....the defence rises....
Hi there - let me say firstly that in my 15+ years of electronic, computer and networking experience gained after studying a 'proper' university course (CCNA is very much beginner level compared to the qualifications and experience we have available at GWI NOC -
and you haven't completed it...), I have found someone who claims a 'bit of knowledge' about something to be dangerous in areas where more than a 'bit of knowledge' is required.
"knowing a bit about 802.11 standards and networking"
In fact, in technical circles it has been distilled to an acronym - ALBOKIADT, kind of like PEBUK, and also exists as many article and document titles...
So - to respond to your allegations that "most of their admins and technicians dont know how to work the systems" - I believe you are making wild accusations purely to illicit a response. Guess what? It worked... and guess what else? Your 'little bit of knowledge' has let you down already!
Now I've got that off my chest, let's try and sort your problem out -
You speak about fresnel:
How did you measure the clearance, how did you calculate it, and what was your result?
You can't just aim with your thumb and go "hmmm... looks ok... must be ok..."
Now the quality of your connection - you speak about 'massive packet loss' and your connection 'failing every 15 minutes'.
This often happens with clients who go the DIY route... and end up connecting to the back of a sector, connecting to a site too far away, connecting to their own indoor wireless units that are also causing their own interference; not
really getting it right and ending up having a really bad experience.
Between what points have you identified this packet loss? Are you 100% sure it's not due to your DIY project, resulting in a sub-standard connection to the tower? As you say - by the sounds of things, it's your connection to the tower...
One installation does not make you experienced - but hundreds do.
Most of our installers are just that - installers. They have done many, many wireless 'point & shoot' connections, and although they are mostly not networking experts, they do have a pretty good feel for what will work and what won't on the wireless side.
Your ridiculing of their abilities is like making fun of a Telkom ADSL technician's inability to configure a Server or Cisco router - so what? That's not their job, and they're not expected to know how to do it either. They are only expected to drill neat holes, run cables neatly & try not to fall off their ladder doing it.
And about us using MikroTik? Again - so what? It works very well, has proved to be very stable (as an OS) and can do everything Cisco can do, and more... Just because it's based on a Linux kernel, doesn't make it any less powerful or reliable... There are many ISP's around the world using MT exclusively, or using it to compliment their networks to make up for Cisco's inadequacies...
And shaping - yes yes and for the 100th time yes, as has been mentioned many times right here in this thread. If you cared to do your research properly before standing up and shouting the odds, you wouldn't sound so silly. Maybe they have a job for you in Parliament, as by the sounds of things, people like that thrive there...
We do NOT 'shape' ftp - that would be ridiculously foolish of us.
We do, however, 'shape' p2p. It's actually not shaped, but routed via a low-cost (to us), low-priority gateway; and is not and never has been guaranteed. This 'shaping' employs an equal-sharing-amongst-users policy, and you get whatever's available for p2p. If there are 100's of users busy downloading to their heart's content, then you are lumped in with the rest of them and get your fair share, whether you use encrypted mode or not.
If p2p is an essential requirement, then you may purchase a public ('real Internet') IP, and you will not go through any of the 'shaping' policies.
...pass the pie...
