How do you figure?
You don't think 5.4 is going to solve part of that?
Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
- Original Message -
From: "Jeffrey Thomas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List"
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 10:55 PM
Subject: Re:
WISPA works to make sure that when government decides they will be
taking a role in our industry that they do so without harming us. You
cannot lobby anonymously. You CAN stand and be counted or hide and cower
under a rock in obscurity. If you are one of the rock dwellers I am sure
you are not
The bill was killed off in committee, but don't think we have seen the last
of it. We must be forever vigilant, epically under our current government.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mark Koskenmaki
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 11:36 PM
To
So, 3650MHz isn't going to fall under Part90 rules?
Brad
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jeffrey Thomas
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 10:51 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 equipment
Comments inline.
> Even given t
Comments inline.
> Even given the 5% of WISP operators who intentionally run too much
> power, I don't feel their "lawlessness" is as serious as someone who
> receives a experimental license under false pretenses and then
> unlawfully profits from their lawbreaking.
Considering the band with
Can you blame them?
Congress is now considering demanding that ALL ISP's log ALL data to and
from thier customers.
Seems like a few someones a while back thought that we needed more
government involvement in the ISP business.
Right now, I think more and more are thinking that thier ONLY chance
Frankly,
The FCC should really hurry up and finish the rules to allow the industry to
really take off. The common view with most manufacturers I have found is
that until there is 3.5ghz or near spectrum available, there will be small
and limited deployments of wisp size and not many large scale d
Butch,
On the airspan thing I would agree on the pricing is a bit more reasonable.
On their unlicensed product, it still seems quite a bit expensive. ( wipll
and wimax ) . The thing we found in testing waveIP is while it is a decent
Amount of throughput, the channel size is a nightmare and brings
On Tue, 23 May 2006, jeffrey thomas wrote:
Actually, on the Ap Side Airspan is around 5000.00 and 400 or so
for the CPE.
It was about a year ago that I got pricing on these. This is a much
more competitive price model than what I was quoted back then. At
that price, they would be a viable
So Patrick, can we expect 3.65 be available at the same time as 5.4 ...
q3-q4 ?
Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent:
Ok, looks like the under a ddos attack.
George
Rick Harnish wrote:
Took forever but it finally loaded the webpage.
Rick Harnish
President
OnlyInternet Broadband & Wireless, Inc.
260-827-2482 Office
260-307-4000 Cell
260-918-4340 VoIP
www.oibw.net
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
WISPA Wireless List:
Took forever but it finally loaded the webpage.
Rick Harnish
President
OnlyInternet Broadband & Wireless, Inc.
260-827-2482 Office
260-307-4000 Cell
260-918-4340 VoIP
www.oibw.net
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of R
Not coming up for me either George
Rick Harnish
President
OnlyInternet Broadband & Wireless, Inc.
260-827-2482 Office
260-307-4000 Cell
260-918-4340 VoIP
www.oibw.net
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of George Rogato
Anyone else having a problem bringing up sorbs?
I just got one of those dreaded reject letters with a sorbs problem and
I'm having a hell of a time getting it to open.
George
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Ar
Thanks Patrick, I understood there was an issue there that needed to get
resolved.
George
Patrick Leary wrote:
That is part of the reconsideration process. The FCC (per multiple talks
with the folks that wrote the rule) did not intent to exclude WiMAX, 802.16,
or 802.11 products from use in 36
That is part of the reconsideration process. The FCC (per multiple talks
with the folks that wrote the rule) did not intent to exclude WiMAX, 802.16,
or 802.11 products from use in 3650MHz. They used the contention language
not in a specific way, but to describe in general terms what they were
look
All the same time, the industry doesn't bother to fill out their Form 477s
also
The sad thing is is that there are long term consequences towards "flaunting
the rules" -- namely the fact that you are just reinforcing the ILEC
argument that unlicensed spectrum just creates a bunch of "cowboys" that
17 matches
Mail list logo
