I think the key would be that these portable devices require a AP to
talk to, and that AP's be limited as licensed devices (like 3650). The
protocol would need to be setup so that they do not talk unless they
can hear a AP (and handshake a stable link). This is my opinion of the
best middle ground
On 1/18/08, Mac Dearman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have mixed thoughts about backing any stand that is for allowing portable
> devices in this spectrum. I deal (daily) in a trash hole of spectrum because
> of these very same "portable" devices. What do you Wireless Internet Service
> Providers
I have mixed thoughts about backing any stand that is for allowing portable
devices in this spectrum. I deal (daily) in a trash hole of spectrum because
of these very same "portable" devices. What do you Wireless Internet Service
Providers want anyway? Do you want spectrum that is fit to be used to
Sascha's got a good point.
So the question is If WISPA alienates groups lobbying for Public
portable devices, Who all would still be allies with WISPA to fight for open
access to it?
Sascha infers, not many. What does WISPA think? As much as I respect how
much WISPA has done so far to figh
* Tom DeReggi wrote, On 1/18/2008 1:10 PM:
what it looks like many are going to do in order to get a greater number of
subs per tower, at $10k+ per radio they will have to
Nope. The manufacturers will have to lower their price per AP.
2.4Ghz can go way up to 50 Watts EIRP, where the c
Hi everyone,
> Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 22:26:54 -0800
> From: "Marlon K. Schafer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Wireless industry slams NAB's white space
> 'misinformation'
> To: "WISPA General List"
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> I've sent a note to WIA and asked if they'd be interested
Tom
You are calling the Wimax base station an AP, this is not the case they are
true base stations with a large amount of R&D behind them plus most are
licensing code which adds a great deal of cost. I do not think you are going
to see Wimax base stations anywhere near what WISP are used to doing,
>what it looks like many are going to do in order to get a greater number of
>subs per tower, at $10k+ per radio they will have to
Nope. The manufacturers will have to lower their price per AP.
>2.4Ghz can go way up to 50 Watts EIRP, where the clients under
>3.65Ghz are limited to 1 Watt max.
Th
What we have found, is that the difficulty is not finding an SLA to copy,
but having a network/monitoring system that can prove the SLA. Most SLAs I
have seen are written to based on what that provider can prove, based on the
capabity of their network, and not necessarilly relevent to someone el
Over all I think we are in agreement then. I would like to see
licensing kind of like 3650 and have personal devices . All consumer hardware would need to be client side gear only,
like cell phones. AP's can only be installed with a license (like
3650, anyone who pays can get one). Also GPS sync w
Marlon, would it be possible for Broadband delivery to be what is current
VHF & low UHF channels 2-13 + 14-30 and Higher UHF 31-68+ for personal
devices. We get better propogations and higher would have appearance of
less distance (not really). Possible solution that all could work for common
goal
Anyone here used Digital Path gear? If so, you mind to hit me offlist
please?
Thanks!
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
-
Personal portable devices would also include laptops. HAS to include
laptops.
I think that a compromise would be to start out with the band as an outdoor
or at least fixed antenna only solution. Out door so that we could use it
for public safety or mobile devices, but only ones that would nor
I haven't been able to nail down actual numbers so I'm working via
experience and intuition at this point.
Having given the standard disclaimers. I have a tower site that looks
out over something like 1000 homes. Give or take a few. This AP has a 45*
sector on it. The closest houses are
I assumed that too but would like to be sure I am making the correct
assumptions. I also wonder what he feels should be allowed. I know how
I feel about it and lacking information, assume everyone feels the
same =)
On 1/18/08, Jason Hensley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would think that by perso
Hey Marlon,
I support you in this belief, "Take that as a firm stance."
Ron Wallace
Hahnron, Inc.
220 S. Jackson Dt.
Addison, MI 49220
Phone: (517)547-8410
Mobile: (517)605-4542
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>-Original Message-
>From: Marlon K. Schafer [mailto:[EMAIL PROT
> Behalf Of Jeromie Reeves
>
> Can you explain why you feel that way?
For all the same reasons we complain about now in the trash spectrum we are
making a living in. If personal portable devices are allowed in the
whitespace then it would be no different than what we have today as far as
the ra
I would think that by personal portable devices he means things like
cordless phones, wireless headsets, etc etc. If I understand that right, I
would have to concur wholeheartedly.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jeromie Reeves
Sent: Fr
Can you explain why you feel that way?
On 1/17/08, Marlon K. Schafer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've sent a note to WIA and asked if they'd be interested in a discussion
> focused on finding common ground between them and us.
>
> It's my belief that WISPA needs to fight tooth and nail to keep pe
19 matches
Mail list logo
