Info about Internet Service Provider and Wireless

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

Hello,
I'm to this NG and to the wireless. I need some infos about this :
my customer wants to provide Internet in a smalltown where there isn't xDSL
service, with wireless solution.
I know that is necessary one (or more) "Central Access Point" connected to
the carrier network with an omnidirectional antenna, and one "Endpoint
Access Point" in every building wants to connect to Internet with
directional antenna pointed to the Central AP.

Now, I need to know if there are any limits (nr. of endpoints for single
central access point, etc...), and what are the best devices to do this
implementation.

thanks to all will want to help me
kind regards Davide

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

In article <2guogoF70il2U1@uni-berlin.de>,
Davide <davide.NOSPAM.depaoli@libero.it> wrote:
:I'm to this NG and to the wireless. I need some infos about this :
:my customer wants to provide Internet in a smalltown where there isn't xDSL
:service, with wireless solution.
:I know that is necessary one (or more) "Central Access Point" connected to
:the carrier network with an omnidirectional antenna, and one "Endpoint
:Access Point" in every building wants to connect to Internet with
:directional antenna pointed to the Central AP.

:Now, I need to know if there are any limits (nr. of endpoints for single
:central access point, etc...), and what are the best devices to do this
:implementation.

There are limits on the number of APs that can associate, but the
limits tend to be more determined by the market than by the technology.
I've seen limits as low as 6; 24 or 60 are not unusual. The Cisco AP's
have a limit of 2048.

The -effective- limit is determined by how many APs are trying to talk
at once, and by how well those APs can see each other, and by the
bandwidth of the carrier network.

I would suggest that you would be better off using 4 sector antennae
rather than one omnidirectional, as that reduces the number of APs
that are associating with the central site, and thus reduces the contention
for that one site. There's a paper out that shows that for practical
purposes, you can squeeze 4 non-overlapping channels out of the range
1-11; in Italy you'd have 1-13 I think, which would make it even easier.

As you are in Europe, you might prefer to look into 802.11a equipment,
which is more available than in North America, and uses frequencies
not interferred with by microwave ovens.

"Best Devices" will depend on what kind of topology there is, what
kind of obstacles. For example if there are a lot of trees, you would
use different antennae than if you can get clear line of sight for each
AP. Mist or fog can make a difference. If not everything is literally
line of site but it is -close- and there aren't lots of tall metal
buildings around, then you might want to use something like the Motorola
Canopy system which does not use WiFi (I think it's 900 MHz, but I'm not
sure.)
--
Oh, to be a Blobel!

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

thank you very much
Davide

"Walter Roberson" <roberson@ibd.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:c8dmnb$qnu$1@canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca...
> In article <2guogoF70il2U1@uni-berlin.de>,
> Davide <davide.NOSPAM.depaoli@libero.it> wrote:
> :I'm to this NG and to the wireless. I need some infos about this :
> :my customer wants to provide Internet in a smalltown where there isn't
xDSL
> :service, with wireless solution.
> :I know that is necessary one (or more) "Central Access Point" connected
to
> :the carrier network with an omnidirectional antenna, and one "Endpoint
> :Access Point" in every building wants to connect to Internet with
> :directional antenna pointed to the Central AP.
>
> :Now, I need to know if there are any limits (nr. of endpoints for single
> :central access point, etc...), and what are the best devices to do this
> :implementation.
>
> There are limits on the number of APs that can associate, but the
> limits tend to be more determined by the market than by the technology.
> I've seen limits as low as 6; 24 or 60 are not unusual. The Cisco AP's
> have a limit of 2048.
>
> The -effective- limit is determined by how many APs are trying to talk
> at once, and by how well those APs can see each other, and by the
> bandwidth of the carrier network.
>
> I would suggest that you would be better off using 4 sector antennae
> rather than one omnidirectional, as that reduces the number of APs
> that are associating with the central site, and thus reduces the
contention
> for that one site. There's a paper out that shows that for practical
> purposes, you can squeeze 4 non-overlapping channels out of the range
> 1-11; in Italy you'd have 1-13 I think, which would make it even easier.
>
> As you are in Europe, you might prefer to look into 802.11a equipment,
> which is more available than in North America, and uses frequencies
> not interferred with by microwave ovens.
>
> "Best Devices" will depend on what kind of topology there is, what
> kind of obstacles. For example if there are a lot of trees, you would
> use different antennae than if you can get clear line of sight for each
> AP. Mist or fog can make a difference. If not everything is literally
> line of site but it is -close- and there aren't lots of tall metal
> buildings around, then you might want to use something like the Motorola
> Canopy system which does not use WiFi (I think it's 900 MHz, but I'm not
> sure.)
> --
> Oh, to be a Blobel!