Hmm That response sounds framiliar
:-)
-B-
Rudy Worrell wrote:
Gents and fellow concerned WISP operators. I had the same questions most of
you have regarding FCC form 477. I went directly to the source as you will
see below. I got an answer and it is stated below.
At this
Rudy Worrell wrote:
I don't have the answers but we should now think of a few things that come
to mind as we move forward.
1.) Security to this list (my customers can join along with anyone else)
Paid WISPA Principle Members have a members only list server called
[EMAIL PROTECTED] It is
- Original Message -
From: David E. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2006 7:23 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] To Break the Law or Not to Break the Law...That is
theQuestion
Scott Reed wrote:
font size=2I must be missing something
John,
Thank you for the response. I am hoping that everyone including myself will
pony up be a paid member.
My issue is simply not having the time. Installer,CEO,support, tower engineer,
and I am sure you know the rest.
I know we all work but is there anyone out there with some free time
Can I get your cell?
Blair Davis wrote:
Brian,
Call me monday, but too many volts is what kills electronics.
Blair
Brian Rohrbacher wrote:
I'm a little confused here. I'm working on a 300 ft run of cat5 and
have a question. The radio is acting sparatic. The power supply has
already
Hehe (offlist) right!
Brian Rohrbacher wrote:
Can I get your cell?
Blair Davis wrote:
Brian,
Call me monday, but too many volts is what kills electronics.
Blair
Brian Rohrbacher wrote:
I'm a little confused here. I'm working on a 300 ft run of cat5 and
have a question. The radio
- Original Message -
From: Rudolph Worrell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 7:15 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Form requirement
John,
Thank you for the response. I am hoping that everyone including myself
will
pony up be
The 2006 WISPA Board election will start tomorrow at 9am (Central time),
and run through Wednesday, 9am (Central time).
I just mailed out ballots to all paid WISPA members. Please don't lose
them, you will need these ballots to vote tomorrow.
If you think you should have received a ballot,
OK, I can't take this anymore
Guys, you all already pay taxes, have phone numbers, business licenses etc.
It's not like anyone that wants to cause trouble can't find ya easlily
enough.
I came up with the most common 4 questions that have been asked here and
shot them off to Ellen at the
Hello everyoneHas anybody used anygigabit wireless products for a customer, and if so what brand did you go with. Can you tell me some details of the link itself and ease of install, I'am assuming this is UNII Band Please contact offlist atRob Maier [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1-941-914-2110
The gigabit wireless products are not UNII. They are unlicensed 60 Ghz
and licensed 70 to 90 Ghz millimeter wave band radios. I have not used
these but others have with success. Some common brands are:
Gigabeam
Bridgewave
Terrabeam
This is comparable to Free Space Optics in that there are some
http://rcrnews.com/news.cms?newsId=25545
What do you think Mark?
Brian
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Well, it does not surprise me that the government has decided to tax the
unlicensed spectrum. Today the Bush administration announced a plan to tax
Wi-Fi and other unlicensed spectrum. It is not clear how they will do it yet
but the process is in motion. That's the bad news, the good news is they
Now we know why they want the 477 forms.
Brian Webster wrote:
Well, it does not surprise me that the government has decided to tax the
unlicensed spectrum. Today the Bush administration announced a plan to tax
Wi-Fi and other unlicensed spectrum. It is not clear how they will do it yet
but
Time to organize troops... Nuff said!
Who's got lead?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Blair Davis
Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 6:49 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Good news and bad news today
Now we
How about if we propose to the Congress that they allow a per base
station license to be paid annually for broadband use that gives first
in rights to those who launch broadband in a given geography in the
channel registered for each base station? Then everyone would have the
ability to have
Sorry to reply to my own post here but I forgot one important part of
this I meant to include. Under this policy we would suggest that
unlicensed spectrum would remain absolutely free of charges. The fees
would only apply to all un-auctioned whitespace in all bands across the
entire radio
I like the idea of offering to be taxed for something in exchange. This
way at least we get something WE VALUE instead of settling for something
stupid later on. I've been playing a lot of poker lately. First to act
usually wins the pot. Let's try acting first. Always reacting sucks.
Interesting how the 5 Ghz spectrum gets resolved right after they come
up with the taxing idea. And one needs to wonder who came up with the
great idea of taxing unlicensed spectrum. It surely wasn't George
hyimself.
-B-
Brian Webster wrote:
Well, it does not surprise me that the
yeah, how about allowing any wattage on ptmp links in exchange for the
tax, THAT i'd like.
Brian Rohrbacher wrote:
I like the idea of offering to be taxed for something in exchange.
This way at least we get something WE VALUE instead of settling for
something stupid later on. I've been
If I read this right it does not specifically mention unlicensed
spectrum but does refer to spectrum not already auctioned which could
mean whitespace. We probably have a chance to spin this to our advantage
unless you guys all would rather just bitch and moan.
Scriv
Bob Moldashel wrote:
Ha. I reread my post. I don't want to be taxed out of business, but a
few pennies *right* here or there in exchange for the right thing might
be worth it.
Rick Smith wrote:
yeah, how about allowing any wattage on ptmp links in exchange for the
tax, THAT i'd like.
Brian Rohrbacher
Ok...Here is a quote from the story..
WASHINGTON-President Bush, facing a huge budget deficit, today proposed
squeezing more money from the nation's airwaves by supporting
legislative changes that would allow the Federal Communications
Commission to set user fees on un-auctioned radio
I would have to agree. Any new spectrum would be taxable. I would be
ok with that, if it meant new spectrum.
Travis
Microserv
John Scrivner wrote:
If I read this right it does not specifically mention unlicensed
spectrum but does refer to spectrum not already auctioned which could
mean
I do not want to pay tax on the current part-15 spectrum. I find it
unfair to change the rules half way into a game. How about
opening new part-15 spectrum with those rules. Someone said to give
first right of way to the first operator on a specific channel.
This is a bad idea for the current
This is a good thought to get something out of the deal. I really think that
we need access to utility easments.
Imagine putting an AP everywhere the cable and phone company aggregates thier
fiber/wires etc. Imagine being able to put an AP on or near a stop sign or
anywhere you deem
Hey no pun intended but who is the guy that gets to say I told you so?
--
Quoting Bob Moldashel [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Well...They sure couldn't have timed it any better.
Now we will see how many people file. 24 Hours ago i would have said
this never would have occured. Now.Well...Let
Good one.
On a serious note though we need to get the membership up to do any of this.
To the powers that be can I help in ramping up support. I could dedicate a
resouce to call you sorry sons like myself and take your money :).
Quoting John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
If I read this
Mac,
I am with you. We need to be very aware but also plan and propose so that we
are not spoken for in an ill way.
One thing that would really help here and on the paid side of things is to have
clear goals, leadership, and direction.
Quoting Mac Dearman [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I say
A bad idea.
The only way it can be enforced is to tax makers of unlicensed equipment,
they would have to register and serialized every device in order to be
taxed.
I doubt this will go anywhere.
North East Oregon Fastnet, LLC 509-593-4061
personal correspondence to: mark at neofast dot net
This sounds allot like what Mark K was talking about. WISPA needs to
find out what the deal is and (imo) fight
any taxing on license free bands. P-15 spectrum built the wisp
industry as it is today and people need it so it
can build the next wave of wispdom. Taxes will make RD money dry up and
Right of Way access is available to anyone right now. Ask your local
city/county for the ROW contracts
that they have with the gas, cable, telco, electric, and others.
Jeromie Reeves
Rudolph Worrell wrote:
This is a good thought to get something out of the deal. I really think that
we need
How could anyone enforce a user fee on ISM bands?
There are countless millions of devices in use, and tracking down and
enforcing thier use would be an absurd proposition.
Taxing equipment that uses it would be the most likely, but even that has
issues. I don't think they're intending to tax
Netrepid is looking to hire skilled tower climbers with experience in
microwave systems. Positions are full time and company offers benefits and
per diem. Work is in the PA area. If interested please contact me at the
following email address. Thanks.
Sam Coyl
Vice President, Business Development
I tend to agree. I think this thing will hit a dead end. My only
concern is that they will only tax people using it for commercial use,
not personal.
Thenits an uphill battle.
-B-
Mark Koskenmaki wrote:
A bad idea.
The only way it can be enforced is to tax makers of unlicensed
It's unclear whether the user fee tax would be paid by equipment vendors or
end users
The above quote from the article leads me to believe that this idea is
half-baked at best. What happens to the myriad of devices already out there in
people's homes? Forget about what we do for a moment. The
First, the rcrnews feed is meaningless. It lacked all detail and clarity, to
understand what it meant.
Second, It is impairative that existing Unlicensed Spectrum NEVER get taxed,
and that users and providers of it, NEVER get taxed.
Unlicensed spectrum belongs to the people. Whn I charge a
There is no evidence that the 5.4Ghz spectrum issue is resolved, but it sure
was convenient for them to through it out there as hope, to reduce the
repercusions of the proposed TAXes.
Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
- Original Message -
From:
I think you and I said the same thing with one exception. Due to
difficulty in tracking per user per megahertz I think it would be
simpler to just have a per base station fee. The fee could be scaled by
the amount (Mhz) of spectrum used in the base station. This would only
be for new spectrum
I HIGHLY recommmend that the WISP industry pitch support for charging fees
or taxes to providers that use TV WHITE SPACE. We need that more than
anything, as its the most valuable spectrum left. The chances of us getting
it today, are null and slim, from what I see. An offer from the WISP
It would grandfather all existing devices. And charge manufacturers for all
future production runs. Or they could charge a tax in retail stores similar
to sales tax, called broadband equipment tax. Aren't they already taxing
broadband equipment, sale tax.
Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL Wireless, Inc
The last thing we want to do is have the tax hidden from the public, in the
WISPs payables.
Consumers won;t understand why we have to raide our prices to cover it.
If its a tax that goes on our invoice, we jsutrefer them to their senator to
complain.
If its a tax on the bill to the custoemr, we
Be aware that WISP's businesses will retain the largest value, if further
spectrum is NOT allocated. When their is a shortage, our preferred early
entry into the game to more advantageously get away using the existing
spectrum, makes our assets more valuable. Better spectrum protection in
They can't. So it means they will tax every ISP that claims that they use
it.
They will tax our revenue not the users.
And it will mean the for profit providers will take the burden isntead of
the hundreds of backyard companies degrading the value of offering
broadband. Taxing will incourage
Why would we want to have future bands hindered by bad policy? It will
not be just new entrants who use it. It will more likely be existing
WISPs who jump to gain better spectrum to add onto the systems they
already have. I say we ask for existing bands which are unlicensed to be
left free and
The problem is that I do not like plans that require the payment of money in
advance of collection of money for service provided.
So allthough paying a fee per AP site, may very well be one of the only
reasonable ways to successfully develop a solution, I'd prefer there to be a
solution that is
mac,
How about we have a march in DC up the steps to the FCC's offices all the
while surfing the net and sending
I proposed such a thing around the time of ISPCON in DC (Baltimore) this
year. (Do they trade show, and MArch the same week). Although the show would
have been supportive, the
Can you explain how it is not available? Yes the insurance is killer.
Jeromie Reeves
Bob Moldashel wrote:
Jeromie Reeves wrote:
Right of Way access is available to anyone right now. Ask your local
city/county for the ROW contracts
that they have with the gas, cable, telco, electric, and
48 matches
Mail list logo
