[MLB-WIRELESS] New node, very interesting stumbles.

[Dan Flett]

>	> I believe the nodeFPY ssid is probably actually Node
>	> GDW in Taylors Lakes.  It is possibly a bit too far away from IXM to get 
>a
>	> useful link, but certainly worth a try.  Also, links across large bodies 
>of
>	> water are usually unstable.
>
>He is actually picking up nodefpy, and with 20dB SNR.
>

Indeed!  I didn't check the SNR closely before posting - not bad!

Now everything hinges on Phil being able to secure the site and keep the 
landlord happy. :)

I'm finding that a viable way of funding nodes like this is for the people 
interested in linking to the node should pay for a dedicated interface at 
that node.

For instance - to get the GHO-South interface happening, we in the Southern 
Region (Glen-Eria cluster) got together and provided the gear - antennas and 
radios - to go up at the GHO site.  This means we get our own dedicated 
interface that links us into the rest of the network.  Of course, if other 
nodes are in the beamwidth of that interface, they can connect too - subject 
to bandwidth, QoS and hidden-node restrictions.

This method can work so long as the people paying for or otherwise providing 
the gear can be assured that their gear will remain their property and won't 
mysteriously dissapear.  Of course, 24/7 access to the gear can't be 
expected, but that's probably acceptable in most cases.

Some node site-owners won't allow their rooftops to be festooned with a 
forest of antennas dedicated to each node in Melbourne (can't understand 
why).  But node-owners should consider the option, within reason, of 
allowing other nodes/clusters to pay for some of the radios and antennas at 
their site.  When you pay for an antenna and radio at someone elses site, 
you can guarantee that it will be pointed straight at you, and it won't have 
to be shared with too many other nodes.  Not that I'm against a sharing, 
caring, omnidirectional AP on a node, but each radio only has a limited 
amount of bandwidth that can be carved up.  The more radios, the better - 
and not every owner of a hilltop node can afford multiple antennas, multiple 
radios and amplifiers all on their own.

I guess there's no hard-and-fast rules as to who should pay for what.  
Everyone's fininacial and geographic situation is different, so people 
should be creative in their methods - and practice the art of friendly 
negotiation.

Of course, there's also the ACA rules to contend with.  I'm not sure if any 
of the ideas I've just mentioned contravene them, but since no-one is 
profiting or receiving Internet access in-kind I believe we at least 
wouldn't be violating the spirit of the rules.  Of course, if providing gear 
to another node to obtain network access does contravene the rules then 
forget what I said and make sure you never put it into practice. ;)

Dan



To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo at wireless.org.au
with "unsubscribe melbwireless" in the body of the message