Eir rural FTTH thread II

Zith

fritzelly wrote: »

Probably get killed in here but why is OE not doing something similar. hey neighbour wanna help out your other neighbours up the road and here's a little discount for you...just for those houses that are a few hundred meters away but may as well be on Mars for BB.
What would the energy cost be? Probably easily covered with a small discount

Burn the heretic!!!

From the spec (for each end):
Max. Power Consumption 8.5W

I'm guessing they would have no interest in the troubleshooting or maintenance of that kind of installation? Presume they couldn't wash their hands of that bit. And what tuxy said.

fritzelly

tuxy wrote: »

No incentive. They can sell that neighbour 7mb dsl for full whack.

Could sell an higher package for more money for very little investment...hell even the install charge would cover the price of it.

tsue921i8wljb3

fritzelly wrote: »

Probably get killed in here but why is OE not doing something similar. hey neighbour wanna help out your other neighbours up the road and here's a little discount for you...just for those houses that are a few hundred meters away but may as well be on Mars for BB.
What would the energy cost be? Probably easily covered with a small discount

Because as you start to add more of them the performance plummets. Even using the 5GHz version is technically illegal I think outdoors. As far as I know you need to apply for a license from Comreg for the 5GHz band. Regional ISPs would have a fit if these became commonplace.

Also you are mistakenly assuming eir care about the neighbours when they actually don't.

ED E

fritzelly wrote: »

Could sell an higher package for more money for very little investment...hell even the install charge would cover the price of it.

Cross the demark. Will never happen.

Marlow

Dominique Loud Waistband wrote: »

Even using the 5GHz version is technically illegal I think outdoors. As far as I know you need to apply for a license from Comreg for the 5GHz band.

No it's not. The 5.1-5.3 GHz band is designated indoors at 200mW.

The 5.5-5.7 GHz band is designated outdoors at 1W.

Those two bands are unlicensed and not regulated across the board across all of Europe apart from some weird limitation in Germany and then France doing their own thing. .. well ... and then there's Greece, where you're not allowed anything outdoor, but everyone is doing it anyhow, because there's no other options.

The 5.8 GHz-5.9 GHz is 2W limit in Ireland and 4W limit in the UK and used to require that you registered your link with Comreg in Ireland, but they don't care about that either anymore, as they're too busy regulating licensed frequencies and making money of those.

17, 24 GHz and 60 GHz are also unlicensed in the Republic. UK/NI 24 and 60 GHz only. But those bands are short range and hampered by rainfade. And rainfade is ... fairly common in Ireland.

Dominique Loud Waistband wrote: »

Also you are mistakenly assuming eir care about the neighbours when they actually don't.

No they don't care. Otherwise they would have gone blanket, not left gaps and even connected people beyond where the yellow line stops, if there is demand. But they are not interested. They are only interested in profit margins and protecting their monopoly .. as long as it lasts .. by any means possible. By holding everyone else ransom .. (so they think).

/M

brianbruff

Dominique Loud Waistband wrote: »

Because as you start to add more of them the performance plummets. Even using the 5GHz version is technically illegal I think outdoors. As far as I know you need to apply for a license from Comreg for the 5GHz band. Regional ISPs would have a fit if these became commonplace.

Also you are mistakenly assuming eir care about the neighbours when they actually don't.

The 5GHz is license free, there are a few providers using this technology in my area I've used two of them, (all over contended but that's a different story).

Seems to be a combination of either ubiquiti or mitrotik gear, i prefer the ubiquiti unifi gear personally.

the problem with this free band (likewise the 2.4 ghz band) is any tom dick and harry can start up and become a WISP, a local shop that used to sell Sky got on-board in my area and they stomped all over the existing WISPs (silly).

Others like Imagine.ie and i think nova broadband in cork use dedicated licensed spectrum on the 3.6Ghz band, but of course they could over contend (don't like it but understand it)


you can do deals with your neighbours but i think the problems are no one wants the hassle of being a support monkey or be liable for others browsing habits, not worth the hassle for anyone other than family IMO.


Read some where (probably silicon republic) that Eir are trialling wireless connections, but on the licensed '5G' allocation they purchased.

tsue921i8wljb3

Marlow wrote: »

No it's not. The 5.1-5.3 GHz band is designated indoors at 200mW.

The 5.5-5.7 GHz band is designated outdoors at 1W.

Those two bands are unlicensed and not regulated across the board across all of Europe apart from some weird limitation in Germany and then France doing their own thing. .. well ... and then there's Greece, where you're not allowed anything outdoor, but everyone is doing it anyhow, because there's no other options.

The 5.8 GHz-5.9 GHz is 2W limit in Ireland and 4W limit in the UK and used to require that you registered your link with Comreg in Ireland, but they don't care about that either anymore, as they're too busy regulating licensed frequencies and making money of those.

17, 24 GHz and 60 GHz are also unlicensed in the Republic. UK/NI 24 and 60 GHz only. But those bands are short range and hampered by rainfade. And rainfade is ... fairly common in Ireland.



No they don't care. Otherwise they would have gone blanket, not left gaps and even connected people beyond where the yellow line stops, if there is demand. But they are not interested. They are only interested in profit margins and protecting their monopoly .. as long as it lasts .. by any means possible. By holding everyone else ransom .. (so they think).

/M

Apologies. It was the 5.8GHz registration I was thinking of. However would a lot of WISPs be using frequencies in the 5GHz range that these Ubiquiti devices operate at? If they were to become more common would it not lead to interference issues?

fritzelly

So if i was to suggest the aforementioned hardware to a customer there should be no issue with it - I know pretty much nothing about the wireless side of stuff

brianbruff

iPhone. wrote: »

Nice and neat!


What would these push over a distance of 5KM LOS I wonder?

you may find this interesting...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LG-AZz_nm5E

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYJFwXw1ZIc

Marlow

Dominique Loud Waistband wrote: »

Apologies. It was the 5.8GHz registration I was thinking of. However would a lot of WISPs be using frequencies in the 5GHz range that these Ubiquiti devices operate at? If they were to become more common would it not lead to interference issues?

Yes .. most fixed wireless providers are using the entire band .. 5.1 to 5.3, 5.5 to 5.7 and 5.8 to 5.9.

That's due to the fact, that it's near impossible to wiggle spectrum out of Comreg at reasonable pricing in bands, that have affordable gear. With the changes in licensing in the 3.5-3.7 GHz band 2 years ago even worse.

Some providers use the Ubiquity gear, but mostly smaller ones .. as it's cheap. But it's also prone to interference. Others use Mikrotik, Radwin, Canopy/Cambrium, Tranzeo and various other vendors, who run proprietary protocols in those bands and are less affected by interference.

Lots of security camera companies use the Ubiquity gear .. cattle cams ... etc.

The 2.4 GHz band is so swamped these days, that unless you're extremely remote, it's useless outdoor.

fritzelly wrote: »

So if i was to suggest the aforementioned hardware to a customer there should be no issue with it - I know pretty much nothing about the wireless side of stuff

Apart from the fact, that it has to be rigged in dead on to get a good result. And that is easy on short distances, but an art-form on longer distances. But not license wise. .. no .. absolutely no issue.

For good measurement .. i've personally got a 25km 5 GHz AC link using Mikrotik gear, that will do 180-200 Mbit/s TCP half-duplex throughput. But rigging it in was a 2 days job. And they're some big dishes with a very very narrow beam.

/M

tsue921i8wljb3

fritzelly wrote: »

So if i was to suggest the aforementioned hardware to a customer there should be no issue with it - I know pretty much nothing about the wireless side of stuff

I would not do it in a professional capacity. You're just bringing issues on yourself and the company you work for. It's not exactly plug and play.

Marlow

If you suggest it, you have to support it.

As a company, it would be a full time job supporting it. Because it's unlicensed and you don't know what interference you may come across.

So if you're not prepared to do full time support on it, I'd stay well clear.

/M

fritzelly

Dominique Loud Waistband wrote: »

I would not do it in a professional capacity. You're just bringing issues on yourself and the company you work for. It's not exactly plug and play.

Wouldn't be in a professional manner but a have a look here, sweet talk your sister down the road and you could be good to go to say goodbye 1mb DSL....

cnocbui

There are people in some parts of the world who have used satellite dishes to work wifi over largish distances.

ED E

fritzelly wrote: »

Wouldn't be in a professional manner but a have a look here, sweet talk your sister down the road and you could be good to go to say goodbye 1mb DSL....

This is a good glimpse at amateurs setting up an extreme version (12clicks vs the 1 you'd wanna aim for)

A bit of time and effort required, but little knowledge.

Marlow

cnocbui wrote: »

There are people in some parts of the world who have used satellite dishes to work wifi over largish distances.

In the US .. at power outputs, that we're not allowed .. across a freakin' desert !!

And it was 2.4 GHz.

/M

Andy From Sligo

cnocbui wrote: »

There are people in some parts of the world who have used satellite dishes to work wifi over largish distances.

high latency times though isnt it?

tuxy

Andy From Sligo wrote: »

high latency times though isnt it?

No it's not satellite internet he is taking about using a standard satellite dish to boost the range of a nanostation.

Marlow

Fixed wireless properly set up and not overcontended has better latency than DSL ...

Any kind of DSL !!

High latency is a phenomenon of satelite broadband, because you can't beat physics. It's a couple 1000 km to the satelite and a couple 1000 km back down. That's just the way it is.

/M

Andy From Sligo

tuxy wrote: »

No it's not satellite internet he is taking about using a standard satellite dish to boost the range of a nanostation.

ah right

fritzelly

ED E wrote: »

This is a good glimpse at amateurs setting up an extreme version (12clicks vs the 1 you'd wanna aim for)

A bit of time and effort required, but little knowledge.

Watched a lot of his stuff - weird, I always feel happy watching them, damn Canadians

Marlow

But to be honest, that video gives a good insight into the issues of building such a link.

- it's not just point and good.
- it takes planning
- it requires line of sight .. so any odd tree in the way and you're scoopered
- and if you don't have patience nor the right sites, it's never going to happen .. no matter how much money you throw at it.

The signal levels they were referring to .. signals -75 and worse is useless .. -75 to -70 is mediocre and for speeds of 50 Mbit/s plus you want to be at least in the mid 60s. Either way .. non of this has to do with FTTH, so it's a bit off topic.

/M

cnocbui

I thought the issue was two houses maybe 500m apart?

Marlow

cnocbui wrote: »

I thought the issue was two houses maybe 500m apart?

Even at 500m .. any odd tree is still an issue. Any structure or obstruction at all. 5 GHz and above is that sensitive.

/M

Andy From Sligo

how about 500m of external cat6 ethernet cable? a reel of 500mtr Cat6 external on ebay 250euro if it would work lol (yes I most probably do live on pluto) and terminate it into a plug one end and put it in LAN1 of router ... then run it along a fence or something or underground and then terminate with a ethernet plug the other end and stick it in WAN side of the router in the other house?

I know - it sounds daft as I even write it

Marlow

The limits of cat5, cat5e, cat6 and cat7 ... or anything rated less than that ... is 100m ... full stop ... and this requires that you have the right gear at each end .. and not chinese cheap crap.

There is some specialized VDSL gear, that will do 3km on cat5e and better.

And then there's the issue of building regulations and planning, that doesn't allow you to pull electrically charged wiring between 2 premises unless you're a certified electrician. Otherwise you're invalidating your planning or worse.

Anything beyond that: fixed wireless or fibre.

Bottom line: forget it ... it's a bad idea.

/M

Andy From Sligo

Marlow wrote: »

The limits of cat5, cat5e, cat6 and cat7 ... or anything rated less than that ... is 100m ... full stop ... and this requires that you have the right gear at each end .. and not chinese cheap crap.

And then there's the issue of building regulations and planning, that doesn't allow you to pull electrically charged wiring between 2 premises unless you're a certified electrician. Otherwise you're invalidating your planning or worse.

Anything beyond that: fixed wireless or fibre.

/M

ah right - as you can see I am completely clueless when it comes to networking ....

when you / they say limit is 100m , what happens to it / speed after 100m - is there big fall of speed ?

Marlow

Andy From Sligo wrote: »

ah right - as you can see I am completely clueless when it comes to networking ....

when you / they say limit is 100m , what happens to it / speed after 100m - is there big fall of speed ?

It stops working .. end of story. Ethernet is not adaptive.

/M

ED E

Mandatory note: Its not just against regs for the fun of it, copper between dwellings (and thus CUs) is dangerous. You can bypass the bits designed to save your life in a fault scenario.

Marlow

ED E wrote: »

Mandatory note: Its not just against regs for the fun of it, copper between dwellings (and thus CUs) is dangerous. You can bypass the bits designed to save your life in a fault scenario.

Yep .. and lightning is no fun, when it happens. And wait ... it actually is not an uncommon event around here. It's actually a major problem to OpenEIR because of some real old fashioned specs how they build their network.

/M