Jump to content

Kansas market NID/MSC change (was "MSC Boundary Change")

sporter82
 Share

Recommended Posts

MacinJosh Member Level: LTE Advanced

MacinJosh

Posted
Posted

 

 

Indeed, Josh, that is the widespread relevance of this thread.

 

 

AJ

Well I guess I'll be keeping an eye out on my NID as I travel California and Nevada.

 

 

Sent from Josh's iPhone 5 using Tapatalk 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WiWavelength Member Level: LTE Advanced

WiWavelength

Posted
Posted

So what is the implication with this?

NID consolidation is likely to affect other markets, too, and that has ramifications for those who have experienced NID boundary problems for many years. (This Bud's for you, larryt510.)

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Boosted20V Member Level: eHRPD

Boosted20V

Posted
Posted

NID consolidation is likely to affect other markets, too, and that has ramifications for those who have experienced NID boundary problems for many years. (This Bud's for you, larryt510.)

AJ

 

I understand NID boundaries affect the user experience but what is causing Sprint to alter them? I should have used the term cause rather than implication.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
larryt510 Member Level: 3G EVDO

larryt510

Posted
Posted

NID consolidation is likely to affect other markets, too, and that has ramifications for those who have experienced NID boundary problems for many years. (This Bud's for you, larryt510.)

 

AJ

 

This is great news!  I have been complaining about this NID boundary (NID 2 and 3 in Orange County, CA) issue for many years.  It's caused an epidemic of missed incoming calls, battery life issues, pilot pollution, etc.  The worst part about this particular NID boundary is that it was set up in the worst possible location.  Right along a highly populated area, major freeway and also a large residential area.  Now had they moved NID 2 just one more cell site to the West it would have been much better as there would have been a separation by a hill to block out the pilot pollution.  But in my opinion they made a huge mistake by doing it the way they did.  I talked to people in the right department at Sprint a number of times about it but was unable to convince them to make a change (which would probably require corporate approval and a lot of red tape). 

 

Nothing has changed here yet but I will keep a watch on it and hope that we get a similiar merging of NID boundaries into one larger one.  That would make a lot of Sprint customers around here very happy.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mooeydj Member Level: 3G EVDO

Mooeydj

Posted
Posted

This is great news!  I have been complaining about this NID boundary (NID 2 and 3 in Orange County, CA) issue for many years.  It's caused an epidemic of missed incoming calls, battery life issues, pilot pollution, etc.  The worst part about this particular NID boundary is that it was set up in the worst possible location.  Right along a highly populated area, major freeway and also a large residential area.  Now had they moved NID 2 just one more cell site to the West it would have been much better as there would have been a separation by a hill to block out the pilot pollution.  But in my opinion they made a huge mistake by doing it the way they did.  I talked to people in the right department at Sprint a number of times about it but was unable to convince them to make a change (which would probably require corporate approval and a lot of red tape). 

 

Nothing has changed here yet but I will keep a watch on it and hope that we get a similiar merging of NID boundaries into one larger one.  That would make a lot of Sprint customers around here very happy.

 

Weird, I had a NID 2 in Mahtomedi, MN on White Bear Lake yesterday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WiWavelength Member Level: LTE Advanced

WiWavelength

Posted
Posted

Mooeydj, NIDs do not require unique number identifiers. They are just subdivisions of SIDs.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WiWavelength Member Level: LTE Advanced

WiWavelength

Posted
Posted

Morning, it appears Northern Spring Hill, KS / Extreme southern Olathe, KS is on NID 308.

 

Thanks for the report, but this is largely a fait accompli now.  Since the rural western portions of SID 4139 have now gone NID 308, even the rural northern portions of SID 4198 have now gone NID 308, there is little doubt that Sprint's entire Kansas market is going NID 308.  No matter what, Spring Hill would have followed along.  The only real question mark remaining is whether the Wichita metro will also be consolidated into NID 308.

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites
leerage Member Level: eHRPD

leerage

Posted
Posted

 

 

Morning, it appears Northern Spring Hill, KS / Extreme southern Olathe, KS is on NID 308.

 

 

Thanks for the report, but this is largely a fait accompli now. Since the rural western portions of SID 4139 have now gone NID 308, even the rural northern portions of SID 4198 have now gone NID 308, there is little doubt that Sprint's entire Kansas market is going NID 308. No matter what, Spring Hill would have followed along. The only real question mark remaining is whether the Wichita metro will also be consolidated into NID 308.

 

AJ

 

My brother lives close to down town in Wichita and I just had him check. He is showing 308

 

Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WiWavelength Member Level: LTE Advanced

WiWavelength

Posted
Posted

My brother lives close to down town in Wichita and I just had him check. He is showing 308

 

That basically settles it.  All of the Kansas market has gone or is going NID 308.  However, that does not mean the entire market is now on one MSC.  Though all on the same NID, it could still be divided up into separate MSC zones -- at least, that is my understanding.

 

AJ

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sporter82 Member Level: Morse Code

sporter82

Posted
  • Author
Posted

That basically settles it.  All of the Kansas market has gone or is going NID 308.  However, that does not mean the entire market is now on one MSC.  Though all on the same NID, it could still be divided up into separate MSC zones -- at least, that is my understanding.

 

AJ

Awesome, thanks for the feedback everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WiWavelength Member Level: LTE Advanced

WiWavelength

Posted
Posted

Even two towers in Missouri have nid 308

 

But we are talking markets.  So, are these Missouri market sites?

 

AJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Posts

    • wispiANt
      Network Vision/LTE - New York City Market

      By wispiANt · Posted

      Historically, T-Mobile has been the only carrier contracting with Crown Castle Solutions, at least in Brooklyn. I did a quick count of the ~35 nodes currently marked as "installed" and everything mapped appears to be T-Mobile. However, they have a macro sector pointed directly at this site and seem to continue relying on the older-style DAS nodes. Additionally, there's another Crown Castle Solutions node approved for construction just around the corner, well within range of their macro. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Verizon using a new vendor for their mmWave build, especially since the macro site directly behind this node lacks mmWave/CBRS deployment (limited to LTE plus C-Band). However, opting for a multi-carrier solution here seems unlikely unless another carrier has actually joined the build. This node is equidistant (about five blocks) between two AT&T macro sites, and there are no oDAS nodes deployed nearby. Although I'm not currently mapping AT&T, based on CellMapper, it appears to be right on cell edge for both sites. Regardless, it appears that whoever is deploying is planning for a significant build. There are eight Crown Castle Solutions nodes approved for construction in a 12-block by 2-block area.
    • radem
      Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread

      By radem · Posted

      Starlink (1900mhz) for T-Mobile, AST SpaceMobile (700mhz and 850mhz) for AT&T, GlobalStar (unknown frequency) for Apple, Iridium (unknown frequency) for Samsung, and AST SpaceMobile (850mhz) for Verizon only work on frequency bands the carrier has licensed nationwide.  These systems broadcast and listen on multiple frequencies at the same time in areas much wider than normal cellular market license areas.  They would struggle with only broadcasting certain frequencies only in certain markets so instead they require a nationwide license.  With the antennas that are included on the satellites, they have range of cellular band frequencies they support and can have different frequencies with different providers in each supported country.  The cellular bands in use are typically 5mhz x 5mhz bands (37.5mbps total for the entire cell) or smaller so they do not have a lot of data bandwidth for the satellite band covering a very large plot of land with potentially millions of customers in a single large cellular satellite cell.  I have heard that each of Starlink's cells sharing that bandwidth will cover 75 or more miles. Satellite cellular connectivity will be set to the lowest priority connection just before SOS service on supported mobile devices and is made available nationwide in supported countries.  The mobile device rules pushed by the provider decide when and where the device is allowed to connect to the satellite service and what services can be provided over that connection.  The satellite has a weak receiving antenna and is moving very quickly so any significant obstructions above your mobile device antenna could cause it not to work.  All the cellular satellite services are starting with texting only and some of them like Apple's solution only support a predefined set of text messages.  Eventually it is expected that a limited number of simultaneous voice calls (VoLTE) will run on these per satellite cell.  Any spare data will then be available as an extremely slow LTE data connection as it could potentially be shared by millions of people.  Satellite data from the way these are currently configured will likely never work well enough to use unless you are in a very remote location.
    • swintec
      Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread

      By swintec · Posted

      will this work for service in a plane?
    • Paynefanbro
      Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread

      By Paynefanbro · Posted

      T-Mobile owns the PCS G-block across the contiguous U.S. so they can just use that spectrum to broadcast direct to cell. Ideally your phone would only connect to it in areas where there isn't any terrestrial service available.
    • schmidtj
      Official Tmobile-Sprint merger discussion thread

      By schmidtj · Posted

      So how does this whole direct to satellite thing fit in with the way it works now? Carriers spend billions for licenses for specific areas. So now T-Mobile can offer service direct to customers without having a Terrestrial license first?

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...