Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

[reader]

Nonsense, Matt.

Read the grant yourself.   The grant is MODULAR certification, meaning you 
can use the module in any way you choose, so long as you lable the device as 
containing blah blah and comply with the antenna rules.   This is very 
explicitly true.

I believe that UBNT has written correspondence from the FCC on this.

I know someone has, I've seen it and read it.







- Original Message - 
From: "Matt Liotta" 
To: ; "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 1:57 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC


>
> On May 12, 2009, at 4:21 PM, Scott Carullo wrote:
>
>>
>> Ok...  so back to original dilemma...
>>
>> I take a XR5, the precise antenna they certified with this radio
>> card, a
>> RB411 and hook it all up and use it myself within FCC RF guidelines.
>>
>> Criminal or law abiding citizen...
>>
> Neither, but you would be in violation of the FCC regulations and be
> subject to civil penalties.
>
> Think about this like tax law. Imagine someone makes a great case
> about how you can avoid taxes legally by doing a certain thing. You
> may believe the person and the person's reasons may seem perfectly
> logical. However, would it be smart to follow them? Probably not
> without signoff from a CPA and/or tax attorney.
>
> -Matt
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

[reader]

wow, this argument AGAIN?

Let's look at this closely...UBNT certified the XR3 - 3.7 as a 
standalone module, and the FCC accepts their certification NO MATTER WHAT OS 
OR DRIVERS CONTROL IT because it has been proven to not radiate outside of 
the designated frequencies.I hold the license to prove it.   It did not 
require their board, or ANYONE's specific board to be licensed.

They have a specified antenna that's certified with the XR3 card.The FCC 
actually issues licenses to anyone to use the card with any BOARD that is 
already fcc accepted.

This discussion was had a while back, when the FCC announced that MODULAR 
CERTIFICATION WAS NOW ACCEPTABLE.

Your simple requirement is to sticker whatever you build with the following 
notice:   "This device contains ( fcc cert number for any modular approved 
radio).This contravenes MUCH of what was said previous to that point, 
and manufacturers such as Compex and UBNT have exploited it wholesale. 
Valemount got their own cert number for Lucaya branded equipment, and they 
merely filed that "xxx contains previously certified " and it isn't 
changed, blah blah, and got their own cert number WITH NO LAB TESTING 
WHATSOEVER.   A little research at the FCC website will confirm that they 
merely used compex's own cert to get their own.I suspect it cost them 
nothing but whatever filing fees the FCC may or may not have.

To better that, Compex actually certified their boards and radios with NO 
enclosure, and it states in the grant that no shielding is required to meet 
emissions limits, therefore the enclosure is irrelevant to compliance. 
Thus the customer can place ANY minipci or full board+minipci into any 
enclosure and it strictly is compliant, so long as the stated antenna is 
used.

Now, please note, that Compex and UBNT sticker t heir products with the 
modular FCC approval.   Last time I saw a picture of a MT R52 it did NOT 
have such a sticker and it appears to not be modular certified, but rather 
system certified.Thus, Mikrotik can choose to extend their cert to 
you... or not.  as they see fit.   UBNT and Compex literally gave it away by 
modular cert and printing the device with all the required information.

This means you can use valemount's boards and the radios in your own 
enclosure using the Compex modular approval ( contains blah blah stickered 
on the outside) or you can use it in Valemount's box w/their number on it.

Now, I'm not professing to be a lawyer or FCC expert.  I'm merely observing 
what they have done and how it has been widely implemented.   Want to argue 
with it?   Don't argue with me, argue with the FCC who has done it with eyes 
wide open.








- Original Message - 
From: "Tom DeReggi" 
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 1:39 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC


> Lets not forget the rules may not be the same depending on what type
> certification one is looking for.
>
> If Mikrotik got a part B certification for the hardware board, and MT 
> makes
> the hardware board, its irrelevent where an end user buys the board,
> Mikrotik is responsible for the certification that they had gotten for 
> their
> hardware.
>
> However, for wireless system certifications (forget technical name of 
> type)
> its a different story. The software, hardware, and RF have to all get
> certified togeather.
> And it was clear their had to be a "responisble party" aka the
> "manufacturer". So certifying a combination yourself would make yourself 
> the
> manufacturer.
> Can one be, without any control of the software code writing? I would 
> think
> an authroized distributor would gain Mikrotik's endorsement for gaining 
> such
> support.
> But does the FCC require it or allow it, considering intelectual property
> considerations?
>
> Tom DeReggi
> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Dennis Burgess - LinkTechs" 
> To: ; "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 11:18 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
>
>
>> Yes, you can not certify the radios, MT wants the distributors to build
>> and certify them.  If you build them, they won't be certified.
>>
>> --
>> * Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
>> WISPA Board Member - wispa.org 
>> Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services*
>> *Office*: 314-735-0270 *Website*: http://www.linktechs.net
>> 
>>
>> */ Link Technologies, Inc is offering LIVE Mikrotik On-Line Training
>> /*
>>
>>
>>
>> Scott Carullo wrote:
>>> I'm pretty sure the FCC and the testing labs don't care who you are or
>>> where you buy your stuff...  thats not what they are looking for.
>>> Example
>>> - I choose to take 4 parts (some mikrotik) and get them certified - I
>>> can  Do you see this differently?
>>>

Re: [WISPA] As seen on Twitter

[Tom DeReggi]

Well that is a totally different thing, using "unspent" USF monies for 
broadband.

That would be great idea if. Any broadband provider would qualify for 
teh USF funds.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Kevin Suitor" 
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 5:54 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] As seen on Twitter


> At the WCA Wireless Policy Conference last week Amy Levine Legislative
> Counsel for the House Telecom Committee from Congressman Rick Boucher's
> office indicated that there will be a push to use the roughly $7.2B in
> unspent USF funds to fund BB service delivery in rural America -- the
> committee seems to be pushing hard for making broadband network build
> outs eligible for USF support.  Others at the conference made statements
> such as "need to fix problems in USF ... support infrastructure versus
> services ... get a triple play capable network built" (sorry about the
> sketchy notes)
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Cliff Olle
> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 5:30 PM
> To: 'WISPA General List'
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] As seen on Twitter
>
> Isn't the federal usf already 11.2 percent?
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 4:28 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] As seen on Twitter
>
> So he is suggesting that existing broadband consumers foot the $7billion
>
> bill via USF broadband taxes?  I'd like to see what that fee calculates
> to.
> I bet the USF tax will be higher than the cost of broadband service.
> Clearly not in line with reducing costs of broadband for consumers.
> Does
> anyone know how much revenue USF brings in today?
>
> Tom DeReggi
> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Mike Hammett" 
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 11:08 AM
> Subject: [WISPA] As seen on Twitter
>
>
>> Recently I saw these comments made on Twitter and I was wondering if
>> anyone could track down some quotable sources for these.
>>
>> Rep Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) says that historically a $1 investment in
> broadband
>
>> yields a $10 return. So a $7.2B investment...
>>
>> NTIA's Larry Irving wants to see USF funds provide $7B ANNUALLY for
>> broadband. Says that the current $7.2 is a "down payment."
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>
> 
> 
> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
> 
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
> 
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] As seen on Twitter

[Kevin Suitor]

At the WCA Wireless Policy Conference last week Amy Levine Legislative
Counsel for the House Telecom Committee from Congressman Rick Boucher's
office indicated that there will be a push to use the roughly $7.2B in
unspent USF funds to fund BB service delivery in rural America -- the
committee seems to be pushing hard for making broadband network build
outs eligible for USF support.  Others at the conference made statements
such as "need to fix problems in USF ... support infrastructure versus
services ... get a triple play capable network built" (sorry about the
sketchy notes)

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Cliff Olle
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 5:30 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] As seen on Twitter

Isn't the federal usf already 11.2 percent? 


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 4:28 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] As seen on Twitter

So he is suggesting that existing broadband consumers foot the $7billion

bill via USF broadband taxes?  I'd like to see what that fee calculates
to. 
I bet the USF tax will be higher than the cost of broadband service. 
Clearly not in line with reducing costs of broadband for consumers.
Does 
anyone know how much revenue USF brings in today?

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Mike Hammett" 
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 11:08 AM
Subject: [WISPA] As seen on Twitter


> Recently I saw these comments made on Twitter and I was wondering if 
> anyone could track down some quotable sources for these.
>
> Rep Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) says that historically a $1 investment in
broadband

> yields a $10 return. So a $7.2B investment...
>
> NTIA's Larry Irving wants to see USF funds provide $7B ANNUALLY for 
> broadband. Says that the current $7.2 is a "down payment."
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
>



> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>



>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/



 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] As seen on Twitter

[Cliff Olle]

Isn't the federal usf already 11.2 percent? 


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 4:28 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] As seen on Twitter

So he is suggesting that existing broadband consumers foot the $7billion 
bill via USF broadband taxes?  I'd like to see what that fee calculates to. 
I bet the USF tax will be higher than the cost of broadband service. 
Clearly not in line with reducing costs of broadband for consumers.  Does 
anyone know how much revenue USF brings in today?

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Mike Hammett" 
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 11:08 AM
Subject: [WISPA] As seen on Twitter


> Recently I saw these comments made on Twitter and I was wondering if 
> anyone could track down some quotable sources for these.
>
> Rep Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) says that historically a $1 investment in broadband

> yields a $10 return. So a $7.2B investment...
>
> NTIA's Larry Irving wants to see USF funds provide $7B ANNUALLY for 
> broadband. Says that the current $7.2 is a "down payment."
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
>


> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>


>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] As seen on Twitter

[Tom DeReggi]

So he is suggesting that existing broadband consumers foot the $7billion 
bill via USF broadband taxes?  I'd like to see what that fee calculates to. 
I bet the USF tax will be higher than the cost of broadband service. 
Clearly not in line with reducing costs of broadband for consumers.  Does 
anyone know how much revenue USF brings in today?

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Mike Hammett" 
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 11:08 AM
Subject: [WISPA] As seen on Twitter


> Recently I saw these comments made on Twitter and I was wondering if 
> anyone could track down some quotable sources for these.
>
> Rep Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) says that historically a $1 investment in broadband 
> yields a $10 return. So a $7.2B investment...
>
> NTIA's Larry Irving wants to see USF funds provide $7B ANNUALLY for 
> broadband. Says that the current $7.2 is a "down payment."
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Today's ARIN

[Tom DeReggi]

Butch,

Arin is really easy to deal with if you stay focused to following their 
guidelines. If you divert from the guidelines in the slightest, it can be 
difficult, because their reps are only authorized to pass through 
submissions that meet the rules and can be justified as complying. Its 
simple, it met the requirement or it didn't. Faking it is hard..

Arin will give you ANY amount of IP space that is still available, that you 
can justify that you need. Not more. They no longer require you to renumber 
smaller blocks to get one larger block, and are more likely to just assign 
you a a small block today, and a second small block later when you justify 
the need for the second block.

Multi-homing qualifies you to get a Class C (/24).  Using Multi-home 
arguement is exactly what you should do, to get their ASN, and their first 
ClassC or greater. That is NOT enough justification to ask for more than a 
/24.  The second justification is showing pre-existing 70% usage of IP 
space.  When a Class C /24 is 70% used, one can ask for a /23, etc.  So it 
is still very hard to get IP space, if you can not yet prove usage. They are 
NOT required to give you IP space for planned expansion.  That is the most 
important thing to understand.  The next jsutification is runumbering off 
your existing upstream ISP, regardless of whether they do or not. For 
example, if they have a /23 from their upstream 70% used, they can say they 
now qualify for a /22, and plan to renumber and return the /23 to their 
upstream within 90 days.  (They do not check in 90 days, but before they 
give you the next allocation, they will make sure you can prove need again, 
and confirm that you have renumbered if that was part of your 
justification.)They will not usually bend on the 70% usage to prove 
need, when you take the path justifying IPs based on need.  If you follow 
the previous advise your allocation will be super fast within days.  The 
last method is to prove unique network need. That is much harder, as it is 
not defined what unique network need is.  And it will have to be a true 
justifyable network need. For example, your upstream saying they wont 
announce anything smaller than a /22 is NOT a unique need, they'll tell you 
to change providers. For example, saying you serve 5 cities and prefer to 
have 5 class Cs, one for each city, is NOT a network need on its own. 
However, if you can prove that you have 5 different Transit connections (or 
orders for service) in 5 cities, and will run BGP in each city, it will be a 
justified network need, as BGP requires a minimum of class C for 
advertising, and each city would have different routing rules.  Lastly, to 
get IP space, the ISP must be fully clear of any judgements from the States 
or Feds. For example, if any overdue income tax or property tax, or 
suspended license, would disqualify your applciation for IP space.

My advise is only ask for what you can justiy according to the above rules. 
If you can't, they are not ready for their own IPs. If it cant be justified 
to ask for what the client wants, then the IPs can be asked for in stages. 
You pay per year for IP space, NOT per request, and NOT per block.  It costs 
the same $2500 to have 32 class Cs, whether its one large /19 or eight /22s.

Now the reality is... if you have small IP allocations, it could be a pain 
for getting them routed by your upstream. For example some tier1s like to 
filter out announcements smaller than /20s.
However, some ISPs prefer to filter out announcements for blocks smaller 
than the top level block. Meaning theyll accept a /22 if that was the 
allocation, but not accept the two /21s inside it.
Because of this, it can actually be beneficial to have two smaller blocks, 
that are indivividually allocated in some cases.

ARIN will verify your stated IP usage. By either of the two methods you 
select in the application.

>As I understand it, you can get as small as a /22 from them
> if you are multi-homed

That may be possible, but you still will have to justify why you need a /22 
over just a /23.  Part of the justification can be the number of IPs that 
you will need in the following 3 months, but you'll need to prove that also. 
Getting 70% usage of /23 justifys a /22.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Butch Evans" 
To: 
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 12:58 AM
Subject: [WISPA] Today's ARIN


>I have a customer that will be multi-homed soon.  He has asked me to
> help him get ready for this move.  I will be handling his BGP and such,
> but he wants me to handle getting his IP space from ARIN as well.
>
> It has been about 5 years since I've dealt with them at all, and I know
> there is likely to have been some changes in the way they handle their
> business.  As I understand it, you can get as small as a /22 from them
> if you are multi-homed.  Are there other requirements that I am
> overlooking?  How hard ar

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik OSPF question

[Kevin Neal]

Subject changed to help with filters. :)

Do you have both /30's in the networks tab?  Look at the Neighbors tab, do
you see the second router listed there?  If so add the Adjacency and State
columns to your view, what state does it say it's in?  

-Kevin
 

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Gino Villarini
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 4:58 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] OSPF question

 
Well I have 1 "Main Router" with 2 peers on the same Eth port, I receive
routes from 1, but not from the 2nd.  Im using the same area for both,
different networks (2 /30)

All are Mt 3.23 with routing test, the only difference is that the 2
exchanging routes are rb1000, the other one is a x86 machine

Gino A. Villarini
g...@aeronetpr.com
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Butch Evans
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 12:35 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] OSPF question

On Mon, 2009-05-11 at 15:40 -0400, Gino Villarini wrote:
> Can I have several neighboors under the same interface?

Yes.
 
> I have a OSPF neighboor in ether1, can I have another neighboor with 
> the same area on the same interface?

This is common for a broadcast network, actually.  What is it that makes you
ask?  Are you seeing problems and wanting to clarify if this is a symptom of
the problem?

--

* Butch Evans   * Professional Network Consultation*
* http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering  *
* http://www.wispa.org/ * WISPA Board Member   *
* http://blog.butchevans.com/   * Wired or Wireless Networks   *







WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

[Matt Liotta]

On May 12, 2009, at 4:21 PM, Scott Carullo wrote:

>
> Ok...  so back to original dilemma...
>
> I take a XR5, the precise antenna they certified with this radio  
> card, a
> RB411 and hook it all up and use it myself within FCC RF guidelines.
>
> Criminal or law abiding citizen...
>
Neither, but you would be in violation of the FCC regulations and be  
subject to civil penalties.

Think about this like tax law. Imagine someone makes a great case  
about how you can avoid taxes legally by doing a certain thing. You  
may believe the person and the person's reasons may seem perfectly  
logical. However, would it be smart to follow them? Probably not  
without signoff from a CPA and/or tax attorney.

-Matt



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

[Tom DeReggi]

Lets not forget the rules may not be the same depending on what type 
certification one is looking for.

If Mikrotik got a part B certification for the hardware board, and MT makes 
the hardware board, its irrelevent where an end user buys the board, 
Mikrotik is responsible for the certification that they had gotten for their 
hardware.

However, for wireless system certifications (forget technical name of type) 
its a different story. The software, hardware, and RF have to all get 
certified togeather.
And it was clear their had to be a "responisble party" aka the 
"manufacturer". So certifying a combination yourself would make yourself the 
manufacturer.
Can one be, without any control of the software code writing? I would think 
an authroized distributor would gain Mikrotik's endorsement for gaining such 
support.
But does the FCC require it or allow it, considering intelectual property 
considerations?

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Dennis Burgess - LinkTechs" 
To: ; "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 11:18 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC


> Yes, you can not certify the radios, MT wants the distributors to build
> and certify them.  If you build them, they won't be certified.
>
> --
> * Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
> WISPA Board Member - wispa.org 
> Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services*
> *Office*: 314-735-0270 *Website*: http://www.linktechs.net
> 
>
> */ Link Technologies, Inc is offering LIVE Mikrotik On-Line Training
> /*
>
>
>
> Scott Carullo wrote:
>> I'm pretty sure the FCC and the testing labs don't care who you are or
>> where you buy your stuff...  thats not what they are looking for. 
>> Example
>> - I choose to take 4 parts (some mikrotik) and get them certified - I
>> can  Do you see this differently?
>>
>> Scott Carullo
>> Brevard Wireless
>> 321-205-1100 x102
>>
>>  Original Message 
>>
>>> From: "Dennis Burgess - Linktechs" 
>>> Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 3:43 PM
>>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
>>>
>>> First, you have to be a distributor of MT to be able to certify. It has
>>> to be a certified system, as well has to have all of the images, text
>>> etc on it as well.  You can only get those if you are a MT distributor.
>>>
>>> * ---
>>> Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
>>> WISPA Board Member - wispa.org 
>>> Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
>>> WISPA Vendor Member*
>>> *Office*: 314-735-0270 *Website*: http://www.linktechs.net
>>> 
>>> */LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training/*
>>> 
>>>
>>> The information transmitted (including attachments) is covered by the
>>>
>> Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is intended
>> only for the person(s) or entity/entities to which
>>
>>> it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material.
>>>
>> Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of 
>> any
>> action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other 
>> than
>> the intended recipient(s) is prohibited, If you
>>
>>> received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the 
>>> material
>>>
>> from any computer.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Randy Cosby wrote:
>>>
 Can you explain what you mean by "certified" then?  What does that
 entail other than just putting together a board, antenna and radio that

>>
>>
 are fcc certified?  Do you have the entire unit tested and certified,

>> or
>>
 do yo see that as not necessary?

 Randy


 Eje Gustafsson wrote:


> Cross roads are certified with the entire Pacific Wireless line of
>
>> antennas.
>>
> R52 is certified with most of those as well (if not all). You can also
>
>> use
>>
> XR2/5 cards in RB SBC's.
>
> There are other solutions as well.
>
> We offer some certified pre built solutions more to come.
>
> / Eje Gustafsson
> CTO
> WISP-Router, Inc.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
>
>> On
>>
> Behalf Of Randy Cosby
> Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 1:56 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
>
> Old thread, but just curious where this has progressed.  I've seen
>
>> that
>>
> JeffSoHoCo has "certified" gear.  Is that based on the same Mikrotik
> program you describe here Mac?  Is that information available from
> Mikrotik to any reseller?
>
> Randy
>
>
> Mac Dearman wrote:
>
>
>

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

[Mike Delp]

As far as I know, you must have a FCC sticker to be in compliance.  Does
your home brew unit have a sticker?

Thanks

Mike

On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 3:21 PM, Scott Carullo wrote:

>
> Ok...  so back to original dilemma...
>
> I take a XR5, the precise antenna they certified with this radio card, a
> RB411 and hook it all up and use it myself within FCC RF guidelines.
>
> Criminal or law abiding citizen...
>
> Scott Carullo
> Brevard Wireless
> 321-205-1100 x102
>
>  Original Message 
> > From: "Jack Unger" 
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 3:47 PM
> > To: "e...@wisp-router.com" , "WISPA General List"
> 
> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
> >
> > My view is that once certified with a specific antenna then a system is
> > legal with any antenna of similar type (panel, yagi, etc.) of equal of
> > lesser gain. Anybody can make the decision to substitute a similar type
> > but lower gain antenna. I ran this by the FCC last year and they
> > confirmed it. Again, the original system must have already been
> certified
> >
> > Eje Gustafsson wrote:
> > > Only the manufacturer listed on the certificate can make that decision.
> The
> > > rules states that antenna of similar type in same or lower gain is
> certified
> > > but it's only the manufacturer that can make that decision what is
> > > considered similar type and there for approved to use with the unit.
> > >
> > > This is at least the feedback I gotten from the FCC testing lab I been
> > > working with on getting radios certified. But if the radio manufacturer
> say
> > > it's ok to use a similar antenna by a different manufacturer but not
> higher
> > > gain then what was tested the it's ok. Of course any antenna that is
> actual
> > > listed on the certificate will always be approved as long it's the
> same
> > > model.
> > >
> > > / Eje
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
> On
> > > Behalf Of Mike Hammett
> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 2:23 PM
> > > To: sc...@brevardwireless.com; WISPA General List
> > > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
> > >
> > > That was some ruling passed a few years ago that really freed the
> markets
> > > up.  Certify with the largest panel, omni, parabolic dish, etc. you can
> get
> > > to pass and anything in those groups is fair game.
> > >
> > >
> > > -
> > > Mike Hammett
> > > Intelligent Computing Solutions
> > > http://www.ics-il.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > From: "Scott Carullo" 
> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 1:24 PM
> > > To: "Matt Liotta" ; 
> > > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
> > >
> > >
> > >> I've been told personally by an FCC testing lab that I can take a XR5
>
> > >> which
> > >> has been tested with say a 23db panel antenna (with FCC) and use the
> same
> > >> gain antenna or less for myself and would not have to have it
> certified
> > >> again...  They told me not to get it tested because I didn't need to
> > >> because Ubiquity already part certified it on that type antenna.
> > >>
> > >> If this is an argument we will never resolve I can live with that, but
> I
> > >> am
> > >> fairly sure with the resources on this list we can come to a final
> > >> conclusion based on facts and I think we should.
> > >>
> > >> Scott Carullo
> > >> Brevard Wireless
> > >> 321-205-1100 x102
> > >>
> > >>  Original Message 
> > >>
> > >>> From: "Matt Liotta" 
> > >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 1:52 PM
> > >>> To: "sc...@brevardwireless.com" , "WISPA
> > >>>
> > >> General List" 
> > >>
> > >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
> > >>>
> > >>> On May 12, 2009, at 1:25 PM, Scott Carullo wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> >  Eje Gustafsson says this is not the case or elsewhen I buy a
> minipci
> >  wireless card for my laptop it would be illegal...
> > 
> > 
> > >>> This has been discussed at length. No matter how many times someone
> > >>> makes the laptop argument it doesn't change the fact that the FCC
> > >>> disagrees with that argument. Now someone could pay an attorney to
> > >>> argue with the FCC and get them to clarify the situation. Until that
> > >>> time the system certification requirement stands.
> > >>>
> > >>> -Matt
> > >>>
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
> > Author - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs"
> > Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993
> > www.ask-wi.com  818-227-4220  jun...@ask-wi.com
> >
> > "Email spam is just the latest way of asking
> > for "Forgiveness" instead of asking for "Permission".
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> 
> 
> > WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> > http://signup.wispa.org/
> >
>
> 
> 
> >
> > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> >
> > Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/l

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

[Randy Cosby]

All depends on who the FCC had deputized, it sounds like :)

Randy


Scott Carullo wrote:
> Ok...  so back to original dilemma...
>
> I take a XR5, the precise antenna they certified with this radio card, a 
> RB411 and hook it all up and use it myself within FCC RF guidelines.
>
> Criminal or law abiding citizen...
>
> Scott Carullo
> Brevard Wireless
> 321-205-1100 x102
>
>  Original Message 
>   
>> From: "Jack Unger" 
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 3:47 PM
>> To: "e...@wisp-router.com" , "WISPA General List" 
>> 
> 
>   
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
>>
>> My view is that once certified with a specific antenna then a system is 
>> legal with any antenna of similar type (panel, yagi, etc.) of equal of 
>> lesser gain. Anybody can make the decision to substitute a similar type 
>> but lower gain antenna. I ran this by the FCC last year and they 
>> confirmed it. Again, the original system must have already been 
>> 
> certified
>   
>> Eje Gustafsson wrote:
>> 
>>> Only the manufacturer listed on the certificate can make that decision. 
>>>   
> The
>   
>>> rules states that antenna of similar type in same or lower gain is 
>>>   
> certified
>   
>>> but it's only the manufacturer that can make that decision what is
>>> considered similar type and there for approved to use with the unit. 
>>>
>>> This is at least the feedback I gotten from the FCC testing lab I been
>>> working with on getting radios certified. But if the radio manufacturer 
>>>   
> say
>   
>>> it's ok to use a similar antenna by a different manufacturer but not 
>>>   
> higher
>   
>>> gain then what was tested the it's ok. Of course any antenna that is 
>>>   
> actual
>   
>>> listed on the certificate will always be approved as long it's the 
>>>   
> same
>   
>>> model. 
>>>
>>> / Eje
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] 
>>>   
> On
>   
>>> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 2:23 PM
>>> To: sc...@brevardwireless.com; WISPA General List
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
>>>
>>> That was some ruling passed a few years ago that really freed the 
>>>   
> markets 
>   
>>> up.  Certify with the largest panel, omni, parabolic dish, etc. you can 
>>>   
> get 
>   
>>> to pass and anything in those groups is fair game.
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> From: "Scott Carullo" 
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 1:24 PM
>>> To: "Matt Liotta" ; 
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
>>>
>>>   
>>>   
 I've been told personally by an FCC testing lab that I can take a XR5 
 
>
>   
 which
 has been tested with say a 23db panel antenna (with FCC) and use the 
 
> same
>   
 gain antenna or less for myself and would not have to have it 
 
> certified
>   
 again...  They told me not to get it tested because I didn't need to
 because Ubiquity already part certified it on that type antenna.

 If this is an argument we will never resolve I can live with that, but 
 
> I 
>   
 am
 fairly sure with the resources on this list we can come to a final
 conclusion based on facts and I think we should.

 Scott Carullo
 Brevard Wireless
 321-205-1100 x102

  Original Message 
 
 
> From: "Matt Liotta" 
> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 1:52 PM
> To: "sc...@brevardwireless.com" , "WISPA
>   
>   
 General List" 
 
 
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
>
> On May 12, 2009, at 1:25 PM, Scott Carullo wrote:
>
>   
>   
>> Eje Gustafsson says this is not the case or elsewhen I buy a 
>> 
> minipci
>   
>> wireless card for my laptop it would be illegal...
>>
>> 
>> 
> This has been discussed at length. No matter how many times someone
> makes the laptop argument it doesn't change the fact that the FCC
> disagrees with that argument. Now someone could pay an attorney to
> argue with the FCC and get them to clarify the situation. Until that
> time the system certification requirement stands.
>
> -Matt
>   
>   
>> -- 
>> Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
>> Author - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs"
>> Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993
>> www.ask-wi.com  818-227-4220  jun...@ask-wi.com
>>
>> "Email spam is just the latest way of asking
>> for "Forgiveness" instead of asking for "Permission". 
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 
> 
> 
>   
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>
>> 
> -

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

[Scott Carullo]

Ok...  so back to original dilemma...

I take a XR5, the precise antenna they certified with this radio card, a 
RB411 and hook it all up and use it myself within FCC RF guidelines.

Criminal or law abiding citizen...

Scott Carullo
Brevard Wireless
321-205-1100 x102

 Original Message 
> From: "Jack Unger" 
> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 3:47 PM
> To: "e...@wisp-router.com" , "WISPA General List" 

> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
> 
> My view is that once certified with a specific antenna then a system is 
> legal with any antenna of similar type (panel, yagi, etc.) of equal of 
> lesser gain. Anybody can make the decision to substitute a similar type 
> but lower gain antenna. I ran this by the FCC last year and they 
> confirmed it. Again, the original system must have already been 
certified
> 
> Eje Gustafsson wrote:
> > Only the manufacturer listed on the certificate can make that decision. 
The
> > rules states that antenna of similar type in same or lower gain is 
certified
> > but it's only the manufacturer that can make that decision what is
> > considered similar type and there for approved to use with the unit. 
> >
> > This is at least the feedback I gotten from the FCC testing lab I been
> > working with on getting radios certified. But if the radio manufacturer 
say
> > it's ok to use a similar antenna by a different manufacturer but not 
higher
> > gain then what was tested the it's ok. Of course any antenna that is 
actual
> > listed on the certificate will always be approved as long it's the 
same
> > model. 
> >
> > / Eje
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] 
On
> > Behalf Of Mike Hammett
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 2:23 PM
> > To: sc...@brevardwireless.com; WISPA General List
> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
> >
> > That was some ruling passed a few years ago that really freed the 
markets 
> > up.  Certify with the largest panel, omni, parabolic dish, etc. you can 
get 
> > to pass and anything in those groups is fair game.
> >
> >
> > -
> > Mike Hammett
> > Intelligent Computing Solutions
> > http://www.ics-il.com
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > From: "Scott Carullo" 
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 1:24 PM
> > To: "Matt Liotta" ; 
> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
> >
> >   
> >> I've been told personally by an FCC testing lab that I can take a XR5 

> >> which
> >> has been tested with say a 23db panel antenna (with FCC) and use the 
same
> >> gain antenna or less for myself and would not have to have it 
certified
> >> again...  They told me not to get it tested because I didn't need to
> >> because Ubiquity already part certified it on that type antenna.
> >>
> >> If this is an argument we will never resolve I can live with that, but 
I 
> >> am
> >> fairly sure with the resources on this list we can come to a final
> >> conclusion based on facts and I think we should.
> >>
> >> Scott Carullo
> >> Brevard Wireless
> >> 321-205-1100 x102
> >>
> >>  Original Message 
> >> 
> >>> From: "Matt Liotta" 
> >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 1:52 PM
> >>> To: "sc...@brevardwireless.com" , "WISPA
> >>>   
> >> General List" 
> >> 
> >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
> >>>
> >>> On May 12, 2009, at 1:25 PM, Scott Carullo wrote:
> >>>
> >>>   
>  Eje Gustafsson says this is not the case or elsewhen I buy a 
minipci
>  wireless card for my laptop it would be illegal...
> 
>  
> >>> This has been discussed at length. No matter how many times someone
> >>> makes the laptop argument it doesn't change the fact that the FCC
> >>> disagrees with that argument. Now someone could pay an attorney to
> >>> argue with the FCC and get them to clarify the situation. Until that
> >>> time the system certification requirement stands.
> >>>
> >>> -Matt
> >>>   
> >
> 
> -- 
> Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
> Author - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs"
> Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993
> www.ask-wi.com  818-227-4220  jun...@ask-wi.com
> 
> "Email spam is just the latest way of asking
> for "Forgiveness" instead of asking for "Permission". 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 


> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 


>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

[Jack Unger]

My view is that once certified with a specific antenna then a system is 
legal with any antenna of similar type (panel, yagi, etc.) of equal of 
lesser gain. Anybody can make the decision to substitute a similar type 
but lower gain antenna. I ran this by the FCC last year and they 
confirmed it. Again, the original system must have already been certified

Eje Gustafsson wrote:
> Only the manufacturer listed on the certificate can make that decision. The
> rules states that antenna of similar type in same or lower gain is certified
> but it's only the manufacturer that can make that decision what is
> considered similar type and there for approved to use with the unit. 
>
> This is at least the feedback I gotten from the FCC testing lab I been
> working with on getting radios certified. But if the radio manufacturer say
> it's ok to use a similar antenna by a different manufacturer but not higher
> gain then what was tested the it's ok. Of course any antenna that is actual
> listed on the certificate will always be approved as long it's the same
> model. 
>
> / Eje
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 2:23 PM
> To: sc...@brevardwireless.com; WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
>
> That was some ruling passed a few years ago that really freed the markets 
> up.  Certify with the largest panel, omni, parabolic dish, etc. you can get 
> to pass and anything in those groups is fair game.
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
> --
> From: "Scott Carullo" 
> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 1:24 PM
> To: "Matt Liotta" ; 
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
>
>   
>> I've been told personally by an FCC testing lab that I can take a XR5 
>> which
>> has been tested with say a 23db panel antenna (with FCC) and use the same
>> gain antenna or less for myself and would not have to have it certified
>> again...  They told me not to get it tested because I didn't need to
>> because Ubiquity already part certified it on that type antenna.
>>
>> If this is an argument we will never resolve I can live with that, but I 
>> am
>> fairly sure with the resources on this list we can come to a final
>> conclusion based on facts and I think we should.
>>
>> Scott Carullo
>> Brevard Wireless
>> 321-205-1100 x102
>>
>>  Original Message 
>> 
>>> From: "Matt Liotta" 
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 1:52 PM
>>> To: "sc...@brevardwireless.com" , "WISPA
>>>   
>> General List" 
>> 
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
>>>
>>> On May 12, 2009, at 1:25 PM, Scott Carullo wrote:
>>>
>>>   
 Eje Gustafsson says this is not the case or elsewhen I buy a minipci
 wireless card for my laptop it would be illegal...

 
>>> This has been discussed at length. No matter how many times someone
>>> makes the laptop argument it doesn't change the fact that the FCC
>>> disagrees with that argument. Now someone could pay an attorney to
>>> argue with the FCC and get them to clarify the situation. Until that
>>> time the system certification requirement stands.
>>>
>>> -Matt
>>>   
>

-- 
Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
Author - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs"
Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993
www.ask-wi.com  818-227-4220  jun...@ask-wi.com

"Email spam is just the latest way of asking
for "Forgiveness" instead of asking for "Permission". 







WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

[Jerry Richardson]

Now that makes sense 


 
 
__ 
Jerry Richardson 
airCloud Communications

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Harold Bledsoe
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 12:30 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

The Contains FCC ID: PPD-AR5BXB63 means that the laptop contains a
certified module.  EEEPC or whoever the manufacturer is, still had to
get a Declaration of Conformity covering the laptop, module, likely
peripherals, and AC adapter.  What they didn't have to do is get a new
full certification for the system.  Just a DoC.  A DoC still requires a
lab test but it is cheaper than a full cert.

-Hal



On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 12:08 -0700, Jerry Richardson wrote:
> Maybe this will clear things up (or muddy the waters)
> 
> I am looking at the bottom of my EEEPC which has a FCC ID: 
> PPD-AR5BXB63 (Atheros 802.11B/G) which refers to:
> https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/ViewExhibitReport.cfm?mode
> =E 
> xhibits&RequestTimeout=500&calledFromFrame=N&application_id=141428&fcc
> _i
> d=%27PPD-AR5BXB63%27
> 
> In the Test Report neither EEEPC or ASUS are mentioned. The test was 
> performed on a external jig on an HP laptop with a 3dB dipole.
> 
> Next I looked up a Ubiquty SR71 card:
> https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/ViewExhibitReport.cfm?mode
> =E 
> xhibits&RequestTimeout=500&calledFromFrame=N&application_id=287610&fcc
> _i
> d=%27SWX-SR71%27.
> 
> Again, the test was done an external jig on a different model HP
laptop.
> The Antenna Info sheet includes a 32Db pac wireless dish, a 5dB 2.4 
> omni, 17dB 2.4 panel (not sector), and a 21dB 5.8 panel (not sector).
> 
> Based on this I conclude that I can use any certified radio in my 
> computer (routerboard) as long as I do not use an antenna that is not 
> type certified. I need to put the FCC ID of the radio(s) on the 
> outside of the case so that an inspector does not need to open the 
> unit to obtain it.
> 
> Thoughts? Comments?
>  
> __
> Jerry Richardson
> airCloud Communications
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] 
> On Behalf Of Scott Carullo
> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 11:24 AM
> To: Matt Liotta; wireless@wispa.org
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
> 
> 
> I've been told personally by an FCC testing lab that I can take a XR5 
> which has been tested with say a 23db panel antenna (with FCC) and use

> the same gain antenna or less for myself and would not have to have it

> certified again...  They told me not to get it tested because I didn't

> need to because Ubiquity already part certified it on that type
antenna.
> 
> If this is an argument we will never resolve I can live with that, but

> I am fairly sure with the resources on this list we can come to a 
> final conclusion based on facts and I think we should.
> 
> Scott Carullo
> Brevard Wireless
> 321-205-1100 x102
> 
>  Original Message 
> > From: "Matt Liotta" 
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 1:52 PM
> > To: "sc...@brevardwireless.com" , "WISPA
> General List" 
> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
> > 
> > On May 12, 2009, at 1:25 PM, Scott Carullo wrote:
> > 
> > >
> > > Eje Gustafsson says this is not the case or elsewhen I buy a 
> > > minipci
> 
> > > wireless card for my laptop it would be illegal...
> > >
> > This has been discussed at length. No matter how many times someone 
> > makes the laptop argument it doesn't change the fact that the FCC 
> > disagrees with that argument. Now someone could pay an attorney to 
> > argue with the FCC and get them to clarify the situation. Until that

> > time the system certification requirement stands.
> > 
> > -Matt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> --
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> --
> --
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 
> 
> --
> --
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> --
> --
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

[Eje Gustafsson]

Only the manufacturer listed on the certificate can make that decision. The
rules states that antenna of similar type in same or lower gain is certified
but it's only the manufacturer that can make that decision what is
considered similar type and there for approved to use with the unit. 

This is at least the feedback I gotten from the FCC testing lab I been
working with on getting radios certified. But if the radio manufacturer say
it's ok to use a similar antenna by a different manufacturer but not higher
gain then what was tested the it's ok. Of course any antenna that is actual
listed on the certificate will always be approved as long it's the same
model. 

/ Eje

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 2:23 PM
To: sc...@brevardwireless.com; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

That was some ruling passed a few years ago that really freed the markets 
up.  Certify with the largest panel, omni, parabolic dish, etc. you can get 
to pass and anything in those groups is fair game.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



--
From: "Scott Carullo" 
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 1:24 PM
To: "Matt Liotta" ; 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

>
> I've been told personally by an FCC testing lab that I can take a XR5 
> which
> has been tested with say a 23db panel antenna (with FCC) and use the same
> gain antenna or less for myself and would not have to have it certified
> again...  They told me not to get it tested because I didn't need to
> because Ubiquity already part certified it on that type antenna.
>
> If this is an argument we will never resolve I can live with that, but I 
> am
> fairly sure with the resources on this list we can come to a final
> conclusion based on facts and I think we should.
>
> Scott Carullo
> Brevard Wireless
> 321-205-1100 x102
>
>  Original Message 
>> From: "Matt Liotta" 
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 1:52 PM
>> To: "sc...@brevardwireless.com" , "WISPA
> General List" 
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
>>
>> On May 12, 2009, at 1:25 PM, Scott Carullo wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > Eje Gustafsson says this is not the case or elsewhen I buy a minipci
>> > wireless card for my laptop it would be illegal...
>> >
>> This has been discussed at length. No matter how many times someone
>> makes the laptop argument it doesn't change the fact that the FCC
>> disagrees with that argument. Now someone could pay an attorney to
>> argue with the FCC and get them to clarify the situation. Until that
>> time the system certification requirement stands.
>>
>> -Matt
>
>
>
>
>


> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>


>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

[Harold Bledsoe]

The Contains FCC ID: PPD-AR5BXB63 means that the laptop contains a
certified module.  EEEPC or whoever the manufacturer is, still had to
get a Declaration of Conformity covering the laptop, module, likely
peripherals, and AC adapter.  What they didn't have to do is get a new
full certification for the system.  Just a DoC.  A DoC still requires a
lab test but it is cheaper than a full cert.

-Hal



On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 12:08 -0700, Jerry Richardson wrote:
> Maybe this will clear things up (or muddy the waters)
> 
> I am looking at the bottom of my EEEPC which has a FCC ID: PPD-AR5BXB63
> (Atheros 802.11B/G) which refers to:
> https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/ViewExhibitReport.cfm?mode=E
> xhibits&RequestTimeout=500&calledFromFrame=N&application_id=141428&fcc_i
> d=%27PPD-AR5BXB63%27
> 
> In the Test Report neither EEEPC or ASUS are mentioned. The test was
> performed on a external jig on an HP laptop with a 3dB dipole.
> 
> Next I looked up a Ubiquty SR71 card:
> https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/ViewExhibitReport.cfm?mode=E
> xhibits&RequestTimeout=500&calledFromFrame=N&application_id=287610&fcc_i
> d=%27SWX-SR71%27.
> 
> Again, the test was done an external jig on a different model HP laptop.
> The Antenna Info sheet includes a 32Db pac wireless dish, a 5dB 2.4
> omni, 17dB 2.4 panel (not sector), and a 21dB 5.8 panel (not sector).
> 
> Based on this I conclude that I can use any certified radio in my
> computer (routerboard) as long as I do not use an antenna that is not
> type certified. I need to put the FCC ID of the radio(s) on the outside
> of the case so that an inspector does not need to open the unit to
> obtain it. 
> 
> Thoughts? Comments?
>  
> __ 
> Jerry Richardson 
> airCloud Communications
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Scott Carullo
> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 11:24 AM
> To: Matt Liotta; wireless@wispa.org
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
> 
> 
> I've been told personally by an FCC testing lab that I can take a XR5
> which has been tested with say a 23db panel antenna (with FCC) and use
> the same gain antenna or less for myself and would not have to have it
> certified again...  They told me not to get it tested because I didn't
> need to because Ubiquity already part certified it on that type antenna.
> 
> If this is an argument we will never resolve I can live with that, but I
> am fairly sure with the resources on this list we can come to a final
> conclusion based on facts and I think we should.
> 
> Scott Carullo
> Brevard Wireless
> 321-205-1100 x102
> 
>  Original Message 
> > From: "Matt Liotta" 
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 1:52 PM
> > To: "sc...@brevardwireless.com" , "WISPA
> General List" 
> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
> > 
> > On May 12, 2009, at 1:25 PM, Scott Carullo wrote:
> > 
> > >
> > > Eje Gustafsson says this is not the case or elsewhen I buy a minipci
> 
> > > wireless card for my laptop it would be illegal...
> > >
> > This has been discussed at length. No matter how many times someone 
> > makes the laptop argument it doesn't change the fact that the FCC 
> > disagrees with that argument. Now someone could pay an attorney to 
> > argue with the FCC and get them to clarify the situation. Until that 
> > time the system certification requirement stands.
> > 
> > -Matt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

[Mike Hammett]

This been debated in circles many times with many people with seemingly 
valid parts on both side.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



--
From: "Jerry Richardson" 
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 2:08 PM
To: "WISPA General List" 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

> Maybe this will clear things up (or muddy the waters)
>
> I am looking at the bottom of my EEEPC which has a FCC ID: PPD-AR5BXB63
> (Atheros 802.11B/G) which refers to:
> https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/ViewExhibitReport.cfm?mode=E
> xhibits&RequestTimeout=500&calledFromFrame=N&application_id=141428&fcc_i
> d=%27PPD-AR5BXB63%27
>
> In the Test Report neither EEEPC or ASUS are mentioned. The test was
> performed on a external jig on an HP laptop with a 3dB dipole.
>
> Next I looked up a Ubiquty SR71 card:
> https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/ViewExhibitReport.cfm?mode=E
> xhibits&RequestTimeout=500&calledFromFrame=N&application_id=287610&fcc_i
> d=%27SWX-SR71%27.
>
> Again, the test was done an external jig on a different model HP laptop.
> The Antenna Info sheet includes a 32Db pac wireless dish, a 5dB 2.4
> omni, 17dB 2.4 panel (not sector), and a 21dB 5.8 panel (not sector).
>
> Based on this I conclude that I can use any certified radio in my
> computer (routerboard) as long as I do not use an antenna that is not
> type certified. I need to put the FCC ID of the radio(s) on the outside
> of the case so that an inspector does not need to open the unit to
> obtain it.
>
> Thoughts? Comments?
>
> __
> Jerry Richardson
> airCloud Communications
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Scott Carullo
> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 11:24 AM
> To: Matt Liotta; wireless@wispa.org
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
>
>
> I've been told personally by an FCC testing lab that I can take a XR5
> which has been tested with say a 23db panel antenna (with FCC) and use
> the same gain antenna or less for myself and would not have to have it
> certified again...  They told me not to get it tested because I didn't
> need to because Ubiquity already part certified it on that type antenna.
>
> If this is an argument we will never resolve I can live with that, but I
> am fairly sure with the resources on this list we can come to a final
> conclusion based on facts and I think we should.
>
> Scott Carullo
> Brevard Wireless
> 321-205-1100 x102
>
>  Original Message 
>> From: "Matt Liotta" 
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 1:52 PM
>> To: "sc...@brevardwireless.com" , "WISPA
> General List" 
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
>>
>> On May 12, 2009, at 1:25 PM, Scott Carullo wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > Eje Gustafsson says this is not the case or elsewhen I buy a minipci
>
>> > wireless card for my laptop it would be illegal...
>> >
>> This has been discussed at length. No matter how many times someone
>> makes the laptop argument it doesn't change the fact that the FCC
>> disagrees with that argument. Now someone could pay an attorney to
>> argue with the FCC and get them to clarify the situation. Until that
>> time the system certification requirement stands.
>>
>> -Matt
>
>
>
>
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

[Mike Hammett]

That was some ruling passed a few years ago that really freed the markets 
up.  Certify with the largest panel, omni, parabolic dish, etc. you can get 
to pass and anything in those groups is fair game.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



--
From: "Scott Carullo" 
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 1:24 PM
To: "Matt Liotta" ; 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

>
> I've been told personally by an FCC testing lab that I can take a XR5 
> which
> has been tested with say a 23db panel antenna (with FCC) and use the same
> gain antenna or less for myself and would not have to have it certified
> again...  They told me not to get it tested because I didn't need to
> because Ubiquity already part certified it on that type antenna.
>
> If this is an argument we will never resolve I can live with that, but I 
> am
> fairly sure with the resources on this list we can come to a final
> conclusion based on facts and I think we should.
>
> Scott Carullo
> Brevard Wireless
> 321-205-1100 x102
>
>  Original Message 
>> From: "Matt Liotta" 
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 1:52 PM
>> To: "sc...@brevardwireless.com" , "WISPA
> General List" 
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
>>
>> On May 12, 2009, at 1:25 PM, Scott Carullo wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > Eje Gustafsson says this is not the case or elsewhen I buy a minipci
>> > wireless card for my laptop it would be illegal...
>> >
>> This has been discussed at length. No matter how many times someone
>> makes the laptop argument it doesn't change the fact that the FCC
>> disagrees with that argument. Now someone could pay an attorney to
>> argue with the FCC and get them to clarify the situation. Until that
>> time the system certification requirement stands.
>>
>> -Matt
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

[Jerry Richardson]

Maybe this will clear things up (or muddy the waters)

I am looking at the bottom of my EEEPC which has a FCC ID: PPD-AR5BXB63
(Atheros 802.11B/G) which refers to:
https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/ViewExhibitReport.cfm?mode=E
xhibits&RequestTimeout=500&calledFromFrame=N&application_id=141428&fcc_i
d=%27PPD-AR5BXB63%27

In the Test Report neither EEEPC or ASUS are mentioned. The test was
performed on a external jig on an HP laptop with a 3dB dipole.

Next I looked up a Ubiquty SR71 card:
https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/ViewExhibitReport.cfm?mode=E
xhibits&RequestTimeout=500&calledFromFrame=N&application_id=287610&fcc_i
d=%27SWX-SR71%27.

Again, the test was done an external jig on a different model HP laptop.
The Antenna Info sheet includes a 32Db pac wireless dish, a 5dB 2.4
omni, 17dB 2.4 panel (not sector), and a 21dB 5.8 panel (not sector).

Based on this I conclude that I can use any certified radio in my
computer (routerboard) as long as I do not use an antenna that is not
type certified. I need to put the FCC ID of the radio(s) on the outside
of the case so that an inspector does not need to open the unit to
obtain it. 

Thoughts? Comments?
 
__ 
Jerry Richardson 
airCloud Communications

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Scott Carullo
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 11:24 AM
To: Matt Liotta; wireless@wispa.org
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC


I've been told personally by an FCC testing lab that I can take a XR5
which has been tested with say a 23db panel antenna (with FCC) and use
the same gain antenna or less for myself and would not have to have it
certified again...  They told me not to get it tested because I didn't
need to because Ubiquity already part certified it on that type antenna.

If this is an argument we will never resolve I can live with that, but I
am fairly sure with the resources on this list we can come to a final
conclusion based on facts and I think we should.

Scott Carullo
Brevard Wireless
321-205-1100 x102

 Original Message 
> From: "Matt Liotta" 
> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 1:52 PM
> To: "sc...@brevardwireless.com" , "WISPA
General List" 
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
> 
> On May 12, 2009, at 1:25 PM, Scott Carullo wrote:
> 
> >
> > Eje Gustafsson says this is not the case or elsewhen I buy a minipci

> > wireless card for my laptop it would be illegal...
> >
> This has been discussed at length. No matter how many times someone 
> makes the laptop argument it doesn't change the fact that the FCC 
> disagrees with that argument. Now someone could pay an attorney to 
> argue with the FCC and get them to clarify the situation. Until that 
> time the system certification requirement stands.
> 
> -Matt






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

[Matt Liotta]

On May 12, 2009, at 2:24 PM, Scott Carullo wrote:

>
> I've been told personally by an FCC testing lab that I can take a  
> XR5 which
> has been tested with say a 23db panel antenna (with FCC) and use the  
> same
> gain antenna or less for myself and would not have to have it  
> certified
> again...  They told me not to get it tested because I didn't need to
> because Ubiquity already part certified it on that type antenna.
>
You are mixing issues. The ability to change antennas is different  
than system certification. If you had a system that was certified with  
one antenna you could change the antenna to something of similar type  
with the same or less gain without an issue. But, the system itself  
must certified.

> If this is an argument we will never resolve I can live with that,  
> but I am
> fairly sure with the resources on this list we can come to a final
> conclusion based on facts and I think we should.
>
This list is filled with resources that will tell you what you don't  
want to hear and another group that will tell you want you do want to  
hear. None of that matters. What you need to do is assume the worst  
case or get your specific case approved by the FCC. In other words,  
what you want will not work and you cannot do it until the FCC gives  
you written approval.

-Matt



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

[Scott Carullo]

I've been told personally by an FCC testing lab that I can take a XR5 which 
has been tested with say a 23db panel antenna (with FCC) and use the same 
gain antenna or less for myself and would not have to have it certified 
again...  They told me not to get it tested because I didn't need to 
because Ubiquity already part certified it on that type antenna.

If this is an argument we will never resolve I can live with that, but I am 
fairly sure with the resources on this list we can come to a final 
conclusion based on facts and I think we should.

Scott Carullo
Brevard Wireless
321-205-1100 x102

 Original Message 
> From: "Matt Liotta" 
> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 1:52 PM
> To: "sc...@brevardwireless.com" , "WISPA 
General List" 
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
> 
> On May 12, 2009, at 1:25 PM, Scott Carullo wrote:
> 
> >
> > Eje Gustafsson says this is not the case or elsewhen I buy a minipci
> > wireless card for my laptop it would be illegal...
> >
> This has been discussed at length. No matter how many times someone  
> makes the laptop argument it doesn't change the fact that the FCC  
> disagrees with that argument. Now someone could pay an attorney to  
> argue with the FCC and get them to clarify the situation. Until that  
> time the system certification requirement stands.
> 
> -Matt 





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

[os10rules]

If that's true then it's illegal for me to buy a RB411, a XR5, an  
enclosure and put it together myself? If that's true why do they sell  
all that stuff without disclaimers? Am I supposed to put this stuff  
together and then go through a certification process?

Greg
On May 12, 2009, at 1:12 PM, Dennis Burgess - Linktechs wrote:

> Scott,  Thats not the case, you have to have the Mikrotik FCC  
> Sticker etc..
>
> To your questions.
>
> 1.  Nope
> 2.  Nope.
>
>
> * ---
> Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
> WISPA Board Member - wispa.org 
> Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
> WISPA Vendor Member*
> *Office*: 314-735-0270 *Website*: http://www.linktechs.net
> 
> */LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training/*
> 
>
> The information transmitted (including attachments) is covered by  
> the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is  
> intended only for the person(s) or entity/entities to which
> it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged  
> material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of,  
> or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by  
> persons or entities other than the intended recipient(s) is  
> prohibited, If you
> received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the  
> material from any computer.
>
>
>
>
>
> Scott Carullo wrote:
>> Randy,
>>
>> Dumb question  If you are a wisp what would be the motivation to
>> certify a "kit"?
>>
>> Its been clearly stated that you can take the RB, a radio card and  
>> stick it
>> in an enclosure and use it to your hearts content legally per FCC /  
>> UL
>> rules.  Why would anyone do anything other than just use the parts  
>> - except
>> if you are reselling the gear...  I think that's where you run into  
>> the
>> issue of having to have the whole system certified vs just buying  
>> and using
>> the parts.
>>
>> Is that correct?  lol sorry to be such a pita but I'd like some  
>> definitive
>> answers just once so I can put this to bed...
>>
>> Questions I ask myself...
>>
>> 1) Ok, Its legal and perfectly accepted for me to buy a RB411, a  
>> XR5, a
>> PoE-24i, an ARC 5Ghz Gen 2 Enclosure put it all together and use it  
>> for my
>> on network or customers all day long every day (assuming I'm legal  
>> power,
>> correct bands etc)...
>> True or False
>>
>> 2) Assuming #1 above is True - I cannot sell this equipment as a  
>> Brevard
>> Wireless Model 500 ptp radio bridge on the retail market without  
>> getting
>> the whole system certified as a "kit" including all parts,  
>> documentation,
>> power supplies etc...
>> True or False
>>
>> 3) If #1 and #2 above are both true, I'm clear thanks conversation  
>> over.
>> If either one is false we have a lot more to talk about...
>>
>> Scott Carullo
>> Brevard Wireless
>> 321-205-1100 x102
>>
>>  Original Message 
>>
>>> From: "Dennis Burgess - Linktechs" 
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 12:08 PM
>>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
>>>
>>> I belive you must purchase hardware directly from MT to be a
>>>
>> distributor.
>>
>>> * ---
>>> Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
>>> WISPA Board Member - wispa.org 
>>> Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
>>> WISPA Vendor Member*
>>> *Office*: 314-735-0270 *Website*: http://www.linktechs.net
>>> 
>>> */LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training/*
>>> 
>>>
>>> The information transmitted (including attachments) is covered by  
>>> the
>>>
>> Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is  
>> intended
>> only for the person(s) or entity/entities to which
>>
>>> it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged  
>>> material.
>>>
>> Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or  
>> taking of any
>> action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities  
>> other than
>> the intended recipient(s) is prohibited, If you
>>
>>> received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the  
>>> material
>>>
>> from any computer.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Randy Cosby wrote:
>>>
 Can we clarify what a "distributor" is, and what a "reseller" is  
 as far

>>
>>
 as Mikrotik is concerned for this program?  Can a wisp (are they
 resellers?) get permission from Mikrotik to certify a kit?  Where  
 can

>> we
>>
 find out more on this?  Are there distributors who will do on  
 behalf of

>>
>>
 a wisp?

 Randy


 Mike Delp wrote:


> I think that what Dennis was trying to say is.  You have to be a
>
>> Mikrotik
>>
> Distributor, and follow the

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

[Butch Evans]

On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 13:02 -0400, Scott Carullo wrote:
> Its been clearly stated that you can take the RB, a radio card and stick it 
> in an enclosure and use it to your hearts content legally per FCC / UL 
> rules.  

The trouble with that approach is that it isn't legal.  In order to be
legal, it has to have the sticker. Having said that, all that is
required in order to get a sticker is one of 2 things:

1. Buy a system that is built by a distributor and stickered.
2. Build a system and take it to a certification lab and pay the price
to get YOUR system certified.  

There is, unfortunately, no shortcut or third option.  This has been
discussed at length on this (and many other) list.  There are, in the
rules, several areas that are not clear.  It is this grey area that is
the source of various opinions.  However, the above 2 options really are
your only choices.

> 1) Ok, Its legal and perfectly accepted for me to buy a RB411, a XR5, a 
> PoE-24i, an ARC 5Ghz Gen 2 Enclosure put it all together and use it for my 
> on network or customers all day long every day (assuming I'm legal power, 
> correct bands etc)...  
> True or False 

False.  First, the combinations that MT has certified include the R52
and nearly any Pac Wireless antenna.  There are, also, some antennas
from Poynting that are (from my understanding) certified.  While I
personally disagree that you can use these component certifications
legally, it appears that MT and several distributors are calling these
FCC certified systems.  They may be correct in doing so.  According to
Eje and his experience with the certification lab, this approach IS
acceptable.  If he is correct, then you can choose option number 1 above
and be legal.  

> 2) Assuming #1 above is True - I cannot sell this equipment as a Brevard 
> Wireless Model 500 ptp radio bridge on the retail market without getting 
> the whole system certified as a "kit" including all parts, documentation, 
> power supplies etc...  
> True or False

This is not a relevant question.  The system that is stickered with
Mikrotik's FCC Certification is only available from a Mikrotik
Distributor.  That is the point that Dennis was making.  The particular
wording he used left a lot of room for misinterpretation and was not
completely correct because of that, however the point is that with the
MT sticker, you can ONLY get that from a Mikrotik distributor as a
system.  (FWIW, I can help you with that, too.)

-- 

* Butch Evans   * Professional Network Consultation*
* http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering  *
* http://www.wispa.org/ * WISPA Board Member   *
* http://blog.butchevans.com/   * Wired or Wireless Networks   *






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

[Matt Liotta]

On May 12, 2009, at 1:25 PM, Scott Carullo wrote:

>
> Eje Gustafsson says this is not the case or elsewhen I buy a minipci
> wireless card for my laptop it would be illegal...
>
This has been discussed at length. No matter how many times someone  
makes the laptop argument it doesn't change the fact that the FCC  
disagrees with that argument. Now someone could pay an attorney to  
argue with the FCC and get them to clarify the situation. Until that  
time the system certification requirement stands.

-Matt



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

[Scott Reed]

I read the rules a few years ago because of the laptop question.  My 
understanding is:
if the SBC is Part B compliant
if the radio board is certified with the antenna
it is OK.
Which, I believe, is what Eje said.

Scott Carullo wrote:
> Eje Gustafsson says this is not the case or elsewhen I buy a minipci 
> wireless card for my laptop it would be illegal...
>
> You guys please come to conclusion so we can move to #2
>
> Scott Carullo
> Brevard Wireless
> 321-205-1100 x102
>
>  Original Message 
>   
>> From: "Dennis Burgess - Linktechs" 
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 1:13 PM
>> To: "sc...@brevardwireless.com" , "WISPA 
>> 
> General List" 
>   
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
>>
>> Scott,  Thats not the case, you have to have the Mikrotik FCC Sticker 
>> 
> etc..
>   
>> To your questions. 
>>
>> 1.  Nope
>> 2.  Nope.
>>
>>
>> * ---
>> Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
>> WISPA Board Member - wispa.org 
>> Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
>> WISPA Vendor Member*
>> *Office*: 314-735-0270 *Website*: http://www.linktechs.net 
>> 
>> */LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training/* 
>> 
>>
>> The information transmitted (including attachments) is covered by the 
>> 
> Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is intended 
> only for the person(s) or entity/entities to which 
>   
>> it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. 
>> 
> Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any 
> action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than 
> the intended recipient(s) is prohibited, If you 
>   
>> received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material 
>> 
> from any computer.
>   
>>  
>>
>>
>>
>> Scott Carullo wrote:
>> 
>>> Randy,
>>>
>>> Dumb question  If you are a wisp what would be the motivation to 
>>> certify a "kit"?
>>>
>>> Its been clearly stated that you can take the RB, a radio card and 
>>>   
> stick it 
>   
>>> in an enclosure and use it to your hearts content legally per FCC / UL 
>>>   
>
>   
>>> rules.  Why would anyone do anything other than just use the parts - 
>>>   
> except 
>   
>>> if you are reselling the gear...  I think that's where you run into the 
>>>   
>
>   
>>> issue of having to have the whole system certified vs just buying and 
>>>   
> using 
>   
>>> the parts.
>>>
>>> Is that correct?  lol sorry to be such a pita but I'd like some 
>>>   
> definitive 
>   
>>> answers just once so I can put this to bed...
>>>
>>> Questions I ask myself...
>>>
>>> 1) Ok, Its legal and perfectly accepted for me to buy a RB411, a XR5, a 
>>>   
>
>   
>>> PoE-24i, an ARC 5Ghz Gen 2 Enclosure put it all together and use it for 
>>>   
> my 
>   
>>> on network or customers all day long every day (assuming I'm legal 
>>>   
> power, 
>   
>>> correct bands etc)...  
>>> True or False 
>>>
>>> 2) Assuming #1 above is True - I cannot sell this equipment as a 
>>>   
> Brevard 
>   
>>> Wireless Model 500 ptp radio bridge on the retail market without 
>>>   
> getting 
>   
>>> the whole system certified as a "kit" including all parts, 
>>>   
> documentation, 
>   
>>> power supplies etc...  
>>> True or False
>>>
>>> 3) If #1 and #2 above are both true, I'm clear thanks conversation 
>>>   
> over.  
>   
>>> If either one is false we have a lot more to talk about...
>>>
>>> Scott Carullo
>>> Brevard Wireless
>>> 321-205-1100 x102
>>>
>>>  Original Message 
>>>   
>>>   
 From: "Dennis Burgess - Linktechs" 
 Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 12:08 PM
 To: "WISPA General List" 
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

 I belive you must purchase hardware directly from MT to be a 
 
 
>>> distributor.
>>>   
>>>   
 * ---
 Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
 WISPA Board Member - wispa.org 
 Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
 WISPA Vendor Member*
 *Office*: 314-735-0270 *Website*: http://www.linktechs.net 
 
 */LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training/* 
 

 The information transmitted (including attachments) is covered by the 
 
>
>   
 
 
>>> Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is intended 
>>>   
>
>   
>>> only for the person(s) or entity/entities to which 
>>>   
>>>   
 it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged 
 
> material. 
>   
 
 
>>> Any review, retransmission, dissemination or ot

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

[Scott Carullo]

Eje Gustafsson says this is not the case or elsewhen I buy a minipci 
wireless card for my laptop it would be illegal...

You guys please come to conclusion so we can move to #2

Scott Carullo
Brevard Wireless
321-205-1100 x102

 Original Message 
> From: "Dennis Burgess - Linktechs" 
> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 1:13 PM
> To: "sc...@brevardwireless.com" , "WISPA 
General List" 
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
> 
> Scott,  Thats not the case, you have to have the Mikrotik FCC Sticker 
etc..
> 
> To your questions. 
> 
> 1.  Nope
> 2.  Nope.
> 
> 
> * ---
> Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
> WISPA Board Member - wispa.org 
> Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
> WISPA Vendor Member*
> *Office*: 314-735-0270 *Website*: http://www.linktechs.net 
> 
> */LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training/* 
> 
> 
> The information transmitted (including attachments) is covered by the 
Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is intended 
only for the person(s) or entity/entities to which 
> it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. 
Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any 
action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than 
the intended recipient(s) is prohibited, If you 
> received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material 
from any computer.
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> Scott Carullo wrote:
> > Randy,
> >
> > Dumb question  If you are a wisp what would be the motivation to 
> > certify a "kit"?
> >
> > Its been clearly stated that you can take the RB, a radio card and 
stick it 
> > in an enclosure and use it to your hearts content legally per FCC / UL 

> > rules.  Why would anyone do anything other than just use the parts - 
except 
> > if you are reselling the gear...  I think that's where you run into the 

> > issue of having to have the whole system certified vs just buying and 
using 
> > the parts.
> >
> > Is that correct?  lol sorry to be such a pita but I'd like some 
definitive 
> > answers just once so I can put this to bed...
> >
> > Questions I ask myself...
> >
> > 1) Ok, Its legal and perfectly accepted for me to buy a RB411, a XR5, a 

> > PoE-24i, an ARC 5Ghz Gen 2 Enclosure put it all together and use it for 
my 
> > on network or customers all day long every day (assuming I'm legal 
power, 
> > correct bands etc)...  
> > True or False 
> >
> > 2) Assuming #1 above is True - I cannot sell this equipment as a 
Brevard 
> > Wireless Model 500 ptp radio bridge on the retail market without 
getting 
> > the whole system certified as a "kit" including all parts, 
documentation, 
> > power supplies etc...  
> > True or False
> >
> > 3) If #1 and #2 above are both true, I'm clear thanks conversation 
over.  
> > If either one is false we have a lot more to talk about...
> >
> > Scott Carullo
> > Brevard Wireless
> > 321-205-1100 x102
> >
> >  Original Message 
> >   
> >> From: "Dennis Burgess - Linktechs" 
> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 12:08 PM
> >> To: "WISPA General List" 
> >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
> >>
> >> I belive you must purchase hardware directly from MT to be a 
> >> 
> > distributor.
> >   
> >> * ---
> >> Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
> >> WISPA Board Member - wispa.org 
> >> Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
> >> WISPA Vendor Member*
> >> *Office*: 314-735-0270 *Website*: http://www.linktechs.net 
> >> 
> >> */LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training/* 
> >> 
> >>
> >> The information transmitted (including attachments) is covered by the 

> >> 
> > Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is intended 

> > only for the person(s) or entity/entities to which 
> >   
> >> it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged 
material. 
> >> 
> > Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of 
any 
> > action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other 
than 
> > the intended recipient(s) is prohibited, If you 
> >   
> >> received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the 
material 
> >> 
> > from any computer.
> >   
> >>  
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Randy Cosby wrote:
> >> 
> >>> Can we clarify what a "distributor" is, and what a "reseller" is as 
far 
> >>>   
> >
> >   
> >>> as Mikrotik is concerned for this program?  Can a wisp (are they 
> >>> resellers?) get permission from Mikrotik to certify a kit?  Where can 

> >>>   
> > we 
> >   
> >>> find out more on this?  Are there distributors who will do on behalf 
of 
> >>>   
> >
> >  

Re: [WISPA] Sector separation/isolation

[Matt]

What about the R52 cards?

Matt



On Sat, May 2, 2009 at 11:00 AM,  wrote:

> Keep in mind that this is not necessary true depending what chip set the
> card is using. For example the SR2 cards will always listen to 20Mhz even if
> they only transmit on 10MHz or even 5MHz. While for example a XR2 set in
> 10MHz mode will only listen to 10MHz.
>
> /Eje
> CTO
> WISP-Router, Inc.
> Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Scott Reed 
>
> Date: Sat, 02 May 2009 11:40:31
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Sector separation/isolation
>
>
> Right now channel 1 uses channel 1, 2 and 3.  Channel 6 uses 4-8.  When
> you go to 10MHz channels 1 will use 1 and  2.  6 will use 5, 6 and 7.
> Therefore, you are no longer on adjacent channels, there is a gap of
> channels 3 and 4 between.
> Also, you will cut down on the amount of other noise you hear because
> you listen to only half as much spectrum.
> And, you will have more effective power so noise may be less of a problem.
>
> I am sure there are some RF savvy folks out there that can explain it
> better.
>
> Michael Baird wrote:
> > I can try that, can you tell me why that would make a difference though
> > with the AP's seeing each other at such signal levels? Will changing to
> > 10mhz channel width's cause the AP's to see each other at a lower RSSI?
> >
> > Regards
> > Michael Baird
> >
> >> Use 10mhz channels instead of 20mhz.
> >>
> >> Kurt Fankhauser
> >> WAVELINC
> >> P.O. Box 126
> >> Bucyrus, OH 44820
> >> 419-562-6405
> >> www.wavelinc.com
> >>
> >>
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> >> Behalf Of Michael Baird
> >> Sent: Saturday, May 02, 2009 6:54 AM
> >> To: WISPA General List
> >> Subject: [WISPA] Sector separation/isolation
> >>
> >> We are still experimenting with aligning sector's on our towers. We are
> >> attempting to use 3 120 degree/13db/6.5 vb/7 degree downtilt, antennas
> >> to cover 360 degrees. I just inspected the towers myself, and noticed
> >> they are setup at 30 degrees/150 degrees/290 degrees (so they aren't
> >> right exactly). So the problem that caused me to inspect the tower was
> >> the signal level I can see the other AP's at.
> >>
> >> AP 30 can see AP 150 at -39 and AP 290 at -42.
> >> AP 150 can see AP 30 at -42 and AP 290 at -70.
> >> AP 290 can see AP 30 at -39 and AP 150 at -65.
> >>
> >> So I'm guessing that the reason 150/290 are much higher is because of
> >> the additional 20 degrees between them. These AP's are on channels
> >> 1/6/11, I'm wondering if I should worry about seeing the other AP's with
> >> such a hot signal, and if so what are some good ways to isolate them
> better.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> Michael Baird
> >>
> >>
> >>
> 
> >> 
> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> >> http://signup.wispa.org/
> >>
> 
> >> 
> >>
> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> >>
> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> >>
> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> 
> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> >> http://signup.wispa.org/
> >>
> 
> >>
> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> >>
> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> >>
> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> > WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> > http://signup.wispa.org/
> >
> 
> >
> > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> >
> > Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> >
> > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> >
> > 
> >
> >
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> > Version: 8.5.323 / Virus Database: 270.12.13/2091 - Release Date:
> 05/01/09 17:52:00
> >
> >
>
> --
> Scott Reed
> Sr. Systems Engineer
> GAB Midwest
> 1-800-363-1544 x4000
> Cell: 260-273-7239
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
> --

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

[Dennis Burgess - Linktechs]

Scott,  Thats not the case, you have to have the Mikrotik FCC Sticker etc..

To your questions. 

1.  Nope
2.  Nope.


* ---
Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
WISPA Board Member - wispa.org 
Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
WISPA Vendor Member*
*Office*: 314-735-0270 *Website*: http://www.linktechs.net 

*/LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training/* 


The information transmitted (including attachments) is covered by the 
Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is intended only 
for the person(s) or entity/entities to which 
it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any 
review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action 
in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the 
intended recipient(s) is prohibited, If you 
received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from 
any computer.

 



Scott Carullo wrote:
> Randy,
>
> Dumb question  If you are a wisp what would be the motivation to 
> certify a "kit"?
>
> Its been clearly stated that you can take the RB, a radio card and stick it 
> in an enclosure and use it to your hearts content legally per FCC / UL 
> rules.  Why would anyone do anything other than just use the parts - except 
> if you are reselling the gear...  I think that's where you run into the 
> issue of having to have the whole system certified vs just buying and using 
> the parts.
>
> Is that correct?  lol sorry to be such a pita but I'd like some definitive 
> answers just once so I can put this to bed...
>
> Questions I ask myself...
>
> 1) Ok, Its legal and perfectly accepted for me to buy a RB411, a XR5, a 
> PoE-24i, an ARC 5Ghz Gen 2 Enclosure put it all together and use it for my 
> on network or customers all day long every day (assuming I'm legal power, 
> correct bands etc)...  
> True or False 
>
> 2) Assuming #1 above is True - I cannot sell this equipment as a Brevard 
> Wireless Model 500 ptp radio bridge on the retail market without getting 
> the whole system certified as a "kit" including all parts, documentation, 
> power supplies etc...  
> True or False
>
> 3) If #1 and #2 above are both true, I'm clear thanks conversation over.  
> If either one is false we have a lot more to talk about...
>
> Scott Carullo
> Brevard Wireless
> 321-205-1100 x102
>
>  Original Message 
>   
>> From: "Dennis Burgess - Linktechs" 
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 12:08 PM
>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
>>
>> I belive you must purchase hardware directly from MT to be a 
>> 
> distributor.
>   
>> * ---
>> Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
>> WISPA Board Member - wispa.org 
>> Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
>> WISPA Vendor Member*
>> *Office*: 314-735-0270 *Website*: http://www.linktechs.net 
>> 
>> */LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training/* 
>> 
>>
>> The information transmitted (including attachments) is covered by the 
>> 
> Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is intended 
> only for the person(s) or entity/entities to which 
>   
>> it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. 
>> 
> Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any 
> action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than 
> the intended recipient(s) is prohibited, If you 
>   
>> received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material 
>> 
> from any computer.
>   
>>  
>>
>>
>>
>> Randy Cosby wrote:
>> 
>>> Can we clarify what a "distributor" is, and what a "reseller" is as far 
>>>   
>
>   
>>> as Mikrotik is concerned for this program?  Can a wisp (are they 
>>> resellers?) get permission from Mikrotik to certify a kit?  Where can 
>>>   
> we 
>   
>>> find out more on this?  Are there distributors who will do on behalf of 
>>>   
>
>   
>>> a wisp?
>>>
>>> Randy
>>>
>>>
>>> Mike Delp wrote:
>>>   
>>>   
 I think that what Dennis was trying to say is.  You have to be a 
 
> Mikrotik
>   
 Distributor, and follow their documentation to be able to use their 
 
> lab
>   
 testing certification.  Distributors are effectively MT agents using 
 
> their
>   
 already completed certification testing.  Anyone can take some parts 
 
> and
>   
 have them lab tested and certified as a system. Mikrotik has already 
 
> gone
>   
 through the expense of testing in a lab, and they have a program to 
 
> make
>   
 these certifica

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

[Randy Cosby]

Thanks Scott.  I'd like to see this all clarified as well.  Guess I must 
have read things differently than you and was not as certain that the 
answers were definitive.

Randy


Scott Carullo wrote:
> Randy,
>
> Dumb question  If you are a wisp what would be the motivation to 
> certify a "kit"?
>
> Its been clearly stated that you can take the RB, a radio card and stick it 
> in an enclosure and use it to your hearts content legally per FCC / UL 
> rules.  Why would anyone do anything other than just use the parts - except 
> if you are reselling the gear...  I think that's where you run into the 
> issue of having to have the whole system certified vs just buying and using 
> the parts.
>
> Is that correct?  lol sorry to be such a pita but I'd like some definitive 
> answers just once so I can put this to bed...
>
> Questions I ask myself...
>
> 1) Ok, Its legal and perfectly accepted for me to buy a RB411, a XR5, a 
> PoE-24i, an ARC 5Ghz Gen 2 Enclosure put it all together and use it for my 
> on network or customers all day long every day (assuming I'm legal power, 
> correct bands etc)...  
> True or False 
>
> 2) Assuming #1 above is True - I cannot sell this equipment as a Brevard 
> Wireless Model 500 ptp radio bridge on the retail market without getting 
> the whole system certified as a "kit" including all parts, documentation, 
> power supplies etc...  
> True or False
>
> 3) If #1 and #2 above are both true, I'm clear thanks conversation over.  
> If either one is false we have a lot more to talk about...
>
> Scott Carullo
> Brevard Wireless
> 321-205-1100 x102
>
>  Original Message 
>   
>> From: "Dennis Burgess - Linktechs" 
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 12:08 PM
>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
>>
>> I belive you must purchase hardware directly from MT to be a 
>> 
> distributor.
>   
>> * ---
>> Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
>> WISPA Board Member - wispa.org 
>> Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
>> WISPA Vendor Member*
>> *Office*: 314-735-0270 *Website*: http://www.linktechs.net 
>> 
>> */LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training/* 
>> 
>>
>> The information transmitted (including attachments) is covered by the 
>> 
> Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is intended 
> only for the person(s) or entity/entities to which 
>   
>> it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. 
>> 
> Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any 
> action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than 
> the intended recipient(s) is prohibited, If you 
>   
>> received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material 
>> 
> from any computer.
>   
>>  
>>
>>
>>
>> Randy Cosby wrote:
>> 
>>> Can we clarify what a "distributor" is, and what a "reseller" is as far 
>>>   
>
>   
>>> as Mikrotik is concerned for this program?  Can a wisp (are they 
>>> resellers?) get permission from Mikrotik to certify a kit?  Where can 
>>>   
> we 
>   
>>> find out more on this?  Are there distributors who will do on behalf of 
>>>   
>
>   
>>> a wisp?
>>>
>>> Randy
>>>
>>>
>>> Mike Delp wrote:
>>>   
>>>   
 I think that what Dennis was trying to say is.  You have to be a 
 
> Mikrotik
>   
 Distributor, and follow their documentation to be able to use their 
 
> lab
>   
 testing certification.  Distributors are effectively MT agents using 
 
> their
>   
 already completed certification testing.  Anyone can take some parts 
 
> and
>   
 have them lab tested and certified as a system. Mikrotik has already 
 
> gone
>   
 through the expense of testing in a lab, and they have a program to 
 
> make
>   
 these certifications available from the distributors.  So, there is a
 difference in having parts listed as certified, and having a complete 
 
> system
>   
 with a sticker on it.  The sticker makes it complete.

 Thanks

 Mike

 On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Scott Carullo 
 
> wrote:
>   
   
 
 
> I'm pretty sure the FCC and the testing labs don't care who you are 
>   
> or
>   
> where you buy your stuff...  thats not what they are looking for.  
>   
> Example
>   
> - I choose to take 4 parts (some mikrotik) and get them certified - 
>   
> I
>   
> can  Do you see this differently?
>
> Scott Carullo
> Brevard Wireless
> 321-205-1100 x102
>
>  Original Message 
> 
>   
>   
>> From: "Dennis Burgess - Linktechs" 
>> Se

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

[Scott Carullo]

Randy,

Dumb question  If you are a wisp what would be the motivation to 
certify a "kit"?

Its been clearly stated that you can take the RB, a radio card and stick it 
in an enclosure and use it to your hearts content legally per FCC / UL 
rules.  Why would anyone do anything other than just use the parts - except 
if you are reselling the gear...  I think that's where you run into the 
issue of having to have the whole system certified vs just buying and using 
the parts.

Is that correct?  lol sorry to be such a pita but I'd like some definitive 
answers just once so I can put this to bed...

Questions I ask myself...

1) Ok, Its legal and perfectly accepted for me to buy a RB411, a XR5, a 
PoE-24i, an ARC 5Ghz Gen 2 Enclosure put it all together and use it for my 
on network or customers all day long every day (assuming I'm legal power, 
correct bands etc)...  
True or False 

2) Assuming #1 above is True - I cannot sell this equipment as a Brevard 
Wireless Model 500 ptp radio bridge on the retail market without getting 
the whole system certified as a "kit" including all parts, documentation, 
power supplies etc...  
True or False

3) If #1 and #2 above are both true, I'm clear thanks conversation over.  
If either one is false we have a lot more to talk about...

Scott Carullo
Brevard Wireless
321-205-1100 x102

 Original Message 
> From: "Dennis Burgess - Linktechs" 
> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 12:08 PM
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
> 
> I belive you must purchase hardware directly from MT to be a 
distributor.
> 
> * ---
> Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
> WISPA Board Member - wispa.org 
> Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
> WISPA Vendor Member*
> *Office*: 314-735-0270 *Website*: http://www.linktechs.net 
> 
> */LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training/* 
> 
> 
> The information transmitted (including attachments) is covered by the 
Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is intended 
only for the person(s) or entity/entities to which 
> it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. 
Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any 
action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than 
the intended recipient(s) is prohibited, If you 
> received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material 
from any computer.
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> Randy Cosby wrote:
> > Can we clarify what a "distributor" is, and what a "reseller" is as far 

> > as Mikrotik is concerned for this program?  Can a wisp (are they 
> > resellers?) get permission from Mikrotik to certify a kit?  Where can 
we 
> > find out more on this?  Are there distributors who will do on behalf of 

> > a wisp?
> >
> > Randy
> >
> >
> > Mike Delp wrote:
> >   
> >> I think that what Dennis was trying to say is.  You have to be a 
Mikrotik
> >> Distributor, and follow their documentation to be able to use their 
lab
> >> testing certification.  Distributors are effectively MT agents using 
their
> >> already completed certification testing.  Anyone can take some parts 
and
> >> have them lab tested and certified as a system. Mikrotik has already 
gone
> >> through the expense of testing in a lab, and they have a program to 
make
> >> these certifications available from the distributors.  So, there is a
> >> difference in having parts listed as certified, and having a complete 
system
> >> with a sticker on it.  The sticker makes it complete.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >> Mike
> >>
> >> On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Scott Carullo 
wrote:
> >>
> >>   
> >> 
> >>> I'm pretty sure the FCC and the testing labs don't care who you are 
or
> >>> where you buy your stuff...  thats not what they are looking for.  
Example
> >>> - I choose to take 4 parts (some mikrotik) and get them certified - 
I
> >>> can  Do you see this differently?
> >>>
> >>> Scott Carullo
> >>> Brevard Wireless
> >>> 321-205-1100 x102
> >>>
> >>>  Original Message 
> >>> 
> >>>   
>  From: "Dennis Burgess - Linktechs" 
>  Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 3:43 PM
>  To: "WISPA General List" 
>  Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
> 
>  First, you have to be a distributor of MT to be able to certify. It 
has
>  to be a certified system, as well has to have all of the images, 
text
>  etc on it as well.  You can only get those if you are a MT 
distributor.
> 
>  * ---
>  Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
>  WISPA Board Member - wispa.org 
>  Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
>  WISPA Vendor Member*
>  *Office*: 314-735-0270 *Website*: 

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

[Mike Delp]

You have to buy your product directly from Mikrotik, and the minimum order
is 10,000/month

Thanks

Mike

On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Randy Cosby  wrote:

> Can we clarify what a "distributor" is, and what a "reseller" is as far
> as Mikrotik is concerned for this program?  Can a wisp (are they
> resellers?) get permission from Mikrotik to certify a kit?  Where can we
> find out more on this?  Are there distributors who will do on behalf of
> a wisp?
>
> Randy
>
>
> Mike Delp wrote:
> > I think that what Dennis was trying to say is.  You have to be a Mikrotik
> > Distributor, and follow their documentation to be able to use their lab
> > testing certification.  Distributors are effectively MT agents using
> their
> > already completed certification testing.  Anyone can take some parts and
> > have them lab tested and certified as a system. Mikrotik has already gone
> > through the expense of testing in a lab, and they have a program to make
> > these certifications available from the distributors.  So, there is a
> > difference in having parts listed as certified, and having a complete
> system
> > with a sticker on it.  The sticker makes it complete.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Scott Carullo <
> sc...@brevardwireless.com>wrote:
> >
> >
> >> I'm pretty sure the FCC and the testing labs don't care who you are or
> >> where you buy your stuff...  thats not what they are looking for.
>  Example
> >> - I choose to take 4 parts (some mikrotik) and get them certified - I
> >> can  Do you see this differently?
> >>
> >> Scott Carullo
> >> Brevard Wireless
> >> 321-205-1100 x102
> >>
> >>  Original Message 
> >>
> >>> From: "Dennis Burgess - Linktechs" 
> >>> Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 3:43 PM
> >>> To: "WISPA General List" 
> >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
> >>>
> >>> First, you have to be a distributor of MT to be able to certify. It has
> >>> to be a certified system, as well has to have all of the images, text
> >>> etc on it as well.  You can only get those if you are a MT distributor.
> >>>
> >>> * ---
> >>> Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
> >>> WISPA Board Member - wispa.org 
> >>> Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
> >>> WISPA Vendor Member*
> >>> *Office*: 314-735-0270 *Website*: http://www.linktechs.net
> >>> 
> >>> */LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training/*
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>> The information transmitted (including attachments) is covered by the
> >>>
> >> Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is intended
> >> only for the person(s) or entity/entities to which
> >>
> >>> it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
> material.
> >>>
> >> Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of
> any
> >> action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other
> than
> >> the intended recipient(s) is prohibited, If you
> >>
> >>> received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the
> material
> >>>
> >> from any computer.
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Randy Cosby wrote:
> >>>
>  Can you explain what you mean by "certified" then?  What does that
>  entail other than just putting together a board, antenna and radio
> that
> 
>  are fcc certified?  Do you have the entire unit tested and certified,
> 
> >> or
> >>
>  do yo see that as not necessary?
> 
>  Randy
> 
> 
>  Eje Gustafsson wrote:
> 
> 
> > Cross roads are certified with the entire Pacific Wireless line of
> >
> >> antennas.
> >>
> > R52 is certified with most of those as well (if not all). You can
> also
> >
> >> use
> >>
> > XR2/5 cards in RB SBC's.
> >
> > There are other solutions as well.
> >
> > We offer some certified pre built solutions more to come.
> >
> > / Eje Gustafsson
> > CTO
> > WISP-Router, Inc.
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
> >
> >> On
> >>
> > Behalf Of Randy Cosby
> > Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 1:56 PM
> > To: WISPA General List
> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
> >
> > Old thread, but just curious where this has progressed.  I've seen
> >
> >> that
> >>
> > JeffSoHoCo has "certified" gear.  Is that based on the same Mikrotik
> > program you describe here Mac?  Is that information available from
> > Mikrotik to any reseller?
> >
> > Randy
> >
> >
> > Mac Dearman wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>   Word on the FCC certified gear is that they are working with USA
> >>
> >> based
> >>
> >> resellers to get them up to speed to offer certified gear. It's all
> >>
> >> in the
> >>
> >> paperwork at this point in time an

Re: [WISPA] whats your longest uptime?

[Josh Luthman]

Just found this - made me happy =)

AN50
492 day(s), 03 hr, 19 min, 00 sec

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

"When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however
improbable, must be the truth."
--- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle


On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 1:16 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

> Why did you reboot it???
>
> On 4/9/09, Travis Johnson  wrote:
> > We had a Trango 5830AP that had an uptime of over 578 days just a few
> days
> > ago... but then we rebooted it. :(
> >
> > Travis
> > Microserv
> >
> > David E. Smith wrote:
> >>
> >> Travis Johnson wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Tower mounted AP = 500+ days.
> >>> Customer prem switch = 5+ years.
> >>> Tower router = 321 days
> >>>
> >>
> >> Sadly, nothing in my NOC has an uptime past this:
> >> mvncsw1 uptime is 2 years, 7 weeks, 8 hours, 43 minutes
> >>
> >> but that's how long it's been since we moved into our new office. Nice
> >> to know the UPS and generator are doing their job...
> >>
> >> I do have at least one Linux server that's been up long enough that its
> >> uptime counter rolled over (which happens somewhere around 497 days).
> >>
> >> The best I can find in my wireless network right now (without really
> >> looking) is a fairly remote Trango SU that says this:
> >> [System Up Time] 230 day(s) 03:13:13
> >>
> >> Hey, as long as it works. :D
> >>
> >> David Smith
> >> MVN.net
> >>
> >>
> >>
> 
> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> >> http://signup.wispa.org/
> >>
> 
> >>
> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> >>
> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> >>
> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
> --
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly.
> --- Henry Spencer
>



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

[Dennis Burgess - Linktechs]

I belive you must purchase hardware directly from MT to be a distributor.

* ---
Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
WISPA Board Member - wispa.org 
Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
WISPA Vendor Member*
*Office*: 314-735-0270 *Website*: http://www.linktechs.net 

*/LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training/* 


The information transmitted (including attachments) is covered by the 
Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is intended only 
for the person(s) or entity/entities to which 
it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any 
review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action 
in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the 
intended recipient(s) is prohibited, If you 
received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from 
any computer.

 



Randy Cosby wrote:
> Can we clarify what a "distributor" is, and what a "reseller" is as far 
> as Mikrotik is concerned for this program?  Can a wisp (are they 
> resellers?) get permission from Mikrotik to certify a kit?  Where can we 
> find out more on this?  Are there distributors who will do on behalf of 
> a wisp?
>
> Randy
>
>
> Mike Delp wrote:
>   
>> I think that what Dennis was trying to say is.  You have to be a Mikrotik
>> Distributor, and follow their documentation to be able to use their lab
>> testing certification.  Distributors are effectively MT agents using their
>> already completed certification testing.  Anyone can take some parts and
>> have them lab tested and certified as a system. Mikrotik has already gone
>> through the expense of testing in a lab, and they have a program to make
>> these certifications available from the distributors.  So, there is a
>> difference in having parts listed as certified, and having a complete system
>> with a sticker on it.  The sticker makes it complete.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Scott Carullo 
>> wrote:
>>
>>   
>> 
>>> I'm pretty sure the FCC and the testing labs don't care who you are or
>>> where you buy your stuff...  thats not what they are looking for.  Example
>>> - I choose to take 4 parts (some mikrotik) and get them certified - I
>>> can  Do you see this differently?
>>>
>>> Scott Carullo
>>> Brevard Wireless
>>> 321-205-1100 x102
>>>
>>>  Original Message 
>>> 
>>>   
 From: "Dennis Burgess - Linktechs" 
 Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 3:43 PM
 To: "WISPA General List" 
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

 First, you have to be a distributor of MT to be able to certify. It has
 to be a certified system, as well has to have all of the images, text
 etc on it as well.  You can only get those if you are a MT distributor.

 * ---
 Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
 WISPA Board Member - wispa.org 
 Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
 WISPA Vendor Member*
 *Office*: 314-735-0270 *Website*: http://www.linktechs.net
 
 */LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training/*
 

 The information transmitted (including attachments) is covered by the
   
 
>>> Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is intended
>>> only for the person(s) or entity/entities to which
>>> 
>>>   
 it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material.
   
 
>>> Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any
>>> action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than
>>> the intended recipient(s) is prohibited, If you
>>> 
>>>   
 received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material
   
 
>>> from any computer.
>>> 
>>>   

 Randy Cosby wrote:
   
 
> Can you explain what you mean by "certified" then?  What does that
> entail other than just putting together a board, antenna and radio that
> 
> are fcc certified?  Do you have the entire unit tested and certified,
> 
>   
>>> or
>>> 
>>>   
> do yo see that as not necessary?
>
> Randy
>
>
> Eje Gustafsson wrote:
>
> 
>   
>> Cross roads are certified with the entire Pacific Wireless line of
>>   
>> 
>>> antennas.
>>> 
>>>   
>> R52 is certified with most of those as well (if not all). You can also
>>   
>> 
>>> use
>>> 
>>>   
>> XR2/5 cards in 

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

[Randy Cosby]

Can we clarify what a "distributor" is, and what a "reseller" is as far 
as Mikrotik is concerned for this program?  Can a wisp (are they 
resellers?) get permission from Mikrotik to certify a kit?  Where can we 
find out more on this?  Are there distributors who will do on behalf of 
a wisp?

Randy


Mike Delp wrote:
> I think that what Dennis was trying to say is.  You have to be a Mikrotik
> Distributor, and follow their documentation to be able to use their lab
> testing certification.  Distributors are effectively MT agents using their
> already completed certification testing.  Anyone can take some parts and
> have them lab tested and certified as a system. Mikrotik has already gone
> through the expense of testing in a lab, and they have a program to make
> these certifications available from the distributors.  So, there is a
> difference in having parts listed as certified, and having a complete system
> with a sticker on it.  The sticker makes it complete.
>
> Thanks
>
> Mike
>
> On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Scott Carullo 
> wrote:
>
>   
>> I'm pretty sure the FCC and the testing labs don't care who you are or
>> where you buy your stuff...  thats not what they are looking for.  Example
>> - I choose to take 4 parts (some mikrotik) and get them certified - I
>> can  Do you see this differently?
>>
>> Scott Carullo
>> Brevard Wireless
>> 321-205-1100 x102
>>
>>  Original Message 
>> 
>>> From: "Dennis Burgess - Linktechs" 
>>> Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 3:43 PM
>>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
>>>
>>> First, you have to be a distributor of MT to be able to certify. It has
>>> to be a certified system, as well has to have all of the images, text
>>> etc on it as well.  You can only get those if you are a MT distributor.
>>>
>>> * ---
>>> Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
>>> WISPA Board Member - wispa.org 
>>> Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
>>> WISPA Vendor Member*
>>> *Office*: 314-735-0270 *Website*: http://www.linktechs.net
>>> 
>>> */LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training/*
>>> 
>>>
>>> The information transmitted (including attachments) is covered by the
>>>   
>> Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is intended
>> only for the person(s) or entity/entities to which
>> 
>>> it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material.
>>>   
>> Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any
>> action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than
>> the intended recipient(s) is prohibited, If you
>> 
>>> received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material
>>>   
>> from any computer.
>> 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Randy Cosby wrote:
>>>   
 Can you explain what you mean by "certified" then?  What does that
 entail other than just putting together a board, antenna and radio that
 
 are fcc certified?  Do you have the entire unit tested and certified,
 
>> or
>> 
 do yo see that as not necessary?

 Randy


 Eje Gustafsson wrote:

 
> Cross roads are certified with the entire Pacific Wireless line of
>   
>> antennas.
>> 
> R52 is certified with most of those as well (if not all). You can also
>   
>> use
>> 
> XR2/5 cards in RB SBC's.
>
> There are other solutions as well.
>
> We offer some certified pre built solutions more to come.
>
> / Eje Gustafsson
> CTO
> WISP-Router, Inc.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
>   
>> On
>> 
> Behalf Of Randy Cosby
> Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 1:56 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
>
> Old thread, but just curious where this has progressed.  I've seen
>   
>> that
>> 
> JeffSoHoCo has "certified" gear.  Is that based on the same Mikrotik
> program you describe here Mac?  Is that information available from
> Mikrotik to any reseller?
>
> Randy
>
>
> Mac Dearman wrote:
>
>
>   
>>   Word on the FCC certified gear is that they are working with USA
>> 
>> based
>> 
>> resellers to get them up to speed to offer certified gear. It's all
>> 
>> in the
>> 
>> paperwork at this point in time and we all know that the devil is in
>> 
>> the
>> 
>> paperwork. It is on its way from what I understand and should be
>> 
>> readily
>> 
>> available in the near future.
>>
>>
>> Mac
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>>

[WISPA] As seen on Twitter

[Mike Hammett]

Recently I saw these comments made on Twitter and I was wondering if anyone 
could track down some quotable sources for these.

Rep Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) says that historically a $1 investment in broadband 
yields a $10 return. So a $7.2B investment...

NTIA's Larry Irving wants to see USF funds provide $7B ANNUALLY for broadband. 
Says that the current $7.2 is a "down payment."


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Today's ARIN

[Scott Carullo]

You must be multihomed first - they request both upstream peers and need to 
see your advertisements on the net in BGP table  My experience any 
way.

Scott Carullo
Brevard Wireless
321-205-1100 x102

 Original Message 
> From: "David E. Smith" 
> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 10:19 AM
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Today's ARIN
> 
> Butch Evans wrote:
> 
> > It has been about 5 years since I've dealt with them at all, and I 
know
> > there is likely to have been some changes in the way they handle their
> > business.  As I understand it, you can get as small as a /22 from them
> > if you are multi-homed.  Are there other requirements that I am
> > overlooking?  How hard are they to deal with in terms of getting them 
to
> > provide you with an allocation in advance of the actual connection of
> > the second circuit?  It would be nice to only have 1 renumbering in 
this
> > process.
> 
> 
> As long as your client needs that much address space, (i.e. is 
> efficiently using at least a /23 or so already), ARIN is generally 
> pretty easy to work with. Have your documentation together, show them 
> that you know what you're talking about, and you'll get your request 
> granted. As long as you're intending to multi-home, the fact that you 
> haven't yet actually done so shouldn't be a problem in getting an ASN 
> and a small IPv4 allocation.
> 
> They did recently introduce a new policy that IPv4 requests need to 
> include a signed attestation from a corporate officer, but that's 
> probably a rubber-stamp affair (and I don't think it officially takes 
> effect 'til next week anyway).
> 
> Be sure to get some IPv6 space while you're there, it's free, and 
> they'll need it in a couple years anyway. :)
> 
> David Smith
> MVN.net
> 
> 
> 
> 


> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 


>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Today's ARIN

[David E. Smith]

Butch Evans wrote:

> It has been about 5 years since I've dealt with them at all, and I know
> there is likely to have been some changes in the way they handle their
> business.  As I understand it, you can get as small as a /22 from them
> if you are multi-homed.  Are there other requirements that I am
> overlooking?  How hard are they to deal with in terms of getting them to
> provide you with an allocation in advance of the actual connection of
> the second circuit?  It would be nice to only have 1 renumbering in this
> process.


As long as your client needs that much address space, (i.e. is 
efficiently using at least a /23 or so already), ARIN is generally 
pretty easy to work with. Have your documentation together, show them 
that you know what you're talking about, and you'll get your request 
granted. As long as you're intending to multi-home, the fact that you 
haven't yet actually done so shouldn't be a problem in getting an ASN 
and a small IPv4 allocation.

They did recently introduce a new policy that IPv4 requests need to 
include a signed attestation from a corporate officer, but that's 
probably a rubber-stamp affair (and I don't think it officially takes 
effect 'til next week anyway).

Be sure to get some IPv6 space while you're there, it's free, and 
they'll need it in a couple years anyway. :)

David Smith
MVN.net




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC

[Mike Delp]

I think that what Dennis was trying to say is.  You have to be a Mikrotik
Distributor, and follow their documentation to be able to use their lab
testing certification.  Distributors are effectively MT agents using their
already completed certification testing.  Anyone can take some parts and
have them lab tested and certified as a system. Mikrotik has already gone
through the expense of testing in a lab, and they have a program to make
these certifications available from the distributors.  So, there is a
difference in having parts listed as certified, and having a complete system
with a sticker on it.  The sticker makes it complete.

Thanks

Mike

On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Scott Carullo wrote:

>
> I'm pretty sure the FCC and the testing labs don't care who you are or
> where you buy your stuff...  thats not what they are looking for.  Example
> - I choose to take 4 parts (some mikrotik) and get them certified - I
> can  Do you see this differently?
>
> Scott Carullo
> Brevard Wireless
> 321-205-1100 x102
>
>  Original Message 
> > From: "Dennis Burgess - Linktechs" 
> > Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 3:43 PM
> > To: "WISPA General List" 
> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
> >
> > First, you have to be a distributor of MT to be able to certify. It has
> > to be a certified system, as well has to have all of the images, text
> > etc on it as well.  You can only get those if you are a MT distributor.
> >
> > * ---
> > Dennis Burgess, CCNA, A+, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
> > WISPA Board Member - wispa.org 
> > Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
> > WISPA Vendor Member*
> > *Office*: 314-735-0270 *Website*: http://www.linktechs.net
> > 
> > */LIVE On-Line Mikrotik Training/*
> > 
> >
> > The information transmitted (including attachments) is covered by the
> Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is intended
> only for the person(s) or entity/entities to which
> > it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material.
> Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any
> action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than
> the intended recipient(s) is prohibited, If you
> > received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material
> from any computer.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Randy Cosby wrote:
> > > Can you explain what you mean by "certified" then?  What does that
> > > entail other than just putting together a board, antenna and radio that
>
> > > are fcc certified?  Do you have the entire unit tested and certified,
> or
> > > do yo see that as not necessary?
> > >
> > > Randy
> > >
> > >
> > > Eje Gustafsson wrote:
> > >
> > >> Cross roads are certified with the entire Pacific Wireless line of
> antennas.
> > >> R52 is certified with most of those as well (if not all). You can also
> use
> > >> XR2/5 cards in RB SBC's.
> > >>
> > >> There are other solutions as well.
> > >>
> > >> We offer some certified pre built solutions more to come.
> > >>
> > >> / Eje Gustafsson
> > >> CTO
> > >> WISP-Router, Inc.
> > >>
> > >> -Original Message-
> > >> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
> On
> > >> Behalf Of Randy Cosby
> > >> Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 1:56 PM
> > >> To: WISPA General List
> > >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
> > >>
> > >> Old thread, but just curious where this has progressed.  I've seen
> that
> > >> JeffSoHoCo has "certified" gear.  Is that based on the same Mikrotik
> > >> program you describe here Mac?  Is that information available from
> > >> Mikrotik to any reseller?
> > >>
> > >> Randy
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Mac Dearman wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>   Word on the FCC certified gear is that they are working with USA
> based
> > >>> resellers to get them up to speed to offer certified gear. It's all
> in the
> > >>> paperwork at this point in time and we all know that the devil is in
> the
> > >>> paperwork. It is on its way from what I understand and should be
> readily
> > >>> available in the near future.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Mac
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> >  -Original Message-
> >  From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org
> ]
> On
> >  Behalf Of Mike Hammett
> >  Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 8:12 PM
> >  To: WISPA General List
> >  Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mikrotik FCC
> > 
> >  Mikrotik has the Crossroads device out now.  Not sure on anyone
> else.
> >  I
> >  think Mikrotik developing their own certified CPE shut down
> everyone
> >  else.
> > 
> > 
> >  --
> >  Mike Hammett
> >  Intelligent Computing Solutions
> >  http://www.ics-il.com
> > 
> > 
> >  - Original Message -
> >  From: "Travis Johnso

Re: [WISPA] Today's ARIN

[Mike Hammett]

https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#four222

You have to utilize the assignment in 3 months.
You have to currently be using 2x /24s.
You have to return your old IPs to your provider.
Some other stuff available on their web site.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



--
From: "Butch Evans" 
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 11:58 PM
To: 
Subject: [WISPA] Today's ARIN

> I have a customer that will be multi-homed soon.  He has asked me to
> help him get ready for this move.  I will be handling his BGP and such,
> but he wants me to handle getting his IP space from ARIN as well.
>
> It has been about 5 years since I've dealt with them at all, and I know
> there is likely to have been some changes in the way they handle their
> business.  As I understand it, you can get as small as a /22 from them
> if you are multi-homed.  Are there other requirements that I am
> overlooking?  How hard are they to deal with in terms of getting them to
> provide you with an allocation in advance of the actual connection of
> the second circuit?  It would be nice to only have 1 renumbering in this
> process.
>
> -- 
> 
> * Butch Evans   * Professional Network Consultation*
> * http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering  *
> * http://www.wispa.org/ * WISPA Board Member   *
> * http://blog.butchevans.com/   * Wired or Wireless Networks   *
> 
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] OSPF question

[Scott Reed]

Does the x86 exchange with the non-main router?
If it can route to it, they should exchange.  If it doesn't, check all 
the settings on the x86 again.  Area number is good.  Router number is 
unique.  Authentication is correct.  Any of those can make it not work.
You could turn on OSPF in logging and see what shows up in the log.  
Might point to the problem.

Gino Villarini wrote:
>  
> Well I have 1 "Main Router" with 2 peers on the same Eth port, I receive
> routes from 1, but not from the 2nd.  Im using the same area for both,
> different networks (2 /30)
>
> All are Mt 3.23 with routing test, the only difference is that the 2
> exchanging routes are rb1000, the other one is a x86 machine
>
> Gino A. Villarini
> g...@aeronetpr.com
> Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
> tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Butch Evans
> Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 12:35 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] OSPF question
>
> On Mon, 2009-05-11 at 15:40 -0400, Gino Villarini wrote:
>   
>> Can I have several neighboors under the same interface?
>> 
>
> Yes.
>  
>   
>> I have a OSPF neighboor in ether1, can I have another neighboor with 
>> the same area on the same interface?
>> 
>
> This is common for a broadcast network, actually.  What is it that makes
> you ask?  Are you seeing problems and wanting to clarify if this is a
> symptom of the problem?
>
> --
> 
> * Butch Evans   * Professional Network Consultation*
> * http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering  *
> * http://www.wispa.org/ * WISPA Board Member   *
> * http://blog.butchevans.com/   * Wired or Wireless Networks   *
> 
>
>
>
>
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>   
> 
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
> Version: 8.5.325 / Virus Database: 270.12.25/2109 - Release Date: 05/11/09 
> 16:14:00
>
>   

-- 
Scott Reed
Sr. Systems Engineer
GAB Midwest
1-800-363-1544 x4000
Cell: 260-273-7239




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] OSPF question

[Gino Villarini]

 
Well I have 1 "Main Router" with 2 peers on the same Eth port, I receive
routes from 1, but not from the 2nd.  Im using the same area for both,
different networks (2 /30)

All are Mt 3.23 with routing test, the only difference is that the 2
exchanging routes are rb1000, the other one is a x86 machine

Gino A. Villarini
g...@aeronetpr.com
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Butch Evans
Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 12:35 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] OSPF question

On Mon, 2009-05-11 at 15:40 -0400, Gino Villarini wrote:
> Can I have several neighboors under the same interface?

Yes.
 
> I have a OSPF neighboor in ether1, can I have another neighboor with 
> the same area on the same interface?

This is common for a broadcast network, actually.  What is it that makes
you ask?  Are you seeing problems and wanting to clarify if this is a
symptom of the problem?

--

* Butch Evans   * Professional Network Consultation*
* http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering  *
* http://www.wispa.org/ * WISPA Board Member   *
* http://blog.butchevans.com/   * Wired or Wireless Networks   *







WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/