Wireless shot across the parking lot. - i3 Detroit Public

The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Message from discussion Wireless shot across the parking lot.
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of darthstry...@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.46 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.212.46;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CALgyjmcW7EBC6KpptMv=YHRk3GSNK6iGePHptU85g2sMY5_...@mail.gmail.com>
References: <caa67b8d-0984-4d87-9018-938759b99...@b15g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>
 <5086BC6B.3000...@bendorius.com> <CAA37vow6dOqCY8-qCxaPKJDJFo05RS=F8UJ=fo64dHA-T4X...@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA37vozOLhZnyruuXd7LwMgctKtimN4ce8FfkDGiZHx-xzF...@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGnLT=ZpNpeFM20wjo6gp+ss73-SGkM94j3h6Eq2ccK+iSk...@mail.gmail.com>
 <8cf9d4cd-7f5d-4c93-bc2d-b48a270f9...@b6g2000yqd.googlegroups.com> <CALgyjmcW7EBC6KpptMv=YHRk3GSNK6iGePHptU85g2sMY5_...@mail.gmail.com>
From: Toby <darthstry...@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 11:28:35 -0400
Message-ID: <CAPj3YiX_oJQiqUtCPsuHmef_+5veS+HHwUjrZxbV-we820X...@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [i3detroit-public] Re: Wireless shot across the parking lot.
To: i3detroit-public@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

I have 2 spare offset feed dishes if that would help. small
soupcantenna feed should be sufficient for off axis rejection.

On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 11:30 AM, Mark Lenigan <mleni...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Having tried the homebrew route for critical infrastructure several
> times before, my vote is to use current production, off the shelf
> hardware.  I'm personally a bit leery of using 5 GHz ISM because I've
> seen so many problems with it when I was working as a wireless
> engineer.  However, if the band is quiet locally, it shouldn't matter
> over such a short hop.  Just a question for my own information, but
> have we considered the 900 MHz band?  Ubiquiti makes Bullets which use
> 802.11 on 900 MHz.  Just a thought.
>
> Mark
>
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 4:01 PM, Nathaniel Bezanson <mys...@telcodata.us> wrote:
>> On Oct 23, 3:16 pm, "Joseph C. Bender" <jcben...@bendorius.com> wrote:
>>>  Increased forward gain doesn't always mean reduced interference.
>>
>> Yeah, like when the interferer is sitting right behind your other
>> endpoint. Drew's point is well taken, it does help in most cases, but
>> not always to a useful degree.
>>
>> On Oct 23, 2:54 pm, Nathan Warnick <digital...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> We could just mount a bi-quad on the front of the building and point it at
>>
>> And just paint the other building with signal, putting no hardware
>> over there at all? That has strong KISS principle bonus, and it's not
>> a bad idea as a fallback, but I think we need to do better for the
>> main link, for two reasons:
>>
>> 1: I failed to mention in the first post, there's a need for wired
>> clients in the annex. Putting a client bridge on 'em could work, but
>> 2.4 still sucks.
>>
>> 2: Gain on the AP end is helpful, but it's limited because members'
>> laptops in the annex would have no additional gain on their end,
>> leading to hidden-node problems and reliability that decreases with
>> utilization.
>>
>> 3: The 20MHz channels on 2.4GHz are a limiting factor for a number of
>> reasons. Wide-channel modes aren't possible on 2.4 here because of the
>> existing spectrum use. The bandwidth available in 5.8GHz is delicious,
>> and completely obviates that concern.
>>
>> Members' ability to make productive use of the annex is riding on this
>> link, and all of us potentially supporting it already have full-time
>> jobs elsewhere. It's worth investing money and/or effort in
>> reliability, and if we get a speed bonus out of it, so much the
>> better. I think a point-to-point shot is the way to go, and I'm quite
>> certain that 5.8 is worth doing. The only question, as I see it, is
>> whether someone's willing to cobble it together from parts-on-hand, or
>> whether we just buy something solid from the get-go.
>>
>> I've got my finger on the Checkout button, but I think I'll hold off
>> for a few days. If a solution assembles itself before, say, Halloween,
>> win! Otherwise I'm just gonna buy the Locos and call it a day.
>>
>> On Oct 23, 3:22 pm, bracestout <bracest...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RONJA
>>
>> Definitely cool, but repeat after me: A URL is not hardware. (But can
>> you imagine a world in which it was? I'd just google for "veyron"
>> before driving to work and "unimog" before going camping. It'd be like
>> CBG's EveryMan but with physical objects instead of superpowers!)
>>
>> If you have a pair gathering dust in your garage, by all means, they'd
>> make a great backup link!
>>
>> However, I will buy a cookie for anyone who runs a pair of RONJAs or
>> similar, in parallel over different colors or polarizations. :)
>>
>> -Nathaniel-
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "i3 Detroit Public" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to i3detroit-public@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to i3detroit-public+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/i3detroit-public?hl=en.
>>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "i3 Detroit Public" group.
> To post to this group, send email to i3detroit-public@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to i3detroit-public+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/i3detroit-public?hl=en.
>
Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
Account Options
