> On Sep 17, 2019, at 4:15 PM, Steve Jones <[email protected]> wrote: > > I guess 6 is moot. I thought GAA operated under SAS as well. Is that > verified?
GAA does operate under SAS control but there is a big debate over what responsibility the SAS has with respect to deconflicting and controlling GAA. The FCC was unclear on the subject saying contradictory things, and refusing to clarify the matter when asked. The general idea is that the SAS will assign nonconflicting channels when they are available, and will try to group compatible technologies together (LTE with same frame timing, Cambium with same frame timing, etc). When they can’t come up with a solution then it gets ugly. > > I guess the better question, having that knowledge, is what recourse is there > in GAA? under the N license when we did the webinar with FCC, FCCs response > was to contact rick harnish if there was a conflict that couldnt be resolved. > in other words, thanks for your 200 bucks. If this is the case, the LTE is > pretty much a terrible idea long term anywhere there is more than one > provider since it doesnt handle noise well. Everyone keeps telling me LTE is supercalifragilisticexpialidocious. But yeah, I share your concern. > > Do you know if there is a map of where the test deployments are in general? > Im assuming NDA type stuff says no. I have not tried searching the ULS for STAs but I think you can search by frequency. > > One thing that came up today was the potential of cellco usage in 48, is > there going to be prohibited use of consumer grade systems in this band like > the Wilson amplifiers? Since they would likely require SAS fees I would not expect a lot of them - but I don’t know. Mark -- AF mailing list [email protected] http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
