Re: WiFI on utility poles

[Josh Luthman <josh () imaginenetworksllc com>]

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