They could do the CPE side as described so far, but they may park additional birds on paths that serve a given area and deploy more earth stations to increase capacity in a funded area.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ken Hohhof" <khoh...@kwom.com> To: "AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group" <af@af.afmug.com> Sent: Friday, August 9, 2024 11:30:00 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Hughesnet Fusion Since you mention Starlink, answer this for me. They have expressed interest in getting BEAD funds. How does that work? What specific infrastructure gets built if a state awards them BEAD money? I’m not being snarky, I genuinely don’t understand what they propose to do with the money to bring service to those locations. From: AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> On Behalf Of Dan P via AF Sent: Friday, August 9, 2024 11:09 AM To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <af@af.afmug.com> Cc: Dan P <d...@webnx.com> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Hughesnet Fusion I assume hughes will die a quick death as even over subbed starlink will miles ahead of it, and non over subed? Well its just laughable. We just recently got one of the small portable ones and damn its pretty neat when traveling. I was always a fanboy from the beta days but now its getting pretty neat if you want to go get way off the grid and still have good i-net From: AF < af-boun...@af.afmug.com > On Behalf Of dmmoff...@gmail.com Sent: Friday, August 09, 2024 9:37 AM To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' < af@af.afmug.com > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Hughesnet Fusion Never seen it, but my employer in 2005 or so was a retailer for one-way satellite with dialup return. It basically worked like that. They referred to it as a “dialup return” and the literature described it as using dialup for the uplink only, but in practice we found a lot of stuff used the dialup for downlink as well. DNS obviously, but also email traffic. I don’t remember what else, but I recall we were a bit surprised by how much the satellite was NOT used. But if you think about it, every dialup connection to their data center added another 24.6k of bandwidth, while the satellite just is what it is. I say 24k because presumably these were rural people with long loops and they were never getting 56k. Most people ended up on 2-way satellite because the cost was lower after you accounted for a phone line and dialup account. I guess I’m saying it’s been done before and nobody liked it then, and they won’t like it now. Maybe it’s a way for Hughes to try to stay relevant so they can exploit the tail of the business cycle a little longer. -Adam From: AF < af-boun...@af.afmug.com > On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof Sent: Friday, August 09, 2024 9:54 AM To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' < af@af.afmug.com > Subject: [AFMUG] Hughesnet Fusion Has anyone tried (or know somebody who has) Hughesnet Fusion? The scheme to reroute latency sensitive traffic over a cellular connection sounds like a Rube Goldberg to me, and it seems like at that point you’d be better off with Starlink, or 5G Home Internet from TMo or VZW. I mean, if your important traffic is going over 5G, why not just use 5G. Does it actually work as promised, for things like gaming? -- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
-- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
