My advice is to run fiber if you must use the tower.
So the whole tower is not charged? Most AM towers are the antenna
themselves. This means as you add equipment you will have to re-proof the
tower as you have changed the radiation pattern of the tower.
I am hoping your climbers hav
I ran a shielded shireen ethernet cable up a tower today about 50-60 feet
maybe, the cable itself was maybe twice that length to run into a building.
While the cable was being hoisted up I was holding the end and it got so
hot I had to let go. There is an AM antenna running up the side of the
PtP link.
2200ft
2ft dishes
CM9's
40MHz channel
5 years in service
with the elevation and beamwidth accounted for, one is shooting the
dirt and the other is hitting the moon ;)
Link from fiber shed to dist. tower over a barn...
Jus
That's what I was driving at. Although technically "5.2" the FCC is treating
the entire band as 5.4 and subject to DFS2 rules.
Applies to anything not already in the air that would be grandfathered in.
Anything not already in the air cannot be installed unless it's DFS2 compliant.
Anything curr
And now I learned something... that the 5.25-5.32GHz band is now
limited by DFS.
This applies to new links only?
On 1/21/2011 12:47 AM, Blair Davis wrote:
Here is the 5.2GHz grant for the CM9
https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/
Here is the 5.2GHz grant for the CM9
https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/tcb/reports/Tcb731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COPY&RequestTimeout=500&tcb_code=&application_id=972754&fcc_id=NKRCM9
I'm still looking for the 5.2GHz grant for the xr5, but here is the
grant for 5.8GHz
htt
That's what I thought
- Jerry
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf
Of Jeromie Reeves
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 9:40 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5.2 or 5.4 Short Hops
unii low 5.15-5.25 GHz. 50mw, integrated antenna and indoor
unii low 5.15-5.25 GHz. 50mw, integrated antenna and indoor use only
unii mid 5.25-5.35 ghz. 250mw, DFS required, 'Professional installer'
take the FCC ID for the cards and go look at the FCC database. They
only have certs . all new installs must
pass the new rules.
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 9:05 P
Can you direct me to the CM9 and xr5 certification for the 5.2 band?
I would really like to be able to use this band for a few sites where subs are
2-3 miles max
- Jerry
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf
Of Blair Davis
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2
The cm9 and xr5 cards are certified for use in the 5.2GHz band
(5.18-5.32GHz) and in the 5.8GHz band (5.745-5.825GHz).
I don't use anything in the 5.4GHz band because that requires DFS
I really don't want to rehash the modular certification argument
again.
Try a Radwin 1000,
Gino A. Villarini
g...@aeronetpr.com
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
787.273.4143
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Patrick Shoemaker
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 6:22 PM
To: WISPA General List
Sub
The TLink45 (P5055m) uses DFS2 and is certified for 5.2 and 5.4... but
it will only carry 3500-4000 PPS and overall is a POS.
Moto PTP series (Orthogon) has 5.4 certified options, but certainly
isn't in the price range mentioned.
RadWin 2000 will do 100 FDX in those bands and is FCC certified.
How much bandwidth and what is your price point? There is Exalt Comm
EX5r series which works great.
There are others but they have various DFS qualities and some false on
noise which they mistake for DFS hits.
-B-
On 1/20/2011 5:00 PM, Jerry Richardson wrote:
> If you want DFS2 legal the o
If you want DFS2 legal the only thing I am aware of is moto
Anything (old) DFS that is not already in the air is not legal to hang.
There is a slough full of stuff that is pending DFS2 certification including
ubiquity.
Mikrotik is not DFS2.
Jerry Richardson
Sent Mobile
On Jan 20, 2011, at 1:4
FCC certified?
Gino A. Villarini
g...@aeronetpr.com
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
787.273.4143
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Blair Davis
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 5:48 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5.2 or 5.4 Sho
sorry for the multiple sends...
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 3:48 PM, Luke Pack wrote:
> Check out trango 5055s- they'll do 5.2, 5.4, 5.7 and are a great
> value- they've worked well for us, and 5.4 works great when under the
> 2-3 ile mark (4 or so if you use external dishes).
>
> On Thu, Jan 20, 201
Check out trango 5055s- they'll do 5.2, 5.4, 5.7 and are a great
value- they've worked well for us, and 5.4 works great when under the
2-3 ile mark (4 or so if you use external dishes).
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Matt wrote:
> Looking for some gear to do 4 short hops under a mile and not in
Check out trango 5055s- they'll do 5.2, 5.4, 5.7 and are a great value-
they've worked well for us, and 5.4 works great when under the 2-3 ile mark
(4 or so if you use external dishes).
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Matt wrote:
> Looking for some gear to do 4 short hops under a mile and not i
Use 5.2GHz, mikrotik with cm9 or xr5 cards. I do a PtP link 3200ft
on 5.3GHz. Carries 50Mbit on a 40MHz channel with ease...
On 1/20/2011 4:39 PM, Matt wrote:
Looking for some gear to do 4 short hops under a mile and not interfer
with existing 2.4 or 5.7 gear.
Looks like Trango still sells the TrangoLINK-45, which claims to support
5.2-5.8GHz with DFS.
-Kristian
On Thu, 2011-01-20 at 15:39 -0600, Matt wrote:
> Looking for some gear to do 4 short hops under a mile and not interfer
> with existing 2.4 or 5.7 gear. Was thinking of the 5.2 or 5.4 band
> g
Looking for some gear to do 4 short hops under a mile and not interfer
with existing 2.4 or 5.7 gear. Was thinking of the 5.2 or 5.4 band
gear. Whats out there that wont break the bank and is FCC compliant
in that band? Leaning towards canopy but would like more bandwidth
and a lower price.
--
I will be watching for this one. A couple months ago our auto-billing
experienced a major issue regarding cards. Platypus support said it was on
IPPay's side (let them remote into my machine even), IPPay denied it being
their issue. Haven't seen it since but if we catch it, I'll update you.
-Ti
We haven't seen any declines through IP pay here but we use k-billing for
credit card and virtual terminal for our ACH recurring payments. It seems
kind of fishy that you can process them with VT but not your normal billing
software. On a side note Virtual terminal does have recurring billing set u
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/19/2011 03:11 PM, Tom DeReggi wrote:
>
> No one is suggesting that we dont challenge big companies with vested
> interests. I'm suggesting the opposite.
> I'm suggesting that we challenge big company spectrum hogs to give back
> spectrum, if
It would seem that, if it truly is the bank having issues, that IPPay
could temporarily change the coding so the cards work until the bank
fixes the issue.
On 1/20/2011 11:57 AM, Chuck Hogg wrote:
Within Platypus the reports show the response codes from IPPay. They
can also be viewed on the I
Within Platypus the reports show the response codes from IPPay. They can
also be viewed on the IPPay reporting website. This isn't just 1 customer,
this is a list of customers... Accounting is asking me if we can add our
AuthorizeNet merchant account to Platypus as well so that they do not have
I don't see the codes in PC but might on the reporting website, that where
you see them?
Only complaint we have is the one customer that can't be charged with a
"recurring transaction".
On Jan 20, 2011 11:24 AM, "Chuck Hogg" wrote:
> I am wondering how many people out there are getting Code 012 D
I am wondering how many people out there are getting Code 012 Declines with
their IPPay account?
We are using Platypus, and all of the C012 Declines are able to be processed
through the Virtual Terminal. Our customer calls the bank and is told, they
are processing using an Adult Recurring Billing
28 matches
Mail list logo
