Re: Little BIG problem with Backbone
Am 2004-04-09 23:20:47, schrieb Andreas John:
>Hello!
>
>Before all this begins to get silly:
>You are playing with amount of money which I would not concern as
>pennyware. As from you mails before, it's clearly to recognize that you
I had a talk with the "Ministry of Communicatin" in Rabat and he ask
me about the costs.
I have answerd "some hundred million Dirham".
A littlebit silence and than he ask me "How many hundred million ?"
OK, between 8 and 12.
He was meaning, thats a real chiffre.
>haven an idea, but no concept nor the skills you need. You will need
>probably consultants who help you to find a concept that works - in
>financial and technical concerns.
Right, and as I have written, I do only the study for this project.
Then I will present this Project som people from the Maroc Gov. and
some Finanicial/Technical Specialists to get a summary...
>Some technical questions:
>
>_ How will you do the accounting for wireless connections? Security? To
>"shoot from the hip" I would recommend Maxina (www.maxina.de)
Oll Users have a fixed IP-Address and security is VPN/pptp (Included
since Win98) and downlodable for Win95.
"Maxina" I do not know and I will check it out.
>_ Did You know that Satellite Communictions has huge latencey ( 2 *
>36000Km distance ... I guess you won't be able to get a ping below 500ms)
Yes I know. Not funny for gamers...
>_ Scalabilty? How many users can an accesspoint (Tsunami et al.) take?
>It's probably not an bandwidth concern ...
I offer only 64, 128 and 256 kBit. because my Experience with the
"Lucent ORINOCO" maybe 2500 Clients with 64 kBit on one 54 MBit Channel.
>_ Did you know that "100% ISPs" are generally nothing else than "99,x%
>ISPs" when it comes to reality? The only advantage is, that you give you
>some pence if they violate their SLA.
YES.
>_ Did you know that "54Mbit" 802.11a doesn't really give you 54 Mbit in
>realiy? (huge overhead, all German readers: C'T benchmarked it)
But they have only Benchmarked the SOHO-Systems not HighEnd.
You can not compare a Lucent ORINOCO or a Proxim Tsunami with
Netgear, Dlink or Linksys.
For example: The cheap 11 MBit WaveLAN cards like Linksys or
Dlink hav only 10-15 mWatt.
The Lucent ORINOCO SilverCard 35 mWatt (required
for the AccessPoints) and the GoldCard 50 mWatt.
Between two Netgear Cards you can have not more
then 100 Meters with 3-4 MBytes/Sec and than you
have a fallback to 5,5 MBit
Between two Lucent ORINOCO GoldCards you can have
more then 600 Meters with 7 MBytes/Sec.
For the cheap Cards you pay 22-40 Euro but for the
Lucent ORINOCO GoldCard 109 Euro
>_ For reliable wireless LAN you need line of sight or very close distance
The Lucent ORINOCO is tested in Kehl/Allemagne with up to 1300 Meters
between the COR (OmniWave 10dBi) and ROR (YAGI 14 dBi) and between ROR
(OmniWave) and Client without External Antenna up to 500 Meters.
The Proxim Tsunami MP.11a is Tested in Strasbourg (Center) and do the
job between the COR (SectorAntenne 120° 12dBi) and ROR (YAGI 16dBi) in
a distance of up to 8000 Meters (I was not able to get bigger distances).
Between ROR (OmniWave 10 dBi) and the Clients I have gotten more then
1000 Meters with 256 kBit and it does not make a fallback to 48 MBit.
>_ 34Mbit and 155Mbit "radio" LAN Connection Equipment is far better than
>802.x but very expensive and maybe shitty to when it comes to "noise"
>concerns. LaserLinks are more reliable but don't work in foggy environments.
8.000 km of FiberOptic cable ?
I do not like to dream about the price...
But RadioBridges with 34 MBit do maximum 30 km and with 155 MBit
around 20 km. So I need many of them.
One of the Enterprises that I have contacted was
<http://www.itm-group.com/> and the Suggestion:
34 MBit Systems: Sagem, Witcom, Ericsson
155 MBit Systems: Ceragon, Ericsson
Also he told me, that I need between 7 and 10 RadioBridges for a
distance of 300 km because the turn of the Earth.
>What you try to build up is an ISP + Carrier + Datacenter. Whooo much
>stuff. There specialists out that only do one of there three things and
>all have much to do with olny one area ....
;-)
My OWN Project was the Creation of a CyberCenter which contains:
1) InternetCafe Based on Debian GNU/Linux
2) Education Center for women Informatic/Linux/Office
3) WaveLAN-ISP Only Localy.
For this it is enough, if I have two E3 (34MBit), a "3Com NETBuilder
II" (8-Slot), one Proxim Tsunami MP.11a and the possibility of
Serverhosting.
Because Internet is realy expensive in Maroc and my Enterprise is
"non-lucrativ" I like to drop down the price under the ADSL.
But NOW: 450.000 DH (41.000 Euro) for ONE E3. Two times more
expensive as in France and fife time more expensive
as in Germany...
OK, my plan is to create three CyberCenters...
Fes, Casablanca and Marrakech.
Each 2 x E3 and 68 MBit ???
Or better two times an OC-3 with 311 MBit ???
I have ask some friends in different Cities of Maroc and the IDEA was
born to create a second Internet-Network in Maroc.
A network like a belt. One side is the Atlantic coast and
the other side Algeria, where I have gotten some requests.
But this requires much more technic.
Now I like to check up the possibilities.
I am Responsable for more the 180 Servers (26 my own), but never I have
worked with a Network of this Dimension. In Kehl/Gemany it was done by
UUnet and the DT-Systems with a CISCO Router and I had only to deal with
a FastEthernet.
The OC-3 in Paris is managed by amen.fr my ISP. I have an GBit Repeater
and my Servers are connected via 100Base-TX Links
So nothing to do with ATM and somthing like this.
>But that does not mean that you project is impossible, but what you need
>to know can't be learned in 8 weeks ....
I know ! - But it is not easy to get the right persons.
>IMHO you will need Moroc Telecom in one way or the other. At all for
>your connecivity. It's pretty similar in all countries.
The "Maroc Telecom" is realy to expensive and Seabone is only a
Partner of the "Maroc Telecom" which mean, I need to use the POP's
of the "Maroc Telecom"...
>Rgds,
>Andreas
Greetings
Michelle
--
Registered Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/
Reply to: