Specifications for Internet services on public frequency
Hello all, My team is working on technical and technological specifications of a document for the deployment of Internet service on public frequencies in rural areas. We welcome your thoughts on the topic in terms of previous experiences and, well sure, you recommendation in terms of equipment. You should note that the environment in question is very mountainous with very precarious infrastructure conditions: no electricity, poor access, etc. We would like to deploy a service at minimal cost, using mainly open source software. All comments, suggestions, recommendations, draft, success stories are well come. Feel free to contact me for additional information. Warms regards, Georges-Keny PAUL
Check out the openbts and tier wireless projects. "Georges-Keny PAUL" <paulgkeny@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello all,
My team is working on technical and technological specifications of a document for the deployment of Internet service on public frequencies in rural areas. We welcome your thoughts on the topic in terms of previous experiences and, well sure, you recommendation in terms of equipment. You should note that the environment in question is very mountainous with very precarious infrastructure conditions: no electricity, poor access, etc. We would like to deploy a service at minimal cost, using mainly open source software.
All comments, suggestions, recommendations, draft, success stories are well come.
Feel free to contact me for additional information.
Warms regards, Georges-Keny PAUL
-- from the desk of Charles wyble ceo & president known element enterprises xmpp/sip/smtp: charles@knownelement.com legacy pstn: 818 280 7059
Ubiquiti Networks - www.ubnt.com I have deployed numerous rural wireless provider nets with a variety of technologies and vendors and this is by far, the most cost effective and reliable last mile solution. IMHO, based on testing and real life lessons learned, unlicensed is the only way to go in rural. The benefits of licensed frequencies are "typically" lost in rural environments as there aren't many contending devices. The above N based equipment performs roughly at the same level as fixed wimax, without the expense of the wimax chipsets. Of course I am generalizing a bit and each deployment has it's own requirements and challenges to be considered. John On Saturday, September 18, 2010, Georges-Keny PAUL <paulgkeny@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello all,
My team is working on technical and technological specifications of a document for the deployment of Internet service on public frequencies in rural areas. We welcome your thoughts on the topic in terms of previous experiences and, well sure, you recommendation in terms of equipment. You should note that the environment in question is very mountainous with very precarious infrastructure conditions: no electricity, poor access, etc. We would like to deploy a service at minimal cost, using mainly open source software.
All comments, suggestions, recommendations, draft, success stories are well come.
Feel free to contact me for additional information.
Warms regards, Georges-Keny PAUL
On Sep 19, 2010, at 2:59 PM, John Gammons wrote:
Ubiquiti Networks - www.ubnt.com
I have deployed numerous rural wireless provider nets with a variety of technologies and vendors and this is by far, the most cost effective and reliable last mile solution.
IMHO, based on testing and real life lessons learned, unlicensed is the only way to go in rural. The benefits of licensed frequencies are "typically" lost in rural environments as there aren't many contending devices. The above N based equipment performs roughly at the same level as fixed wimax, without the expense of the wimax chipsets. Of course I am generalizing a bit and each deployment has it's own requirements and challenges to be considered.
+1 UBNT. Can not beat the price/performance of the equipment. ($160 for a pair of dual-pol 802.11n equipment). - Jared
Another +1 UBNT. We're using the NanoStation2 to deliver 802.11g to remote camps in Afghanistan. They advertise a 60 deg LOS signal but it seems to do much better. Supposedly they will reach 15 km but we've never tried to use them that far. What's really neat is they come ready to mount with some heavy duty zip ties. I'm also a fan of the Cisco Aironet 1310, but we're using the built-in omni-directional antennae so the range isn't as nice as the Ubiquity and they cost about five times as much. The terminations are RG6 and the mount kit comes with the cable and weather strips to protect the terminations. The Ubiquity by comparison is all PoE so you'll want to use loom to protect the ethernet cable. I would venture to say that the UBNT omni-directional devices (eg. PicoStation2HP) have better range than the aforementioned Aironet 1310. Jeff On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 4:00 AM, Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net> wrote:
On Sep 19, 2010, at 2:59 PM, John Gammons wrote:
Ubiquiti Networks - www.ubnt.com
I have deployed numerous rural wireless provider nets with a variety of technologies and vendors and this is by far, the most cost effective and reliable last mile solution.
IMHO, based on testing and real life lessons learned, unlicensed is the only way to go in rural. The benefits of licensed frequencies are "typically" lost in rural environments as there aren't many contending devices. The above N based equipment performs roughly at the same level as fixed wimax, without the expense of the wimax chipsets. Of course I am generalizing a bit and each deployment has it's own requirements and challenges to be considered.
+1 UBNT.
Can not beat the price/performance of the equipment. ($160 for a pair of dual-pol 802.11n equipment).
- Jared
-- Jeffrey Lyon, Leadership Team jeffrey.lyon@blacklotus.net | http://www.blacklotus.net Black Lotus Communications - AS32421 First and Leading in DDoS Protection Solutions
UBNT is fine if you need a bridged network, using them in junction to MikroTik's RouterBOARDs will give you all of the tools you will need to be successful as well. Routing, traffic shaping etc. Contact me off-list if you need pre-built / configured solutions with either hardware. ----------------------------------------------------------- Dennis Burgess, Mikrotik Certified Trainer Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services Office: 314-735-0270 Website: http://www.linktechs.net LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training - Author of "Learn RouterOS" -----Original Message----- From: Jeffrey Lyon [mailto:jeffrey.lyon@blacklotus.net] Sent: Monday, September 20, 2010 1:33 AM To: Jared Mauch Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Specifications for Internet services on public frequency Another +1 UBNT. We're using the NanoStation2 to deliver 802.11g to remote camps in Afghanistan. They advertise a 60 deg LOS signal but it seems to do much better. Supposedly they will reach 15 km but we've never tried to use them that far. What's really neat is they come ready to mount with some heavy duty zip ties. I'm also a fan of the Cisco Aironet 1310, but we're using the built-in omni-directional antennae so the range isn't as nice as the Ubiquity and they cost about five times as much. The terminations are RG6 and the mount kit comes with the cable and weather strips to protect the terminations. The Ubiquity by comparison is all PoE so you'll want to use loom to protect the ethernet cable. I would venture to say that the UBNT omni-directional devices (eg. PicoStation2HP) have better range than the aforementioned Aironet 1310. Jeff On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 4:00 AM, Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net> wrote:
On Sep 19, 2010, at 2:59 PM, John Gammons wrote:
Ubiquiti Networks - www.ubnt.com
I have deployed numerous rural wireless provider nets with a variety of technologies and vendors and this is by far, the most cost effective and reliable last mile solution.
IMHO, based on testing and real life lessons learned, unlicensed is the only way to go in rural. The benefits of licensed frequencies are "typically" lost in rural environments as there aren't many contending devices. The above N based equipment performs roughly at the same level as fixed wimax, without the expense of the wimax chipsets. Of course I am generalizing a bit and each deployment has it's own requirements and challenges to be considered.
+1 UBNT.
Can not beat the price/performance of the equipment. ($160 for a pair of dual-pol 802.11n equipment).
- Jared
-- Jeffrey Lyon, Leadership Team jeffrey.lyon@blacklotus.net | http://www.blacklotus.net Black Lotus Communications - AS32421 First and Leading in DDoS Protection Solutions
participants (6)
-
Charles n wyble -
Dennis Burgess -
Georges-Keny PAUL -
Jared Mauch -
Jeffrey Lyon -
John Gammons