[183657] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: WiFI on utility poles
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mike Hammett)
Thu Sep 10 11:46:14 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2015 10:46:07 -0500 (CDT)
From: Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net>
To: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net>
In-Reply-To: <2AA17621-E9C8-4E68-B878-656F7DBF1A52@puck.nether.net>
Cc: Corey Petrulich <Corey_Petrulich@cable.comcast.com>,
Kenneth Falkenstein <Ken_Falkenstein@Cable.Comcast.com>,
NANOG mailing list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
I wish IEEE would natively support smaller channels as that's what's needed=
most of the time. Interference would be so much less.=20
If there's opportunity for Comcast to work with the WISP community on chann=
el selection to avoid mutual destruction, then great.=20
That said, the cable company's efforts scream of OPM.=20
-----=20
Mike Hammett=20
Intelligent Computing Solutions=20
http://www.ics-il.com=20
Midwest Internet Exchange=20
http://www.midwest-ix.com=20
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jared Mauch" <jared@puck.nether.net>=20
To: "Mike Hammett" <nanog@ics-il.net>=20
Cc: "Jason Livingood" <Jason_Livingood@cable.comcast.com>, "Corey Petrulich=
" <Corey_Petrulich@cable.comcast.com>, "Kenneth Falkenstein" <Ken_Falkenste=
in@Cable.Comcast.com>, "NANOG mailing list" <nanog@nanog.org>=20
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2015 9:52:59 AM=20
Subject: Re: WiFI on utility poles=20
> On Sep 10, 2015, at 9:00 AM, Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net> wrote:=20
>=20
> 5 GHz noise levels affecting people whose primary means of Internet acces=
s is via fixed wireless .=20
>=20
This is a huge deal for those people like myself that depend on fixed wirel=
ess for access at home because there is no broadband available despite ince=
ntives given by cities and states and the federal government.=20
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 c=
onfigured for, not al the 10, 15, 8, 30mhz wide variants).=20
It=E2=80=99s just poor practice to show up and break something else because=
you can=E2=80=99t be bothered to notice the interference or noise floor yo=
u created. I suspect the hardware that Comcast is using doesn=E2=80=99t not=
ice this interference or adjacent channel issues. With the FCC aiming to le=
t cell carriers also clog the 5ghz ISM band it=E2=80=99s only going to get =
worse.=20
- Jared=20
