Re: [WISPA] How much does FCC certification cost?

2007-06-12 Thread Tom DeReggi
Lets be fair now. My understanding is that you got those results with 
48Volt.  Using 18V, (more than enough Volts) it did not show the same poor 
results.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2007 10:47 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] How much does FCC certification cost?


The current 532 board will NOT pass FCC certs. Too much noise coming 
directly off the board at 150mHz and 400mHz ranges. Thus the reason it has 
never been FCC tested.


Travis
Microserv

joelaura wrote:


So are we saying that it would be under 5K to get MT certified with 
different antennas? If thats the case why wouldnt they have done it? 
Seems like they would have a much bigger market if the stuff was 
certified. Joe

-Original Message-
From: Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent 6/10/2007 7:17:42 PM
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Subject: Re: [WISPA] How much does FCC certification cost?

Depends on the amount of lab-time testing needed.

You can minimize test time (and cost) when you use a wireless card that
has already received a modular approval from the card manufacturer along
with a clean single-board computer (SBC) motherboard, a clean power
supply plus software that dis-allows operation (or excess radiation)
outside of the U.S. band. That combination costs about $3219 to certify.

I recommend certifying with a range of antennas (the entire range of
antenna types that you're likely to use).

Hit me off-line for more detailed info.

jack


D. Ryan Spott wrote:
 ?



 ryan



--
Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
FCC License # PG-12-25133
Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993
Author of the WISP Handbook - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs
True Vendor-Neutral Wireless Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting
FCC Part 15 Certification for Manufacturers and Service Providers
Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220 www.ask-wi.com



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

--
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 Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 
269.8.13/842 - Release Date: 6/9/2007 10:46 AM





--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


[WISPA] ADI's open Architecture system

2007-06-12 Thread Dawn DiPietro




The thing that's screwing us all up with MT, StarOS and others like 
that is that they don't have ANY certified systems available to us.


I guess you missed my post last week about ADI Engineering.
They have a certified system that works with Star OS. This was just 
release a few weeks ago.


http://www.adiengineering.com/products/data/FCC-Whitepaper-R100.pdf
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


RE: [WISPA] ADI's open Architecture system

2007-06-12 Thread Smith, Rick
Right.

And I hear a rumor that they're doing the same with Mikrotik.

Before I make any more comments, I want to see an RB600 in my hands.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dawn DiPietro
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:17 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] ADI's open Architecture system



 The thing that's screwing us all up with MT, StarOS and others like 
 that is that they don't have ANY certified systems available to us.

I guess you missed my post last week about ADI Engineering.
They have a certified system that works with Star OS. This was just 
release a few weeks ago.

http://www.adiengineering.com/products/data/FCC-Whitepaper-R100.pdf
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-12 Thread Mike Hammett
So you're saying (in your opinion, not necessarily any bearing on what the 
FCC actually requires) when we have certified SBCs, we'd be able to go that 
route?  Those that are running a certified radio with no amp (who uses that 
garbage anymore) into an antenna with equal or lower gain on a PC based 
system run a good chance of being legal?



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


- Original Message - 
From: Marlon K. Schafer [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 12:39 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble



It works like this Doug.

A radio card is an intentional radiator.  Under part 15 rules it can only 
be sold as a part of a certified system.  That means if you put the radio 
card in a computer and it's designed to be used in a computer either with 
it's own built in antenna or the antenna build into the computer that's 
ok.  As long as it's CERTIFIED that way.


If you take that same card, hook a pigtail to it and put an amp on it. 
You are out of compliance.  If you put an antenna larger than the one 
certified, you are out of compliance.  If you put a different type of 
antenna than it was certified with (yagi to grid or panel to omni etc.) 
you are out of compliance.


The thing that's screwing us all up with MT, StarOS and others like that 
is that they don't have ANY certified systems available to us.


And, if you look on LEGAL computer boards, even though they are 
UN-intentional radiators, they will have an FCC certification on them. 
Many of the war board type devices don't have that FCC logo on them.


Yes the rule is silly.  Yes it's widely ignored, even by the FCC.  No, 
uncertified systems don't seem to be a problem in the real world.


However, do YOU want to take a chance on having YOUR customers go dark 
because you want to ignore the rules?  Do you really want to give your 
competition that much ammunition against you?


I have the contacts, forms to fill out etc. just waiting for me to get the 
time to take this issue on as part of the FCC committee's job.  We have 
basically no FCC committee though.  The principal membership doesn't seem 
to be all that interested in anything other than whining about the work 
that other people do.  No one wants to step up and take on the hard 
issues.


When I get done with the CALEA work (that's costing me 2 to 4 hours per 
DAY and others are working harder than I am) I'll write up a petition 
to get this certified system rule changed.  Ideally I'd like to get a real 
pro installer mechanism in place so that joe q public still has to buy 
certified systems, but we could just buy certified components.


Or, if anyone would like to take this issue on, I've got a bit of a road 
map and some basic language worked out already :-).


In the mean time, run an honest legal business as much as you possibly 
can.


laters,
marlon

- Original Message - 
From: Doug Ratcliffe [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 4:27 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] MT Babble


But the base product, the computer does not start life as an 
intentional

radiator.  So at what point does a FCC certified computer become an
intentional radiator as a whole?

When you add a wireless card?  That would land Dell, HP and Compaq in a 
load
of trouble.  But alas, is a FCC certified Netgear card, any different 
than

an FCC certified Ubiquiti card when used with the certified antennas?

I'm NOT talking about marketing these as products as a vendor, I'm 
talking
about USING these computers, with wireless cards installed in them after 
the

sale.

I don't see how page 78 and on reference a computer becoming an 
intentional

radiator?  At the beginning of the day, you have a motherboard and power
supply, which become a Personal Computer.  At the end of the day, you 
add

a wireless card and antenna which makes it what then?

Calling a Cisco Aironet a PC or vice versa doesn't make sense.  Cisco
Aironet=Intentional Radiator, PC=Unintentional Radiator.


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dawn DiPietro
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 7:10 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

Sam,

Since some here feel I have no credibility because I no longer run a
WISP I will let you decide from this information provided.

Starting on page 78 of the following link should explain why the
wireless devices in question cannot be certified as computers.
http://www.fcc.gov/oet/info/rules/part15/part15-2-16-06.pdf

Regards,
Dawn DiPietro


Sam Tetherow wrote:

I think the question that really hasn't been answered is if a RB can
be certified class B and then use a certified radio/antenna combo as
is allowed with a PC/laptop.
And you are right that then FCC makes the rules.  What is not clear is
that Dawn's (and others) position that the component rules can not
apply to an RB or other SBC.  The only 

Re: [WISPA] ADI's open Architecture system

2007-06-12 Thread Dawn DiPietro

Rick,

Yes, they would like to work with Mikrotik.

Regards,
Dawn DiPietro
Smith, Rick wrote:

Right.

And I hear a rumor that they're doing the same with Mikrotik.

Before I make any more comments, I want to see an RB600 in my hands.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dawn DiPietro
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:17 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] ADI's open Architecture system


  
The thing that's screwing us all up with MT, StarOS and others like 
that is that they don't have ANY certified systems available to us.



I guess you missed my post last week about ADI Engineering.
They have a certified system that works with Star OS. This was just 
release a few weeks ago.


http://www.adiengineering.com/products/data/FCC-Whitepaper-R100.pdf
  


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-12 Thread Dawn DiPietro

Mike,

What Marlon said IS NOT OPINION. The only way you can be legal is to 
certify a system as a whole. You might want to take a look at the ADI 
link I posted and maybe this will help you understand what is required 
to become certified. You must have all the components certified together.


Is it that I keep misunderstanding what you are trying to say? But I 
feel like this has been discussed before in no uncertain terms.


Regards,
Dawn DiPietro

Mike Hammett wrote:
So you're saying (in your opinion, not necessarily any bearing on what 
the FCC actually requires) when we have certified SBCs, we'd be able 
to go that route?  Those that are running a certified radio with no 
amp (who uses that garbage anymore) into an antenna with equal or 
lower gain on a PC based system run a good chance of being legal?



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


- Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 12:39 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble



It works like this Doug.

A radio card is an intentional radiator.  Under part 15 rules it can 
only be sold as a part of a certified system.  That means if you put 
the radio card in a computer and it's designed to be used in a 
computer either with it's own built in antenna or the antenna build 
into the computer that's ok.  As long as it's CERTIFIED that way.


If you take that same card, hook a pigtail to it and put an amp on 
it. You are out of compliance.  If you put an antenna larger than the 
one certified, you are out of compliance.  If you put a different 
type of antenna than it was certified with (yagi to grid or panel to 
omni etc.) you are out of compliance.


The thing that's screwing us all up with MT, StarOS and others like 
that is that they don't have ANY certified systems available to us.


And, if you look on LEGAL computer boards, even though they are 
UN-intentional radiators, they will have an FCC certification on 
them. Many of the war board type devices don't have that FCC logo on 
them.


Yes the rule is silly.  Yes it's widely ignored, even by the FCC.  
No, uncertified systems don't seem to be a problem in the real world.


However, do YOU want to take a chance on having YOUR customers go 
dark because you want to ignore the rules?  Do you really want to 
give your competition that much ammunition against you?


I have the contacts, forms to fill out etc. just waiting for me to 
get the time to take this issue on as part of the FCC committee's 
job.  We have basically no FCC committee though.  The principal 
membership doesn't seem to be all that interested in anything other 
than whining about the work that other people do.  No one wants to 
step up and take on the hard issues.


When I get done with the CALEA work (that's costing me 2 to 4 hours 
per DAY and others are working harder than I am) I'll write up a 
petition to get this certified system rule changed.  Ideally I'd like 
to get a real pro installer mechanism in place so that joe q public 
still has to buy certified systems, but we could just buy certified 
components.


Or, if anyone would like to take this issue on, I've got a bit of a 
road map and some basic language worked out already :-).


In the mean time, run an honest legal business as much as you 
possibly can.


laters,
marlon

- Original Message - From: Doug Ratcliffe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 4:27 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] MT Babble


But the base product, the computer does not start life as an 
intentional

radiator.  So at what point does a FCC certified computer become an
intentional radiator as a whole?

When you add a wireless card?  That would land Dell, HP and Compaq 
in a load
of trouble.  But alas, is a FCC certified Netgear card, any 
different than

an FCC certified Ubiquiti card when used with the certified antennas?

I'm NOT talking about marketing these as products as a vendor, I'm 
talking
about USING these computers, with wireless cards installed in them 
after the

sale.

I don't see how page 78 and on reference a computer becoming an 
intentional
radiator?  At the beginning of the day, you have a motherboard and 
power
supply, which become a Personal Computer.  At the end of the day, 
you add

a wireless card and antenna which makes it what then?

Calling a Cisco Aironet a PC or vice versa doesn't make sense.  Cisco
Aironet=Intentional Radiator, PC=Unintentional Radiator.


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dawn DiPietro
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 7:10 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

Sam,

Since some here feel I have no credibility because I no longer run a
WISP I will let you decide from this information provided.

Starting on page 78 of the following link should explain why the
wireless devices in question cannot 

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-12 Thread Mike Hammett
I understood that was the way it was until perhaps yesterday when someone 
brought up the issue of PC's with add in wireless cards being in no way 
different than what we do.



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


- Original Message - 
From: Dawn DiPietro [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:09 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble



Mike,

What Marlon said IS NOT OPINION. The only way you can be legal is to 
certify a system as a whole. You might want to take a look at the ADI link 
I posted and maybe this will help you understand what is required to 
become certified. You must have all the components certified together.


Is it that I keep misunderstanding what you are trying to say? But I feel 
like this has been discussed before in no uncertain terms.


Regards,
Dawn DiPietro

Mike Hammett wrote:
So you're saying (in your opinion, not necessarily any bearing on what 
the FCC actually requires) when we have certified SBCs, we'd be able to 
go that route?  Those that are running a certified radio with no amp (who 
uses that garbage anymore) into an antenna with equal or lower gain on a 
PC based system run a good chance of being legal?



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


- Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 12:39 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble



It works like this Doug.

A radio card is an intentional radiator.  Under part 15 rules it can 
only be sold as a part of a certified system.  That means if you put the 
radio card in a computer and it's designed to be used in a computer 
either with it's own built in antenna or the antenna build into the 
computer that's ok.  As long as it's CERTIFIED that way.


If you take that same card, hook a pigtail to it and put an amp on it. 
You are out of compliance.  If you put an antenna larger than the one 
certified, you are out of compliance.  If you put a different type of 
antenna than it was certified with (yagi to grid or panel to omni etc.) 
you are out of compliance.


The thing that's screwing us all up with MT, StarOS and others like that 
is that they don't have ANY certified systems available to us.


And, if you look on LEGAL computer boards, even though they are 
UN-intentional radiators, they will have an FCC certification on them. 
Many of the war board type devices don't have that FCC logo on them.


Yes the rule is silly.  Yes it's widely ignored, even by the FCC.  No, 
uncertified systems don't seem to be a problem in the real world.


However, do YOU want to take a chance on having YOUR customers go dark 
because you want to ignore the rules?  Do you really want to give your 
competition that much ammunition against you?


I have the contacts, forms to fill out etc. just waiting for me to get 
the time to take this issue on as part of the FCC committee's job.  We 
have basically no FCC committee though.  The principal membership 
doesn't seem to be all that interested in anything other than whining 
about the work that other people do.  No one wants to step up and take 
on the hard issues.


When I get done with the CALEA work (that's costing me 2 to 4 hours per 
DAY and others are working harder than I am) I'll write up a 
petition to get this certified system rule changed.  Ideally I'd like to 
get a real pro installer mechanism in place so that joe q public still 
has to buy certified systems, but we could just buy certified 
components.


Or, if anyone would like to take this issue on, I've got a bit of a road 
map and some basic language worked out already :-).


In the mean time, run an honest legal business as much as you possibly 
can.


laters,
marlon

- Original Message - From: Doug Ratcliffe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 4:27 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] MT Babble


But the base product, the computer does not start life as an 
intentional

radiator.  So at what point does a FCC certified computer become an
intentional radiator as a whole?

When you add a wireless card?  That would land Dell, HP and Compaq in a 
load
of trouble.  But alas, is a FCC certified Netgear card, any different 
than

an FCC certified Ubiquiti card when used with the certified antennas?

I'm NOT talking about marketing these as products as a vendor, I'm 
talking
about USING these computers, with wireless cards installed in them 
after the

sale.

I don't see how page 78 and on reference a computer becoming an 
intentional
radiator?  At the beginning of the day, you have a motherboard and 
power
supply, which become a Personal Computer.  At the end of the day, you 
add

a wireless card and antenna which makes it what then?

Calling a Cisco Aironet a PC or vice versa doesn't make sense.  Cisco
Aironet=Intentional Radiator, PC=Unintentional Radiator.


Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-12 Thread Dawn DiPietro

Mike,

That post was looking for clarification on whether or not it was 
possible it would make this legal without going through system 
certification as an intentional radiator. Since the FCC wording can be 
mind boggling sometimes there is confusion. In other words you cannot 
take certified parts and use them together and expect to be legal no 
matter how anyone tries to justify it. I am glad to see that you do 
understand. ;-)


Regards,
Dawn DiPietro






Mike Hammett wrote:
I understood that was the way it was until perhaps yesterday when 
someone brought up the issue of PC's with add in wireless cards being 
in no way different than what we do.



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


- Original Message - From: Dawn DiPietro [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:09 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble



Mike,

What Marlon said IS NOT OPINION. The only way you can be legal is to 
certify a system as a whole. You might want to take a look at the ADI 
link I posted and maybe this will help you understand what is 
required to become certified. You must have all the components 
certified together.


Is it that I keep misunderstanding what you are trying to say? But I 
feel like this has been discussed before in no uncertain terms.


Regards,
Dawn DiPietro

Mike Hammett wrote:
So you're saying (in your opinion, not necessarily any bearing on 
what the FCC actually requires) when we have certified SBCs, we'd be 
able to go that route?  Those that are running a certified radio 
with no amp (who uses that garbage anymore) into an antenna with 
equal or lower gain on a PC based system run a good chance of being 
legal?



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


- Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 12:39 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble



It works like this Doug.

A radio card is an intentional radiator.  Under part 15 rules it 
can only be sold as a part of a certified system.  That means if 
you put the radio card in a computer and it's designed to be used 
in a computer either with it's own built in antenna or the antenna 
build into the computer that's ok.  As long as it's CERTIFIED that 
way.


If you take that same card, hook a pigtail to it and put an amp on 
it. You are out of compliance.  If you put an antenna larger than 
the one certified, you are out of compliance.  If you put a 
different type of antenna than it was certified with (yagi to grid 
or panel to omni etc.) you are out of compliance.


The thing that's screwing us all up with MT, StarOS and others like 
that is that they don't have ANY certified systems available to us.


And, if you look on LEGAL computer boards, even though they are 
UN-intentional radiators, they will have an FCC certification on 
them. Many of the war board type devices don't have that FCC logo 
on them.


Yes the rule is silly.  Yes it's widely ignored, even by the FCC.  
No, uncertified systems don't seem to be a problem in the real world.


However, do YOU want to take a chance on having YOUR customers go 
dark because you want to ignore the rules?  Do you really want to 
give your competition that much ammunition against you?


I have the contacts, forms to fill out etc. just waiting for me to 
get the time to take this issue on as part of the FCC committee's 
job.  We have basically no FCC committee though.  The principal 
membership doesn't seem to be all that interested in anything other 
than whining about the work that other people do.  No one wants to 
step up and take on the hard issues.


When I get done with the CALEA work (that's costing me 2 to 4 hours 
per DAY and others are working harder than I am) I'll write up 
a petition to get this certified system rule changed.  Ideally I'd 
like to get a real pro installer mechanism in place so that joe q 
public still has to buy certified systems, but we could just buy 
certified components.


Or, if anyone would like to take this issue on, I've got a bit of a 
road map and some basic language worked out already :-).


In the mean time, run an honest legal business as much as you 
possibly can.


laters,
marlon

- Original Message - From: Doug Ratcliffe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 4:27 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] MT Babble


But the base product, the computer does not start life as an 
intentional

radiator.  So at what point does a FCC certified computer become an
intentional radiator as a whole?

When you add a wireless card?  That would land Dell, HP and Compaq 
in a load
of trouble.  But alas, is a FCC certified Netgear card, any 
different than

an FCC certified Ubiquiti card when used with the certified antennas?

I'm NOT talking about marketing these as products as a vendor, I'm 
talking
about 

RE: [WISPA] How much does FCC certification cost?

2007-06-12 Thread Mac Dearman
That issue was fixed and new RB's don't have that problem. 

You are correct Tom - if you drop the POE to 18vdc or less the problem
disappears.

Mac Dearman
Maximum Access, LLC.
Rayville, La.
www.inetsouth.com
www.radioresponse.org (Katrina relief)
www.mac-tel.us (VoIP sales)
318.728.8600
318.728.9600



 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
 Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 5:03 AM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] How much does FCC certification cost?
 
 Lets be fair now. My understanding is that you got those results with
 48Volt.  Using 18V, (more than enough Volts) it did not show the same poor
 results.
 
 Tom DeReggi
 RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
 IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
 
 
 - Original Message -
 From: Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2007 10:47 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] How much does FCC certification cost?
 
 
  The current 532 board will NOT pass FCC certs. Too much noise coming
  directly off the board at 150mHz and 400mHz ranges. Thus the reason it
 has
  never been FCC tested.
 
  Travis
  Microserv
 
  joelaura wrote:
 
  So are we saying that it would be under 5K to get MT certified with
  different antennas? If thats the case why wouldnt they have done it?
  Seems like they would have a much bigger market if the stuff was
  certified. Joe
  -Original Message-
  From: Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Sent 6/10/2007 7:17:42 PM
  To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
  Subject: Re: [WISPA] How much does FCC certification cost?
 
  Depends on the amount of lab-time testing needed.
 
  You can minimize test time (and cost) when you use a wireless card that
  has already received a modular approval from the card manufacturer
 along
  with a clean single-board computer (SBC) motherboard, a clean power
  supply plus software that dis-allows operation (or excess radiation)
  outside of the U.S. band. That combination costs about $3219 to
 certify.
 
  I recommend certifying with a range of antennas (the entire range of
  antenna types that you're likely to use).
 
  Hit me off-line for more detailed info.
 
  jack
 
 
  D. Ryan Spott wrote:
   ?
  
  
  
   ryan
  
  
 
  --
  Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
  FCC License # PG-12-25133
  Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993
  Author of the WISP Handbook - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs
  True Vendor-Neutral Wireless Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting
  FCC Part 15 Certification for Manufacturers and Service Providers
  Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220 www.ask-wi.com
 
 
 
  --
  WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
 
  Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
  http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
 
  Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
  --
  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 Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database:
  269.8.13/842 - Release Date: 6/9/2007 10:46 AM
 
 
 
 --
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
 
 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
 
 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-12 Thread Matt Liotta

Marlon K. Schafer wrote:
I have the contacts, forms to fill out etc. just waiting for me to get 
the time to take this issue on as part of the FCC committee's job.  We 
have basically no FCC committee though.  The principal membership 
doesn't seem to be all that interested in anything other than whining 
about the work that other people do.  No one wants to step up and take 
on the hard issues.


I can't speak for others, but I have no interest in stepping up to help 
on a certification issue. I believe that time better spent by vendors. 
Further, I have no interest in stepping up on CALEA since there is 
nothing that WISPA could do to help us as we had the be compliant by the 
deadline. There have been two times were I offered to help with spectrum 
discussions with the FCC. Only one of those times was my help accepted, 
which was WISPA's visit to the FCC in regard to 3.65Ghz. I feel like 
that was a worthwhile trip in the sense that I believe the FCC delivered 
what we asked for.


My point from above is that the membership will likely only help on 
issues they care about. And, would probably complain about WISPA 
spending time on issues they don't care about. This is what happens when 
you have a diverse group of people needing to be represented by a single 
organization.


-Matt

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-12 Thread Mike Hammett

Then why can I purchase a Netgear PCI card for my Dell desktop?


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


- Original Message - 
From: Dawn DiPietro [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:39 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble



Mike,

That post was looking for clarification on whether or not it was possible 
it would make this legal without going through system certification as an 
intentional radiator. Since the FCC wording can be mind boggling sometimes 
there is confusion. In other words you cannot take certified parts and use 
them together and expect to be legal no matter how anyone tries to justify 
it. I am glad to see that you do understand. ;-)


Regards,
Dawn DiPietro






Mike Hammett wrote:
I understood that was the way it was until perhaps yesterday when someone 
brought up the issue of PC's with add in wireless cards being in no way 
different than what we do.



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


- Original Message - From: Dawn DiPietro [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:09 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble



Mike,

What Marlon said IS NOT OPINION. The only way you can be legal is to 
certify a system as a whole. You might want to take a look at the ADI 
link I posted and maybe this will help you understand what is required 
to become certified. You must have all the components certified 
together.


Is it that I keep misunderstanding what you are trying to say? But I 
feel like this has been discussed before in no uncertain terms.


Regards,
Dawn DiPietro

Mike Hammett wrote:
So you're saying (in your opinion, not necessarily any bearing on what 
the FCC actually requires) when we have certified SBCs, we'd be able to 
go that route?  Those that are running a certified radio with no amp 
(who uses that garbage anymore) into an antenna with equal or lower 
gain on a PC based system run a good chance of being legal?



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


- Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 12:39 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble



It works like this Doug.

A radio card is an intentional radiator.  Under part 15 rules it can 
only be sold as a part of a certified system.  That means if you put 
the radio card in a computer and it's designed to be used in a 
computer either with it's own built in antenna or the antenna build 
into the computer that's ok.  As long as it's CERTIFIED that way.


If you take that same card, hook a pigtail to it and put an amp on it. 
You are out of compliance.  If you put an antenna larger than the one 
certified, you are out of compliance.  If you put a different type of 
antenna than it was certified with (yagi to grid or panel to omni 
etc.) you are out of compliance.


The thing that's screwing us all up with MT, StarOS and others like 
that is that they don't have ANY certified systems available to us.


And, if you look on LEGAL computer boards, even though they are 
UN-intentional radiators, they will have an FCC certification on them. 
Many of the war board type devices don't have that FCC logo on them.


Yes the rule is silly.  Yes it's widely ignored, even by the FCC.  No, 
uncertified systems don't seem to be a problem in the real world.


However, do YOU want to take a chance on having YOUR customers go dark 
because you want to ignore the rules?  Do you really want to give your 
competition that much ammunition against you?


I have the contacts, forms to fill out etc. just waiting for me to get 
the time to take this issue on as part of the FCC committee's job.  We 
have basically no FCC committee though.  The principal membership 
doesn't seem to be all that interested in anything other than whining 
about the work that other people do.  No one wants to step up and take 
on the hard issues.


When I get done with the CALEA work (that's costing me 2 to 4 hours 
per DAY and others are working harder than I am) I'll write up a 
petition to get this certified system rule changed.  Ideally I'd like 
to get a real pro installer mechanism in place so that joe q public 
still has to buy certified systems, but we could just buy certified 
components.


Or, if anyone would like to take this issue on, I've got a bit of a 
road map and some basic language worked out already :-).


In the mean time, run an honest legal business as much as you possibly 
can.


laters,
marlon

- Original Message - From: Doug Ratcliffe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 4:27 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] MT Babble


But the base product, the computer does not start life as an 
intentional

radiator.  So at what point does a FCC certified computer become an
intentional radiator as 

Re: [WISPA] ADI's open Architecture system

2007-06-12 Thread Mike Hammett
I see nothing about it that would fix it to Star OS, unless the IXP425 is 
not x86.



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


- Original Message - 
From: Dawn DiPietro [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 6:17 AM
Subject: [WISPA] ADI's open Architecture system






The thing that's screwing us all up with MT, StarOS and others like that 
is that they don't have ANY certified systems available to us.


I guess you missed my post last week about ADI Engineering.
They have a certified system that works with Star OS. This was just 
release a few weeks ago.


http://www.adiengineering.com/products/data/FCC-Whitepaper-R100.pdf
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-12 Thread Forrest W. Christian

Mike Hammett wrote:


Then why can I purchase a Netgear PCI card for my Dell desktop?


Because the Netgear PCI card has been certified both as a computing 
device and a Part 15 intentional radiator - but only if it is used with 
the antenna which the Netgear was certified with.


-forrestc
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


[WISPA] Orthogon

2007-06-12 Thread Mike Hammett
Has anyone experienced an Orthogon Gemini rebooting itself between the hours of 
04:30 and 08:00 due to registration time-outs?


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

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


[WISPA] FCC WISP test case (was MT Babble)

2007-06-12 Thread Ralph
So we are now going to start thinking that a do-it-yourself access point on
a tower is the same as a wireless laptop computer on a desk?  If people are
now going to start believing things like this, then it clearly is obvious
that many WISPS are just interpreting the rules the way that they want to.
I have an idea for a precedent-setting test that may put them more at ease
with their decision to self-regulate.

How about this:  One of you who is using build it yourself stuff please call
the FCC and invite them to inspect your company. Tell them that you have
assembled your own access points and CPEs from modular components and that
none of the devices are type accepted as a system. Make sure you have an SBC
in there somewhere (make/model is not important).  

After the inspection, you'll have the exclusive opportunity to find out
whether or not you are correct in your own interpretation.  Publish the
findings here and we'll know for sure who is right- you, or the FCC. 

In order to close the loop, the volunteer needs to be one of you who has
adamantly admitted to creating his own systems.  Since you are willing to
post about your own special interpretation of what is allowed by the FCC in
this archived, searchable public forum, then you should have no problem
eating your own dog food and becoming the poster child. 

I'm telling you:  In 30 years of licensed radio (Commercial 2-way as well as
Amateur), I have learned at least one thing.  NEVER ask the FCC for an
interpretation, because you will not like the answer you get. They will
always interpret in the most conservative way they can- usually telling you
that you can't do what you wanted to do.


I'd really love to see what the end result is and how much you do or don't
get fined!

Who's the volunteer?




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:23 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble


I understood that was the way it was until perhaps yesterday when someone 
brought up the issue of PC's with add in wireless cards being in no way 
different than what we do.


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


- Original Message - 
From: Dawn DiPietro [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:09 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble


 Mike,

 What Marlon said IS NOT OPINION. The only way you can be legal is to
 certify a system as a whole. You might want to take a look at the ADI link

 I posted and maybe this will help you understand what is required to 
 become certified. You must have all the components certified together.

 Is it that I keep misunderstanding what you are trying to say? But I 
 feel
 like this has been discussed before in no uncertain terms.

 Regards,
 Dawn DiPietro

 Mike Hammett wrote:
 So you're saying (in your opinion, not necessarily any bearing on 
 what
 the FCC actually requires) when we have certified SBCs, we'd be able to 
 go that route?  Those that are running a certified radio with no amp (who

 uses that garbage anymore) into an antenna with equal or lower gain on a 
 PC based system run a good chance of being legal?


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


 - Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 12:39 AM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble


 It works like this Doug.

 A radio card is an intentional radiator.  Under part 15 rules it can
 only be sold as a part of a certified system.  That means if you put the

 radio card in a computer and it's designed to be used in a computer 
 either with it's own built in antenna or the antenna build into the 
 computer that's ok.  As long as it's CERTIFIED that way.

 If you take that same card, hook a pigtail to it and put an amp on 
 it.
 You are out of compliance.  If you put an antenna larger than the one 
 certified, you are out of compliance.  If you put a different type of 
 antenna than it was certified with (yagi to grid or panel to omni etc.) 
 you are out of compliance.

 The thing that's screwing us all up with MT, StarOS and others like 
 that
 is that they don't have ANY certified systems available to us.

 And, if you look on LEGAL computer boards, even though they are
 UN-intentional radiators, they will have an FCC certification on them. 
 Many of the war board type devices don't have that FCC logo on them.

 Yes the rule is silly.  Yes it's widely ignored, even by the FCC.  
 No,
 uncertified systems don't seem to be a problem in the real world.

 However, do YOU want to take a chance on having YOUR customers go 
 dark
 because you want to ignore the rules?  Do you really want to give your 
 competition that much ammunition against you?

 I have the contacts, forms to fill out etc. just waiting for me to 
 get
 the time to take this 

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-12 Thread Tim Kerns

Dawn,

Do you have a laptop with a wireless card in it?  Look on the bottom and 
tell us the FCC number. I will bet that number does not equate to 
certification of the laptop and wireless card together as a complete 
system. AND this is the point that many have been trying to make.  The 
laptop is FCC certified, the wireless card is FCC certified, but it has not 
been certified as a complete system. WHY, EXPLAIN, LEGAL?


So the contacts that Marlon has and the contacts that Jack have are telling 
one story, but the mfg of other devices are being allowed to build and sell 
computers without going the complete system certification. So if we could 
discover how they are allowed to do this, then we also should be allowed to 
produce a mix and match system using certified components just as they do.


The second point several have been trying to make, that you just seem to 
blow off .
Why is it legal to go to CompUSA, buy a Netgear, Linksys, or other PCI 
Wireless card, insert it into a PC. Where is the complete system 
certification. You do not get a new sticker to attach to the computer once 
the PCI card is inserted and used. I don't see any mention of the computer 
brand, or model number they are approved to be installed into. If this is 
not legal, why has the FCC allowed these mfg to continue selling these 
wireless parts to allow the consumer to put together an illegal system.


The complete system seems to fall down for everyone except WISP. It 
appears that the contacts both Jack and Marlon have are hard liners, by the 
rules, no exception type. And this is not a slam to either of these fine 
guys who have been working hard to interface with the FCC for us. It is just 
that we are hearing one thing, but seeing something different.


Now ADI is proclaiming a DYI certified system. So again, the rules say only 
the mfg holds the certificate. So how can others build this system using 
instructions and like components from ADI and be legal?


SO, why is an SBC (one that has been FCC certified like ADI's Metro or 
Gateworks), a mini PCI radio (also certified) and an external antenna (again 
only one that has been certified with the Radio) NOT a legal system. In 
other words, WHY is my Dell laptop, or my partners Toshiba laptop NOT a 
legal system. They have all 3 of the mentioned components, but I don't see 
the FCC number where it was certified as a complete system. Did I miss 
something?


Tim Kerns
CV-Access, Inc.






- Original Message - 
From: Dawn DiPietro [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 5:09 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble



Mike,

What Marlon said IS NOT OPINION. The only way you can be legal is to 
certify a system as a whole. You might want to take a look at the ADI link 
I posted and maybe this will help you understand what is required to 
become certified. You must have all the components certified together.


Is it that I keep misunderstanding what you are trying to say? But I feel 
like this has been discussed before in no uncertain terms.


Regards,
Dawn DiPietro

Mike Hammett wrote:
So you're saying (in your opinion, not necessarily any bearing on what 
the FCC actually requires) when we have certified SBCs, we'd be able to 
go that route?  Those that are running a certified radio with no amp (who 
uses that garbage anymore) into an antenna with equal or lower gain on a 
PC based system run a good chance of being legal?



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


- Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 12:39 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble



It works like this Doug.

A radio card is an intentional radiator.  Under part 15 rules it can 
only be sold as a part of a certified system.  That means if you put the 
radio card in a computer and it's designed to be used in a computer 
either with it's own built in antenna or the antenna build into the 
computer that's ok.  As long as it's CERTIFIED that way.


If you take that same card, hook a pigtail to it and put an amp on it. 
You are out of compliance.  If you put an antenna larger than the one 
certified, you are out of compliance.  If you put a different type of 
antenna than it was certified with (yagi to grid or panel to omni etc.) 
you are out of compliance.


The thing that's screwing us all up with MT, StarOS and others like that 
is that they don't have ANY certified systems available to us.


And, if you look on LEGAL computer boards, even though they are 
UN-intentional radiators, they will have an FCC certification on them. 
Many of the war board type devices don't have that FCC logo on them.


Yes the rule is silly.  Yes it's widely ignored, even by the FCC.  No, 
uncertified systems don't seem to be a problem in the real world.


However, do YOU want to take a chance on having YOUR customers go dark 
because you want 

Re: [WISPA] ADI's open Architecture system

2007-06-12 Thread Dawn DiPietro

Mike,

As quoted from the white paper;


Software Requirements for Compliance
The only requirement our FCC approval places on software is to “hard 
code” the transmit power control
settings and channel selection options so that they always conform to 
the FCC certified limits. There must not
be any way to configure the system to operate above the certified 
power levels or channel settings. Any

software can be run on the unit provided it meets this requirement.


ADI is accomplishing the power and channel hard coding with the 
cooperation of our commercial WISP and
municipal wireless software partners – RoamAD, Valemount Networks, 
Antcor, and others. These partners will
be providing a Pronghorn Metro™ FCC compliant code build that sets 
power and channel selections correctly.
ADI is also underway developing an FCC compliance capability for 
MadWiFi. This will provide a clear path
forward to FCC compliance to customers creating their own software 
based on MadWiFi.

Regards,
Dawn DiPietro



Mike Hammett wrote:
I see nothing about it that would fix it to Star OS, unless the IXP425 
is not x86.



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


- Original Message - From: Dawn DiPietro [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 6:17 AM
Subject: [WISPA] ADI's open Architecture system






The thing that's screwing us all up with MT, StarOS and others like 
that is that they don't have ANY certified systems available to us.


I guess you missed my post last week about ADI Engineering.
They have a certified system that works with Star OS. This was just 
release a few weeks ago.


http://www.adiengineering.com/products/data/FCC-Whitepaper-R100.pdf
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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





--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


RE: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-12 Thread Ralph
There is some degree of control used by at least some laptops. All 3 times I
ever tried to switch mini-pci wireless cards in a laptop to something else,
the computer refused to even POST, giving a BIOS error that an unsupported
wireless card was installed. This was on IBM, Compaq, and Dell.  

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 8:17 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble


Then why can I purchase a Netgear PCI card for my Dell desktop?


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


- Original Message - 
From: Dawn DiPietro [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:39 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble


 Mike,

 That post was looking for clarification on whether or not it was 
 possible
 it would make this legal without going through system certification as an 
 intentional radiator. Since the FCC wording can be mind boggling sometimes

 there is confusion. In other words you cannot take certified parts and use

 them together and expect to be legal no matter how anyone tries to justify

 it. I am glad to see that you do understand. ;-)

 Regards,
 Dawn DiPietro






 Mike Hammett wrote:
 I understood that was the way it was until perhaps yesterday when 
 someone
 brought up the issue of PC's with add in wireless cards being in no way 
 different than what we do.


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


 - Original Message - From: Dawn DiPietro [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:09 AM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble


 Mike,

 What Marlon said IS NOT OPINION. The only way you can be legal is to
 certify a system as a whole. You might want to take a look at the ADI 
 link I posted and maybe this will help you understand what is required 
 to become certified. You must have all the components certified 
 together.

 Is it that I keep misunderstanding what you are trying to say? But I
 feel like this has been discussed before in no uncertain terms.

 Regards,
 Dawn DiPietro

 Mike Hammett wrote:
 So you're saying (in your opinion, not necessarily any bearing on 
 what
 the FCC actually requires) when we have certified SBCs, we'd be able to

 go that route?  Those that are running a certified radio with no amp 
 (who uses that garbage anymore) into an antenna with equal or lower 
 gain on a PC based system run a good chance of being legal?


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


 - Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 12:39 AM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble


 It works like this Doug.

 A radio card is an intentional radiator.  Under part 15 rules it 
 can
 only be sold as a part of a certified system.  That means if you put 
 the radio card in a computer and it's designed to be used in a 
 computer either with it's own built in antenna or the antenna build 
 into the computer that's ok.  As long as it's CERTIFIED that way.

 If you take that same card, hook a pigtail to it and put an amp on 
 it.
 You are out of compliance.  If you put an antenna larger than the one 
 certified, you are out of compliance.  If you put a different type of 
 antenna than it was certified with (yagi to grid or panel to omni 
 etc.) you are out of compliance.

 The thing that's screwing us all up with MT, StarOS and others 
 like
 that is that they don't have ANY certified systems available to us.

 And, if you look on LEGAL computer boards, even though they are
 UN-intentional radiators, they will have an FCC certification on them.

 Many of the war board type devices don't have that FCC logo on them.

 Yes the rule is silly.  Yes it's widely ignored, even by the FCC.  
 No,
 uncertified systems don't seem to be a problem in the real world.

 However, do YOU want to take a chance on having YOUR customers go 
 dark
 because you want to ignore the rules?  Do you really want to give your

 competition that much ammunition against you?

 I have the contacts, forms to fill out etc. just waiting for me to 
 get
 the time to take this issue on as part of the FCC committee's job.  We

 have basically no FCC committee though.  The principal membership 
 doesn't seem to be all that interested in anything other than whining 
 about the work that other people do.  No one wants to step up and take

 on the hard issues.

 When I get done with the CALEA work (that's costing me 2 to 4 
 hours
 per DAY and others are working harder than I am) I'll write up a 
 petition to get this certified system rule changed.  Ideally I'd like 
 to get a real pro installer mechanism in place so that joe q public 
 still has to buy certified systems, but we could just buy certified 
 components.

 Or, if 

[WISPA] LIST HIJACKED AGAIN

2007-06-12 Thread Marty Dougherty
This list has been hijacked AGAIN by a few folks who send never ending
emails-day and night-  please stop, your killing the usefulness of the whole
thing.

Marty

___
Marty Dougherty
CEO
Roadstar Internet Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
703-554-6620
www.roadstarinternet.com
 

The way to get started is to quit talking and begin doing.

-Walt Disney


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of George Rogato
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 10:42 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

I wonder how many wisps who would usually discuss their infrastructure 
and talk about their issues and performance of the equipment they are 
using, etc, no longer say a word on this list because of the fear 
mongers who have them running scared?

We used to have lots of wisps discussing this stuff in detail, not any 
longer.


Matt Liotta wrote:
 This has become a ridiculous thread. Dawn's customer experience is 
 irrelevant in this case. Plenty of operators who have lots of customers 
 (including me) understand and agree with the position presented. Don't 
 kill the messenger! The FCC makes the rules; not Dawn or me or any of 
 the other folks who have made accurate statements regarding 
 certification. Use of certified equipment is required by law. Many 
 people break laws for a variety of reasons, but that doesn't change the 
 law. For example, everyday I drive over the speed limit and occasionally 
 I am fined for doing so.
 
 -Matt
 
 Brad Belton wrote:
 How would the number of customers I had on my network have any 
 bearing on
 this discussion?


 Well, it's a lot like having a medical intern weigh in on what a 
 resident is
 more qualified to answer.  Certainly the intern is not to be considered a
 dummy, but the intern's general lack of tenure, real world experience and
 overall knowledge can not be considered equal to an experienced resident.

 Questioning your ISP experience and specifically your fixed wireless
 experience is certainly relevant to this discussion.  Anyone that has 
 scaled
 their operation beyond a few dozen or even a few hundred clients knows 
 the
 difficulty and complexity is compounded.  It is quite a different 
 animal to
 run an ISP with several thousand users behind it as compared to a few
 hundred.

 No offense is intended Dawn.  I enjoy reading your posts and agree 
 with your
 FCC Certification Crusade, but until you have walked a mile (or more 
 in many
 cases) in the shoes of those you are speaking of many will rightly 
 question
 what you offer here as the gospel.

 Best,


 Brad




 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Dawn DiPietro
 Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 2:37 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

 George,

 As I said in my post wireless providers do not get to decide what has 
 to be certified this is up to the FCC and if there are any questions 
 they need to be clarified not argued against which seems to be the 
 norm among some on this list.

 How would the number of customers I had on my network have any bearing 
 on this discussion?

 Regards,
 Dawn DiPietro


 George Rogato wrote:
  
 Dawn,

 Just how many wisp customers did you have in your short career as a 
 wisp?

 Why is it that some people who don't actually participate in running 
 a wireless service want to come in and try to tell us how to run our 
 wisps?





 Dawn DiPietro wrote:

 All,

 I have come to the conclusion that there are some on this list that 
 think FCC certification is up for debate. There may be a need for 
 clarification in some cases but like it or not the FCC has the final 
 say in what can and cannot be certified.

 Regards,
 Dawn DiPietro
   

   
 

-- 
George Rogato

Welcome to WISPA

www.wispa.org

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 Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


[WISPA] Question posed to the FCC

2007-06-12 Thread Mike Hammett
I sent this off to the FCC today:

What is different between 

 

1)   Adding an FCC certified PCI wireless card with antenna within the 
card's certification from Best Buy to a computer with FCC certified components 
(either manufactured by Dell or DIY) sitting in my living room

 

And

 

2)   Adding an FCC certified miniPCI wireless card with antenna within the 
card's certification from a different vendor to a computer with FCC certified 
components (either manufactured by Dell or DIY) sitting on a tower



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

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


RE: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-12 Thread dougr
So is the Ubiquiti SRC and 4.9 PCMCIA card a computing device since it was 
designed for install in laptops?

-Original Message-
From: Forrest W. Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 9:32 AM
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

Mike Hammett wrote:

 Then why can I purchase a Netgear PCI card for my Dell desktop?

Because the Netgear PCI card has been certified both as a computing 
device and a Part 15 intentional radiator - but only if it is used with 
the antenna which the Netgear was certified with.

-forrestc
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-12 Thread Forrest W. Christian

Let me further clarify the statement below.

Computer certifications permit each component to be certified separately 
and assembled as a system.  As long as all of the components which go 
into the computer are certified individually, you can assemble them 
together into a computer which is also FCC legal, as far as the 
unintential radiation (FCC Class A and B computing device) 
certifications go.  This is somewhat simplified, but you get the jist.   
The reason why this works is that each device is only adding a certain 
amount of noise, and as long as the total quantity of rf noise doesn't 
exceed a threshold, the computer is compliant.


On the Part 15 intential radiator rules it is significantly different.  
This is because you are intending to transmit, and when this occurs you 
aren't just looking at random noise which happens because of the way the 
computer is put together... you are looking at a transmitter which must 
work correctly in order to meet the emission limits, both in and out of 
band.   Because the limits are so tight, if you change an anteena you 
may affect the in-band or the out-of-band emissions or both.  If either 
is out of spec, the equipment would not pass certification.  Even 
changing the type of antenna may make a transmitter not work correctly, 
even if the gain is the same across the board.  This is why the whole 
system needs to be certified together.   The FCC has loosened this up a 
bit, so that the manufacturer can say that they tested it with antenna X 
which is similar to antennas Y and Z and as such X Y and Z are all 
certified.  But this flexibility does not extend to the end user.  They 
have to use only antenna X, Y, or Z and not antenna A.


A certified radio card straddles both lines - as such it has been tested 
for emissions both under Part 15 intentional and also unintentional 
radiator rules.  Both sets of permissions apply - it can be used, as 
certified, to operate as a Part 15 intentional radiator - and it can 
also be added to a certified computer system and comply with Class A and 
Class B computing device for the unintentional emissions.  Think of it 
as two different devices - the radio part and the computer interface part.


Forrest W. Christian wrote:


Mike Hammett wrote:


Then why can I purchase a Netgear PCI card for my Dell desktop?



Because the Netgear PCI card has been certified both as a computing 
device and a Part 15 intentional radiator - but only if it is used 
with the antenna which the Netgear was certified with.


-forrestc



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-12 Thread Mike Hammett
So then we need Ubiquiti to certify their cards as a computing device and as 
a Part 15 intentional radiator?



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


- Original Message - 
From: Forrest W. Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 8:32 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble



Mike Hammett wrote:


Then why can I purchase a Netgear PCI card for my Dell desktop?


Because the Netgear PCI card has been certified both as a computing device 
and a Part 15 intentional radiator - but only if it is used with the 
antenna which the Netgear was certified with.


-forrestc
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Question posed to the FCC

2007-06-12 Thread Forrest W. Christian

Mike Hammett wrote:


2)   Adding an FCC certified miniPCI wireless card with antenna within the 
card's certification from a different vendor to a computer with FCC certified 
components (either manufactured by Dell or DIY) sitting on a tower
 


There is absolutely NO difference..  You are missing a critical point:

Show me a miniPCI wireless card which has a certification for an outdoor 
AP style antenna.  *That* is the point of this thread.   None of the 
miniPCI based systems are certified because noone has bothered to 
certify the miniPCI wireless card with a correct set of antennas.


For instance, the Ubiquiti SR2 is only certified with a 3dbi omni from 
Hyperlink.  Other cards are similar. 


-forrest
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Question posed to the FCC

2007-06-12 Thread Mike Hammett
The XR5 is certified with a 31.4 dbi antenna.  Nothing in the FCC 
certification says what type of antenna.  Someone I spoke with familiar with 
the certification process said the type doesn't matter, only maximum 
(perhaps minimum too, I can't remember) gains.



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


- Original Message - 
From: Forrest W. Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 9:12 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question posed to the FCC



Mike Hammett wrote:

2)   Adding an FCC certified miniPCI wireless card with antenna within 
the card's certification from a different vendor to a computer with FCC 
certified components (either manufactured by Dell or DIY) sitting on a 
tower



There is absolutely NO difference..  You are missing a critical point:

Show me a miniPCI wireless card which has a certification for an outdoor 
AP style antenna.  *That* is the point of this thread.   None of the 
miniPCI based systems are certified because noone has bothered to certify 
the miniPCI wireless card with a correct set of antennas.


For instance, the Ubiquiti SR2 is only certified with a 3dbi omni from 
Hyperlink.  Other cards are similar.

-forrest
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


[WISPA] Good Luck to all.

2007-06-12 Thread Dawn DiPietro

All,

Some on this list have felt it important to steer the discussion towards 
personal attacks and try to discredit me anytime I want to discuss how 
the rules and regulations affect this industry as a whole. My only 
agenda is to help others to understand how they can become compliant and 
do my best to explain how to read the rules set forth by the 
authorities. Since there is a lack of appreciation for my posts I feel I 
need to move on to a more professional venue. Good luck with all your 
future endeavors.


Regards,
Dawn DiPietro
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


RE: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-12 Thread Eric Rogers
A good read:  http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/part15.html.  Specifically,
look at Declaration of Conformity (DoC) under Equipment Authorization
Procedures and Information.

The bottoms of 2 of my nearby laptops (HP and Dell) have a FCC logo and
list a FCC registration number.  That, with the fact that the Netgear
PCI also complies with the FCC part 15 rules (no external antennas) the
combination is allowed.  Most of the internal cards that come with
laptops are put together as a complete system, and DELL, HP, Gateway are
all assuming the responsibility that their complete system will not
exceed FCC limits.  If you look at
http://www.fcc.gov/oet/ea/Labelling_Guidelines_Parts_15_and_18.pdf on
page 3 of 4, it states...Devices authorized under the DoC procedure
must also include a compliance information statement as required.  Now
here is the killer statement, The main objective of this compliance
statement is to allow the FCC to associate the equipment with the party
responsible for compliance with the DoC requirements.

There are two possibilities.  First, what some have been saying is that
IF someone (like ADI) says X, Y, and Z parts are used, and assembled
this way; AND gets approved by the FCC as a system, then they can sell
the rights as long as you follow their same procedures.  You then are
compliant, but only if you follow their tested procedures, but you need
to follow the DoC procedure, and you also become liable.

Second is if we (WISPA, independent ISPs, or hopefully Manufacturers)
get a few SBCs tested as a Part 15 B device (un-intentional radiator)
and get a couple mPCI cards tested with high-gain antennas (as a
system).  Then we (those that are testing) can certify the system.

The bottom line, the DoC specifies who is liable.  So those that are
assembling those systems have to mimic the procedures of an approved
system that someone will take responsibility for.  No one has stepped to
the plate and gotten a system approved and offered it to the general
public.  ADI is the first that I have seen that may be doing that.

Eric Rogers
Precision Data Solutions, LLC
(317) 831-3000 x200


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 9:17 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

Then why can I purchase a Netgear PCI card for my Dell desktop?


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


- Original Message - 
From: Dawn DiPietro [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:39 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble


 Mike,

 That post was looking for clarification on whether or not it was
possible 
 it would make this legal without going through system certification as
an 
 intentional radiator. Since the FCC wording can be mind boggling
sometimes 
 there is confusion. In other words you cannot take certified parts and
use 
 them together and expect to be legal no matter how anyone tries to
justify 
 it. I am glad to see that you do understand. ;-)

 Regards,
 Dawn DiPietro






 Mike Hammett wrote:
 I understood that was the way it was until perhaps yesterday when
someone 
 brought up the issue of PC's with add in wireless cards being in no
way 
 different than what we do.


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


 - Original Message - From: Dawn DiPietro [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:09 AM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble


 Mike,

 What Marlon said IS NOT OPINION. The only way you can be legal is to

 certify a system as a whole. You might want to take a look at the
ADI 
 link I posted and maybe this will help you understand what is
required 
 to become certified. You must have all the components certified 
 together.

 Is it that I keep misunderstanding what you are trying to say? But I

 feel like this has been discussed before in no uncertain terms.

 Regards,
 Dawn DiPietro

 Mike Hammett wrote:
 So you're saying (in your opinion, not necessarily any bearing on
what 
 the FCC actually requires) when we have certified SBCs, we'd be
able to 
 go that route?  Those that are running a certified radio with no
amp 
 (who uses that garbage anymore) into an antenna with equal or lower

 gain on a PC based system run a good chance of being legal?


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


 - Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer 
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 12:39 AM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble


 It works like this Doug.

 A radio card is an intentional radiator.  Under part 15 rules it
can 
 only be sold as a part of a certified system.  That means if you
put 
 the radio card in a computer and it's designed to be used in a 
 computer either with it's own built in antenna or the antenna
build 
 into 

Re: [WISPA] Good Luck to all.

2007-06-12 Thread JohnnyO
Dawn - you speak about personal attacks but then in your same breath you say 
Since there is a lack of appreciation for my posts I feel I

need to move on to a more professional venue.


I believe your posts have a lot of personal attacks built into them even if 
just generalized.


Sorry to see you go, some of your posts were worth reading.

JohnnyO


- Original Message - 
From: Dawn DiPietro [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 9:13 AM
Subject: [WISPA] Good Luck to all.



All,

Some on this list have felt it important to steer the discussion towards 
personal attacks and try to discredit me anytime I want to discuss how the 
rules and regulations affect this industry as a whole. My only agenda is 
to help others to understand how they can become compliant and do my best 
to explain how to read the rules set forth by the authorities.  Good luck 
with all your future endeavors.


Regards,
Dawn DiPietro
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] LIST HIJACKED AGAIN

2007-06-12 Thread Jeromie Reeves

How is having a discussion about a real issue hijacking a list?  What
is so hard about ignoring a thread?

On 6/12/07, Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Well, I think we're evolving past I say this because I want to and you say
that because you want to into a discussion citing facts and posing real
questions to the powers that be.


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


- Original Message -
From: Marty Dougherty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 8:39 AM
Subject: [WISPA] LIST HIJACKED AGAIN


 This list has been hijacked AGAIN by a few folks who send never ending
 emails-day and night-  please stop, your killing the usefulness of the
 whole
 thing.

 Marty

 ___
 Marty Dougherty
 CEO
 Roadstar Internet Inc.
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 703-554-6620
 www.roadstarinternet.com


 The way to get started is to quit talking and begin doing.

 -Walt Disney


 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of George Rogato
 Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 10:42 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

 I wonder how many wisps who would usually discuss their infrastructure
 and talk about their issues and performance of the equipment they are
 using, etc, no longer say a word on this list because of the fear
 mongers who have them running scared?

 We used to have lots of wisps discussing this stuff in detail, not any
 longer.


 Matt Liotta wrote:
 This has become a ridiculous thread. Dawn's customer experience is
 irrelevant in this case. Plenty of operators who have lots of customers
 (including me) understand and agree with the position presented. Don't
 kill the messenger! The FCC makes the rules; not Dawn or me or any of
 the other folks who have made accurate statements regarding
 certification. Use of certified equipment is required by law. Many
 people break laws for a variety of reasons, but that doesn't change the
 law. For example, everyday I drive over the speed limit and occasionally
 I am fined for doing so.

 -Matt

 Brad Belton wrote:
 How would the number of customers I had on my network have any
 bearing on
 this discussion?


 Well, it's a lot like having a medical intern weigh in on what a
 resident is
 more qualified to answer.  Certainly the intern is not to be considered
 a
 dummy, but the intern's general lack of tenure, real world experience
 and
 overall knowledge can not be considered equal to an experienced
 resident.

 Questioning your ISP experience and specifically your fixed wireless
 experience is certainly relevant to this discussion.  Anyone that has
 scaled
 their operation beyond a few dozen or even a few hundred clients knows
 the
 difficulty and complexity is compounded.  It is quite a different
 animal to
 run an ISP with several thousand users behind it as compared to a few
 hundred.

 No offense is intended Dawn.  I enjoy reading your posts and agree
 with your
 FCC Certification Crusade, but until you have walked a mile (or more
 in many
 cases) in the shoes of those you are speaking of many will rightly
 question
 what you offer here as the gospel.

 Best,


 Brad




 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Dawn DiPietro
 Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 2:37 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

 George,

 As I said in my post wireless providers do not get to decide what has
 to be certified this is up to the FCC and if there are any questions
 they need to be clarified not argued against which seems to be the
 norm among some on this list.

 How would the number of customers I had on my network have any bearing
 on this discussion?

 Regards,
 Dawn DiPietro


 George Rogato wrote:

 Dawn,

 Just how many wisp customers did you have in your short career as a
 wisp?

 Why is it that some people who don't actually participate in running
 a wireless service want to come in and try to tell us how to run our
 wisps?





 Dawn DiPietro wrote:

 All,

 I have come to the conclusion that there are some on this list that
 think FCC certification is up for debate. There may be a need for
 clarification in some cases but like it or not the FCC has the final
 say in what can and cannot be certified.

 Regards,
 Dawn DiPietro





 --
 George Rogato

 Welcome to WISPA

 www.wispa.org

 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 Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

Archives: 

Re: [WISPA] LIST HIJACKED AGAIN

2007-06-12 Thread David E. Smith
Marty Dougherty wrote:
 This list has been hijacked AGAIN by a few folks who send never ending
 emails-day and night-  please stop, your killing the usefulness of the whole
 thing.

If you have evidence of a security breach, where someone has hijacked
the subscriber list and is using it for nefarious purposes, please let
me know so I can address the issue.

(If you're referring to the fact that some folks use a discussion list
for discussing stuff, relax. It's just the Internet.)

David Smith
MVN.net
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


RE: [WISPA] LIST HIJACKED AGAIN

2007-06-12 Thread Ralph
Please squawk 7500 and continue on course...

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Marty Dougherty
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 8:40 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: [WISPA] LIST HIJACKED AGAIN


This list has been hijacked AGAIN by a few folks who send never ending
emails-day and night-  please stop, your killing the usefulness of the whole
thing.

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

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Question posed to the FCC

2007-06-12 Thread Forrest W. Christian

Mike Hammett wrote:

The XR5 is certified with a 31.4 dbi antenna.  Nothing in the FCC 
certification says what type of antenna.  Someone I spoke with 
familiar with the certification process said the type doesn't matter, 
only maximum (perhaps minimum too, I can't remember) gains. 


Actually it appears to have been tested with the following two antennas:*

*Hyperlinktech, Dipole, HG2403RD-RSF, 3dbi
Radio waves, Parabolic, SP1.5(2/3)-5.8, 31.4dBi.

The ceritificate at the FCC is for 5.7 only.  Not sure what happened to 
the 2.4 grant.


So it looks like you can use the XR5 in 5.7 with the radiowaves 
antenna.  However, any other antennas would be illegal until such time 
as Ubiquiti specifies in writing that the additional antennas are legal 
to use, with specific model numbers.   I would, however, be skeptical of 
anything but a Parabolic of some sort, since the FCC requires the 
certification testing be done for each antenna type - where type is 
not neccessarily just parabolic, but things like parabolic with 
dipole feed, DC open, and a specific in and out of band gain pattern.   
I would expect there to be no problem with Ubiquiti saying that the 
lower gain radiowaves 5.8ghz parabolic antennas are ok,  but anything 
else may require additional testing.


-forrest
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-12 Thread Clint Ricker

Matt,
I'm not a WISP (I do network design, deployment, and consulting for service
providers), but, seeing as how none of the WISPs are answering, I'll give it
a shot as to percieved advantages of MT or StarOS.

1. I don't think the FCC certification is a huge issue.  This is largely
because any of the certification stuff needs to be done once, and can then
be replicated.  Regardless of how you look at it, the initial cost of
deploying a platform (any platform) is quite expensive especially once you
start factoring in all of the things that are usually ignored by smaller
service providers (ie their own time for RD).  This is true whether you are
doing Cisco, Moto, Alvarion, Trango, etc...--you have to (should!) do bench
testing, draw up network diagrams, figure out all the specifics to getting
install processes and so forth down pat), figure out how you are going to
manage hundreds or thousands of these things, and so forth.  The effort for
certification is not a huge deal, then, since you can amoratize out the time
across all of your systems, just like you're already doing for all the other
aspects of your network.  Is it an increased cost? Sure...but, in the end,
not that big of one on a per-unit basis, especially since the whole concept
of a business is to scale big (right?).  That said, the irony is that the
guys that tend to run MT or StarOS are often the small providers where there
simply isn't the return of scale that makes this even vaguely a good idea.

2. The main advantage is (theoretically) the ability to have a single
platform across the entire infrastructure.  I say theoretically because
there are areas where most providers diverge from this because they don't
feel that it really fits.  Still, the idea of having a unified platform
across the infrastructure can potentially be very powerful and very good.
Still, I tend to find the MT management app kinda weak in this regard; it
hasn't (IMHO) sufficiently evolved from a mass managment app to a
platform management app.  Still, while these are criticisms, if MT can
cover a sufficiently large portion of your infrastructure needs, then having
a single (or 2 or 3) platforms can really reduce operational costs
considerably.  Conceptually, the idea of upgrade the hardware, not the
platform is great.

3. Some degree of freedom.  This is somewhat seperate from #2, but along the
same lines.  I can think of several instances of larger service providers
being left with millions of dollars of infrastructure with no support and no
future because a particular product line no longer fit into their vendors
roadmap.  Divorcing the hardware from the software makes this less of a
possibility, although does not totally negate the possibility, especially
given that most of the hardware vendors that MT stuff typically ends up
running on (ie the embedded PC market) are often, well, not the most
financially stable operations.

I hope this helps.  Just for the record, while I do think MT can be a good
choice for some people, I would make the observation that there are
providers out there who could have better allocated their resources
elsewhere--most of the advantages don't really work until there is some
degree of scale, but at that point there are other considerations that often
take MT out of consideration.

Thanks,
Clint Ricker
Kentnis Technologies

On 6/10/07, Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


George Rogato wrote:
 Matt there is a tool for every job. Just because someone uses MT or
 Star does not mean they don't use canopy, trango or alvarion as well.

 And nobody needs to explain why.


I am well aware of that, which is why we use so many different vendors'
radios. We first started with Canopy on a recommendation and over time
various operators (mostly WISPA members) introduced us to other vendors'
radios. Every time we learned about a new vendor from the experiences of
others. I respect the experience of my peers and find it quite useful in
vendor selection. Why everyone is so defensive about MT I don't know. I
personally don't care what equipment anyone uses. I am just curious why
people use it in case it would be useful for us. But, no one seems
willing to answer that.

-Matt

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


RE: [WISPA] Question posed to the FCC

2007-06-12 Thread Doug Ratcliffe
It seems to me like having Ubiquiti certified with various WISP antennas
would be far cheaper than certifying each combination of Routerboard /
Wireless Card / Case / Antenna combination.


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Forrest W. Christian
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 11:13 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question posed to the FCC

Mike Hammett wrote:

 The XR5 is certified with a 31.4 dbi antenna.  Nothing in the FCC 
 certification says what type of antenna.  Someone I spoke with 
 familiar with the certification process said the type doesn't matter, 
 only maximum (perhaps minimum too, I can't remember) gains. 

Actually it appears to have been tested with the following two antennas:*

*Hyperlinktech, Dipole, HG2403RD-RSF, 3dbi
Radio waves, Parabolic, SP1.5(2/3)-5.8, 31.4dBi.

The ceritificate at the FCC is for 5.7 only.  Not sure what happened to 
the 2.4 grant.

So it looks like you can use the XR5 in 5.7 with the radiowaves 
antenna.  However, any other antennas would be illegal until such time 
as Ubiquiti specifies in writing that the additional antennas are legal 
to use, with specific model numbers.   I would, however, be skeptical of 
anything but a Parabolic of some sort, since the FCC requires the 
certification testing be done for each antenna type - where type is 
not neccessarily just parabolic, but things like parabolic with 
dipole feed, DC open, and a specific in and out of band gain pattern.   
I would expect there to be no problem with Ubiquiti saying that the 
lower gain radiowaves 5.8ghz parabolic antennas are ok,  but anything 
else may require additional testing.

-forrest
-- 
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 Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.11/836 - Release Date: 6/6/2007
1:10 PM


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] LIST HIJACKED AGAIN

2007-06-12 Thread Tim Kerns

LOL..

wonder how many understand 7500..

Tim

- Original Message - 
From: Ralph [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:36 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] LIST HIJACKED AGAIN


Please squawk 7500 and continue on course...

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Marty Dougherty
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 8:40 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: [WISPA] LIST HIJACKED AGAIN


This list has been hijacked AGAIN by a few folks who send never ending
emails-day and night-  please stop, your killing the usefulness of the whole
thing.

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

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


RE: [WISPA] LIST HIJACKED AGAIN

2007-06-12 Thread Brad Belton
I didn't until nowgrin

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transponder_code#Transponder_codes

Best,


Brad



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tim Kerns
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 10:31 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] LIST HIJACKED AGAIN

LOL..

wonder how many understand 7500..

Tim

- Original Message - 
From: Ralph [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:36 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] LIST HIJACKED AGAIN


Please squawk 7500 and continue on course...

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Marty Dougherty
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 8:40 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: [WISPA] LIST HIJACKED AGAIN


This list has been hijacked AGAIN by a few folks who send never ending
emails-day and night-  please stop, your killing the usefulness of the whole
thing.

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

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Question posed to the FCC

2007-06-12 Thread Forrest W. Christian

Doug Ratcliffe wrote:


It seems to me like having Ubiquiti certified with various WISP antennas
would be far cheaper than certifying each combination of Routerboard /
Wireless Card / Case / Antenna combination.

That would be correct.  If I understand the regs correctly, what you 
could do is verify the routerboard (and probably the cases) emission 
limits as a computing device, and then certify the Ubiquiti card with 
antennas.  You would also have to do the computing device test on the 
ubiquity card so that it can be integrated into a routerboard enclosure.


-forrest
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Good Luck to all.

2007-06-12 Thread Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181
I'd not worry about those that folks Dawn.  If people choose to ignore the 
rules that's up to them.


Personal attacks are clearly against the list rules.  If people are name 
calling etc. just forward the email to the list moderator (Rick Harnish) and 
he'll slap them around.


Disagreements are ok.  Being a jerk to those you don't agree with isn't ok 
here.

Marlon
(509) 982-2181
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



- Original Message - 
From: Dawn DiPietro [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:13 AM
Subject: [WISPA] Good Luck to all.



All,

Some on this list have felt it important to steer the discussion towards 
personal attacks and try to discredit me anytime I want to discuss how the 
rules and regulations affect this industry as a whole. My only agenda is 
to help others to understand how they can become compliant and do my best 
to explain how to read the rules set forth by the authorities. Since there 
is a lack of appreciation for my posts I feel I need to move on to a more 
professional venue. Good luck with all your future endeavors.


Regards,
Dawn DiPietro
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


[WISPA] Pricing

2007-06-12 Thread Peter R.

Seth Godin has a good post on the theory of pricing:
http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2007/06/three_humps_and.html

--


Regards,

Peter Radizeski
RAD-INFO, Inc. - NSP Strategist
We Help ISPs Connect  Communicate
813.963.5884 
http://www.marketingIDEAguy.com



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


RE: [WISPA] Question posed to the FCC

2007-06-12 Thread Doug Ratcliffe
Motherboards and power supplies are tested independent of a case - if it's
in a case, they test it with the all covers removed.  Section 15.32(a).

We may still have an issue, however.  Routerboards are not typical personal
computers due to lack of keyboard, video, etc.  So Routerboards and similar
SBCs may never make it as a personal computer.  But VIA boards, and any
NanoITX with video, keyboard, mouse DOES meet the definition of a personal
computer.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Forrest W. Christian
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 11:52 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question posed to the FCC

Doug Ratcliffe wrote:

It seems to me like having Ubiquiti certified with various WISP antennas
would be far cheaper than certifying each combination of Routerboard /
Wireless Card / Case / Antenna combination.

That would be correct.  If I understand the regs correctly, what you 
could do is verify the routerboard (and probably the cases) emission 
limits as a computing device, and then certify the Ubiquiti card with 
antennas.  You would also have to do the computing device test on the 
ubiquity card so that it can be integrated into a routerboard enclosure.

-forrest
-- 
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 Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.11/836 - Release Date: 6/6/2007
1:10 PM

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Pricing

2007-06-12 Thread Mark Nash
This is interesting, and something I've been giving alot of thought to.  My 
market is mostly rural, residential, mom  pop shops, etc.  Providing 
inexpensive access will get me more customers but as we all know, our APs 
only have so much capacity so how do you get as much revenue as you can out 
of each and every one of them?  If you go exclusive then you grow slower but 
your revenue per user goes up, making your AP more valuable.


Anyone got comments on providing a mixture, perhaps even with different 
quality APs at a single site?


Mark Nash
UnwiredOnline
350 Holly Street
Junction City, OR 97448
http://www.uwol.net
541-998-
541-998-5599 fax

- Original Message - 
From: Peter R. [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 9:27 AM
Subject: [WISPA] Pricing



Seth Godin has a good post on the theory of pricing:
http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2007/06/three_humps_and.html

--


Regards,

Peter Radizeski
RAD-INFO, Inc. - NSP Strategist
We Help ISPs Connect  Communicate
813.963.5884 http://www.marketingIDEAguy.com


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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





--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Pricing

2007-06-12 Thread Peter R.

You could create 2 brands like Toyota and Lexus.
One is a decent car but the other is a luxury.
The difference between a Camary and a Lexus 200 was about $5000. Same 
basic car.


Let's look at Marriott. These are its brands:
Marriott Hotels  Resorts
JW Marriott Hotels  Resorts
Renaissance Hotels  Resorts
Courtyard by Marriott
Residence Inn by Marriott
Fairfield Inn by Marriott
Marriott Conference Centers
TownePlace Suites by Marriott
SpringHill Suites by Marriott
Marriott Vacation Club International
Horizons by Marriott
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company, L.L.C.
The Ritz-Carlton Club
Marriott ExecuStay
Marriott Executive Apartments
Grand Residences by Marriott

Everyone is branded with an exact thought in your head for who it 
targets and what you get.


It's all in the marketing. Lots of ways to package your services to meet 
different strata of a region.


Regards,

Peter Radizeski
RAD-INFO, Inc.
813-963-5884


Mark Nash wrote:

This is interesting, and something I've been giving alot of thought 
to.  My market is mostly rural, residential, mom  pop shops, etc.  
Providing inexpensive access will get me more customers but as we all 
know, our APs only have so much capacity so how do you get as much 
revenue as you can out of each and every one of them?  If you go 
exclusive then you grow slower but your revenue per user goes up, 
making your AP more valuable.


Anyone got comments on providing a mixture, perhaps even with 
different quality APs at a single site?


Mark Nash
UnwiredOnline
350 Holly Street
Junction City, OR 97448
http://www.uwol.net
541-998-
541-998-5599 fax


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Question posed to the FCC

2007-06-12 Thread Forrest W. Christian

Doug Ratcliffe wrote:


Motherboards and power supplies are tested independent of a case - if it's
in a case, they test it with the all covers removed.  Section 15.32(a).

We may still have an issue, however.  Routerboards are not typical personal
computers due to lack of keyboard, video, etc.  So Routerboards and similar
SBCs may never make it as a personal computer.  But VIA boards, and any
NanoITX with video, keyboard, mouse DOES meet the definition of a personal
computer.

I don't think this is an insurmountable issue.  As long as the tests are 
done like it was a Class B personal computer, you shouldn't have any 
problems at all.  If you read the appropriate sections of Part 15, what 
they really mean by personal computer seems to be a computing device you 
use at your house (or can be used at the house) and has boards which can 
be added or removed.


That is:  Motherboard, case and power supply are tested (together or 
seperate, i'm not sure).   This takes care of the certification for the 
Routerboard.  This should be done my Mikrotik or the board manufacturer.


Then the radio is tested and certified both as a Peripheral and as a 
Part 15 intentional radiator.  This should be done by the radio 
manufacturer - and needs to include a reasonable range of antennas.


That would solve the problem we are talking about.  The problem is 
getting the vendors to actually go the additional mile to make this happen.


-forrest
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] ADI's open Architecture system

2007-06-12 Thread Tom DeReggi

Finally, an OEM manufacturer stepping up to the plate, to get this done!

I hope their certified case allows enough working room inside.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Dawn DiPietro [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:17 AM
Subject: [WISPA] ADI's open Architecture system






The thing that's screwing us all up with MT, StarOS and others like that 
is that they don't have ANY certified systems available to us.


I guess you missed my post last week about ADI Engineering.
They have a certified system that works with Star OS. This was just 
release a few weeks ago.


http://www.adiengineering.com/products/data/FCC-Whitepaper-R100.pdf
--
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 Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 
269.8.13/843 - Release Date: 6/10/2007 1:39 PM





--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-12 Thread Michael Erskine

Dawn DiPietro wrote:


Is it that I keep misunderstanding what you are trying to say? But I 
feel like this has been discussed before in no uncertain terms.


Maybe I wasn't there?  
I gladly yield to your apparent superior knowledge, until that is proper 
reflected in an FCC ruling and the only party who has authority do make 
these kinds of decisions has spoken.

I have more important worries.

Ta.
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Good Luck to all.

2007-06-12 Thread Michael Erskine

Dawn DiPietro wrote:

All,

Some on this list have felt it important to steer the discussion 
towards personal attacks and try to discredit me anytime I want to 
discuss how the rules and regulations affect this industry as a whole. 
My only agenda is to help others to understand how they can become 
compliant and do my best to explain how to read the rules set forth by 
the authorities. Since there is a lack of appreciation for my posts I 
feel I need to move on to a more professional venue. Good luck with 
all your future endeavors.


Regards,
Dawn DiPietro
Ahem, Sorry to see you go.  I didn't see personal attacks but I didn't 
read all the posts.  I don't think it is necessary to tar the venue 
because there are people on the venue you can't get along with.


Why not stay and prove your points?  When you are right you are right.  
Eventually the truth will come out.


-m-
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


[WISPA] 700 auction

2007-06-12 Thread Peter R.

Big surprise here: ATT, Verizon Oppose Google Over Airwaves

http://www.webpronews.com/topnews/2007/06/11/at-t-verizon-oppose-google-over-airwaves 


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] ADI's open Architecture system

2007-06-12 Thread Jeromie Reeves

The IXP is not x86. It is a XScale CPU. ARM based if I remember correctly.

Now hopefully ADI's move will cause others to move too

On 6/12/07, Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Finally, an OEM manufacturer stepping up to the plate, to get this done!

I hope their certified case allows enough working room inside.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message -
From: Dawn DiPietro [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:17 AM
Subject: [WISPA] ADI's open Architecture system




 The thing that's screwing us all up with MT, StarOS and others like that
 is that they don't have ANY certified systems available to us.

 I guess you missed my post last week about ADI Engineering.
 They have a certified system that works with Star OS. This was just
 release a few weeks ago.

 http://www.adiengineering.com/products/data/FCC-Whitepaper-R100.pdf
 --
 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 Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database:
 269.8.13/843 - Release Date: 6/10/2007 1:39 PM



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Good Luck to all.

2007-06-12 Thread Peter R.

Michael Erskine wrote:


Dawn DiPietro wrote:


All,

Some on this list have felt it important to steer the discussion 
towards personal attacks and try to discredit me anytime I want to 
discuss how the rules and regulations affect this industry as a 
whole. My only agenda is to help others to understand how they can 
become compliant and do my best to explain how to read the rules set 
forth by the authorities. Since there is a lack of appreciation for 
my posts I feel I need to move on to a more professional venue. Good 
luck with all your future endeavors.


Regards,
Dawn DiPietro


Ahem, Sorry to see you go.  I didn't see personal attacks but I didn't 
read all the posts.  I don't think it is necessary to tar the venue 
because there are people on the venue you can't get along with.


Why not stay and prove your points?  When you are right you are 
right.  Eventually the truth will come out.


-m-


Mike,

I know email is lousy communication because there is a lack of tone and 
emotion, but many of your responses come off as personal attacks. Maybe 
it is supposed to be sarcasm, but as I read it, it was an attack.


If you don't agree, say why you don't agree.   No reason to just throw 
sarcastic jabs.  One of the rules of netiquette is that if you are not 
adding anything to the conversation, then don't post. (I am guilty of 
this at times myself). 

Yeah, it was a harped on issue. (It seems the longest threads involve 
MT).  From what I read, most people are offering opinions, not facts. 
And there is no shortage of Opinion. And in the case of MT, it is like 
arguing religion or politics -- you aren't going to change anyone's 
mind.  Hence, why at least one person thought the list was hijacked.


And threads like this with even perceived attacks, don't help the Org.

Regards,

Peter @ RAD-INFO, Inc.
www.4isps.com
www.rad-info.net
marketingideaguy.com


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


[WISPA] Windows Network configuration tool

2007-06-12 Thread Ryan Langseth

Here is a tool you all might find useful:

http://netprofiles.danielmilner.com/

With Net Profiles, mobile computing becomes a whole lot easier. It 
eliminates the need to manually reconfigure your network settings when 
you move your desktop/laptop computer to another location. Once a 
profile is created, Net Profiles can configure your IP settings, proxy 
settings, mapped drives, default printer, wallpaper, and screen 
resolution with a click of a button; as well as run any number of 
user-defined applications upon activation of a profile.


Ryan
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] ADI's open Architecture system

2007-06-12 Thread Tom DeReggi

RB600? Whats that?
Was that a MUM announced product?

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Smith, Rick [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:33 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] ADI's open Architecture system


Right.

And I hear a rumor that they're doing the same with Mikrotik.

Before I make any more comments, I want to see an RB600 in my hands.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dawn DiPietro
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:17 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] ADI's open Architecture system




The thing that's screwing us all up with MT, StarOS and others like
that is that they don't have ANY certified systems available to us.


I guess you missed my post last week about ADI Engineering.
They have a certified system that works with Star OS. This was just
release a few weeks ago.

http://www.adiengineering.com/products/data/FCC-Whitepaper-R100.pdf
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
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 Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.13/843 - Release Date: 6/10/2007 
1:39 PM



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Question posed to the FCC

2007-06-12 Thread Tom DeReggi

Talking about XR5s
You get them to work yet?
My test cards get out performed by CM9s.
I'm using WARs and StarOS for testing.
I haven't tried them in Mikrotik yet.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 10:14 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question posed to the FCC


The XR5 is certified with a 31.4 dbi antenna.  Nothing in the FCC 
certification says what type of antenna.  Someone I spoke with familiar 
with the certification process said the type doesn't matter, only maximum 
(perhaps minimum too, I can't remember) gains.



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


- Original Message - 
From: Forrest W. Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 9:12 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question posed to the FCC



Mike Hammett wrote:

2)   Adding an FCC certified miniPCI wireless card with antenna 
within the card's certification from a different vendor to a computer 
with FCC certified components (either manufactured by Dell or DIY) 
sitting on a tower



There is absolutely NO difference..  You are missing a critical point:

Show me a miniPCI wireless card which has a certification for an outdoor 
AP style antenna.  *That* is the point of this thread.   None of the 
miniPCI based systems are certified because noone has bothered to certify 
the miniPCI wireless card with a correct set of antennas.


For instance, the Ubiquiti SR2 is only certified with a 3dbi omni from 
Hyperlink.  Other cards are similar.

-forrest
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



--
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 Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 
269.8.14/845 - Release Date: 6/12/2007 6:39 AM





--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Question posed to the FCC

2007-06-12 Thread Blair Davis
My XR5 cards are work great! 


Tom DeReggi wrote:

Talking about XR5s
You get them to work yet?
My test cards get out performed by CM9s.
I'm using WARs and StarOS for testing.
I haven't tried them in Mikrotik yet.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - From: Mike Hammett 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 10:14 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question posed to the FCC


The XR5 is certified with a 31.4 dbi antenna.  Nothing in the FCC 
certification says what type of antenna.  Someone I spoke with 
familiar with the certification process said the type doesn't matter, 
only maximum (perhaps minimum too, I can't remember) gains.



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


- Original Message - From: Forrest W. Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 9:12 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question posed to the FCC



Mike Hammett wrote:

2)   Adding an FCC certified miniPCI wireless card with antenna 
within the card's certification from a different vendor to a 
computer with FCC certified components (either manufactured by Dell 
or DIY) sitting on a tower



There is absolutely NO difference..  You are missing a critical point:

Show me a miniPCI wireless card which has a certification for an 
outdoor AP style antenna.  *That* is the point of this thread.   
None of the miniPCI based systems are certified because noone has 
bothered to certify the miniPCI wireless card with a correct set of 
antennas.


For instance, the Ubiquiti SR2 is only certified with a 3dbi omni 
from Hyperlink.  Other cards are similar.

-forrest
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



--
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 Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 
269.8.14/845 - Release Date: 6/12/2007 6:39 AM







--
Blair Davis

AOL IM Screen Name --  Theory240

West Michigan Wireless ISP
269-686-8648

A division of:
Camp Communication Services, INC

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Question posed to the FCC

2007-06-12 Thread Blair Davis

That was supposed to be.

My XR5 cards are working great!

Blair Davis wrote:

My XR5 cards are work great!
Tom DeReggi wrote:

Talking about XR5s
You get them to work yet?
My test cards get out performed by CM9s.
I'm using WARs and StarOS for testing.
I haven't tried them in Mikrotik yet.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - From: Mike Hammett 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 10:14 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question posed to the FCC


The XR5 is certified with a 31.4 dbi antenna.  Nothing in the FCC 
certification says what type of antenna.  Someone I spoke with 
familiar with the certification process said the type doesn't 
matter, only maximum (perhaps minimum too, I can't remember) gains.



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


- Original Message - From: Forrest W. Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 9:12 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question posed to the FCC



Mike Hammett wrote:

2)   Adding an FCC certified miniPCI wireless card with 
antenna within the card's certification from a different vendor to 
a computer with FCC certified components (either manufactured by 
Dell or DIY) sitting on a tower



There is absolutely NO difference..  You are missing a critical point:

Show me a miniPCI wireless card which has a certification for an 
outdoor AP style antenna.  *That* is the point of this thread.   
None of the miniPCI based systems are certified because noone has 
bothered to certify the miniPCI wireless card with a correct set of 
antennas.


For instance, the Ubiquiti SR2 is only certified with a 3dbi omni 
from Hyperlink.  Other cards are similar.

-forrest
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



--
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 Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 
269.8.14/845 - Release Date: 6/12/2007 6:39 AM









--
Blair Davis

AOL IM Screen Name --  Theory240

West Michigan Wireless ISP
269-686-8648

A division of:
Camp Communication Services, INC

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Good Luck to all.

2007-06-12 Thread Tom DeReggi

Dawn,

You have the right to do what ever you feel is best, but
Don't let the comments of a few, influence your perception of what the rest 
of the membership may think.

There are 100s, if not 1000s of readers on this list.
I assure you that that are many that value your posts and contributions.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Dawn DiPietro [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 10:13 AM
Subject: [WISPA] Good Luck to all.



All,

Some on this list have felt it important to steer the discussion towards 
personal attacks and try to discredit me anytime I want to discuss how the 
rules and regulations affect this industry as a whole. My only agenda is 
to help others to understand how they can become compliant and do my best 
to explain how to read the rules set forth by the authorities. Since there 
is a lack of appreciation for my posts I feel I need to move on to a more 
professional venue. Good luck with all your future endeavors.


Regards,
Dawn DiPietro
--
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 Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 
269.8.14/845 - Release Date: 6/12/2007 6:39 AM





--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


RE: [WISPA] Question posed to the FCC

2007-06-12 Thread Mark McElvy
I have an XR2 in a MT AP. I cannot get it to authenticate PPPoE. All my
others work fine, WLM54g's.

Mark 
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 2:41 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question posed to the FCC

Talking about XR5s
You get them to work yet?
My test cards get out performed by CM9s.
I'm using WARs and StarOS for testing.
I haven't tried them in Mikrotik yet.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Pricing

2007-06-12 Thread Tom DeReggi
I agree that branding product levels is one good approach. However I'd liek 
to bring up there is a big diffeerence between Marriot and an ISP.


With Marriot, you can touch, see, and feel the difference between the 
product brands.  Whether the budget hotel has smelly carpet and the high end 
hotel has fancy chandaliers and hottubs, or efficiencies with kitchens, etc.


With Wireless its very difficult for the end iser to see the difference, and 
the ISP to prove the difference, or for that matter truly build a network 
that can deliver the mulitple services differenciated.  In other words its 
both a technical problem and a perception problem, for the ISP.


I'm aware of one company who specifically stayed out of the DSL replacement 
business because they had evidense that getting into it was lowering the 
value of their high ARPU service, because there really was no way for them 
to differenciate it. They actually started a completely different company to 
go after the low end business, to protect the value of thier name for the 
high ARPU business company.



Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Peter R. [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 12:52 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Pricing



You could create 2 brands like Toyota and Lexus.
One is a decent car but the other is a luxury.
The difference between a Camary and a Lexus 200 was about $5000. Same 
basic car.


Let's look at Marriott. These are its brands:
Marriott Hotels  Resorts
JW Marriott Hotels  Resorts
Renaissance Hotels  Resorts
Courtyard by Marriott
Residence Inn by Marriott
Fairfield Inn by Marriott
Marriott Conference Centers
TownePlace Suites by Marriott
SpringHill Suites by Marriott
Marriott Vacation Club International
Horizons by Marriott
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company, L.L.C.
The Ritz-Carlton Club
Marriott ExecuStay
Marriott Executive Apartments
Grand Residences by Marriott

Everyone is branded with an exact thought in your head for who it targets 
and what you get.


It's all in the marketing. Lots of ways to package your services to meet 
different strata of a region.


Regards,

Peter Radizeski
RAD-INFO, Inc.
813-963-5884


Mark Nash wrote:

This is interesting, and something I've been giving alot of thought to. 
My market is mostly rural, residential, mom  pop shops, etc.  Providing 
inexpensive access will get me more customers but as we all know, our APs 
only have so much capacity so how do you get as much revenue as you can 
out of each and every one of them?  If you go exclusive then you grow 
slower but your revenue per user goes up, making your AP more valuable.


Anyone got comments on providing a mixture, perhaps even with different 
quality APs at a single site?


Mark Nash
UnwiredOnline
350 Holly Street
Junction City, OR 97448
http://www.uwol.net
541-998-
541-998-5599 fax


--
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 Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 
269.8.14/845 - Release Date: 6/12/2007 6:39 AM





--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Question posed to the FCC

2007-06-12 Thread Tom DeReggi

In what configuration and OS?

Actually, Our tests were with the XR2s.

I basically, inserted a CM9, SR2, ZCOM (100watt), and XR2, and then did the 
swap aroo, recording the rssi received on the other end.


The first thing that was required, was that with the XR2, STAROS had to be 
set to a 10 tx power. Anything higher, would cause the card not to associate 
or ahve way to high a degraded quality value less than 15%.  Set at 10 or 
under, it would function at appropriate quality. The other cards could be 
set at def and deliver higher RSSI at a higher quality than the XR2.   The 
CM9, ZCOM, and SR2's rssi changed appropriatealy as calculated that it 
should, with the SR2 it had added about 8-10 db over the CM9.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Blair Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 3:56 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question posed to the FCC



That was supposed to be.

My XR5 cards are working great!

Blair Davis wrote:

My XR5 cards are work great!
Tom DeReggi wrote:

Talking about XR5s
You get them to work yet?
My test cards get out performed by CM9s.
I'm using WARs and StarOS for testing.
I haven't tried them in Mikrotik yet.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - From: Mike Hammett 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 10:14 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question posed to the FCC


The XR5 is certified with a 31.4 dbi antenna.  Nothing in the FCC 
certification says what type of antenna.  Someone I spoke with familiar 
with the certification process said the type doesn't matter, only 
maximum (perhaps minimum too, I can't remember) gains.



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


- Original Message - From: Forrest W. Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 9:12 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Question posed to the FCC



Mike Hammett wrote:

2)   Adding an FCC certified miniPCI wireless card with antenna 
within the card's certification from a different vendor to a computer 
with FCC certified components (either manufactured by Dell or DIY) 
sitting on a tower



There is absolutely NO difference..  You are missing a critical point:

Show me a miniPCI wireless card which has a certification for an 
outdoor AP style antenna.  *That* is the point of this thread.   None 
of the miniPCI based systems are certified because noone has bothered 
to certify the miniPCI wireless card with a correct set of antennas.


For instance, the Ubiquiti SR2 is only certified with a 3dbi omni from 
Hyperlink.  Other cards are similar.

-forrest
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



--
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 Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 
269.8.14/845 - Release Date: 6/12/2007 6:39 AM









--
Blair Davis

AOL IM Screen Name --  Theory240

West Michigan Wireless ISP
269-686-8648

A division of:
Camp Communication Services, INC

--
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 Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 
269.8.14/845 - Release Date: 6/12/2007 6:39 AM





--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Windows Network configuration tool

2007-06-12 Thread Mark Nash
I use this program  extensively to change my ip address around on my laptop 
for configuration.  It's easy and straightforward...probably not anything 
else to say about it. ;)


Mark Nash
Network Engineer
UnwiredOnline.Net
350 Holly Street
Junction City, OR 97448
http://www.uwol.net
541-998-
541-998-5599 fax
- Original Message - 
From: Ryan Langseth [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 12:04 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Windows Network configuration tool



Here is a tool you all might find useful:

http://netprofiles.danielmilner.com/

With Net Profiles, mobile computing becomes a whole lot easier. It 
eliminates the need to manually reconfigure your network settings when you 
move your desktop/laptop computer to another location. Once a profile is 
created, Net Profiles can configure your IP settings, proxy settings, 
mapped drives, default printer, wallpaper, and screen resolution with a 
click of a button; as well as run any number of user-defined applications 
upon activation of a profile.


Ryan
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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





--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Pricing

2007-06-12 Thread Sam Tetherow
Someone talked about this at ISPCON in Santa Clara.  Their phone system 
actually asked the user which service they had and queued the calls 
appropriately.  Higher end service got priority on all calls.  He used 
it as an upselling point.


   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless

Tom DeReggi wrote:
I agree that branding product levels is one good approach. However I'd 
liek to bring up there is a big diffeerence between Marriot and an ISP.


With Marriot, you can touch, see, and feel the difference between the 
product brands.  Whether the budget hotel has smelly carpet and the 
high end hotel has fancy chandaliers and hottubs, or efficiencies with 
kitchens, etc.


With Wireless its very difficult for the end iser to see the 
difference, and the ISP to prove the difference, or for that matter 
truly build a network that can deliver the mulitple services 
differenciated.  In other words its both a technical problem and a 
perception problem, for the ISP.


I'm aware of one company who specifically stayed out of the DSL 
replacement business because they had evidense that getting into it 
was lowering the value of their high ARPU service, because there 
really was no way for them to differenciate it. They actually started 
a completely different company to go after the low end business, to 
protect the value of thier name for the high ARPU business company.



Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - From: Peter R. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 12:52 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Pricing



You could create 2 brands like Toyota and Lexus.
One is a decent car but the other is a luxury.
The difference between a Camary and a Lexus 200 was about $5000. Same 
basic car.


Let's look at Marriott. These are its brands:
Marriott Hotels  Resorts
JW Marriott Hotels  Resorts
Renaissance Hotels  Resorts
Courtyard by Marriott
Residence Inn by Marriott
Fairfield Inn by Marriott
Marriott Conference Centers
TownePlace Suites by Marriott
SpringHill Suites by Marriott
Marriott Vacation Club International
Horizons by Marriott
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company, L.L.C.
The Ritz-Carlton Club
Marriott ExecuStay
Marriott Executive Apartments
Grand Residences by Marriott

Everyone is branded with an exact thought in your head for who it 
targets and what you get.


It's all in the marketing. Lots of ways to package your services to 
meet different strata of a region.


Regards,

Peter Radizeski
RAD-INFO, Inc.
813-963-5884


Mark Nash wrote:

This is interesting, and something I've been giving alot of thought 
to. My market is mostly rural, residential, mom  pop shops, etc.  
Providing inexpensive access will get me more customers but as we 
all know, our APs only have so much capacity so how do you get as 
much revenue as you can out of each and every one of them?  If you 
go exclusive then you grow slower but your revenue per user goes up, 
making your AP more valuable.


Anyone got comments on providing a mixture, perhaps even with 
different quality APs at a single site?


Mark Nash
UnwiredOnline
350 Holly Street
Junction City, OR 97448
http://www.uwol.net
541-998-
541-998-5599 fax


--
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 Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 
269.8.14/845 - Release Date: 6/12/2007 6:39 AM







--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


RE: [WISPA] Windows Network configuration tool

2007-06-12 Thread Mike Delp
It looks like it does a lot more than my ipchanger program that I wrote a
couple of years ago, and use daily.

Mike

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mark Nash
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 4:24 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Windows Network configuration tool

I use this program  extensively to change my ip address around on my laptop 
for configuration.  It's easy and straightforward...probably not anything 
else to say about it. ;)

Mark Nash
Network Engineer
UnwiredOnline.Net
350 Holly Street
Junction City, OR 97448
http://www.uwol.net
541-998-
541-998-5599 fax
- Original Message - 
From: Ryan Langseth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 12:04 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Windows Network configuration tool


 Here is a tool you all might find useful:

 http://netprofiles.danielmilner.com/

 With Net Profiles, mobile computing becomes a whole lot easier. It 
 eliminates the need to manually reconfigure your network settings when you

 move your desktop/laptop computer to another location. Once a profile is 
 created, Net Profiles can configure your IP settings, proxy settings, 
 mapped drives, default printer, wallpaper, and screen resolution with a 
 click of a button; as well as run any number of user-defined applications 
 upon activation of a profile.

 Ryan
 -- 
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



-- 
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 outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.13/843 - Release Date: 6/10/2007
1:39 PM
 

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] FCC WISP test case (was MT Babble)

2007-06-12 Thread Sam Tetherow
Mike has sent the question to the FCC so I'll wait to hear a response 
there or if enough time lapses I will pose the question to them.


I can't speak for anyone else, but *I* did not say that I interpreted 
the law in any manner. I *asked* the question, what makes an SBC with a 
a radio card any different than a laptop or PC with a radio card.


The closest thing I have seen so far is that it is not a PC because you 
can't hook up a keyboard and monitor to it. This is incorrect of course, 
a RB230 for instance has a USB port and an LCD connector on the board as 
well as a full PCI slot so you have several options for monitor and 
keyboard. Of course not all PCs have graphics cards built in either and 
newer motherboards are relying entirely on USB for keyboard and mouse ports.


Sam Tetherow
Sandhills Wireless


Ralph wrote:

So we are now going to start thinking that a do-it-yourself access point on
a tower is the same as a wireless laptop computer on a desk?  If people are
now going to start believing things like this, then it clearly is obvious
that many WISPS are just interpreting the rules the way that they want to.
I have an idea for a precedent-setting test that may put them more at ease
with their decision to self-regulate.

How about this:  One of you who is using build it yourself stuff please call
the FCC and invite them to inspect your company. Tell them that you have
assembled your own access points and CPEs from modular components and that
none of the devices are type accepted as a system. Make sure you have an SBC
in there somewhere (make/model is not important).  


After the inspection, you'll have the exclusive opportunity to find out
whether or not you are correct in your own interpretation.  Publish the
findings here and we'll know for sure who is right- you, or the FCC. 


In order to close the loop, the volunteer needs to be one of you who has
adamantly admitted to creating his own systems.  Since you are willing to
post about your own special interpretation of what is allowed by the FCC in
this archived, searchable public forum, then you should have no problem
eating your own dog food and becoming the poster child. 


I'm telling you:  In 30 years of licensed radio (Commercial 2-way as well as
Amateur), I have learned at least one thing.  NEVER ask the FCC for an
interpretation, because you will not like the answer you get. They will
always interpret in the most conservative way they can- usually telling you
that you can't do what you wanted to do.


I'd really love to see what the end result is and how much you do or don't
get fined!

Who's the volunteer?
  


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Orthogon

2007-06-12 Thread Nigel Bruin

On 12 Jun 2007, at 21:33, Mike Hammett wrote:

Has anyone experienced an Orthogon Gemini rebooting itself between
the hours of 04:30 and 08:00 due to registration time-outs?


Nope. Never heard of such a thing.

N.
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Orthogon

2007-06-12 Thread Felix A. Lopez
Nigel, I can ask a fellow on the Orthogon team. I
worked with Orthogon equipment, Canopy, other;  and
installed several Point to Point installations here in
Northern California.  Can you better describe your
problem?

Thanks
Felix
--- Nigel Bruin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 On 12 Jun 2007, at 21:33, Mike Hammett wrote:
  Has anyone experienced an Orthogon Gemini
 rebooting itself between
  the hours of 04:30 and 08:00 due to registration
 time-outs?
 
 Nope. Never heard of such a thing.
 
 N.
 -- 
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
 
 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
 
 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
 



  

Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles. Visit the 
Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/ 
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


RE: [WISPA] Orthogon - OFFLIST

2007-06-12 Thread Charles Wu
Hey Felix,

We need to catch up...what's your number?

-Charles 


---
WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.com 


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Felix A. Lopez
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:16 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Orthogon

Nigel, I can ask a fellow on the Orthogon team. I worked with Orthogon
equipment, Canopy, other;  and installed several Point to Point
installations here in Northern California.  Can you better describe your
problem?

Thanks
Felix
--- Nigel Bruin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 On 12 Jun 2007, at 21:33, Mike Hammett wrote:
  Has anyone experienced an Orthogon Gemini
 rebooting itself between
  the hours of 04:30 and 08:00 due to registration
 time-outs?
 
 Nope. Never heard of such a thing.
 
 N.
 --
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
 
 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
 
 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
 



 


Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles.
Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


RE: [WISPA] Orthogon - OFFLIST - ugh...

2007-06-12 Thread Charles Wu
Sorry about that guys

-Charles 


---
WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.com 


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Charles Wu
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:20 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Orthogon - OFFLIST

Hey Felix,

We need to catch up...what's your number?

-Charles 


---
WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.com 


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Felix A. Lopez
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:16 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Orthogon

Nigel, I can ask a fellow on the Orthogon team. I worked with Orthogon
equipment, Canopy, other;  and installed several Point to Point
installations here in Northern California.  Can you better describe your
problem?

Thanks
Felix
--- Nigel Bruin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 On 12 Jun 2007, at 21:33, Mike Hammett wrote:
  Has anyone experienced an Orthogon Gemini
 rebooting itself between
  the hours of 04:30 and 08:00 due to registration
 time-outs?
 
 Nope. Never heard of such a thing.
 
 N.
 --
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
 
 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
 
 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
 



 


Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles.
Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] ADI's open Architecture system

2007-06-12 Thread Mike Hammett

There are several new RouterBoards on the way.

http://www.czfree-ol.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=2745


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


- Original Message - 
From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 2:35 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] ADI's open Architecture system



RB600? Whats that?
Was that a MUM announced product?

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Smith, Rick [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:33 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] ADI's open Architecture system


Right.

And I hear a rumor that they're doing the same with Mikrotik.

Before I make any more comments, I want to see an RB600 in my hands.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dawn DiPietro
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:17 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] ADI's open Architecture system




The thing that's screwing us all up with MT, StarOS and others like
that is that they don't have ANY certified systems available to us.


I guess you missed my post last week about ADI Engineering.
They have a certified system that works with Star OS. This was just
release a few weeks ago.

http://www.adiengineering.com/products/data/FCC-Whitepaper-R100.pdf
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
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 Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.13/843 - Release Date: 6/10/2007 
1:39 PM



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Pricing

2007-06-12 Thread Felix A. Lopez
I think Seth Godin has interesting points and I
respect his work (Stanford MBA!).  But it is one thing
to write excellent books and think big (he does this
quite well) and another thing to sell, deploy and
manage a large fixed wireless network - as a WiSP for
retail customers; or large enterprise..

However, I believe there is pricing opportunity once a
network is installed  maintain a fixed base of
customer mix.  For example I helped a WiSP (in
Northern California) build their business by
leveraging their wireless expertise to help my
enterprise customers.   My enterprise customers always
have issues at the  edge edge of their networks.  
Not all of these problems are solved by wireline. So I
brought in my WISP to help solve the problems. Their
practical field experience was quite helpful.

Once again, I think the pricing curve described by
Seth has some validity.  But it is easier said than
done when dealing with a network infrastructure.
Examples are present - think about your local electric
utility and the electric distribution system The
utility has different price tariffs for different
classes of customers, times of use, etc.  .   
If I were a WiSP operator I would look at things that
people are trying to do to save money and time and
build products around these needs. For example
-energy conservation ; distance learning; traffic
congestion reduction; reducing carbon footprint and
social networking. I would then work hard to think
of products that solve these problems with your WISP
network.  For example, a university in my area is
struggling to meet rural education needs and improve
tuition revenue flow.   A rural WISP could easily team
up with this university and offer distance learning;
consider getting fee from the university for the
flow-through traffic. I am sure some of you are doing
this already..

In another case, a utility wants to offer regional
energy conservation demand response programs during
peak summer loads.   The idea is the  connected
home. or connected business can reduce energy
demand in big customer blocks of energy high demand
areas. 

Well if you think about it...let us say a WISP
operator has at least 1000 connected homes on his/her
network. Therefore the WiSP operator could register
with a local Public Utilities Commission and say  I
have a great relationship with my 1000 customers and I
can provide my local utility X amount of energy
demand reduction by asking all my customers to reduce
their elect rial load between 12 noon and 6 PM.I
posed such a question to my local electric utility and
in theory they agreed.  We set up a Hypothetical
Connected Home using wireless utility meter reading
on a web-based application server via my WISP
operator..  The wireless meter controlled appliances
via Zigbee.  Our  wireless meter provider provide
chipsets to work on 802.11, or whatever. we read
meters wirelessly via the fixed wireless ISP network
and sent messages via SNMP..  The homeowner could read
his own meter and get a message sent to his mobile PDA
when the peak period rate started AND control on-off
of his/her appliances.

Therefore, from a pricing point of view, I see the
WISP as regional networks to do many things. 

I also know that it is a lot of hard work. issues such
as like cash flow, paying employees, keeping customers
happy, while raising a family is hard work too.

Felix
Wireless Practitioner


--- Sam Tetherow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Someone talked about this at ISPCON in Santa Clara. 
 Their phone system 
 actually asked the user which service they had and
 queued the calls 
 appropriately.  Higher end service got priority on
 all calls.  He used 
 it as an upselling point.
 
 Sam Tetherow
 Sandhills Wireless
 
 Tom DeReggi wrote:
  I agree that branding product levels is one good
 approach. However I'd 
  liek to bring up there is a big diffeerence
 between Marriot and an ISP.
 
  With Marriot, you can touch, see, and feel the
 difference between the 
  product brands.  Whether the budget hotel has
 smelly carpet and the 
  high end hotel has fancy chandaliers and hottubs,
 or efficiencies with 
  kitchens, etc.
 
  With Wireless its very difficult for the end iser
 to see the 
  difference, and the ISP to prove the difference,
 or for that matter 
  truly build a network that can deliver the
 mulitple services 
  differenciated.  In other words its both a
 technical problem and a 
  perception problem, for the ISP.
 
  I'm aware of one company who specifically stayed
 out of the DSL 
  replacement business because they had evidense
 that getting into it 
  was lowering the value of their high ARPU service,
 because there 
  really was no way for them to differenciate it.
 They actually started 
  a completely different company to go after the low
 end business, to 
  protect the value of thier name for the high ARPU
 business company.
 
 
  Tom DeReggi
  RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
  IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
 
 
  - Original Message - 

[WISPA] Intel's New Montevina Architecture for WiFi and WiMax

2007-06-12 Thread Felix A. Lopez
Readers, I read some of the postings on archticture
and CPUs.  Some of you may know that Intel is doing a
lot of work around future certified archiecture in
preparation for convergence of 802.11 WiFi + 802.16(d,
e)

Intel recently announced the mid-2008 introduction of
an entirely new mobile platform, called Montevina ¡V
built for 802.11 and 802.16 !!.  Montevina is the
fifth-generation Centrino platform.  The announcement
fits quite nicely into the future of WiFi/WiMax and
demonstrates Intel¡¦s foresight.  

Montevina (Centrino) will offer multi-mode Wi-Fi/WiMAX
adapters including a single Wi-Fi (802.11n) if needed.
 This means that the OEMs/ODMs, and the mobile
workforce can look forward to seamless connection to
Wi-Fi and WiMax networks.  
The Montevina platform places its lineage on the Intel
Santa Rosa platform. The Santa Rosa is the original
Centrino.  But Montevina will be based on Intel's
upcoming 45-nm quad-core Penryn processor.  The system
is based on the new the Intel Robeson 2.0
architecture.  Robeson was designed and built for
mobility. The Robeson architecture will enable mobile
laptops to use less battery power, and crunch data
better and faster with less latency - an important
feature in the 802.16 environments.

Where does the WinTel (Intel-Microsoft ) relationship
fit into the picture?Intel designed the Robson 2.0
to support Vista¡¦s instant on and off technologies. 
For those organizations using Microsoft, the Montevina
platform (laptops) will give the IT managers the
ability to better manger their untethered mobile
assets. Just think of a truck fleet but in this case a
PC fleet. Fleet managers need to provide end user
support in a remote environment.  Montevina will
enable this in a battery efficient energy savings
WiFi/Wimax enabled environment.

Intel Active Management Technology is part of the
Montevina roadmap.  This means that future mobile
devices will more readily integrate a Windows Vista
type mobile application from remote server managers ¡V
in a thin or thick client approach.

In my opinion the Intel announcement indicate this
large manufacture is alive and kicking. Furthermore
the trend demonstrates the continued importance of the
WiFi. WiFi is here to stay. The ¡§WINTEL¡¨
relationship and how WiFi/WiMax integrates with
ubiquitous Microsoft operating systems; specifically
Windows Vista; is a key indicator of the near future..


 Trained readers should continue to trace the
development of Montevina and trends in the retail and 
enterprise environment. Network operators of
WiFi/WiMax systems using Microsoft operating systems
such as Windows Vista will want to see a WiF/WiMax
enabled integrated architecture.

Felix



   

Get the free Yahoo! toolbar and rest assured with the added security of spyware 
protection.
http://new.toolbar.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/norton/index.php
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Pricing

2007-06-12 Thread Tom DeReggi
I did the same thing, until the client base realized that the same guy 
answered the phone regardless of whether they were calling the priority or 
non-priority line.
Somethings only work after a company scales to a certain number of 
employees.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Sam Tetherow [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 6:35 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Pricing


Someone talked about this at ISPCON in Santa Clara.  Their phone system 
actually asked the user which service they had and queued the calls 
appropriately.  Higher end service got priority on all calls.  He used it 
as an upselling point.


   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless

Tom DeReggi wrote:
I agree that branding product levels is one good approach. However I'd 
liek to bring up there is a big diffeerence between Marriot and an ISP.


With Marriot, you can touch, see, and feel the difference between the 
product brands.  Whether the budget hotel has smelly carpet and the high 
end hotel has fancy chandaliers and hottubs, or efficiencies with 
kitchens, etc.


With Wireless its very difficult for the end iser to see the difference, 
and the ISP to prove the difference, or for that matter truly build a 
network that can deliver the mulitple services differenciated.  In other 
words its both a technical problem and a perception problem, for the ISP.


I'm aware of one company who specifically stayed out of the DSL 
replacement business because they had evidense that getting into it was 
lowering the value of their high ARPU service, because there really was 
no way for them to differenciate it. They actually started a completely 
different company to go after the low end business, to protect the value 
of thier name for the high ARPU business company.



Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - From: Peter R. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 12:52 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Pricing



You could create 2 brands like Toyota and Lexus.
One is a decent car but the other is a luxury.
The difference between a Camary and a Lexus 200 was about $5000. Same 
basic car.


Let's look at Marriott. These are its brands:
Marriott Hotels  Resorts
JW Marriott Hotels  Resorts
Renaissance Hotels  Resorts
Courtyard by Marriott
Residence Inn by Marriott
Fairfield Inn by Marriott
Marriott Conference Centers
TownePlace Suites by Marriott
SpringHill Suites by Marriott
Marriott Vacation Club International
Horizons by Marriott
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company, L.L.C.
The Ritz-Carlton Club
Marriott ExecuStay
Marriott Executive Apartments
Grand Residences by Marriott

Everyone is branded with an exact thought in your head for who it 
targets and what you get.


It's all in the marketing. Lots of ways to package your services to meet 
different strata of a region.


Regards,

Peter Radizeski
RAD-INFO, Inc.
813-963-5884


Mark Nash wrote:

This is interesting, and something I've been giving alot of thought to. 
My market is mostly rural, residential, mom  pop shops, etc. 
Providing inexpensive access will get me more customers but as we all 
know, our APs only have so much capacity so how do you get as much 
revenue as you can out of each and every one of them?  If you go 
exclusive then you grow slower but your revenue per user goes up, 
making your AP more valuable.


Anyone got comments on providing a mixture, perhaps even with different 
quality APs at a single site?


Mark Nash
UnwiredOnline
350 Holly Street
Junction City, OR 97448
http://www.uwol.net
541-998-
541-998-5599 fax


--
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 Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 
269.8.14/845 - Release Date: 6/12/2007 6:39 AM







--
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 Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 
269.8.14/845 - Release Date: 6/12/2007 6:39 AM





--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Pricing

2007-06-12 Thread Travis Johnson

Or you work on a call-back tech support basis. ;)

We changed to that model almost 8 years ago and it was the best thing we 
ever did. No hold times for customers, less tech support personnel, 
better tech support when they do call back (because they can review the 
notes about the call BEFORE calling the customer).


Travis
Microserv

Tom DeReggi wrote:
I did the same thing, until the client base realized that the same guy 
answered the phone regardless of whether they were calling the 
priority or non-priority line.
Somethings only work after a company scales to a certain number of 
employees.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - From: Sam Tetherow [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 6:35 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Pricing


Someone talked about this at ISPCON in Santa Clara.  Their phone 
system actually asked the user which service they had and queued the 
calls appropriately.  Higher end service got priority on all calls.  
He used it as an upselling point.


   Sam Tetherow
   Sandhills Wireless

Tom DeReggi wrote:
I agree that branding product levels is one good approach. However 
I'd liek to bring up there is a big diffeerence between Marriot and 
an ISP.


With Marriot, you can touch, see, and feel the difference between 
the product brands.  Whether the budget hotel has smelly carpet and 
the high end hotel has fancy chandaliers and hottubs, or 
efficiencies with kitchens, etc.


With Wireless its very difficult for the end iser to see the 
difference, and the ISP to prove the difference, or for that matter 
truly build a network that can deliver the mulitple services 
differenciated.  In other words its both a technical problem and a 
perception problem, for the ISP.


I'm aware of one company who specifically stayed out of the DSL 
replacement business because they had evidense that getting into it 
was lowering the value of their high ARPU service, because there 
really was no way for them to differenciate it. They actually 
started a completely different company to go after the low end 
business, to protect the value of thier name for the high ARPU 
business company.



Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - From: Peter R. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 12:52 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Pricing



You could create 2 brands like Toyota and Lexus.
One is a decent car but the other is a luxury.
The difference between a Camary and a Lexus 200 was about $5000. 
Same basic car.


Let's look at Marriott. These are its brands:
Marriott Hotels  Resorts
JW Marriott Hotels  Resorts
Renaissance Hotels  Resorts
Courtyard by Marriott
Residence Inn by Marriott
Fairfield Inn by Marriott
Marriott Conference Centers
TownePlace Suites by Marriott
SpringHill Suites by Marriott
Marriott Vacation Club International
Horizons by Marriott
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company, L.L.C.
The Ritz-Carlton Club
Marriott ExecuStay
Marriott Executive Apartments
Grand Residences by Marriott

Everyone is branded with an exact thought in your head for who it 
targets and what you get.


It's all in the marketing. Lots of ways to package your services to 
meet different strata of a region.


Regards,

Peter Radizeski
RAD-INFO, Inc.
813-963-5884


Mark Nash wrote:

This is interesting, and something I've been giving alot of 
thought to. My market is mostly rural, residential, mom  pop 
shops, etc. Providing inexpensive access will get me more 
customers but as we all know, our APs only have so much capacity 
so how do you get as much revenue as you can out of each and every 
one of them?  If you go exclusive then you grow slower but your 
revenue per user goes up, making your AP more valuable.


Anyone got comments on providing a mixture, perhaps even with 
different quality APs at a single site?


Mark Nash
UnwiredOnline
350 Holly Street
Junction City, OR 97448
http://www.uwol.net
541-998-
541-998-5599 fax


--
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 Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 
269.8.14/845 - Release Date: 6/12/2007 6:39 AM







--
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 Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 
269.8.14/845 - Release Date: 6/12/2007 6:39 AM






--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Pricing

2007-06-12 Thread Marlon K. Schafer
We're about to do an upgrade that will give us wifi and non wifi at one of 
our sites that overlooks out largest population bases.


We'll have $40 wifi, $50 3/3meg non wifi and $75 6/6meg non wifi service.

We make extra money from systems by having a bit threshold over which our 
heavy users have to pay extra.


Had a customer get a machine messed up about a week ago.  None of us 
noticed.  The threshold is 6 gigs, this customer is already at 77 gigs for 
June!  Our biggest customer pays $350 per month for 60 gigs.  Ug.  Not sure 
what to do with the one that got whacked.  I'll probably try to get $100 out 
of them and call it even.  At least it'll cover our costs that way.  They 
are a good customer with multiple accounts so I don't want to piss them off 
too much over it.  Nice folk too, I feel bad about it.  But, they used the 
data and that has a cost on my end.


laters,
marlon

- Original Message - 
From: Mark Nash [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 9:37 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Pricing


This is interesting, and something I've been giving alot of thought to. 
My market is mostly rural, residential, mom  pop shops, etc.  Providing 
inexpensive access will get me more customers but as we all know, our APs 
only have so much capacity so how do you get as much revenue as you can 
out of each and every one of them?  If you go exclusive then you grow 
slower but your revenue per user goes up, making your AP more valuable.


Anyone got comments on providing a mixture, perhaps even with different 
quality APs at a single site?


Mark Nash
UnwiredOnline
350 Holly Street
Junction City, OR 97448
http://www.uwol.net
541-998-
541-998-5599 fax

- Original Message - 
From: Peter R. [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 9:27 AM
Subject: [WISPA] Pricing



Seth Godin has a good post on the theory of pricing:
http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2007/06/three_humps_and.html

--


Regards,

Peter Radizeski
RAD-INFO, Inc. - NSP Strategist
We Help ISPs Connect  Communicate
813.963.5884 http://www.marketingIDEAguy.com


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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





--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Pricing

2007-06-12 Thread Marlon K. Schafer
That's exactly what we're working on.  I didn't know I was so smart! 
hehehehe

marlon

- Original Message - 
From: Peter R. [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 9:52 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Pricing



You could create 2 brands like Toyota and Lexus.
One is a decent car but the other is a luxury.
The difference between a Camary and a Lexus 200 was about $5000. Same 
basic car.


Let's look at Marriott. These are its brands:
Marriott Hotels  Resorts
JW Marriott Hotels  Resorts
Renaissance Hotels  Resorts
Courtyard by Marriott
Residence Inn by Marriott
Fairfield Inn by Marriott
Marriott Conference Centers
TownePlace Suites by Marriott
SpringHill Suites by Marriott
Marriott Vacation Club International
Horizons by Marriott
The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company, L.L.C.
The Ritz-Carlton Club
Marriott ExecuStay
Marriott Executive Apartments
Grand Residences by Marriott

Everyone is branded with an exact thought in your head for who it targets 
and what you get.


It's all in the marketing. Lots of ways to package your services to meet 
different strata of a region.


Regards,

Peter Radizeski
RAD-INFO, Inc.
813-963-5884


Mark Nash wrote:

This is interesting, and something I've been giving alot of thought to. 
My market is mostly rural, residential, mom  pop shops, etc.  Providing 
inexpensive access will get me more customers but as we all know, our APs 
only have so much capacity so how do you get as much revenue as you can 
out of each and every one of them?  If you go exclusive then you grow 
slower but your revenue per user goes up, making your AP more valuable.


Anyone got comments on providing a mixture, perhaps even with different 
quality APs at a single site?


Mark Nash
UnwiredOnline
350 Holly Street
Junction City, OR 97448
http://www.uwol.net
541-998-
541-998-5599 fax


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Good Luck to all.

2007-06-12 Thread Michael Erskine

Peter R. wrote:

Michael Erskine wrote:


Dawn DiPietro wrote:


All,

Some on this list have felt it important to steer the discussion 
towards personal attacks and try to discredit me anytime I want to 
discuss how the rules and regulations affect this industry as a 
whole. My only agenda is to help others to understand how they can 
become compliant and do my best to explain how to read the rules set 
forth by the authorities. Since there is a lack of appreciation for 
my posts I feel I need to move on to a more professional venue. Good 
luck with all your future endeavors.


Regards,
Dawn DiPietro


Ahem, Sorry to see you go.  I didn't see personal attacks but I 
didn't read all the posts.  I don't think it is necessary to tar the 
venue because there are people on the venue you can't get along 
with.


Why not stay and prove your points?  When you are right you are 
right.  Eventually the truth will come out.


-m-


Mike,

I know email is lousy communication because there is a lack of tone 
and emotion, but many of your responses come off as personal attacks. 



Assertion is exactly that.  Document.



Maybe it is supposed to be sarcasm, but as I read it, it was an attack.



Well, prove it and I will apologize.  Otherwise, I think that you are 
exactly right, the medium is not good and *anyone* can read *anything* 
into *nothing*.





If you don't agree, say why you don't agree.   No reason to just throw 
sarcastic jabs.  One of the rules of netiquette is that if you are not 
adding anything to the conversation, then don't post. (I am guilty of 
this at times myself).



Oh. Well you certainly missed my intent then.  I absolutely disagree 
with Dawn regarding her interpretation of the FCC's rulings.  Not so 
much because I have any particular understanding of them but because I 
figure that she really doesn't have any better understanding of them 
that anyone else here.  What qualifies her to speak for the FCC?  What 
qualifies me to speak for the FCC?


This argument which is foolish on it's face because the only authority 
who can speak to the issue is not being consulted, is simply a red 
herring.  The argument damages the list and gives someone an opportunity 
to make excuses about professionalism, and personal attacks.  When in 
fact, my perception tells me that the argument is more about who the 
most knowledgeable person in the room is actually.


Clearly that sort of horse hockey and arrogance doesn't belong on a 
professional list.  I therefore thank God that well understand that I 
am an ignorant fellow who would never try to force my opinion upon 
anyone, even when I thought I was correct.


Yeah, it was a harped on issue. (It seems the longest threads involve 
MT).  From what I read, most people are offering opinions, not facts. 
And there is no shortage of Opinion. And in the case of MT, it is like 
arguing religion or politics -- you aren't going to change anyone's 
mind.  Hence, why at least one person thought the list was hijacked.


Well, you called that exactly right.  It is more like *religion* than 
fact. 




And threads like this with even perceived attacks, don't help the Org.
Well, you know the most unfortunate thing is when people perceive 
whatever makes them feel good, or works for their personal agenda.  
Sadly, that is what I perceive is happening here.


... but then perceptions are like opinions, and we all know what 
opinions are like ... :)

-m-

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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