[159434] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: OOB core router connectivity wish list
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Warren Bailey)
Thu Jan 10 12:33:15 2013
From: Warren Bailey <wbailey@satelliteintelligencegroup.com>
To: "morrowc.lists@gmail.com" <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 17:31:42 +0000
In-Reply-To: <CAL9jLaaE1b3T4QE6x5ttwtTHMAaZ8U95TWb=OJc7NNyqntbwsA@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Reply-To: Warren Bailey <wbailey@satelliteintelligencegroup.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Antenna is pretty small now. Can back haul all alarms privately, single hop=
back to the teleport. Very low power consumption, and very decent throughp=
ut (we can run 100mbps+ these days, which is pricey).
From my Galaxy Note II, please excuse any mistakes.
-------- Original message --------
From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
Date: 01/10/2013 9:24 AM (GMT-08:00)
To: Warren Bailey <wbailey@satelliteintelligencegroup.com>
Cc: bill@herrin.us,rcarpen@network1.net,nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: OOB core router connectivity wish list
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 12:16 PM, Warren Bailey
<wbailey@satelliteintelligencegroup.com> wrote:
> Why is Satellite not a good OOB option?
>
inside iron boxes satellite signal is 'hard'.
getting a roof mounted antenna is extra cost/complexity.
or so some thinking goes.
