Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations
Chuck, My point was that if the RF module has already received a modular certification but with a low-gain antenna then the process process of obtaining certification with additional (typically higher-gain outdoor) antennas is shortened. Typically in this instance, the original card manufacturer has obtained the original modular certification with the intent of promoting the sales of the card in a variety of different types of certified equipment. In other words, the card manufacturer is being "cooperative". If you are paying your certification lab to run the same complete series of RF tests on a variety of equipment models that use the same modularly-certified card then you may be paying them too much. Feel free to hit me up offline so we can compare notes. jack Chuck McCown - 2 wrote: > You cannot get anything certified without the schematic, block diagram, and > other pieces of information that you may not be able to get from the > manufacturer. If the manufacturer does not cooperate, there isn't any way a > WISP can obtain the certification. Moreover, the RF tests do have to be > tested due to the prospect of the out of band emissions changing with a > change of antenna. I have been through this several times. > - Original Message - > From: "Jack Unger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 12:55 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations > > > >> Right. The WISP then has the option of sending the AP or CPE to a >> certification lab with several different types of higher-gain outdoor >> antennas to get a new FCC ID number (a new certification) in /*your*/ >> company name. The cost is less than certifying without using the >> already-certified card because many of the RF tests do not need to be >> repeated because they were already done by the original manufacturer. >> The cost to do this depends on the number of antenna types tested but >> could run between $1800 (one or two antennas) to $2800 (more antennas). >> >> jack >> >> >> Tom Sharples wrote: >> >>> That is true only if the original modular radio was tested with an >>> antenna >>> of equal or greater gain. You'll want to look at the FCC filings that go >>> with that radio; bring up the detail page and look at the test photos. >>> Quite >>> often you'll find that these modular radios were only tested with a >>> low-gain >>> rubber-duck omni. >>> >>> Tom Sharples >>> Qorvus Systems, Inc. >>> >>> - Original Message - >>> From: "Kurt Fankhauser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "'WISPA General List'" >>> Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 6:48 AM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> Exactly, with that attitude from the FCC then all of my network is 100% >>>> FCC >>>> certified because all the radio's have an FCC number on them, I would >>>> just >>>> have to put that number on the outside of the rootenna. >>>> >>>> Kurt Fankhauser >>>> WAVELINC >>>> P.O. Box 126 >>>> Bucyrus, OH 44820 >>>> 419-562-6405 >>>> www.wavelinc.com >>>> >>>> >>>> -Original Message- >>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >>>> Behalf Of Butch Evans >>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 11:57 PM >>>> To: WISPA General List >>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations >>>> >>>> On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, Kyle Duren wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> *Response: * >>>>> >>>>> Since the device is already certified, it can be installed into a >>>>> final basestation without further approval, as long as the FCCID >>>>> label is attached on the outside of the final product. However, if >>>>> your company wishes to obtain it's own FCC number for the final >>>>> product, then you must apply for an original FCCID. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> WOW! I wonder if this type of flexibility carries over to 2.4 and >>>> 5gig. I know this has been a REALLY contentious question, but if >>>> that's the response in 3.65, I have to question the reality of FCC >>>> views in other bands that are NOT licensed. >>>> >&
Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations
You cannot get anything certified without the schematic, block diagram, and other pieces of information that you may not be able to get from the manufacturer. If the manufacturer does not cooperate, there isn't any way a WISP can obtain the certification. Moreover, the RF tests do have to be tested due to the prospect of the out of band emissions changing with a change of antenna. I have been through this several times. - Original Message - From: "Jack Unger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 12:55 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations > Right. The WISP then has the option of sending the AP or CPE to a > certification lab with several different types of higher-gain outdoor > antennas to get a new FCC ID number (a new certification) in /*your*/ > company name. The cost is less than certifying without using the > already-certified card because many of the RF tests do not need to be > repeated because they were already done by the original manufacturer. > The cost to do this depends on the number of antenna types tested but > could run between $1800 (one or two antennas) to $2800 (more antennas). > > jack > > > Tom Sharples wrote: >> That is true only if the original modular radio was tested with an >> antenna >> of equal or greater gain. You'll want to look at the FCC filings that go >> with that radio; bring up the detail page and look at the test photos. >> Quite >> often you'll find that these modular radios were only tested with a >> low-gain >> rubber-duck omni. >> >> Tom Sharples >> Qorvus Systems, Inc. >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "Kurt Fankhauser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "'WISPA General List'" >> Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 6:48 AM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations >> >> >> >>> Exactly, with that attitude from the FCC then all of my network is 100% >>> FCC >>> certified because all the radio's have an FCC number on them, I would >>> just >>> have to put that number on the outside of the rootenna. >>> >>> Kurt Fankhauser >>> WAVELINC >>> P.O. Box 126 >>> Bucyrus, OH 44820 >>> 419-562-6405 >>> www.wavelinc.com >>> >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >>> Behalf Of Butch Evans >>> Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 11:57 PM >>> To: WISPA General List >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations >>> >>> On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, Kyle Duren wrote: >>> >>> >>>> *Response: * >>>> >>>> Since the device is already certified, it can be installed into a >>>> final basestation without further approval, as long as the FCCID >>>> label is attached on the outside of the final product. However, if >>>> your company wishes to obtain it's own FCC number for the final >>>> product, then you must apply for an original FCCID. >>>> >>> WOW! I wonder if this type of flexibility carries over to 2.4 and >>> 5gig. I know this has been a REALLY contentious question, but if >>> that's the response in 3.65, I have to question the reality of FCC >>> views in other bands that are NOT licensed. >>> >>> -- >>> >>> *Butch Evans *Professional Network Consultation * >>> *Network Engineering *MikroTik RouterOS* >>> *573-276-2879 *ImageStream * >>> *http://www.butchevans.com/ *StarOS and MORE * >>> *Mikrotik Certified Consultant *Wired or Wireless Networks* >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>> >>> >>> >>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>> >>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>> >>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>> http://signup.wispa.org
Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations
Right. The WISP then has the option of sending the AP or CPE to a certification lab with several different types of higher-gain outdoor antennas to get a new FCC ID number (a new certification) in /*your*/ company name. The cost is less than certifying without using the already-certified card because many of the RF tests do not need to be repeated because they were already done by the original manufacturer. The cost to do this depends on the number of antenna types tested but could run between $1800 (one or two antennas) to $2800 (more antennas). jack Tom Sharples wrote: > That is true only if the original modular radio was tested with an antenna > of equal or greater gain. You'll want to look at the FCC filings that go > with that radio; bring up the detail page and look at the test photos. Quite > often you'll find that these modular radios were only tested with a low-gain > rubber-duck omni. > > Tom Sharples > Qorvus Systems, Inc. > > - Original Message - > From: "Kurt Fankhauser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'WISPA General List'" > Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 6:48 AM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations > > > >> Exactly, with that attitude from the FCC then all of my network is 100% >> FCC >> certified because all the radio's have an FCC number on them, I would just >> have to put that number on the outside of the rootenna. >> >> Kurt Fankhauser >> WAVELINC >> P.O. Box 126 >> Bucyrus, OH 44820 >> 419-562-6405 >> www.wavelinc.com >> >> >> -Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >> Behalf Of Butch Evans >> Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 11:57 PM >> To: WISPA General List >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations >> >> On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, Kyle Duren wrote: >> >> >>> *Response: * >>> >>> Since the device is already certified, it can be installed into a >>> final basestation without further approval, as long as the FCCID >>> label is attached on the outside of the final product. However, if >>> your company wishes to obtain it's own FCC number for the final >>> product, then you must apply for an original FCCID. >>> >> WOW! I wonder if this type of flexibility carries over to 2.4 and >> 5gig. I know this has been a REALLY contentious question, but if >> that's the response in 3.65, I have to question the reality of FCC >> views in other bands that are NOT licensed. >> >> -- >> >> *Butch Evans *Professional Network Consultation * >> *Network Engineering *MikroTik RouterOS* >> *573-276-2879 *ImageStream * >> *http://www.butchevans.com/ *StarOS and MORE * >> *Mikrotik Certified Consultant *Wired or Wireless Networks* >> >> >> >> >> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> >> >> >> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > -- Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993 Cisco Press Author - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs" Vendor-Neutral Wireless Design-Training-Troubleshooting-Consulting FCC License # PG-12-25133 Profile <http://www.linkedin.com/in/jackunger> Phone 818-227-4220 Email <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations
That is true only if the original modular radio was tested with an antenna of equal or greater gain. You'll want to look at the FCC filings that go with that radio; bring up the detail page and look at the test photos. Quite often you'll find that these modular radios were only tested with a low-gain rubber-duck omni. Tom Sharples Qorvus Systems, Inc. - Original Message - From: "Kurt Fankhauser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 6:48 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations > Exactly, with that attitude from the FCC then all of my network is 100% > FCC > certified because all the radio's have an FCC number on them, I would just > have to put that number on the outside of the rootenna. > > Kurt Fankhauser > WAVELINC > P.O. Box 126 > Bucyrus, OH 44820 > 419-562-6405 > www.wavelinc.com > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Butch Evans > Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 11:57 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations > > On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, Kyle Duren wrote: > >>*Response: * > >>Since the device is already certified, it can be installed into a >>final basestation without further approval, as long as the FCCID >>label is attached on the outside of the final product. However, if >>your company wishes to obtain it's own FCC number for the final >>product, then you must apply for an original FCCID. > > WOW! I wonder if this type of flexibility carries over to 2.4 and > 5gig. I know this has been a REALLY contentious question, but if > that's the response in 3.65, I have to question the reality of FCC > views in other bands that are NOT licensed. > > -- > > *Butch Evans *Professional Network Consultation * > *Network Engineering *MikroTik RouterOS* > *573-276-2879 *ImageStream * > *http://www.butchevans.com/ *StarOS and MORE * > *Mikrotik Certified Consultant *Wired or Wireless Networks* > > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations
Not to burst a bubble but the special "type certification" that is part of part-15 was created for unlicensed solutions. Most license holders are responsible for the equipment that is in use. Thus the equipment is only certified to meet special regs of the band, unlike unlicensed where the majority of the responsibility is on the manufacture. Anthony Will Broadband Corp. http://www.broadband-mn.com Kurt Fankhauser wrote: > Exactly, with that attitude from the FCC then all of my network is 100% FCC > certified because all the radio's have an FCC number on them, I would just > have to put that number on the outside of the rootenna. > > Kurt Fankhauser > WAVELINC > P.O. Box 126 > Bucyrus, OH 44820 > 419-562-6405 > www.wavelinc.com > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Butch Evans > Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 11:57 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations > > On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, Kyle Duren wrote: > > >> *Response: * >> > > >> Since the device is already certified, it can be installed into a >> final basestation without further approval, as long as the FCCID >> label is attached on the outside of the final product. However, if >> your company wishes to obtain it's own FCC number for the final >> product, then you must apply for an original FCCID. >> > > WOW! I wonder if this type of flexibility carries over to 2.4 and > 5gig. I know this has been a REALLY contentious question, but if > that's the response in 3.65, I have to question the reality of FCC > views in other bands that are NOT licensed. > > 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] 3650 XR3 locations
Well, let's ask! :) I assume part-15 rules are written quite a bit differently on this matter than part-90, but hey, why not ask? Randy Kurt Fankhauser wrote: > Exactly, with that attitude from the FCC then all of my network is 100% FCC > certified because all the radio's have an FCC number on them, I would just > have to put that number on the outside of the rootenna. > > Kurt Fankhauser > WAVELINC > P.O. Box 126 > Bucyrus, OH 44820 > 419-562-6405 > www.wavelinc.com > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Butch Evans > Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 11:57 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations > > On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, Kyle Duren wrote: > > >> *Response: * >> > > >> Since the device is already certified, it can be installed into a >> final basestation without further approval, as long as the FCCID >> label is attached on the outside of the final product. However, if >> your company wishes to obtain it's own FCC number for the final >> product, then you must apply for an original FCCID. >> > > WOW! I wonder if this type of flexibility carries over to 2.4 and > 5gig. I know this has been a REALLY contentious question, but if > that's the response in 3.65, I have to question the reality of FCC > views in other bands that are NOT licensed. > > -- Randy Cosby Vice President InfoWest, Inc office: 435-773-6071 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] 3650 XR3 locations
Exactly, with that attitude from the FCC then all of my network is 100% FCC certified because all the radio's have an FCC number on them, I would just have to put that number on the outside of the rootenna. Kurt Fankhauser WAVELINC P.O. Box 126 Bucyrus, OH 44820 419-562-6405 www.wavelinc.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Butch Evans Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 11:57 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, Kyle Duren wrote: >*Response: * >Since the device is already certified, it can be installed into a >final basestation without further approval, as long as the FCCID >label is attached on the outside of the final product. However, if >your company wishes to obtain it's own FCC number for the final >product, then you must apply for an original FCCID. WOW! I wonder if this type of flexibility carries over to 2.4 and 5gig. I know this has been a REALLY contentious question, but if that's the response in 3.65, I have to question the reality of FCC views in other bands that are NOT licensed. -- *Butch Evans*Professional Network Consultation * *Network Engineering*MikroTik RouterOS * *573-276-2879 *ImageStream * *http://www.butchevans.com/ *StarOS and MORE * *Mikrotik Certified Consultant *Wired or Wireless Networks* WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations
On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, Kyle Duren wrote: >*Response: * >Since the device is already certified, it can be installed into a >final basestation without further approval, as long as the FCCID >label is attached on the outside of the final product. However, if >your company wishes to obtain it's own FCC number for the final >product, then you must apply for an original FCCID. WOW! I wonder if this type of flexibility carries over to 2.4 and 5gig. I know this has been a REALLY contentious question, but if that's the response in 3.65, I have to question the reality of FCC views in other bands that are NOT licensed. -- *Butch Evans*Professional Network Consultation * *Network Engineering*MikroTik RouterOS * *573-276-2879 *ImageStream * *http://www.butchevans.com/ *StarOS and MORE * *Mikrotik Certified Consultant *Wired or Wireless Networks* WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations
I have been working on this a little bit with Jack and some other people, and we had a few questions submitted directly to the FCC, to verify some of these exact questions, here are there responses: *Inquiry:* I am trying to fully understand the procedures for getting a radio device certified for used as a registered base station under the new 3650-3700 rules. I know this device is only allowed to operate in the lower 25mhz. The device in question is fcc id: SWX-XR3B. What procedures do I need to take, to allow me to use this in a single board computer, as a Access Point (Base station)? SBC: Routerboard 333 http://routerboard.com/pdf/rb333b.pdf Radio Device: http://ubnt.com/products/xr3.php Thanks, Kyle Duren *Response: * Since the device is already certified, it can be installed into a final basestation without further approval, as long as the FCCID label is attached on the outside of the final product. However, if your company wishes to obtain it's own FCC number for the final product, then you must apply for an original FCCID. #2 *Inquiry:* ---*Reply from Customer on 04/29/2008*--- The grant issued for this device lists this: This device incorporates a restricted contention based protocol. It is not capable of avoiding co frequency interference with devices using all other types of contention-based protocols. Operation is restricted to the 3650-3675 MHz band. Yet using this device, which is a 802.11g device, includes support for CSMA/CD, which is a method of detecting and avoiding interference with other devices. Doesn't this meet the requirements set forward in part90.7? Thanks, Kyle Duren *Response: * We will not issue unrestricted use approval until the 802.16h and 802.19 protocol standards are finalized. 802.16h = Improved Coexistence Mechanisms for License-Exempt Operation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.16) 802.19 = More Coexistence Stuff (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.19) - Now #2 is only being asked, in regards to the grant aproval actually given to the XR3, since there was much discussion before hand, on how the wi-fi band would meet these rules, whereas WiMax would not. Grant can be found here: https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COPY&RequestTimeout=500&application_id=930658&fcc_id=SWX-XR3B or here, if that didnt come across correctly: *http://tinyurl.com/5alnkl - *ARC Wireless does make a nice antenna/enclosure, for the 3.65ghz range, although Im not sure who has it in stock. --- Label examples and such can be found here: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/kdb/forms/FTSSearchResultPage.cfm?id=27980&switch=P To me it seems like using the "Assembled with tested components" makes the most sense, since thats totally true, the "system" has not been certified, just the radio device within the system. - Details on channels and conversion frequencies: "Channel Freq Driver Freq Real Channel Width Support ChannelA 5765MHz 3658MHz 5/10MHz ChannelB 5770MHz 3663MHz 20/10/5MHz ChannelC 5775MHz 3668MHz 5/10MHz 3 channels is not a lot; but the best that can be done with only 25MHz of bandwidth and the band edge rules of the 3.65GHz band." from [EMAIL PROTECTED], who is in charge of the XR3 compliance stuff. --- The statement about which card to buy: There are 3 versions of this card, as far as I know, they follow XR-3-2.8 = 2.70ghz - 2.90ghz XR-3-3.5 = 3.400ghz - 3.7ghz **XR3-3.5 is a General Purpose Engineer Card that can be used toqualify performane up to 3.7GHz** XR-3-3.7 = 3.65ghz - 3.7gh (FCC Part90 Compliant card) I do NOT know what the differences in appears on these cards might be, but if its marked with the SWX-SR3B FCCID sticker, I would assume it is the correct 3.65ghz radio card. None of the other models should actually have that fcc, since they are not approved for those other ranges. They are mostly for export outside the US, much like the XR7 card (760mhz-780mhz) --- Also from what I have "heard" (cannot back up with fact) Ubiquiti is working on a LS3, or PS3 or NS3 style radio, and also a LS9 or PS9 radio (This one is for sure, it is in beta tests currently, checking its compatibility with the XR9/SR9 existing networks) Hope that clears a few things up, Kyle Duren 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] 3650 XR3 locations
Approval by getting your FCC cert ID means it qualifies, period. And yes, 802.11 is "contention based" but the FCC refuses to allow 802.11 to be approved for the full spectrum until some 802.something standard is finalized. - Original Message - From: "Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 11:16 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations >* Randy Cosby wrote, On 6/4/2008 12:36 PM: >> Thanks for the clarification on the cards. Any hints on getting someone >> at UBNT to talk to you? My emails, private forum messages, etc. have >> been ignored. I understand they are completely buried with NS2 / NS5 >> demand, but come on... :) >> > As far as I know, 3650 requires a contention based protocol not just a > modular part's FCCID to use it. > > Leon >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> >>> I've been in contact with UBNT for some time.The modular approval >>> specifies the antenna to be used, and it is, according to both the FCC ( >>> email from the FCC in response to an inquiry ) and UBNT entirely legal >>> to >>> use with any OS that properly operates the card. >>> >>> So, yes you can grow your own, and if nothing else, you simply use the >>> FCC >>> ID on the card itself as your FCC ID...If you wish to have your own >>> number on the box, you must apply to the FCC for your own number, and >>> simply >>> cite the "this is unchanged from XX " in your applicaiton. >>> >>> All stated clearly and unambiguously by the FCC personell. >>> >>> I hope this puts this argument to bed.Modular approval is just that. >>> The module, ON ITS OWN, is approved and can be put in anything >>> appropriate. >>> Again, stated clearly by the FCC. >>> >>> BTW, on your license, you're required to put the ID of the equipment >>> you're >>> putting in place. In this case, it's the FCC ID for UBNT. >>> >>> BTW, current XR3's out now are not ACTUALLY the right card. I've been >>> promised a pair from the first stickered and channelized batch. I >>> would >>> not deploy anything being sold by retailers right now, as they are >>> pretty >>> much engineering mules... Not optimized and not properly channel >>> filtered >>> and limited. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> - Original Message - >>> From: "Randy Cosby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "WISPA General List" >>> Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 9:12 AM >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations (was: Rapid Link Launches WiMax) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> I had a feeling this would unleash a can of worms. >>>> >>>> I'm the one who registered the locations. My first location (my office >>>> rooftop) was done purely as an academic exercise to see what exactly >>>> was >>>> required. I had hoped the FCC would come back and say, "you need to do >>>> X Y and Z before this is acceptable." I would have been fine with that >>>> and taken that into consideration in my feasibility study. They did >>>> not. >>>> >>>> Since then, there has been some further digging to clarify some >>>> questions that were brought up by this approval. From what I >>>> understand, using the XR3, MT and an 18dbi antenna (or smaller) is >>>> approved as far as Part 90 goes. See >>>> http://forum.ubnt.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1451&start=14 for >>>> clarification. >>>> >>>> Now, if you were to go out and SELL that bundle as a product, I would >>>> think there would need to be further licensing >>>> (http://www.fcc.gov/oet/ea/ ) to be approved. Hana Wireless ( >>>> http://www.streakwave.com/mmSWAVE1/Video/HW3.pdf ) is selling pretty >>>> much the same kit I made myself, but I do NOT see any OET approvals for >>>> them. I hear other WISPS are using the Hana units, but I see nothing >>>> of the sort registered in ULS, so I would think they are not legal. >>>> >>>> If I use any of these, they will be for PTP links. Because the XR3 was >>>> only approved for 18dBi antennas, and has a max output of 25dbm (see >>>>
Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations (was: Rapid Link Launches WiMax)
Yes. - Original Message - From: "Doug Ratcliffe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 9:44 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations (was: Rapid Link Launches WiMax) > Does that apply to part 15 modular approval as well for SR2/SR5/XR2/XR5? > 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] 3650 XR3 locations
* Randy Cosby wrote, On 6/4/2008 12:36 PM: > Thanks for the clarification on the cards. Any hints on getting someone > at UBNT to talk to you? My emails, private forum messages, etc. have > been ignored. I understand they are completely buried with NS2 / NS5 > demand, but come on... :) > As far as I know, 3650 requires a contention based protocol not just a modular part's FCCID to use it. Leon > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> I've been in contact with UBNT for some time.The modular approval >> specifies the antenna to be used, and it is, according to both the FCC ( >> email from the FCC in response to an inquiry ) and UBNT entirely legal to >> use with any OS that properly operates the card. >> >> So, yes you can grow your own, and if nothing else, you simply use the FCC >> ID on the card itself as your FCC ID...If you wish to have your own >> number on the box, you must apply to the FCC for your own number, and simply >> cite the "this is unchanged from XX " in your applicaiton. >> >> All stated clearly and unambiguously by the FCC personell. >> >> I hope this puts this argument to bed.Modular approval is just that. >> The module, ON ITS OWN, is approved and can be put in anything appropriate. >> Again, stated clearly by the FCC. >> >> BTW, on your license, you're required to put the ID of the equipment you're >> putting in place. In this case, it's the FCC ID for UBNT. >> >> BTW, current XR3's out now are not ACTUALLY the right card. I've been >> promised a pair from the first stickered and channelized batch. I would >> not deploy anything being sold by retailers right now, as they are pretty >> much engineering mules... Not optimized and not properly channel filtered >> and limited. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> - Original Message - >> From: "Randy Cosby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "WISPA General List" >> Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 9:12 AM >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations (was: Rapid Link Launches WiMax) >> >> >> >> >>> I had a feeling this would unleash a can of worms. >>> >>> I'm the one who registered the locations. My first location (my office >>> rooftop) was done purely as an academic exercise to see what exactly was >>> required. I had hoped the FCC would come back and say, "you need to do >>> X Y and Z before this is acceptable." I would have been fine with that >>> and taken that into consideration in my feasibility study. They did not. >>> >>> Since then, there has been some further digging to clarify some >>> questions that were brought up by this approval. From what I >>> understand, using the XR3, MT and an 18dbi antenna (or smaller) is >>> approved as far as Part 90 goes. See >>> http://forum.ubnt.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1451&start=14 for >>> clarification. >>> >>> Now, if you were to go out and SELL that bundle as a product, I would >>> think there would need to be further licensing >>> (http://www.fcc.gov/oet/ea/ ) to be approved. Hana Wireless ( >>> http://www.streakwave.com/mmSWAVE1/Video/HW3.pdf ) is selling pretty >>> much the same kit I made myself, but I do NOT see any OET approvals for >>> them. I hear other WISPS are using the Hana units, but I see nothing >>> of the sort registered in ULS, so I would think they are not legal. >>> >>> If I use any of these, they will be for PTP links. Because the XR3 was >>> only approved for 18dBi antennas, and has a max output of 25dbm (see >>> *http://tinyurl.com/4jpndg *, >>> http://ubnt.com/downloads/ubi_mtik_power.pdf ) and assuming .5 dB loss >>> for the jumper cable, at slow speeds we're only going to get a 42.5 dBm >>> or 17.8 watts, not the full 20 watts allowed under the rules in a 20 mhz >>> channel. If you want to run at full 54 mbps, you will only get 18 >>> dBm on the radio, plus 18 on the antenna, or 35.5 dbm, or 3.5 watts. >>> Not the ideal PTP solution. >>> >>> So is it moral or legal to run it? I'm glad this has stirred some >>> debate and further clarifications. I'd like to see 802.11Y moved along >>> and put into MT and the cards, that would help open up lots of other >>> non-wimax possibilities. For now, it is what it is. I've seen nothing >>> to indicate it is illegal. Is it unwise? >>>
Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations (was: Rapid Link Launches WiMax)
Does that apply to part 15 modular approval as well for SR2/SR5/XR2/XR5? - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 12:33 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations (was: Rapid Link Launches WiMax) > I've been in contact with UBNT for some time.The modular approval > specifies the antenna to be used, and it is, according to both the FCC ( > email from the FCC in response to an inquiry ) and UBNT entirely legal to > use with any OS that properly operates the card. > > So, yes you can grow your own, and if nothing else, you simply use the FCC > ID on the card itself as your FCC ID...If you wish to have your own > number on the box, you must apply to the FCC for your own number, and > simply > cite the "this is unchanged from XX " in your applicaiton. > > All stated clearly and unambiguously by the FCC personell. > > I hope this puts this argument to bed.Modular approval is just that. > The module, ON ITS OWN, is approved and can be put in anything > appropriate. > Again, stated clearly by the FCC. > > BTW, on your license, you're required to put the ID of the equipment > you're > putting in place. In this case, it's the FCC ID for UBNT. > > BTW, current XR3's out now are not ACTUALLY the right card. I've been > promised a pair from the first stickered and channelized batch. I would > not deploy anything being sold by retailers right now, as they are pretty > much engineering mules... Not optimized and not properly channel > filtered > and limited. > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > From: "Randy Cosby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 9:12 AM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations (was: Rapid Link Launches WiMax) > > >>I had a feeling this would unleash a can of worms. >> >> I'm the one who registered the locations. My first location (my office >> rooftop) was done purely as an academic exercise to see what exactly was >> required. I had hoped the FCC would come back and say, "you need to do >> X Y and Z before this is acceptable." I would have been fine with that >> and taken that into consideration in my feasibility study. They did not. >> >> Since then, there has been some further digging to clarify some >> questions that were brought up by this approval. From what I >> understand, using the XR3, MT and an 18dbi antenna (or smaller) is >> approved as far as Part 90 goes. See >> http://forum.ubnt.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1451&start=14 for >> clarification. >> >> Now, if you were to go out and SELL that bundle as a product, I would >> think there would need to be further licensing >> (http://www.fcc.gov/oet/ea/ ) to be approved. Hana Wireless ( >> http://www.streakwave.com/mmSWAVE1/Video/HW3.pdf ) is selling pretty >> much the same kit I made myself, but I do NOT see any OET approvals for >> them. I hear other WISPS are using the Hana units, but I see nothing >> of the sort registered in ULS, so I would think they are not legal. >> >> If I use any of these, they will be for PTP links. Because the XR3 was >> only approved for 18dBi antennas, and has a max output of 25dbm (see >> *http://tinyurl.com/4jpndg *, >> http://ubnt.com/downloads/ubi_mtik_power.pdf ) and assuming .5 dB loss >> for the jumper cable, at slow speeds we're only going to get a 42.5 dBm >> or 17.8 watts, not the full 20 watts allowed under the rules in a 20 mhz >> channel. If you want to run at full 54 mbps, you will only get 18 >> dBm on the radio, plus 18 on the antenna, or 35.5 dbm, or 3.5 watts. >> Not the ideal PTP solution. >> >> So is it moral or legal to run it? I'm glad this has stirred some >> debate and further clarifications. I'd like to see 802.11Y moved along >> and put into MT and the cards, that would help open up lots of other >> non-wimax possibilities. For now, it is what it is. I've seen nothing >> to indicate it is illegal. Is it unwise? >> >> I honestly am interested in hearing verifiable refutations to anything >> I've found so far. I want to do what is legal, as well as wise. >> >> Randy >> >> >> >> >> Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE wrote: >>> George...you can not plug-n-play components as I said earlier. It has to >>> be certified as a system that makes use of a contention based protocol. >>> >>> Leon >>> >>> *
Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations
Thanks for the clarification on the cards. Any hints on getting someone at UBNT to talk to you? My emails, private forum messages, etc. have been ignored. I understand they are completely buried with NS2 / NS5 demand, but come on... :) Randy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I've been in contact with UBNT for some time.The modular approval > specifies the antenna to be used, and it is, according to both the FCC ( > email from the FCC in response to an inquiry ) and UBNT entirely legal to > use with any OS that properly operates the card. > > So, yes you can grow your own, and if nothing else, you simply use the FCC > ID on the card itself as your FCC ID...If you wish to have your own > number on the box, you must apply to the FCC for your own number, and simply > cite the "this is unchanged from XX " in your applicaiton. > > All stated clearly and unambiguously by the FCC personell. > > I hope this puts this argument to bed.Modular approval is just that. > The module, ON ITS OWN, is approved and can be put in anything appropriate. > Again, stated clearly by the FCC. > > BTW, on your license, you're required to put the ID of the equipment you're > putting in place. In this case, it's the FCC ID for UBNT. > > BTW, current XR3's out now are not ACTUALLY the right card. I've been > promised a pair from the first stickered and channelized batch. I would > not deploy anything being sold by retailers right now, as they are pretty > much engineering mules... Not optimized and not properly channel filtered > and limited. > > > > > > > > - Original Message ----- > From: "Randy Cosby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" > Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 9:12 AM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations (was: Rapid Link Launches WiMax) > > > >> I had a feeling this would unleash a can of worms. >> >> I'm the one who registered the locations. My first location (my office >> rooftop) was done purely as an academic exercise to see what exactly was >> required. I had hoped the FCC would come back and say, "you need to do >> X Y and Z before this is acceptable." I would have been fine with that >> and taken that into consideration in my feasibility study. They did not. >> >> Since then, there has been some further digging to clarify some >> questions that were brought up by this approval. From what I >> understand, using the XR3, MT and an 18dbi antenna (or smaller) is >> approved as far as Part 90 goes. See >> http://forum.ubnt.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1451&start=14 for >> clarification. >> >> Now, if you were to go out and SELL that bundle as a product, I would >> think there would need to be further licensing >> (http://www.fcc.gov/oet/ea/ ) to be approved. Hana Wireless ( >> http://www.streakwave.com/mmSWAVE1/Video/HW3.pdf ) is selling pretty >> much the same kit I made myself, but I do NOT see any OET approvals for >> them. I hear other WISPS are using the Hana units, but I see nothing >> of the sort registered in ULS, so I would think they are not legal. >> >> If I use any of these, they will be for PTP links. Because the XR3 was >> only approved for 18dBi antennas, and has a max output of 25dbm (see >> *http://tinyurl.com/4jpndg *, >> http://ubnt.com/downloads/ubi_mtik_power.pdf ) and assuming .5 dB loss >> for the jumper cable, at slow speeds we're only going to get a 42.5 dBm >> or 17.8 watts, not the full 20 watts allowed under the rules in a 20 mhz >> channel. If you want to run at full 54 mbps, you will only get 18 >> dBm on the radio, plus 18 on the antenna, or 35.5 dbm, or 3.5 watts. >> Not the ideal PTP solution. >> >> So is it moral or legal to run it? I'm glad this has stirred some >> debate and further clarifications. I'd like to see 802.11Y moved along >> and put into MT and the cards, that would help open up lots of other >> non-wimax possibilities. For now, it is what it is. I've seen nothing >> to indicate it is illegal. Is it unwise? >> >> I honestly am interested in hearing verifiable refutations to anything >> I've found so far. I want to do what is legal, as well as wise. >> >> Randy >> >> >> >> >> Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE wrote: >> >>> George...you can not plug-n-play components as I said earlier. It has to >>> be certified as a system that makes use of a contention based protocol. >>> >>> Leon >>> >>> * George Rogat
Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations (was: Rapid Link Launches WiMax)
I've been in contact with UBNT for some time.The modular approval specifies the antenna to be used, and it is, according to both the FCC ( email from the FCC in response to an inquiry ) and UBNT entirely legal to use with any OS that properly operates the card. So, yes you can grow your own, and if nothing else, you simply use the FCC ID on the card itself as your FCC ID...If you wish to have your own number on the box, you must apply to the FCC for your own number, and simply cite the "this is unchanged from XX " in your applicaiton. All stated clearly and unambiguously by the FCC personell. I hope this puts this argument to bed.Modular approval is just that. The module, ON ITS OWN, is approved and can be put in anything appropriate. Again, stated clearly by the FCC. BTW, on your license, you're required to put the ID of the equipment you're putting in place. In this case, it's the FCC ID for UBNT. BTW, current XR3's out now are not ACTUALLY the right card. I've been promised a pair from the first stickered and channelized batch. I would not deploy anything being sold by retailers right now, as they are pretty much engineering mules... Not optimized and not properly channel filtered and limited. - Original Message - From: "Randy Cosby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 9:12 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations (was: Rapid Link Launches WiMax) >I had a feeling this would unleash a can of worms. > > I'm the one who registered the locations. My first location (my office > rooftop) was done purely as an academic exercise to see what exactly was > required. I had hoped the FCC would come back and say, "you need to do > X Y and Z before this is acceptable." I would have been fine with that > and taken that into consideration in my feasibility study. They did not. > > Since then, there has been some further digging to clarify some > questions that were brought up by this approval. From what I > understand, using the XR3, MT and an 18dbi antenna (or smaller) is > approved as far as Part 90 goes. See > http://forum.ubnt.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1451&start=14 for > clarification. > > Now, if you were to go out and SELL that bundle as a product, I would > think there would need to be further licensing > (http://www.fcc.gov/oet/ea/ ) to be approved. Hana Wireless ( > http://www.streakwave.com/mmSWAVE1/Video/HW3.pdf ) is selling pretty > much the same kit I made myself, but I do NOT see any OET approvals for > them. I hear other WISPS are using the Hana units, but I see nothing > of the sort registered in ULS, so I would think they are not legal. > > If I use any of these, they will be for PTP links. Because the XR3 was > only approved for 18dBi antennas, and has a max output of 25dbm (see > *http://tinyurl.com/4jpndg *, > http://ubnt.com/downloads/ubi_mtik_power.pdf ) and assuming .5 dB loss > for the jumper cable, at slow speeds we're only going to get a 42.5 dBm > or 17.8 watts, not the full 20 watts allowed under the rules in a 20 mhz > channel. If you want to run at full 54 mbps, you will only get 18 > dBm on the radio, plus 18 on the antenna, or 35.5 dbm, or 3.5 watts. > Not the ideal PTP solution. > > So is it moral or legal to run it? I'm glad this has stirred some > debate and further clarifications. I'd like to see 802.11Y moved along > and put into MT and the cards, that would help open up lots of other > non-wimax possibilities. For now, it is what it is. I've seen nothing > to indicate it is illegal. Is it unwise? > > I honestly am interested in hearing verifiable refutations to anything > I've found so far. I want to do what is legal, as well as wise. > > Randy > > > > > Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE wrote: >> George...you can not plug-n-play components as I said earlier. It has to >> be certified as a system that makes use of a contention based protocol. >> >> Leon >> >> * George Rogato wrote, On 6/4/2008 11:22 AM: >> >>> Thanks for explaining that Travis. >>> I asked Jack Unger to look into this recently. >>> There was a post somewhere else recently about 3650 use and I forwarded >>> it to Jack to find out from the FCC if in fact it is the way the post >>> read. >>> >>> I'd like to hear Jack's opinion based on what he has found out from the >>> FCC. >>> >>> As far as using those cards, if they work in mt and star, then for most >>> of us it's just add another card to the multi port board and go. It >>> sounds a lot cheaper than I had e
Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations (was: Rapid Link Launches WiMax)
I had a feeling this would unleash a can of worms. I'm the one who registered the locations. My first location (my office rooftop) was done purely as an academic exercise to see what exactly was required. I had hoped the FCC would come back and say, "you need to do X Y and Z before this is acceptable." I would have been fine with that and taken that into consideration in my feasibility study. They did not. Since then, there has been some further digging to clarify some questions that were brought up by this approval. From what I understand, using the XR3, MT and an 18dbi antenna (or smaller) is approved as far as Part 90 goes. See http://forum.ubnt.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1451&start=14 for clarification. Now, if you were to go out and SELL that bundle as a product, I would think there would need to be further licensing (http://www.fcc.gov/oet/ea/ ) to be approved. Hana Wireless ( http://www.streakwave.com/mmSWAVE1/Video/HW3.pdf ) is selling pretty much the same kit I made myself, but I do NOT see any OET approvals for them. I hear other WISPS are using the Hana units, but I see nothing of the sort registered in ULS, so I would think they are not legal. If I use any of these, they will be for PTP links. Because the XR3 was only approved for 18dBi antennas, and has a max output of 25dbm (see *http://tinyurl.com/4jpndg *, http://ubnt.com/downloads/ubi_mtik_power.pdf ) and assuming .5 dB loss for the jumper cable, at slow speeds we're only going to get a 42.5 dBm or 17.8 watts, not the full 20 watts allowed under the rules in a 20 mhz channel. If you want to run at full 54 mbps, you will only get 18 dBm on the radio, plus 18 on the antenna, or 35.5 dbm, or 3.5 watts. Not the ideal PTP solution. So is it moral or legal to run it? I'm glad this has stirred some debate and further clarifications. I'd like to see 802.11Y moved along and put into MT and the cards, that would help open up lots of other non-wimax possibilities. For now, it is what it is. I've seen nothing to indicate it is illegal. Is it unwise? I honestly am interested in hearing verifiable refutations to anything I've found so far. I want to do what is legal, as well as wise. Randy Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE wrote: > George...you can not plug-n-play components as I said earlier. It has to > be certified as a system that makes use of a contention based protocol. > > Leon > > * George Rogato wrote, On 6/4/2008 11:22 AM: > >> Thanks for explaining that Travis. >> I asked Jack Unger to look into this recently. >> There was a post somewhere else recently about 3650 use and I forwarded >> it to Jack to find out from the FCC if in fact it is the way the post read. >> >> I'd like to hear Jack's opinion based on what he has found out from the FCC. >> >> As far as using those cards, if they work in mt and star, then for most >> of us it's just add another card to the multi port board and go. It >> sounds a lot cheaper than I had expected. >> >> George >> >> Travis Johnson wrote: >> >> >>> John, >>> >>> Here is what I have heard or read so far: >>> >>> (1) I "heard" that 3650 users that are conflicting will have to "work it >>> out" and that "more than likely" the FCC would not get involved in a >>> frequency conflict. >>> >>> (2) Getting a license for 3650 takes about 2 hours, start to finish >>> (from what I have heard from people that have done it). Meaning any >>> person with Internet access can have a valid, FCC license in 2 hours. >>> >>> (3) The FCC has already approved someone using just the Ubiquiti XR3 >>> card as the registered "base station". Putting that card in a MT system >>> does not broadcast any call signs or info in the packet frame, yet you >>> are "licensed" and "FCC legal" as per the registration. >>> >>> (4) If it truly is a "first registered, everyone else work around me" >>> then I will be registering every single tower within a 1,000 mile radius >>> from my NOC. :) >>> >>> I'm not trying bash you or anything you said... I'm just thinking the >>> 3650 band is going to get just as messy as the 5ghz band within a few >>> years... and I think the FCC has given "false hope" that it is somewhat >>> protected... yet I don't see how. >>> >>> Travis >>> Microserv >>> >>> John Scrivner wrote: >>> >>> Here is how it is different than 5 GHz. In 5 GHz the rules are that you have to accept interference. Also any equipment on earth can use the band from mobile phones to cameras and of course broadband devices of many types. There is little involved in dropping your link. Also there is little chance of you knowing what the interfering source is without some leg work. In 3650 only people who get a license can launch. Base stations must be certified systems with the FCC and must be registered with the FCC. The rules state that it is a requirement that anyone using the band must work to eliminate inter
