When WISPA did the 3ghz webinar, it was decided we were supposed to tell the guy from the webinar who would facilitate the FCC business end of the stick, but 200 bucks for a forever license doesnt buy alot of power
On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 9:09 AM, Wireless Admin via Af <[email protected]> wrote: > It was inevitable that it would come to this when some decide following > the law is optional. Best thing to do is notify the FCC of the violation. > If they get involved it will likely be too late to help your immediate > problem, however it would likely help in the long run. Giving up on the > process doesn’t help anyone. > > > > Steve B. > > > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Eric Muehleisen > via Af > *Sent:* Wednesday, November 05, 2014 9:19 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Finding 3650 interference > > > > I'm currently dealing with this exact scenario. Analyzing the FCC database > was a waste of time for me. I simply called all other wireless operators in > the area and confirmed their frequencies. That also lead to a dead end. I > ended up swapping frequencies and calling it a day. > > > > On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 8:03 AM, That One Guy via Af <[email protected]> wrote: > > you are assuming that the offender is even registered, and thats a pretty > big leap of faith. Youre better off going out with a cheap ubnt in SA mode > and drive sourcing it, but what good will it do, even if its an > unregistered base station, you have no fcc recourse. > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 7:59 AM, Adam Moffett via Af <[email protected]> wrote: > > So registering everyone's locations sounds great in theory because in > theory you could then determine who's interfering with you and get a hold > of them. > > My 320 AP sees a -79 on the exact channel I've been using for a few > years. Not sure exactly when it showed up. If it was a base station > antenna pointed at my base station antenna, then it could be up to 40km > away. So I do a geo search in ULS for NN licenses with a location within > 40km. It shows me 5 license holders who each have many locations.....it > doesn't actually tell me which locations triggered the search hit. > > So I'm thinking I could spend hours putting every location in Google Earth > to see where they land.....and I could pre-filter locations where the > lat/long looks way too far off. That's still going to take hours, and if > they didn't register their location anyway then it might end up being a > waste of time. > > Is there a way to see which *locations *matched the 40km search RADIUS > rather than seeing only the license holder and having to look through a > zillion locations for each one? If so, I'm not seeing it....please tell me > I'm missing it. > > > > > > -- > > All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember that the > parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you. Therefore, if you > can't get them together again, there must be a reason. By all means, do not > use a hammer. -- IBM maintenance manual, 1925 > > > -- All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember that the parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you. Therefore, if you can't get them together again, there must be a reason. By all means, do not use a hammer. -- IBM maintenance manual, 1925
