://www.ics-il.com
- Original Message -
From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 7:51 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Re: [WISPA FCC] FCC 3650 band responsetoday..the
lawyerswin most
Now, as to your main question about
Hammett
Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2007 8:02 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Re: [WISPA FCC] FCC 3650 bandresponsetoday..the
lawyerswin most
I think he's referring to having BreezeMAX in other bands, with
different
rules. I imagine it'll be a few months before anyone could get 3650
WiMAX, scheduled Canopy, and any other system that can be synchronized
-- i.e. automatically cooperate -- with like systems, but cannot sense
and deal with other resident systems are confined to the lower 25 MHz.
If all units were required to use GPS sync I think the band would be a
much better
Only FCC Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein added comments to the 3650 band
Memorandum Opinion and Order published today.
He said:
___
*A little over two years ago, I was very pleased to support the
Commission’s
: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 12:21 PM
To: wireless@wispa.org; FCC Discussion
Subject: [WISPA] Re: [WISPA FCC] FCC 3650 band response today..
Only FCC
, 2007 1:09 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Re: [WISPA FCC] FCC 3650 band response today..
I just hope systems like Mikrotik w/ Ubiquiti SR3s/ XR3s(eventually) can
be
made certified under 3650. That will keep the equipment low priced AND
able
to use the whole band. And in CSMA
] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Doug Ratcliffe
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 1:09 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Re: [WISPA FCC] FCC 3650 band response today..
I just hope systems like Mikrotik w/ Ubiquiti SR3s/ XR3s(eventually) can
be
made certified under 3650. That will keep
PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Doug Ratcliffe
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 1:09 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Re: [WISPA FCC] FCC 3650 band response today..
I just hope systems like Mikrotik w/ Ubiquiti SR3s
Unger
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 2:43 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Re: [WISPA FCC] FCC 3650 band response today..
As I read it, the FCC says that contention-based protocols that are
capable of detecting signals that are using *both* *similar* and
*non-similar* protocols
] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 2:43 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Re: [WISPA FCC] FCC 3650 band response today..
As I read it, the FCC says that contention-based protocols that are
capable of detecting signals that are using *both* *similar
Scrivner
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 4:18 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Re: [WISPA FCC] FCC 3650 band response today..the
lawyerswin most
Patrick,
How soon after the RO comes out can we expect to see Alvarion branded
product ready to ship that can be registered and used
Now, as to your main question about Alvarion...let's just say things are
moving. BreezeMAX, the .16e TDD version has now been commercially
shipping inside the U.S. for a few months so it is a real option.
BreezeACCESS VL is also a real option.
So...VL has a 3650 version ready to go right
Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 8:01 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Re: [WISPA FCC] FCC 3650 band response
today..thelawyerswin most
Hi John,
Well, remember that as far as the FCC is concerned, WiMAX IS
contention-based. Keep in mind they are not using a Wi-Fi definition
The rules apply on a per transmitter basis.
I know that some systems are able to hop around some known channels. I'm
not sure if that extends to 900mhz or not.
Marlon
(509) 982-2181
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)
John,
The FCC should not have to bribe Wireless Providers for this
information. If Wireless Providers are serious about playing in this
field then they should fill out the proper paperwork they are asked to
file. If not then they will have to pay the price of not being looked as
serious
It just seems that if the information is important, the FCC should be
willing to put their money where their mouth is.
I don't know who would actually put up the money.
John
Peter R. wrote:
I think many (half?) don't even know that they have to file.
Many don't understand CALEA or know that
, April 23, 2007 9:47 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
you don't give them stuff for free
Yes we do.
Care to quantify this statement?
Sure, the government has never paid me to give them taxes.
George Rogato
Welcome
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mark Koskenmaki
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 11:59 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband
Competition
Heh... Is this an argument that taxes are a violation of the 5th
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mark Koskenmaki
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 11:59 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband
Competition
Heh... Is this an argument that taxes are a violation
Mark Koskenmaki wrote:
And why aren't we defending our industry from gatekeeper regulation which
stifles entry into it?
Man, you people don't logically connect the dots, do you? Why wasn't WISPA
asking every member, list member, and everyone else they could to flood the
FCC with objections,
Mark Koskenmaki wrote:
While I'm sure the statement this is not universally possible is
technically correct (the best kind of correct!) I believe you're
seriously over-estimating the difficulty. I'd wager most of us already
have, somewhere in our network, a decent managed switch that can be
The way I understand it, is that Mark has to do the capture. His
provider can not do it for him. Also per a previous conversation the
tap needs to be done at the CPE. To me that should be real simple with
a few firewall rules in the CPE or at worst the AP. If PPPoE were in
use then it would be
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Rick Harnish
Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2007 11:39 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband
Competition
Mark,
This was one of the best emails you have ever
,
Mac Dearman
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Chris Cooper
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 6:41 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
I think many (half?) don't even know that they have to file.
Many don't understand CALEA or know that they need to comply.
So $500... it would probably get you about 400 more, but who will pony
up the $200k?
Peter
John Thomas wrote:
Pete, you hit on an interesting idea. What if the FCC were
Mark Koskenmaki wrote:
Never say never, they say.What will you do when the FCC or FBI
comes and
says we want you to help us enforce... blah blah?You're going
to have
a hard time saying no when you have already made a policy of always
saying
yes. You will have to blow that
Peter said:
That being said. Since 1999, the RBOCs have been charging us for a DS3
fiber network that they have yet to build.
That's right - 45MB to the home - as promised in 1999.
Do you have proof of this in some document form? If you do can you share
it? I would love to read this. I
- Original Message -
From: Peter R. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 7:00 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
Mark Koskenmaki wrote:
Never say never, they say.What will you do
Bruce Kushnick wrote a book about it:
http://www.newnetworks.com/broadbandscandals.htm
Here's the summary: http://www.newnetworks.com/ShortSCANDALSummary.htm
In case you think he made this up, Bruce has pages and reams and pages
of documents from VZ's own press releases and FCC and state
Peter R. wrote:
So $500... it would probably get you about 400 more, but who will pony
up the $200k?
For five hundred bucks, I could easily create a few new business
entities that serve one or two customers each, do the paperwork, and
turn a tidy profit from the affair. I heartily encourage
Mark Koskenmaki wrote:
I know you've repeatedly complained that I don't put my money where my mouth
is, because I can't buy plane tickets and hotel nights and can't run for
office in WISPA. But I WILL put EVERYTHING on the line. I'll fight the
FCC by myself if I have to. And, it sounds like
)WISP Operator since 1999!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam
- Original Message -
From: Mark Koskenmaki [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 11:06 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits
- Original Message -
From: Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 4:08 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
OK, I'm in a pissy mood today so don't anyone take
ot; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "WISPA General List" wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 4:08 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
OK, I'm in a pissy mood today so don't anyone take this too personally.
So am I.
Mark Koskenmaki wrote:
Law? Hell, no. It's the FCC's wishes. And we're discussing how stupid
the whole damn thing is as well. And here you are defending it. You wonder
why I'm in a pissy mood???
It's indirectly a law - the FCC is granted broad powers under current
law to request things
David E. Smith wrote:
Mark Koskenmaki wrote:
You pay some property taxes, you get to use all
those roads they built.
. It's all trade-offs. Basic
freshman-year-of-college economics.
I just wanted to point out an error you just made mark, you said :
The government doesn't give you
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 21:19 -0700, George Rogato wrote:
David E. Smith wrote:
Mark Koskenmaki wrote:
You pay some property taxes, you get to use all
those roads they built.
. It's all trade-offs. Basic
freshman-year-of-college economics.
I just wanted to point out an error you
- Original Message -
From: David E. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 9:03 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
Mark Koskenmaki wrote:
Law? Hell, no. It's the FCC's wishes
you don't give them stuff for free
Yes we do.
Care to quantify this statement?
Sure, the government has never paid me to give them taxes.
George Rogato
Welcome to WISPA
www.wispa.org
http://signup.wispa.org/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
, April 23, 2007 9:31 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 21:19 -0700, George Rogato wrote:
David E. Smith wrote:
Mark Koskenmaki wrote:
You pay some property taxes, you get to use all
those roads they built.
. It's
.
- Original Message -
From: George Rogato [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 9:47 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
you don't give them stuff for free
Yes we do.
Care
Mark,
A well written piece.
However, I think you miss my point:
Either we defend ourselves, and we defend the cowboys as Peter likes to
call people like me by rising in opposition to ANY regulatory garbage that
puts us under their thumb... Or we've just killed our whole industry.
You talk
it.
- Original Message -
From: Peter R. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2007 7:40 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
Mark,
A well written piece.
However, I think you miss my point:
Either we
)WISP Operator since
1999!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam
- Original Message - From: Peter R. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2007 2:52 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC
Nope. I still won't fill it out.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Thomas
Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2007 2:58 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband
Competition
Pete, you hit
Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2007 7:40 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
Mark,
A well written piece.
However, I think you miss my point:
Either we defend ourselves, and we defend the cowboys as Peter likes to
call people like me by rising in opposition
Mark,
Are you a paid WISPA member?
Mac Dearman
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mark Koskenmaki
Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2007 11:43 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring
- Original Message -
From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2007 12:50 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
Mark,
As the driver of the bus I feel compelled to reply. You
I used to be, Mac.
The why not now is not to be aired in public.
- Original Message -
From: Mac Dearman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2007 1:00 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
: Sunday, April 22, 2007 5:59 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
12000, 6000, 2000, or whatever number of WISPs is mainly hard to quantify
because there are LOTS of 2 and 3 customer private wireless networks,
where a business will buy a T1, DSL or whatever
Of coures it's flawed. That's like saying that if anyone within zipcode
x has a newly paved street in front of their home, then everyone in zip
code x has the same.
I don't offer service via zip code. I offer service via where my signal
reaches.
And, I've even made a few little
Wireless, Inc.
260-827-2482
Founding Member of WISPA
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mark Koskenmaki
Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2007 4:14 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mark Koskenmaki
Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2007 4:14 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
Of coures it's flawed. That's like saying that if anyone within zipcode
x has a newly paved street in front
, and abandon meddling where I think
they shouldn't have ever interfered.
Rich
- Original Message -
From: Rick Harnish
To: 'WISPA General List'
Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2007 10:38 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
Mark,
This was one
Amen Brother!!!
-RickG
On 4/21/07, Mark Koskenmaki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Of coures it's flawed. That's like saying that if anyone within zipcode
x has a newly paved street in front of their home, then everyone in zip
code x has the same.
I don't offer service via zip code. I
That's true. Under the current definition I got from a muni guy *I'M* a
muni wifi provider! Is that cool or what?
marlon
- Original Message -
From: Dawn DiPietro [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2007 4:08 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC
wishful thinking
FCC realizes areas are underserved.
They also realize independent broadband providers -- read wireless
ISPs -- are an excellent, if not better, solution as a competitive
solution in many areas, rural and otherwise.
FCC makes sub-700Mhz available for unlicensed
wishful thinking
FCC realizes areas are underserved.
They also realize independent broadband providers -- read wireless
ISPs -- are an excellent, if not better, solution as a competitive
solution in many areas, rural and otherwise.
FCC makes sub-700Mhz available for unlicensed broadband,
Where did you get THAT number?
3000. 6000.
I'd bet that there are less than 2000 total indie ISP's left.
Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote:
Arrggh!
The REAL problem is that the don't accurately count providers. They
only catch the larger ones.
We're NOT behind. Not like
It is kind of an apples to oranges comparison since Japan and Korea and
a few other places (even Aussie) have more than 70% of their population
living densely in a city. That makes BB penetration easy.
That being said. Since 1999, the RBOCs have been charging us for a DS3
fiber network that
Arrggh!
The REAL problem is that the don't accurately count providers. They only
catch the larger ones.
We're NOT behind. Not like some like to claim we are.
Hell, there are at LEAST 3000 wisps out there yet the FCC only has 400 of
them filing the form 477. I'll bet the real
For years, plenty of folks (including the Government Accountability Office)
have been pointing out that the way the FCC
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070205/165735.shtml measures broadband
competition is very flawed. It simply assumes that if a single household in
a zip code is offered
-2482
Founding Member of WISPA
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Peter R.
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2007 11:38 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
Where did you get THAT number?
3000
-
From: Dawn DiPietro [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2007 8:46 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
Marlon,
And why does the FCC only know about 400 WISP's? How can the FCC know
these numbers did
- From: Dawn DiPietro [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2007 8:46 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
Marlon,
And why does the FCC only know about 400 WISP's? How can the FCC know
these numbers did
Doesn't explain where you got the 3000 or 6000 number.
If you pulled it out of your.. air... then you are doing a disservice.
If the number is really 900, and 300 fill out the form - that's 1/3 and
great. Even though it is disappointed that there are only 900 indie
ISP's left.
If the number
PROTECTED]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam
- Original Message -
From: Rick Harnish [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2007 9:03 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring
)WISP Operator since 1999!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam
- Original Message -
From: George Rogato [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2007 12:20 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits
-
From: Peter R. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2007 12:13 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
Doesn't explain where you got the 3000 or 6000 number.
If you pulled it out of your.. air... then you
: Peter R. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2007 8:37 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
Where did you get THAT number?
3000. 6000.
I'd bet that there are less than 2000 total indie ISP's left.
Marlon
: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
Doesn't explain where you got the 3000 or 6000 number.
If you pulled it out of your.. air... then you are doing a disservice.
If the number is really 900, and 300 fill out the form - that's 1/3 and
great. Even though
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband
Competition
In 2004 *I* called the main distributors in the wisp space. 5 of them
as I
recall.
It took some time and some arm twisting, but I got them to tell me how
many
wisps that they had
And that was 2004.
I'm not arguing just to argue. This is a soapbox, so delete and move on
if you want.
When you go to the Feds and say that there are 6000 and only 400 have
reported, that doesn't bode well for anyone.
It makes the Feds nervous. It shines an ugly light on this so-called
I can tell you that I have talked to wisps that want nothing to do with
FCC, 477, CALEA or anyone that wants to know about their business.
So there is quite a large percentage that will not show up on the radar.
It would be hard to imagine that the supply chain to this industry would
survive
!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam
- Original Message -
From: Peter R. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2007 2:52 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2007 2:52 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband
Competition
And that was 2004.
I'm not arguing just to argue. This is a soapbox, so delete and move
on if you want.
When you go to the Feds and say
10:15 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Committee
Okay, Marlon,
What issues are left on the table currently?
Regards,
Peter @ RAD-INFO, Inc.
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org
Okay, Marlon,
What issues are left on the table currently?
Regards,
Peter @ RAD-INFO, Inc.
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
10:32 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz
Brad,
The simple answer (IMHO) is for anyone who wishes to comment to do so
as an individual.
jack
Brad Belton wrote:
... I am sure we could setup a committee to work on 11 GHz dish size
issues
Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 2:23 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz
Marlon,
Just for info... see inline...
Marlon K. Schafer wrote:
All due respect right back at ya! grin
Anyhow
wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2007 3:03 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz
Tom,
Now I wish I had read this post of yours first - before I responded to an
earlier post that you made. I guess I should learn to always read later
posts before
List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz
Brad,
I think you may be misquoting or misunderstanding me. No good can
come from that. Real questions need to be asked and need to be
correctly answered before we risk our reputation by filing comments
with the FCC
PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 12:27 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz
The truth is we need qualified RF engineers to speak up if they are
here. It is my limited RF
Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2007 12:27 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz
The truth is we need qualified RF engineers to speak up if they are
here
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz
Brad,
Do you care to address my comments about F/D ratios and beam width? I
think that is more pertinent in mitigating interference than dish size.
If there is one qualified RF engineer in this group who can post a
single
: Friday, March 30, 2007 10:32 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz
Brad,
The simple answer (IMHO) is for anyone who wishes to comment to do so as
an individual.
jack
Brad Belton wrote:
... I am sure we could setup a committee to work
: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 9:08 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz
Hi Bob,
Short is relative to rain zone
In your world, where rain isn't that much of a problem -- it's nice to
have 18 GHz to go 8+ miles on a 2' dish
However, go to East TX or LA, and in those
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz
Marlon,
Just for info... see inline...
Marlon K. Schafer wrote:
All due respect right back at ya! grin
Anyhow, to think that manufacturers all have our best interests at heart
is a bit naive I think. What's better for them
My suggest was, that we should support this but suggest that they mandate
atpc.
thoughts?
marlon
- Original Message -
From: Brad Belton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 8:03 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC requests comment
General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz
Anything related to 11Ghz, should be WISPs concern. It is my belief that
all serious unlicensed ISPs will at some point start to migrate to Licensed
spectrums for backhauls. 11Ghz is one of the few upgrade options
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2007 11:54 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz
Brad,
Jack and I did not say this is something WISPA should ignore
have
expected from you in the first place.
Best,
Brad
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 1:33 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz
Brad
George,
i have done very few optical links. I have installed a ton of wireless
links to either replace them or back them up over the years.
I have not done one in about 2 years so I really can't comment on
present new technology, if any.
Regards
-B-
George Rogato wrote:
Hey Bob M.
shots.
Regards
Stephen Patrick
CableFree Solutions
www.cablefreesolutions.com
-Original Message-
From: George Rogato [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 28 March 2007 05:47
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests .. Bob M. what about FSO
Hey Bob M.
Seeing your on list
] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 10:57 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz
And exactly HOW do you suppose that a very low power link will somehow screw
up the band?
Using
We need the paper, to be sure. But we also need the flexibility to do
what's expedient in the field.
marlon
- Original Message - From: Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 10:26 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment
: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 1:07 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz
All due respect right back at ya! grin
Anyhow, to think that manufacturers all have our best interests at heart is
a bit naive I think. What's better for them? A 4' dish
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz
Brad,
I think you may be misquoting or misunderstanding me. No good can come
from that. Real questions need to be asked and need to be correctly
answered before we risk our reputation by filing comments with the FCC
The FCC already permits two classes of licensed antennas in Part 101.115:
Standard A and Standard B. Antennas meeting performance standard A must be
used except in areas not subject to frequency congestion (however that is
defined). If Standard B antennas are used, the operator must replace them
- Original Message -
From: Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 12:23 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC requests comment on smaller dishes for 11 GHz
Marlon,
Just for info... see inline...
Marlon K. Schafer wrote:
All
401 - 500 of 655 matches
Mail list logo
