Re: [WISPA] FCC tower lighting question

Short addition… Steve Coran has this (theoretically pending) NPRM on his watch list. I asked Ari and the Legislative group to see what is happening in Congress with CCA’s efforts. If they are making any traction WISPA can pile on if the CCA’s plan works for us. Mark Mark Radabaugh WISPA

Re: [WISPA] FCC tower lighting question

The FAA has not yet proposed any new rules. The law discussed below was passed in 2016 and requires the FAA to issue regulations by this summer (within one year of the Act), but the FAA has not yet initiated a rulemaking. FCC Commissioner O'Reilly has called for changes to the law. As

Re: [WISPA] FCC tower lighting question

WISPA reported on this a while back. It was in response to some airplane crashes on towers that weren't required to be lit. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP - Original Message - From: "David Williamson"

Re: [WISPA] FCC tower lighting question

This was something Congress enacted last year and it required the FAA to issue the rule by 7/15/2017. The FAA has not yet issued the NPRM or, as best WISPA can tell, done anything in regard to the issue. The FAA appears to be ignoring it. I asked what happens when a Federal Agency ignores

Re: [WISPA] FCC tower lighting question

GEEZE... can a guy get a break? Joe Lenig VABB From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of David Williamson Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 12:05 AM To: wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] FCC tower lighting question Can someone comment on whether this

Re: [WISPA] FCC 477 reminder

Coverage I would Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Feb 17, 2017 5:39 PM, "William C Bardwell" wrote: > Do you have to file 477 if not currently operating with customers? I'm > building network but only using

Re: [WISPA] FCC 477 reminder

IANAL but I would, because it will get you set up in the system and start to put you on the map where you are offering services. My .02 On 2/17/2017 5:39 PM, William C Bardwell wrote: Do you have to file 477 if not currently operating with customers? I'm building network but only using

Re: [WISPA] FCC 477 reminder

Do you have to file 477 if not currently operating with customers? I'm building network but only using personally. On Feb 17, 2017 1:48 PM, "Jim Patient" wrote: > 11 days, 11 hours, 11 minutes, and 11 seconds from now your 477 > submission is due. > > > > > > [image:

Re: [WISPA] FCC 477 reminder

You sent that email 11 milliseconds early =/ Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 1:48 PM, Jim Patient wrote: > 11 days, 11 hours, 11 minutes, and 11 seconds from now your 477 >

Re: [WISPA] FCC NOI for Cellular 24GHz (and a note about 5GHz...)

I suspect that would only be used in small cells. It would be useless at the macro level, even with various smart antenna techniques. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com To: WISPA

Re: [WISPA] FCC PET LAb goodies in July

Did you mean to include a URL with this message? On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 8:34 AM, Gino Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com wrote: Is it Xmas in July? Lots of FCC approval goodies coming out… Gino A. Villarini President Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. www.aeronetpr.com @aeronetpr

Re: [WISPA] FCC Broadband experiments phase 2 funding question

Deployed to. The whole thing sounds like a freaking play to the cable cos (imagine that). From my understanding, if you were a very large provider and wanted to maintain market-share and not let a competitor build out in your area with federal funding, you could submit a bid for the

Re: [WISPA] FCC Broadband experiments phase 2 funding question

Why would you bid $1 , if you wanted to lock the area. You would have build out already? Sent from my Motorola Startac... On Jul 31, 2014, at 7:26 PM, Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com wrote: Deployed to. The whole thing sounds like a freaking play to the cable cos (imagine that).

Re: [WISPA] FCC Broadband experiments phase 2 funding question

It depends. I know of large ISPs with heafty cash reserves set aside for various projects, and it wouldn't be outside of their realm of morality to pull a stunt like that. Josh Reynolds, CIO SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com On 07/31/2014 03:44 PM, Gino Villarini wrote: Why would you bid $1 , if

Re: [WISPA] FCC Broadband experiments phase 2 funding question

: [WISPA] FCC Broadband experiments phase 2 funding question It depends. I know of large ISPs with heafty cash reserves set aside for various projects, and it wouldn't be outside of their realm of morality to pull a stunt like that. Josh Reynolds, CIO SPITwSPOTS www.spitwspots.com On 07/31/2014 03

Re: [WISPA] FCC Broadband experiments phase 2 funding question

...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Josh Reynolds Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2014 3:50 PM To: wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Broadband experiments phase 2 funding question It depends. I know of large ISPs with heafty cash reserves set aside for various projects, and it wouldn't be outside

Re: [WISPA] FCC to propose new Net Neutrality Rules

Probably if they're charging the going rate for paid peering or if they're being raked over the coals. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Douglas A. Hass d...@franczek.com To: a...@afmug.com, WISPA General List

Re: [WISPA] FCC revises 60 Ghz rules for more power

*nods* I read the article, but it was short on details and I was short on time to actually look up what they did. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Gino Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com To: a...@afmug.com Cc: WISPA

Re: [WISPA] FCC revises 60 Ghz rules for more power

10:04 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC revises 60 Ghz rules for more power *nods* I read the article, but it was short on details and I was short on time to actually look up what they did. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com

Re: [WISPA] FCC revises 60 Ghz rules for more power

be watching? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Gino Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, August 10, 2013 9:14:48 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC revises 60 Ghz rules

Re: [WISPA] FCC Chairman Genachowski to step down

I personally believe Genachowski was out of tune with the reality of the Broadband Industry, and Im not disappointed he's stepping down. But... the risk is always in the unknowns of who comes next. Its like being a small winner at a game show, and then being asked, do you want to take the

Re: [WISPA] FCC 3.5 Ghz Workshop Live

http://www.fcc.gov/live Gino A. Villarini g...@aeronetpr.commailto:g...@aeronetpr.com Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. 787.273.4143 From: a...@afmug.com [mailto:a...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Gino Villarini Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2013 11:19 AM To: a...@afmug.com; WISPA General List Subject:

Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Baaaackkkk!

Message--- From: Rick Harnish Date: 11/29/2012 2:53:28 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Bc! Are you on the Louisiana Broadband Map? http://www.bakerbb.com/labroadbandmapping/ My contact in Louisiana is: Mr. Craig Johnson Louisiana

Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Baaaackkkk!

and may help. From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Doug Clark Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 10:01 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Bc! Correct me if I am wrong here Rick, it will be fruitless

Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Baaaackkkk!

Excellent point. ---Original Message--- From: Fred Goldstein Date: 11/30/2012 9:10:00 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Bc! At 11/30/2012 10:17 AM, Rick Harnish wrote: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary

Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Baaaackkkk!

[ mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Doug Clark Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 10:01 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Bc! Correct me if I am wrong here Rick, it will be fruitless to do the map unless you are able to maintain

Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Baaaackkkk!

approach is used, you could comment that raising it from 768/200 to 4/1 is excessive, and perhaps say a 1.5/384 standard is more appropriate. Even Canopy 100 can probably claim that (if it's not loaded), though YMMV. Are you saying no one is providing service past 1.5/384 with Canopy 100?

Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Baaaackkkk!

I assumed he meant that Canopy 900mHz can not provide speeds above that. ---Original Message--- From: Matt Date: 11/30/2012 9:46:04 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Bc! approach is used, you could comment that raising

Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Baaaackkkk!

At 11/30/2012 11:45 AM, Matt wrote: approach is used, you could comment that raising it from 768/200 to 4/1 is excessive, and perhaps say a 1.5/384 standard is more appropriate. Even Canopy 100 can probably claim that (if it's not loaded), though YMMV. Are you saying no one is providing

Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Baaaackkkk!

approach is used, you could comment that raising it from 768/200 to 4/1 is excessive, and perhaps say a 1.5/384 standard is more appropriate. Even Canopy 100 can probably claim that (if it's not loaded), though YMMV. Are you saying no one is providing service past 1.5/384 with Canopy 100?

Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Baaaackkkk!

the rules. Thank You, Brian Webster www.wirelessmapping.com www.Broadband-Mapping.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Fred Goldstein Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 11:59 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC

Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Baaaackkkk!

Webster www.wirelessmapping.com www.Broadband-Mapping.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Brian Webster Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 3:27 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's

Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Baaaackkkk!

At 11/30/2012 03:26 PM, Brian Webster wrote: The rule as it stands now is 3 meg down and 768 up. The 4 meg down and 1 meg up was something put in the National Broadband Plan by the white house team. Problem with that is the National Broadband Map (of which was already spec'd out when they wrote

Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Baaaackkkk!

Rick, I thought that we did this task, but please tell me how I can confirm. - Cliff On 11/28/12 4:45 PM, Rick Harnish rharn...@wispa.org wrote: Fred, I assure you the WISPA FCC Committee is indeed on this. You make great points and we appreciate your review. You are definitely correct,

Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Baaaackkkk!

List Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Bc! Rick, I thought that we did this task, but please tell me how I can confirm. - Cliff On 11/28/12 4:45 PM, Rick Harnish rharn...@wispa.org wrote: Fred, I assure you the WISPA FCC Committee is indeed

Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Baaaackkkk!

Fred, I assure you the WISPA FCC Committee is indeed on this. You make great points and we appreciate your review. You are definitely correct, that WISPs NEED to get on the National Broadband Map NOW! Those that don't will be suffering from subsidized competition. Anyone who does not know who

Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Baaaackkkk!

Perhaps renewed efforts with the vendors? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Rick Harnish rharn...@wispa.org To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 4:45:15 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC

Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Baaaackkkk!

For a one time payment of $775 per home, I can connect ALL the unconnected homes in my county... But that is not how it works, is it? I'll be buried in red tape and paper for the rest of my life, right? And, of course, since I took their money, they can now

Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Baaaackkkk!

At 11/28/2012 05:56 PM, Blair Davis wrote: For a one time payment of $775 per home, I can connect ALL the unconnected homes in my county... But that is not how it works, is it? Alas, Phase I is for incumbents only. Phase II, when it happens next year, will allow others to bid. This will

Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Baaaackkkk!

General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Connect America Fund -- It's Bc! Fred, I assure you the WISPA FCC Committee is indeed on this. You make great points and we appreciate your review. You are definitely correct, that WISPs NEED to get on the National Broadband Map NOW! Those

Re: [WISPA] FCC broadband deployment report

I am guessing they get some of the information from the Sam Knows broadband report. Over a year ago you could signup on http://www.samknows.com/ and they sent you a Netgear router with some custom firmware. Everynow and then they pull tests from your router. I get a report each month on

Re: [WISPA] FCC broadband deployment report

I have done all that you ask here. I am on EVERY other map ever made by ALL other agencies and they act like I do not exist on this one. Total BS. Scriv On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 5:15 PM, Jack Unger jun...@ask-wi.com wrote: 1. WISPs need to submit their information. 2. WISPs need to be

Re: [WISPA] FCC broadband deployment report

? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: John Scrivner j...@mvn.net To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, August 24, 2012 11:41:57 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC broadband deployment report I have done all

Re: [WISPA] FCC broadband deployment report

Our coverage area is not displayed on that map. Is it only including wireline providers? On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 5:28 PM, Sean Heskett af...@zirkel.us wrote: Hi all, Sorry for all the cross posts on multiple lists but this seems troubling to me. We submitted our coverage data to the state of

Re: [WISPA] FCC broadband deployment report

My coverage update for the 2nd to last round is not there,but the rest is. The map is for 3Meg svc. and up also. --- On Thu, 8/23/12, Sean Heskett af...@zirkel.us wrote: From: Sean Heskett af...@zirkel.us Subject: [WISPA] FCC broadband deployment report To: wireless@wispa.org, a...@afmug.com,

Re: [WISPA] FCC broadband deployment report

if you hover over a county a popup chart on the right shows up and displays the demographics for that county and % of broadband that is Fiber, Cable, DSL, or fixed wireless. both the counties we serve show 0% fixed wireless. -sean On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 3:48 PM, Chris Fabien

Re: [WISPA] FCC broadband deployment report

wow, they have my area as covered as NON-Rural DSL and Cable no wireless links at all.. I think someone fixed the books on this info. As its completely BS.. 1. everything out here in our area is Rural.. 2. No wireless listed at ALL ( there are 2 providers ourselves and the telco to the south of

Re: [WISPA] FCC broadband deployment report

Where? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 5:59 PM, Ryan Ghering rgher...@gmail.com wrote: wow, they have my area as covered as NON-Rural DSL and Cable no wireless links at all.. I think someone fixed the

Re: [WISPA] FCC broadband deployment report

1. WISPs need to submit their information. 2. WISPs need to be diligent about working with their State mapping agency to correct wrong information. No one else is going to do it for us. On

Re: [WISPA] FCC broadband deployment report

We did submit, and have worked with the mapping agency in colorado a number of times.. :( On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Jack Unger jun...@ask-wi.com wrote: 1. WISPs need to submit their information. 2. WISPs need to be diligent about working with their State mapping agency to correct wrong

Re: [WISPA] FCC broadband deployment report

Andrew, (Andrew MacRae from the NTIA is BCC'd) There seems to be some discrepancy in the Colorado and Michigan Data. Can you assist as to why Wisp coverage is not represented? Please read the email below my signature line. Also, here are some other comments from other providers. .

Re: [WISPA] FCC broadband deployment report

Great! Keep working with the mapping agency until they get it right. On 8/23/2012 3:17 PM, Ryan Ghering wrote: We did submit, and have worked with the mapping agency in colorado a number of times.. :( On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 4:15 PM,

Re: [WISPA] FCC broadband deployment report

ditto. we have worked with the colorado agency and i have contacted him today about this issue. -sean On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Ryan Ghering rgher...@gmail.com wrote: We did submit, and have worked with the mapping agency in colorado a number of times.. :( On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at

Re: [WISPA] FCC broadband deployment report

Thanks Rick! --- On Thu, 8/23/12, Rick Harnish rharn...@wispa.org wrote: From: Rick Harnish rharn...@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC broadband deployment report To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org, a...@afmug.com, us...@wug.cc, color...@wispa.org Date: Thursday, August 23, 2012, 6:18

Re: [WISPA] FCC releases USF/ICC Order, rules on subsidizing ILECs

but not that one. Steve Barnes General Manager PCS-WIN / RC-WiFi -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Scottie Arnett Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2011 12:58 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC releases USF

Re: [WISPA] FCC releases USF/ICC Order, rules on subsidizing ILECs

List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 9:08 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC releases USF/ICC Order, rules on subsidizing ILECs At 11/21/2011 08:04 PM, you wrote: Yes agreed, its not nearly as bad as it could have been. But I still say ARRGGG! Price Cap Carriers will be offered $775

Re: [WISPA] FCC releases USF/ICC Order, rules on subsidizing ILECs

Is there any provision in the document for reducing funding in the future as areas get overbuilt? Or are we really looking at a 6-8month land grab? On 11/21/11 7:04 PM, Tom DeReggi wrote: Yes agreed, its not nearly as bad as it could have been. But I still say ARRGGG! Price Cap Carriers

Re: [WISPA] FCC releases USF/ICC Order, rules on subsidizing ILECs

-- they at least made some effort to balance it a little. - Original Message - From: Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 9:08 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC releases USF/ICC Order, rules on subsidizing ILECs At 11/21/2011

Re: [WISPA] FCC releases USF/ICC Order, rules on subsidizing ILECs

At 11/22/2011 11:53 AM, Sam Tetherow wrote: Is there any provision in the document for reducing funding in the future as areas get overbuilt? Or are we really looking at a 6-8month land grab? Good question. I see two land grabs, actually, Phase 1 and 2, both in 2012, but potentially a few

Re: [WISPA] FCC releases USF/ICC Order, rules on subsidizing ILECs

How can you offer voice if you can not get local phone number's because of a rural telephone cooperative? Scottie Arnett President Info-Ed, Inc. Electronics and More 931-243-2101 sarn...@info-ed.com - Original Message - From: Fred R. Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com To: WISPA General

Re: [WISPA] FCC releases USF/ICC Order, rules on subsidizing ILECs

At 11/21/2011 06:43 PM, Victoria Proffer wrote: Great summary! Thanks! I saw the VoIP part too and the flag went up. This would tell me, it is better to put VoIP on your network, sooner than later. I am curious what you thought of the Remote Fund that specifically mentioned Fixed Wireless build

Re: [WISPA] FCC releases USF/ICC Order, rules on subsidizing ILECs

Yes agreed, its not nearly as bad as it could have been. But I still say ARRGGG! Price Cap Carriers will be offered $775 per line to add 4/1 broadband serivce to unserved areas Thats much better for WISPs than if they agreed to pay our competitors greater than $10,000 per sub for FIOS like

Re: [WISPA] FCC releases USF/ICC Order, rules on subsidizing ILECs

At 11/21/2011 07:50 PM, Scottie Arnett wrote: How can you offer voice if you can not get local phone number's because of a rural telephone cooperative? I don't believe a rural cooperative can prevent you from pulling numbers from the NANPA. They are even required to interconnect with you for

Re: [WISPA] FCC releases USF/ICC Order, rules on subsidizing ILECs

At 11/21/2011 08:04 PM, you wrote: Yes agreed, its not nearly as bad as it could have been. But I still say ARRGGG! Price Cap Carriers will be offered $775 per line to add 4/1 broadband serivce to unserved areas Thats much better for WISPs than if they agreed to pay our competitors greater

Re: [WISPA] FCC releases USF/ICC Order, rules on subsidizing ILECs

- Original Message - From: Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 8:01 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC releases USF/ICC Order, rules on subsidizing ILECs At 11/21/2011 07:50 PM, Scottie Arnett wrote: How can you offer voice

Re: [WISPA] FCC releases USF/ICC Order, rules on subsidizing ILECs

Goldsteinfgoldst...@ionary.com To: WISPA General Listwireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 8:01 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC releases USF/ICC Order, rules on subsidizing ILECs At 11/21/2011 07:50 PM, Scottie Arnett wrote: How can you offer voice if you can not get local phone

Re: [WISPA] FCC releases USF/ICC Order, rules on subsidizing ILECs

At 11/21/2011 09:29 PM, you wrote: The only other telcos/cellcos here that have local numbers are US Cellular and Verizon. None of the big VOIP carriers do, such as Vonage/Packet8/take your pick. They have NO Clec's here either. I like to think of that as a challenge. ;-) The good news is that

Re: [WISPA] FCC releases USF/ICC Order, rules on subsidizing ILECs

wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 8:42 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC releases USF/ICC Order, rules on subsidizing ILECs http://www.localcallingguide.com/lca_switch.php?tandem=NSVNTNGN00T Looks like all RLECs, but maybe you'd have luck with one of them. - Mike Hammett

Re: [WISPA] FCC releases USF/ICC Order, rules on subsidizing ILECs

List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 9:08 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC releases USF/ICC Order, rules on subsidizing ILECs At 11/21/2011 09:29 PM, you wrote: The only other telcos/cellcos here that have local numbers are US Cellular and Verizon. None of the big VOIP carriers do

Re: [WISPA] FCC releases USF/ICC Order, rules on subsidizing ILECs

-ed.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 10:14 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC releases USF/ICC Order, rules on subsidizing ILECs Please explain about the Livingston exchange!!! I have been trying to break this barrier for almost 12 years. Scottie Arnett

Re: [WISPA] FCC releases USF/ICC Order, rules on subsidizing ILECs

Message - From: Scottie Arnett sarn...@info-ed.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 10:14 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC releases USF/ICC Order, rules on subsidizing ILECs Please explain about the Livingston exchange!!! I have been trying to break

Re: [WISPA] FCC releases USF/ICC Order, rules on subsidizing ILECs

...@ionary.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 10:38 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC releases USF/ICC Order, rules on subsidizing ILECs At 11/21/2011 11:18 PM, Scottie Arnett wrote: Re-reading your posts brings me to another question.has any VOIP carriers ever

Re: [WISPA] FCC 5.4 gig training

Current count 161 registered -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509-982-2181) Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 11:05 AM To: WISPA General List Cc: Principal WISPA Member List Subject: [WISPA] FCC 5.4

Re: [WISPA] FCC 5.4 gig training

I plan to. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 11:04 AM, Marlon K. Schafer (509-982-2181) o...@odessaoffice.com wrote: Just wondering How many are going to join the What's legal, what's not webinar

Re: [WISPA] FCC 5.4 gig training

Is it possible to receive slides and/or video from this? I was registered to watch this, but was pulled away to a conference out of town. The guy I asked to fill in didn't come through for me. I'd really like to have access to this info though. Rick, can you help? -- Blake Covarrubias On Jul

Re: [WISPA] FCC Refuses to Say Wireless Industry is Competitive (Again)

cat /this/thread 2 /dev/null Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 3:41 PM, Cliff Leboeuf cliff.lebo...@cssla.comwrote: Duh…….. http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2387751,00.asp

Re: [WISPA] FCC NPRM for Licensed Links in 7 and 13 Ghz

On 6/8/2011 11:11 AM, Gino Villarini wrote: Anyone has the link for the latest news on this? Gino A. Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com mailto:g...@aeronetpr.com Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. 787.273.4143 I posted it yesterday leon - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG -

Re: [WISPA] FCC NPRM for Licensed Links in 7 and 13 Ghz

Released: 06/07/2011. WIRELESS BACKHAUL: FURTHER INQUIRY INTO FIXED SERVICE SHARING OF THE 6875-7125 MHZ AND 12700-13200 MHZ BANDS. (DA No. 11-1011). (Dkt No 10-153 ). WTB http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-1011A1.doc

Re: [WISPA] FCC NPRM for Licensed Links in 7 and 13 Ghz

thanks Gino A. Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. 787.273.4143 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Rick Harnish Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2011 11:20 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC NPRM

Re: [WISPA] FCC NPRM for Licensed Links in 7 and 13 Ghz

: [WISPA] FCC NPRM for Licensed Links in 7 and 13 Ghz Released: 06/07/2011. WIRELESS BACKHAUL: FURTHER INQUIRY INTO FIXED SERVICE SHARING OF THE 6875-7125 MHZ AND 12700-13200 MHZ BANDS. (DA No. 11-1011). (Dkt No 10-153 ). WTB http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11

Re: [WISPA] FCC not listening to us

Thanks for sharing the arcticle and point of view. I personally would side with the conclusion of the author, which is one reason I supported congress's protest to overturn the FCC's netneutrality work. However, there are trade offs with anything. The first battle might have been to stop the

Re: [WISPA] FCC tweet

... and 140 million of them timed out? - Original Message - From: support supp...@nitline.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org; us...@wug.cc Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 1:39 PM Subject: [WISPA] FCC tweet FCC just tweeted Broadbandmap.gov got 150 million hits first 24hrs

Re: [WISPA] FCC tweet

...you only tweet the good stuff... On 2/22/2011 3:04 PM, Mike Mattox wrote: ... and 140 million of them timed out? - Original Message - From: supportsupp...@nitline.com To: WISPA General Listwireless@wispa.org;us...@wug.cc Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 1:39 PM Subject: [WISPA]

Re: [WISPA] FCC Favors Shifting Rural Subsidies To Broadband

...@cticonnect.com] Sent: Sunday, February 13, 2011 11:26 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Favors Shifting Rural Subsidies To Broadband It looks like a success-based voucher technologically neutral system for USF Reform/CAF is what's being proposed by the RCA (Rural Cellular Association

Re: [WISPA] FCC Favors Shifting Rural Subsidies To Broadband

: Friday, February 11, 2011 11:49 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Favors Shifting Rural Subsidies To Broadband We need to have the USF turned into a voucher credit system that the end user can apply to what ever supplier they chose. Maybe its not the best idea, but I do not feel I

Re: [WISPA] FCC Favors Shifting Rural Subsidies To Broadband

- Original Message - From: Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2011 9:56 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Favors Shifting Rural Subsidies To Broadband At 2/13/2011 11:26 AM, Charles Wu wrote: It looks like a success-based voucher

Re: [WISPA] FCC Favors Shifting Rural Subsidies To Broadband

Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jeromie Reeves Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 11:49 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Favors Shifting Rural Subsidies To Broadband We need to have the USF turned into a voucher

Re: [WISPA] FCC Favors Shifting Rural Subsidies To Broadband

At 2/14/2011 11:30 AM, John Scrivner wrote: I think we should consider supporting it only as our fallback position. I think our primary mission should be on bringing awareness that it makes no sense to raise government money by selling off the one asset (spectrum) required to bring affordable and

Re: [WISPA] FCC Favors Shifting Rural Subsidies To Broadband

(Of course when I point out the same thing to netheads, that TCP/IP is terribly obsolete, they look at me like I'm nuts, but then they're inside the belly of their beast too.) If you have a link to any of your past writings along that regard I would very much like to see them. Just give us

Re: [WISPA] FCC Favors Shifting Rural Subsidies To Broadband

At 2/14/2011 01:40 PM, you wrote: (Of course when I point out the same thing to netheads, that TCP/IP is terribly obsolete, they look at me like I'm nuts, but then they're inside the belly of their beast too.) If you have a link to any of your past writings along that regard I would very

Re: [WISPA] FCC Favors Shifting Rural Subsidies To Broadband

partner up with them for a stronger voice? -Charles -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jeromie Reeves Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 11:49 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Favors Shifting Rural Subsidies

Re: [WISPA] [FCC Committee] $25,0000 FCC TDWR Enforcement Action

This is GREAT news! We don't need any blatent repeat offenders in our midst. It's not like this is a system out in the middle of no where and not hurting anything Looks like it's owned by Steven McGhie. Anyone know who that is? He got some good press in 2003.

Re: [WISPA] FCC Favors Shifting Rural Subsidies To Broadband

At 2/11/2011 01:06 AM, JohnS wrote: The FCC is looking for comments, so we all need to make it quite clear that the funds should be available for any and all broadband providers! http://news.yahoo.com/s/nf/20110207/tc_nf/77213 Bret We should comment. The comment should be that we

Re: [WISPA] FCC Favors Shifting Rural Subsidies To Broadband

We need to have the USF turned into a voucher credit system that the end user can apply to what ever supplier they chose. Maybe its not the best idea, but I do not feel I have heard of a better one. Better for /the users/ not better for the I/CLECs and other very vested interests. On Fri, Feb

Re: [WISPA] FCC Favors Shifting Rural Subsidies To Broadband

 The FCC is looking for comments, so we all need to make it quite clear that the funds should be available for any and all broadband providers! http://news.yahoo.com/s/nf/20110207/tc_nf/77213 Bret Bret Clark Spectra Access 25 Lowell Street Manchester, NH 03101 www.spectraaccess.com

Re: [WISPA] FCC Favors Shifting Rural Subsidies To Broadband

USF for broadband is scary... The big problems... 1) There will be a push to use funds for fiber networks, (since so many are pushing for higher speeds for consumers, and with USF mentality its not a competition to spend cost effectively.). 2) There will be a push to give money to

Re: [WISPA] FCC Favors Shifting Rural Subsidies To Broadband

inline On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 6:53 AM, Tom DeReggi wirelessn...@rapiddsl.net wrote: USF for broadband is scary... The big problems... 1) There will be a push to use funds for fiber networks, (since so many are pushing for higher speeds for consumers, and with USF mentality its not a

Re: [WISPA] FCC Favors Shifting Rural Subsidies To Broadband

I would rather see the fund /not/ be available. I can not afford to compete against the money nor can I afford to take the money and keep my business mine. On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Bret Clark bcl...@spectraaccess.com wrote: Ugh...not good. Last thing I need is to compete with the ILEC who

Re: [WISPA] FCC Favors Shifting Rural Subsidies To Broadband

USF should not go to areas that meet criteria for an already demonstrated ability to have private sector dollars profitably deploy broadband. Check out my blog on the topic with a data chart for a few states as to the household density of those areas with existing broadband and those without. USF

Re: [WISPA] FCC Pushes Public Safety Broadband Network

I wonder if there's any room for us to build the networks in our areas. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com On 1/27/2011 6:53 PM, Kurt Fankhauser wrote:

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   >