Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

2008-08-05 Thread reader
Comments inline



insert witty tagline here

- Original Message - 
From: Doug Ratcliffe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 7:46 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction


 But when 802.11 became easy it invited all the people to use it who
 thought that 10 watt amps were a good idea too.

I don't get your point here.You're talking about licensed vs 
unlicensed...

 Doesn't the more amateur
 HAM users invite those who are less experienced to just crank up the power
 rather than look at the engineering of their systems?  Isn't removing a
 barrier to broadcasting as a HAM (the CW requirement) simply inviting less
 experienced, less responsible users into the band?

What does learning CW have to do with experienced and knowledgeable?I 
studied to get my HAM license all the way back in the early 70's.   I dug 
into the books and burned the mindnight oil and spent my weekends studying 
the Handbook and learning the bands and rules and all that stuff.   But I 
could no more learn to send or understand CW than I could sprout wings and 
fly.   I can't.  I am not the only one.   Many have struggled and given up, 
who were both responsible and very well educated and knowledgeable, because 
of that physical incapacity.   Given that I was in grade school back then, I 
am surprised at my lifelong continued interest.   The question is, what will 
replace that wow cool factor?   I can communicate farther and faster and 
do more than most, over my internet service.  There's no real magic left in 
that regard.  The only thing that interests me is now a sense of need of 
community service.

I recently looked over a practice test and it appears to me I could pass it 
even today without preparation.   I understand the historical value of CW, 
but exactly what purpose does it serve today?It would be like being 
required to be proficient in telegraphy in order to be licensed to use a fax 
machine.

I, too, have noticed a serious decline in the activity of our local ham 
club...at least I see nothing public anymore.   The swapmeets used to be so 
big they clogged up several city blocks and huge parking lots.   I don't 
know if they even have any, anymore.   I haven't seen one in years.  I 
haven't seen a public announcment, sign, event, booth, display, or PR effort 
from them in at least 15 years.

But the dropping of the code requirement renewed my interest in getting my 
license and when I have time, I may very well pursue it again.  I'm not sure 
if I got together with my local club, if I'd be learning or educating, but 
one thing does come to mind, that the purpose for which they exist is NOT 
out of style, nor is it useless.   But could use some updating.  I am going 
to go and offer to coordinate with thier field days and offer them my 
assistance in creating yet another means of communication in the event of a 
disaster.


 Like look at the CB world, how many times have you seen someone with a
 massive RF amp out there broadcasting over everyone else?

I used CB radios for years, too.   And the vast majority of CB users were 
nothing like that.  I lived where we had no phones, and cell phones were not 
yet invented.   CB's were our mode of communication for chat, for emergency, 
for whatever.   And for the most part, all but one person I knew was 
legal.   And he did a lot of other not legal stuff, too.I think most 
people would resent being lumped in with him.   Even the local Ham buff was 
an avid CB'er.








WISPA Wants You! Join today!
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/


Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

2008-08-05 Thread Blake Bowers
Removing  a barrier is the only hope that HAM radio
has.

Come on, in the 50's 60's, 70's CW  was still cool, and
we could introduce youth into talking to far away places
on HF.

Now, with technology being what it is, the Internet has
removed all kewlness of HF.  Look at the average age
of HAMS, it says it all.

Don't take your organs to heaven,
heaven knows we need them down here!
Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today.

- Original Message - 
From: Doug Ratcliffe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 9:46 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction


 But when 802.11 became easy it invited all the people to use it who
 thought that 10 watt amps were a good idea too.  Doesn't the more amateur
 HAM users invite those who are less experienced to just crank up the power
 rather than look at the engineering of their systems?  Isn't removing a
 barrier to broadcasting as a HAM (the CW requirement) simply inviting less
 experienced, less responsible users into the band?

 Like look at the CB world, how many times have you seen someone with a
 massive RF amp out there broadcasting over everyone else?





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
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/


Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

2008-08-05 Thread Blake Bowers
The entry level code requirement and tech plus license
was created in 1991.

In 1997 there were 678,473 licensed
in 2001 there were 682,240 licensed
in 2008 there were 659,198 licensed.

Thats a decrease.

Even the FCC states that after the most recent license
changes eliminating the CW requirement altogether, they
have not seen a large increase in licenses, but they have
seen a big increase in UPGRADES.

I am surprised you have the sales figures from TenTec, Elecraft
and Flex-radio.  Being privately held, those figures are usually
pretty closely held.


Don't take your organs to heaven,
heaven knows we need them down here!
Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today.

- Original Message - 
From: Rick Fletcher, W7RAF [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 9:26 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction


 You make some good points, Chuck, but you are wrong about one thing:  The
 amateur ranks have been growing like mad since the archaic CW (Morse Code)
 requirement was eliminated.  Also, hams are still experimenting and
 innovating like never before as is demonstrated by the tremendous growth 
 of
 SDR (Software Defined Radio) amongst the ham ranks.  The Big 3 of ham 
 radio
 manufacturers (Icom, Yaesu and Kenwood) are fast losing ground to the more
 innovative ham-owned and operated companies of TenTec, Elecraft and
 Flex-Radio.  These same ham-owned companies are selling a lot of gear to 
 the
 military, so they must be on to something.

 Hams are pushing the envelope in satellite and microwave comms as well as
 digital communications methods which allow communications to occur at 
 levels
 30dB below the noise floor.

 Anyone who thinks we're a dying breed and parasites with frequency
 allocations that should be reassigned to folks who can make better use of
 it knows absolutely nothing about what's really happening in ham radio
 today.  Of course, people talking strongly about things they don't
 understand is very common, particularly in election years.

 Rick, W7RAF
 Extra Class and 1st Class Radiotelephone





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
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/


Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

2008-08-05 Thread Jack Unger
That's a rather insignificant decrease of 2.8%. I'd say that's pretty 
good over an 11-year period during which Internet use increased greatly. 
A 2.8% decrease proves nothing and even if it did, anyone who thinks 
that a 2.8% change gives one group new spectrum rights over a group that 
already has spectrum rights in only fooling themselves. I'd say it's 
time to get back to work gentlemen...

Blake Bowers wrote:
 The entry level code requirement and tech plus license
 was created in 1991.

 In 1997 there were 678,473 licensed
 in 2001 there were 682,240 licensed
 in 2008 there were 659,198 licensed.

 Thats a decrease.

 Even the FCC states that after the most recent license
 changes eliminating the CW requirement altogether, they
 have not seen a large increase in licenses, but they have
 seen a big increase in UPGRADES.

 I am surprised you have the sales figures from TenTec, Elecraft
 and Flex-radio.  Being privately held, those figures are usually
 pretty closely held.


 Don't take your organs to heaven,
 heaven knows we need them down here!
 Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today.

 - Original Message - 
 From: Rick Fletcher, W7RAF [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 9:26 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction


   
 You make some good points, Chuck, but you are wrong about one thing:  The
 amateur ranks have been growing like mad since the archaic CW (Morse Code)
 requirement was eliminated.  Also, hams are still experimenting and
 innovating like never before as is demonstrated by the tremendous growth 
 of
 SDR (Software Defined Radio) amongst the ham ranks.  The Big 3 of ham 
 radio
 manufacturers (Icom, Yaesu and Kenwood) are fast losing ground to the more
 innovative ham-owned and operated companies of TenTec, Elecraft and
 Flex-Radio.  These same ham-owned companies are selling a lot of gear to 
 the
 military, so they must be on to something.

 Hams are pushing the envelope in satellite and microwave comms as well as
 digital communications methods which allow communications to occur at 
 levels
 30dB below the noise floor.

 Anyone who thinks we're a dying breed and parasites with frequency
 allocations that should be reassigned to folks who can make better use of
 it knows absolutely nothing about what's really happening in ham radio
 today.  Of course, people talking strongly about things they don't
 understand is very common, particularly in election years.

 Rick, W7RAF
 Extra Class and 1st Class Radiotelephone

 



 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 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/



   

-- 
Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993
Cisco Press Author - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs
Vendor-Neutral Wireless Design-Training-Troubleshooting-Consulting
FCC License # PG-12-25133 Profile http://www.linkedin.com/in/jackunger
Phone 818-227-4220  Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
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/


Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

2008-08-05 Thread Lance Jahnke
It comes down to this.. Amateur Radio operators are licensed and Part 15 
users are not.  If you want to guarantee yourself minimal interference, then 
you must use the licensed part of the RF spectrum. I do believe that hams 
and part 15's can coexist with a little communication and the sharing of 
info.  As far as being experienced and responsible, I would say that the Ham 
is licensed and therefore is the only user of 900MHz that has a requirement 
to be knowledgeable and responsible for his/her operating activities. 
Everyone else is unlicensed and therefore the FCC has no way of mandating 
any educational requirments.  This is not to say they are not educated and 
knowledgable, just no way of mandating that.

Good Basic Radio Practices is a start..   Proper Electrical Ground, 
Proper RF ground, Best possible SWR, High quality Radios, Bandpass 
Filters...

Lance, KB5ZFO

- Original Message - 
From: Doug Ratcliffe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 9:46 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction


 But when 802.11 became easy it invited all the people to use it who
 thought that 10 watt amps were a good idea too.  Doesn't the more amateur
 HAM users invite those who are less experienced to just crank up the power
 rather than look at the engineering of their systems?  Isn't removing a
 barrier to broadcasting as a HAM (the CW requirement) simply inviting less
 experienced, less responsible users into the band?

 Like look at the CB world, how many times have you seen someone with a
 massive RF amp out there broadcasting over everyone else?

 - Original Message - 
 From: Rick Fletcher, W7RAF [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 10:26 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction


 You make some good points, Chuck, but you are wrong about one thing:  The
 amateur ranks have been growing like mad since the archaic CW (Morse 
 Code)
 requirement was eliminated.  Also, hams are still experimenting and
 innovating like never before as is demonstrated by the tremendous growth
 of
 SDR (Software Defined Radio) amongst the ham ranks.  The Big 3 of ham
 radio
 manufacturers (Icom, Yaesu and Kenwood) are fast losing ground to the 
 more
 innovative ham-owned and operated companies of TenTec, Elecraft and
 Flex-Radio.  These same ham-owned companies are selling a lot of gear to
 the
 military, so they must be on to something.

 Hams are pushing the envelope in satellite and microwave comms as well as
 digital communications methods which allow communications to occur at
 levels
 30dB below the noise floor.

 Anyone who thinks we're a dying breed and parasites with frequency
 allocations that should be reassigned to folks who can make better use 
 of
 it knows absolutely nothing about what's really happening in ham radio
 today.  Of course, people talking strongly about things they don't
 understand is very common, particularly in election years.

 Rick, W7RAF
 Extra Class and 1st Class Radiotelephone


 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Chuck McCown
 Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 5:32 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

 A KA has been a ham longer than a KD.
 (assuming it is not a vanity call sign)
 Long time hams have more passion for the subject.

 But really, I agree with almost everything said.  Ham really has been
 dying
 for a very long time.
 I just get bent when some WISPs take the entitlement attitude towards ham
 freqs.
 There are lots of PhDs that work in electrodynamics that are hams and
 merge
 their work world with their hobby world.

 Amateur Radio is Amateur like the Olympics used to be Amateur.
 If anything they were the most professional people in the industry.

 I would hire a hobbiest ham over some guy with a certificate any day of
 the
 week.

 - Original Message - 
 From: Blake Bowers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:58 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction


 Chuck - why would that make a bit of difference?  KD versus KA?



 
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 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 Wants You! Join today!
 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/

Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

2008-08-05 Thread Mike Hammett
Someone had mentioned on another list that ISM is above part 97 in 900 MHz.


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


- Original Message - 
From: Jerry Richardson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Motorola 
Canopy User Group [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 2:44 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Court Injunction




 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 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 Wants You! Join today!
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/


Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

2008-08-05 Thread Victoria Proffer
I have had to deal with a similar situation.  I talked to the guy and told
him that he was causing interference in our network. I gave him a free
internet account and he only uses his radio one hour a week, with prior
notice.

On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 9:27 AM, Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 That's a rather insignificant decrease of 2.8%. I'd say that's pretty
 good over an 11-year period during which Internet use increased greatly.
 A 2.8% decrease proves nothing and even if it did, anyone who thinks
 that a 2.8% change gives one group new spectrum rights over a group that
 already has spectrum rights in only fooling themselves. I'd say it's
 time to get back to work gentlemen...

 Blake Bowers wrote:
  The entry level code requirement and tech plus license
  was created in 1991.
 
  In 1997 there were 678,473 licensed
  in 2001 there were 682,240 licensed
  in 2008 there were 659,198 licensed.
 
  Thats a decrease.
 
  Even the FCC states that after the most recent license
  changes eliminating the CW requirement altogether, they
  have not seen a large increase in licenses, but they have
  seen a big increase in UPGRADES.
 
  I am surprised you have the sales figures from TenTec, Elecraft
  and Flex-radio.  Being privately held, those figures are usually
  pretty closely held.
 
 
  Don't take your organs to heaven,
  heaven knows we need them down here!
  Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today.
 
  - Original Message -
  From: Rick Fletcher, W7RAF [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
  Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 9:26 PM
  Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction
 
 
 
  You make some good points, Chuck, but you are wrong about one thing:
  The
  amateur ranks have been growing like mad since the archaic CW (Morse
 Code)
  requirement was eliminated.  Also, hams are still experimenting and
  innovating like never before as is demonstrated by the tremendous growth
  of
  SDR (Software Defined Radio) amongst the ham ranks.  The Big 3 of ham
  radio
  manufacturers (Icom, Yaesu and Kenwood) are fast losing ground to the
 more
  innovative ham-owned and operated companies of TenTec, Elecraft and
  Flex-Radio.  These same ham-owned companies are selling a lot of gear to
  the
  military, so they must be on to something.
 
  Hams are pushing the envelope in satellite and microwave comms as well
 as
  digital communications methods which allow communications to occur at
  levels
  30dB below the noise floor.
 
  Anyone who thinks we're a dying breed and parasites with frequency
  allocations that should be reassigned to folks who can make better use
 of
  it knows absolutely nothing about what's really happening in ham radio
  today.  Of course, people talking strongly about things they don't
  understand is very common, particularly in election years.
 
  Rick, W7RAF
  Extra Class and 1st Class Radiotelephone
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  WISPA Wants You! Join today!
  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/
 
 
 
 

 --
 Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
 Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993
 Cisco Press Author - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs
 Vendor-Neutral Wireless Design-Training-Troubleshooting-Consulting
 FCC License # PG-12-25133 Profile http://www.linkedin.com/in/jackunger
 Phone 818-227-4220  Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]






 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 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/




-- 
Victoria Proffer
CEO
St. Louis Broadband
Visit us @
www.StLBroadband.com
314-974-5600



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
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/


Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

2008-08-05 Thread Larry Yunker
Jerry,

As with all good legal questions, the answer is: It Depends.

If the HAM operator is INTENTIONALLY interfering with your signal, then you
have a very good chance of maintaining a cause of action against him (IMHO).
If on the other hand, he was unaware of your signal at the time that he put
up his equipment, you have very little chance of maintaining an action.  The
iffy party is when he falls in between knowing and intentional.  If he knew
you were out there, but he didn't mean to shut you down, there is an
argument both ways as to whether he is liable.

I guess the first thing is to determine whether he knew you were operating
on the same frequency as the one on which he was planning to deploy.

Regards,
Larry Yunker
Network Consultant
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

DISCLAIMER: The above comments are solely an opinion and should not be
construed to be legal advice.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jerry Richardson
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:45 PM
To: WISPA General List; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Motorola Canopy User Group
Subject: [WISPA] Court Injunction

Is it possible to get an injunction against a HAM if he moved to a
900MHz frequency as is causing interference that would disrupt our
ability to do business? I know he has a license and I don't however
there must be some precedent that allows for commercial venture versus
amateur radio.
 
Any ideas?
 
 
Jerry Richardson
VP Operations
925-260-4119
P Please consider the environment before printing this email
 




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
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/


Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

2008-08-05 Thread Jack Unger
Victoria,

That sounds like an excellent solution. I would hope that all WISPs 
would follow your example.

jack

Victoria Proffer wrote:
 I have had to deal with a similar situation.  I talked to the guy and told
 him that he was causing interference in our network. I gave him a free
 internet account and he only uses his radio one hour a week, with prior
 notice.

 On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 9:27 AM, Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

   
 That's a rather insignificant decrease of 2.8%. I'd say that's pretty
 good over an 11-year period during which Internet use increased greatly.
 A 2.8% decrease proves nothing and even if it did, anyone who thinks
 that a 2.8% change gives one group new spectrum rights over a group that
 already has spectrum rights in only fooling themselves. I'd say it's
 time to get back to work gentlemen...

 Blake Bowers wrote:
 
 The entry level code requirement and tech plus license
 was created in 1991.

 In 1997 there were 678,473 licensed
 in 2001 there were 682,240 licensed
 in 2008 there were 659,198 licensed.

 Thats a decrease.

 Even the FCC states that after the most recent license
 changes eliminating the CW requirement altogether, they
 have not seen a large increase in licenses, but they have
 seen a big increase in UPGRADES.

 I am surprised you have the sales figures from TenTec, Elecraft
 and Flex-radio.  Being privately held, those figures are usually
 pretty closely held.


 Don't take your organs to heaven,
 heaven knows we need them down here!
 Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today.

 - Original Message -
 From: Rick Fletcher, W7RAF [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 9:26 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction



   
 You make some good points, Chuck, but you are wrong about one thing:
 
  The
 
 amateur ranks have been growing like mad since the archaic CW (Morse
 
 Code)
 
 requirement was eliminated.  Also, hams are still experimenting and
 innovating like never before as is demonstrated by the tremendous growth
 of
 SDR (Software Defined Radio) amongst the ham ranks.  The Big 3 of ham
 radio
 manufacturers (Icom, Yaesu and Kenwood) are fast losing ground to the
 
 more
 
 innovative ham-owned and operated companies of TenTec, Elecraft and
 Flex-Radio.  These same ham-owned companies are selling a lot of gear to
 the
 military, so they must be on to something.

 Hams are pushing the envelope in satellite and microwave comms as well
 
 as
 
 digital communications methods which allow communications to occur at
 levels
 30dB below the noise floor.

 Anyone who thinks we're a dying breed and parasites with frequency
 allocations that should be reassigned to folks who can make better use
 
 of
 
 it knows absolutely nothing about what's really happening in ham radio
 today.  Of course, people talking strongly about things they don't
 understand is very common, particularly in election years.

 Rick, W7RAF
 Extra Class and 1st Class Radiotelephone


 


   
 
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 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/




   
 --
 Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
 Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993
 Cisco Press Author - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs
 Vendor-Neutral Wireless Design-Training-Troubleshooting-Consulting
 FCC License # PG-12-25133 Profile http://www.linkedin.com/in/jackunger
 Phone 818-227-4220  Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]






 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 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/

 



   

-- 
Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993
Cisco Press Author - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs
Vendor-Neutral Wireless Design-Training-Troubleshooting-Consulting
FCC License # PG-12-25133 Profile http://www.linkedin.com/in/jackunger
Phone 818-227-4220  Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

Archives: 

Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

2008-08-05 Thread Jerry Richardson
I determined the best course of action is to upgrade the antennas and
re-assign frequencies customer AP re-assignments.

900 is getting crowded and eventually I will likely have to abandon the
frequency. I'm not going to make a big stink about this one only to have
to deal with it again in six months or a year.

Life's too short.
 
__ 
Jerry Richardson 
airCloud Communications
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Larry Yunker
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 8:04 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

Jerry,

As with all good legal questions, the answer is: It Depends.

If the HAM operator is INTENTIONALLY interfering with your signal, then
you
have a very good chance of maintaining a cause of action against him
(IMHO).
If on the other hand, he was unaware of your signal at the time that he
put
up his equipment, you have very little chance of maintaining an action.
The
iffy party is when he falls in between knowing and intentional.  If he
knew
you were out there, but he didn't mean to shut you down, there is an
argument both ways as to whether he is liable.

I guess the first thing is to determine whether he knew you were
operating
on the same frequency as the one on which he was planning to deploy.

Regards,
Larry Yunker
Network Consultant
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

DISCLAIMER: The above comments are solely an opinion and should not be
construed to be legal advice.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jerry Richardson
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:45 PM
To: WISPA General List; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Motorola Canopy User Group
Subject: [WISPA] Court Injunction

Is it possible to get an injunction against a HAM if he moved to a
900MHz frequency as is causing interference that would disrupt our
ability to do business? I know he has a license and I don't however
there must be some precedent that allows for commercial venture versus
amateur radio.
 
Any ideas?
 
 
Jerry Richardson
VP Operations
925-260-4119
P Please consider the environment before printing this email
 





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
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 Wants You! Join today!
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/


Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

2008-08-05 Thread Tim Kerns
Jerry,

From where you are located, I believe you are being hit by a new repeater on 
Mt Diablo. It seems the HAMs were using another freq and it was interfering 
with military operations. They kept reducing power til it was down to 
nothing. They then decided to use 900 mhz, it is only going to get worse as 
they intend to add more AMP to it. It will most likely take out all 900 in 
the Central Valley, your area and the Bay Area. I wonder what all the power 
co's meters that are on 900 also will do. this is not going to be a 
pleasant thing for HAM's... right or wrong.

- Original Message 
From: Jerry Richardson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 8:16 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction


I determined the best course of action is to upgrade the antennas and
 re-assign frequencies customer AP re-assignments.

 900 is getting crowded and eventually I will likely have to abandon the
 frequency. I'm not going to make a big stink about this one only to have
 to deal with it again in six months or a year.

 Life's too short.

 __
 Jerry Richardson
 airCloud Communications
 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Larry Yunker
 Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 8:04 AM
 To: 'WISPA General List'
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

 Jerry,

 As with all good legal questions, the answer is: It Depends.

 If the HAM operator is INTENTIONALLY interfering with your signal, then
 you
 have a very good chance of maintaining a cause of action against him
 (IMHO).
 If on the other hand, he was unaware of your signal at the time that he
 put
 up his equipment, you have very little chance of maintaining an action.
 The
 iffy party is when he falls in between knowing and intentional.  If he
 knew
 you were out there, but he didn't mean to shut you down, there is an
 argument both ways as to whether he is liable.

 I guess the first thing is to determine whether he knew you were
 operating
 on the same frequency as the one on which he was planning to deploy.

 Regards,
 Larry Yunker
 Network Consultant
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 DISCLAIMER: The above comments are solely an opinion and should not be
 construed to be legal advice.

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Jerry Richardson
 Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:45 PM
 To: WISPA General List; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Motorola Canopy User Group
 Subject: [WISPA] Court Injunction

 Is it possible to get an injunction against a HAM if he moved to a
 900MHz frequency as is causing interference that would disrupt our
 ability to do business? I know he has a license and I don't however
 there must be some precedent that allows for commercial venture versus
 amateur radio.

 Any ideas?


 Jerry Richardson
 VP Operations
 925-260-4119
 P Please consider the environment before printing this email




 
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 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 Wants You! Join today!
 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 Wants You! Join today!
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/


Re: [WISPA] was -- Court Injunction --- now ham radio

2008-08-05 Thread Brian Webster
Having been in the commercial wireless industry since 1990 and a ham as
well, here are my perspectives on the state of ham radio today:

There has always been pressure on the hams for their spectrum, and always
will be as long as money is involved.

A decline in hamfests should not be the only way to gauge activity, EBay and
on line retailing has replaced the need for many hams to go to a hamfest. In
the past they were great because that was one of the few places you could
find specialty ham equipment. The information age has changed that.

The growth is not what one might expect because there are a lot of older
licensees and attrition by death is still high, yet the numbers are holding,
so that tells you they are being replaced at the same rate.

Ham radio is doing a lot for innovation, you just need to dig around to find
the information (www.arrl.org). Innovation does not always mean mainstream
(yet). Much of this innovation involves IP based technology and WISP's could
be a part of this in the proper context. Here are just a few cool things
hams are currently doing:

HF email client and mail system worldwide www.winlink.org that can be 
used
on HF, VHF packet and telnet. Nice way to get email where nobody else can
connect.
Radio/VOIP www.irlp.net and www.echolink.org, this links radios systems 
and
computer users worldwide to establish voice networks over large areas.
Automatic Vehicle Location (with web mapping), tracking, tactical 
mapping
and weather data systems, www.aprs.org, www.findu.com.
Amateur Television (ATV) both analog and digital http://www.hamtv.com/,
http://www.von-info.ch/hb9afo/datv_e.htm.
Satellite communications on their own birds
http://www.amsat.org/amsat-new/index.php
Digital data over HF using computer sound cards as DSP processors, 
PSK31 is
one mode and uses only 60KHz bandwidth! That's KHz, not MHz
http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/regulations/techchar/PSK31.html
Digital voice over HF http://www.n1su.com/fdmdv/
Software defined radio
http://wedothatradio.wordpress.com/category/software-defined-radio-sdr/

These are but just a few of the technologies in ham radio today. A WISP
could benefit from being a ham in many ways. One that comes to mind, is the
ability to use some of the international channels (legally) in current
wireless gear for testing and evaluation of radios and technology. While you
can't use this for commercial use in your WISP business, you can use the
extra spectrum to set up some links and try things before trying to put
something into production. This allows space to work without disrupting your
current operations or wasting valuable spectrum. You of course need to get
licensed, but that is easy these days.

Ham radio is not dying and still provides a valuable contribution to
society. Of course there is always the public safety communication benefits
that everyone seems to remember but that is only a part of amateur radio.




Thank You,
Brian Webster N2KGC

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Blake Bowers
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 9:33 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction


Removing  a barrier is the only hope that HAM radio
has.

Come on, in the 50's 60's, 70's CW  was still cool, and
we could introduce youth into talking to far away places
on HF.

Now, with technology being what it is, the Internet has
removed all kewlness of HF.  Look at the average age
of HAMS, it says it all.

Don't take your organs to heaven,
heaven knows we need them down here!
Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today.

- Original Message -
From: Doug Ratcliffe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 9:46 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction


 But when 802.11 became easy it invited all the people to use it who
 thought that 10 watt amps were a good idea too.  Doesn't the more amateur
 HAM users invite those who are less experienced to just crank up the power
 rather than look at the engineering of their systems?  Isn't removing a
 barrier to broadcasting as a HAM (the CW requirement) simply inviting less
 experienced, less responsible users into the band?

 Like look at the CB world, how many times have you seen someone with a
 massive RF amp out there broadcasting over everyone else?






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
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 Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

2008-08-05 Thread Blake Bowers
Jack,

Don't get me wrong - I am not advocating any
relinquishing of spectrum from HAM use.  I will
say that if we don't get more into the hobby, there
will be more and more pressure for the FCC to
reallocate spectrum, as they have in the past.

It may seem like a small drop, but when you figure
that HAM licenses are 10 year licenses, any drop
is significant.


Don't take your organs to heaven,
heaven knows we need them down here!
Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today.

- Original Message - 
From: Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 9:27 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction


 That's a rather insignificant decrease of 2.8%. I'd say that's pretty
 good over an 11-year period during which Internet use increased greatly.
 A 2.8% decrease proves nothing and even if it did, anyone who thinks
 that a 2.8% change gives one group new spectrum rights over a group that
 already has spectrum rights in only fooling themselves. I'd say it's
 time to get back to work gentlemen...

 Blake Bowers wrote:
 The entry level code requirement and tech plus license
 was created in 1991.

 In 1997 there were 678,473 licensed
 in 2001 there were 682,240 licensed
 in 2008 there were 659,198 licensed.

 Thats a decrease.

 Even the FCC states that after the most recent license
 changes eliminating the CW requirement altogether, they
 have not seen a large increase in licenses, but they have
 seen a big increase in UPGRADES.

 I am surprised you have the sales figures from TenTec, Elecraft
 and Flex-radio.  Being privately held, those figures are usually
 pretty closely held.


 Don't take your organs to heaven,
 heaven knows we need them down here!
 Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today.

 - Original Message - 
 From: Rick Fletcher, W7RAF [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 9:26 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction



 You make some good points, Chuck, but you are wrong about one thing: 
 The
 amateur ranks have been growing like mad since the archaic CW (Morse 
 Code)
 requirement was eliminated.  Also, hams are still experimenting and
 innovating like never before as is demonstrated by the tremendous growth
 of
 SDR (Software Defined Radio) amongst the ham ranks.  The Big 3 of ham
 radio
 manufacturers (Icom, Yaesu and Kenwood) are fast losing ground to the 
 more
 innovative ham-owned and operated companies of TenTec, Elecraft and
 Flex-Radio.  These same ham-owned companies are selling a lot of gear to
 the
 military, so they must be on to something.

 Hams are pushing the envelope in satellite and microwave comms as well 
 as
 digital communications methods which allow communications to occur at
 levels
 30dB below the noise floor.

 Anyone who thinks we're a dying breed and parasites with frequency
 allocations that should be reassigned to folks who can make better use 
 of
 it knows absolutely nothing about what's really happening in ham radio
 today.  Of course, people talking strongly about things they don't
 understand is very common, particularly in election years.

 Rick, W7RAF
 Extra Class and 1st Class Radiotelephone





 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 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/





 -- 
 Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
 Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993
 Cisco Press Author - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs
 Vendor-Neutral Wireless Design-Training-Troubleshooting-Consulting
 FCC License # PG-12-25133 Profile http://www.linkedin.com/in/jackunger
 Phone 818-227-4220  Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]





 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 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 Wants You! Join today!
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] New in Box: 5.2 Adv Canopy AP, 5.2 Advantage Cyclone Omni AP

2008-08-05 Thread John McDowell
Best offer.

Thanks

-- 
John M. McDowell
Boonlink Communications
307 Grand Ave NW
Fort Payne, AL 35967
256.844.9932
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.boonlink.com






This message contains information which may be confidential and privileged.
Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive for the addressee),
you may not use, copy, re-transmit, or disclose to anyone the message or any
information contained in the message. If you have received the message in
error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED], and
delete the message. E-mail communication is highly susceptible to spoofing,
spamming, and other tampering, some of which may be harmful to your
computer. If you are concerned about the authenticity of the message or the
source, please contact the sender directly.



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
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/


Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

2008-08-05 Thread Jerry Richardson
They already added the bigger amp. They worked with me by trying to move
to 919 however it's too noisy for their purposes so they will be moving
back to 910. This will affect 906 and 915. 924 is virtually unusable so
things will be interesting.

I was just wondering if there was any legal precedence. Since there is
not, and I am not interested in trying to set one, I'll work around it.

Fortunately we are not completely dependent on 900. We'll upgrade the
antennas, re-assign freq's as best we can, raise the minimum signal
level, and move weaker users to another band so I'm not completely
hosed. It's just a PITA and costly. 
 
__ 
Jerry Richardson 
airCloud Communications

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tim Kerns
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 8:31 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

Jerry,

From where you are located, I believe you are being hit by a new
repeater on 
Mt Diablo. It seems the HAMs were using another freq and it was
interfering 
with military operations. They kept reducing power til it was down to 
nothing. They then decided to use 900 mhz, it is only going to get worse
as 
they intend to add more AMP to it. It will most likely take out all 900
in 
the Central Valley, your area and the Bay Area. I wonder what all the
power 
co's meters that are on 900 also will do. this is not going to be a 
pleasant thing for HAM's... right or wrong.

- Original Message 
From: Jerry Richardson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 8:16 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction


I determined the best course of action is to upgrade the antennas and
 re-assign frequencies customer AP re-assignments.

 900 is getting crowded and eventually I will likely have to abandon
the
 frequency. I'm not going to make a big stink about this one only to
have
 to deal with it again in six months or a year.

 Life's too short.

 __
 Jerry Richardson
 airCloud Communications
 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
 Behalf Of Larry Yunker
 Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 8:04 AM
 To: 'WISPA General List'
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

 Jerry,

 As with all good legal questions, the answer is: It Depends.

 If the HAM operator is INTENTIONALLY interfering with your signal,
then
 you
 have a very good chance of maintaining a cause of action against him
 (IMHO).
 If on the other hand, he was unaware of your signal at the time that
he
 put
 up his equipment, you have very little chance of maintaining an
action.
 The
 iffy party is when he falls in between knowing and intentional.  If he
 knew
 you were out there, but he didn't mean to shut you down, there is an
 argument both ways as to whether he is liable.

 I guess the first thing is to determine whether he knew you were
 operating
 on the same frequency as the one on which he was planning to deploy.

 Regards,
 Larry Yunker
 Network Consultant
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 DISCLAIMER: The above comments are solely an opinion and should not be
 construed to be legal advice.

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
 Behalf Of Jerry Richardson
 Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:45 PM
 To: WISPA General List; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Motorola Canopy User Group
 Subject: [WISPA] Court Injunction

 Is it possible to get an injunction against a HAM if he moved to a
 900MHz frequency as is causing interference that would disrupt our
 ability to do business? I know he has a license and I don't however
 there must be some precedent that allows for commercial venture versus
 amateur radio.

 Any ideas?


 Jerry Richardson
 VP Operations
 925-260-4119
 P Please consider the environment before printing this email






 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 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 Wants You! Join today!
 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 Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:

[WISPA] MTI 120 12dB Vs Canopy Integrated

2008-08-05 Thread Jerry Richardson
Can anyone comment on the potential performance increase of the MTI 120*
12.5dB H-POL sector vs the Canopy Integrated 60degree?
 
Specs are all pretty equal with the exception of the pattern. Seems with
narrower vertical I should see less ground scatter.
 
 
Jerry Richardson
VP Operations
925-260-4119
P Please consider the environment before printing this email
 
image001.jpg


WISPA Wants You! Join today!
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/

Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

2008-08-05 Thread Brian Rohrbacher
I've seen it suggested several times and maybe I missed your reply but, 
have you talked to him?

Brian

Jerry Richardson wrote:
 I determined the best course of action is to upgrade the antennas and
 re-assign frequencies customer AP re-assignments.

 900 is getting crowded and eventually I will likely have to abandon the
 frequency. I'm not going to make a big stink about this one only to have
 to deal with it again in six months or a year.

 Life's too short.
  
 __ 
 Jerry Richardson 
 airCloud Communications
 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Larry Yunker
 Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 8:04 AM
 To: 'WISPA General List'
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

 Jerry,

 As with all good legal questions, the answer is: It Depends.

 If the HAM operator is INTENTIONALLY interfering with your signal, then
 you
 have a very good chance of maintaining a cause of action against him
 (IMHO).
 If on the other hand, he was unaware of your signal at the time that he
 put
 up his equipment, you have very little chance of maintaining an action.
 The
 iffy party is when he falls in between knowing and intentional.  If he
 knew
 you were out there, but he didn't mean to shut you down, there is an
 argument both ways as to whether he is liable.

 I guess the first thing is to determine whether he knew you were
 operating
 on the same frequency as the one on which he was planning to deploy.

 Regards,
 Larry Yunker
 Network Consultant
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 DISCLAIMER: The above comments are solely an opinion and should not be
 construed to be legal advice.

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Jerry Richardson
 Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:45 PM
 To: WISPA General List; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Motorola Canopy User Group
 Subject: [WISPA] Court Injunction

 Is it possible to get an injunction against a HAM if he moved to a
 900MHz frequency as is causing interference that would disrupt our
 ability to do business? I know he has a license and I don't however
 there must be some precedent that allows for commercial venture versus
 amateur radio.
  
 Any ideas?
  
  
 Jerry Richardson
 VP Operations
 925-260-4119
 P Please consider the environment before printing this email
  



 
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 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 Wants You! Join today!
 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 Wants You! Join today!
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/


Re: [WISPA] MTI 120 12dB Vs Canopy Integrated

2008-08-05 Thread Matt Jenkins
I have both here in the shop but have never tested the two side by side. 
I can try to run some tests with them if you want, but am not sure what 
you would want tested or how.

- Matt

Jerry Richardson wrote:
 Can anyone comment on the potential performance increase of the MTI 120*
 12.5dB H-POL sector vs the Canopy Integrated 60degree?
  
 Specs are all pretty equal with the exception of the pattern. Seems with
 narrower vertical I should see less ground scatter.
  
  
 Jerry Richardson
 VP Operations
 925-260-4119
 P Please consider the environment before printing this email
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 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 Wants You! Join today!
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] Pathloss 4

2008-08-05 Thread 3-dB Networks
Anyone on the list using Pathloss 4?  Just trying to figure out if the money
is really worth it.

Thanks!

Daniel White
3-dB Networks




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
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/


Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

2008-08-05 Thread Jerry Richardson
Yes.

---
airCloud Communications
Jerry Richardson
925-260-4119
Sent Mobile 

-Original Message-
From: Brian Rohrbacher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 10:43 AM
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

I've seen it suggested several times and maybe I missed your reply but, 
have you talked to him?

Brian

Jerry Richardson wrote:
 I determined the best course of action is to upgrade the antennas and
 re-assign frequencies customer AP re-assignments.

 900 is getting crowded and eventually I will likely have to abandon the
 frequency. I'm not going to make a big stink about this one only to have
 to deal with it again in six months or a year.

 Life's too short.
  
 __ 
 Jerry Richardson 
 airCloud Communications
 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Larry Yunker
 Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 8:04 AM
 To: 'WISPA General List'
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

 Jerry,

 As with all good legal questions, the answer is: It Depends.

 If the HAM operator is INTENTIONALLY interfering with your signal, then
 you
 have a very good chance of maintaining a cause of action against him
 (IMHO).
 If on the other hand, he was unaware of your signal at the time that he
 put
 up his equipment, you have very little chance of maintaining an action.
 The
 iffy party is when he falls in between knowing and intentional.  If he
 knew
 you were out there, but he didn't mean to shut you down, there is an
 argument both ways as to whether he is liable.

 I guess the first thing is to determine whether he knew you were
 operating
 on the same frequency as the one on which he was planning to deploy.

 Regards,
 Larry Yunker
 Network Consultant
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 DISCLAIMER: The above comments are solely an opinion and should not be
 construed to be legal advice.

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Jerry Richardson
 Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:45 PM
 To: WISPA General List; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Motorola Canopy User Group
 Subject: [WISPA] Court Injunction

 Is it possible to get an injunction against a HAM if he moved to a
 900MHz frequency as is causing interference that would disrupt our
 ability to do business? I know he has a license and I don't however
 there must be some precedent that allows for commercial venture versus
 amateur radio.
  
 Any ideas?
  
  
 Jerry Richardson
 VP Operations
 925-260-4119
 P Please consider the environment before printing this email
  



 
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 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 Wants You! Join today!
 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 Wants You! Join today!
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 Wants You! Join today!
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/


Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

2008-08-05 Thread Jerry Richardson
They tried another freq but its not working out. Basically their position is 
that I am a guest, deal with it.

---
airCloud Communications
Jerry Richardson
925-260-4119
Sent Mobile 

-Original Message-
From: Brian Rohrbacher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 10:43 AM
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

I've seen it suggested several times and maybe I missed your reply but, 
have you talked to him?

Brian

Jerry Richardson wrote:
 I determined the best course of action is to upgrade the antennas and
 re-assign frequencies customer AP re-assignments.

 900 is getting crowded and eventually I will likely have to abandon the
 frequency. I'm not going to make a big stink about this one only to have
 to deal with it again in six months or a year.

 Life's too short.
  
 __ 
 Jerry Richardson 
 airCloud Communications
 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Larry Yunker
 Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 8:04 AM
 To: 'WISPA General List'
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

 Jerry,

 As with all good legal questions, the answer is: It Depends.

 If the HAM operator is INTENTIONALLY interfering with your signal, then
 you
 have a very good chance of maintaining a cause of action against him
 (IMHO).
 If on the other hand, he was unaware of your signal at the time that he
 put
 up his equipment, you have very little chance of maintaining an action.
 The
 iffy party is when he falls in between knowing and intentional.  If he
 knew
 you were out there, but he didn't mean to shut you down, there is an
 argument both ways as to whether he is liable.

 I guess the first thing is to determine whether he knew you were
 operating
 on the same frequency as the one on which he was planning to deploy.

 Regards,
 Larry Yunker
 Network Consultant
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 DISCLAIMER: The above comments are solely an opinion and should not be
 construed to be legal advice.

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Jerry Richardson
 Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:45 PM
 To: WISPA General List; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Motorola Canopy User Group
 Subject: [WISPA] Court Injunction

 Is it possible to get an injunction against a HAM if he moved to a
 900MHz frequency as is causing interference that would disrupt our
 ability to do business? I know he has a license and I don't however
 there must be some precedent that allows for commercial venture versus
 amateur radio.
  
 Any ideas?
  
  
 Jerry Richardson
 VP Operations
 925-260-4119
 P Please consider the environment before printing this email
  



 
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 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 Wants You! Join today!
 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 Wants You! Join today!
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 Wants You! Join today!
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/


Re: [WISPA] Pathloss 4

2008-08-05 Thread Charles Wu
I'll be more than happy to sell you my copy =)

Uh...think that answers the question...

-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 3-dB Networks
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 1:35 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: [WISPA] Pathloss 4

Anyone on the list using Pathloss 4?  Just trying to figure out if the money
is really worth it.

Thanks!

Daniel White
3-dB Networks




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
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 Wants You! Join today!
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/


Re: [WISPA] Pathloss 4

2008-08-05 Thread John Seaman
We use it every day for running path profiles and microwave reliability
estimates for customers... I would say we definitely got our money's
worth.   

John Seaman
Trango Broadband

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of 3-dB Networks
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 11:35 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: [WISPA] Pathloss 4

Anyone on the list using Pathloss 4?  Just trying to figure out if the
money is really worth it.

Thanks!

Daniel White
3-dB Networks





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
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 Wants You! Join today!
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/


Re: [WISPA] Pathloss 4

2008-08-05 Thread Chuck McCown - 3
I prefer RadioMobile.

- Original Message - 
From: John Seaman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 4:02 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Pathloss 4


 We use it every day for running path profiles and microwave reliability
 estimates for customers... I would say we definitely got our money's
 worth.

 John Seaman
 Trango Broadband

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of 3-dB Networks
 Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 11:35 AM
 To: 'WISPA General List'
 Subject: [WISPA] Pathloss 4

 Anyone on the list using Pathloss 4?  Just trying to figure out if the
 money is really worth it.

 Thanks!

 Daniel White
 3-dB Networks



 
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 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 Wants You! Join today!
 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 Wants You! Join today!
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/


Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

2008-08-05 Thread Rick Fletcher, W7RAF
That's like saying that giving people drivers licenses who have no
experience driving a horse team is producing bad drivers.  Some of the worst
hams I've encountered were old timers with great fists on a key.  The CW
requirement never filtered out bad operators any more than rigid testing of
one's knowledge of electronics theory.  What you describe is an issue of
character and no one's figured out how to reliably test for that that I know
of.

In any event, I fail to see how this is a ham issue since the amateur
service has a license for this band and wireless operators are forbidden to
cause interference to the licensed users of the band and must accept any
interference from the operations of licensed users.

If a wireless ISP wants to avoid this interference, they're welcome to get a
license like the big boys or figure out how to configure their systems, if
possible, to avoid the interference.  Don't make operating a wireless ISP
business on the cheap a ham problem.

Rick

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Doug Ratcliffe
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 8:47 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

But when 802.11 became easy it invited all the people to use it who 
thought that 10 watt amps were a good idea too.  Doesn't the more amateur 
HAM users invite those who are less experienced to just crank up the power 
rather than look at the engineering of their systems?  Isn't removing a 
barrier to broadcasting as a HAM (the CW requirement) simply inviting less 
experienced, less responsible users into the band?

Like look at the CB world, how many times have you seen someone with a 
massive RF amp out there broadcasting over everyone else?

- Original Message - 
From: Rick Fletcher, W7RAF [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 10:26 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction


 You make some good points, Chuck, but you are wrong about one thing:  The
 amateur ranks have been growing like mad since the archaic CW (Morse Code)
 requirement was eliminated.  Also, hams are still experimenting and
 innovating like never before as is demonstrated by the tremendous growth 
 of
 SDR (Software Defined Radio) amongst the ham ranks.  The Big 3 of ham 
 radio
 manufacturers (Icom, Yaesu and Kenwood) are fast losing ground to the more
 innovative ham-owned and operated companies of TenTec, Elecraft and
 Flex-Radio.  These same ham-owned companies are selling a lot of gear to 
 the
 military, so they must be on to something.

 Hams are pushing the envelope in satellite and microwave comms as well as
 digital communications methods which allow communications to occur at 
 levels
 30dB below the noise floor.

 Anyone who thinks we're a dying breed and parasites with frequency
 allocations that should be reassigned to folks who can make better use of
 it knows absolutely nothing about what's really happening in ham radio
 today.  Of course, people talking strongly about things they don't
 understand is very common, particularly in election years.

 Rick, W7RAF
 Extra Class and 1st Class Radiotelephone


 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Chuck McCown
 Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 5:32 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

 A KA has been a ham longer than a KD.
 (assuming it is not a vanity call sign)
 Long time hams have more passion for the subject.

 But really, I agree with almost everything said.  Ham really has been 
 dying
 for a very long time.
 I just get bent when some WISPs take the entitlement attitude towards ham
 freqs.
 There are lots of PhDs that work in electrodynamics that are hams and 
 merge
 their work world with their hobby world.

 Amateur Radio is Amateur like the Olympics used to be Amateur.
 If anything they were the most professional people in the industry.

 I would hire a hobbiest ham over some guy with a certificate any day of 
 the
 week.

 - Original Message - 
 From: Blake Bowers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:58 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction


 Chuck - why would that make a bit of difference?  KD versus KA?





 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 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 Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/




 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 

Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

2008-08-05 Thread Rick Fletcher, W7RAF
Chuck, I hope you'll consider going after that Extra now.  It's never too
late...

Rick

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Chuck McCown - 3
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 9:07 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

That is good to hear.  I was the president of my university ham club many 
years ago.  I let my license expire due to ignorance of the due date.  I 
have never bothered to renew it.  I never made extra 'cause I couldn't do 
one minute of perfect copy @ 20 wpm.  I had some mistakes.

- Original Message - 
From: Rick Fletcher, W7RAF [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 8:26 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction


 You make some good points, Chuck, but you are wrong about one thing:  The
 amateur ranks have been growing like mad since the archaic CW (Morse Code)
 requirement was eliminated.  Also, hams are still experimenting and
 innovating like never before as is demonstrated by the tremendous growth 
 of
 SDR (Software Defined Radio) amongst the ham ranks.  The Big 3 of ham 
 radio
 manufacturers (Icom, Yaesu and Kenwood) are fast losing ground to the more
 innovative ham-owned and operated companies of TenTec, Elecraft and
 Flex-Radio.  These same ham-owned companies are selling a lot of gear to 
 the
 military, so they must be on to something.

 Hams are pushing the envelope in satellite and microwave comms as well as
 digital communications methods which allow communications to occur at 
 levels
 30dB below the noise floor.

 Anyone who thinks we're a dying breed and parasites with frequency
 allocations that should be reassigned to folks who can make better use of
 it knows absolutely nothing about what's really happening in ham radio
 today.  Of course, people talking strongly about things they don't
 understand is very common, particularly in election years.

 Rick, W7RAF
 Extra Class and 1st Class Radiotelephone


 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Chuck McCown
 Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 5:32 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

 A KA has been a ham longer than a KD.
 (assuming it is not a vanity call sign)
 Long time hams have more passion for the subject.

 But really, I agree with almost everything said.  Ham really has been 
 dying
 for a very long time.
 I just get bent when some WISPs take the entitlement attitude towards ham
 freqs.
 There are lots of PhDs that work in electrodynamics that are hams and 
 merge
 their work world with their hobby world.

 Amateur Radio is Amateur like the Olympics used to be Amateur.
 If anything they were the most professional people in the industry.

 I would hire a hobbiest ham over some guy with a certificate any day of 
 the
 week.

 - Original Message - 
 From: Blake Bowers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:58 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction


 Chuck - why would that make a bit of difference?  KD versus KA?





 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 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 Wants You! Join today!
 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 Wants You! Join today!
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 Wants You! Join today!
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/


Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

2008-08-05 Thread Doug Ratcliffe
So I guess you, as a WISP, must be operating solely on licensed frequencies?

- Original Message - 
From: Rick Fletcher, W7RAF [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 8:13 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction


 If a wireless ISP wants to avoid this interference, they're welcome to get 
 a
 license like the big boys or figure out how to configure their systems, if
 possible, to avoid the interference.  Don't make operating a wireless ISP
 business on the cheap a ham problem.

 Rick






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
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/


Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

2008-08-05 Thread Chuck McCown - 3
Have to take the written again.  I guess if I had a manual to bone up on the 
freqs and regs and a test session close by... naw, too lazy.
- Original Message - 
From: Rick Fletcher, W7RAF [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 6:16 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction


 Chuck, I hope you'll consider going after that Extra now.  It's never 
 too
 late...

 Rick

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Chuck McCown - 3
 Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 9:07 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

 That is good to hear.  I was the president of my university ham club many
 years ago.  I let my license expire due to ignorance of the due date.  I
 have never bothered to renew it.  I never made extra 'cause I couldn't do
 one minute of perfect copy @ 20 wpm.  I had some mistakes.

 - Original Message - 
 From: Rick Fletcher, W7RAF [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 8:26 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction


 You make some good points, Chuck, but you are wrong about one thing:  The
 amateur ranks have been growing like mad since the archaic CW (Morse 
 Code)
 requirement was eliminated.  Also, hams are still experimenting and
 innovating like never before as is demonstrated by the tremendous growth
 of
 SDR (Software Defined Radio) amongst the ham ranks.  The Big 3 of ham
 radio
 manufacturers (Icom, Yaesu and Kenwood) are fast losing ground to the 
 more
 innovative ham-owned and operated companies of TenTec, Elecraft and
 Flex-Radio.  These same ham-owned companies are selling a lot of gear to
 the
 military, so they must be on to something.

 Hams are pushing the envelope in satellite and microwave comms as well as
 digital communications methods which allow communications to occur at
 levels
 30dB below the noise floor.

 Anyone who thinks we're a dying breed and parasites with frequency
 allocations that should be reassigned to folks who can make better use 
 of
 it knows absolutely nothing about what's really happening in ham radio
 today.  Of course, people talking strongly about things they don't
 understand is very common, particularly in election years.

 Rick, W7RAF
 Extra Class and 1st Class Radiotelephone


 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Chuck McCown
 Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 5:32 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

 A KA has been a ham longer than a KD.
 (assuming it is not a vanity call sign)
 Long time hams have more passion for the subject.

 But really, I agree with almost everything said.  Ham really has been
 dying
 for a very long time.
 I just get bent when some WISPs take the entitlement attitude towards ham
 freqs.
 There are lots of PhDs that work in electrodynamics that are hams and
 merge
 their work world with their hobby world.

 Amateur Radio is Amateur like the Olympics used to be Amateur.
 If anything they were the most professional people in the industry.

 I would hire a hobbiest ham over some guy with a certificate any day of
 the
 week.

 - Original Message - 
 From: Blake Bowers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:58 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction


 Chuck - why would that make a bit of difference?  KD versus KA?




 
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 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 Wants You! Join today!
 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 Wants You! Join today!
 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 Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 

Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

2008-08-05 Thread Rick Fletcher, W7RAF
After a major change like dropping the CW requirement, it always takes a
while for the word to get out but that's finally happening.  All the VE's
(Volunteer Examiners) I know across the country tell me that they've seen a
huge increase in testees and class attendees in the past 6-8 months, not
just for upgrades but also new entrants to the ham community.

While you fail to mention the huge increase in licensees starting in 1991
(your data starts with 1997), the data you cite shows a slight decline due
to the fact that the low-code and no-code Tech licenses brought a lot of new
people into ham radio who eventually discovered that repeater-based
operation wasn't all that exciting and they let their licenses expire.  Now
that they can get expanded ham privileges without CW, they're coming back.

It will take a while for the FCC's data to reflect this change but it will,
mark my words.

I'm not sure what your point is about sales figures.  My point was that
hams are still making important technological contributions and I used 3
Ham-founded and operated U.S. companies that are producing more advanced
radios for a much lower price than the Japanese Big 3 as an example.

To illustrate further, TenTec (Omni VII) and Elecraft (K3) offer
sophisticated SDR rigs for around $2500-3000 with receiver performance that
equals or exceeds that of Icom's $10k flagship IC-7800.  These companies are
also selling a lot of their gear to the military because of its advanced
features.

Other ham-owned companies like Hi-Q make not only sophisticated ham HF
antennas but also HF antennas for the military including submarine antenna
systems.

We can argue numbers of licensees until the cows come home and it won't
prove anything.  The important reality is that there are many technically
sophisticated hams who are still pushing the envelope and innovating and
producing commercially successful products.

Ham-based educational programs like the CubeSats being produced by many of
our leading universities are creating the next generation of satellite
systems engineers.

It is NOT a 'dead' or 'irrelevant' radio service.

Rick

 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Blake Bowers
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 8:13 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

The entry level code requirement and tech plus license
was created in 1991.

In 1997 there were 678,473 licensed
in 2001 there were 682,240 licensed
in 2008 there were 659,198 licensed.

Thats a decrease.

Even the FCC states that after the most recent license
changes eliminating the CW requirement altogether, they
have not seen a large increase in licenses, but they have
seen a big increase in UPGRADES.

I am surprised you have the sales figures from TenTec, Elecraft
and Flex-radio.  Being privately held, those figures are usually
pretty closely held.


Don't take your organs to heaven,
heaven knows we need them down here!
Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today.

- Original Message - 
From: Rick Fletcher, W7RAF [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 9:26 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction


 You make some good points, Chuck, but you are wrong about one thing:  The
 amateur ranks have been growing like mad since the archaic CW (Morse Code)
 requirement was eliminated.  Also, hams are still experimenting and
 innovating like never before as is demonstrated by the tremendous growth 
 of
 SDR (Software Defined Radio) amongst the ham ranks.  The Big 3 of ham 
 radio
 manufacturers (Icom, Yaesu and Kenwood) are fast losing ground to the more
 innovative ham-owned and operated companies of TenTec, Elecraft and
 Flex-Radio.  These same ham-owned companies are selling a lot of gear to 
 the
 military, so they must be on to something.

 Hams are pushing the envelope in satellite and microwave comms as well as
 digital communications methods which allow communications to occur at 
 levels
 30dB below the noise floor.

 Anyone who thinks we're a dying breed and parasites with frequency
 allocations that should be reassigned to folks who can make better use of
 it knows absolutely nothing about what's really happening in ham radio
 today.  Of course, people talking strongly about things they don't
 understand is very common, particularly in election years.

 Rick, W7RAF
 Extra Class and 1st Class Radiotelephone






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
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 Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

2008-08-05 Thread Rick Fletcher, W7RAF
Not at all, but I do recognize my limited 'privileges' as an unlicensed
user.  I also know how to mitigate many of the sources of interference I
encounter.

In the end, I went into this knowing that what I was doing was somewhat akin
to driving without insurance and the risk of operating unlicensed was
totally mine.

Rick

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Doug Ratcliffe
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 6:32 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

So I guess you, as a WISP, must be operating solely on licensed frequencies?

- Original Message - 
From: Rick Fletcher, W7RAF [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 8:13 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction


 If a wireless ISP wants to avoid this interference, they're welcome to get

 a
 license like the big boys or figure out how to configure their systems, if
 possible, to avoid the interference.  Don't make operating a wireless ISP
 business on the cheap a ham problem.

 Rick







WISPA Wants You! Join today!
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 Wants You! Join today!
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/


Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

2008-08-05 Thread RickG
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 10:47 AM, Victoria Proffer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 I have had to deal with a similar situation.  I talked to the guy and told
 him that he was causing interference in our network. I gave him a free
 internet account and he only uses his radio one hour a week, with prior
 notice.
 --
 Victoria Proffer
 CEO
 St. Louis Broadband
 Visit us @
 www.StLBroadband.com
 314-974-5600

At first, I thought this was a good idea but then I thought what is
the word gets out? Cool! Free internet from Victoria for turning up
the power on the 900 band! -RickG



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
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] Any Juniper Experts?

2008-08-05 Thread Jake VanDewater
I have just acquired some Juniper router admin duties.  I'm in need of doing 
some one-to-one static NAT translations.  Is there anyone out there that can 
give me some guidance?

(Swapping out with a MT is not an option right now)

_
Got Game? Win Prizes in the Windows Live Hotmail Mobile Summer Games Trivia 
Contest
http://www.gowindowslive.com/summergames?ocid=TXT_TAGHM



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
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/


Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

2008-08-05 Thread Mike Hammett
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/33_centimeters#The_beginning


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


- Original Message - 
From: Jerry Richardson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Motorola 
Canopy User Group [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 2:44 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Court Injunction




 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 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 Wants You! Join today!
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/


Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

2008-08-05 Thread Chuck McCown - 3
The industrial, scientific and medical (ISM) radio bands were originally 
reserved internationally for the use of RF electromagnetic fields for 
industrial, scientific and medical purposes other than communications.

So, other than communications were primary, then HAM, then Part -15.  My 25 
kW induction furnace still trumps everyone.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISM_band


- Original Message - 
From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 8:37 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction


 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/33_centimeters#The_beginning


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


 - Original Message - 
 From: Jerry Richardson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 
 Motorola
 Canopy User Group [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 2:44 PM
 Subject: [WISPA] Court Injunction




 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 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 Wants You! Join today!
 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 Wants You! Join today!
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/


Re: [WISPA] Court Injunction

2008-08-05 Thread Matt
 By the way, we have been up there for 4 years - this HAM only recently
 increased the power in the last three weeks.

What are they using the 900 band for?  Voice, video or what?  Are they
bleeding into any cell towers nearby with that much power?  Is this a
small community?

Matt



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
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] polling

2008-08-05 Thread Travis Johnson
Hi,

I would like to start a quick list of the wireless radio's available 
today that have some type of polling system. Here are the ones I can 
think of quickly... please add this list:

Canopy
Trango
Alvarion
Mikrotik

thanks,

Travis
Microserv



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
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/


Re: [WISPA] IP based security system

2008-08-05 Thread Joshua Rowe
I currenty have a customer that is using Intellinet 550710 cameras, the 
quality is acceptable and the cost is reasonable. The cameras have lifetime 
warranties and interchangable lenses (wide angle, zoom, etc.) Motion 
detection built in, however I use motion detection built into the camera 
server I setup for them using an open source software package. There are 5 
cameras on the system and could be expanded for more. If you want more 
information let me know and I could get some demo video for you and specs.

I also have another customer that has purchased their night vision mpeg4 
cameras 550314, but has not had me install them yet, however the testing I 
got to do with them impressed me.

If I can help you out just let me know.

Josh Rowe


 Message: 11
 Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2008 17:29:40 -0500
 From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: [WISPA] IP based security system
 To: WISPA List wireless@wispa.org
 Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
 
 I am looking for recommendations of an IP based security system with 
 high quality video.  I believe PC based is what we're after for low 
 cost and upgradability.
 
 I am not looking for a single camera, but a whole system with 
 perhaps dozens of cameras.  Most security systems I've seen (albeit 
 I'm not really exposed to this industry) you can hardly tell the 
 difference between a person and a dog on it's hind legs.
 
 --
 Mike Hammett
 Intelligent Computing Solutions
 http://www.ics-il.com
 
 --




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
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/


Re: [WISPA] IP based security system

2008-08-05 Thread Chuck McCown - 3
Outdoor rated?
How much power do they need?
- Original Message - 
From: Joshua Rowe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 9:13 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] IP based security system


I currenty have a customer that is using Intellinet 550710 cameras, the
 quality is acceptable and the cost is reasonable. The cameras have 
 lifetime
 warranties and interchangable lenses (wide angle, zoom, etc.) Motion
 detection built in, however I use motion detection built into the camera
 server I setup for them using an open source software package. There are 5
 cameras on the system and could be expanded for more. If you want more
 information let me know and I could get some demo video for you and specs.

 I also have another customer that has purchased their night vision mpeg4
 cameras 550314, but has not had me install them yet, however the testing I
 got to do with them impressed me.

 If I can help you out just let me know.

 Josh Rowe


 Message: 11
 Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2008 17:29:40 -0500
 From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: [WISPA] IP based security system
 To: WISPA List wireless@wispa.org
 Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1

 I am looking for recommendations of an IP based security system with
 high quality video.  I believe PC based is what we're after for low
 cost and upgradability.

 I am not looking for a single camera, but a whole system with
 perhaps dozens of cameras.  Most security systems I've seen (albeit
 I'm not really exposed to this industry) you can hardly tell the
 difference between a person and a dog on it's hind legs.

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

 --



 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 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 Wants You! Join today!
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/


Re: [WISPA] IP based security system

2008-08-05 Thread Tom Sharples
Best quality outdoor-rated IP cams are the megapixel-sensor units made by 
Mobotix. We use them in our installations whenever possible. They are 
expensive, but well worth it - one Mobotix cam can do the work of  4 
ordinary ones. You can see the image quality on our website, and you can buy 
them from Radius Security among others.

Tom Sharples
President
Qorvus Systems, Inc.
www.qorvus.com

- Original Message - 
From: Chuck McCown - 3 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 8:28 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] IP based security system


 Outdoor rated?
 How much power do they need?
 - Original Message - 
 From: Joshua Rowe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 9:13 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] IP based security system


I currenty have a customer that is using Intellinet 550710 cameras, the
 quality is acceptable and the cost is reasonable. The cameras have
 lifetime
 warranties and interchangable lenses (wide angle, zoom, etc.) Motion
 detection built in, however I use motion detection built into the camera
 server I setup for them using an open source software package. There are 
 5
 cameras on the system and could be expanded for more. If you want more
 information let me know and I could get some demo video for you and 
 specs.

 I also have another customer that has purchased their night vision mpeg4
 cameras 550314, but has not had me install them yet, however the testing 
 I
 got to do with them impressed me.

 If I can help you out just let me know.

 Josh Rowe


 Message: 11
 Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2008 17:29:40 -0500
 From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: [WISPA] IP based security system
 To: WISPA List wireless@wispa.org
 Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1

 I am looking for recommendations of an IP based security system with
 high quality video.  I believe PC based is what we're after for low
 cost and upgradability.

 I am not looking for a single camera, but a whole system with
 perhaps dozens of cameras.  Most security systems I've seen (albeit
 I'm not really exposed to this industry) you can hardly tell the
 difference between a person and a dog on it's hind legs.

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

 --



 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 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 Wants You! Join today!
 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 Wants You! Join today!
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/