[129786] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Specifications for Internet services on public frequency
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jared Mauch)
Sun Sep 19 19:30:30 2010
From: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTik2iT26yBs-G__ZKUpLY5JLvi6NweKupE3Kn9Lk@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2010 19:30:17 -0400
To: John Gammons <jgammons@gmail.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Sep 19, 2010, at 2:59 PM, John Gammons wrote:
> Ubiquiti Networks - www.ubnt.com
>=20
> 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.
>=20
> 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
