OOBE rules have/are being modified so as to meet the intended DoD
requirements but not hamstring the manufacturers with expensive filters
etc.  I believe they pushed back some or all of the implementation for a
year.  there was an explanation at last years wispapalooza on the technical
details and i know steve coran posted some filings etc. to the list a while
back.  I think the FCC chose the UBNT method over the WISPA/JAB method.

don't quote me on this tho...i might have just been drunk in vegas and
dreamed all this up lol.

-Sean


On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 6:17 PM, Matt <[email protected]> wrote:

> Will the "next generation PMP 450 SM" have the same throughput and
> range as the current standard PMP450 SM with a reflector dish in 5.8
> ghz band?  Just concerned the new OOBE rules might reduce usefulness
> of 5 ghz band for longer range PtmP and PTP?  I am guessing they will
> have some added filtering to meet the OOBE rules and just hoping this
> does not reduce range terribly?  24 volt or 48 volt POE?  It would be
> nice if they worked on either voltage to make swap outs easier.  Will
> also slightly reduce cost of swapping power supplies.
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Matt Mangriotis
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > YES!
> >
> > We are undertaking this project and working toward a next generation PMP
> 450
> > SM that will cover the entire 5 GHz band (from 4.9-5.9 GHz), and be less
> > expensive than the 450i SM.
> >
> > At this point, I can’t comment on much surrounding the launch, as we’ve
> only
> > recently embarked down this path.
> >
> > Matt
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Sam Lambie
> > Sent: Sunday, February 21, 2016 8:59 PM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450i 5.1 and 5.2 non overlapping channels?
> >
> >
> >
> > Thank you Matt. I appreciate the info.
> >
> > Are there any plans on creating 1 450 SM that can handle all 4
> frequencies?
> >
> > That would be super....
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 3:30 PM, George Skorup <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > No, the regular 450 is hardware limited to 5470-5900.
> >
> >
> >
> > On 2/20/2016 3:55 PM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists wrote:
> >
> > Will the 450 CPE work in 5.2?
> >
> > Jeff Broadwick
> >
> > ConVergence Technologies, Inc.
> >
> > 312-205-2519 Office
> >
> > 574-220-7826 Cell
> >
> > [email protected]
> >
> >
> > On Feb 20, 2016, at 2:45 PM, Tushar Patel <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Matt,
> >
> >
> >
> > To take advantage don't we need cheaper CPE?
> >
> > Tushar
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Feb 20, 2016, at 12:43 PM, Matt Mangriotis
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Didn’t see anyone answer you on this Sam.
> >
> >
> >
> > 5.1 GHz (UNII-1) is 100 MHz (5150-5250 MHz), and is not DFS controlled,
> and
> > follows similar rules to 5.8 GHz.  This band is available in R14.1.1.
> >
> >
> >
> > 5.2 GHz (UNII-2) is also 100 MHz (5250-5350 MHz), but is a bit less
> useful
> > in that the max EIRP allowed is 30 dBm and it’s subject to DFS radar
> > detection mechanisms.
> >
> >
> >
> > Additional info: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-NII
> >
> >
> >
> > Taking advantage of these bands, however, can prove hugely useful and
> > several of our customers are getting equipment deployed and working soon.
> >
> >
> >
> > (Note: 5.2 and 5.4 will be supported in the R14.1.2 beta release that
> will
> > be out very soon).
> >
> >
> >
> > Matt
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Sam Lambie
> > Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 4:54 PM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: [AFMUG] 450i 5.1 and 5.2 non overlapping channels?
> >
> >
> >
> > Is there any documentation or list knowledge on how big each frequency
> is?
> >
> > Just wondering if it is worth it to go to the 450i and the ridiculously
> > expensive SM's.
> >
> > We are running out of spectrum in 5.4 and 5.8 though.
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > --
> > Sam Lambie
> > Taosnet Wireless Tech.
> > 575-758-7598 Office
> > www.Taosnet.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > --
> > Sam Lambie
> > Taosnet Wireless Tech.
> > 575-758-7598 Office
> > www.Taosnet.com
>

Reply via email to