PDA

View Full Version : FBO's and WiFi


Javier Henderson
August 18th 03, 07:20 PM
I overnighted at CRQ on Friday, and used Western Flight for FBO services.

I was pleasantly surprised to find out that they offer complimentary WiFi
Internet access to their customers. Details are posted right on the
counter.

Just passing the info along. I wish more FBO's offered this
service. The overnight ramp fee was $10. Fuel is $2.18 at the self
service island. Friendly folks, the car I had reserved was ready as
promised, and the hotel room they had reserved had been guaranteed for
a late arrival as requested.

-jav

mtmueller
August 18th 03, 08:17 PM
With a good card, and assuming the FBO has their router/antennas positioned
properly, I would say yes.


"Newps" > wrote in message
. net...
>
>
> Javier Henderson wrote:
>
> > I overnighted at CRQ on Friday, and used Western Flight for FBO
services.
> >
> > I was pleasantly surprised to find out that they offer complimentary
WiFi
> > Internet access to their customers. Details are posted right on the
> > counter.
>
> Is the range sufficient that, say, the guy in the tower might be able to
> access the net?
>




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

mtmueller
August 18th 03, 08:18 PM
Seeing as McD's and Panerra's offer this as complimentary these days, it is
going to be just another ammenity.

It means not having to wait for the students to finish up at the weather
terminal...


"Javier Henderson" > wrote in message
...
> I overnighted at CRQ on Friday, and used Western Flight for FBO services.
>
> I was pleasantly surprised to find out that they offer complimentary WiFi
> Internet access to their customers. Details are posted right on the
> counter.
>
> Just passing the info along. I wish more FBO's offered this
> service. The overnight ramp fee was $10. Fuel is $2.18 at the self
> service island. Friendly folks, the car I had reserved was ready as
> promised, and the hotel room they had reserved had been guaranteed for
> a late arrival as requested.
>
> -jav




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

Javier Henderson
August 19th 03, 02:42 PM
Newps > writes:

> Javier Henderson wrote:
>
> > I overnighted at CRQ on Friday, and used Western Flight for FBO services.
> > I was pleasantly surprised to find out that they offer complimentary
> > WiFi
> > Internet access to their customers. Details are posted right on the
> > counter.
>
> Is the range sufficient that, say, the guy in the tower might be able
> to access the net?

In general, it can be made work like that. In this particular situation,
the tower isn't too far from the FBO, but I doubt the signal is usable
at that distance.

-jav

Mark Astley
August 19th 03, 05:09 PM
Another data point for you...

Lincoln Park Aviation (N07) in New Jersey also has wireless. I regularly
bring my laptop over to get the latest weather, DUATs, etc. before a flight.

It should be a no brainer if you already have DSL/Cable. Your overhead is
$100 for a WAP. You'd think every FBO would do it. Of course, some FBOs
are so cheap they don't even have PCs (nevermind a network connection). If
you like anachronisms, stop by the "weather center" at Caldwell Flight
Academy at CDW sometime. If I recall correctly, it's a 100Mhz Pentium with
a 2400 baud modem and a dot matrix printer.

mark

"Javier Henderson" > wrote in message
...
> I overnighted at CRQ on Friday, and used Western Flight for FBO services.
>
> I was pleasantly surprised to find out that they offer complimentary WiFi
> Internet access to their customers. Details are posted right on the
> counter.
>
> Just passing the info along. I wish more FBO's offered this
> service. The overnight ramp fee was $10. Fuel is $2.18 at the self
> service island. Friendly folks, the car I had reserved was ready as
> promised, and the hotel room they had reserved had been guaranteed for
> a late arrival as requested.
>
> -jav

One's Too Many
August 19th 03, 11:42 PM
"Mark Astley" > wrote in message >...
> Another data point for you...
>
> Lincoln Park Aviation (N07) in New Jersey also has wireless. I regularly
> bring my laptop over to get the latest weather, DUATs, etc. before a flight.
>
> It should be a no brainer if you already have DSL/Cable. Your overhead is
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

That's the gotcha at most smaller G/A airports. Around here DSL would
cost $350 for the "approved" DSL modem, plus another $300 installation
fee and then because the FBO would be a "business subscriber" the
monthly bandwidth service + phone line fees will cost $99/month
instead of $49/month like a residential account would pay. And then we
find out that the airport is almost 3000 feet too far in terms of wire
length from the nearest phone company central office building for DSL
to even work. ISDN service might reach out here but would cost
$140/month plus the $350 modem plus $300 setup fee. Of course they'd
be happy to sell us a fractional T-1 line for $450/month plus
installation and equipment costs. I hate the phone company. They're
hardly selling any broadband accounts because they refuse to sell
anything unless they can first make a killing off each one.

Cablemodems still aren't available since the airport is located in a
quasi-rural area. Maybe in about another year they'll have TV cable
run out to this neck of the woods. Meanwhile we're hoping someone will
open up a long-range wireless ISP with those outdoor parabolic grid
antennas. The thought of installing a 50-75' tall antenna pole next to
the FBO building that close to the runway doesn't sit too well with
most folks around here however, but the airport sits down in a hole
and reaching back into town to a WISP's tower will be tough.

We can't even get decent dialup service because the analog phone lines
servicing this area are decades old and have so much sizzling and
crackling static on them that 19.2k - 21.6k baud is doing good if you
can keep the connection alive for more than 10 minues at a time. And
the phone company was going to attempt to use these same old copper
lines for transporting DSL, ISDN or T-1 signal. Shyeah right.

Montblack
August 20th 03, 12:52 AM
http://www.orderdsl.net/satellite.htm
How well do these systems work?

2-way satellite "high speed" internet access.

Anyone with experience with these systems? Hidden costs?

Looks like a good $99 month solution - if it works.

--
Montblack

John Galban
August 20th 03, 02:43 AM
Newps > wrote in message >...
> Javier Henderson wrote:
>
> > I overnighted at CRQ on Friday, and used Western Flight for FBO services.
> >
> > I was pleasantly surprised to find out that they offer complimentary WiFi
> > Internet access to their customers. Details are posted right on the
> > counter.
>
> Is the range sufficient that, say, the guy in the tower might be able to
> access the net?


You know how to use a Pringle's can, don't you??

http://www.time.com/time/archive/preview/from_redirect/0,10987,1101020617-260724,00.html

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

Darrel Toepfer
August 20th 03, 03:36 AM
"Montblack" > wrote...
> http://www.orderdsl.net/satellite.htm
> How well do these systems work?
>
> 2-way satellite "high speed" internet access.
>
> Anyone with experience with these systems? Hidden costs?
>
> Looks like a good $99 month solution - if it works.

500ms ping time minimum... So count on lots of lag...

Some don't network very well...

None will work when it rains hard or the sun is in transit (summer / winter
soltice)...

All end up with more customers than they can actually support (whether it be
on the transponders, gateways or internet bandwidth)...

They all limit how much you can download, whether they tell you they do or
not...

Peter Duniho
August 20th 03, 05:13 AM
"Darrel Toepfer" > wrote in message
...
> 500ms ping time minimum... So count on lots of lag...

Unless you are playing online computer games, you would never notice the
lag. Most Internet access is of the form "brief request for data, followed
by large amount of data returned". It'll take an extra half-second for the
data to show up, but that will generally be swamped by the time it takes to
actually generate and send the data, even at broadband speeds.

> Some don't network very well...

Not sure what that means.

> None will work when it rains hard or the sun is in transit (summer /
winter
> soltice)...

Why would you say that? The satellite data systems I've seen are based on
similar technology to that used for my digital broadcast satellite system.
At worst, data throughput drops *some*, and that's in the very worst
downpours.

I have no idea why the solstices would have any effect on data transmission.
Perhaps you could explain that one.

> All end up with more customers than they can actually support (whether it
be
> on the transponders, gateways or internet bandwidth)...

That may well be true. Though, of course, it happens with DSL and cable as
well.

Pete

Pete Zaitcev
August 20th 03, 06:58 AM
On Tue, 19 Aug 2003 18:52:58 -0500, Montblack wrote:

> http://www.orderdsl.net/satellite.htm How well do these systems work?
>
> 2-way satellite "high speed" internet access.
>
> Anyone with experience with these systems? Hidden costs?
>
> Looks like a good $99 month solution - if it works.

Less than that, actually. Around here, lots of gas stations
use it to connect to their HQ. Perhaps they get discounts.

I do not have experience, but there are some obvious gotchas.
First, you must have USB, and you must have Windows (2K or XP).
Second, interactive traffic is a pain in the ass because
of the delay, so gaming is out. Neither are fatal for FBO
or a gas station, I suppose.

-- Pete

Pete Zaitcev
August 20th 03, 07:08 AM
On Tue, 19 Aug 2003 21:13:35 -0700, Peter Duniho wrote:

>> 500ms ping time minimum... So count on lots of lag...
>
> Unless you are playing online computer games, you would never notice the
> lag. Most Internet access is of the form "brief request for data,
> followed by large amount of data returned". It'll take an extra
> half-second for the data to show up, but that will generally be swamped by
> the time it takes to actually generate and send the data, even at
> broadband speeds.

This depends on how big the data piece is relative to the
starting handshake. Consider that TCP start-up involves
so-called 3-way handshake, and that many protocols have
a setup phase when client and server exchange messages
strictly in simplex, before bulk data transmission can commence.

>> None will work when it rains hard or the sun is in transit
>> (summer / winter soltice)...

> Why would you say that? The satellite data systems I've seen are based on
> similar technology to that used for my digital broadcast satellite system.
> At worst, data throughput drops *some*, and that's in the very worst
> downpours.
>
> I have no idea why the solstices would have any effect on data
> transmission. Perhaps you could explain that one.

Your transmitter is nowhere as powerful as the one of the base station
or the one on the satellite.

The good news is that DirecWay's dish is about as big as the
old PrimeStar dish. I have one of those, modified to support
DirecTV's LNB with a bunch of duct tape and some pieces of wood.
My TV never goes off even in "worst downpours". So, your downlink
is virtually rain proof. The bad news is that the same cannot
be said about your uplink.

Solstices only knock communication off for several minutes a day,
when the Sun is directly behind the satellite. It is a well known
effect. I used to depend on an old Soviet satellite Raduga-7
for connectivity, and it was true back then.

-- Pete

Peter Duniho
August 20th 03, 07:41 AM
"Pete Zaitcev" > wrote in message
...
> This depends on how big the data piece is relative to the
> starting handshake. Consider that TCP start-up involves
> so-called 3-way handshake, and that many protocols have
> a setup phase when client and server exchange messages
> strictly in simplex, before bulk data transmission can commence.

Regardless, that still only affects the initial delay in response. Even if
the delay were 10 seconds (which it's almost never going to be), that's in
the same ballpark as the delay some servers have just getting around to
servicing a client. It's just not a big deal.

> [...] So, your downlink
> is virtually rain proof. The bad news is that the same cannot
> be said about your uplink.

Hmmm...okay, I see. I wasn't aware that they didn't provide a high enough
power transmitter to deal with weather.

> Solstices only knock communication off for several minutes a day,
> when the Sun is directly behind the satellite. It is a well known
> effect. I used to depend on an old Soviet satellite Raduga-7
> for connectivity, and it was true back then.

Several minutes? I guess I'd call that insignificant. That's what, 10
minutes of downtime per year? Big deal. I have to deal with that kind of
downtime with my wired DSL access.

Pete

Robert Henry
August 20th 03, 02:01 PM
"Martin Hotze" > wrote in message
...
> (John Galban) wrote:

> the Pringles can is too small to have good signals. You have to use a
> wider can.
>

While I haven't tried the pringles can, a 14dbi YAGI antenna is 3" in
diameter. The specs show some incredible range capabilities with height,
while still offering T1 speeds, interference and practicality
notwithstanding (how do you get two fixed antennas 4000ft tall, 80 miles
apart?). The tower could easily use the FBO set up with the right antennas
and line of sight.

Robert Henry
August 20th 03, 02:08 PM
"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
...
> "Pete Zaitcev" > wrote in message
> ...
> > This depends on how big the data piece is relative to the
> > starting handshake. Consider that TCP start-up involves
> > so-called 3-way handshake, and that many protocols have
> > a setup phase when client and server exchange messages
> > strictly in simplex, before bulk data transmission can commence.
>
> Regardless, that still only affects the initial delay in response.

The number of DNS queries to render any particular page can drive this time
up quite high. Have a couple packets lost in between? ouch.

$1000 a year is a bit steep for the class of service.

Javier Henderson
August 20th 03, 02:56 PM
"Peter Duniho" > writes:

> "Darrel Toepfer" > wrote in message
> ...
> > 500ms ping time minimum... So count on lots of lag...
>
> Unless you are playing online computer games, you would never notice the
> lag.

Interactive logins (telnet, etc) would suck with such a lag.

-jav

Morgans
August 20th 03, 03:52 PM
"John Galban" > wrote in message
om...
> Newps > wrote in message
>...
> > Javier Henderson wrote:
> >
> > > I overnighted at CRQ on Friday, and used Western Flight for FBO
services.
> > >
> > > I was pleasantly surprised to find out that they offer complimentary
WiFi
> > > Internet access to their customers. Details are posted right on the
> > > counter.
> >
> > Is the range sufficient that, say, the guy in the tower might be able to
> > access the net?
>
>
> You know how to use a Pringle's can, don't you??
>
>
http://www.time.com/time/archive/preview/from_redirect/0,10987,1101020617-260724,00.html
>
> John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

Like I'm going to pay $2.50 to see a story on the net! NOT!
--
Jim in NC--

Aardvarks
August 20th 03, 03:59 PM
>
> Like I'm going to pay $2.50 to see a story on the net! NOT!
Free version
http://www.oreillynet.com/cs/weblog/view/wlg/448
:)



WW

Morgans
August 20th 03, 04:02 PM
"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
...
>
> I have no idea why the solstices would have any effect on data
transmission.
> Perhaps you could explain that one.
>

During solstices, or even within a few days, the elevation to the sun and
the satelite is nearly the same. As the sun transits across the sky, for a
period of time, your reciever, the satelite, and the sun are all nearly in
line. The sun; since it appears directly on the other side of the
transmitter, overcomes the transmitter signal with white noise (radiation)
--
Jim in NC--

Scott Lowrey
August 20th 03, 06:13 PM
Pete Zaitcev > wrote in message >...
> On Tue, 19 Aug 2003 21:13:35 -0700, Peter Duniho wrote:
>
> >> 500ms ping time minimum... So count on lots of lag...
> >
> > Unless you are playing online computer games, you would never notice the
> > lag. Most Internet access is of the form "brief request for data,
> > followed by large amount of data returned". It'll take an extra
> > half-second for the data to show up, but that will generally be swamped by
> > the time it takes to actually generate and send the data, even at
> > broadband speeds.
>
> This depends on how big the data piece is relative to the
> starting handshake. Consider that TCP start-up involves
> so-called 3-way handshake, and that many protocols have
> a setup phase when client and server exchange messages
> strictly in simplex, before bulk data transmission can commence.

Sorry for continuing an off-topic conversation and splitting hairs,
but....

"Lag" in the original poster's case, is actually referred to as
"latency" in the world of computer networking. Latency is defined as
the time it takes to set up and send a message, whereas bandwidth is
the rate at which data moves from point to point. Sat connections,
therefore, have a latency of 500ms (for example) plus the latency of
the system doing the send/receive.

Since all data is transported in TCP packets (in the case of Web
traffic), there is continual send AND receive on BOTH sides since TCP
requires acknowledgement of every packet on the part the of the
receiver (remember, TCP is a *reliable* protocol). Granted, the ACK
packets are much smaller than the data packets and most of the traffic
to a web browswer is downstream, but a high-latency network like
satellite will exhibit performance degradation during *all* phases of
a connection, not just startup.

Did I just restate what was already said? Sorry!

-Scott

Peter Duniho
August 20th 03, 06:50 PM
"Robert Henry" > wrote in message
news:hpK0b.11202$uh6.8355@lakeread05...
> The number of DNS queries to render any particular page can drive this
time
> up quite high. Have a couple packets lost in between? ouch.

That's just silly. Especially for the typical use in an FBO, the number of
DNS queries to render any particular page is going to be quite small.
Furthermore, there's no need for DNS queries to be serviced sequentially,
and I doubt any browser would do it that way. I know that IE doesn't.

Once they get the initial page HTML, any additional Internet addresses that
need a DNS query to be resolved can and will be handled asynchronously. In
other words, a dozen DNS queries required by a single page isn't going to
take much more time than one additional DNS query would take.

> $1000 a year is a bit steep for the class of service.

Only if you can have DSL or a cable modem installed. If you are in the
boonies and satellite is the fastest, most reliable Internet connection you
can get, $1000/year isn't that bad at all.

Pete

Peter Duniho
August 20th 03, 06:55 PM
"Scott Lowrey" > wrote in message
om...
> Since all data is transported in TCP packets (in the case of Web
> traffic), there is continual send AND receive on BOTH sides since TCP
> requires acknowledgement of every packet on the part the of the
> receiver (remember, TCP is a *reliable* protocol). Granted, the ACK
> packets are much smaller than the data packets and most of the traffic
> to a web browswer is downstream, but a high-latency network like
> satellite will exhibit performance degradation during *all* phases of
> a connection, not just startup.

Wrong. Only if the server requires a protocol-defined acknowledgement
(where protocol is the high-level protocol, like FTP, HTTP, etc., *not* TCP)
would that happen. And that's uncommon with TCP-based protocols (since it
would totally break one of the main advantages of using TCP). Certainly
it's not the case with any of the commonly used protocols.

TCP uses sliding windows to allow constant streaming of data to occur as
long as the latency in the connection is "reasonable". That is, it will
send many packets before needing to receive any acknowledgement even for the
first packet. As long as the acknowledgements start coming in time, the
latency of the connection will NOT affect throughput AT ALL. A latency of
500ms is MORE than reasonable in this context.

Pete

Peter Duniho
August 20th 03, 06:58 PM
"Pete Zaitcev" > wrote in message
...
> [...]
> Solstices only knock communication off for several minutes a day,
> when the Sun is directly behind the satellite. It is a well known
> effect.

By the way, surely you and the others mean equinoxes, not solstices? During
a solstice, the sun is at its greatest deflection from the equator (and thus
a geostationary satellite), while during an equinox, the sun is directly
over the equator.

Not that it matters in the context of this discussion, since the downtime
still is present, regardless of what time during the year it happens.

Pete

Peter Duniho
August 20th 03, 06:59 PM
"One's Too Many" > wrote in message
m...
> [...] The money for acquiring a broadband Internet connection for our
> humble little FBO is being mostly pooled together by the local EAA /
> homebuilt guys who are all quite the Linux and Apple zealots and hate
> Microsoft. A Windows-only broadband connection will be totally
> unpalateable to them.

Well, it's true. Religious zealots often pay dearly for their irrational
beliefs.

By the way, if they'd tolerate even a single Windows box (the cost of which
would be miniscule compared to the total cost of the Internet connection),
they could hook up whatever other operating systems they want, using the
Windows box as the network router.

Pete

Ron Natalie
August 20th 03, 07:05 PM
"Scott Lowrey" > wrote in message om...
> Pete Zaitcev > wrote in message >...
>> "Lag" in the original poster's case, is actually referred to as
> "latency" in the world of computer networking. Latency is defined as
> the time it takes to set up and send a message,

Well, it's the overall transmission time from source to destination. The
overhead to set up and send a satellite packet isn't really any worse
than anything else, it just takes a long time to deliever.
>
> Since all data is transported in TCP packets (in the case of Web
> traffic), there is continual send AND receive on BOTH sides since TCP
> requires acknowledgement of every packet on the part the of the
> receiver (remember, TCP is a *reliable* protocol).

Actually, it's acknowledgement of the position in the byte stream.

> Granted, the ACK
> packets are much smaller than the data packets

There's no such thing as an ACK packet. A TCP packet can have
data as well as the ack for data received.

John Harper
August 20th 03, 07:10 PM
Huh? MS attempted to build a NT-based router several years ago and gave
up. There is no such animal.

OTOH a Linksys router will cost $100-200 at your friendly local Fry's
(or whatever) and will do everything required.

I suppose I should admit a bias here since Linksys just got acquired by
my employer, but actually we acquired them precisely BECAUSE they
are such a good fit to this kind of requirement. They
have competitors like Netgear who do the same kind of thing at the
same price point, so you can take this as a generic recommendation.

John

"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
...
> "One's Too Many" > wrote in message
> m...
> > [...] The money for acquiring a broadband Internet connection for our
> > humble little FBO is being mostly pooled together by the local EAA /
> > homebuilt guys who are all quite the Linux and Apple zealots and hate
> > Microsoft. A Windows-only broadband connection will be totally
> > unpalateable to them.
>
> Well, it's true. Religious zealots often pay dearly for their irrational
> beliefs.
>
> By the way, if they'd tolerate even a single Windows box (the cost of
which
> would be miniscule compared to the total cost of the Internet connection),
> they could hook up whatever other operating systems they want, using the
> Windows box as the network router.
>
> Pete
>
>

Kyler Laird
August 20th 03, 08:18 PM
"Peter Duniho" > writes:

>"Darrel Toepfer" > wrote in message
...
>> 500ms ping time minimum... So count on lots of lag...

>Unless you are playing online computer games, you would never notice the
>lag.

Call me on my Asterisk VoIP phone and let's talk about that.

>> Some don't network very well...

>Not sure what that means.

Consumer satellite network systems have traditionally been closed. I
recall one (StarBand, I think) that had a USB interface but someone
figured out that it just went to a USB Ethernet adapter which would be
easily bypassed to get plain old Ethernet. Still, MS Windows is often
an official requirement and setting up a NATed network is not always
straightforward (because of special caching clients?).

>> None will work when it rains hard or the sun is in transit (summer /
>winter
>> soltice)...

>Why would you say that? The satellite data systems I've seen are based on
>similar technology to that used for my digital broadcast satellite system.
>At worst, data throughput drops *some*, and that's in the very worst
>downpours.

The downlink is not as much of a problem as the uplink.

>I have no idea why the solstices would have any effect on data transmission.
>Perhaps you could explain that one.

Probably has something to do with naked people dancing in front of the
dish.

>> All end up with more customers than they can actually support (whether it
>be
>> on the transponders, gateways or internet bandwidth)...

>That may well be true. Though, of course, it happens with DSL and cable as
>well.

Sure, but DSL and cable have comparatively huge data capacities. It
takes a tiny amount of usage to swamp a satellite uplink.

Make sure to check out some reviews of satellite services before jumping
in. Lots of people have gotten burned when they planned on using them
just like other high-speed services. (I'd still like to get one with a
folding antenna for plane camping someday.)

--kyler

Joachim Feise
August 20th 03, 08:32 PM
Peter Duniho wrote:

> "One's Too Many" > wrote in message
> m...
>
>>[...] The money for acquiring a broadband Internet connection for our
>>humble little FBO is being mostly pooled together by the local EAA /
>>homebuilt guys who are all quite the Linux and Apple zealots and hate
>>Microsoft. A Windows-only broadband connection will be totally
>>unpalateable to them.
>
>
> Well, it's true. Religious zealots often pay dearly for their irrational
> beliefs.

BS. It is not about zealotry, but about using the right tool for the right
task.

> By the way, if they'd tolerate even a single Windows box (the cost of which
> would be miniscule compared to the total cost of the Internet connection),
> they could hook up whatever other operating systems they want, using the
> Windows box as the network router.

Talk about using the wrong tool for the task. You can get specialized
routers/firewalls from Linksys for next to nothing. Plug it in, and
forget about it. Maintenance free, unlike a Windows box.
Or, put an old 386 or 486 PC with Linux or OpenBSD there. You can get
such old machines for next to nothing at your local swap meet. A little
bit more installation, but certainly less maintenance than a Windows box.
I reboot my Linux firewall only when I change some hardware. My Windows
laptop needs a reboot every coupld of days...

-Joe

Newps
August 20th 03, 09:51 PM
Morgans wrote:


> During solstices, or even within a few days, the elevation to the sun and
> the satelite is nearly the same. As the sun transits across the sky, for a
> period of time, your reciever, the satelite, and the sun are all nearly in
> line. The sun; since it appears directly on the other side of the
> transmitter, overcomes the transmitter signal with white noise (radiation)

Directv is unaffected. I have had my system for 7 years now. Not so
much as a hiccup excpet when there is a heavy wet snow. The snow sticks
to the feedhorn. Brush it off and the picture is back. I have turned
the TV on in a heavy downpour and checked signal strength, no change.
Always in the high 80's here.

Pete Zaitcev
August 20th 03, 10:03 PM
On Wed, 20 Aug 2003 11:10:20 -0700, John Harper wrote:

> OTOH a Linksys router will cost $100-200 at your friendly local Fry's (or
> whatever) and will do everything required.

You weren't following. The whole reason to deploy Windows box
is to run the driver for the DirecWay channel end with the
USB interface. It's basically the winmodem story redux.

-- Pete

Peter Duniho
August 21st 03, 12:26 AM
"John Harper" > wrote in message
news:1061403096.349486@sj-nntpcache-3...
> Huh? MS attempted to build a NT-based router several years ago and gave
> up. There is no such animal.

Of course there is. Windows comes with Internet Connection Sharing, which
is basically a software NAT router. Works fine.

> OTOH a Linksys router will cost $100-200 at your friendly local Fry's
> (or whatever) and will do everything required.

Not with the satellite hookups, since they require a specific USB connection
and driver. I think it's silly the satellite data services don't just use
Ethernet, but they don't. You can't use a regular hardware router with
them.

Pete

Peter Duniho
August 21st 03, 02:29 AM
"Joachim Feise" > wrote in message
...
> The beauty of capitalism is that other companies offering similar systems
may
> see that there is a competitive advantage by offering drivers for other
> platforms

And I hope they do. I think it's silly that any Internet connectivity
solution is reliant on a specific software platform, which just building it
as an Ethernet access point gives you universal connectivity.

> True, stability of Windows has gone up, but it is still not at par with
*nix.

If and when Unix supports the same feature set and wide variety of hardware
that Windows does, you will see Unix platforms stability having the same
problems people see in Windows. Conservatively, half of all crashes on
Windows are due to third-party software and have nothing to do with anything
Microsoft wrote or published.

People love to say the same thing about Macs. However, first of all, those
people apparently forget the "good old days" when the Mac didn't have a real
memory manager, and rogue applications caused the entire machine to lock up
all the time. Also, those people blame Microsoft and laud Apple, while
forgetting that the main reason Macs are so stable is that Apple has
complete control over all of the hardware and operating system combinations.
They simply have a much smaller test matrix to ensure proper operation.

There's a reason that there's a correlation between the number of possible
software/hardware combinations and the problems with stablility.

> [...] There should be no reason for a plain software install to
> require a reboot.

You are right. However, that's just not the fact of life with Windows.
Windows itself doesn't require a reboot for basic application installs, but
third-party publishers continue to write application installs that require a
reboot. That's not Microsoft's fault.

Beyond that, some installs DO require a reboot. Anything driver-related
that affects hardware that is initialized on boot is going to want to reboot
the system.

Regardless, it's been years (since I moved our last Win9x machine to Windows
2000) since I've had to reboot a machine just to fix a problem. All reboots
have been for reasons unrelated to system stability.

> It is known, btw, that Windows often has problems with laptop hibernation.

And in some versions of Windows, it was actually Windows fault. Win98SE was
a particular abomination in this respect (though it did get patched soon
after release). However, most of the time it's due to inconsistent
implementation of the power control in hardware.

Regardless, neither of the laptops in our household have any problem with
suspend/hibernate/resume.

How well does Linux handle suspend/hibernate/resume? I've never tried it,
myself.

Pete

Scott Lowrey
August 21st 03, 02:37 AM
"Ron Natalie" > wrote:
>
> There's no such thing as an ACK packet. A TCP packet can have
> data as well as the ack for data received.

I wouldn't say there's "no such thing". The people I work with
generally call a packet with the ACK bit set an "ACK". :-). And
if you examine the packets flying in and out during a web surfing
session, they usually don't contain any data.

The latency in the network is going to affect the retransmission
timer on the sending end. Delay is delay. It's not constant, but
it is cumulative.

I'll concede, though, that as long as the acknowledgement timing is
not highly variable, the window will stabilize and you'll get your
nominal throughput *for that particular HTTP request*. Another click
or a redirect and, presto, another delay. It all adds up.

Sorry to flog the dead horse... I'll shut up.

-Scott

Kyler Laird
August 21st 03, 04:18 AM
"Peter Duniho" > writes:

>TCP uses sliding windows to allow constant streaming of data to occur as
>long as the latency in the connection is "reasonable". That is, it will
>send many packets before needing to receive any acknowledgement even for the
>first packet. As long as the acknowledgements start coming in time, the
>latency of the connection will NOT affect throughput AT ALL. A latency of
>500ms is MORE than reasonable in this context.

Everything you're saying makes sense to me, but you might want to hang
around on news:comp.protocols.tcp-ip for awhile. I regularly notice
people trying to debug satellite TCP issues there.

It's quite possible that it's just a matter of getting all of the
settings tweaked everywhere, but it seems to cause a lot of grief.

--kyler

Javier Henderson
August 21st 03, 05:16 AM
Newps > writes:

> Morgans wrote:
>
>
> > During solstices, or even within a few days, the elevation to the sun and
> > the satelite is nearly the same. As the sun transits across the sky, for a
> > period of time, your reciever, the satelite, and the sun are all nearly in
> > line. The sun; since it appears directly on the other side of the
> > transmitter, overcomes the transmitter signal with white noise (radiation)
>
> Directv is unaffected. I have had my system for 7 years now. Not so
> much as a hiccup excpet when there is a heavy wet snow. The snow
> sticks to the feedhorn. Brush it off and the picture is back. I have
> turned the TV on in a heavy downpour and checked signal strength, no
> change. Always in the high 80's here.

DirecTV and Dishnetwork are indeed affected. The affection lasts just
a few minutes twice a year. Check it at the next equinox, you will
see. The exact time varies with your location, I'm sure there's a web
page somewhere that will calculate the service-out time for your
lat/lon.

-jav

Darrel Toepfer
August 21st 03, 04:39 PM
"Peter Duniho" > wrote...
> "Pete Zaitcev" > wrote...
> > This depends on how big the data piece is relative to the
> > starting handshake. Consider that TCP start-up involves
> > so-called 3-way handshake, and that many protocols have
> > a setup phase when client and server exchange messages
> > strictly in simplex, before bulk data transmission can commence.
>
> Regardless, that still only affects the initial delay in response. Even
if
> the delay were 10 seconds (which it's almost never going to be), that's in
> the same ballpark as the delay some servers have just getting around to
> servicing a client. It's just not a big deal.

Ever tried VOIP over satellite? Painful, is a good one word discription,
same for remote access applications, network gaming as mentioned is
impossible...

> > [...] So, your downlink
> > is virtually rain proof. The bad news is that the same cannot
> > be said about your uplink.
>
> Hmmm...okay, I see. I wasn't aware that they didn't provide a high enough
> power transmitter to deal with weather.

Someone who lives in the desert might not experience as much rainfall that
occurs in other parts of the USofA or other countries in the beam... Hmmm
Las Vegas just got flooded, so better wording might be, "on a regular
basis"...

> > Solstices only knock communication off for several minutes a day,
> > when the Sun is directly behind the satellite. It is a well known
> > effect. I used to depend on an old Soviet satellite Raduga-7
> > for connectivity, and it was true back then.
>
> Several minutes? I guess I'd call that insignificant. That's what, 10
> minutes of downtime per year? Big deal. I have to deal with that kind of
> downtime with my wired DSL access.

Nearly 10 minutes per day spread over several days, twice a year...
Guaranteed to screw up something important that needed to be done,
everytime...

Satellite data delivery has faults, just making you aware of it... I've been
there done that (our lawyers got the money from the class action lawsuit
against Hughes) and won't geaux back (2 cards still sits in the deactivated
computers since '98, dishes are still pointed at the satellites) to anything
with a ping time over 90 ms to the world... I actually endured the loss of
the satellite itself once, and the repointing a few times due to bird
migration (moving from one satellite to another, as the provider sees
fit)...

Peter Duniho
August 21st 03, 05:56 PM
"Joachim Feise" > wrote in message
...
> > How well does Linux handle suspend/hibernate/resume? I've never tried
it,
> > myself.
>
> A couple years back, the first time I put Linux on my laptop, the network
> driver wouldn't work after a resume. At that time, reinitializing the
network
> driver was required.
> Nowadays, I don't experience any problems. Both wired and wireless network
> come back to life just fine.

A couple years back, Windows was handling that just fine on my laptop.

Nice to hear Linux has caught up...

John Galban
August 21st 03, 09:18 PM
"Morgans" > wrote in message >...
> "John Galban" > wrote in message
> om...
> > Newps > wrote in message
> >...
> > > Javier Henderson wrote:
> > >
> > > > I overnighted at CRQ on Friday, and used Western Flight for FBO
> services.
> > > >
> > > > I was pleasantly surprised to find out that they offer complimentary
> WiFi
> > > > Internet access to their customers. Details are posted right on the
> > > > counter.
> > >
> > > Is the range sufficient that, say, the guy in the tower might be able to
> > > access the net?
> >
> >
> > You know how to use a Pringle's can, don't you??
> >
> >
> http://www.time.com/time/archive/preview/from_redirect/0,10987,1101020617-260724,00.html
> >
> > John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)
>
> Like I'm going to pay $2.50 to see a story on the net! NOT!

What??? I found the link on Google and it didn't ask me to pay
anything. It just showed the article. Go figure.

Sorry 'bout that.

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

Peter Duniho
August 22nd 03, 02:09 AM
"Kyler Laird" > wrote in message
...
> If you meant "Unless you are playing online computer games, you would
never
> notice the lag while doing things a typical FBO is likely to do" you
should
> have said so.

Of course you're right. This is, after all, the Usenet, and there's always
someone around willing to broaden your discussion in an attempt to discredit
you. Heaven forbib someone make a try at a little brevity, and leave out
critical clauses like "(or something like that)", or "(for example)", or
another parenthetical elaboration that would prevent the Usenet pundits from
distracting from the underlying point once again.

Thank you for the reminder.

> (Then we'd ask why you thought you had to specifically count
> out online computer games as something FBOs typically use.)

Actually, I mentioned online computer games specifically because there are a
handful that I could actually see being used in an FBO. Multiplayer flight
sims, for example. The other examples of things that latency would cause
problems with are farther afield, and in fact are things many people reading
my post would not have even heard of.

Pete

Kyler Laird
August 22nd 03, 10:19 PM
"Peter Duniho" > writes:

>"Kyler Laird" > wrote in message
...
>> If you meant "Unless you are playing online computer games, you would
>never
>> notice the lag while doing things a typical FBO is likely to do" you
>should
>> have said so.

>Of course you're right. This is, after all, the Usenet, and there's always
>someone around willing to broaden your discussion in an attempt to discredit
>you.

Well, you *were* wrong.

>Heaven forbib someone make a try at a little brevity, and leave out
>critical clauses like "(or something like that)", or "(for example)", or
>another parenthetical elaboration that would prevent the Usenet pundits from
>distracting from the underlying point once again.

If you're going to say things that are wrong, you should know that someone
is likely to nail you. I depend on people doing that for me.

If you still think you'll never notice the lag, do as I suggested and set
up a voice call to me over a consumer satellite IP service. Do it from an
FBO if it makes you happy. I'll be *thrilled* if we don't "notice the lag."

--kyler

Peter Duniho
August 22nd 03, 11:13 PM
"Kyler Laird" > wrote in message
...
> Well, you *were* wrong.

Hardly.

My statement was never intended to be the end-all, be-all enumeration of
situations in which the connection's latency would be noticed. My point was
and still is that it's not the kind of thing an FBO would be concerned with.
I mentioned games as something that, while probably still unusual, is a
situation in which someone at an FBO would notice the latency.

You took it upon yourself to broaden the intended interpretation of the
statement, and then correct it on that basis. Granted, that's typical
Usenet behavior, and that's all my most recent reply was intended to
acknowledge.

Pete

Marty Ross
August 23rd 03, 12:29 AM
Which Linux are you using, and which laptop (model #)?

"Joachim Feise" > wrote in message
...
> Peter Duniho wrote:
> >
> > A couple years back, Windows was handling that just fine on my laptop.
>
> Well, still not on mine... Sometimes W2K hangs when trying to hibernate,
> and I have to do a hard reset.
>
> > Nice to hear Linux has caught up...
>
> At least it hibernates consistently, which I can't say for Windows.
>
> -Joe
>

Darrel Toepfer
August 24th 03, 07:16 PM
"Peter Duniho" > wrote...
> Darrel Toepfer wrote...
> > Ever tried VOIP over satellite?
>
> I'm not aware of any FBO that is talking about using VOIP over a satellite
> link. There are many applications for with the latency in a satellite
link
> would be detrimental. That's not the point. The question is whether such
a
> link would work for an FBO.

I think the original inquiry was as to the limitations of satellite supplied
IP service, those limitations were passed on from personal experiences. VOIP
is available through most IP networks, might as well take advantage of it if
its there...

> I'd take issue with your claim that "network gaming as mentioned is
> impossible", since that's not universally true (many online games work
fine
> even with high latency), but it's not relevant at all to this discussion.

Fine, play checkers on Yahoo, knock yourself out. Don't cry too loudly when
you get kicked out for lagging the games found there...

> > Nearly 10 minutes per day spread over several days, twice a year...
> > Guaranteed to screw up something important that needed to be done,
> > everytime...
>
> Doesn't sound like a problem that would preclude an FBO using a satellite
> link.

As stated it will eventually effect something important that needed to be
done at that instant...

The weather station that is there now is fed via satellite, was replaced
awhile back when the terminal went under water for a time. Its unavailable
afterhours since the terminal is locked...

My local FBO will be supplied with an 802.11b repeater from my wireless
service, most if not all outbound ports will be blocked except for port
80... Service will be free to those that need access, my subscription
service already covers the north end of the runway... Now if they'd just
install one of those 24hr fueling stations... Have another wireless project
in the works at 3R7, so may duplicate the service there as well... They have
one of those 24 fueling stations... <g>

Darrel Toepfer
Eunice, La. 4R7

Roger Halstead
August 30th 03, 08:22 AM
>You probably shouldn't be trusted to maintain a Windows system then. None
>of my Windows machines (all running Windows 2000 or Windows XP, including
>two laptops) ever need a reboot. I let them go weeks, and they only get
>rebooted for reasons unrelated to system stability (usually a software
>install, new drivers, that sort of thing).

I'm afraid to ask which frequency version this is using.

Roger Halstead (K8RI EN73 & ARRL Life Member)
www.rogerhalstead.com
N833R World's oldest Debonair? (S# CD-2)

>
>Pete
>

Google