I think it was discussed on the WISPA list.  Something about not revealing BS 
locations for security or competitive reasons, I think.

From: Adam Moffett 
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 11:45 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] PAL bidding

Did they have a reasonable justification for that idea?  It does seem to 
circumvent the whole purpose of the SAS.


------ Original Message ------
From: "Ken Hohhof" <af...@kwisp.com>
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: 9/21/2016 12:44:03 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] PAL bidding

  If PAL is unused, others can use it as GAA.  Kind of like T’Pring in Star 
Trek, even if Spock wins and doesn’t reject her for exercising the right of 
challenge, he will be gone and she can still be with Stonn.  OK, maybe not such 
a good analogy after all.

  However, the big telcos want to just put claimed service areas into the SAS 
rather than actual lat/lon of basestations, which seems like a way to claim 
territory without putting up a base station at a verifiable location.  Not that 
I would suspect them of trying to game the system and squat on spectrum.


  From: That One Guy /sarcasm 
  Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 11:30 AM
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] PAL bidding

  i thought there were going to be antisquatting regulations in play to stop 
that

  On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 10:57 PM, Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com> wrote:

    Does anyone know how PAL bidding in CBRS is going to work?  I'm too tired 
for deep reading tonight.

    My first thought was "maybe we should just bid $1 (or the minimum) for a 
channel in every tract around us just in case nobody else does."

    Second thought was "There are only around 73,000 census tracts in the US, 
what stops somebody with deep pockets from bidding $1000 on all of them? If I'm 
Google, why not bid $10,000 each?"






  -- 

  If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as 
part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.

Reply via email to