Re: WiFI on utility poles

[Mike Hammett <nanog () ics-il net>]

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