.phil@gmail.com> wrote:

There are Comcast people on the list who may have more info, but it’s just expansion of their WiFi hotspot network and part of the CableWifi consortium. http://www.cablewifi.com, or you can go to http://wifi.xfinity.com to see Comcast’s specific deployment.

Cable companies have thousands of strand-mount Wifi APs deployed at this point.

Phil

-----Original Message----- From: NANOG on behalf of "Michael T. Voity" Organization: University of Vermont and State Agricultural College Date: Wednesday, September 9, 2015 at 21:52 To: <nanog@nanog.org> Subject: Re: WiFI on utility poles

...

Sorry folks, attachment didn't work. Here is the link -

https://www.uvm.edu/~mvoity/pole.JPG

-Mike

Michael Voity University of Vermont

...

Hello,

Today another colleague and I discovered the famous 'xfinitywifi' ,'CableWIFi', 'CoxWiFi' and a new one 'XFINITY' on our University campus. After doing some poking around on campus we found these gems (attached

On 9/9/15 9:24 PM, Michael T. Voity wrote: picture) on 2 utility poles that pass by our east campus. Standing underneath it I got a -46 RSSI in both 5 and 2.4Ghz, maybe 75-100 yards away inside our hockey fieldhouse, through lots of brick, cinder blocks and metal, I was still picking the 2.4Ghz at -64.

...

Looks like the unit is getting power from the coax.

My question is, I've done a little poking around and have not found

anything substantial to learn more information about this Comcast program.

...

Any insight would be nice!

Michael Voity University of Vermont

-- Mike Lyon 408-621-4826 mike.lyon@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlyon

My issue with the "free" wifi that comcast is forcing into our homes and businesses is that it's also interfering with our own access points in the same building! - Michael On 9/10/2015 7:56 AM, Livingood, Jason wrote:

If you run across any you think are terribly placed, feel free to email Corey and Ken with the location and your thoughts on better placement.

- Jason

On 9/9/15, 10:31 PM, "NANOG on behalf of Mike Hammett" <nanog-bounces@nanog.org on behalf of nanog@ics-il.net> wrote:

...

Usually terribly placed, like a shotgun blast instead of strategic locations.

----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com

Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com

----- Original Message -----

From: "Mike Lyon" <mike.lyon@gmail.com> To: "Phil Bedard" <bedard.phil@gmail.com> Cc: "NANOG" <nanog@nanog.org> Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2015 9:23:46 PM Subject: Re: WiFI on utility poles

And they are as annoying as f*&k! and litter the already noisy 5 Ghz unlicensed band, Hopefully, the sun will fry them dead over time.

-Mike

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 7:19 PM, Phil Bedard <bedard.phil@gmail.com> wrote:

...

There are Comcast people on the list who may have more info, but it¹s just expansion of their WiFi hotspot network and part of the CableWifi consortium. http://www.cablewifi.com, or you can go to http://wifi.xfinity.com to see Comcast¹s specific deployment.

Cable companies have thousands of strand-mount Wifi APs deployed at this point.

Phil

-----Original Message----- From: NANOG on behalf of "Michael T. Voity" Organization: University of Vermont and State Agricultural College Date: Wednesday, September 9, 2015 at 21:52 To: <nanog@nanog.org> Subject: Re: WiFI on utility poles

...

Sorry folks, attachment didn't work. Here is the link -

https://www.uvm.edu/~mvoity/pole.JPG

-Mike

Michael Voity University of Vermont

...

Hello,

Today another colleague and I discovered the famous 'xfinitywifi' ,'CableWIFi', 'CoxWiFi' and a new one 'XFINITY' on our University campus. After doing some poking around on campus we found these gems (attached

On 9/9/15 9:24 PM, Michael T. Voity wrote: picture) on 2 utility poles that pass by our east campus. Standing underneath it I got a -46 RSSI in both 5 and 2.4Ghz, maybe 75-100 yards away inside our hockey fieldhouse, through lots of brick, cinder blocks and metal, I was still picking the 2.4Ghz at -64.

...

Looks like the unit is getting power from the coax.

My question is, I've done a little poking around and have not found

anything substantial to learn more information about this Comcast program.

...

Any insight would be nice!

Michael Voity University of Vermont

-- Mike Lyon 408-621-4826 mike.lyon@gmail.com

http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlyon

On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 4:22 PM, Mike Lyon <mike.lyon@gmail.com> wrote:

And it's not free, unless you are a Comcast or TW customer :(

But it is free to the children of C&TW customers who then can watch HD content while away at Uni without sapping the EDU bandwidth. -Jim P.

On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 4:53 PM, Hunter Fuller <hf0002+nanog@uah.edu> wrote:

Ehh... All that content is going over Internet2 for us anyway.

I'm genuinely curious, is that is optimized for HD delivery from TW and C, or such services as Netflix/YouTube, etc. -Jim P.

On Sep 10, 2015, at 1:47 PM, Michael Englehorn <michael@englehorn.com> wrote:

My issue with the "free" wifi that comcast is forcing into our homes and businesses is that it's also interfering with our own access points in the same building!

[resending due to hitting limit on file size to nanog list] This is the biggest problem I’ve seen regarding this. If you care about 5ghz please provide feedback about the LTE-U stuff and encourage the cablewifi, wayport, etc to do a proper listen-before-use similar to what is required with DFS to avoid interference. Here’s a sample of what a spectrum might look like: http://puck.nether.net/~jared/airview_20150910_210354.png and http://puck.nether.net/~jared/airview_20150910_211313.png You can clearly see things at the various frequencies but without looking at the waveform you may not see the 40mhz user and where their center frequency is. If they are just sending beacons it may look different. A “site survey” isn’t a spectrum view as your receiver may not understand what is going on. This is the UBNT 5ghz AC radio which is quite handy, but it as it’s an 802.11 device it may not see other things that use the ISM band and aren’t 802.11 based. These do exist, eg: mimosa b5, af-5/af-5x. These may use different frequencies for TX vs RX as well. Either way, I figure this is interesting enough to share if you aren’t doing WISP stuff or looking at spectrum often. - Jared

In article <CAFFgAjBKRQAiyvci0qW=R8F=7VgpDyjSQTxPWTr7=f7HQhM+XQ@mail.gmail.com> you write:

And they are as annoying as f*&k! and litter the already noisy 5 Ghz unlicensed band, Hopefully, the sun will fry them dead over time.

The placement may be suboptimal, but free wifi away from home is nice. CableWifi really is a consortium, T-W customers can use Comcast's hotspots and vice versa.

On Sep 9, 2015, at 11:13 PM, John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> wrote:

The placement may be suboptimal, but free wifi away from home is nice. CableWifi really is a consortium, T-W customers can use Comcast's hotspots and vice versa.

If it were truly free and open access I’d be more tolerant of them stomping on my signal, but you have to be a CableCo customer in order to use it. The truly sucky thing about TWC’s deployment is that they are also installing it in restaurants, bars, and similar venues—sometimes displacing the open access setup that was already there. They conveniently forget to tell the owner/manager that it’s not really free access. —Chris (Who spent many hours helping restaurants, bars, and similar venues in the Austin area set up guest wireless networks.)

Sabotaging how? - Jason On 9/9/15, 10:20 PM, "NANOG on behalf of Hunter Fuller" <nanog-bounces@nanog.org on behalf of hf0002+nanog@uah.edu> wrote:

Wow, it is like they are actively sabotaging us. Sigh...

None of that in this area yet - I'm sure it's only a matter of time though.

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 8:52 PM, Michael T. Voity <mvoity@uvm.edu> wrote:

...

Sorry folks, attachment didn't work. Here is the link -

https://www.uvm.edu/~mvoity/pole.JPG

-Mike

Michael Voity University of Vermont

On 9/9/15 9:24 PM, Michael T. Voity wrote:

...

Hello,

Today another colleague and I discovered the famous 'xfinitywifi' ,'CableWIFi', 'CoxWiFi' and a new one 'XFINITY' on our University campus. After doing some poking around on campus we found these gems (attached picture) on 2 utility poles that pass by our east campus. Standing underneath it I got a -46 RSSI in both 5 and 2.4Ghz, maybe 75-100 yards away inside our hockey fieldhouse, through lots of brick, cinder blocks and metal, I was still picking the 2.4Ghz at -64.

Looks like the unit is getting power from the coax.

My question is, I've done a little poking around and have not found anything substantial to learn more information about this Comcast program.

Any insight would be nice!

Michael Voity University of Vermont

And how do you propose we solve this? On Sep 10, 2015 9:06 AM, "Mike Hammett" <nanog@ics-il.net> wrote:

5 GHz noise levels affecting people whose primary means of Internet access is via fixed wireless .

----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com

Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com

----- Original Message -----

From: "Jason Livingood" <Jason_Livingood@cable.comcast.com> To: "Hunter Fuller" <hf0002+nanog@uah.edu> Cc: "Corey Petrulich" <Corey_Petrulich@cable.comcast.com>, "Kenneth Falkenstein" <Ken_Falkenstein@Cable.Comcast.com>, nanog@nanog.org Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2015 7:54:56 AM Subject: Re: WiFI on utility poles

Sabotaging how?

- Jason

On 9/9/15, 10:20 PM, "NANOG on behalf of Hunter Fuller" <nanog-bounces@nanog.org on behalf of hf0002+nanog@uah.edu> wrote:

...

Wow, it is like they are actively sabotaging us. Sigh...

None of that in this area yet - I'm sure it's only a matter of time though.

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 8:52 PM, Michael T. Voity <mvoity@uvm.edu> wrote:

...

Sorry folks, attachment didn't work. Here is the link -

https://www.uvm.edu/~mvoity/pole.JPG

-Mike

Michael Voity University of Vermont

On 9/9/15 9:24 PM, Michael T. Voity wrote:

...

Hello,

Today another colleague and I discovered the famous 'xfinitywifi' ,'CableWIFi', 'CoxWiFi' and a new one 'XFINITY' on our University campus. After doing some poking around on campus we found these gems (attached picture) on 2 utility poles that pass by our east campus. Standing underneath it I got a -46 RSSI in both 5 and 2.4Ghz, maybe 75-100 yards away inside our hockey fieldhouse, through lots of brick, cinder blocks and metal, I was still picking the 2.4Ghz at -64.

Looks like the unit is getting power from the coax.

My question is, I've done a little poking around and have not found anything substantial to learn more information about this Comcast program.

Any insight would be nice!

Michael Voity University of Vermont

So we should limit our public use of the 5ghz spectrum so that others can use it? How about we use licensed spectrum for fixed wireless services. On Sep 10, 2015 9:13 AM, "Matt Hoppes" <mhoppes@indigowireless.com> wrote:

Use 2GHz instead of 5GHz for the outdoor WiFi plants?

On 9/10/15 9:09 AM, Shane Ronan wrote:

...

And how do you propose we solve this? On Sep 10, 2015 9:06 AM, "Mike Hammett" <nanog@ics-il.net> wrote:

5 GHz noise levels affecting people whose primary means of Internet access

...

is via fixed wireless .

----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com

Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com

----- Original Message -----

From: "Jason Livingood" <Jason_Livingood@cable.comcast.com> To: "Hunter Fuller" <hf0002+nanog@uah.edu> Cc: "Corey Petrulich" <Corey_Petrulich@cable.comcast.com>, "Kenneth Falkenstein" <Ken_Falkenstein@Cable.Comcast.com>, nanog@nanog.org Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2015 7:54:56 AM Subject: Re: WiFI on utility poles

Sabotaging how?

- Jason

On 9/9/15, 10:20 PM, "NANOG on behalf of Hunter Fuller" <nanog-bounces@nanog.org on behalf of hf0002+nanog@uah.edu> wrote:

Wow, it is like they are actively sabotaging us. Sigh...

...

None of that in this area yet - I'm sure it's only a matter of time though.

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 8:52 PM, Michael T. Voity <mvoity@uvm.edu> wrote:

...

Sorry folks, attachment didn't work. Here is the link -

https://www.uvm.edu/~mvoity/pole.JPG

-Mike

Michael Voity University of Vermont

On 9/9/15 9:24 PM, Michael T. Voity wrote:

...

Hello,

Today another colleague and I discovered the famous 'xfinitywifi' ,'CableWIFi', 'CoxWiFi' and a new one 'XFINITY' on our University campus. After doing some poking around on campus we found these gems (attached picture) on 2 utility poles that pass by our east campus. Standing underneath it I got a -46 RSSI in both 5 and 2.4Ghz, maybe 75-100 yards away inside our hockey fieldhouse, through lots of brick, cinder blocks and metal, I was still picking the 2.4Ghz at -64.

Looks like the unit is getting power from the coax.

My question is, I've done a little poking around and have not found anything substantial to learn more information about this Comcast program.

Any insight would be nice!

Michael Voity University of Vermont

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 despite 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 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

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.

The tower-deployed AP can see the cable wireless APs for miles and can see a few dozen of them at any one time. Given the goal of full modulation at all times for optimal use of spectrum and dollars, the ever increasing noise from the cable APs makes this a challenge. You need 25 to 30 dB to maintain full modulation and that's increasingly difficult when you hear cable APs everywhere at -70. The APs can't have narrow radiation patterns given that they need to cover a roughly 90* area of where the customers are. An 18 to 20 dB gain sector antenna will pick up those cable radios from pretty far away. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott Helms" <khelms@zcorum.com> To: "Jared Mauch" <jared@puck.nether.net> Cc: "Mike Hammett" <nanog@ics-il.net>, "Corey Petrulich" <Corey_Petrulich@cable.comcast.com>, "Kenneth Falkenstein" <Ken_Falkenstein@cable.comcast.com>, "NANOG mailing list" <nanog@nanog.org> Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2015 10:00:41 AM Subject: Re: WiFI on utility poles 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 despite 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 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

Really Comcast? Your spam software SUCKS ASS! For those interested, the word that violated their spam software was "damn" -Mike ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- This email has violated the PROFANITY. and Pass has been taken on 9/10/2015 1:34:19 PM. Message details: Server: BUPMEXCASHUB2 Sender: mike.lyon@gmail.com; Recipient: nanog@ics-il.net;Corey_Petrulich@cable.comcast.com; Ken_Falkenstein@cable.comcast.com;nanog@nanog.org; Subject: Re: WiFI on utility poles The information in this message, including in all attachments, is confidential or privileged. In the event you have received this message in error and are not the intended recipient, you are hereby advised that any use, copying or reproduction of this document is strictly forbidden. Please notify immediately the sender of this error and destroy this message, including its attachments, as the case may be. </P> L'information apparaissant dans ce message electronique et dans les documents qui y sont joints est de nature confidentielle ou privilegiee. Si ce message vous est parvenu par erreur et que vous n'en etes pas le destinataire vise, vous etes par les presentes avise que toute utilisation, copie ou distribution de ce message est strictement interdite. Vous etes donc prie d’en informer immediatement l’expediteur et de detruire ce message, ainsi que les documents qui y sont joints, le cas echeant. On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Mike Lyon <mike.lyon@gmail.com> wrote:

A few dozen? Damn, you are lucy, Mike!

I did an install the other day, a good 60-70 XfinityWifi SSIDs popped up.

Reminds me of the Good 'Ole CB days back in the 80's where everyone talked over each other and played background music and such...

That's a big 10-4 and I got a Smokey on my trail!

-Mike

On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 10:15 AM, Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net> wrote:

...

The tower-deployed AP can see the cable wireless APs for miles and can see a few dozen of them at any one time. Given the goal of full modulation at all times for optimal use of spectrum and dollars, the ever increasing noise from the cable APs makes this a challenge. You need 25 to 30 dB to maintain full modulation and that's increasingly difficult when you hear cable APs everywhere at -70.

The APs can't have narrow radiation patterns given that they need to cover a roughly 90* area of where the customers are. An 18 to 20 dB gain sector antenna will pick up those cable radios from pretty far away.

----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com

Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com

----- Original Message -----

From: "Scott Helms" <khelms@zcorum.com> To: "Jared Mauch" <jared@puck.nether.net> Cc: "Mike Hammett" <nanog@ics-il.net>, "Corey Petrulich" < Corey_Petrulich@cable.comcast.com>, "Kenneth Falkenstein" < Ken_Falkenstein@cable.comcast.com>, "NANOG mailing list" <nanog@nanog.org

...

Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2015 10:00:41 AM Subject: Re: WiFI on utility poles

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 despite 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 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

-- Mike Lyon 408-621-4826 mike.lyon@gmail.com

http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlyon

-- Mike Lyon 408-621-4826 mike.lyon@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlyon

It's either Mike, Comcast or the NANOG list, so it's probably a safe bet. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Livingood, Jason < Jason_Livingood@cable.comcast.com> wrote:

Odd - I got the email fine. The bound message you got also is in French, which would not seem like something our email servers would do. Are you sure that was from our servers? I¹d love to see the mail headers so I can talk to the enterprise mail team.

Jason

On 9/10/15, 1:37 PM, "NANOG on behalf of Mike Lyon" <nanog-bounces@nanog.org on behalf of mike.lyon@gmail.com> wrote:

...

Really Comcast? Your spam software SUCKS ASS!

For those interested, the word that violated their spam software was "damn"

-Mike

-------------------------------------------------------------------------- --

This email has violated the PROFANITY. and Pass has been taken on 9/10/2015 1:34:19 PM. Message details: Server: BUPMEXCASHUB2 Sender: mike.lyon@gmail.com; Recipient: nanog@ics-il.net;Corey_Petrulich@cable.comcast.com; Ken_Falkenstein@cable.comcast.com;nanog@nanog.org; Subject: Re: WiFI on utility poles

The information in this message, including in all attachments, is confidential or privileged. In the event you have received this message in error and are not the intended recipient, you are hereby advised that any use, copying or reproduction of this document is strictly forbidden. Please notify immediately the sender of this error and destroy this message, including its attachments, as the case may be. </P> L'information apparaissant dans ce message electronique et dans les documents qui y sont joints est de nature confidentielle ou privilegiee. Si ce message vous est parvenu par erreur et que vous n'en etes pas le destinataire vise, vous etes par les presentes avise que toute utilisation, copie ou distribution de ce message est strictement interdite. Vous etes donc prie d¹en informer immediatement l¹expediteur et de detruire ce message, ainsi que les documents qui y sont joints, le cas echeant.

On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Mike Lyon <mike.lyon@gmail.com> wrote:

...

A few dozen? Damn, you are lucy, Mike!

I did an install the other day, a good 60-70 XfinityWifi SSIDs popped up.

Reminds me of the Good 'Ole CB days back in the 80's where everyone talked over each other and played background music and such...

That's a big 10-4 and I got a Smokey on my trail!

-Mike

On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 10:15 AM, Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net> wrote:

...

The tower-deployed AP can see the cable wireless APs for miles and can see a few dozen of them at any one time. Given the goal of full modulation at all times for optimal use of spectrum and dollars, the ever increasing noise from the cable APs makes this a challenge. You need 25 to 30 dB to maintain full modulation and that's increasingly difficult when you hear cable APs everywhere at -70.

The APs can't have narrow radiation patterns given that they need to cover a roughly 90* area of where the customers are. An 18 to 20 dB gain sector antenna will pick up those cable radios from pretty far away.

----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com

Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com

----- Original Message -----

From: "Scott Helms" <khelms@zcorum.com> To: "Jared Mauch" <jared@puck.nether.net> Cc: "Mike Hammett" <nanog@ics-il.net>, "Corey Petrulich" < Corey_Petrulich@cable.comcast.com>, "Kenneth Falkenstein" < Ken_Falkenstein@cable.comcast.com>, "NANOG mailing list" <nanog@nanog.org

...

Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2015 10:00:41 AM Subject: Re: WiFI on utility poles

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_coll

...

ege_campuses.html

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 despite 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 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).

It¹s just poor practice to show up and break something else because you can¹t be bothered to notice the interference or noise floor you created. I suspect the hardware that Comcast is using doesn¹t notice this interference or adjacent channel issues. With the FCC aiming to let cell carriers also clog the 5ghz ISM band it¹s only going to get worse.

- Jared

-- Mike Lyon 408-621-4826 mike.lyon@gmail.com

http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlyon

-- Mike Lyon 408-621-4826 mike.lyon@gmail.com

http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlyon

My apologies, Comcast, I have an itchy trigger finger A little googling indicates that the mail server that was listed on that bounced email is a COGENT email server, not Comcast, My apologies for that. -Mike On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 10:37 AM, Mike Lyon <mike.lyon@gmail.com> wrote:

Really Comcast? Your spam software SUCKS ASS!

For those interested, the word that violated their spam software was "damn"

-Mike

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

This email has violated the PROFANITY. and Pass has been taken on 9/10/2015 1:34:19 PM. Message details: Server: BUPMEXCASHUB2 Sender: mike.lyon@gmail.com; Recipient: nanog@ics-il.net;Corey_Petrulich@cable.comcast.com; Ken_Falkenstein@cable.comcast.com;nanog@nanog.org; Subject: Re: WiFI on utility poles

The information in this message, including in all attachments, is confidential or privileged. In the event you have received this message in error and are not the intended recipient, you are hereby advised that any use, copying or reproduction of this document is strictly forbidden. Please notify immediately the sender of this error and destroy this message, including its attachments, as the case may be. </P> L'information apparaissant dans ce message electronique et dans les documents qui y sont joints est de nature confidentielle ou privilegiee. Si ce message vous est parvenu par erreur et que vous n'en etes pas le destinataire vise, vous etes par les presentes avise que toute utilisation, copie ou distribution de ce message est strictement interdite. Vous etes donc prie d’en informer immediatement l’expediteur et de detruire ce message, ainsi que les documents qui y sont joints, le cas echeant.

On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Mike Lyon <mike.lyon@gmail.com> wrote:

...

A few dozen? Damn, you are lucy, Mike!

I did an install the other day, a good 60-70 XfinityWifi SSIDs popped up.

Reminds me of the Good 'Ole CB days back in the 80's where everyone talked over each other and played background music and such...

That's a big 10-4 and I got a Smokey on my trail!

-Mike

On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 10:15 AM, Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net> wrote:

...

The tower-deployed AP can see the cable wireless APs for miles and can see a few dozen of them at any one time. Given the goal of full modulation at all times for optimal use of spectrum and dollars, the ever increasing noise from the cable APs makes this a challenge. You need 25 to 30 dB to maintain full modulation and that's increasingly difficult when you hear cable APs everywhere at -70.

The APs can't have narrow radiation patterns given that they need to cover a roughly 90* area of where the customers are. An 18 to 20 dB gain sector antenna will pick up those cable radios from pretty far away.

----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com

Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com

----- Original Message -----

From: "Scott Helms" <khelms@zcorum.com> To: "Jared Mauch" <jared@puck.nether.net> Cc: "Mike Hammett" <nanog@ics-il.net>, "Corey Petrulich" < Corey_Petrulich@cable.comcast.com>, "Kenneth Falkenstein" < Ken_Falkenstein@cable.comcast.com>, "NANOG mailing list" < nanog@nanog.org> Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2015 10:00:41 AM Subject: Re: WiFI on utility poles

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 despite 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 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

-- Mike Lyon 408-621-4826 mike.lyon@gmail.com

http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlyon

-- Mike Lyon 408-621-4826 mike.lyon@gmail.com

http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlyon

-- Mike Lyon 408-621-4826 mike.lyon@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlyon

Always getting blamed for Cogent stuff, no worries. ;-) - JL On 9/10/15, 2:23 PM, "NANOG on behalf of Mike Lyon" <nanog-bounces@nanog.org on behalf of mike.lyon@gmail.com> wrote:

My apologies, Comcast, I have an itchy trigger finger

A little googling indicates that the mail server that was listed on that bounced email is a COGENT email server, not Comcast,

My apologies for that.

-Mike

On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 10:37 AM, Mike Lyon <mike.lyon@gmail.com> wrote:

...

Really Comcast? Your spam software SUCKS ASS!

For those interested, the word that violated their spam software was "damn"

-Mike

------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---

This email has violated the PROFANITY. and Pass has been taken on 9/10/2015 1:34:19 PM. Message details: Server: BUPMEXCASHUB2 Sender: mike.lyon@gmail.com; Recipient: nanog@ics-il.net;Corey_Petrulich@cable.comcast.com; Ken_Falkenstein@cable.comcast.com;nanog@nanog.org; Subject: Re: WiFI on utility poles

The information in this message, including in all attachments, is confidential or privileged. In the event you have received this message in error and are not the intended recipient, you are hereby advised that any use, copying or reproduction of this document is strictly forbidden. Please notify immediately the sender of this error and destroy this message, including its attachments, as the case may be. </P> L'information apparaissant dans ce message electronique et dans les documents qui y sont joints est de nature confidentielle ou privilegiee. Si ce message vous est parvenu par erreur et que vous n'en etes pas le destinataire vise, vous etes par les presentes avise que toute utilisation, copie ou distribution de ce message est strictement interdite. Vous etes donc prie d¹en informer immediatement l¹expediteur et de detruire ce message, ainsi que les documents qui y sont joints, le cas echeant.

On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Mike Lyon <mike.lyon@gmail.com> wrote:

...

A few dozen? Damn, you are lucy, Mike!

I did an install the other day, a good 60-70 XfinityWifi SSIDs popped up.

Reminds me of the Good 'Ole CB days back in the 80's where everyone talked over each other and played background music and such...

That's a big 10-4 and I got a Smokey on my trail!

-Mike

On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 10:15 AM, Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net> wrote:

...

The tower-deployed AP can see the cable wireless APs for miles and can see a few dozen of them at any one time. Given the goal of full modulation at all times for optimal use of spectrum and dollars, the ever increasing noise from the cable APs makes this a challenge. You need 25 to 30 dB to maintain full modulation and that's increasingly difficult when you hear cable APs everywhere at -70.

The APs can't have narrow radiation patterns given that they need to cover a roughly 90* area of where the customers are. An 18 to 20 dB gain sector antenna will pick up those cable radios from pretty far away.

----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com

Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com

----- Original Message -----

From: "Scott Helms" <khelms@zcorum.com> To: "Jared Mauch" <jared@puck.nether.net> Cc: "Mike Hammett" <nanog@ics-il.net>, "Corey Petrulich" < Corey_Petrulich@cable.comcast.com>, "Kenneth Falkenstein" < Ken_Falkenstein@cable.comcast.com>, "NANOG mailing list" < nanog@nanog.org> Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2015 10:00:41 AM Subject: Re: WiFI on utility poles

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_col lege_campuses.html

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 despite 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 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).

It¹s just poor practice to show up and break something else because you can¹t be bothered to notice the interference or noise floor you created. I suspect the hardware that Comcast is using doesn¹t notice this interference or adjacent channel issues. With the FCC aiming to let cell carriers also clog the 5ghz ISM band it¹s only going to get worse.

- Jared

-- Mike Lyon 408-621-4826 mike.lyon@gmail.com

http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlyon

-- Mike Lyon 408-621-4826 mike.lyon@gmail.com

http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlyon

-- Mike Lyon 408-621-4826 mike.lyon@gmail.com

http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlyon

I'm not suggesting that WISPs have exclusive-use spectrum at all. It isn't necessary, just cooperation and design best practices. For example, there aren't likely to be any people a hundred or two hundred feet in the air where the towers are, so why do the cable companies' radiation patterns include up there? Get yourself some higher gain antennas that focus their power in the lower 180* of elevation. I do understand that the cables these are typically mounted to will sway, so just put the AP closer to the pole where the sway will be less. Where would you suggest WISPs deploy? In spectrum that costs so much that it ruins the business model of being a WISP? Say there's a new WISP that wants to start, how could they possibly get spectrum if Clear bought it all up 10 years ago? At least there's potential with the upcoming 3550 - 3650 MHz. Then again, the licensed channels are tiny, so real amounts of bandwidth can't really be delivered. The government has been crapping on the TVWS for the last ten years as well. Then the areas that have foliage issues will have some relief, but there's always some special interest or another rearing their heads in the way, spewing FUD. Canopy operators are WISPs and their platform has been one of the most successful WISP platforms. So successful in fact that sync capability has been on the demanded features list for all other vendors. Spoken by a WISP that's been running in rural and suburban areas for the past 11 years. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan Fields" <Bryan@bryanfields.net> To: "Mike Hammett" <nanog@ics-il.net>, "Scott Helms" <khelms@zcorum.com> Cc: "Corey Petrulich" <Corey_Petrulich@cable.comcast.com>, "Kenneth Falkenstein" <Ken_Falkenstein@cable.comcast.com>, "NANOG mailing list" <nanog@nanog.org> Sent: Friday, September 11, 2015 2:56:18 AM Subject: Re: WiFI on utility poles On 9/10/15 1:15 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:

The tower-deployed AP can see the cable wireless APs for miles and can see a few dozen of them at any one time. Given the goal of full modulation at all times for optimal use of spectrum and dollars, the ever increasing noise from the cable APs makes this a challenge. You need 25 to 30 dB to maintain full modulation and that's increasingly difficult when you hear cable APs everywhere at -70.

Frankly this is what the WISP's get for deploying on Part 15 spectrum. It's a race to the bottom, and always has been. In 1999-2000 2.4 Part 15 was golden with FHSS, and we played nice with the Karlnet guys. Then the muni's came in with their 2.4 networks and killed 2.4 for anything decent. Canopy operators came in like a thousand people blinking in unison and crapped up 5.8. We all retreated to 5.3 and then 5.4 opened up and life was good. 900 was never an option as even in rural areas you had to deal with paging at 929 mhz blowing out the front end of your receiver. We made it work with stupid long antennas and horizontal polarization, but that was only to go 2 miles through trees. Remember waverider? Now it's happening again; get licensed spectrum or go home. -- Bryan Fields 727-409-1194 - Voice 727-214-2508 - Fax http://bryanfields.net

OPM, as in Other People's Money? If that's what you meant I don't think that's an accurate description since AFAIK Comcast didn't get any CAF money. Scott Helms Vice President of Technology ZCorum (678) 507-5000 -------------------------------- http://twitter.com/kscotthelms -------------------------------- On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 11:46 AM, Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net> wrote:

I wish IEEE would natively support smaller channels as that's what's needed most of the time. Interference would be so much less.

If there's opportunity for Comcast to work with the WISP community on channel selection to avoid mutual destruction, then great.

That said, the cable company's efforts scream of OPM.

----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com

Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com

----- Original Message -----

From: "Jared Mauch" <jared@puck.nether.net> To: "Mike Hammett" <nanog@ics-il.net> Cc: "Jason Livingood" <Jason_Livingood@cable.comcast.com>, "Corey Petrulich" <Corey_Petrulich@cable.comcast.com>, "Kenneth Falkenstein" < Ken_Falkenstein@Cable.Comcast.com>, "NANOG mailing list" <nanog@nanog.org> Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2015 9:52:59 AM Subject: Re: WiFI on utility poles

...

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 despite 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 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

It's backed by large investments rather than CAF. At the same time, it's well known that millions are spent on lobbying in the government to sway the decisions. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 12:17 PM, Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net> wrote:

Yeah, Other People's Money.

I highly doubt they got government money, but large corporations are full of OPM from the perspective of the guy doing the work. Let's pitch this big science project because it sounds awesome and I can convince these guys to pay for it. It's not in any way unique to Comcast.

Contrasting that to a small company where it very much is the head guy's money in every decision, so (generally, though certainly not always) more judicious caution is exercised.

----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com

Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com

----- Original Message -----

From: "Scott Helms" <khelms@zcorum.com> To: "Mike Hammett" <nanog@ics-il.net> Cc: "Jared Mauch" <jared@puck.nether.net>, "Corey Petrulich" < Corey_Petrulich@cable.comcast.com>, "Kenneth Falkenstein" < Ken_Falkenstein@cable.comcast.com>, "NANOG mailing list" <nanog@nanog.org> Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2015 10:50:27 AM Subject: Re: WiFI on utility poles

OPM, as in Other People's Money? If that's what you meant I don't think that's an accurate description since AFAIK Comcast didn't get any CAF money.

Scott Helms Vice President of Technology ZCorum (678) 507-5000 -------------------------------- http://twitter.com/kscotthelms --------------------------------

On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 11:46 AM, Mike Hammett < nanog@ics-il.net > wrote:

I wish IEEE would natively support smaller channels as that's what's needed most of the time. Interference would be so much less.

If there's opportunity for Comcast to work with the WISP community on channel selection to avoid mutual destruction, then great.

That said, the cable company's efforts scream of OPM.

----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com

Midwest Internet Exchange http://www.midwest-ix.com

----- Original Message -----

From: "Jared Mauch" < jared@puck.nether.net > To: "Mike Hammett" < nanog@ics-il.net > Cc: "Jason Livingood" < Jason_Livingood@cable.comcast.com >, "Corey Petrulich" < Corey_Petrulich@cable.comcast.com >, "Kenneth Falkenstein" < Ken_Falkenstein@Cable.Comcast.com >, "NANOG mailing list" < nanog@nanog.org > Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2015 9:52:59 AM Subject: Re: WiFI on utility poles

...

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 despite 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 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

Thank you all for your replies to the topic I have started. UVM does not purchase Xfinity on Campus for our students to have TV via their computers or device. However Xfinity usually has a both setup on move-in day for students to individually purchase accounts to watch stuff online. UVM provides its own wireless to all the Residential halls/dorm in 2.4/5Ghz spectrum. Comcast/Xfinity has 2 Nodes on campus that have nothing connected to them, just collecting dust and burning power. We see the addition of the Comcast/Xfinity AP's on the poles to either generate confusion and or interface to the already dirty wireless spectrum. Recently we are running into issue with DFS being 3 miles away from an airport and the TDWR. Thanks again folks and see you in Montreal! -Mike Michael Voity University of Vermont On 9/10/2015 8:53 AM, Livingood, Jason wrote:

You can learn more at http://wifi.xfinity.com/. There are more than 8M hotspots around the country today and we’re doing more and more outdoor / public area WiFi hotspots. In my area (Philadelphia) I hit them all along the route that my commuter train takes, so it’s convenient.

The XFINITY SSID is new and uses WPA2 IIRC.

The guys copied (Ken and Corey) are good contacts for any direct questions about Comcast’s WiFi network.

As an aside, it does not look like UVM is covered yet but we expanded our free college streaming service this Fall and on campuses that have Xfinity WiFi, it would presumably help students stream from more places (see http://corporate.comcast.com/comcast-voices/xfinity-on-campus-expands-comcas...).

- Jason Comcast

On 9/9/15, 9:52 PM, "NANOG on behalf of Michael T. Voity" <nanog-bounces@nanog.org <mailto:nanog-bounces@nanog.org> on behalf of mvoity@uvm.edu <mailto:mvoity@uvm.edu>> wrote:

Sorry folks, attachment didn't work. Here is the link -

https://www.uvm.edu/~mvoity/pole.JPG <https://www.uvm.edu/%7Emvoity/pole.JPG>

-Mike

Michael Voity University of Vermont

On 9/9/15 9:24 PM, Michael T. Voity wrote:

Hello,

Today another colleague and I discovered the famous 'xfinitywifi' ,'CableWIFi', 'CoxWiFi' and a new one 'XFINITY' on our University campus. After doing some poking around on campus we found these gems (attached picture) on 2 utility poles that pass by our east campus. Standing underneath it I got a -46 RSSI in both 5 and 2.4Ghz, maybe 75-100 yards away inside our hockey fieldhouse, through lots of brick, cinder blocks and metal, I was still picking the 2.4Ghz at -64.

Looks like the unit is getting power from the coax.

My question is, I've done a little poking around and have not found anything substantial to learn more information about this Comcast program.

Any insight would be nice!

Michael Voity University of Vermont