Re: [WISPA] Looking for opinions on a proposal for PTMP in 6Ghz Part 101 spectrum
+1000 Us too On 6/4/2017 7:45 PM, garrettshan...@vabb.com wrote: I think the 6Ghz band need to stay for PtP links only. As for band sharing I think that the need for reliable wireless back-haul far outweighs any benefit of moving the band completely to part 15. Use of this band for PtMP applications should not be permitted and all installations should require registration and professional installation. As for higher power and larger channels: I do think the band could use some updates. But not at the expense of the current links. We've seen the 5.1Ghz band fill in with noise almost as soon as certifications rolled out. I don't want hundreds of "Xfinity wifi" SSID's in 6ghz as well. While I don't think our company alone counts as significant opposition, you can count us as "significantly opposed". Garrett Shankle Senior Field Technician Virginia Broadband LLC. (540)-829-1700 -Original Message- From: mike.l...@gmail.com Sent: Sunday, June 4, 2017 7:35pm To: "WISPA General List" Subject: Re: [WISPA] Looking for opinions on a proposal for PTMP in 6Ghz Part 101 spectrum +1000 > On Jun 4, 2017, at 16:23, Seth Mattinen wrote: > >> On 6/2/17 2:12 PM, Mark Radabaugh wrote: >> I’m interested in opinions on how important 6Ghz PTP links are to the >> membership and for those who use them if there would be significant >> opposition to using the spectrum for Point to Multipoint. > > > I think that if the history of behavior with unlicensed is any > indication, then all licensed PTP links will be at risk of seeing > substantial interference by idiots and would be at high risk of being > forced offline. > > ~Seth > ___ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@wispa.org > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
[WISPA] Kinda OT: fiber suppliers
For those of you that are doing (and terminating your own) fiber, where are you buying your bulk (1000ft+) single mode fiber from? Thanks, Mike ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Looking for opinions on a proposal for PTMP in 6Ghz Part 101 spectrum
I think the 6Ghz band need to stay for PtP links only. As for band sharing I think that the need for reliable wireless back-haul far outweighs any benefit of moving the band completely to part 15. Use of this band for PtMP applications should not be permitted and all installations should require registration and professional installation. As for higher power and larger channels: I do think the band could use some updates. But not at the expense of the current links. We've seen the 5.1Ghz band fill in with noise almost as soon as certifications rolled out. I don't want hundreds of "Xfinity wifi" SSID's in 6ghz as well. While I don't think our company alone counts as significant opposition, you can count us as "significantly opposed". Garrett Shankle Senior Field Technician Virginia Broadband LLC. (540)-829-1700 -Original Message- From: mike.l...@gmail.com Sent: Sunday, June 4, 2017 7:35pm To: "WISPA General List" Subject: Re: [WISPA] Looking for opinions on a proposal for PTMP in 6Ghz Part 101 spectrum +1000 > On Jun 4, 2017, at 16:23, Seth Mattinen wrote: > >> On 6/2/17 2:12 PM, Mark Radabaugh wrote: >> I’m interested in opinions on how important 6Ghz PTP links are to the >> membership and for those who use them if there would be significant >> opposition to using the spectrum for Point to Multipoint. > > > I think that if the history of behavior with unlicensed is any > indication, then all licensed PTP links will be at risk of seeing > substantial interference by idiots and would be at high risk of being > forced offline. > > ~Seth > ___ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@wispa.org > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Looking for opinions on a proposal for PTMP in 6Ghz Part 101 spectrum
+1000 > On Jun 4, 2017, at 16:23, Seth Mattinen wrote: > >> On 6/2/17 2:12 PM, Mark Radabaugh wrote: >> I’m interested in opinions on how important 6Ghz PTP links are to the >> membership and for those who use them if there would be significant >> opposition to using the spectrum for Point to Multipoint. > > > I think that if the history of behavior with unlicensed is any > indication, then all licensed PTP links will be at risk of seeing > substantial interference by idiots and would be at high risk of being > forced offline. > > ~Seth > ___ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@wispa.org > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Looking for opinions on a proposal for PTMP in 6Ghz Part 101 spectrum
On 6/2/17 2:12 PM, Mark Radabaugh wrote: > I’m interested in opinions on how important 6Ghz PTP links are to the > membership and for those who use them if there would be significant > opposition to using the spectrum for Point to Multipoint. I think that if the history of behavior with unlicensed is any indication, then all licensed PTP links will be at risk of seeing substantial interference by idiots and would be at high risk of being forced offline. ~Seth ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Looking for opinions on a proposal for PTMP in 6Ghz Part 101 spectrum
On 6/4/17 2:00 PM, Keefe John wrote: > Count me in. The channel sizes available in 6 GHz don't allow enough > bandwidth for current applications. I hardly see 6 GHz PCNs anymore. 60MHz channels are still serviceable. ~Seth ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Looking for opinions on a proposal for PTMP in 6Ghz Part 101 spectrum
Count me in. The channel sizes available in 6 GHz don't allow enough bandwidth for current applications. I hardly see 6 GHz PCNs anymore. Keefe On June 2, 2017 4:12:45 PM CDT, Mark Radabaugh wrote: >WISPA has been asked to participate in a wireless industry push to >explore unlicensed use in the current Part 101 6Ghz spectrum.The >idea is to increase the current Part 15 allowed power limits and to >bring in UNII rules, along with additional mitigations currently under >study (e.g., sensing, database) to protect incumbents. As there are no >federal users (other than PTP) this would not require the ESC system of >CBRS and is potentially considerably simpler to implement. > >The upside is significantly more spectrum availability in a high >power/capacity/range band. The downside is some potential loss of >geographic exclusivity and availability of new 6GHz Part 101 PTP links >in exchange for greater reliance on the use of spectrum sharing >mechanisms over time. > >I’m interested in opinions on how important 6Ghz PTP links are to the >membership and for those who use them if there would be significant >opposition to using the spectrum for Point to Multipoint. > >Mark > >Mark Radabaugh >WISPA FCC Committee Chair >419-261-5996 -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
