Hi, I am quite new to this canopy network and can say that I don’t know to much about it. I am moving to a new house and I have 2 options for broadband. Canopy and Charter. I have little trust in charter and it is very expensive.
I’m thinking about trying canopy. Currently I am using Speakeasy SDSL and hosting several websites. I am quite leary about wireless. I’m worried that I will run into things like latency and disconnects. The company offering the canopy says that none of that should be an issue. My house is literally 1/4 of a mile from the canopy tower. I am looking at a package that would be 9 mb down and 3 mb up. I will also have a static ip address.
Could anyone tell me if running web servers (where clients are paying) is not a good idea on a canopy wireless network? I would really like to try canopy but I need it to be reliable. My network will also be connecting to another network via VPN IPSEC.
Any suggestions/comments are much appreciated.
Thanks
dingo wrote: Could anyone tell me if running web servers (where clients are paying) is not a good idea on a canopy wireless network? I would really like to try canopy but I need it to be reliable. My network will also be connecting to another network via VPN IPSEC.
All should work as expected, as long as you don't "max" your bandwidth. The hardware is very reliable, and a 1/4 mile connection should be the best possible connection.
However, whether or not your clients trust the connection is the real issue. If you are offering a 99.99% service guarantee or something of that nature, then you really should be co-locating a system where there is direct access to fibre. Also, ask your WISP whether or not they offer any guarantees for their wireless service - if they do not, then you can't.
Canopy equipment is very reliable, but at the end of the day, any wireless system no matter what make it is, is never a good as cable/fibre.
In my experience, the canopy equip works very well, no matter what kind of traffic passes through the system, but as Shaman said, don’t max your bandwidth, the higher the amount of traffic passing, the greater the chance of failure, although not very common…
I don’t see a problem with what you want to do. I put DSL, cable, and wireless in the same boat. None of them are the best choice of connections for a commercial server, but should be good enough for low volume needs. The ideal for a mission critical server is to have it colocated at the ISP’s NOC. I think if you’re happy with DSL you’ll be happy with wireless.
To give you an idea… We have many small businesses hosting email and web servers on our network. We have a radio station customer streaming a mp3 feed to a streaming server. We even have a xbox customer using a SM lite, which provides only 256k up/down, he hasn’t complained of any service problems. Lastly we have a customer that pushes 800k minimum of continuous outbound http traffic, basically exactly what you are talking about.
The other thing to consider is response time to support calls if something does happen. I know we have a better response time than time warner and sbc here in Racine, WI. We do not provide coverage that far north, but I don’t think you’re going to have any trouble. They’re really giving you 9/3 though?
Thanks for the comments. Yes, 9mb down 3mb up. At least that is what they are advertising. I will not be subscribing to their services until 4/28. Then, I will really be able to see if they can meet my needs.
Thanks,
Why is it an issue if I happen to max the bandwidth?
You will be sharing the bandwidth with all clients. Where as you will reach speeds up to 9meg down and 3meg up. this will not always be your constant speed. Unless you are set up with a back haul system alone. Which is very expense but possible.