Re: [WISPA] Vyatta?

[Tom Sharples]

I picked up the Gateway model, equipped with nine 4-port ethernet expansion 
boards, for $625 on Ebay. Seems like a good deal altho I don't know what 
this model costs new with the added ports. Way more than we really need. I'm 
looking forward to trying it out tho.

Tom S.

- Original Message - 
From: "Josh Luthman" 
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 9:57 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vyatta?


Call support and they can fix your ImageStream issues.  Need to push a
little bit and use the phone.  To this day I've not had a response to
my emails without a phone call.

On 4/6/10, Scott Lambert  wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 11:37:54PM -0400, Josh Luthman wrote:
>> I really think you'll love ImageStream...
>
> I don't mind the three living ImageStream TransPort routers we
> inherited.  Once I changed the editor to default to vi, I was pretty
> happy.
>
> I am not much of a fan of the interface configuration, though it is
> currently more flexible and transparent than pfSense for multiple
> subnets on the same interface.  The shellcmd plugin lets me have a GUI
> to get around the current inadaquacy of the interface configuration GUI
> of pfSense 1.2.3.
>
> I do find that I will make a change to the default route on the
> Interface Configuration file; it will reload sand; and I will have to
> go to bash and route delete default, route add default gateway newip
> manually.  Or, I will put a new subnet on an interface and can't get
> OSPFd to talk on that interface until I reboot the box.
>
> Just stopping and starting OSPFd didn't work.  I don't know if that is
> an indication that I have bad hardware or what.  Using suspect gear for
> your first experience with a platform is probably not the best situation
> for figuring out what is what.  The other 4 inherited TransPorts all
> have one or more blown ethernet ports so I haven't been able to use
> them.  I can't point to anything on the other three that screams "I'm
> busted."
>
> Having to reboot is really annoying.  Having to use the shell to
> manually apply desired configuration changes, annoying, but at least
> they give me the tools to do it. :-) I like flexibility.
>
> The biggest problem I have with going whole hog for the ImageStreams is,
> it would take me much longer to train guys to run the ImageStreams than
> it will take to train them to run pfSense.  The secondary problem is
> cost :
>
> pfSense on Alix:  $204 3 eth
> pfSense on soekris:   $275-350 4 eth
>
> ImageStream on TransPort: $900 new 4 eth
>   $600 e-bay.  3 eth
>
> We only do about 20 to 30 Mbps where I will have these deployed.  More
> horsepower would be wasted.  The BGP running pfSense box is a bit
> beefier than the Alix boxes, but didn't quite cost as much as a new
> TransPort.
>
>> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 11:34 PM, Scott Lambert
>> wrote:
>>
>> > On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 07:52:41PM -0400, Glenn Kelley wrote:
>> > > Scott
>> > >
>> > > One limitation currently with BGP is you cannot have more than 1 
>> > > peer.
>> > > I am awaiting that fix myself.
>> >
>> > In the GUI anyway.
>> >
>> > 1. mount -u -w /
>> >
>> > 2. vi config file
>> >
>> > 3. Don't change the config in the gui again until it gets updated to
>> >   handle more peers.
>> >
>> > That's why I love pfSense, if the GUI doesn't support it, I can still
>> > make it work.
>> >
>> > I only need one peer for now.  The only reason it needs to speak BGP is
>> > so I can announce a subset of our ARIN space to the transit provider.
>> >
>> > I've been tempted to just pkg_add quagga.  But my long term goal is to
>> > not be the only guy here who can manage the network.
>> >
>> > > I love PFSENSE -  Chris has done an awesome job on that project.
>> >
>> > Durn tootin'.  Chris and that other Scott, and Ermal and . . .
>> >
>> > --
>> > Scott LambertKC5MLE   Unix
>> > SysAdmin
>> > lamb...@lambertfam.org
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > 
>> > 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/
>
> --
> Scott LambertKC5MLE   Unix 
> SysAdmin
> lamb...@lambertfam.org
>
>
>
> ---

Re: [WISPA] Vyatta?

[Josh Luthman]

Call support and they can fix your ImageStream issues.  Need to push a
little bit and use the phone.  To this day I've not had a response to
my emails without a phone call.

On 4/6/10, Scott Lambert  wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 11:37:54PM -0400, Josh Luthman wrote:
>> I really think you'll love ImageStream...
>
> I don't mind the three living ImageStream TransPort routers we
> inherited.  Once I changed the editor to default to vi, I was pretty
> happy.
>
> I am not much of a fan of the interface configuration, though it is
> currently more flexible and transparent than pfSense for multiple
> subnets on the same interface.  The shellcmd plugin lets me have a GUI
> to get around the current inadaquacy of the interface configuration GUI
> of pfSense 1.2.3.
>
> I do find that I will make a change to the default route on the
> Interface Configuration file; it will reload sand; and I will have to
> go to bash and route delete default, route add default gateway newip
> manually.  Or, I will put a new subnet on an interface and can't get
> OSPFd to talk on that interface until I reboot the box.
>
> Just stopping and starting OSPFd didn't work.  I don't know if that is
> an indication that I have bad hardware or what.  Using suspect gear for
> your first experience with a platform is probably not the best situation
> for figuring out what is what.  The other 4 inherited TransPorts all
> have one or more blown ethernet ports so I haven't been able to use
> them.  I can't point to anything on the other three that screams "I'm
> busted."
>
> Having to reboot is really annoying.  Having to use the shell to
> manually apply desired configuration changes, annoying, but at least
> they give me the tools to do it. :-) I like flexibility.
>
> The biggest problem I have with going whole hog for the ImageStreams is,
> it would take me much longer to train guys to run the ImageStreams than
> it will take to train them to run pfSense.  The secondary problem is
> cost :
>
> pfSense on Alix:  $204 3 eth
> pfSense on soekris:   $275-350 4 eth
>
> ImageStream on TransPort: $900 new 4 eth
>   $600 e-bay.  3 eth
>
> We only do about 20 to 30 Mbps where I will have these deployed.  More
> horsepower would be wasted.  The BGP running pfSense box is a bit
> beefier than the Alix boxes, but didn't quite cost as much as a new
> TransPort.
>
>> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 11:34 PM, Scott Lambert
>> wrote:
>>
>> > On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 07:52:41PM -0400, Glenn Kelley wrote:
>> > > Scott
>> > >
>> > > One limitation currently with BGP is you cannot have more than 1 peer.
>> > > I am awaiting that fix myself.
>> >
>> > In the GUI anyway.
>> >
>> > 1. mount -u -w /
>> >
>> > 2. vi config file
>> >
>> > 3. Don't change the config in the gui again until it gets updated to
>> >   handle more peers.
>> >
>> > That's why I love pfSense, if the GUI doesn't support it, I can still
>> > make it work.
>> >
>> > I only need one peer for now.  The only reason it needs to speak BGP is
>> > so I can announce a subset of our ARIN space to the transit provider.
>> >
>> > I've been tempted to just pkg_add quagga.  But my long term goal is to
>> > not be the only guy here who can manage the network.
>> >
>> > > I love PFSENSE -  Chris has done an awesome job on that project.
>> >
>> > Durn tootin'.  Chris and that other Scott, and Ermal and . . .
>> >
>> > --
>> > Scott LambertKC5MLE   Unix
>> > SysAdmin
>> > lamb...@lambertfam.org
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > 
>> > 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/
>
> --
> Scott LambertKC5MLE   Unix SysAdmin
> lamb...@lambertfam.org
>
>
>
> 
> 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/
>


-- 
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2

Re: [WISPA] Vyatta?

[Justin Wilson]

I have always been a fan of the Imagestream routers.  The main advantage I
see is you can actually pickup the phone and call someone if you have
issues. One network I work on had a BGP issue a few months back.  After a
call to Imagestream we had a course of action to fix this weird issue.  To
me, it is worth the extra money to have that support & bug fixes at a
moment¹s notice.  To others they may be perfectly comfortable with a
community supported solution. Nothing wrong with that.

BGP config on Imagestream is very Cisco-like via the command line.  I
have had engineers experience very little learning curve when diagnosing
routing protocols.

Justin

--- 
Justin Wilson 
http://www.mtin.net/blog
Wisp Consulting ­ Tower Climbing ­ Network Support





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] Vyatta?

[Scott Lambert]

On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 11:37:54PM -0400, Josh Luthman wrote:
> I really think you'll love ImageStream...

I don't mind the three living ImageStream TransPort routers we
inherited.  Once I changed the editor to default to vi, I was pretty
happy.

I am not much of a fan of the interface configuration, though it is
currently more flexible and transparent than pfSense for multiple
subnets on the same interface.  The shellcmd plugin lets me have a GUI
to get around the current inadaquacy of the interface configuration GUI
of pfSense 1.2.3.

I do find that I will make a change to the default route on the
Interface Configuration file; it will reload sand; and I will have to
go to bash and route delete default, route add default gateway newip
manually.  Or, I will put a new subnet on an interface and can't get
OSPFd to talk on that interface until I reboot the box.  

Just stopping and starting OSPFd didn't work.  I don't know if that is
an indication that I have bad hardware or what.  Using suspect gear for
your first experience with a platform is probably not the best situation
for figuring out what is what.  The other 4 inherited TransPorts all
have one or more blown ethernet ports so I haven't been able to use
them.  I can't point to anything on the other three that screams "I'm
busted."

Having to reboot is really annoying.  Having to use the shell to
manually apply desired configuration changes, annoying, but at least
they give me the tools to do it. :-) I like flexibility.

The biggest problem I have with going whole hog for the ImageStreams is,
it would take me much longer to train guys to run the ImageStreams than
it will take to train them to run pfSense.  The secondary problem is
cost :

pfSense on Alix:  $204 3 eth
pfSense on soekris:   $275-350 4 eth

ImageStream on TransPort: $900 new 4 eth
  $600 e-bay.  3 eth

We only do about 20 to 30 Mbps where I will have these deployed.  More
horsepower would be wasted.  The BGP running pfSense box is a bit
beefier than the Alix boxes, but didn't quite cost as much as a new
TransPort.

> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 11:34 PM, Scott Lambert wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 07:52:41PM -0400, Glenn Kelley wrote:
> > > Scott
> > >
> > > One limitation currently with BGP is you cannot have more than 1 peer.
> > > I am awaiting that fix myself.
> >
> > In the GUI anyway.
> >
> > 1. mount -u -w /
> >
> > 2. vi config file
> >
> > 3. Don't change the config in the gui again until it gets updated to
> >   handle more peers.
> >
> > That's why I love pfSense, if the GUI doesn't support it, I can still
> > make it work.
> >
> > I only need one peer for now.  The only reason it needs to speak BGP is
> > so I can announce a subset of our ARIN space to the transit provider.
> >
> > I've been tempted to just pkg_add quagga.  But my long term goal is to
> > not be the only guy here who can manage the network.
> >
> > > I love PFSENSE -  Chris has done an awesome job on that project.
> >
> > Durn tootin'.  Chris and that other Scott, and Ermal and . . .
> >
> > --
> > Scott LambertKC5MLE   Unix SysAdmin
> > lamb...@lambertfam.org
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> > 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/

-- 
Scott LambertKC5MLE   Unix SysAdmin
lamb...@lambertfam.org




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] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Ryan Spott]

Be careful when installing those antennae and make sure you read those
instructions:
<
http://consumerist.com/2010/03/these-antenna-installation-instructions-are-surprisingly-specific.html
>

ryan

On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 9:33 AM, Ryan Spott  wrote:

> Channel 2 (54-60 MHz) 102" 259cm
> Channel 3 (60-66 MHz) 92"  234cm
> Channel 4 (66-72 MHz) 83"  211cm
> Channel 6 (82-88 MHz) 72"  183cm
>
> A typical antenna for low-band VHF:
>  from <
> http://www.antennacraft.net/Yagi.html>
> Ugly? Yes.
> Cheap (for now)? Yes
> Broadband with penetration: Heck yes. :)
>
>
> ryan
>
> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 9:07 AM, Leon D. Zetekoff  wrote:
>
>> On 4/5/2010 11:02 AM, Tom DeReggi wrote:
>>
>>> A Couple questions.
>>>
>>> First,  I would agree, any Whitespace spectrum is good spectrum for us,
>>> and
>>> better than none.
>>>
>>> But, why does the FCC keep hypothetically asking us "what about VHF
>>> channels 1-x" the lower part of the band?
>>> I think when we met with Blair, the lower portion of VHF also came up
>>> briefly.
>>>
>>> 1. Are they asking us, because they plan to give the rest to someone else
>>> :-(
>>> 2. Are they asking because others are requesting the higher portions of
>>> the
>>> band, that are more advantageous?And wondering whether we consider the
>>> lower
>>> portions more or less advantageous for our use?
>>> 3. Is there something wrong or more encombersome with Bands 1-X (7?),
>>> that
>>> we dont know about or do know about?
>>> 4. Is VHF ch 1-X (7?) more advantageous, becaue its a band more widely
>>> available in more places in the US?
>>> (For example, I think some free channels exist in Band 1-7 for the DC
>>> area, but I'd need to go back and check to verify).
>>> 5. How will our Antenna size requirements vary for this portion of the
>>> band?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Hey Tom...
>>
>> a six meter vertical is long - a half wave is about 8.6 feet.(6m is
>> 50-54mHz) so a quarter wave vertical is 4.3'. Add more gain gets bigger.
>>
>> Look at the elements in a TV yagi to get a feel for the low-band (2-6)
>> element size. ALso, most tv antennas are not that directional on lo-band;
>> hi-band (7-13) usually has more gain and directionality.
>>
>> But would I want to be able to use that spectrum? Absolutely.
>>
>> 
>>
>> Leon
>>
>> No virus found in this outgoing message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 9.0.800 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2792 - Release Date: 04/05/10
>> 02:32:00
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>> 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] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Josh Luthman]

Probably not but it has some other uses!

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

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

“Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue
that counts.”
--- Winston Churchill


On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 12:02 AM, RickG  wrote:

> GHz. I dont think MHz would carry much data?
>
> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 4:36 PM, Greg Ihnen  wrote:
> > 2.5GHz or MHz?
> >
> > On Apr 4, 2010, at 5:06 PM, RickG wrote:
> >
> >> Back in the late 90's when I was running an MMDS operation on 2.5MHz,
> >> we used a 100 watt system. We had customers more than 30 miles away
> >> with multi-megabit connections. Give me power!
> >>
> >> On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 12:15 AM, Kurt Fankhauser 
> wrote:
> >>> 20 watt radio's? Going into lets say a 6db antenna? Your looking at 80
> >>> watts. Is this really necessary?
> >>>
> >>> Kurt Fankhauser
> >>> WAVELINC
> >>> P.O. Box 126
> >>> Bucyrus, OH 44820
> >>> 419-562-6405
> >>> www.wavelinc.com
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -Original Message-
> >>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
> On
> >>> Behalf Of Ryan Spott
> >>> Sent: Sunday, April 04, 2010 12:10 AM
> >>> To: WISPA General List
> >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
> >>>
> >>> This would be UP TO 20 watts at the radio.
> >>>
> >>> We explained how 900 works for most of us. (it sorta does... mostly)
> >>>
> >>> ryan
> >>>
> >>> On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 8:58 PM, Kurt Fankhauser 
> wrote:
> >>>
>  The 20 watt power output request. Is this for total ERP or at the
> radio?
> 
>  Kurt Fankhauser
>  WAVELINC
>  P.O. Box 126
>  Bucyrus, OH 44820
>  419-562-6405
>  www.wavelinc.com
> 
> 
>  -Original Message-
>  From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
> On
>  Behalf Of Jack Unger
>  Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 7:17 PM
>  To: memb...@wispa.org; WISPA General List
>  Subject: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
> 
>  Last Wednesday, March 31, the WISPA FCC Committee assisted by the
> WISPA
>  Promotions Committee met with top managers of the FCC Office of
>  Engineering and Technology (OET) at FCC Headquarters in Washington
> D.C.
>  to discuss the status of WISPA's TV Whitespaces filings.
> 
>  The following Members represented WISPA. Ryan Spott, Alex Phillips,
> John
>  Scriver, and Jack Unger. The WISPA Team was assisted by Steve Coran of
>  Rini/Coran LLC in Washington.
> 
>  All Team Members made valuable contributions to the effort and we all
>  feel that the meeting went well. Our goal was to ask the FCC take
>  favorable action soon on WISPA's Petitions to adjust the TV Whitespace
>  rules by making corrections to several problem areas, thereby making
>  WISP use of the Whitespaces more practical and more successful.
> 
>  I'm attaching a more detailed report (.doc file) and also the official
>  written filing (PDF) that WISPA is required to make after every
> meeting
>  with the FCC. A copy of our FCC PowerPoint presentation is also
> required
>  to be part of our written filing. To easily view our presentation,
>  please rotate the attached PDF clockwise 90 degrees in your Adobe
> Reader
>  viewer.
> 
>  Your questions and constructive suggestions are always welcome.
> 
>  Respectfully Submitted,
> 
>  Jack Unger
>  WISPA FCC Committee Chair
>  818-227-4220
> 
>  --
>  Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
>  Network Design - Technical Training - Technical Writing
>  Serving the Broadband Wireless, Networking and Telecom Communities
> since
>  1993
>  www.ask-wi.com  818-227-4220  jun...@ask-wi.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] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[RickG]

GHz. I dont think MHz would carry much data?

On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 4:36 PM, Greg Ihnen  wrote:
> 2.5GHz or MHz?
>
> On Apr 4, 2010, at 5:06 PM, RickG wrote:
>
>> Back in the late 90's when I was running an MMDS operation on 2.5MHz,
>> we used a 100 watt system. We had customers more than 30 miles away
>> with multi-megabit connections. Give me power!
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 12:15 AM, Kurt Fankhauser  wrote:
>>> 20 watt radio's? Going into lets say a 6db antenna? Your looking at 80
>>> watts. Is this really necessary?
>>>
>>> Kurt Fankhauser
>>> WAVELINC
>>> P.O. Box 126
>>> Bucyrus, OH 44820
>>> 419-562-6405
>>> www.wavelinc.com
>>>
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>>> Behalf Of Ryan Spott
>>> Sent: Sunday, April 04, 2010 12:10 AM
>>> To: WISPA General List
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>>>
>>> This would be UP TO 20 watts at the radio.
>>>
>>> We explained how 900 works for most of us. (it sorta does... mostly)
>>>
>>> ryan
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 8:58 PM, Kurt Fankhauser  wrote:
>>>
 The 20 watt power output request. Is this for total ERP or at the radio?

 Kurt Fankhauser
 WAVELINC
 P.O. Box 126
 Bucyrus, OH 44820
 419-562-6405
 www.wavelinc.com


 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of Jack Unger
 Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 7:17 PM
 To: memb...@wispa.org; WISPA General List
 Subject: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

 Last Wednesday, March 31, the WISPA FCC Committee assisted by the WISPA
 Promotions Committee met with top managers of the FCC Office of
 Engineering and Technology (OET) at FCC Headquarters in Washington D.C.
 to discuss the status of WISPA's TV Whitespaces filings.

 The following Members represented WISPA. Ryan Spott, Alex Phillips, John
 Scriver, and Jack Unger. The WISPA Team was assisted by Steve Coran of
 Rini/Coran LLC in Washington.

 All Team Members made valuable contributions to the effort and we all
 feel that the meeting went well. Our goal was to ask the FCC take
 favorable action soon on WISPA's Petitions to adjust the TV Whitespace
 rules by making corrections to several problem areas, thereby making
 WISP use of the Whitespaces more practical and more successful.

 I'm attaching a more detailed report (.doc file) and also the official
 written filing (PDF) that WISPA is required to make after every meeting
 with the FCC. A copy of our FCC PowerPoint presentation is also required
 to be part of our written filing. To easily view our presentation,
 please rotate the attached PDF clockwise 90 degrees in your Adobe Reader
 viewer.

 Your questions and constructive suggestions are always welcome.

 Respectfully Submitted,

 Jack Unger
 WISPA FCC Committee Chair
 818-227-4220

 --
 Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
 Network Design - Technical Training - Technical Writing
 Serving the Broadband Wireless, Networking and Telecom Communities since
 1993
 www.ask-wi.com  818-227-4220  jun...@ask-wi.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/
>>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subsc

Re: [WISPA] Vyatta?

[Scott Lambert]

On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 04:48:38PM -0700, Tom Sharples wrote:
> Have you run into the pfsense pptp limitation? That is, only one
> customer (behind your pfsense NAT router) , can establish a pptp
> session to the same external pptp server at a time. At least, that's
> what the pfsense download site lists under known limitations.

Yes, on the office LAN.  We had a short period of time during which two
or three of us were doing unrelated work for the same client at the same
time.  We collided.  We took turns.  We don't have many PPTP VPN using
customers and it's very rare that more than one of us will need to deal
with that customer at the same time.

I've not heard any complaints from my customers who are behind the other
pfSense box.

IIRC, the limitation is one NATed IP talking to a particular PPTP server
on the outside via a particular outside IP at one time.  Unless you have
a lot of people tele-commuting for the same company, you are unlikely to
see the problem.

You can have an "unlimited" number of customers talking to an
"unlimited" number of external PPTP servers at the same time so long as
no two customers are talking to the same server at the same time.  If
you have multiple external IPs, you should be able to work around the
problem for the rare customers who are affected by playing with the
Advanced Outbound NAT rules.  I've not actually had to do so, thus the
word "should".  I believe this situation is supposed to be all better in
2.0.  I haven't had the time, or need, to check up on it.

-- 
Scott LambertKC5MLE   Unix SysAdmin
lamb...@lambertfam.org




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] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Marlon K. Schafer]

Very cool!

I'm glad this meeting went so well.  Fingers crossed that we get positive 
results!
marlon

- Original Message - 
From: "Jack Unger" 
To: ; "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 4:17 PM
Subject: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC


> Last Wednesday, March 31, the WISPA FCC Committee assisted by the WISPA
> Promotions Committee met with top managers of the FCC Office of
> Engineering and Technology (OET) at FCC Headquarters in Washington D.C.
> to discuss the status of WISPA's TV Whitespaces filings.
>
> The following Members represented WISPA. Ryan Spott, Alex Phillips, John
> Scriver, and Jack Unger. The WISPA Team was assisted by Steve Coran of
> Rini/Coran LLC in Washington.
>
> All Team Members made valuable contributions to the effort and we all
> feel that the meeting went well. Our goal was to ask the FCC take
> favorable action soon on WISPA's Petitions to adjust the TV Whitespace
> rules by making corrections to several problem areas, thereby making
> WISP use of the Whitespaces more practical and more successful.
>
> I'm attaching a more detailed report (.doc file) and also the official
> written filing (PDF) that WISPA is required to make after every meeting
> with the FCC. A copy of our FCC PowerPoint presentation is also required
> to be part of our written filing. To easily view our presentation,
> please rotate the attached PDF clockwise 90 degrees in your Adobe Reader
> viewer.
>
> Your questions and constructive suggestions are always welcome.
>
> Respectfully Submitted,
>
> Jack Unger
> WISPA FCC Committee Chair
> 818-227-4220
>
> -- 
> Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
> Network Design - Technical Training - Technical Writing
> Serving the Broadband Wireless, Networking and Telecom Communities since 
> 1993
> www.ask-wi.com  818-227-4220  jun...@ask-wi.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] dry copper solution

[Marlon K. Schafer]

Oh man.

I used to use net to net and paradyn.  Both are gone now though.

I think I still have a couple of kits here though.  Is 2 megs enough.

Can't do 3 miles with wireless?  Even with one mid point repeater?

marlon

- Original Message - 
From: "chris cooper" 
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 8:11 AM
Subject: [WISPA] dry copper solution


>
>
> Im looking for a copper solution that will allow me to use a dry pair to
> extend service to a location @ 3 miles distant.  Any pointers much
> appreciated.
>
> Thanks
> Chris Cooper
> Intelliwave
>
>
>
> 
> 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] Vyatta?

[Josh Luthman]

I really think you'll love ImageStream...

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

“Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue
that counts.”
--- Winston Churchill


On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 11:34 PM, Scott Lambert wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 07:52:41PM -0400, Glenn Kelley wrote:
> > Scott
> >
> > One limitation currently with BGP is you cannot have more than 1 peer.
> > I am awaiting that fix myself.
>
> In the GUI anyway.
>
> 1. mount -u -w /
>
> 2. vi config file
>
> 3. Don't change the config in the gui again until it gets updated to
>   handle more peers.
>
> That's why I love pfSense, if the GUI doesn't support it, I can still
> make it work.
>
> I only need one peer for now.  The only reason it needs to speak BGP is
> so I can announce a subset of our ARIN space to the transit provider.
>
> I've been tempted to just pkg_add quagga.  But my long term goal is to
> not be the only guy here who can manage the network.
>
> > I love PFSENSE -  Chris has done an awesome job on that project.
>
> Durn tootin'.  Chris and that other Scott, and Ermal and . . .
>
> --
> Scott LambertKC5MLE   Unix SysAdmin
> lamb...@lambertfam.org
>
>
>
>
> 
> 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] Vyatta?

[Scott Lambert]

On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 07:52:41PM -0400, Glenn Kelley wrote:
> Scott
> 
> One limitation currently with BGP is you cannot have more than 1 peer.
> I am awaiting that fix myself.

In the GUI anyway.  

1. mount -u -w /

2. vi config file

3. Don't change the config in the gui again until it gets updated to
   handle more peers.

That's why I love pfSense, if the GUI doesn't support it, I can still
make it work.

I only need one peer for now.  The only reason it needs to speak BGP is
so I can announce a subset of our ARIN space to the transit provider.

I've been tempted to just pkg_add quagga.  But my long term goal is to
not be the only guy here who can manage the network.

> I love PFSENSE -  Chris has done an awesome job on that project.

Durn tootin'.  Chris and that other Scott, and Ermal and . . . 

-- 
Scott LambertKC5MLE   Unix SysAdmin
lamb...@lambertfam.org




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] dry copper solution

[Jeromie Reeves]

There are VDSL2+ setups that use 2 pair for bonding. Yes it can fall
back to ADSL2. I have a install where its about 2.8mi and doing 5mbit
each direction between a farmers house and his 2nd house/shop/barn.

On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 7:01 PM, Patrick Cole  wrote:
> At 3 miles, VDSL is not a good solution. That is a very long loop length.
>
> VDSL2 does not use 2 pairs.  In fact, VDSL2 is designed to fall back to
> ADSL2+ modulation when going beyond the beneficial limits of VDSL (~ 2km).
>
> Most ethernet extenders also tap out around 2km.
>
> The only real option you would have is G.SHDSL point-to-point modems
> with multiple pair bonding.  G.SHDSL supports 5.6mbps per pair, however,
> this speed is only attainable up to about 3km.  at 4.8km you would be
> getting probably less than half of this per pair.
>
> Pat
>
> Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 06:44:25PM -0700, Jeromie Reeves wrote:
>
>> VDSL units back to back should get you a pretty decent amount of
>> bandwidth, VDSL2+ will use 2 pair vs 1 pair and gain even more.
>>
>> How are you getting the copper between sites? Qwest is a PITA and
>> demands it all runs back to the CO, adding miles like crazy.
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 4:02 PM, Marco Coelho  wrote:
>> > I've used cisco DSLAM and DSL Clients to do that (many other options
>> > exist).  3 miles is not far at all, you should be able to push at
>> > least 10M-20M symetrical depending on the quality of the copper.  If
>> > you are getting the dry pair from your phone company, you may have
>> > problems with them.  Many only allow alarm circuits and will balk when
>> > they see data on the line.
>> >
>> > Marco
>> >
>> > On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 10:11 AM, chris cooper  
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Im looking for a copper solution that will allow me to use a dry pair to
>> >> extend service to a location @ 3 miles distant.  Any pointers much
>> >> appreciated.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks
>> >> Chris Cooper
>> >> Intelliwave
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 
>> >> 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/
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Marco C. Coelho
>> > Argon Technologies Inc.
>> > POB 875
>> > Greenville, TX 75403-0875
>> > 903-455-5036
>> >
>> >
>> > 
>> > 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] dry copper solution

[Patrick Cole]

At 3 miles, VDSL is not a good solution. That is a very long loop length.

VDSL2 does not use 2 pairs.  In fact, VDSL2 is designed to fall back to
ADSL2+ modulation when going beyond the beneficial limits of VDSL (~ 2km).

Most ethernet extenders also tap out around 2km.

The only real option you would have is G.SHDSL point-to-point modems
with multiple pair bonding.  G.SHDSL supports 5.6mbps per pair, however,
this speed is only attainable up to about 3km.  at 4.8km you would be
getting probably less than half of this per pair.

Pat

Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 06:44:25PM -0700, Jeromie Reeves wrote:

> VDSL units back to back should get you a pretty decent amount of
> bandwidth, VDSL2+ will use 2 pair vs 1 pair and gain even more.
> 
> How are you getting the copper between sites? Qwest is a PITA and
> demands it all runs back to the CO, adding miles like crazy.
> 
> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 4:02 PM, Marco Coelho  wrote:
> > I've used cisco DSLAM and DSL Clients to do that (many other options
> > exist).  3 miles is not far at all, you should be able to push at
> > least 10M-20M symetrical depending on the quality of the copper.  If
> > you are getting the dry pair from your phone company, you may have
> > problems with them.  Many only allow alarm circuits and will balk when
> > they see data on the line.
> >
> > Marco
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 10:11 AM, chris cooper  
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Im looking for a copper solution that will allow me to use a dry pair to
> >> extend service to a location @ 3 miles distant.  Any pointers much
> >> appreciated.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> Chris Cooper
> >> Intelliwave
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 
> >> 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/
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Marco C. Coelho
> > Argon Technologies Inc.
> > POB 875
> > Greenville, TX 75403-0875
> > 903-455-5036
> >
> >
> > 
> > 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] dry copper solution

[Jeromie Reeves]

VDSL units back to back should get you a pretty decent amount of
bandwidth, VDSL2+ will use 2 pair vs 1 pair and gain even more.

How are you getting the copper between sites? Qwest is a PITA and
demands it all runs back to the CO, adding miles like crazy.

On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 4:02 PM, Marco Coelho  wrote:
> I've used cisco DSLAM and DSL Clients to do that (many other options
> exist).  3 miles is not far at all, you should be able to push at
> least 10M-20M symetrical depending on the quality of the copper.  If
> you are getting the dry pair from your phone company, you may have
> problems with them.  Many only allow alarm circuits and will balk when
> they see data on the line.
>
> Marco
>
> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 10:11 AM, chris cooper  wrote:
>>
>>
>> Im looking for a copper solution that will allow me to use a dry pair to
>> extend service to a location @ 3 miles distant.  Any pointers much
>> appreciated.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Chris Cooper
>> Intelliwave
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> 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/
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Marco C. Coelho
> Argon Technologies Inc.
> POB 875
> Greenville, TX 75403-0875
> 903-455-5036
>
>
> 
> 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] Outsourced Tech support options?

[Nick Olsen]

We are looking for a tech support option for our hotspot users only. 
Somewhere to send our hotspot tech support calls to after hours or when 
were unavailable.  This would be low volume. Any ideas?

Nick Olsen
Network Engineer / Customer Support
(321) 205-1100 x106





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] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Mike]

Theoretically, if you have the circular sense of a circularly polarized
signal wrong, you will have infinite loss.  However, typically, due to
distortions in the atmosphere and multipath, you will end up with an
elliptical signal with an E-field vector component greater in one direction
than the other.

Using a linearly polarized antenna for a circularly polarized signal shows a
theoretical loss of 3 dB.  My experiments showed this loss to be both
greater and lesser than that, depending on the path.

Friendly Regards,
 
Mike
 
Mike Gilchrist
Disruptive Technologist
Advanced Wireless Express
P.O. Box 255
Toledo, IA   52342
239.770.6203
m...@aweiowa.com
 

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Greg Ihnen
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 3:17 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

Circular polarization is used to prevent "picket fencing" - the signal
dropping out repeatedly as one moves through areas where reflections meet to
create a null in the signal. And you pay a price for that because the
receive antennas are not circularly polarized. So there's a polarization
mismatch.

Greg

On Apr 5, 2010, at 1:09 PM, Mike wrote:

> Have you ever taken a really good look at an FM broadcast antenna?  Most
are
> circularly polarized so they can be received by both horizontal and
vertical
> receive antennas.  Even at 90 MHz they aren't that large either.  My
choice
> of sector would be something like that, and would be made of aluminum
parts,
> not panels like we are used to using now.  I predict circular polarity
will
> be the norm.  Why?  Because theoretically, a receive antenna of opposite
> circular sense exhibits infinite loss.  My experiments have shown that
> reality is less, but you CAN expect at least 30 to 40 dB of isolation.
The
> same 6 MHz segment could be reused on the same tower.  The phasing harness
> on the CPE antenna would have to set to either left hand or right hand
> circular polarization.
> 
> Friendly Regards,
> 
> Mike
> 
> Mike Gilchrist
> Disruptive Technologist
> Advanced Wireless Express
> P.O. Box 255
> Toledo, IA   52342
> 239.770.6203
> m...@aweiowa.com
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 12:23 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
> 
> Then the problem arises of frequency reuse if we have such low gain
antenna 
> all over the place...  and the size of a sector antenna for towers.
> 
> 
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
> 
> 
> 
> --
> From: "Mike" 
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 11:59 AM
> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
> 
>> Just for discussion, let's say a TV LPDA has a gain of 8 dBi.  It will 
>> cover
>> the entire VHF TV band, and by superimposing a UHF LPDA on the same mast,
>> can cover the entire UHF TV band with similar gain figures.
>> 
>> I'd make this challenge:
>> 
>> I could TRY to hide a TV band LPDA on my property and beg you to find it.
>> Even well hidden, you would.  Now, give me a few hours to build a narrow
>> band antenna with similar gain in ANY 6 MHz segment of the same bands,
and
>> let me try to hide it.  Do you think I could hide it well enough you
>> wouldn't find it?  I know I can.
>> 
>> My point is, the antenna which will be needed for any segment of the
>> whitespace will be much less intrusive than the LPDA (or Yagi) being used
>> for comparison.
>> 
>> This is great dialogue.  I hope we are faced with the challenge of 
>> deploying
>> in these bands.
>> 
>> Mike
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>

> 
>> 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
> 
> Subscr

Re: [WISPA] Vyatta?

[Glenn Kelley]

nice ;-)
On Apr 5, 2010, at 9:00 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

> Technology kicks ass...
>
> <
> http://www.wunderground.com/radar/radblast.asp?ID=ILN&lat=40.03506851&lon=-84.20671082&label=Troy%2C+OH&type=N0R&zoommode=pan&map.x=400&map.y=240¢erx=400¢ery=240&prevzoom=zoom&num=6&delay=15&scale=1&showlabels=1&smooth=0&noclutter=0&showstorms=0&rainsnow=0&lightning=1
>>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to  
> continue
> that counts.”
> --- Winston Churchill
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 8:43 PM, Chuck Hogg  wrote:
>
>> Let me know if you need anything...you know how to get ahold of me.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Chuck Hogg
>> Shelby Broadband
>> 502-722-9292
>> ch...@shelbybb.com
>> http://www.shelbybb.com
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless- 
>> boun...@wispa.org] On
>> Behalf Of Josh Luthman
>> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 8:42 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vyatta?
>>
>> Hang tight!  We'll get through this!!!
>>
>> *draw some action movie with protagonist over acting in a fake storm*
>>
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>>
>> "Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to
>> continue
>> that counts."
>> --- Winston Churchill
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Glenn Kelley 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Fayette County is right in the middle of it - so for Bob and Larry  
>>> - I
>>> know it will hit... :-/
>>>
>>> hail right now here in Court House - just a little however
>>>
>>>
>>> have a good one
>>>
>>> On Apr 5, 2010, at 8:20 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>>>
 ht screen = monitoring system

 Top screen = weather

 Bottom screen is me hoping for the best =)

 It looks like a small storm, most of my stuff is north of the
 storm.  I
 don't think it will go near anyone else.  At least I'm h
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> 
>> 
>>> 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/




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] Vyatta?

[Josh Luthman]

Technology kicks ass...

<
http://www.wunderground.com/radar/radblast.asp?ID=ILN&lat=40.03506851&lon=-84.20671082&label=Troy%2C+OH&type=N0R&zoommode=pan&map.x=400&map.y=240¢erx=400¢ery=240&prevzoom=zoom&num=6&delay=15&scale=1&showlabels=1&smooth=0&noclutter=0&showstorms=0&rainsnow=0&lightning=1
>

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

“Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue
that counts.”
--- Winston Churchill


On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 8:43 PM, Chuck Hogg  wrote:

> Let me know if you need anything...you know how to get ahold of me.
>
> Regards,
> Chuck Hogg
> Shelby Broadband
> 502-722-9292
> ch...@shelbybb.com
> http://www.shelbybb.com
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Josh Luthman
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 8:42 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vyatta?
>
> Hang tight!  We'll get through this!!!
>
> *draw some action movie with protagonist over acting in a fake storm*
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> "Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to
> continue
> that counts."
> --- Winston Churchill
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Glenn Kelley 
> wrote:
>
> > Fayette County is right in the middle of it - so for Bob and Larry - I
> > know it will hit... :-/
> >
> > hail right now here in Court House - just a little however
> >
> >
> > have a good one
> >
> > On Apr 5, 2010, at 8:20 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
> >
> > > ht screen = monitoring system
> > >
> > > Top screen = weather
> > >
> > > Bottom screen is me hoping for the best =)
> > >
> > > It looks like a small storm, most of my stuff is north of the
> > > storm.  I
> > > don't think it will go near anyone else.  At least I'm h
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> > 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] Vyatta?

[Chuck Hogg]

Let me know if you need anything...you know how to get ahold of me.

Regards,
Chuck Hogg
Shelby Broadband
502-722-9292
ch...@shelbybb.com
http://www.shelbybb.com


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 8:42 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vyatta?

Hang tight!  We'll get through this!!!

*draw some action movie with protagonist over acting in a fake storm*

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

"Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to
continue
that counts."
--- Winston Churchill


On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Glenn Kelley 
wrote:

> Fayette County is right in the middle of it - so for Bob and Larry - I
> know it will hit... :-/
>
> hail right now here in Court House - just a little however
>
>
> have a good one
>
> On Apr 5, 2010, at 8:20 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
> > ht screen = monitoring system
> >
> > Top screen = weather
> >
> > Bottom screen is me hoping for the best =)
> >
> > It looks like a small storm, most of my stuff is north of the
> > storm.  I
> > don't think it will go near anyone else.  At least I'm h
>
>
>
>
>


> 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] Vyatta?

[Josh Luthman]

Hang tight!  We'll get through this!!!

*draw some action movie with protagonist over acting in a fake storm*

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

“Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue
that counts.”
--- Winston Churchill


On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Glenn Kelley  wrote:

> Fayette County is right in the middle of it - so for Bob and Larry - I
> know it will hit... :-/
>
> hail right now here in Court House - just a little however
>
>
> have a good one
>
> On Apr 5, 2010, at 8:20 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
>
> > ht screen = monitoring system
> >
> > Top screen = weather
> >
> > Bottom screen is me hoping for the best =)
> >
> > It looks like a small storm, most of my stuff is north of the
> > storm.  I
> > don't think it will go near anyone else.  At least I'm h
>
>
>
>
> 
> 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] Vyatta?

[Glenn Kelley]

Fayette County is right in the middle of it - so for Bob and Larry - I  
know it will hit... :-/

hail right now here in Court House - just a little however


have a good one

On Apr 5, 2010, at 8:20 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:

> ht screen = monitoring system
>
> Top screen = weather
>
> Bottom screen is me hoping for the best =)
>
> It looks like a small storm, most of my stuff is north of the  
> storm.  I
> don't think it will go near anyone else.  At least I'm h




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] Vyatta?

[Josh Luthman]

Right screen = monitoring system

Top screen = weather

Bottom screen is me hoping for the best =)

It looks like a small storm, most of my stuff is north of the storm.  I
don't think it will go near anyone else.  At least I'm hoping not!

Thanks for the luck!

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

“Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue
that counts.”
--- Winston Churchill


On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 8:18 PM, Glenn Kelley  wrote:

> i hear ya
>
> but then again - windows is a virus anyhow is it not ;-)
>
> ok - knowing I said that - I am sure that I am about to start a war...
>
>
> PS Josh, Bob, Mark and Larry - good luck w/ tonights lightning storms
> here in Ohio -  know they tend to kick hard ...
>
> :-(
>
>
> On Apr 5, 2010, at 7:55 PM, Tom Sharples wrote:
>
> > Sure, but that's the default Windows VPN client.
> >
> > Tom S.
>
>
>
>
> 
> 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] Vyatta?

[Glenn Kelley]

i hear ya

but then again - windows is a virus anyhow is it not ;-)

ok - knowing I said that - I am sure that I am about to start a war...


PS Josh, Bob, Mark and Larry - good luck w/ tonights lightning storms  
here in Ohio -  know they tend to kick hard ...

:-(


On Apr 5, 2010, at 7:55 PM, Tom Sharples wrote:

> Sure, but that's the default Windows VPN client.
>
> Tom S.




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] Vyatta?

[Tom Sharples]

Sure, but that's the default Windows VPN client.

Tom S.

- Original Message - 
From: "Glenn Kelley" 
To: "Tom Sharples" ; "WISPA General List" 

Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 4:51 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vyatta?


> there are other options than pptp such as openvpn or ipsec
>
>
> On Apr 5, 2010, at 7:48 PM, Tom Sharples wrote:
>
>> Have you run into the pfsense pptp limitation? That is, only one
>> customer
>> (behind your pfsense NAT router) , can establish a pptp session to
>> the same
>> external pptp server at a time. At least, that's what the pfsense
>> download
>> site lists under known limitations.
>>
>> Tom S.
>>
>> - Original Message -
>> From: "Scott Lambert" 
>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 4:30 PM
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vyatta?
>>
>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 10:15:24PM -0400, Tom DeReggi wrote:
 What Vyatta does is pretty cool. And they have also been giving
 back to
 open

 

 But the bad is its priced wrong. They are going high end,
 targeting a
 coporate user that might have one or two routers.
 They make their money on support contracts and their fees are very
 expensive. You pay per router, per processor, per year. And at
 $600-$900
 each./yr or something like that.  Then there is the free community
 version,
>>>
>>> pfSense was the same way.  But, now they have support contracts
>>> based on
>>> resonable metrics, like hours, rather than boxes.
>>>
>>> I have had a pfSense box (Pentium III) acting as the corporate
>>> firewall
>>> with 5 interfaces for several years.  No problems.
>>>
>>> For the past 4 or 5 months, I've had a pfSense box (1 Ghz C7) running
>>> as a NAT box for a network we purchased recently.  It has been
>>> working
>>> great.  I have recently added the OpenOSPFd package and it is working
>>> well talking to StarOS, Mikrotik, Cisco, and Imagestream boxes.  The
>>> web GUI means I'm not the only guy who can figure out how to use
>>> them.
>>> Carp means I can set them up in redundant pairs.  I'll be bringing up
>>> OpenBGPd talking to the upstream soon so that we can get rid of the
>>> NAT.
>>>
>>> Both boxes have been loafing with 20 and 10Mbps of traffic
>>> respectively.
>>>
>>> My favorite part of pfSense is the fact that I can ssh in and use the
>>> usual BSD commands to do things when I can't get to the web interface
>>> because I am coming from an unusual IP which is not normally allowed
>>> access to the web interface.  I can also use tcpdump, mtr, nmap to
>>> look
>>> at any possible issues.
>>>
>>> I like the unix command line interfaces.  ImageStream and pfSense are
>>> both pretty decent from that perspective.  I hate how mikrotik and
>>> staros have gotten in my way.
>>>
>>> StarOS's shell with 6 commands really annoys me.  They could at least
>>> have included busybox.  Even just including less/more would have been
>>> an improvement.  Having grep would make my day.  Finding the route
>>> any
>>> particular StarOS box has to BFE in the midst of the other 300
>>> routes is
>>> "fun".
>>>
>>> I think mikrotik should have tried to emulate the junos or cisco cli
>>> rather than inventing something new.  The hierarchy of the command
>>> tree
>>> feels random to me.  It probably makes sense to the developers
>>> though.
>>>
>>> But, I've been able to make them all work together.  They all seem
>>> reaonably reliable.
>>>
>>> I've not used Vyatta.
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Scott LambertKC5MLE   Unix
>>> SysAdmin
>>> lamb...@lambertfam.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>> 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/
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>>
>>
>> Internal Virus Database is out of date.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 8.5.435 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2675 - Release Date:
>> 02/08/10
>> 07:35:00
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> 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/
>






Internal Virus Database is out of date.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.435 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2675 - Release Date: 02/08/10 
07:35:00

Re: [WISPA] Vyatta?

[Glenn Kelley]

Scott

One limitation currently with BGP is you cannot have more than 1 peer.
I am awaiting that fix myself.

I love PFSENSE -  Chris has done an awesome job on that project.


On Apr 5, 2010, at 7:30 PM, Scott Lambert wrote:

> he same way.  But, now they have support contracts based on
> resonable metrics, like hours, rather than boxes.




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] Vyatta?

[Glenn Kelley]

there are other options than pptp such as openvpn or ipsec


On Apr 5, 2010, at 7:48 PM, Tom Sharples wrote:

> Have you run into the pfsense pptp limitation? That is, only one  
> customer
> (behind your pfsense NAT router) , can establish a pptp session to  
> the same
> external pptp server at a time. At least, that's what the pfsense  
> download
> site lists under known limitations.
>
> Tom S.
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Scott Lambert" 
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 4:30 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vyatta?
>
>
>> On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 10:15:24PM -0400, Tom DeReggi wrote:
>>> What Vyatta does is pretty cool. And they have also been giving  
>>> back to
>>> open
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>> But the bad is its priced wrong. They are going high end,  
>>> targeting a
>>> coporate user that might have one or two routers.
>>> They make their money on support contracts and their fees are very
>>> expensive. You pay per router, per processor, per year. And at  
>>> $600-$900
>>> each./yr or something like that.  Then there is the free community
>>> version,
>>
>> pfSense was the same way.  But, now they have support contracts  
>> based on
>> resonable metrics, like hours, rather than boxes.
>>
>> I have had a pfSense box (Pentium III) acting as the corporate  
>> firewall
>> with 5 interfaces for several years.  No problems.
>>
>> For the past 4 or 5 months, I've had a pfSense box (1 Ghz C7) running
>> as a NAT box for a network we purchased recently.  It has been  
>> working
>> great.  I have recently added the OpenOSPFd package and it is working
>> well talking to StarOS, Mikrotik, Cisco, and Imagestream boxes.  The
>> web GUI means I'm not the only guy who can figure out how to use  
>> them.
>> Carp means I can set them up in redundant pairs.  I'll be bringing up
>> OpenBGPd talking to the upstream soon so that we can get rid of the  
>> NAT.
>>
>> Both boxes have been loafing with 20 and 10Mbps of traffic  
>> respectively.
>>
>> My favorite part of pfSense is the fact that I can ssh in and use the
>> usual BSD commands to do things when I can't get to the web interface
>> because I am coming from an unusual IP which is not normally allowed
>> access to the web interface.  I can also use tcpdump, mtr, nmap to  
>> look
>> at any possible issues.
>>
>> I like the unix command line interfaces.  ImageStream and pfSense are
>> both pretty decent from that perspective.  I hate how mikrotik and
>> staros have gotten in my way.
>>
>> StarOS's shell with 6 commands really annoys me.  They could at least
>> have included busybox.  Even just including less/more would have been
>> an improvement.  Having grep would make my day.  Finding the route  
>> any
>> particular StarOS box has to BFE in the midst of the other 300  
>> routes is
>> "fun".
>>
>> I think mikrotik should have tried to emulate the junos or cisco cli
>> rather than inventing something new.  The hierarchy of the command  
>> tree
>> feels random to me.  It probably makes sense to the developers  
>> though.
>>
>> But, I've been able to make them all work together.  They all seem
>> reaonably reliable.
>>
>> I've not used Vyatta.
>>
>> -- 
>> Scott LambertKC5MLE   Unix
>> SysAdmin
>> lamb...@lambertfam.org
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> 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/
>
>
> 
>
>
>
> Internal Virus Database is out of date.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.435 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2675 - Release Date:  
> 02/08/10
> 07:35:00
>
>
>
> 
> 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] Vyatta?

[Tom Sharples]

Have you run into the pfsense pptp limitation? That is, only one customer 
(behind your pfsense NAT router) , can establish a pptp session to the same 
external pptp server at a time. At least, that's what the pfsense download 
site lists under known limitations.

Tom S.

- Original Message - 
From: "Scott Lambert" 
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 4:30 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vyatta?


> On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 10:15:24PM -0400, Tom DeReggi wrote:
>> What Vyatta does is pretty cool. And they have also been giving back to 
>> open
>>
>> 
>>
>> But the bad is its priced wrong. They are going high end, targeting a
>> coporate user that might have one or two routers.
>> They make their money on support contracts and their fees are very
>> expensive. You pay per router, per processor, per year. And at $600-$900
>> each./yr or something like that.  Then there is the free community 
>> version,
>
> pfSense was the same way.  But, now they have support contracts based on
> resonable metrics, like hours, rather than boxes.
>
> I have had a pfSense box (Pentium III) acting as the corporate firewall
> with 5 interfaces for several years.  No problems.
>
> For the past 4 or 5 months, I've had a pfSense box (1 Ghz C7) running
> as a NAT box for a network we purchased recently.  It has been working
> great.  I have recently added the OpenOSPFd package and it is working
> well talking to StarOS, Mikrotik, Cisco, and Imagestream boxes.  The
> web GUI means I'm not the only guy who can figure out how to use them.
> Carp means I can set them up in redundant pairs.  I'll be bringing up
> OpenBGPd talking to the upstream soon so that we can get rid of the NAT.
>
> Both boxes have been loafing with 20 and 10Mbps of traffic respectively.
>
> My favorite part of pfSense is the fact that I can ssh in and use the
> usual BSD commands to do things when I can't get to the web interface
> because I am coming from an unusual IP which is not normally allowed
> access to the web interface.  I can also use tcpdump, mtr, nmap to look
> at any possible issues.
>
> I like the unix command line interfaces.  ImageStream and pfSense are
> both pretty decent from that perspective.  I hate how mikrotik and
> staros have gotten in my way.
>
> StarOS's shell with 6 commands really annoys me.  They could at least
> have included busybox.  Even just including less/more would have been
> an improvement.  Having grep would make my day.  Finding the route any
> particular StarOS box has to BFE in the midst of the other 300 routes is
> "fun".
>
> I think mikrotik should have tried to emulate the junos or cisco cli
> rather than inventing something new.  The hierarchy of the command tree
> feels random to me.  It probably makes sense to the developers though.
>
> But, I've been able to make them all work together.  They all seem
> reaonably reliable.
>
> I've not used Vyatta.
>
> -- 
> Scott LambertKC5MLE   Unix 
> SysAdmin
> lamb...@lambertfam.org
>
>
>
> 
> 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/






Internal Virus Database is out of date.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.435 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2675 - Release Date: 02/08/10 
07:35:00




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] Vyatta?

[Scott Lambert]

On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 10:15:24PM -0400, Tom DeReggi wrote:
> What Vyatta does is pretty cool. And they have also been giving back to open 
> 
> 
> 
> But the bad is its priced wrong. They are going high end, targeting a 
> coporate user that might have one or two routers.
> They make their money on support contracts and their fees are very 
> expensive. You pay per router, per processor, per year. And at $600-$900 
> each./yr or something like that.  Then there is the free community version, 

pfSense was the same way.  But, now they have support contracts based on
resonable metrics, like hours, rather than boxes.

I have had a pfSense box (Pentium III) acting as the corporate firewall
with 5 interfaces for several years.  No problems.

For the past 4 or 5 months, I've had a pfSense box (1 Ghz C7) running
as a NAT box for a network we purchased recently.  It has been working
great.  I have recently added the OpenOSPFd package and it is working
well talking to StarOS, Mikrotik, Cisco, and Imagestream boxes.  The
web GUI means I'm not the only guy who can figure out how to use them.
Carp means I can set them up in redundant pairs.  I'll be bringing up
OpenBGPd talking to the upstream soon so that we can get rid of the NAT.

Both boxes have been loafing with 20 and 10Mbps of traffic respectively.

My favorite part of pfSense is the fact that I can ssh in and use the
usual BSD commands to do things when I can't get to the web interface
because I am coming from an unusual IP which is not normally allowed
access to the web interface.  I can also use tcpdump, mtr, nmap to look
at any possible issues.  

I like the unix command line interfaces.  ImageStream and pfSense are
both pretty decent from that perspective.  I hate how mikrotik and
staros have gotten in my way.  

StarOS's shell with 6 commands really annoys me.  They could at least
have included busybox.  Even just including less/more would have been
an improvement.  Having grep would make my day.  Finding the route any
particular StarOS box has to BFE in the midst of the other 300 routes is
"fun".

I think mikrotik should have tried to emulate the junos or cisco cli
rather than inventing something new.  The hierarchy of the command tree
feels random to me.  It probably makes sense to the developers though.

But, I've been able to make them all work together.  They all seem
reaonably reliable.

I've not used Vyatta.

-- 
Scott LambertKC5MLE   Unix SysAdmin
lamb...@lambertfam.org




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] dry copper solution

[Marco Coelho]

I've used cisco DSLAM and DSL Clients to do that (many other options
exist).  3 miles is not far at all, you should be able to push at
least 10M-20M symetrical depending on the quality of the copper.  If
you are getting the dry pair from your phone company, you may have
problems with them.  Many only allow alarm circuits and will balk when
they see data on the line.

Marco

On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 10:11 AM, chris cooper  wrote:
>
>
> Im looking for a copper solution that will allow me to use a dry pair to
> extend service to a location @ 3 miles distant.  Any pointers much
> appreciated.
>
> Thanks
> Chris Cooper
> Intelliwave
>
>
>
> 
> 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/
>



-- 
Marco C. Coelho
Argon Technologies Inc.
POB 875
Greenville, TX 75403-0875
903-455-5036



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] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Mike Hammett]

How much existing equipment is in these bands on what polarities?  I'm 
assuming TV broadcast on V and H and then mics on random linear polarities.


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



--
From: "Cameron Crum" 
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 4:54 PM
To: "WISPA General List" 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

> Well it will still see the H and V pol but at reduced gain. The main
> advantage would be to use as you suggest...opposite pols for greater
> frequency reuse.
>
> Cameron
>
> On 4/5/2010 4:41 PM, Matt Liotta wrote:
>> Doesn't a circularly polarized antenna actually accept more noise? I mean 
>> if you have a vertically polarized antenna than horizontal noise is 
>> reduced by 20db and vice versa. Whereas, there is no such penalty for a 
>> circularly polarized antenna regarding vertically and horizontally 
>> polarized noise. In fact, only the opposite circularly polarized patten 
>> has a penalty.
>>
>> -Matt
>>
>> On Apr 5, 2010, at 5:32 PM, Cameron Crum wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Actually, Mike I like your original idea about circularly polarized
>>> antennas for these bands. They are by nature, very broadband, and don't
>>> need to be extremely big. At these frequencies, propagation is so much
>>> better, that you wouldn't super high gain...and probably wouldn't want
>>> it. Besides that, the circ. pol will help filter out a lot of the
>>> unwanted noise.
>>>
>>> Cameron
>>>
>>> On 4/5/2010 12:27 PM, Mike wrote:
>>>
 Think innovation.  Remove or move a segment of a certain element design 
 and
 you've modified the resonant frequency.  With things I have in my barn 
 I
 could design and build a turnstile with tunable elements.  Think 
 trombone
 with specific markings.  Broadband antennas by design need be larger 
 than an
 antenna designed for a specific segment.  From everything I know about
 antenna design, this is NOT a deal breaker.

 Friendly Regards,

 Mike

 Mike Gilchrist
 Disruptive Technologist
 Advanced Wireless Express
 P.O. Box 255
 Toledo, IA   52342
 239.770.6203
 m...@aweiowa.com


 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of Mike Hammett
 Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 12:10 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

 While it wouldn't need to cover the entire range, I'd expect at a most
 separate UHF and VHF antenna...  otherwise you're way too specific and 
 would

 need to stock too many different antenna models.


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



 --
 From: "Mike"
 Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 8:23 AM
 To: "'WISPA General List'"
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC



> Awesome report!  Thanks.
> Give me equipment capable of 20 watts, circularly polarized sectors, a
> turnstile antenna on the CPE, and it would be a perfect fit for THIS 
> rural
> market.  At that power level, and circular polarization, I could reuse 
> any
> channel on the same tower using opposite circular sense.  I know some 
> of
> the
> discussion in the past on this list led some to believe an antenna 
> would
> look like a big TV log periodic, but it just isn't so.  A TV antenna 
> is by
> necessity a broadband device, and as such is BIG to handle a RANGE of
> frequencies.  A turnstile or other narrow band antenna could be built 
> to
> blend with the aesthetics of a home or business.  Heck, if this comes 
> to
> pass, I may go into the antenna building business just for this usage.
>
> Friendly Regards,
>
> Mike
>
> Mike Gilchrist
> Disruptive Technologist
> Advanced Wireless Express
> P.O. Box 255
> Toledo, IA   52342
> 239.770.6203
> m...@aweiowa.com
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] 
> On
> Behalf Of Steve Barnes
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 7:41 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
> This is a great report good job guys and thank you.
>
> Next question.  I don't know any of the team personally just from your
> posts.  The picture in the report, can you give us a who's who left to
> right.
>
> Steve Barnes
> RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] 
> On
> Behalf Of Jack Unger
> Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 7:17 PM
> To

Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Cameron Crum]

Well it will still see the H and V pol but at reduced gain. The main 
advantage would be to use as you suggest...opposite pols for greater 
frequency reuse.

Cameron

On 4/5/2010 4:41 PM, Matt Liotta wrote:
> Doesn't a circularly polarized antenna actually accept more noise? I mean if 
> you have a vertically polarized antenna than horizontal noise is reduced by 
> 20db and vice versa. Whereas, there is no such penalty for a circularly 
> polarized antenna regarding vertically and horizontally polarized noise. In 
> fact, only the opposite circularly polarized patten has a penalty.
>
> -Matt
>
> On Apr 5, 2010, at 5:32 PM, Cameron Crum wrote:
>
>
>> Actually, Mike I like your original idea about circularly polarized
>> antennas for these bands. They are by nature, very broadband, and don't
>> need to be extremely big. At these frequencies, propagation is so much
>> better, that you wouldn't super high gain...and probably wouldn't want
>> it. Besides that, the circ. pol will help filter out a lot of the
>> unwanted noise.
>>
>> Cameron
>>
>> On 4/5/2010 12:27 PM, Mike wrote:
>>  
>>> Think innovation.  Remove or move a segment of a certain element design and
>>> you've modified the resonant frequency.  With things I have in my barn I
>>> could design and build a turnstile with tunable elements.  Think trombone
>>> with specific markings.  Broadband antennas by design need be larger than an
>>> antenna designed for a specific segment.  From everything I know about
>>> antenna design, this is NOT a deal breaker.
>>>
>>> Friendly Regards,
>>>
>>> Mike
>>>
>>> Mike Gilchrist
>>> Disruptive Technologist
>>> Advanced Wireless Express
>>> P.O. Box 255
>>> Toledo, IA   52342
>>> 239.770.6203
>>> m...@aweiowa.com
>>>
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>>> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
>>> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 12:10 PM
>>> To: WISPA General List
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>>>
>>> While it wouldn't need to cover the entire range, I'd expect at a most
>>> separate UHF and VHF antenna...  otherwise you're way too specific and would
>>>
>>> need to stock too many different antenna models.
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> From: "Mike"
>>> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 8:23 AM
>>> To: "'WISPA General List'"
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>>>
>>>
>>>
 Awesome report!  Thanks.
 Give me equipment capable of 20 watts, circularly polarized sectors, a
 turnstile antenna on the CPE, and it would be a perfect fit for THIS rural
 market.  At that power level, and circular polarization, I could reuse any
 channel on the same tower using opposite circular sense.  I know some of
 the
 discussion in the past on this list led some to believe an antenna would
 look like a big TV log periodic, but it just isn't so.  A TV antenna is by
 necessity a broadband device, and as such is BIG to handle a RANGE of
 frequencies.  A turnstile or other narrow band antenna could be built to
 blend with the aesthetics of a home or business.  Heck, if this comes to
 pass, I may go into the antenna building business just for this usage.

 Friendly Regards,

 Mike

 Mike Gilchrist
 Disruptive Technologist
 Advanced Wireless Express
 P.O. Box 255
 Toledo, IA   52342
 239.770.6203
 m...@aweiowa.com

 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of Steve Barnes
 Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 7:41 AM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

 This is a great report good job guys and thank you.

 Next question.  I don't know any of the team personally just from your
 posts.  The picture in the report, can you give us a who's who left to
 right.

 Steve Barnes
 RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service

 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of Jack Unger
 Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 7:17 PM
 To: memb...@wispa.org; WISPA General List
 Subject: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

 Last Wednesday, March 31, the WISPA FCC Committee assisted by the WISPA
 Promotions Committee met with top managers of the FCC Office of
 Engineering
 and Technology (OET) at FCC Headquarters in Washington D.C.
 to discuss the status of WISPA's TV Whitespaces filings.

 The following Members represented WISPA. Ryan Spott, Alex Phillips, John
 Scriver, and Jack Unger. The WISPA Team was assisted by Steve Coran of
 Rini/Coran LLC in Washington.

 All Team Members made valuab

Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Matt Liotta]

Doesn't a circularly polarized antenna actually accept more noise? I mean if 
you have a vertically polarized antenna than horizontal noise is reduced by 
20db and vice versa. Whereas, there is no such penalty for a circularly 
polarized antenna regarding vertically and horizontally polarized noise. In 
fact, only the opposite circularly polarized patten has a penalty.

-Matt

On Apr 5, 2010, at 5:32 PM, Cameron Crum wrote:

> Actually, Mike I like your original idea about circularly polarized 
> antennas for these bands. They are by nature, very broadband, and don't 
> need to be extremely big. At these frequencies, propagation is so much 
> better, that you wouldn't super high gain...and probably wouldn't want 
> it. Besides that, the circ. pol will help filter out a lot of the 
> unwanted noise.
> 
> Cameron
> 
> On 4/5/2010 12:27 PM, Mike wrote:
>> Think innovation.  Remove or move a segment of a certain element design and
>> you've modified the resonant frequency.  With things I have in my barn I
>> could design and build a turnstile with tunable elements.  Think trombone
>> with specific markings.  Broadband antennas by design need be larger than an
>> antenna designed for a specific segment.  From everything I know about
>> antenna design, this is NOT a deal breaker.
>> 
>> Friendly Regards,
>> 
>> Mike
>> 
>> Mike Gilchrist
>> Disruptive Technologist
>> Advanced Wireless Express
>> P.O. Box 255
>> Toledo, IA   52342
>> 239.770.6203
>> m...@aweiowa.com
>> 
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
>> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 12:10 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>> 
>> While it wouldn't need to cover the entire range, I'd expect at a most
>> separate UHF and VHF antenna...  otherwise you're way too specific and would
>> 
>> need to stock too many different antenna models.
>> 
>> 
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> From: "Mike"
>> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 8:23 AM
>> To: "'WISPA General List'"
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>> 
>> 
>>> Awesome report!  Thanks.
>>> Give me equipment capable of 20 watts, circularly polarized sectors, a
>>> turnstile antenna on the CPE, and it would be a perfect fit for THIS rural
>>> market.  At that power level, and circular polarization, I could reuse any
>>> channel on the same tower using opposite circular sense.  I know some of
>>> the
>>> discussion in the past on this list led some to believe an antenna would
>>> look like a big TV log periodic, but it just isn't so.  A TV antenna is by
>>> necessity a broadband device, and as such is BIG to handle a RANGE of
>>> frequencies.  A turnstile or other narrow band antenna could be built to
>>> blend with the aesthetics of a home or business.  Heck, if this comes to
>>> pass, I may go into the antenna building business just for this usage.
>>> 
>>> Friendly Regards,
>>> 
>>> Mike
>>> 
>>> Mike Gilchrist
>>> Disruptive Technologist
>>> Advanced Wireless Express
>>> P.O. Box 255
>>> Toledo, IA   52342
>>> 239.770.6203
>>> m...@aweiowa.com
>>> 
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>>> Behalf Of Steve Barnes
>>> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 7:41 AM
>>> To: WISPA General List
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>>> 
>>> This is a great report good job guys and thank you.
>>> 
>>> Next question.  I don't know any of the team personally just from your
>>> posts.  The picture in the report, can you give us a who's who left to
>>> right.
>>> 
>>> Steve Barnes
>>> RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service
>>> 
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>>> Behalf Of Jack Unger
>>> Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 7:17 PM
>>> To: memb...@wispa.org; WISPA General List
>>> Subject: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>>> 
>>> Last Wednesday, March 31, the WISPA FCC Committee assisted by the WISPA
>>> Promotions Committee met with top managers of the FCC Office of
>>> Engineering
>>> and Technology (OET) at FCC Headquarters in Washington D.C.
>>> to discuss the status of WISPA's TV Whitespaces filings.
>>> 
>>> The following Members represented WISPA. Ryan Spott, Alex Phillips, John
>>> Scriver, and Jack Unger. The WISPA Team was assisted by Steve Coran of
>>> Rini/Coran LLC in Washington.
>>> 
>>> All Team Members made valuable contributions to the effort and we all feel
>>> that the meeting went well. Our goal was to ask the FCC take favorable
>>> action soon on WISPA's Petitions to adjust the TV Whitespace rules by
>>> making
>>> corrections to several problem areas, thereby making WISP use of the
>>> Whitespaces more practical and more successful.
>>>

Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Cameron Crum]

Actually, Mike I like your original idea about circularly polarized 
antennas for these bands. They are by nature, very broadband, and don't 
need to be extremely big. At these frequencies, propagation is so much 
better, that you wouldn't super high gain...and probably wouldn't want 
it. Besides that, the circ. pol will help filter out a lot of the 
unwanted noise.

Cameron

On 4/5/2010 12:27 PM, Mike wrote:
> Think innovation.  Remove or move a segment of a certain element design and
> you've modified the resonant frequency.  With things I have in my barn I
> could design and build a turnstile with tunable elements.  Think trombone
> with specific markings.  Broadband antennas by design need be larger than an
> antenna designed for a specific segment.  From everything I know about
> antenna design, this is NOT a deal breaker.
>
> Friendly Regards,
>
> Mike
>
> Mike Gilchrist
> Disruptive Technologist
> Advanced Wireless Express
> P.O. Box 255
> Toledo, IA   52342
> 239.770.6203
> m...@aweiowa.com
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 12:10 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
> While it wouldn't need to cover the entire range, I'd expect at a most
> separate UHF and VHF antenna...  otherwise you're way too specific and would
>
> need to stock too many different antenna models.
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
> --
> From: "Mike"
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 8:23 AM
> To: "'WISPA General List'"
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
>
>> Awesome report!  Thanks.
>> Give me equipment capable of 20 watts, circularly polarized sectors, a
>> turnstile antenna on the CPE, and it would be a perfect fit for THIS rural
>> market.  At that power level, and circular polarization, I could reuse any
>> channel on the same tower using opposite circular sense.  I know some of
>> the
>> discussion in the past on this list led some to believe an antenna would
>> look like a big TV log periodic, but it just isn't so.  A TV antenna is by
>> necessity a broadband device, and as such is BIG to handle a RANGE of
>> frequencies.  A turnstile or other narrow band antenna could be built to
>> blend with the aesthetics of a home or business.  Heck, if this comes to
>> pass, I may go into the antenna building business just for this usage.
>>
>> Friendly Regards,
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> Mike Gilchrist
>> Disruptive Technologist
>> Advanced Wireless Express
>> P.O. Box 255
>> Toledo, IA   52342
>> 239.770.6203
>> m...@aweiowa.com
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>> Behalf Of Steve Barnes
>> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 7:41 AM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>>
>> This is a great report good job guys and thank you.
>>
>> Next question.  I don't know any of the team personally just from your
>> posts.  The picture in the report, can you give us a who's who left to
>> right.
>>
>> Steve Barnes
>> RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>> Behalf Of Jack Unger
>> Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 7:17 PM
>> To: memb...@wispa.org; WISPA General List
>> Subject: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>>
>> Last Wednesday, March 31, the WISPA FCC Committee assisted by the WISPA
>> Promotions Committee met with top managers of the FCC Office of
>> Engineering
>> and Technology (OET) at FCC Headquarters in Washington D.C.
>> to discuss the status of WISPA's TV Whitespaces filings.
>>
>> The following Members represented WISPA. Ryan Spott, Alex Phillips, John
>> Scriver, and Jack Unger. The WISPA Team was assisted by Steve Coran of
>> Rini/Coran LLC in Washington.
>>
>> All Team Members made valuable contributions to the effort and we all feel
>> that the meeting went well. Our goal was to ask the FCC take favorable
>> action soon on WISPA's Petitions to adjust the TV Whitespace rules by
>> making
>> corrections to several problem areas, thereby making WISP use of the
>> Whitespaces more practical and more successful.
>>
>> I'm attaching a more detailed report (.doc file) and also the official
>> written filing (PDF) that WISPA is required to make after every meeting
>> with
>> the FCC. A copy of our FCC PowerPoint presentation is also required to be
>> part of our written filing. To easily view our presentation, please rotate
>> the attached PDF clockwise 90 degrees in your Adobe Reader viewer.
>>
>> Your questions and constructive suggestions are always welcome.
>>
>> Respectfully Submitted,
>>
>> Jack Unger
>> WISPA FCC Committee Chair
>> 818-227-4220
>>
>> --
>> Jack Unger - President, A

Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Philip Dorr]

Probably 2.5GHz.  2.5MHz should/would go hundreds (if not thousands)
of miles at 100 watts.

A local 145.12MHz amateur repeater that uses 50 watts and a omni
reaches ~100 miles away (to a 1/4 wave car mounted antenna), and
probably further with a directional on the client/mobile/station.  And
there are HF QRP people that use low power (10W or lower) and still
makes long distant contacts.

On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 3:36 PM, Greg Ihnen  wrote:
> 2.5GHz or MHz?
>
> On Apr 4, 2010, at 5:06 PM, RickG wrote:
>
>> Back in the late 90's when I was running an MMDS operation on 2.5MHz,
>> we used a 100 watt system. We had customers more than 30 miles away
>> with multi-megabit connections. Give me power!
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 12:15 AM, Kurt Fankhauser  wrote:
>>> 20 watt radio's? Going into lets say a 6db antenna? Your looking at 80
>>> watts. Is this really necessary?
>>>
>>> Kurt Fankhauser
>>> WAVELINC
>>> P.O. Box 126
>>> Bucyrus, OH 44820
>>> 419-562-6405
>>> www.wavelinc.com
>>>
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>>> Behalf Of Ryan Spott
>>> Sent: Sunday, April 04, 2010 12:10 AM
>>> To: WISPA General List
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>>>
>>> This would be UP TO 20 watts at the radio.
>>>
>>> We explained how 900 works for most of us. (it sorta does... mostly)
>>>
>>> ryan
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 8:58 PM, Kurt Fankhauser  wrote:
>>>
 The 20 watt power output request. Is this for total ERP or at the radio?

 Kurt Fankhauser
 WAVELINC
 P.O. Box 126
 Bucyrus, OH 44820
 419-562-6405
 www.wavelinc.com


 -Original Message-
 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
 Behalf Of Jack Unger
 Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 7:17 PM
 To: memb...@wispa.org; WISPA General List
 Subject: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

 Last Wednesday, March 31, the WISPA FCC Committee assisted by the WISPA
 Promotions Committee met with top managers of the FCC Office of
 Engineering and Technology (OET) at FCC Headquarters in Washington D.C.
 to discuss the status of WISPA's TV Whitespaces filings.

 The following Members represented WISPA. Ryan Spott, Alex Phillips, John
 Scriver, and Jack Unger. The WISPA Team was assisted by Steve Coran of
 Rini/Coran LLC in Washington.

 All Team Members made valuable contributions to the effort and we all
 feel that the meeting went well. Our goal was to ask the FCC take
 favorable action soon on WISPA's Petitions to adjust the TV Whitespace
 rules by making corrections to several problem areas, thereby making
 WISP use of the Whitespaces more practical and more successful.

 I'm attaching a more detailed report (.doc file) and also the official
 written filing (PDF) that WISPA is required to make after every meeting
 with the FCC. A copy of our FCC PowerPoint presentation is also required
 to be part of our written filing. To easily view our presentation,
 please rotate the attached PDF clockwise 90 degrees in your Adobe Reader
 viewer.

 Your questions and constructive suggestions are always welcome.

 Respectfully Submitted,

 Jack Unger
 WISPA FCC Committee Chair
 818-227-4220

 --
 Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
 Network Design - Technical Training - Technical Writing
 Serving the Broadband Wireless, Networking and Telecom Communities since
 1993
 www.ask-wi.com  818-227-4220  jun...@ask-wi.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
>>>
>>> Ar

Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Brian Webster]

Bonding will probably not be much use because the odds of having adjacent
TVWS channels available in the same market are going to be slim. What would
probably work though is a full duplex arrangement where you could deal with
the available channels not being adjacent.



Thank You,
Brian Webster

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 1:12 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

The transmit frequency has nothing to do with how much data you can send, 
it's the channel size.  Channel 2 will move as much data as channel 50. 
TVBD will have limited use if you can't bond at least 3 channels together, 
closer to 6.


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



--
From: "Steve Barnes" 
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 8:55 AM
To: "WISPA General List" 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

> Mike, though I agree that circular polarization could work.  What channel 
> width are you going to need to have a usable system.  I mean in the VHF 
> band of 54 Mhz to 88 Mhz the frequency is to slow to have any ability to 
> clock the data through at any worth wile speed. We are supposed to be 
> giving customers more bandwidth and faster service.  Yes it would cut 
> through trees and I would love it.  But at 2-3X dialup speed?
>
> The upper bands are definitely better but then you lower your penetration 
> (>800 Mhz).
>
> Someone enlighten me here.
>
> Steve Barnes
> RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
> Behalf Of Mike
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 9:24 AM
> To: 'WISPA General List'
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
> Awesome report!  Thanks.
> Give me equipment capable of 20 watts, circularly polarized sectors, a
> turnstile antenna on the CPE, and it would be a perfect fit for THIS rural
> market.  At that power level, and circular polarization, I could reuse any
> channel on the same tower using opposite circular sense.  I know some of 
> the
> discussion in the past on this list led some to believe an antenna would
> look like a big TV log periodic, but it just isn't so.  A TV antenna is by
> necessity a broadband device, and as such is BIG to handle a RANGE of
> frequencies.  A turnstile or other narrow band antenna could be built to
> blend with the aesthetics of a home or business.  Heck, if this comes to
> pass, I may go into the antenna building business just for this usage.
>
> Friendly Regards,
>
> Mike
>
> Mike Gilchrist
> Disruptive Technologist
> Advanced Wireless Express
> P.O. Box 255
> Toledo, IA   52342
> 239.770.6203
> m...@aweiowa.com
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Steve Barnes
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 7:41 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
> This is a great report good job guys and thank you.
>
> Next question.  I don't know any of the team personally just from your
> posts.  The picture in the report, can you give us a who's who left to
> right.
>
> Steve Barnes
> RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Jack Unger
> Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 7:17 PM
> To: memb...@wispa.org; WISPA General List
> Subject: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
> Last Wednesday, March 31, the WISPA FCC Committee assisted by the WISPA
> Promotions Committee met with top managers of the FCC Office of 
> Engineering
> and Technology (OET) at FCC Headquarters in Washington D.C.
> to discuss the status of WISPA's TV Whitespaces filings.
>
> The following Members represented WISPA. Ryan Spott, Alex Phillips, John
> Scriver, and Jack Unger. The WISPA Team was assisted by Steve Coran of
> Rini/Coran LLC in Washington.
>
> All Team Members made valuable contributions to the effort and we all feel
> that the meeting went well. Our goal was to ask the FCC take favorable
> action soon on WISPA's Petitions to adjust the TV Whitespace rules by 
> making
> corrections to several problem areas, thereby making WISP use of the
> Whitespaces more practical and more successful.
>
> I'm attaching a more detailed report (.doc file) and also the official
> written filing (PDF) that WISPA is required to make after every meeting 
> with
> the FCC. A copy of our FCC PowerPoint presentation is also required to be
> part of our written filing. To easily view our presentation, please rotate
> the attached PDF clockwise 90 degrees in your Adobe Reader viewer.
>
> Your questions and constructive suggestions are always welcome.
>
> Respectfully Submitted,
>
> Jack Unger
> WISP

Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Greg Ihnen]

2.5GHz or MHz?

On Apr 4, 2010, at 5:06 PM, RickG wrote:

> Back in the late 90's when I was running an MMDS operation on 2.5MHz,
> we used a 100 watt system. We had customers more than 30 miles away
> with multi-megabit connections. Give me power!
> 
> On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 12:15 AM, Kurt Fankhauser  wrote:
>> 20 watt radio's? Going into lets say a 6db antenna? Your looking at 80
>> watts. Is this really necessary?
>> 
>> Kurt Fankhauser
>> WAVELINC
>> P.O. Box 126
>> Bucyrus, OH 44820
>> 419-562-6405
>> www.wavelinc.com
>> 
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>> Behalf Of Ryan Spott
>> Sent: Sunday, April 04, 2010 12:10 AM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>> 
>> This would be UP TO 20 watts at the radio.
>> 
>> We explained how 900 works for most of us. (it sorta does... mostly)
>> 
>> ryan
>> 
>> On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 8:58 PM, Kurt Fankhauser  wrote:
>> 
>>> The 20 watt power output request. Is this for total ERP or at the radio?
>>> 
>>> Kurt Fankhauser
>>> WAVELINC
>>> P.O. Box 126
>>> Bucyrus, OH 44820
>>> 419-562-6405
>>> www.wavelinc.com
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>>> Behalf Of Jack Unger
>>> Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 7:17 PM
>>> To: memb...@wispa.org; WISPA General List
>>> Subject: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>>> 
>>> Last Wednesday, March 31, the WISPA FCC Committee assisted by the WISPA
>>> Promotions Committee met with top managers of the FCC Office of
>>> Engineering and Technology (OET) at FCC Headquarters in Washington D.C.
>>> to discuss the status of WISPA's TV Whitespaces filings.
>>> 
>>> The following Members represented WISPA. Ryan Spott, Alex Phillips, John
>>> Scriver, and Jack Unger. The WISPA Team was assisted by Steve Coran of
>>> Rini/Coran LLC in Washington.
>>> 
>>> All Team Members made valuable contributions to the effort and we all
>>> feel that the meeting went well. Our goal was to ask the FCC take
>>> favorable action soon on WISPA's Petitions to adjust the TV Whitespace
>>> rules by making corrections to several problem areas, thereby making
>>> WISP use of the Whitespaces more practical and more successful.
>>> 
>>> I'm attaching a more detailed report (.doc file) and also the official
>>> written filing (PDF) that WISPA is required to make after every meeting
>>> with the FCC. A copy of our FCC PowerPoint presentation is also required
>>> to be part of our written filing. To easily view our presentation,
>>> please rotate the attached PDF clockwise 90 degrees in your Adobe Reader
>>> viewer.
>>> 
>>> Your questions and constructive suggestions are always welcome.
>>> 
>>> Respectfully Submitted,
>>> 
>>> Jack Unger
>>> WISPA FCC Committee Chair
>>> 818-227-4220
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
>>> Network Design - Technical Training - Technical Writing
>>> Serving the Broadband Wireless, Networking and Telecom Communities since
>>> 1993
>>> www.ask-wi.com  818-227-4220  jun...@ask-wi.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/
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Greg Ihnen]

Circular polarization is used to prevent "picket fencing" - the signal dropping 
out repeatedly as one moves through areas where reflections meet to create a 
null in the signal. And you pay a price for that because the receive antennas 
are not circularly polarized. So there's a polarization mismatch.

Greg

On Apr 5, 2010, at 1:09 PM, Mike wrote:

> Have you ever taken a really good look at an FM broadcast antenna?  Most are
> circularly polarized so they can be received by both horizontal and vertical
> receive antennas.  Even at 90 MHz they aren't that large either.  My choice
> of sector would be something like that, and would be made of aluminum parts,
> not panels like we are used to using now.  I predict circular polarity will
> be the norm.  Why?  Because theoretically, a receive antenna of opposite
> circular sense exhibits infinite loss.  My experiments have shown that
> reality is less, but you CAN expect at least 30 to 40 dB of isolation.  The
> same 6 MHz segment could be reused on the same tower.  The phasing harness
> on the CPE antenna would have to set to either left hand or right hand
> circular polarization.
> 
> Friendly Regards,
> 
> Mike
> 
> Mike Gilchrist
> Disruptive Technologist
> Advanced Wireless Express
> P.O. Box 255
> Toledo, IA   52342
> 239.770.6203
> m...@aweiowa.com
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 12:23 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
> 
> Then the problem arises of frequency reuse if we have such low gain antenna 
> all over the place...  and the size of a sector antenna for towers.
> 
> 
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
> 
> 
> 
> --
> From: "Mike" 
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 11:59 AM
> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
> 
>> Just for discussion, let's say a TV LPDA has a gain of 8 dBi.  It will 
>> cover
>> the entire VHF TV band, and by superimposing a UHF LPDA on the same mast,
>> can cover the entire UHF TV band with similar gain figures.
>> 
>> I'd make this challenge:
>> 
>> I could TRY to hide a TV band LPDA on my property and beg you to find it.
>> Even well hidden, you would.  Now, give me a few hours to build a narrow
>> band antenna with similar gain in ANY 6 MHz segment of the same bands, and
>> let me try to hide it.  Do you think I could hide it well enough you
>> wouldn't find it?  I know I can.
>> 
>> My point is, the antenna which will be needed for any segment of the
>> whitespace will be much less intrusive than the LPDA (or Yagi) being used
>> for comparison.
>> 
>> This is great dialogue.  I hope we are faced with the challenge of 
>> deploying
>> in these bands.
>> 
>> Mike
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
>> 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] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Mike]

I was sent a private post asking what system, if I was designing it, I would
deploy.  Respecting that post, I'll just answer here.

I think a form of spread spectrum technology, perhaps using coherent radios
would be just the thing.  Some of the best algorithms give those whose
function it is to intercept and analyze heartburn.  But there is a way
around that.

If use of the segments were subject to a sort of licensing light, where the
operator has demonstrated ability to provide CALEA data by user if
subpoenaed, a compromise could be found.

A properly designed coherent system could use 200 watts and only raise the
measurable local noise floor a portion of a dB or so.

If each "coherent" band comprised 6 MHz chunks across 50 or 100 MHz, a
simple (mechanically) antenna at the CPE end could be designed.  Some sort
of daisy, or fractal, or whatever elements could be designed and phased to
exhibit circular polarization of whichever sense you desired.

These are all just brainstorming ideas and in no way constitute a completely
though out plan.  My math may be off by a factor of 10.  LOL

Friendly Regards,
 
Mike
 
Mike Gilchrist
Disruptive Technologist
Advanced Wireless Express
P.O. Box 255
Toledo, IA   52342
239.770.6203
m...@aweiowa.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] Vyatta?

[Tom Sharples]

Thanks for all the input folks. I just picked up an Imagstream gateway 
router at what I think is an excellent price on Ebay. I'll also download 
Vyatta and test that. We'll see :-)

Tom S.

- Original Message - 
From: "Jeff Broadwick" 
To: "'Tom Sharples'" ; "'WISPA General List'" 

Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 5:47 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Vyatta?


> Hi Tom,
>
> They are available new with pretty good prices too!  :-)
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Jeff
>
>
> Jeff Broadwick
> ImageStream
> 800-813-5123 x106 (US/Can)
> +1 574-935-8484 x106  (Int'l)
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Tom Sharples
> Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 10:45 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vyatta?
>
> Fair question. As you know, almost every product has at least one 
> irritating
> limitation that can drive you nuts (for example the later discussion about
> having to retype the vyatta config by hand) and those kinds of limitations
> or oversights are usually easy to correct, but only if you can add your 
> own
> code! For the kinds of things we do here, easy flexibility and (preferably
> automated) re-configurability are key.
>
> The imagestream looks good, and I see they are available used at pretty 
> good
> prices.
>  - Original Message -
>  From: Travis Johnson
>  To: Tom Sharples ; WISPA General List
>  Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 7:09 PM
>  Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vyatta?
>
>
>  Hi,
>
>  I'm curious what you would need to add or access on a "main" router?
> Shouldn't you just let the router "route" and put everything else 
> somewhere
> else? Hardware is cheap cheap cheap now... why complicate and possibly 
> cause
> conflicts on a "main" router?
>
>  We have run Imagestream in the past, and it works flawless. We currently
> run a Cisco for our main BGP router, and then Mikrotik for a main edge
> router (to allow bandwidth limiting, firewalling, etc.). Both boxes have
> been flawless and not missed a beat in almost a year (since the last
> firmware update on each of them). I am now moving 300Mbps x 100Mbps 
> through
> these boxes on a daily basis. :)
>
>  Travis
>  Microserv
>
>  Tom Sharples wrote:
> We strongly prefer working with open-source / open-architecture solutions
> that allow us to add our own code and hardware as needed. That rules out
> Cisco. I see that Imagestream runs on Linux, do they give customers root
> access / ability to add scripts / modules in user space? How about MT in
> that regard?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tom S.
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Josh Luthman" 
> To: "Tom Sharples" ; "WISPA General List"
> 
> Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 6:06 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vyatta?
>
>
> I've heard of many WISPs using MT, Imagestream and Cisco as their core
> routers.  Never heard of Vyatta.  I've always liked following what
> works.
>
> On 4/2/10, Tom Sharples  wrote:
>  Time to update our ancient and overloaded main router. I'm intrigued by
> Vyatta
>
> and am wondering if anyone out here has any experience - good or bad -
> with
> them.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tom S.
>
>
> 
> 
> 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/
>
>
>
>
>
> 
> --
>
>
>
>  Internal Virus Database is out of date.
>  Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>  Version: 8.5.435 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2675 - Release Date: 02/08/10
> 07:35:00
>
>
> 
> 
> 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] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Mike Hammett]

Antenna gain is just as much about where the power is as where it isn't. 
It's a much more effective use of my equipment to focus the energy out in a 
8 or 10 degree E plane than it is to shoot it at the moon or at the base of 
the tower.  I also can't very well engineer my network around sources of 
interference if it's listening in all directions.  IF these devices have 
sync, it still doesn't help against other sources that aren't synced such as 
an uncooperative competitor, different technology (whether competitor, TV 
station, spurious emission, etc.)

Even with all these safeguards for the TV stations, I'd still rather not 
point a sector using the same frequency as a TV station towards that 
station's contour unless I have to...  just being a friendly neighbor.

A link budget is still a link budget.  All that's different is the amount of 
free space loss and attenuation by various objects.  I'd rather have quiet 
radios and big antennas than vice versa.  We'd be a completely different use 
of these bands.  Typical uses are broadcast or two-way systems where cells 
and capacity aren't of concern.

Our *ULTIMATE* goal is to get as many mbit/s to as many customers as 
profitably as we can.  Frequency, radio power, and radiation patterns 
dictate how many people get the mbit/s your gear is capable of.


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



--
From: "Mike" 
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 2:15 PM
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

> You're not going to need 15 dBi.
>
> Link budgets are way different at VHF than Microwave.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 12:46 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
> My experience is mostly limited to the WISP market (though I'm not
> completely ignorant of other markets).  Innovation is always welcome, but
> any sector that delivers approximately 90 degrees and 15 dBi performance 
> is
> going to be huge.
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
> --
> From: "Mike" 
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 12:39 PM
> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
>> Have you ever taken a really good look at an FM broadcast antenna?  Most
>> are
>> circularly polarized so they can be received by both horizontal and
>> vertical
>> receive antennas.  Even at 90 MHz they aren't that large either.  My
>> choice
>> of sector would be something like that, and would be made of aluminum
>> parts,
>> not panels like we are used to using now.  I predict circular polarity
>> will
>> be the norm.  Why?  Because theoretically, a receive antenna of opposite
>> circular sense exhibits infinite loss.  My experiments have shown that
>> reality is less, but you CAN expect at least 30 to 40 dB of isolation.
>> The
>> same 6 MHz segment could be reused on the same tower.  The phasing 
>> harness
>> on the CPE antenna would have to set to either left hand or right hand
>> circular polarization.
>>
>> Friendly Regards,
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> Mike Gilchrist
>> Disruptive Technologist
>> Advanced Wireless Express
>> P.O. Box 255
>> Toledo, IA   52342
>> 239.770.6203
>> m...@aweiowa.com
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
>> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 12:23 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>>
>> Then the problem arises of frequency reuse if we have such low gain
>> antenna
>> all over the place...  and the size of a sector antenna for towers.
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> From: "Mike" 
>> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 11:59 AM
>> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>>
>>> Just for discussion, let's say a TV LPDA has a gain of 8 dBi.  It will
>>> cover
>>> the entire VHF TV band, and by superimposing a UHF LPDA on the same 
>>> mast,
>>> can cover the entire UHF TV band with similar gain figures.
>>>
>>> I'd make this challenge:
>>>
>>> I could TRY to hide a TV band LPDA on my property and beg you to find 
>>> it.
>>> Even well hidden, you would.  Now, give me a few hours to build a narrow
>>> band antenna with similar gain in ANY 6 MHz segment of the same bands,
>>> and
>>> let me try to hide it.  Do you think I could hide it well enough you
>>> wouldn't find it?  I know I can.
>>>
>>> My point is, the antenna which will be needed for any segment of the
>>> whitespace will be much less intrusive than the LP

Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Mike]

You're not going to need 15 dBi.

Link budgets are way different at VHF than Microwave. 

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 12:46 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

My experience is mostly limited to the WISP market (though I'm not 
completely ignorant of other markets).  Innovation is always welcome, but 
any sector that delivers approximately 90 degrees and 15 dBi performance is 
going to be huge.


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



--
From: "Mike" 
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 12:39 PM
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

> Have you ever taken a really good look at an FM broadcast antenna?  Most 
> are
> circularly polarized so they can be received by both horizontal and 
> vertical
> receive antennas.  Even at 90 MHz they aren't that large either.  My 
> choice
> of sector would be something like that, and would be made of aluminum 
> parts,
> not panels like we are used to using now.  I predict circular polarity 
> will
> be the norm.  Why?  Because theoretically, a receive antenna of opposite
> circular sense exhibits infinite loss.  My experiments have shown that
> reality is less, but you CAN expect at least 30 to 40 dB of isolation. 
> The
> same 6 MHz segment could be reused on the same tower.  The phasing harness
> on the CPE antenna would have to set to either left hand or right hand
> circular polarization.
>
> Friendly Regards,
>
> Mike
>
> Mike Gilchrist
> Disruptive Technologist
> Advanced Wireless Express
> P.O. Box 255
> Toledo, IA   52342
> 239.770.6203
> m...@aweiowa.com
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 12:23 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
> Then the problem arises of frequency reuse if we have such low gain 
> antenna
> all over the place...  and the size of a sector antenna for towers.
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
> --
> From: "Mike" 
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 11:59 AM
> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
>> Just for discussion, let's say a TV LPDA has a gain of 8 dBi.  It will
>> cover
>> the entire VHF TV band, and by superimposing a UHF LPDA on the same mast,
>> can cover the entire UHF TV band with similar gain figures.
>>
>> I'd make this challenge:
>>
>> I could TRY to hide a TV band LPDA on my property and beg you to find it.
>> Even well hidden, you would.  Now, give me a few hours to build a narrow
>> band antenna with similar gain in ANY 6 MHz segment of the same bands, 
>> and
>> let me try to hide it.  Do you think I could hide it well enough you
>> wouldn't find it?  I know I can.
>>
>> My point is, the antenna which will be needed for any segment of the
>> whitespace will be much less intrusive than the LPDA (or Yagi) being used
>> for comparison.
>>
>> This is great dialogue.  I hope we are faced with the challenge of
>> deploying
>> in these bands.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

> 
>> 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://list

Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Mike Hammett]

On the contrary, with proper equipment availability, the band will be quite 
a benefit, but I suggest that we not underestimate the negatives and 
overestimate the positives.

I would call myself rural, but not desolate.  ;-)  There's 2400 pigs on this 
property, no less than 100k pigs within a 1.5 mile radius, approximately 1M 
pigs in the county.

Providing adequate current\next generation speeds to a 100 home subdivision 
or town is just as much of a pain due to foliage for me as it is for anyone 
else.  I'd much rather point a TV sector from an existing tower or two than 
construct an 80' tower to overcome foliage before I can use equipment in 
legacy bands.  This method reduce the points of failure and permits more 
sophisticated support systems (power backup, backhaul, security, etc.) than 
building little towers everywhere I want to serve a few houses.

It also allows me to reach into new markets before I can justify the cost of 
setting up a full tower using legacy bands.


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



--
From: "Ryan Spott" 
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 1:26 PM
To: "WISPA General List" 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

> Mike,
>
> I would suggest that you not use this band if it does not meet your needs. 
> I
> tend to not use 5.8 in my area as 5.8 does not meet my needs.
>
> Your needs appear to be different from mine.
>
> ryan
>
> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Mike Hammett 
> wrote:
>
>> So we're regressing to a bunch of high powered omnis?  Maybe I don't
>> understand how much of a God-send sync is, but if it's that great, why is
>> the default Canopy setup 6x 60* sectors instead of a single omni?  (I'm 
>> not
>> saying sync is bad, I wish everything had sync).
>>
>> I don't really give a hoot about the higher power.  Regular power levels
>> will give me the penetration I need.  I'll run out of mbit/s long before 
>> I
>> run out of dB.  I am aware that more rural areas need the higher power. 
>> As
>> many people are looking to penetrate the foliage domain of a populated 
>> town
>> or subdivision as there are looking to traverse a sparse forest.
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> From: "Ryan Spott" 
>> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 1:02 PM
>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>>
>> > At 20watts, you probably won't need a 15db antenna. :)
>> >
>> > With lightly licensed, you probably won't need a sector. (less
>> > interference).
>> >
>> > With GPS timing (ala moto/cell gear) you will have less
>> self-interference.
>> >
>> > ryan
>> >
>> > On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 10:45 AM, Mike Hammett
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> My experience is mostly limited to the WISP market (though I'm not
>> >> completely ignorant of other markets).  Innovation is always welcome,
>> but
>> >> any sector that delivers approximately 90 degrees and 15 dBi 
>> >> performance
>> >> is
>> >> going to be huge.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> -
>> >> Mike Hammett
>> >> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> >> http://www.ics-il.com
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> From: "Mike" 
>> >> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 12:39 PM
>> >> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
>> >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>> >>
>> >> > Have you ever taken a really good look at an FM broadcast antenna?
>> >> > Most
>> >> > are
>> >> > circularly polarized so they can be received by both horizontal and
>> >> > vertical
>> >> > receive antennas.  Even at 90 MHz they aren't that large either.  My
>> >> > choice
>> >> > of sector would be something like that, and would be made of 
>> >> > aluminum
>> >> > parts,
>> >> > not panels like we are used to using now.  I predict circular 
>> >> > polarity
>> >> > will
>> >> > be the norm.  Why?  Because theoretically, a receive antenna of
>> >> > opposite
>> >> > circular sense exhibits infinite loss.  My experiments have shown 
>> >> > that
>> >> > reality is less, but you CAN expect at least 30 to 40 dB of 
>> >> > isolation.
>> >> > The
>> >> > same 6 MHz segment could be reused on the same tower.  The phasing
>> >> harness
>> >> > on the CPE antenna would have to set to either left hand or right 
>> >> > hand
>> >> > circular polarization.
>> >> >
>> >> > Friendly Regards,
>> >> >
>> >> > Mike
>> >> >
>> >> > Mike Gilchrist
>> >> > Disruptive Technologist
>> >> > Advanced Wireless Express
>> >> > P.O. Box 255
>> >> > Toledo, IA   52342
>> >> > 239.770.6203
>> >> > m...@aweiowa.com
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > -Original Message-
>> >> > From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
>> On
>> >> > Behalf Of Mike Hammett
>> >> > Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 12:23 PM
>> >> > To: WISPA General List
>> >> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV

Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Ryan Spott]

Mike,

I would suggest that you not use this band if it does not meet your needs. I
tend to not use 5.8 in my area as 5.8 does not meet my needs.

Your needs appear to be different from mine.

ryan

On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:

> So we're regressing to a bunch of high powered omnis?  Maybe I don't
> understand how much of a God-send sync is, but if it's that great, why is
> the default Canopy setup 6x 60* sectors instead of a single omni?  (I'm not
> saying sync is bad, I wish everything had sync).
>
> I don't really give a hoot about the higher power.  Regular power levels
> will give me the penetration I need.  I'll run out of mbit/s long before I
> run out of dB.  I am aware that more rural areas need the higher power.  As
> many people are looking to penetrate the foliage domain of a populated town
> or subdivision as there are looking to traverse a sparse forest.
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
> --
> From: "Ryan Spott" 
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 1:02 PM
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
> > At 20watts, you probably won't need a 15db antenna. :)
> >
> > With lightly licensed, you probably won't need a sector. (less
> > interference).
> >
> > With GPS timing (ala moto/cell gear) you will have less
> self-interference.
> >
> > ryan
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 10:45 AM, Mike Hammett
> > wrote:
> >
> >> My experience is mostly limited to the WISP market (though I'm not
> >> completely ignorant of other markets).  Innovation is always welcome,
> but
> >> any sector that delivers approximately 90 degrees and 15 dBi performance
> >> is
> >> going to be huge.
> >>
> >>
> >> -
> >> Mike Hammett
> >> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> >> http://www.ics-il.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> From: "Mike" 
> >> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 12:39 PM
> >> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
> >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
> >>
> >> > Have you ever taken a really good look at an FM broadcast antenna?
> >> > Most
> >> > are
> >> > circularly polarized so they can be received by both horizontal and
> >> > vertical
> >> > receive antennas.  Even at 90 MHz they aren't that large either.  My
> >> > choice
> >> > of sector would be something like that, and would be made of aluminum
> >> > parts,
> >> > not panels like we are used to using now.  I predict circular polarity
> >> > will
> >> > be the norm.  Why?  Because theoretically, a receive antenna of
> >> > opposite
> >> > circular sense exhibits infinite loss.  My experiments have shown that
> >> > reality is less, but you CAN expect at least 30 to 40 dB of isolation.
> >> > The
> >> > same 6 MHz segment could be reused on the same tower.  The phasing
> >> harness
> >> > on the CPE antenna would have to set to either left hand or right hand
> >> > circular polarization.
> >> >
> >> > Friendly Regards,
> >> >
> >> > Mike
> >> >
> >> > Mike Gilchrist
> >> > Disruptive Technologist
> >> > Advanced Wireless Express
> >> > P.O. Box 255
> >> > Toledo, IA   52342
> >> > 239.770.6203
> >> > m...@aweiowa.com
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > -Original Message-
> >> > From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
> On
> >> > Behalf Of Mike Hammett
> >> > Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 12:23 PM
> >> > To: WISPA General List
> >> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
> >> >
> >> > Then the problem arises of frequency reuse if we have such low gain
> >> > antenna
> >> > all over the place...  and the size of a sector antenna for towers.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > -
> >> > Mike Hammett
> >> > Intelligent Computing Solutions
> >> > http://www.ics-il.com
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > From: "Mike" 
> >> > Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 11:59 AM
> >> > To: "'WISPA General List'" 
> >> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
> >> >
> >> >> Just for discussion, let's say a TV LPDA has a gain of 8 dBi.  It
> will
> >> >> cover
> >> >> the entire VHF TV band, and by superimposing a UHF LPDA on the same
> >> mast,
> >> >> can cover the entire UHF TV band with similar gain figures.
> >> >>
> >> >> I'd make this challenge:
> >> >>
> >> >> I could TRY to hide a TV band LPDA on my property and beg you to find
> >> it.
> >> >> Even well hidden, you would.  Now, give me a few hours to build a
> >> >> narrow
> >> >> band antenna with similar gain in ANY 6 MHz segment of the same
> bands,
> >> >> and
> >> >> let me try to hide it.  Do you think I could hide it well enough you
> >> >> wouldn't find it?  I know I can.
> >> >>
> >> >> My point is, the antenna which will be needed for any segment of the
> >> >> whitespace will be much less intrusive than the LPDA (or Yagi) being
> >> used
> >> >> for comparison.
>

Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Mike Hammett]

So we're regressing to a bunch of high powered omnis?  Maybe I don't 
understand how much of a God-send sync is, but if it's that great, why is 
the default Canopy setup 6x 60* sectors instead of a single omni?  (I'm not 
saying sync is bad, I wish everything had sync).

I don't really give a hoot about the higher power.  Regular power levels 
will give me the penetration I need.  I'll run out of mbit/s long before I 
run out of dB.  I am aware that more rural areas need the higher power.  As 
many people are looking to penetrate the foliage domain of a populated town 
or subdivision as there are looking to traverse a sparse forest.


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



--
From: "Ryan Spott" 
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 1:02 PM
To: "WISPA General List" 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

> At 20watts, you probably won't need a 15db antenna. :)
>
> With lightly licensed, you probably won't need a sector. (less
> interference).
>
> With GPS timing (ala moto/cell gear) you will have less self-interference.
>
> ryan
>
> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 10:45 AM, Mike Hammett 
> wrote:
>
>> My experience is mostly limited to the WISP market (though I'm not
>> completely ignorant of other markets).  Innovation is always welcome, but
>> any sector that delivers approximately 90 degrees and 15 dBi performance 
>> is
>> going to be huge.
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> From: "Mike" 
>> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 12:39 PM
>> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>>
>> > Have you ever taken a really good look at an FM broadcast antenna? 
>> > Most
>> > are
>> > circularly polarized so they can be received by both horizontal and
>> > vertical
>> > receive antennas.  Even at 90 MHz they aren't that large either.  My
>> > choice
>> > of sector would be something like that, and would be made of aluminum
>> > parts,
>> > not panels like we are used to using now.  I predict circular polarity
>> > will
>> > be the norm.  Why?  Because theoretically, a receive antenna of 
>> > opposite
>> > circular sense exhibits infinite loss.  My experiments have shown that
>> > reality is less, but you CAN expect at least 30 to 40 dB of isolation.
>> > The
>> > same 6 MHz segment could be reused on the same tower.  The phasing
>> harness
>> > on the CPE antenna would have to set to either left hand or right hand
>> > circular polarization.
>> >
>> > Friendly Regards,
>> >
>> > Mike
>> >
>> > Mike Gilchrist
>> > Disruptive Technologist
>> > Advanced Wireless Express
>> > P.O. Box 255
>> > Toledo, IA   52342
>> > 239.770.6203
>> > m...@aweiowa.com
>> >
>> >
>> > -Original Message-
>> > From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>> > Behalf Of Mike Hammett
>> > Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 12:23 PM
>> > To: WISPA General List
>> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>> >
>> > Then the problem arises of frequency reuse if we have such low gain
>> > antenna
>> > all over the place...  and the size of a sector antenna for towers.
>> >
>> >
>> > -
>> > Mike Hammett
>> > Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> > http://www.ics-il.com
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > From: "Mike" 
>> > Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 11:59 AM
>> > To: "'WISPA General List'" 
>> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>> >
>> >> Just for discussion, let's say a TV LPDA has a gain of 8 dBi.  It will
>> >> cover
>> >> the entire VHF TV band, and by superimposing a UHF LPDA on the same
>> mast,
>> >> can cover the entire UHF TV band with similar gain figures.
>> >>
>> >> I'd make this challenge:
>> >>
>> >> I could TRY to hide a TV band LPDA on my property and beg you to find
>> it.
>> >> Even well hidden, you would.  Now, give me a few hours to build a 
>> >> narrow
>> >> band antenna with similar gain in ANY 6 MHz segment of the same bands,
>> >> and
>> >> let me try to hide it.  Do you think I could hide it well enough you
>> >> wouldn't find it?  I know I can.
>> >>
>> >> My point is, the antenna which will be needed for any segment of the
>> >> whitespace will be much less intrusive than the LPDA (or Yagi) being
>> used
>> >> for comparison.
>> >>
>> >> This is great dialogue.  I hope we are faced with the challenge of
>> >> deploying
>> >> in these bands.
>> >>
>> >> Mike
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> 
>> > 
>> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> >> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> >>
>> >
>> 
>> > 
>> >>
>> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>> >>
>> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> >> 

Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Ryan Spott]

At 20watts, you probably won't need a 15db antenna. :)

With lightly licensed, you probably won't need a sector. (less
interference).

With GPS timing (ala moto/cell gear) you will have less self-interference.

ryan

On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 10:45 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:

> My experience is mostly limited to the WISP market (though I'm not
> completely ignorant of other markets).  Innovation is always welcome, but
> any sector that delivers approximately 90 degrees and 15 dBi performance is
> going to be huge.
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
> --
> From: "Mike" 
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 12:39 PM
> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
> > Have you ever taken a really good look at an FM broadcast antenna?  Most
> > are
> > circularly polarized so they can be received by both horizontal and
> > vertical
> > receive antennas.  Even at 90 MHz they aren't that large either.  My
> > choice
> > of sector would be something like that, and would be made of aluminum
> > parts,
> > not panels like we are used to using now.  I predict circular polarity
> > will
> > be the norm.  Why?  Because theoretically, a receive antenna of opposite
> > circular sense exhibits infinite loss.  My experiments have shown that
> > reality is less, but you CAN expect at least 30 to 40 dB of isolation.
> > The
> > same 6 MHz segment could be reused on the same tower.  The phasing
> harness
> > on the CPE antenna would have to set to either left hand or right hand
> > circular polarization.
> >
> > Friendly Regards,
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > Mike Gilchrist
> > Disruptive Technologist
> > Advanced Wireless Express
> > P.O. Box 255
> > Toledo, IA   52342
> > 239.770.6203
> > m...@aweiowa.com
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> > Behalf Of Mike Hammett
> > Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 12:23 PM
> > To: WISPA General List
> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
> >
> > Then the problem arises of frequency reuse if we have such low gain
> > antenna
> > all over the place...  and the size of a sector antenna for towers.
> >
> >
> > -
> > Mike Hammett
> > Intelligent Computing Solutions
> > http://www.ics-il.com
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > From: "Mike" 
> > Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 11:59 AM
> > To: "'WISPA General List'" 
> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
> >
> >> Just for discussion, let's say a TV LPDA has a gain of 8 dBi.  It will
> >> cover
> >> the entire VHF TV band, and by superimposing a UHF LPDA on the same
> mast,
> >> can cover the entire UHF TV band with similar gain figures.
> >>
> >> I'd make this challenge:
> >>
> >> I could TRY to hide a TV band LPDA on my property and beg you to find
> it.
> >> Even well hidden, you would.  Now, give me a few hours to build a narrow
> >> band antenna with similar gain in ANY 6 MHz segment of the same bands,
> >> and
> >> let me try to hide it.  Do you think I could hide it well enough you
> >> wouldn't find it?  I know I can.
> >>
> >> My point is, the antenna which will be needed for any segment of the
> >> whitespace will be much less intrusive than the LPDA (or Yagi) being
> used
> >> for comparison.
> >>
> >> This is great dialogue.  I hope we are faced with the challenge of
> >> deploying
> >> in these bands.
> >>
> >> Mike
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> 
> > 
> >> 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] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Mike Hammett]

My experience is mostly limited to the WISP market (though I'm not 
completely ignorant of other markets).  Innovation is always welcome, but 
any sector that delivers approximately 90 degrees and 15 dBi performance is 
going to be huge.


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



--
From: "Mike" 
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 12:39 PM
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

> Have you ever taken a really good look at an FM broadcast antenna?  Most 
> are
> circularly polarized so they can be received by both horizontal and 
> vertical
> receive antennas.  Even at 90 MHz they aren't that large either.  My 
> choice
> of sector would be something like that, and would be made of aluminum 
> parts,
> not panels like we are used to using now.  I predict circular polarity 
> will
> be the norm.  Why?  Because theoretically, a receive antenna of opposite
> circular sense exhibits infinite loss.  My experiments have shown that
> reality is less, but you CAN expect at least 30 to 40 dB of isolation. 
> The
> same 6 MHz segment could be reused on the same tower.  The phasing harness
> on the CPE antenna would have to set to either left hand or right hand
> circular polarization.
>
> Friendly Regards,
>
> Mike
>
> Mike Gilchrist
> Disruptive Technologist
> Advanced Wireless Express
> P.O. Box 255
> Toledo, IA   52342
> 239.770.6203
> m...@aweiowa.com
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 12:23 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
> Then the problem arises of frequency reuse if we have such low gain 
> antenna
> all over the place...  and the size of a sector antenna for towers.
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
> --
> From: "Mike" 
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 11:59 AM
> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
>> Just for discussion, let's say a TV LPDA has a gain of 8 dBi.  It will
>> cover
>> the entire VHF TV band, and by superimposing a UHF LPDA on the same mast,
>> can cover the entire UHF TV band with similar gain figures.
>>
>> I'd make this challenge:
>>
>> I could TRY to hide a TV band LPDA on my property and beg you to find it.
>> Even well hidden, you would.  Now, give me a few hours to build a narrow
>> band antenna with similar gain in ANY 6 MHz segment of the same bands, 
>> and
>> let me try to hide it.  Do you think I could hide it well enough you
>> wouldn't find it?  I know I can.
>>
>> My point is, the antenna which will be needed for any segment of the
>> whitespace will be much less intrusive than the LPDA (or Yagi) being used
>> for comparison.
>>
>> This is great dialogue.  I hope we are faced with the challenge of
>> deploying
>> in these bands.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
>> 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] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Mike]

Have you ever taken a really good look at an FM broadcast antenna?  Most are
circularly polarized so they can be received by both horizontal and vertical
receive antennas.  Even at 90 MHz they aren't that large either.  My choice
of sector would be something like that, and would be made of aluminum parts,
not panels like we are used to using now.  I predict circular polarity will
be the norm.  Why?  Because theoretically, a receive antenna of opposite
circular sense exhibits infinite loss.  My experiments have shown that
reality is less, but you CAN expect at least 30 to 40 dB of isolation.  The
same 6 MHz segment could be reused on the same tower.  The phasing harness
on the CPE antenna would have to set to either left hand or right hand
circular polarization.

Friendly Regards,
 
Mike
 
Mike Gilchrist
Disruptive Technologist
Advanced Wireless Express
P.O. Box 255
Toledo, IA   52342
239.770.6203
m...@aweiowa.com
 

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 12:23 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

Then the problem arises of frequency reuse if we have such low gain antenna 
all over the place...  and the size of a sector antenna for towers.


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



--
From: "Mike" 
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 11:59 AM
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

> Just for discussion, let's say a TV LPDA has a gain of 8 dBi.  It will 
> cover
> the entire VHF TV band, and by superimposing a UHF LPDA on the same mast,
> can cover the entire UHF TV band with similar gain figures.
>
> I'd make this challenge:
>
> I could TRY to hide a TV band LPDA on my property and beg you to find it.
> Even well hidden, you would.  Now, give me a few hours to build a narrow
> band antenna with similar gain in ANY 6 MHz segment of the same bands, and
> let me try to hide it.  Do you think I could hide it well enough you
> wouldn't find it?  I know I can.
>
> My point is, the antenna which will be needed for any segment of the
> whitespace will be much less intrusive than the LPDA (or Yagi) being used
> for comparison.
>
> This is great dialogue.  I hope we are faced with the challenge of 
> deploying
> in these bands.
>
> Mike
>
>
>
>
>


> 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] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Mike]

Think innovation.  Remove or move a segment of a certain element design and
you've modified the resonant frequency.  With things I have in my barn I
could design and build a turnstile with tunable elements.  Think trombone
with specific markings.  Broadband antennas by design need be larger than an
antenna designed for a specific segment.  From everything I know about
antenna design, this is NOT a deal breaker.

Friendly Regards,
 
Mike
 
Mike Gilchrist
Disruptive Technologist
Advanced Wireless Express
P.O. Box 255
Toledo, IA   52342
239.770.6203
m...@aweiowa.com
 

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 12:10 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

While it wouldn't need to cover the entire range, I'd expect at a most 
separate UHF and VHF antenna...  otherwise you're way too specific and would

need to stock too many different antenna models.


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



--
From: "Mike" 
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 8:23 AM
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

> Awesome report!  Thanks.
> Give me equipment capable of 20 watts, circularly polarized sectors, a
> turnstile antenna on the CPE, and it would be a perfect fit for THIS rural
> market.  At that power level, and circular polarization, I could reuse any
> channel on the same tower using opposite circular sense.  I know some of 
> the
> discussion in the past on this list led some to believe an antenna would
> look like a big TV log periodic, but it just isn't so.  A TV antenna is by
> necessity a broadband device, and as such is BIG to handle a RANGE of
> frequencies.  A turnstile or other narrow band antenna could be built to
> blend with the aesthetics of a home or business.  Heck, if this comes to
> pass, I may go into the antenna building business just for this usage.
>
> Friendly Regards,
>
> Mike
>
> Mike Gilchrist
> Disruptive Technologist
> Advanced Wireless Express
> P.O. Box 255
> Toledo, IA   52342
> 239.770.6203
> m...@aweiowa.com
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Steve Barnes
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 7:41 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
> This is a great report good job guys and thank you.
>
> Next question.  I don't know any of the team personally just from your
> posts.  The picture in the report, can you give us a who's who left to
> right.
>
> Steve Barnes
> RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Jack Unger
> Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 7:17 PM
> To: memb...@wispa.org; WISPA General List
> Subject: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
> Last Wednesday, March 31, the WISPA FCC Committee assisted by the WISPA
> Promotions Committee met with top managers of the FCC Office of 
> Engineering
> and Technology (OET) at FCC Headquarters in Washington D.C.
> to discuss the status of WISPA's TV Whitespaces filings.
>
> The following Members represented WISPA. Ryan Spott, Alex Phillips, John
> Scriver, and Jack Unger. The WISPA Team was assisted by Steve Coran of
> Rini/Coran LLC in Washington.
>
> All Team Members made valuable contributions to the effort and we all feel
> that the meeting went well. Our goal was to ask the FCC take favorable
> action soon on WISPA's Petitions to adjust the TV Whitespace rules by 
> making
> corrections to several problem areas, thereby making WISP use of the
> Whitespaces more practical and more successful.
>
> I'm attaching a more detailed report (.doc file) and also the official
> written filing (PDF) that WISPA is required to make after every meeting 
> with
> the FCC. A copy of our FCC PowerPoint presentation is also required to be
> part of our written filing. To easily view our presentation, please rotate
> the attached PDF clockwise 90 degrees in your Adobe Reader viewer.
>
> Your questions and constructive suggestions are always welcome.
>
> Respectfully Submitted,
>
> Jack Unger
> WISPA FCC Committee Chair
> 818-227-4220
>
> --
> Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
> Network Design - Technical Training - Technical Writing Serving the
> Broadband Wireless, Networking and Telecom Communities since 1993
> www.ask-wi.com  818-227-4220  jun...@ask-wi.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
>

Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Mike Hammett]

Then the problem arises of frequency reuse if we have such low gain antenna 
all over the place...  and the size of a sector antenna for towers.


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



--
From: "Mike" 
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 11:59 AM
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

> Just for discussion, let's say a TV LPDA has a gain of 8 dBi.  It will 
> cover
> the entire VHF TV band, and by superimposing a UHF LPDA on the same mast,
> can cover the entire UHF TV band with similar gain figures.
>
> I'd make this challenge:
>
> I could TRY to hide a TV band LPDA on my property and beg you to find it.
> Even well hidden, you would.  Now, give me a few hours to build a narrow
> band antenna with similar gain in ANY 6 MHz segment of the same bands, and
> let me try to hide it.  Do you think I could hide it well enough you
> wouldn't find it?  I know I can.
>
> My point is, the antenna which will be needed for any segment of the
> whitespace will be much less intrusive than the LPDA (or Yagi) being used
> for comparison.
>
> This is great dialogue.  I hope we are faced with the challenge of 
> deploying
> in these bands.
>
> Mike
>
>
>
>
> 
> 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] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Mike Hammett]

The transmit frequency has nothing to do with how much data you can send, 
it's the channel size.  Channel 2 will move as much data as channel 50. 
TVBD will have limited use if you can't bond at least 3 channels together, 
closer to 6.


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



--
From: "Steve Barnes" 
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 8:55 AM
To: "WISPA General List" 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

> Mike, though I agree that circular polarization could work.  What channel 
> width are you going to need to have a usable system.  I mean in the VHF 
> band of 54 Mhz to 88 Mhz the frequency is to slow to have any ability to 
> clock the data through at any worth wile speed. We are supposed to be 
> giving customers more bandwidth and faster service.  Yes it would cut 
> through trees and I would love it.  But at 2-3X dialup speed?
>
> The upper bands are definitely better but then you lower your penetration 
> (>800 Mhz).
>
> Someone enlighten me here.
>
> Steve Barnes
> RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
> Behalf Of Mike
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 9:24 AM
> To: 'WISPA General List'
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
> Awesome report!  Thanks.
> Give me equipment capable of 20 watts, circularly polarized sectors, a
> turnstile antenna on the CPE, and it would be a perfect fit for THIS rural
> market.  At that power level, and circular polarization, I could reuse any
> channel on the same tower using opposite circular sense.  I know some of 
> the
> discussion in the past on this list led some to believe an antenna would
> look like a big TV log periodic, but it just isn't so.  A TV antenna is by
> necessity a broadband device, and as such is BIG to handle a RANGE of
> frequencies.  A turnstile or other narrow band antenna could be built to
> blend with the aesthetics of a home or business.  Heck, if this comes to
> pass, I may go into the antenna building business just for this usage.
>
> Friendly Regards,
>
> Mike
>
> Mike Gilchrist
> Disruptive Technologist
> Advanced Wireless Express
> P.O. Box 255
> Toledo, IA   52342
> 239.770.6203
> m...@aweiowa.com
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Steve Barnes
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 7:41 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
> This is a great report good job guys and thank you.
>
> Next question.  I don't know any of the team personally just from your
> posts.  The picture in the report, can you give us a who's who left to
> right.
>
> Steve Barnes
> RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Jack Unger
> Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 7:17 PM
> To: memb...@wispa.org; WISPA General List
> Subject: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
> Last Wednesday, March 31, the WISPA FCC Committee assisted by the WISPA
> Promotions Committee met with top managers of the FCC Office of 
> Engineering
> and Technology (OET) at FCC Headquarters in Washington D.C.
> to discuss the status of WISPA's TV Whitespaces filings.
>
> The following Members represented WISPA. Ryan Spott, Alex Phillips, John
> Scriver, and Jack Unger. The WISPA Team was assisted by Steve Coran of
> Rini/Coran LLC in Washington.
>
> All Team Members made valuable contributions to the effort and we all feel
> that the meeting went well. Our goal was to ask the FCC take favorable
> action soon on WISPA's Petitions to adjust the TV Whitespace rules by 
> making
> corrections to several problem areas, thereby making WISP use of the
> Whitespaces more practical and more successful.
>
> I'm attaching a more detailed report (.doc file) and also the official
> written filing (PDF) that WISPA is required to make after every meeting 
> with
> the FCC. A copy of our FCC PowerPoint presentation is also required to be
> part of our written filing. To easily view our presentation, please rotate
> the attached PDF clockwise 90 degrees in your Adobe Reader viewer.
>
> Your questions and constructive suggestions are always welcome.
>
> Respectfully Submitted,
>
> Jack Unger
> WISPA FCC Committee Chair
> 818-227-4220
>
> --
> Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
> Network Design - Technical Training - Technical Writing Serving the
> Broadband Wireless, Networking and Telecom Communities since 1993
> www.ask-wi.com  818-227-4220  jun...@ask-wi.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wi

Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Mike Hammett]

While it wouldn't need to cover the entire range, I'd expect at a most 
separate UHF and VHF antenna...  otherwise you're way too specific and would 
need to stock too many different antenna models.


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



--
From: "Mike" 
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 8:23 AM
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

> Awesome report!  Thanks.
> Give me equipment capable of 20 watts, circularly polarized sectors, a
> turnstile antenna on the CPE, and it would be a perfect fit for THIS rural
> market.  At that power level, and circular polarization, I could reuse any
> channel on the same tower using opposite circular sense.  I know some of 
> the
> discussion in the past on this list led some to believe an antenna would
> look like a big TV log periodic, but it just isn't so.  A TV antenna is by
> necessity a broadband device, and as such is BIG to handle a RANGE of
> frequencies.  A turnstile or other narrow band antenna could be built to
> blend with the aesthetics of a home or business.  Heck, if this comes to
> pass, I may go into the antenna building business just for this usage.
>
> Friendly Regards,
>
> Mike
>
> Mike Gilchrist
> Disruptive Technologist
> Advanced Wireless Express
> P.O. Box 255
> Toledo, IA   52342
> 239.770.6203
> m...@aweiowa.com
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Steve Barnes
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 7:41 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
> This is a great report good job guys and thank you.
>
> Next question.  I don't know any of the team personally just from your
> posts.  The picture in the report, can you give us a who's who left to
> right.
>
> Steve Barnes
> RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Jack Unger
> Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 7:17 PM
> To: memb...@wispa.org; WISPA General List
> Subject: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
> Last Wednesday, March 31, the WISPA FCC Committee assisted by the WISPA
> Promotions Committee met with top managers of the FCC Office of 
> Engineering
> and Technology (OET) at FCC Headquarters in Washington D.C.
> to discuss the status of WISPA's TV Whitespaces filings.
>
> The following Members represented WISPA. Ryan Spott, Alex Phillips, John
> Scriver, and Jack Unger. The WISPA Team was assisted by Steve Coran of
> Rini/Coran LLC in Washington.
>
> All Team Members made valuable contributions to the effort and we all feel
> that the meeting went well. Our goal was to ask the FCC take favorable
> action soon on WISPA's Petitions to adjust the TV Whitespace rules by 
> making
> corrections to several problem areas, thereby making WISP use of the
> Whitespaces more practical and more successful.
>
> I'm attaching a more detailed report (.doc file) and also the official
> written filing (PDF) that WISPA is required to make after every meeting 
> with
> the FCC. A copy of our FCC PowerPoint presentation is also required to be
> part of our written filing. To easily view our presentation, please rotate
> the attached PDF clockwise 90 degrees in your Adobe Reader viewer.
>
> Your questions and constructive suggestions are always welcome.
>
> Respectfully Submitted,
>
> Jack Unger
> WISPA FCC Committee Chair
> 818-227-4220
>
> --
> Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
> Network Design - Technical Training - Technical Writing Serving the
> Broadband Wireless, Networking and Telecom Communities since 1993
> www.ask-wi.com  818-227-4220  jun...@ask-wi.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:

Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Mike Hammett]

I've driven this often, but ATPC should be on every device that engages in 2 
way communications.  Every...  single...  one.  Don't tell me it's expensive to 
do, I can buy a new $10 cell phone out of contract that does it.

Without proper ATPC, high power on low frequencies will travel forever in both 
intended and unintended areas.


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




From: Jack Unger 
Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 11:55 PM
To: WISPA General List 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC


Depends on the distance and the obstructions. Sometimes yes, sometimes no. 
Would you rather have more power than you need or not enough? We also propose 
use of automatic transmitter power control so we only use as much power as we 
need. 

jack

Kurt Fankhauser wrote: 
20 watt radio's? Going into lets say a 6db antenna? Your looking at 80
watts. Is this really necessary?

Kurt Fankhauser
WAVELINC
P.O. Box 126
Bucyrus, OH 44820
419-562-6405
www.wavelinc.com
 
 
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Ryan Spott
Sent: Sunday, April 04, 2010 12:10 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

This would be UP TO 20 watts at the radio.

We explained how 900 works for most of us. (it sorta does... mostly)

ryan

On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 8:58 PM, Kurt Fankhauser  wrote:

  The 20 watt power output request. Is this for total ERP or at the radio?

Kurt Fankhauser
WAVELINC
P.O. Box 126
Bucyrus, OH 44820
419-562-6405
www.wavelinc.com


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 7:17 PM
To: memb...@wispa.org; WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

Last Wednesday, March 31, the WISPA FCC Committee assisted by the WISPA
Promotions Committee met with top managers of the FCC Office of
Engineering and Technology (OET) at FCC Headquarters in Washington D.C.
to discuss the status of WISPA's TV Whitespaces filings.

The following Members represented WISPA. Ryan Spott, Alex Phillips, John
Scriver, and Jack Unger. The WISPA Team was assisted by Steve Coran of
Rini/Coran LLC in Washington.

All Team Members made valuable contributions to the effort and we all
feel that the meeting went well. Our goal was to ask the FCC take
favorable action soon on WISPA's Petitions to adjust the TV Whitespace
rules by making corrections to several problem areas, thereby making
WISP use of the Whitespaces more practical and more successful.

I'm attaching a more detailed report (.doc file) and also the official
written filing (PDF) that WISPA is required to make after every meeting
with the FCC. A copy of our FCC PowerPoint presentation is also required
to be part of our written filing. To easily view our presentation,
please rotate the attached PDF clockwise 90 degrees in your Adobe Reader
viewer.

Your questions and constructive suggestions are always welcome.

Respectfully Submitted,

Jack Unger
WISPA FCC Committee Chair
818-227-4220

--
Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
Network Design - Technical Training - Technical Writing
Serving the Broadband Wireless, Networking and Telecom Communities since
1993
www.ask-wi.com  818-227-4220  jun...@ask-wi.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/


  

-- 
Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
Network Design - Technical Training - Technical Writing
Serving the Broadband Wireless, Networking and Telecom Communities since 1993
www.ask-wi.com  818-227-4220  jun...@ask-wi.com











WISPA Wants You

Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Mike]

Just for discussion, let's say a TV LPDA has a gain of 8 dBi.  It will cover
the entire VHF TV band, and by superimposing a UHF LPDA on the same mast,
can cover the entire UHF TV band with similar gain figures.

I'd make this challenge:

I could TRY to hide a TV band LPDA on my property and beg you to find it.
Even well hidden, you would.  Now, give me a few hours to build a narrow
band antenna with similar gain in ANY 6 MHz segment of the same bands, and
let me try to hide it.  Do you think I could hide it well enough you
wouldn't find it?  I know I can.

My point is, the antenna which will be needed for any segment of the
whitespace will be much less intrusive than the LPDA (or Yagi) being used
for comparison.

This is great dialogue.  I hope we are faced with the challenge of deploying
in these bands.

Mike





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] Pan flutes on the tower

[Data Technology]

Mike,
The pvc standoff you have for the repeater antenna is mounted 
horizontally and the wind would have to blow just right in order for it 
to make any sound.  I think the wind needs to blow across the opening 
close to 90 deg to create the sound. If you mounted the 2 in pipe 
vertically then I bet it is you culprit because the wind can blow from 
any direction and still blow across the opening to make the sound. 

As for the SDR-IQ, I bet that is a sweet radio.  I have been thinking 
about a 160m sloper or inverted v off of my tower at the house.  I put 
up a 160m delta loop before winter but I have not been overly impressed 
with it.

73's
LaRoy McCann, N5OHO
Data Technology

Mike wrote:
> LaRoy:
>
> (and others)  Thanks for your analysis and feedback.  The more I look,
> listen and observe, the more I believe you guys have found the melodic
> culprit.
>
> When I put up the amateur antenna, a new backhaul was put up during the same
> time period.  I built that mount with a 2 inch piece of galvanized pipe.
> So, I am counting open ends of open pipes and the math adds up to a four
> part melody.  The next trip up the tower will see duty capping all ends of
> all open pipes.  I just hope the sound doesn't affect growth of my asparagus
> or morel mushrooms in the meantime.  LOL
>
> For you amateur radio operators and armchair SWLers, that 900 foot long wire
> (actually an inverted Vee) with the apex at 160 feet, coupled to one of
> these http://rfspace.com/RFSPACE/SDR-IQ.html is beyond compare!  The NDB
> band is a solid band of colors.  Even LW signals from Europe come pounding
> in regularly.
>
> Friendly Regards,
>  
> Mike
>  
> Mike Gilchrist
> Disruptive Technologist
> Advanced Wireless Express
> P.O. Box 255
> Toledo, IA   52342
> 239.770.6203
> m...@aweiowa.com
>  
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Data Technology
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 11:04 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Pan flutes on the tower
>
> I bet if you cap the ends it will quit whistling.
> I have the same problem on one of my towers.  I have a 1.5" dia pipe as 
> a standoff and it will make sounds when the wind blows.
> I was up there on a windy day once and I could put my hand over the top 
> of the pipe and it would quit whistling.
>
> LaRoy McCann
> Data Technology
>
> Mike wrote:
>   
>> A while back, the amateur community talked me into putting a ham antenna
>> 
> on
>   
>> my highest tower.  It is a dual band 2 meter 70 cm DC grounded unit (as
>> 
> per
>   
>> my specs).  I built a mount which offsets the stick a couple feet from the
>> tower.  A piece of 1 inch PVC through which I passed a piece of poly rope
>> 
> is
>   
>> attached with stainless hose clamps near the top of the stick to lasso the
>> 17 foot stick to keep it from swaying.
>>
>>  
>>
>> A couple times this winter when I was outside, I heard this eerie melodic
>> 
> 4
>   
>> part tone.  It sounded like someone blowing across Pan flutes.  Now that
>> spring has sprung, every time the wind blows, there is this tune again.
>> While I questioned my sanity this winter, I do think it is coming from the
>> amateur antenna.
>>
>>  
>>
>> Although the sound is somewhat melodic and not objectionable, I fear this
>> summer with windows open in the house, it will keep me up at night.  I
>> 
> have
>   
>> this fear it will be like when I first put that tower up and put a 10 foot
>> by 20 foot flag at the top to raise awareness in the community.  It
>> 
> snapped
>   
>> so loud it would wake you from a sound sleep.  One of my best nights was
>> when that flag finally came down.
>>
>>  
>>
>> Since everything was done per my requests, and I want to maintain my stead
>> with the amateur community, how does one keep that stick from making those
>> noises?  I am hoping someone here has encountered something similar and
>> 
> has
>   
>> a resolve.
>>
>>  
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>  
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 
> 
> 
>   
>> 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] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Leon D. Zetekoff]

On 4/5/2010 12:18 PM, Mike wrote:

Leon:

Innovation will be key.  Yes, a 6 meter vertical is large.  But, what if you
bent that quarter wave into an odd shape?  Think fractals, cloverleafs, and
other HORIZONATL elements.  Comparing what we'd HAVE to use compared to a TV
Yagi is apples to oranges.  Besides, most TV antennas I have ever met are
Log Periodic Dipole arrays, NOT Yagis.  Why?  Because they have to be
engineered to operate in the ENTIRE TV spectrum, NOT a 6 MHz segment.
   

Hey Mike...

I was just using the size as a reference as well as the tv antenna. THe 
longest elements on a TV antenna is 6m.
yes log periodic is the correct terminology :-) but its still a yagi of 
sorts.


I agree that innovation will be the key. remember the top part of 
lo-band is 88 mHz. There is probably a way to build a multi-TV channel 
antenna. Look at HF verticals or vhf/uhf mobile antennas.


leon
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.800 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2792 - Release Date: 04/05/10 
02:32:00



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] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Ryan Spott]

Channel 2 (54-60 MHz) 102" 259cm
Channel 3 (60-66 MHz) 92"  234cm
Channel 4 (66-72 MHz) 83"  211cm
Channel 6 (82-88 MHz) 72"  183cm

A typical antenna for low-band VHF:
 from <
http://www.antennacraft.net/Yagi.html>
Ugly? Yes.
Cheap (for now)? Yes
Broadband with penetration: Heck yes. :)


ryan
On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 9:07 AM, Leon D. Zetekoff  wrote:

> On 4/5/2010 11:02 AM, Tom DeReggi wrote:
>
>> A Couple questions.
>>
>> First,  I would agree, any Whitespace spectrum is good spectrum for us,
>> and
>> better than none.
>>
>> But, why does the FCC keep hypothetically asking us "what about VHF
>> channels 1-x" the lower part of the band?
>> I think when we met with Blair, the lower portion of VHF also came up
>> briefly.
>>
>> 1. Are they asking us, because they plan to give the rest to someone else
>> :-(
>> 2. Are they asking because others are requesting the higher portions of
>> the
>> band, that are more advantageous?And wondering whether we consider the
>> lower
>> portions more or less advantageous for our use?
>> 3. Is there something wrong or more encombersome with Bands 1-X (7?), that
>> we dont know about or do know about?
>> 4. Is VHF ch 1-X (7?) more advantageous, becaue its a band more widely
>> available in more places in the US?
>> (For example, I think some free channels exist in Band 1-7 for the DC
>> area, but I'd need to go back and check to verify).
>> 5. How will our Antenna size requirements vary for this portion of the
>> band?
>>
>>
>>
> Hey Tom...
>
> a six meter vertical is long - a half wave is about 8.6 feet.(6m is
> 50-54mHz) so a quarter wave vertical is 4.3'. Add more gain gets bigger.
>
> Look at the elements in a TV yagi to get a feel for the low-band (2-6)
> element size. ALso, most tv antennas are not that directional on lo-band;
> hi-band (7-13) usually has more gain and directionality.
>
> But would I want to be able to use that spectrum? Absolutely.
>
> 
>
> Leon
>
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 9.0.800 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2792 - Release Date: 04/05/10
> 02:32:00
>
>
>
>
> 
> 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] Pan flutes on the tower

[Mike]

LaRoy:

(and others)  Thanks for your analysis and feedback.  The more I look,
listen and observe, the more I believe you guys have found the melodic
culprit.

When I put up the amateur antenna, a new backhaul was put up during the same
time period.  I built that mount with a 2 inch piece of galvanized pipe.
So, I am counting open ends of open pipes and the math adds up to a four
part melody.  The next trip up the tower will see duty capping all ends of
all open pipes.  I just hope the sound doesn't affect growth of my asparagus
or morel mushrooms in the meantime.  LOL

For you amateur radio operators and armchair SWLers, that 900 foot long wire
(actually an inverted Vee) with the apex at 160 feet, coupled to one of
these http://rfspace.com/RFSPACE/SDR-IQ.html is beyond compare!  The NDB
band is a solid band of colors.  Even LW signals from Europe come pounding
in regularly.

Friendly Regards,
 
Mike
 
Mike Gilchrist
Disruptive Technologist
Advanced Wireless Express
P.O. Box 255
Toledo, IA   52342
239.770.6203
m...@aweiowa.com
 

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Data Technology
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 11:04 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Pan flutes on the tower

I bet if you cap the ends it will quit whistling.
I have the same problem on one of my towers.  I have a 1.5" dia pipe as 
a standoff and it will make sounds when the wind blows.
I was up there on a windy day once and I could put my hand over the top 
of the pipe and it would quit whistling.

LaRoy McCann
Data Technology

Mike wrote:
> A while back, the amateur community talked me into putting a ham antenna
on
> my highest tower.  It is a dual band 2 meter 70 cm DC grounded unit (as
per
> my specs).  I built a mount which offsets the stick a couple feet from the
> tower.  A piece of 1 inch PVC through which I passed a piece of poly rope
is
> attached with stainless hose clamps near the top of the stick to lasso the
> 17 foot stick to keep it from swaying.
>
>  
>
> A couple times this winter when I was outside, I heard this eerie melodic
4
> part tone.  It sounded like someone blowing across Pan flutes.  Now that
> spring has sprung, every time the wind blows, there is this tune again.
> While I questioned my sanity this winter, I do think it is coming from the
> amateur antenna.
>
>  
>
> Although the sound is somewhat melodic and not objectionable, I fear this
> summer with windows open in the house, it will keep me up at night.  I
have
> this fear it will be like when I first put that tower up and put a 10 foot
> by 20 foot flag at the top to raise awareness in the community.  It
snapped
> so loud it would wake you from a sound sleep.  One of my best nights was
> when that flag finally came down.
>
>  
>
> Since everything was done per my requests, and I want to maintain my stead
> with the amateur community, how does one keep that stick from making those
> noises?  I am hoping someone here has encountered something similar and
has
> a resolve.
>
>  
>
> Regards,
>
>  
>
> Mike
>
>
>
>


> 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] Pan flutes on the tower

[Justin Wilson]

Yeah wind does not blow at a constant rate so the tones will change.

---
Justin Wilson 
http://www.mtin.net/blog
Wisp Consulting ­ Tower Climbing ­ Network Support



From: Josh Luthman 
Reply-To: WISPA General List 
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2010 12:17:15 -0400
To: WISPA General List 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Pan flutes on the tower

Makes sense.  Just like when you blow over a bottle (root beer, beer, etc -
the glass ones).

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

³Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue
that counts.²
--- Winston Churchill


On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 12:03 PM, Data Technology  wrote:

> I bet if you cap the ends it will quit whistling.
> I have the same problem on one of my towers.  I have a 1.5" dia pipe as
> a standoff and it will make sounds when the wind blows.
> I was up there on a windy day once and I could put my hand over the top
> of the pipe and it would quit whistling.
>
> LaRoy McCann
> Data Technology
>
> Mike wrote:
> > A while back, the amateur community talked me into putting a ham antenna
> on
> > my highest tower.  It is a dual band 2 meter 70 cm DC grounded unit (as
> per
> > my specs).  I built a mount which offsets the stick a couple feet from
> the
> > tower.  A piece of 1 inch PVC through which I passed a piece of poly rope
> is
> > attached with stainless hose clamps near the top of the stick to lasso
> the
> > 17 foot stick to keep it from swaying.
> >
> >
> >
> > A couple times this winter when I was outside, I heard this eerie melodic
> 4
> > part tone.  It sounded like someone blowing across Pan flutes.  Now that
> > spring has sprung, every time the wind blows, there is this tune again.
> > While I questioned my sanity this winter, I do think it is coming from
> the
> > amateur antenna.
> >
> >
> >
> > Although the sound is somewhat melodic and not objectionable, I fear this
> > summer with windows open in the house, it will keep me up at night.  I
> have
> > this fear it will be like when I first put that tower up and put a 10
> foot
> > by 20 foot flag at the top to raise awareness in the community.  It
> snapped
> > so loud it would wake you from a sound sleep.  One of my best nights was
> > when that flag finally came down.
> >
> >
> >
> > Since everything was done per my requests, and I want to maintain my
> stead
> > with the amateur community, how does one keep that stick from making
> those
> > noises?  I am hoping someone here has encountered something similar and
> has
> > a resolve.
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> >
> >
> > Mike
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 

> > 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] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Mike]

Leon:

Innovation will be key.  Yes, a 6 meter vertical is large.  But, what if you
bent that quarter wave into an odd shape?  Think fractals, cloverleafs, and
other HORIZONATL elements.  Comparing what we'd HAVE to use compared to a TV
Yagi is apples to oranges.  Besides, most TV antennas I have ever met are
Log Periodic Dipole arrays, NOT Yagis.  Why?  Because they have to be
engineered to operate in the ENTIRE TV spectrum, NOT a 6 MHz segment.

Friendly Regards,
 
Mike
 
Mike Gilchrist
Disruptive Technologist
Advanced Wireless Express
P.O. Box 255
Toledo, IA   52342
239.770.6203
m...@aweiowa.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] Pan flutes on the tower

[Josh Luthman]

Makes sense.  Just like when you blow over a bottle (root beer, beer, etc -
the glass ones).

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373

“Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue
that counts.”
--- Winston Churchill


On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 12:03 PM, Data Technology  wrote:

> I bet if you cap the ends it will quit whistling.
> I have the same problem on one of my towers.  I have a 1.5" dia pipe as
> a standoff and it will make sounds when the wind blows.
> I was up there on a windy day once and I could put my hand over the top
> of the pipe and it would quit whistling.
>
> LaRoy McCann
> Data Technology
>
> Mike wrote:
> > A while back, the amateur community talked me into putting a ham antenna
> on
> > my highest tower.  It is a dual band 2 meter 70 cm DC grounded unit (as
> per
> > my specs).  I built a mount which offsets the stick a couple feet from
> the
> > tower.  A piece of 1 inch PVC through which I passed a piece of poly rope
> is
> > attached with stainless hose clamps near the top of the stick to lasso
> the
> > 17 foot stick to keep it from swaying.
> >
> >
> >
> > A couple times this winter when I was outside, I heard this eerie melodic
> 4
> > part tone.  It sounded like someone blowing across Pan flutes.  Now that
> > spring has sprung, every time the wind blows, there is this tune again.
> > While I questioned my sanity this winter, I do think it is coming from
> the
> > amateur antenna.
> >
> >
> >
> > Although the sound is somewhat melodic and not objectionable, I fear this
> > summer with windows open in the house, it will keep me up at night.  I
> have
> > this fear it will be like when I first put that tower up and put a 10
> foot
> > by 20 foot flag at the top to raise awareness in the community.  It
> snapped
> > so loud it would wake you from a sound sleep.  One of my best nights was
> > when that flag finally came down.
> >
> >
> >
> > Since everything was done per my requests, and I want to maintain my
> stead
> > with the amateur community, how does one keep that stick from making
> those
> > noises?  I am hoping someone here has encountered something similar and
> has
> > a resolve.
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> >
> >
> > Mike
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> > 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] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Leon D. Zetekoff]

On 4/5/2010 11:02 AM, Tom DeReggi wrote:

A Couple questions.

First,  I would agree, any Whitespace spectrum is good spectrum for us, and
better than none.

But, why does the FCC keep hypothetically asking us "what about VHF
channels 1-x" the lower part of the band?
I think when we met with Blair, the lower portion of VHF also came up
briefly.

1. Are they asking us, because they plan to give the rest to someone else
:-(
2. Are they asking because others are requesting the higher portions of the
band, that are more advantageous?And wondering whether we consider the lower
portions more or less advantageous for our use?
3. Is there something wrong or more encombersome with Bands 1-X (7?), that
we dont know about or do know about?
4. Is VHF ch 1-X (7?) more advantageous, becaue its a band more widely
available in more places in the US?
 (For example, I think some free channels exist in Band 1-7 for the DC
area, but I'd need to go back and check to verify).
5. How will our Antenna size requirements vary for this portion of the band?

   

Hey Tom...

a six meter vertical is long - a half wave is about 8.6 feet.(6m is 
50-54mHz) so a quarter wave vertical is 4.3'. Add more gain gets bigger.


Look at the elements in a TV yagi to get a feel for the low-band (2-6) 
element size. ALso, most tv antennas are not that directional on 
lo-band; hi-band (7-13) usually has more gain and directionality.


But would I want to be able to use that spectrum? Absolutely.



Leon
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.800 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2792 - Release Date: 04/05/10 
02:32:00



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] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Steve Barnes]

(As the lights come on and the eyes brighten) OK so now I get it. The Carrier 
frequency and the bandwidth is just the pipe.  What we need to worry about is 
the floor noise, the carrier we attach to and what compression technology we 
use on that carrier which determines the speed and throughput.

I've been in the PC business to long and had the higher freq = more throughput 
had that assumption since there is lower throughput on 900Mhz.  Need to go back 
to my radio classes from college.

Steve Barnes
RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf 
Of John Scrivner
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 10:17 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

I am not sure where you get your assumptions but they are not correct. Every
television channel has available 6 MHz of bandwidth and can be modulated
with the same amount of data regardless of where the channel resides in the
VHF or UHF frequency bands. The limiting factor for these lowest VHF
channels is the overall higher noise level which is certainly an issue but
not a deal killer for us. I am guessing that our use of the lowest VHF
channels would require more forward error correction to provide high quality
service. In my opinion this is a minor annoyance to be able to have coverage
to 100% of my potential customer base.
John Scrivner


On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 8:55 AM, Steve Barnes  wrote:

> Mike, though I agree that circular polarization could work.  What channel
> width are you going to need to have a usable system.  I mean in the VHF band
> of 54 Mhz to 88 Mhz the frequency is to slow to have any ability to clock
> the data through at any worth wile speed. We are supposed to be giving
> customers more bandwidth and faster service.  Yes it would cut through trees
> and I would love it.  But at 2-3X dialup speed?
>
> The upper bands are definitely better but then you lower your penetration
> (>800 Mhz).
>
> Someone enlighten me here.
>
> Steve Barnes
> RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Mike
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 9:24 AM
> To: 'WISPA General List'
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
> Awesome report!  Thanks.
> Give me equipment capable of 20 watts, circularly polarized sectors, a
> turnstile antenna on the CPE, and it would be a perfect fit for THIS rural
> market.  At that power level, and circular polarization, I could reuse any
> channel on the same tower using opposite circular sense.  I know some of
> the
> discussion in the past on this list led some to believe an antenna would
> look like a big TV log periodic, but it just isn't so.  A TV antenna is by
> necessity a broadband device, and as such is BIG to handle a RANGE of
> frequencies.  A turnstile or other narrow band antenna could be built to
> blend with the aesthetics of a home or business.  Heck, if this comes to
> pass, I may go into the antenna building business just for this usage.
>
> Friendly Regards,
>
> Mike
>
> Mike Gilchrist
> Disruptive Technologist
> Advanced Wireless Express
> P.O. Box 255
> Toledo, IA   52342
> 239.770.6203
> m...@aweiowa.com
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Steve Barnes
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 7:41 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
> This is a great report good job guys and thank you.
>
> Next question.  I don't know any of the team personally just from your
> posts.  The picture in the report, can you give us a who's who left to
> right.
>
> Steve Barnes
> RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Jack Unger
> Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 7:17 PM
> To: memb...@wispa.org; WISPA General List
> Subject: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
> Last Wednesday, March 31, the WISPA FCC Committee assisted by the WISPA
> Promotions Committee met with top managers of the FCC Office of Engineering
> and Technology (OET) at FCC Headquarters in Washington D.C.
> to discuss the status of WISPA's TV Whitespaces filings.
>
> The following Members represented WISPA. Ryan Spott, Alex Phillips, John
> Scriver, and Jack Unger. The WISPA Team was assisted by Steve Coran of
> Rini/Coran LLC in Washington.
>
> All Team Members made valuable contributions to the effort and we all feel
> that the meeting went well. Our goal was to ask the FCC take favorable
> action soon on WISPA's Petitions to adjust the TV Whitespace rules by
> making
> corrections to several problem areas, thereby making WISP use of the
> Whitespaces more practical and more successful.
>
> I'm attaching a more detailed report (.doc file) and also the off

Re: [WISPA] Pan flutes on the tower

[Data Technology]

I bet if you cap the ends it will quit whistling.
I have the same problem on one of my towers.  I have a 1.5" dia pipe as 
a standoff and it will make sounds when the wind blows.
I was up there on a windy day once and I could put my hand over the top 
of the pipe and it would quit whistling.

LaRoy McCann
Data Technology

Mike wrote:
> A while back, the amateur community talked me into putting a ham antenna on
> my highest tower.  It is a dual band 2 meter 70 cm DC grounded unit (as per
> my specs).  I built a mount which offsets the stick a couple feet from the
> tower.  A piece of 1 inch PVC through which I passed a piece of poly rope is
> attached with stainless hose clamps near the top of the stick to lasso the
> 17 foot stick to keep it from swaying.
>
>  
>
> A couple times this winter when I was outside, I heard this eerie melodic 4
> part tone.  It sounded like someone blowing across Pan flutes.  Now that
> spring has sprung, every time the wind blows, there is this tune again.
> While I questioned my sanity this winter, I do think it is coming from the
> amateur antenna.
>
>  
>
> Although the sound is somewhat melodic and not objectionable, I fear this
> summer with windows open in the house, it will keep me up at night.  I have
> this fear it will be like when I first put that tower up and put a 10 foot
> by 20 foot flag at the top to raise awareness in the community.  It snapped
> so loud it would wake you from a sound sleep.  One of my best nights was
> when that flag finally came down.
>
>  
>
> Since everything was done per my requests, and I want to maintain my stead
> with the amateur community, how does one keep that stick from making those
> noises?  I am hoping someone here has encountered something similar and has
> a resolve.
>
>  
>
> Regards,
>
>  
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> 
> 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] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Randy Cosby]

Tom,

Could you give us a hint how we would find this info?

Randy

> It might be a good idea for WISPs to look up their Whitechannel availabilty
> in their areas, and determine if VHF channels 1-7 are available in their
> territory or not.
>
> Tom DeReggi
> RapidDSL&  Wireless, Inc
> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "John Scrivner"
> To: "WISPA General List"
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 10:16 AM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
>
>
>> I am not sure where you get your assumptions but they are not correct.
>> Every
>> television channel has available 6 MHz of bandwidth and can be modulated
>> with the same amount of data regardless of where the channel resides in
>> the
>> VHF or UHF frequency bands. The limiting factor for these lowest VHF
>> channels is the overall higher noise level which is certainly an issue but
>> not a deal killer for us. I am guessing that our use of the lowest VHF
>> channels would require more forward error correction to provide high
>> quality
>> service. In my opinion this is a minor annoyance to be able to have
>> coverage
>> to 100% of my potential customer base.
>> John Scrivner
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 8:55 AM, Steve Barnes  wrote:
>>
>>  
>>> Mike, though I agree that circular polarization could work.  What channel
>>> width are you going to need to have a usable system.  I mean in the VHF
>>> band
>>> of 54 Mhz to 88 Mhz the frequency is to slow to have any ability to clock
>>> the data through at any worth wile speed. We are supposed to be giving
>>> customers more bandwidth and faster service.  Yes it would cut through
>>> trees
>>> and I would love it.  But at 2-3X dialup speed?
>>>
>>> The upper bands are definitely better but then you lower your penetration
>>> (>800 Mhz).
>>>
>>> Someone enlighten me here.
>>>
>>> Steve Barnes
>>> RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service
>>>
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>>> Behalf Of Mike
>>> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 9:24 AM
>>> To: 'WISPA General List'
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>>>
>>> Awesome report!  Thanks.
>>> Give me equipment capable of 20 watts, circularly polarized sectors, a
>>> turnstile antenna on the CPE, and it would be a perfect fit for THIS
>>> rural
>>> market.  At that power level, and circular polarization, I could reuse
>>> any
>>> channel on the same tower using opposite circular sense.  I know some of
>>> the
>>> discussion in the past on this list led some to believe an antenna would
>>> look like a big TV log periodic, but it just isn't so.  A TV antenna is
>>> by
>>> necessity a broadband device, and as such is BIG to handle a RANGE of
>>> frequencies.  A turnstile or other narrow band antenna could be built to
>>> blend with the aesthetics of a home or business.  Heck, if this comes to
>>> pass, I may go into the antenna building business just for this usage.
>>>
>>> Friendly Regards,
>>>
>>> Mike
>>>
>>> Mike Gilchrist
>>> Disruptive Technologist
>>> Advanced Wireless Express
>>> P.O. Box 255
>>> Toledo, IA   52342
>>> 239.770.6203
>>> m...@aweiowa.com
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>>> Behalf Of Steve Barnes
>>> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 7:41 AM
>>> To: WISPA General List
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>>>
>>> This is a great report good job guys and thank you.
>>>
>>> Next question.  I don't know any of the team personally just from your
>>> posts.  The picture in the report, can you give us a who's who left to
>>> right.
>>>
>>> Steve Barnes
>>> RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>>> Behalf Of Jack Unger
>>> Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 7:17 PM
>>> To: memb...@wispa.org; WISPA General List
>>> Subject: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>>>
>>> Last Wednesday, March 31, the WISPA FCC Committee assisted by the WISPA
>>> Promotions Committee met with top managers of the FCC Office of
>>> Engineering
>>> and Technology (OET) at FCC Headquarters in Washington D.C.
>>> to discuss the status of WISPA's TV Whitespaces filings.
>>>
>>> The following Members represented WISPA. Ryan Spott, Alex Phillips, John
>>> Scriver, and Jack Unger. The WISPA Team was assisted by Steve Coran of
>>> Rini/Coran LLC in Washington.
>>>
>>> All Team Members made valuable contributions to the effort and we all
>>> feel
>>> that the meeting went well. Our goal was to ask the FCC take favorable
>>> action soon on WISPA's Petitions to adjust the TV Whitespace rules by
>>> making
>>> corrections to several problem areas, thereby making WISP use of the
>>> Whitespaces more practical and more successful.
>>>
>>> I'm attaching a more detailed report (.doc file) and also the official
>

Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Mike]

In-line ...

 

A Couple questions.

 

 

3. Is there something wrong or more encombersome with Bands 1-X (7?), that 

we dont know about or do know about?

 

We know the size of radiators in the lower portion would be greater.
However, lower frequencies propagate better, and a half wave element shows a
higher voltage than the voltage at higher frequencies, so gain tradeoffs are
partially negated.

 

5. How will our Antenna size requirements vary for this portion of the band?

 

Each "segment" would have to have a radiator designed for that segment --
optimally.

 

I guess my point is What do we as WISPs really think about the VHF ch 

1-X (7?) compared to the other portions of the Whitespace band?

 

I'd much rather have 300 MHz, 500 MHz or higher, but in rural areas, lower
frequencies would work quite well in my opinion.

 

If the FCC is  hypothetically putting the lower bands out there, what do we 

want to do about it?

 

Reach for the ring and don't look back! 




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] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Ryan Spott]

Wimax in 3.65 is 7MHz IIRC... ?


With this sort of bandwidth, and the channel bonding ?that is possible? this
could be a real game changer.. SD video streams top out at 1.5mbps, HD is
between that at 8mbps (ESPN requires a CIR of 8mbps)

Suddenly triple-play is available... with no wire.

Expect hard core competition.

ryan

On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 8:32 AM, Harold Bledsoe wrote:

> 6MHz is a weird channel size for our industry traditionally but in 5MHz
> ~25Mbps aggregate would be comfortable.
>
> -Hal
>
> On Mon, 2010-04-05 at 07:39 -0700, Ryan Spott wrote:
> > Hey Steve,
> >
> > I use the cable-cos as an example. They get 30Mbit/sec for 6Mhz. (at
> least
> > using docsis)
> >
> > ryan
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 6:55 AM, Steve Barnes  wrote:
> >
> > > Mike, though I agree that circular polarization could work.  What
> channel
> > > width are you going to need to have a usable system.  I mean in the VHF
> band
> > > of 54 Mhz to 88 Mhz the frequency is to slow to have any ability to
> clock
> > > the data through at any worth wile speed. We are supposed to be giving
> > > customers more bandwidth and faster service.  Yes it would cut through
> trees
> > > and I would love it.  But at 2-3X dialup speed?
> > >
> > > The upper bands are definitely better but then you lower your
> penetration
> > > (>800 Mhz).
> > >
> > > Someone enlighten me here.
> > >
> > > Steve Barnes
> > > RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service
> > >
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
> On
> > > Behalf Of Mike
> > > Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 9:24 AM
> > > To: 'WISPA General List'
> > > Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
> > >
> > > Awesome report!  Thanks.
> > > Give me equipment capable of 20 watts, circularly polarized sectors, a
> > > turnstile antenna on the CPE, and it would be a perfect fit for THIS
> rural
> > > market.  At that power level, and circular polarization, I could reuse
> any
> > > channel on the same tower using opposite circular sense.  I know some
> of
> > > the
> > > discussion in the past on this list led some to believe an antenna
> would
> > > look like a big TV log periodic, but it just isn't so.  A TV antenna is
> by
> > > necessity a broadband device, and as such is BIG to handle a RANGE of
> > > frequencies.  A turnstile or other narrow band antenna could be built
> to
> > > blend with the aesthetics of a home or business.  Heck, if this comes
> to
> > > pass, I may go into the antenna building business just for this usage.
> > >
> > > Friendly Regards,
> > >
> > > Mike
> > >
> > > Mike Gilchrist
> > > Disruptive Technologist
> > > Advanced Wireless Express
> > > P.O. Box 255
> > > Toledo, IA   52342
> > > 239.770.6203
> > > m...@aweiowa.com
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
> On
> > > Behalf Of Steve Barnes
> > > Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 7:41 AM
> > > To: WISPA General List
> > > Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
> > >
> > > This is a great report good job guys and thank you.
> > >
> > > Next question.  I don't know any of the team personally just from your
> > > posts.  The picture in the report, can you give us a who's who left to
> > > right.
> > >
> > > Steve Barnes
> > > RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
> On
> > > Behalf Of Jack Unger
> > > Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 7:17 PM
> > > To: memb...@wispa.org; WISPA General List
> > > Subject: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
> > >
> > > Last Wednesday, March 31, the WISPA FCC Committee assisted by the WISPA
> > > Promotions Committee met with top managers of the FCC Office of
> Engineering
> > > and Technology (OET) at FCC Headquarters in Washington D.C.
> > > to discuss the status of WISPA's TV Whitespaces filings.
> > >
> > > The following Members represented WISPA. Ryan Spott, Alex Phillips,
> John
> > > Scriver, and Jack Unger. The WISPA Team was assisted by Steve Coran of
> > > Rini/Coran LLC in Washington.
> > >
> > > All Team Members made valuable contributions to the effort and we all
> feel
> > > that the meeting went well. Our goal was to ask the FCC take favorable
> > > action soon on WISPA's Petitions to adjust the TV Whitespace rules by
> > > making
> > > corrections to several problem areas, thereby making WISP use of the
> > > Whitespaces more practical and more successful.
> > >
> > > I'm attaching a more detailed report (.doc file) and also the official
> > > written filing (PDF) that WISPA is required to make after every meeting
> > > with
> > > the FCC. A copy of our FCC PowerPoint presentation is also required to
> be
> > > part of our written filing. To easily view our presentation, please
> rotate
> > > the attached PDF clockwise 90 degrees in your Adobe Reader viewer.
> > >
> > > Your

Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Harold Bledsoe]

6MHz is a weird channel size for our industry traditionally but in 5MHz
~25Mbps aggregate would be comfortable.

-Hal

On Mon, 2010-04-05 at 07:39 -0700, Ryan Spott wrote:
> Hey Steve,
> 
> I use the cable-cos as an example. They get 30Mbit/sec for 6Mhz. (at least
> using docsis)
> 
> ryan
> 
> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 6:55 AM, Steve Barnes  wrote:
> 
> > Mike, though I agree that circular polarization could work.  What channel
> > width are you going to need to have a usable system.  I mean in the VHF band
> > of 54 Mhz to 88 Mhz the frequency is to slow to have any ability to clock
> > the data through at any worth wile speed. We are supposed to be giving
> > customers more bandwidth and faster service.  Yes it would cut through trees
> > and I would love it.  But at 2-3X dialup speed?
> >
> > The upper bands are definitely better but then you lower your penetration
> > (>800 Mhz).
> >
> > Someone enlighten me here.
> >
> > Steve Barnes
> > RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> > Behalf Of Mike
> > Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 9:24 AM
> > To: 'WISPA General List'
> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
> >
> > Awesome report!  Thanks.
> > Give me equipment capable of 20 watts, circularly polarized sectors, a
> > turnstile antenna on the CPE, and it would be a perfect fit for THIS rural
> > market.  At that power level, and circular polarization, I could reuse any
> > channel on the same tower using opposite circular sense.  I know some of
> > the
> > discussion in the past on this list led some to believe an antenna would
> > look like a big TV log periodic, but it just isn't so.  A TV antenna is by
> > necessity a broadband device, and as such is BIG to handle a RANGE of
> > frequencies.  A turnstile or other narrow band antenna could be built to
> > blend with the aesthetics of a home or business.  Heck, if this comes to
> > pass, I may go into the antenna building business just for this usage.
> >
> > Friendly Regards,
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > Mike Gilchrist
> > Disruptive Technologist
> > Advanced Wireless Express
> > P.O. Box 255
> > Toledo, IA   52342
> > 239.770.6203
> > m...@aweiowa.com
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> > Behalf Of Steve Barnes
> > Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 7:41 AM
> > To: WISPA General List
> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
> >
> > This is a great report good job guys and thank you.
> >
> > Next question.  I don't know any of the team personally just from your
> > posts.  The picture in the report, can you give us a who's who left to
> > right.
> >
> > Steve Barnes
> > RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> > Behalf Of Jack Unger
> > Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 7:17 PM
> > To: memb...@wispa.org; WISPA General List
> > Subject: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
> >
> > Last Wednesday, March 31, the WISPA FCC Committee assisted by the WISPA
> > Promotions Committee met with top managers of the FCC Office of Engineering
> > and Technology (OET) at FCC Headquarters in Washington D.C.
> > to discuss the status of WISPA's TV Whitespaces filings.
> >
> > The following Members represented WISPA. Ryan Spott, Alex Phillips, John
> > Scriver, and Jack Unger. The WISPA Team was assisted by Steve Coran of
> > Rini/Coran LLC in Washington.
> >
> > All Team Members made valuable contributions to the effort and we all feel
> > that the meeting went well. Our goal was to ask the FCC take favorable
> > action soon on WISPA's Petitions to adjust the TV Whitespace rules by
> > making
> > corrections to several problem areas, thereby making WISP use of the
> > Whitespaces more practical and more successful.
> >
> > I'm attaching a more detailed report (.doc file) and also the official
> > written filing (PDF) that WISPA is required to make after every meeting
> > with
> > the FCC. A copy of our FCC PowerPoint presentation is also required to be
> > part of our written filing. To easily view our presentation, please rotate
> > the attached PDF clockwise 90 degrees in your Adobe Reader viewer.
> >
> > Your questions and constructive suggestions are always welcome.
> >
> > Respectfully Submitted,
> >
> > Jack Unger
> > WISPA FCC Committee Chair
> > 818-227-4220
> >
> > --
> > Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
> > Network Design - Technical Training - Technical Writing Serving the
> > Broadband Wireless, Networking and Telecom Communities since 1993
> > www.ask-wi.com  818-227-4220  jun...@ask-wi.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> > 
> > WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> > http://signup.wispa.org/
> >
> > ---

[WISPA] dry copper solution

[chris cooper]

Im looking for a copper solution that will allow me to use a dry pair to
extend service to a location @ 3 miles distant.  Any pointers much
appreciated.

Thanks
Chris Cooper
Intelliwave 




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] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Tom DeReggi]

A Couple questions.

First,  I would agree, any Whitespace spectrum is good spectrum for us, and 
better than none.

But, why does the FCC keep hypothetically asking us "what about VHF 
channels 1-x" the lower part of the band?
I think when we met with Blair, the lower portion of VHF also came up 
briefly.

1. Are they asking us, because they plan to give the rest to someone else 
:-(
2. Are they asking because others are requesting the higher portions of the 
band, that are more advantageous?And wondering whether we consider the lower 
portions more or less advantageous for our use?
3. Is there something wrong or more encombersome with Bands 1-X (7?), that 
we dont know about or do know about?
4. Is VHF ch 1-X (7?) more advantageous, becaue its a band more widely 
available in more places in the US?
(For example, I think some free channels exist in Band 1-7 for the DC 
area, but I'd need to go back and check to verify).
5. How will our Antenna size requirements vary for this portion of the band?

I guess my point is What do we as WISPs really think about the VHF ch 
1-X (7?) compared to the other portions of the Whitespace band?

If the FCC is  hypothetically putting the lower bands out there, what do we 
want to do about it?

Should we make an official statement asking for that part of the band, to 
feed the FCC thoughts for allocation that potentially are already being 
considered, to increase the chances of prompt release? Or should we continue 
pushing for the complete band?

Also After reading the report, it was clear that the FCC trip was highly 
advantageous and a lot was accomplished. I also recognize that the FCC will 
not disclose their full intent on their intent record.  But have we learned 
anything more than we knew from our meeting with Blair, as far as how 
Whitespace will progress? Did we get any updates on the Broadcaster's 
database development for Whitespace?  Is this still in motion towards 
progress? Or has anything gotten stalled relating to the database work, 
because of the possible Whitespace re-organization and re-consideration that 
potentially could still be occuring?

I think we need to make sure the FCC recognizes a couple things and we need 
to be cautious what we do about it Any Whitespace given to unlicensed 
will not likely ever be used for Cellular phone cell sites, obviously. 
They'd want fully licenced for that. But that does not mean that large 
carriers wont use unlicensed Whitespace for special applications, expecially 
public safety. UNlicensed has the unique abilty to go anywhere with little 
advanced planning, and carriers can use that advantage to their benefit, 
just the same as WISPs can. And they do. The wide use of Proxim Lynx radios 
(that use the full 5.8G band per 1 link) by Telcos is proof of that. With 
some carriers pushing for Whitespace Backhaul, it viable that they'd try to 
use Whitespace UNlicensed for backhaul just the same.

Part of the  attraction of TV Whitespace was not only its propogation 
characteristics, but also the large number of channels, so there was enough 
to go around for multiple palyers.
If unlicensed Whitespace is only allocated in a small capacity, our industry 
would continue to get plagued with risk, with little room to move to, if 
interference ever occured.

So it scares me when I hear things like, "what do you think about the first 
7 channels?" It could mean, say goodbye to the rest?

It might be a good idea for WISPs to look up their Whitechannel availabilty 
in their areas, and determine if VHF channels 1-7 are available in their 
territory or not.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "John Scrivner" 
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 10:16 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC


>I am not sure where you get your assumptions but they are not correct. 
>Every
> television channel has available 6 MHz of bandwidth and can be modulated
> with the same amount of data regardless of where the channel resides in 
> the
> VHF or UHF frequency bands. The limiting factor for these lowest VHF
> channels is the overall higher noise level which is certainly an issue but
> not a deal killer for us. I am guessing that our use of the lowest VHF
> channels would require more forward error correction to provide high 
> quality
> service. In my opinion this is a minor annoyance to be able to have 
> coverage
> to 100% of my potential customer base.
> John Scrivner
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 8:55 AM, Steve Barnes  wrote:
>
>> Mike, though I agree that circular polarization could work.  What channel
>> width are you going to need to have a usable system.  I mean in the VHF 
>> band
>> of 54 Mhz to 88 Mhz the frequency is to slow to have any ability to clock
>> the data through at any worth wile speed. We are supposed to be giving
>> customers more bandwidth and faster service.  Yes it would c

Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Ryan Spott]

Hey Steve,

I use the cable-cos as an example. They get 30Mbit/sec for 6Mhz. (at least
using docsis)

ryan

On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 6:55 AM, Steve Barnes  wrote:

> Mike, though I agree that circular polarization could work.  What channel
> width are you going to need to have a usable system.  I mean in the VHF band
> of 54 Mhz to 88 Mhz the frequency is to slow to have any ability to clock
> the data through at any worth wile speed. We are supposed to be giving
> customers more bandwidth and faster service.  Yes it would cut through trees
> and I would love it.  But at 2-3X dialup speed?
>
> The upper bands are definitely better but then you lower your penetration
> (>800 Mhz).
>
> Someone enlighten me here.
>
> Steve Barnes
> RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Mike
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 9:24 AM
> To: 'WISPA General List'
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
> Awesome report!  Thanks.
> Give me equipment capable of 20 watts, circularly polarized sectors, a
> turnstile antenna on the CPE, and it would be a perfect fit for THIS rural
> market.  At that power level, and circular polarization, I could reuse any
> channel on the same tower using opposite circular sense.  I know some of
> the
> discussion in the past on this list led some to believe an antenna would
> look like a big TV log periodic, but it just isn't so.  A TV antenna is by
> necessity a broadband device, and as such is BIG to handle a RANGE of
> frequencies.  A turnstile or other narrow band antenna could be built to
> blend with the aesthetics of a home or business.  Heck, if this comes to
> pass, I may go into the antenna building business just for this usage.
>
> Friendly Regards,
>
> Mike
>
> Mike Gilchrist
> Disruptive Technologist
> Advanced Wireless Express
> P.O. Box 255
> Toledo, IA   52342
> 239.770.6203
> m...@aweiowa.com
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Steve Barnes
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 7:41 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
> This is a great report good job guys and thank you.
>
> Next question.  I don't know any of the team personally just from your
> posts.  The picture in the report, can you give us a who's who left to
> right.
>
> Steve Barnes
> RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Jack Unger
> Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 7:17 PM
> To: memb...@wispa.org; WISPA General List
> Subject: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
> Last Wednesday, March 31, the WISPA FCC Committee assisted by the WISPA
> Promotions Committee met with top managers of the FCC Office of Engineering
> and Technology (OET) at FCC Headquarters in Washington D.C.
> to discuss the status of WISPA's TV Whitespaces filings.
>
> The following Members represented WISPA. Ryan Spott, Alex Phillips, John
> Scriver, and Jack Unger. The WISPA Team was assisted by Steve Coran of
> Rini/Coran LLC in Washington.
>
> All Team Members made valuable contributions to the effort and we all feel
> that the meeting went well. Our goal was to ask the FCC take favorable
> action soon on WISPA's Petitions to adjust the TV Whitespace rules by
> making
> corrections to several problem areas, thereby making WISP use of the
> Whitespaces more practical and more successful.
>
> I'm attaching a more detailed report (.doc file) and also the official
> written filing (PDF) that WISPA is required to make after every meeting
> with
> the FCC. A copy of our FCC PowerPoint presentation is also required to be
> part of our written filing. To easily view our presentation, please rotate
> the attached PDF clockwise 90 degrees in your Adobe Reader viewer.
>
> Your questions and constructive suggestions are always welcome.
>
> Respectfully Submitted,
>
> Jack Unger
> WISPA FCC Committee Chair
> 818-227-4220
>
> --
> Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
> Network Design - Technical Training - Technical Writing Serving the
> Broadband Wireless, Networking and Telecom Communities since 1993
> www.ask-wi.com  818-227-4220  jun...@ask-wi.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/
>
> -

Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Mike]

Even assuming we would only have access to the lower VHF portion of the
bands, a 6.3 dBi antenna is a simple, non-intrusive radiator.  Commercial
antennas are available now for 6 meters to give you an idea of sizes and get
you thinking about what the maximum effort would be. The propagation on
these bands could be the enemy as well as the black magic, but let me at
'em; we can make it work.  Again, innovation will be key to usage.

Here is a loop antenna made for 50 MHz.  Properly mounted, they are barely
visible from the street.  I installed a stacked pair of these in a deed
restricted area and nobody knew they were there. 

http://www.m2inc.com/index2.html


Friendly Regards,
 
Mike
 
Mike Gilchrist
Disruptive Technologist
Advanced Wireless Express
P.O. Box 255
Toledo, IA   52342
239.770.6203
m...@aweiowa.com
 

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Steve Barnes
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 8:56 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

Mike, though I agree that circular polarization could work.  What channel
width are you going to need to have a usable system.  I mean in the VHF band
of 54 Mhz to 88 Mhz the frequency is to slow to have any ability to clock
the data through at any worth wile speed. We are supposed to be giving
customers more bandwidth and faster service.  Yes it would cut through trees
and I would love it.  But at 2-3X dialup speed?

The upper bands are definitely better but then you lower your penetration
(>800 Mhz). 

Someone enlighten me here.

Steve Barnes
RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Mike
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 9:24 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

Awesome report!  Thanks.
Give me equipment capable of 20 watts, circularly polarized sectors, a
turnstile antenna on the CPE, and it would be a perfect fit for THIS rural
market.  At that power level, and circular polarization, I could reuse any
channel on the same tower using opposite circular sense.  I know some of the
discussion in the past on this list led some to believe an antenna would
look like a big TV log periodic, but it just isn't so.  A TV antenna is by
necessity a broadband device, and as such is BIG to handle a RANGE of
frequencies.  A turnstile or other narrow band antenna could be built to
blend with the aesthetics of a home or business.  Heck, if this comes to
pass, I may go into the antenna building business just for this usage.

Friendly Regards,
 
Mike
 
Mike Gilchrist
Disruptive Technologist
Advanced Wireless Express
P.O. Box 255
Toledo, IA   52342
239.770.6203
m...@aweiowa.com
 
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Steve Barnes
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 7:41 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

This is a great report good job guys and thank you.  

Next question.  I don't know any of the team personally just from your
posts.  The picture in the report, can you give us a who's who left to
right.

Steve Barnes
RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 7:17 PM
To: memb...@wispa.org; WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

Last Wednesday, March 31, the WISPA FCC Committee assisted by the WISPA
Promotions Committee met with top managers of the FCC Office of Engineering
and Technology (OET) at FCC Headquarters in Washington D.C. 
to discuss the status of WISPA's TV Whitespaces filings.

The following Members represented WISPA. Ryan Spott, Alex Phillips, John
Scriver, and Jack Unger. The WISPA Team was assisted by Steve Coran of
Rini/Coran LLC in Washington.

All Team Members made valuable contributions to the effort and we all feel
that the meeting went well. Our goal was to ask the FCC take favorable
action soon on WISPA's Petitions to adjust the TV Whitespace rules by making
corrections to several problem areas, thereby making WISP use of the
Whitespaces more practical and more successful.

I'm attaching a more detailed report (.doc file) and also the official
written filing (PDF) that WISPA is required to make after every meeting with
the FCC. A copy of our FCC PowerPoint presentation is also required to be
part of our written filing. To easily view our presentation, please rotate
the attached PDF clockwise 90 degrees in your Adobe Reader viewer.

Your questions and constructive suggestions are always welcome.

Respectfully Submitted,

Jack Unger
WISPA FCC Committee Chair
818-227-4220

--
Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
Network Design - Technical Training - Technical Writing Serving the
Broadband Wireless, Netw

Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[John Scrivner]

I am not sure where you get your assumptions but they are not correct. Every
television channel has available 6 MHz of bandwidth and can be modulated
with the same amount of data regardless of where the channel resides in the
VHF or UHF frequency bands. The limiting factor for these lowest VHF
channels is the overall higher noise level which is certainly an issue but
not a deal killer for us. I am guessing that our use of the lowest VHF
channels would require more forward error correction to provide high quality
service. In my opinion this is a minor annoyance to be able to have coverage
to 100% of my potential customer base.
John Scrivner


On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 8:55 AM, Steve Barnes  wrote:

> Mike, though I agree that circular polarization could work.  What channel
> width are you going to need to have a usable system.  I mean in the VHF band
> of 54 Mhz to 88 Mhz the frequency is to slow to have any ability to clock
> the data through at any worth wile speed. We are supposed to be giving
> customers more bandwidth and faster service.  Yes it would cut through trees
> and I would love it.  But at 2-3X dialup speed?
>
> The upper bands are definitely better but then you lower your penetration
> (>800 Mhz).
>
> Someone enlighten me here.
>
> Steve Barnes
> RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Mike
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 9:24 AM
> To: 'WISPA General List'
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
> Awesome report!  Thanks.
> Give me equipment capable of 20 watts, circularly polarized sectors, a
> turnstile antenna on the CPE, and it would be a perfect fit for THIS rural
> market.  At that power level, and circular polarization, I could reuse any
> channel on the same tower using opposite circular sense.  I know some of
> the
> discussion in the past on this list led some to believe an antenna would
> look like a big TV log periodic, but it just isn't so.  A TV antenna is by
> necessity a broadband device, and as such is BIG to handle a RANGE of
> frequencies.  A turnstile or other narrow band antenna could be built to
> blend with the aesthetics of a home or business.  Heck, if this comes to
> pass, I may go into the antenna building business just for this usage.
>
> Friendly Regards,
>
> Mike
>
> Mike Gilchrist
> Disruptive Technologist
> Advanced Wireless Express
> P.O. Box 255
> Toledo, IA   52342
> 239.770.6203
> m...@aweiowa.com
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Steve Barnes
> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 7:41 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
> This is a great report good job guys and thank you.
>
> Next question.  I don't know any of the team personally just from your
> posts.  The picture in the report, can you give us a who's who left to
> right.
>
> Steve Barnes
> RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Jack Unger
> Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 7:17 PM
> To: memb...@wispa.org; WISPA General List
> Subject: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
> Last Wednesday, March 31, the WISPA FCC Committee assisted by the WISPA
> Promotions Committee met with top managers of the FCC Office of Engineering
> and Technology (OET) at FCC Headquarters in Washington D.C.
> to discuss the status of WISPA's TV Whitespaces filings.
>
> The following Members represented WISPA. Ryan Spott, Alex Phillips, John
> Scriver, and Jack Unger. The WISPA Team was assisted by Steve Coran of
> Rini/Coran LLC in Washington.
>
> All Team Members made valuable contributions to the effort and we all feel
> that the meeting went well. Our goal was to ask the FCC take favorable
> action soon on WISPA's Petitions to adjust the TV Whitespace rules by
> making
> corrections to several problem areas, thereby making WISP use of the
> Whitespaces more practical and more successful.
>
> I'm attaching a more detailed report (.doc file) and also the official
> written filing (PDF) that WISPA is required to make after every meeting
> with
> the FCC. A copy of our FCC PowerPoint presentation is also required to be
> part of our written filing. To easily view our presentation, please rotate
> the attached PDF clockwise 90 degrees in your Adobe Reader viewer.
>
> Your questions and constructive suggestions are always welcome.
>
> Respectfully Submitted,
>
> Jack Unger
> WISPA FCC Committee Chair
> 818-227-4220
>
> --
> Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
> Network Design - Technical Training - Technical Writing Serving the
> Broadband Wireless, Networking and Telecom Communities since 1993
> www.ask-wi.com  818-227-4220  jun...@ask-wi.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 

Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Mike]

The bandwidth of the radio frequency channel is the major factor that
determines the performance capabilities for data transmission and reception
and not the actual radio frequency of the radio channel. 

There is no difference in the amount of data, or the data speeds that can be
transmitted in the same amount of radio frequency bandwidth, regardless of
the radio frequency band. 

Transmitting more data at higher data rates  requires greater radio
frequency bandwidth.

Realistically, some innovative techniques would need to be used.  Three 1
MHz segments, even in similar, if not contiguous spectrum would be
infinitely usable.

Friendly Regards,
 
Mike
 
Mike Gilchrist
Disruptive Technologist
Advanced Wireless Express
P.O. Box 255
Toledo, IA   52342
239.770.6203
m...@aweiowa.com
 

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Steve Barnes
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 8:56 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

Mike, though I agree that circular polarization could work.  What channel
width are you going to need to have a usable system.  I mean in the VHF band
of 54 Mhz to 88 Mhz the frequency is to slow to have any ability to clock
the data through at any worth wile speed. We are supposed to be giving
customers more bandwidth and faster service.  Yes it would cut through trees
and I would love it.  But at 2-3X dialup speed?

The upper bands are definitely better but then you lower your penetration
(>800 Mhz). 

Someone enlighten me here.

Steve Barnes
RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Mike
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 9:24 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

Awesome report!  Thanks.
Give me equipment capable of 20 watts, circularly polarized sectors, a
turnstile antenna on the CPE, and it would be a perfect fit for THIS rural
market.  At that power level, and circular polarization, I could reuse any
channel on the same tower using opposite circular sense.  I know some of the
discussion in the past on this list led some to believe an antenna would
look like a big TV log periodic, but it just isn't so.  A TV antenna is by
necessity a broadband device, and as such is BIG to handle a RANGE of
frequencies.  A turnstile or other narrow band antenna could be built to
blend with the aesthetics of a home or business.  Heck, if this comes to
pass, I may go into the antenna building business just for this usage.

Friendly Regards,
 
Mike
 
Mike Gilchrist
Disruptive Technologist
Advanced Wireless Express
P.O. Box 255
Toledo, IA   52342
239.770.6203
m...@aweiowa.com
 
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Steve Barnes
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 7:41 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

This is a great report good job guys and thank you.  

Next question.  I don't know any of the team personally just from your
posts.  The picture in the report, can you give us a who's who left to
right.

Steve Barnes
RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 7:17 PM
To: memb...@wispa.org; WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

Last Wednesday, March 31, the WISPA FCC Committee assisted by the WISPA
Promotions Committee met with top managers of the FCC Office of Engineering
and Technology (OET) at FCC Headquarters in Washington D.C. 
to discuss the status of WISPA's TV Whitespaces filings.

The following Members represented WISPA. Ryan Spott, Alex Phillips, John
Scriver, and Jack Unger. The WISPA Team was assisted by Steve Coran of
Rini/Coran LLC in Washington.

All Team Members made valuable contributions to the effort and we all feel
that the meeting went well. Our goal was to ask the FCC take favorable
action soon on WISPA's Petitions to adjust the TV Whitespace rules by making
corrections to several problem areas, thereby making WISP use of the
Whitespaces more practical and more successful.

I'm attaching a more detailed report (.doc file) and also the official
written filing (PDF) that WISPA is required to make after every meeting with
the FCC. A copy of our FCC PowerPoint presentation is also required to be
part of our written filing. To easily view our presentation, please rotate
the attached PDF clockwise 90 degrees in your Adobe Reader viewer.

Your questions and constructive suggestions are always welcome.

Respectfully Submitted,

Jack Unger
WISPA FCC Committee Chair
818-227-4220

--
Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
Network Design - Technical Training - Technical Writing Serving the
Broadband Wireless, Networking and Telecom Communities si

Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Dylan Bouterse]

I second everybody else's enthusiasm and appreciation for the
committee's efforts here. This is one of the primary reasons we are a
WISPA member and I recommend annual we continue contributing to this
group. Thanks again guys!

Dylan

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 7:17 PM
To: memb...@wispa.org; WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

Last Wednesday, March 31, the WISPA FCC Committee assisted by the WISPA
Promotions Committee met with top managers of the FCC Office of
Engineering and Technology (OET) at FCC Headquarters in Washington D.C. 
to discuss the status of WISPA's TV Whitespaces filings.

The following Members represented WISPA. Ryan Spott, Alex Phillips, John
Scriver, and Jack Unger. The WISPA Team was assisted by Steve Coran of
Rini/Coran LLC in Washington.

All Team Members made valuable contributions to the effort and we all
feel that the meeting went well. Our goal was to ask the FCC take
favorable action soon on WISPA's Petitions to adjust the TV Whitespace
rules by making corrections to several problem areas, thereby making
WISP use of the Whitespaces more practical and more successful.

I'm attaching a more detailed report (.doc file) and also the official
written filing (PDF) that WISPA is required to make after every meeting
with the FCC. A copy of our FCC PowerPoint presentation is also required
to be part of our written filing. To easily view our presentation,
please rotate the attached PDF clockwise 90 degrees in your Adobe Reader
viewer.

Your questions and constructive suggestions are always welcome.

Respectfully Submitted,

Jack Unger
WISPA FCC Committee Chair
818-227-4220

--
Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
Network Design - Technical Training - Technical Writing Serving the
Broadband Wireless, Networking and Telecom Communities since 1993
www.ask-wi.com  818-227-4220  jun...@ask-wi.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] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Steve Barnes]

Mike, though I agree that circular polarization could work.  What channel width 
are you going to need to have a usable system.  I mean in the VHF band of 54 
Mhz to 88 Mhz the frequency is to slow to have any ability to clock the data 
through at any worth wile speed. We are supposed to be giving customers more 
bandwidth and faster service.  Yes it would cut through trees and I would love 
it.  But at 2-3X dialup speed?

The upper bands are definitely better but then you lower your penetration (>800 
Mhz). 

Someone enlighten me here.

Steve Barnes
RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service


-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf 
Of Mike
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 9:24 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

Awesome report!  Thanks.
Give me equipment capable of 20 watts, circularly polarized sectors, a
turnstile antenna on the CPE, and it would be a perfect fit for THIS rural
market.  At that power level, and circular polarization, I could reuse any
channel on the same tower using opposite circular sense.  I know some of the
discussion in the past on this list led some to believe an antenna would
look like a big TV log periodic, but it just isn't so.  A TV antenna is by
necessity a broadband device, and as such is BIG to handle a RANGE of
frequencies.  A turnstile or other narrow band antenna could be built to
blend with the aesthetics of a home or business.  Heck, if this comes to
pass, I may go into the antenna building business just for this usage.

Friendly Regards,
 
Mike
 
Mike Gilchrist
Disruptive Technologist
Advanced Wireless Express
P.O. Box 255
Toledo, IA   52342
239.770.6203
m...@aweiowa.com
 
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Steve Barnes
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 7:41 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

This is a great report good job guys and thank you.  

Next question.  I don't know any of the team personally just from your
posts.  The picture in the report, can you give us a who's who left to
right.

Steve Barnes
RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 7:17 PM
To: memb...@wispa.org; WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

Last Wednesday, March 31, the WISPA FCC Committee assisted by the WISPA
Promotions Committee met with top managers of the FCC Office of Engineering
and Technology (OET) at FCC Headquarters in Washington D.C. 
to discuss the status of WISPA's TV Whitespaces filings.

The following Members represented WISPA. Ryan Spott, Alex Phillips, John
Scriver, and Jack Unger. The WISPA Team was assisted by Steve Coran of
Rini/Coran LLC in Washington.

All Team Members made valuable contributions to the effort and we all feel
that the meeting went well. Our goal was to ask the FCC take favorable
action soon on WISPA's Petitions to adjust the TV Whitespace rules by making
corrections to several problem areas, thereby making WISP use of the
Whitespaces more practical and more successful.

I'm attaching a more detailed report (.doc file) and also the official
written filing (PDF) that WISPA is required to make after every meeting with
the FCC. A copy of our FCC PowerPoint presentation is also required to be
part of our written filing. To easily view our presentation, please rotate
the attached PDF clockwise 90 degrees in your Adobe Reader viewer.

Your questions and constructive suggestions are always welcome.

Respectfully Submitted,

Jack Unger
WISPA FCC Committee Chair
818-227-4220

--
Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
Network Design - Technical Training - Technical Writing Serving the
Broadband Wireless, Networking and Telecom Communities since 1993
www.ask-wi.com  818-227-4220  jun...@ask-wi.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/
---

Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Mike]

Awesome report!  Thanks.
Give me equipment capable of 20 watts, circularly polarized sectors, a
turnstile antenna on the CPE, and it would be a perfect fit for THIS rural
market.  At that power level, and circular polarization, I could reuse any
channel on the same tower using opposite circular sense.  I know some of the
discussion in the past on this list led some to believe an antenna would
look like a big TV log periodic, but it just isn't so.  A TV antenna is by
necessity a broadband device, and as such is BIG to handle a RANGE of
frequencies.  A turnstile or other narrow band antenna could be built to
blend with the aesthetics of a home or business.  Heck, if this comes to
pass, I may go into the antenna building business just for this usage.

Friendly Regards,
 
Mike
 
Mike Gilchrist
Disruptive Technologist
Advanced Wireless Express
P.O. Box 255
Toledo, IA   52342
239.770.6203
m...@aweiowa.com
 
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Steve Barnes
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 7:41 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

This is a great report good job guys and thank you.  

Next question.  I don't know any of the team personally just from your
posts.  The picture in the report, can you give us a who's who left to
right.

Steve Barnes
RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 7:17 PM
To: memb...@wispa.org; WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

Last Wednesday, March 31, the WISPA FCC Committee assisted by the WISPA
Promotions Committee met with top managers of the FCC Office of Engineering
and Technology (OET) at FCC Headquarters in Washington D.C. 
to discuss the status of WISPA's TV Whitespaces filings.

The following Members represented WISPA. Ryan Spott, Alex Phillips, John
Scriver, and Jack Unger. The WISPA Team was assisted by Steve Coran of
Rini/Coran LLC in Washington.

All Team Members made valuable contributions to the effort and we all feel
that the meeting went well. Our goal was to ask the FCC take favorable
action soon on WISPA's Petitions to adjust the TV Whitespace rules by making
corrections to several problem areas, thereby making WISP use of the
Whitespaces more practical and more successful.

I'm attaching a more detailed report (.doc file) and also the official
written filing (PDF) that WISPA is required to make after every meeting with
the FCC. A copy of our FCC PowerPoint presentation is also required to be
part of our written filing. To easily view our presentation, please rotate
the attached PDF clockwise 90 degrees in your Adobe Reader viewer.

Your questions and constructive suggestions are always welcome.

Respectfully Submitted,

Jack Unger
WISPA FCC Committee Chair
818-227-4220

--
Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
Network Design - Technical Training - Technical Writing Serving the
Broadband Wireless, Networking and Telecom Communities since 1993
www.ask-wi.com  818-227-4220  jun...@ask-wi.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] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[D. Ryan Spott]

L->R

Ryan, John, Alex, Jack and Stephen.

ryan



On Apr 5, 2010, at 5:41 AM, Steve Barnes  wrote:

> This is a great report good job guys and thank you.
>
> Next question.  I don't know any of the team personally just from  
> your posts.  The picture in the report, can you give us a who's who  
> left to right.
>
> Steve Barnes
> RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]  
> On Behalf Of Jack Unger
> Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 7:17 PM
> To: memb...@wispa.org; WISPA General List
> Subject: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC
>
> Last Wednesday, March 31, the WISPA FCC Committee assisted by the  
> WISPA Promotions Committee met with top managers of the FCC Office  
> of Engineering and Technology (OET) at FCC Headquarters in  
> Washington D.C.
> to discuss the status of WISPA's TV Whitespaces filings.
>
> The following Members represented WISPA. Ryan Spott, Alex Phillips,  
> John Scriver, and Jack Unger. The WISPA Team was assisted by Steve  
> Coran of Rini/Coran LLC in Washington.
>
> All Team Members made valuable contributions to the effort and we  
> all feel that the meeting went well. Our goal was to ask the FCC  
> take favorable action soon on WISPA's Petitions to adjust the TV  
> Whitespace rules by making corrections to several problem areas,  
> thereby making WISP use of the Whitespaces more practical and more  
> successful.
>
> I'm attaching a more detailed report (.doc file) and also the  
> official written filing (PDF) that WISPA is required to make after  
> every meeting with the FCC. A copy of our FCC PowerPoint  
> presentation is also required to be part of our written filing. To  
> easily view our presentation, please rotate the attached PDF  
> clockwise 90 degrees in your Adobe Reader viewer.
>
> Your questions and constructive suggestions are always welcome.
>
> Respectfully Submitted,
>
> Jack Unger
> WISPA FCC Committee Chair
> 818-227-4220
>
> --
> Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
> Network Design - Technical Training - Technical Writing Serving the  
> Broadband Wireless, Networking and Telecom Communities since 1993 
> www.ask-wi.com 
>   818-227-4220  jun...@ask-wi.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] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

[Steve Barnes]

This is a great report good job guys and thank you.  

Next question.  I don't know any of the team personally just from your posts.  
The picture in the report, can you give us a who's who left to right.

Steve Barnes
RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf 
Of Jack Unger
Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 7:17 PM
To: memb...@wispa.org; WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] WISPA TV Whitespaces Meeting with the FCC

Last Wednesday, March 31, the WISPA FCC Committee assisted by the WISPA 
Promotions Committee met with top managers of the FCC Office of Engineering and 
Technology (OET) at FCC Headquarters in Washington D.C. 
to discuss the status of WISPA's TV Whitespaces filings.

The following Members represented WISPA. Ryan Spott, Alex Phillips, John 
Scriver, and Jack Unger. The WISPA Team was assisted by Steve Coran of 
Rini/Coran LLC in Washington.

All Team Members made valuable contributions to the effort and we all feel that 
the meeting went well. Our goal was to ask the FCC take favorable action soon 
on WISPA's Petitions to adjust the TV Whitespace rules by making corrections to 
several problem areas, thereby making WISP use of the Whitespaces more 
practical and more successful.

I'm attaching a more detailed report (.doc file) and also the official written 
filing (PDF) that WISPA is required to make after every meeting with the FCC. A 
copy of our FCC PowerPoint presentation is also required to be part of our 
written filing. To easily view our presentation, please rotate the attached PDF 
clockwise 90 degrees in your Adobe Reader viewer.

Your questions and constructive suggestions are always welcome.

Respectfully Submitted,

Jack Unger
WISPA FCC Committee Chair
818-227-4220

--
Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
Network Design - Technical Training - Technical Writing Serving the Broadband 
Wireless, Networking and Telecom Communities since 1993 www.ask-wi.com  
818-227-4220  jun...@ask-wi.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/