nanog mailing list archives

Re: WiFI on utility poles


From: Mike Lyon <mike.lyon () gmail com>
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2015 10:32:34 -0700

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_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).

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


Current thread: