> Orlando Andico: > Ahh. The ITU/FCC regulation on unlicensed 2.4GHz ISM band > requires/mandates that the ERP (effective radiated power) > does not exceed 27dBm [= 0.5W].
Now I am more confused than before. The FCC regulation is already confusing to begin with, e.g., http://www.lns.com/papers/part15/ http://www.lns.com/papers/part15/FCCPart15_and_the_ISM_2.4G_Band.index but I kind of got the impression that the maximum allowed was one watt (30 dBm) or maybe one watt plus 6 dB (= 36 dBm = 4W) or something along those lines depending on issues of transmitter power vs. antenna gain and maybe other complications. This 27 dBm (0.5W) figure is news to me. > AGAIN I must stress: do NOT do this in the Meralco franchise area. > Meralco as we all know has made pakyaw the entire 2.4GHz ISM band > here in Metro Manila and Regions 3/4. They WILL raid you, just > ask ASTI :) What does "made pakyaw" mean? (Sorry for not being familiar with the lingo.) Maybe in fairness to Meralco they were just going by the NTC rules and allocations that existed at the time? Anyone know the history of how Philippines became inconsistent with rest of world? How this (2400-2483.5 MHz) particular band and maybe the others (902-928, 5150-5350?, and 5725-5825 MHz) came to be not available for unlicensed use in Philippines? Or, for some reason, did Meralco actually cause or influence this state of affairs, such as by bribing the NTC? > Also, if you're planning to do this within the Meralco franchise > area, it won't fly. You will NOT get away with it. ASTI tried > to do this, and they got raided by Meralco and the NBI. "Raided" sounds very dramatic. Did it actually happen this way, with agents "storming" the ASTI building to "seize" the evidence? Or maybe a formal letter of complaint was just sent to ASTI, detailing the scanner evidence? It sounds strange, one arm of government raiding another arm of government... Anyone have more details on the ASTI experience? It could be instructive for the rest of us. And not just in Meralco area, but everywhere else, because, as some pointed out in plug-isp mailing list, another entity like a telco might have the license for the band outside the Meralco area. For example, I would be interested to know: Was ASTI the good guy, e.g., just using 2.4 GHz within their building, thinking that this was reasonable use, and Meralco/NTC/NBI was overzealous in detection/enforcement and maybe wanted to make an example of ASTI to scare everyone else? Or was ASTI trying a point-to-point link and did its homework well (spectrum scan beforehand to check that path is unused, then use very narrow beam), but Meralco/NTC/NBI still somehow detected it anyway and wanted to make an example? Or, at other extreme, was ASTI the bad guy, radiating high power (>30 dBm?) over a considerable area either due to ignorance or in wanton disregard for the current law, possibly jeopardizing Meralco transmissions? If we go ahead and buy the license for a particular area, and then later detect others using the band, can we count on the same enforcement that Meralco presumably got from NTC/NBI? --a.p. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com _ Philippine Linux Users Group. Web site and archives at http://plug.linux.org.ph To leave: send "unsubscribe" in the body to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe to the Linux Newbies' List: send "subscribe" in the body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
