All I can say is OUCH!
-- Original Message --
From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 20:32:35 -0500
I am going to launch and I am going to hold others to the interference
avoidance
I repriced the CPE and got under $350, so apparently I'm a better shopper
today than I was last week. ;-)
--
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
- Original Message -
From: Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List
* Travis Johnson wrote, On 6/3/2008 10:17 PM:
Yup... and it's only because they can... they are getting the big
operators to pay that kind of money, so they will keep selling at those
prices. Supply and demand... but you can build a MT 3.65ghz CPE for less
than $400, but it's still
The rules are quite clear unfortunately. The FCC opened a can of worms
IMHO. All licensees have to work together to resolve anything. There
are no first rights to a site I've been told.
Leon
* Scottie Arnett wrote, On 6/4/2008 2:45 AM:
All I can say is OUCH!
-- Original Message
Another WISP has already gotten an FCC license using the Ubiquiti XR3
card as the registered device... in fact, the FCC actually called this
person to clarify the specified frequency ranges.
Travis
Microserv
Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE wrote:
* Travis Johnson wrote, On 6/3/2008 10:17 PM:
Who?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Travis Johnson
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 9:34 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Rapid Link Launches WiMax Service in Atlanta
Another WISP has already gotten an FCC license using the
Thank You for saying that.
I hope all of us have sense enough not to home build solutions on a LICENSED
band now that we have one!
Ralph
Brightlan.net
Atlanta Ga
(yes, we too have a 3650 license - big woop-de-do)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Rapid Link acquired One Ring earlier this year.
-Matt
On Jun 3, 2008, at 7:42 PM, Gino Villarini wrote:
I thought you were One ring ...
Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel 787.273.4143 fax 787.273.4145
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
- Atlanta business can now enjoy the only wide-area alternative to ATT
-
OMAHA, NE - June 3, 2008 - Rapid Link, Incorporated (OTCBB: RPID), a
leading provider of WiMax and Communication Services, announced today
the official launch of its much anticipated WiMax service offering in
the Atlanta
On one of the wireless lists someone stated that the FCC approved a site
registration with the XR3's FCC ID. They even corrected an error in his
registration.
--
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
- Original Message -
From: Leon D. Zetekoff,
Does this mean we can all do this now?
Who is the wisp?
George
Mike Hammett wrote:
On one of the wireless lists someone stated that the FCC approved a site
registration with the XR3's FCC ID. They even corrected an error in his
registration.
--
Mike Hammett
Intelligent
You're welcome. First I don't want to jeopardize my FCC Commercial and
Amateur licenses because of something stupid. And second, I'm deep in
the middle of all this trying to negotiate with FSS' and have been in
talks with higher ups at the WTB over the last few months.
Leon
* ralph wrote, On
Why does it matter who it is? Fill out the FCC online registration
forms, get your 3650 license using the XR3 specs and description and
away you go.
Travis
Microserv
George Rogato wrote:
Does this mean we can all do this now?
Who is the wisp?
George
Mike Hammett wrote:
On one
* Travis Johnson wrote, On 6/4/2008 10:07 AM:
Why does it matter who it is? Fill out the FCC online registration
forms, get your 3650 license using the XR3 specs and description and
away you go.
Because it is wrong and not legal. We already have the license. The 3650
solution the FCC
Thanks for explaining that Travis.
I asked Jack Unger to look into this recently.
There was a post somewhere else recently about 3650 use and I forwarded
it to Jack to find out from the FCC if in fact it is the way the post read.
I'd like to hear Jack's opinion based on what he has found out
Mike,
I realize your just starting out and don't have a lot of money, but
260.00 for a card added to a multiport pord or system is next to nothing
compared to the benefit of having one more clean channel to work with.
George
Mike Hammett wrote:
Yeah, I think I'm going to be passing on 3650
George...you can not plug-n-play components as I said earlier. It has to
be certified as a system that makes use of a contention based protocol.
Leon
* George Rogato wrote, On 6/4/2008 11:22 AM:
Thanks for explaining that Travis.
I asked Jack Unger to look into this recently.
There was a
WISPA had a tele conference with the FCC about plug n playin certified
components last year.
It was a consideration of ours to try to see what needs to be done so
that we can legally build on the fly systems that were made up of
certified components.
We need to go back to the FCC and get that
HI George...can't be done with 3650 at least not now. There's not going
to be any change in the Feds IMHO. It's lucky we got what we have now
and it's hard enough to try and deploy as well due to the grandfathered
FSS'.
Leon
* George Rogato wrote, On 6/4/2008 12:03 PM:
WISPA had a tele
I had a feeling this would unleash a can of worms.
I'm the one who registered the locations. My first location (my office
rooftop) was done purely as an academic exercise to see what exactly was
required. I had hoped the FCC would come back and say, you need to do
X Y and Z before this is
I've been in contact with UBNT for some time.The modular approval
specifies the antenna to be used, and it is, according to both the FCC (
email from the FCC in response to an inquiry ) and UBNT entirely legal to
use with any OS that properly operates the card.
So, yes you can grow your
Thanks for the clarification on the cards. Any hints on getting someone
at UBNT to talk to you? My emails, private forum messages, etc. have
been ignored. I understand they are completely buried with NS2 / NS5
demand, but come on... :)
Randy
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've been in contact
Does that apply to part 15 modular approval as well for SR2/SR5/XR2/XR5?
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 12:33 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations (was: Rapid Link Launches WiMax)
I've been in
Travis,
Yes the base station costs are more. But you are also talking about carrier
class systems that not only, improve your valuation as an operator, but also
offer more scalablity and more bits per hertz. Not to mention, NLOS
performance, larger LOS cell sizes, frequency reuse, and higher
Congrats MARLON!
Jeff Booher
Channel Manager, North America
www.apertonet.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
24/7: 206-455-4950
This email may contain material that is confidential, privileged and/or work
product for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or
I would argue that this issue would be something best under the jurisdiction
of Federal Courts, not the FCC or States.
Any service that is provided to a consumer for use in Multiple States, makes
it overly encumbersome for the provider or consumer to have to address it
legally with MULTIPLE
John,
The Link provided is for a 500mw amp extender. 500mw with small Omni is not
illegal power levels in 2.4Ghz unlicensed.
Lucor very wel could have gotten that certified as a combination.
If they had a 1 watt model, well that would be different.
But Take note that it is not illegal to make
reform contracts when the contracts try to impose penalties
I'd also argue, that the opposite sometimes also occurs. That the Courts
will often dismiss judgements when Penalties are not clearly defined in a
contract upfront.
If one can clearly define upfront, a penalty, that would
When we bought some 1W amps for export to a non-FCC country, Hyperlink made
us sign a military/export use only form and fax it back to them.
It was not just a buy online thing.
- Original Message -
From: Tom DeReggi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent:
kinking cat 5 doesn't hurt anything unless you mess up the insulation
kinking clearly can damage CAT5 cable.
Anytime a wire exceeds its allowable bending radius, it breaks or partially
breaks, which can reduce conductivity at that weak point, and possibly even
create an open.
The most common
* Randy Cosby wrote, On 6/4/2008 12:36 PM:
Thanks for the clarification on the cards. Any hints on getting someone
at UBNT to talk to you? My emails, private forum messages, etc. have
been ignored. I understand they are completely buried with NS2 / NS5
demand, but come on... :)
As
My question is
Are they really worried about the usage? Is it really hurting them?
Or are they just jumping on the bandwagon, crying wolf, to get a peice of
the action, to find a reason to increase revenues?
Why turn opportunity away?
Its so much easier to just increase the price, than it
Just be clear, there is a big difference between doing 3650, and doing 3650
with WiMax.
I'd argue, it could be more advantageous to an operator with non-Wimax, just
because the 50mhz of available spectrum they would have available to them, if
they used the contention based rules.
Although
Regardless, Are 3650 registrations being allowed for modular components?
They might be using the experiemental license?
Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
- Original Message -
From: Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List
I'm not sure it's actually hurting them. Moreso that they're trying to deal
with the fact that falling revenue has been met with increased usage. The
all-you-can-eat bandwidth usage model is 500% different today than it was 5
years ago. The pressure to lower pricing to the subscribers while at
Judging by the comments on the list it sounds like a few members have
managed to reach the inner sanctum of Ubiquiti with regard to 3650 Mhz
support, specifically their XR3 card. I'd sure appreciate hearing whom
you've managed to reach over there. I like others have had no luck
getting my
* Tom DeReggi wrote, On 6/4/2008 2:38 PM:
Just be clear, there is a big difference between doing 3650, and doing 3650
with WiMax.
Tom I beg to differ. 3650 rules were written without any WiMax
reference. The key is contention protocol must be used in the restricted
25 mHz and the
* Tom DeReggi wrote, On 6/4/2008 2:40 PM:
Regardless, Are 3650 registrations being allowed for modular
components?
They might be using the experiemental license?
As far as I know from my contacts you need a full system certified. You
just can't register a single unit of a certified system.
Yes.
insert witty tagline here
- Original Message -
From: Doug Ratcliffe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 9:44 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations (was: Rapid Link Launches WiMax)
Approval by getting your FCC cert ID means it qualifies, period.
And yes, 802.11 is contention based but the FCC refuses to allow 802.11 to
be approved for the full spectrum until some 802.something standard is
finalized.
insert witty tagline here
-
It doesn't have to have a contention based protocol for use in the lower
half of the spectrum. What do you think WiMax is?
--
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
- Original Message -
From: Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA
Amen. I don't have a lot of time, nor a boat load of money, but if joining
WISPA is what I need to do to push that forward, I'll do it tomorrow.
--
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
- Original Message -
From: George Rogato [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have been working on this a little bit with Jack and some other
people, and we had a few questions submitted directly to the FCC, to
verify some of these exact questions, here are there responses:
*Inquiry:*
I am trying to fully understand the procedures for getting a radio
device certified
On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, Kyle Duren wrote:
*Response: *
Since the device is already certified, it can be installed into a
final basestation without further approval, as long as the FCCID
label is attached on the outside of the final product. However, if
your company wishes to obtain it's own FCC
44 matches
Mail list logo
