Damned radomes blow off in the wind... (at least one of them did)
From: Ben Moore Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 12:46 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Licensed backhaul pricing - still ridiculous If only you could read some of Josh's emails to us and you would see that he isn't always showing us the love ;) He will dish it when it is due...I have seen it publicly as well ;) Healthy discussion on backhauls and backhaul pricing...I will say that since the AF24 launch, I have not seen an email/post related to AF24 causing issues due to being installed by ignorant operators... On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 12:37 PM, TJ Trout <[email protected]> wrote: Seth be careful stepping on the toes of ubiquiti's No#1 fanboi :) On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Seth Mattinen <[email protected]> wrote: On 1/15/15 11:02, Josh Reynolds wrote: I don't understand how an 18GHz path has anything to do with Ubiquiti here, since the closest product they make to that band is on 24GHz. Ifyour problem is with ignorant operators, or just plain stupid operators, say so. If your problem is with Ubiquiti, say so. If your problem is with people failing to do the proper path analysis studies and frequency coordination (byyour PCN comment), say so. In any of these cases, it sounds like you are angry about something that has nothing to do with Ubiquiti or even an operator, but more or less whoever was *supposed* to be in chargeof the link design and common courtesy. I agreed with the post I responded to and the points contained therein, with my real life experience extrapolated to it a short response. I not only agree that licensed bands get used up faster, but that it would exacerbate existing instances of interference due to a higher percentage of ignorant operators jumping on a lower entry point or companies like UBNT making it easier for ignorant operators to enter the space and do bad things (i.e. past issues with compliance test mode and TDWR). ~Seth
