Re: [WISPA] 3650 Omni
We have a few operators doing this with our COMPACT using a dual polarity omni. Granted, the locations are extremely rural with ample tree density, so conflict of what nearby cells there may be is not a problem. For us, it is not a recommended design, but the operator finds it is working well for their needs. Their range is better than I would have expected as well. I am not sure what brand or model antenna is being used. Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image003.png@01CF531D.F9A21620]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of wi...@mncomm.com Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2014 10:55 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] 3650 Omni Just curious if others have deployed a 3650 Omni and to know if it was effective? We have a few sites that we use 3650 PTP and one with a 120 degree panel that cranks out some decent power. Of course we are always looking for areas that we can break up APs and get some RF separation. I ran into a competitor on the extreme north side of one of our competitors that has a customer using a M365 power bridge. From their registration on FCC the closest sites they have registered are over 20 miles away. Can this be done PtMP on 3650? I have a BH link doing 24 miles on Rockets but havent tried anything this distance PtMP. I assume they have a closer site that’s not fully registered on the FCC site as of yet. Anyways, just curious if omni was real effective. Just more or less looking for areas to throw on 15 to 20 subs to break down some overloaded M2 M5 AP. And if so, are you using UBNT antennas or KP or other thanks heith This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses. This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses. inline: image003.png___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] 3650 Omni
Doesn't answer your question but, we've use splitters and sector antennas to get around the use of omni's. There are a couple of advantages to sector design. Downtilt being the most important. However, it does cost more tower rent and cable management can be a pain. We've used it with great success. On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 9:55 AM, wi...@mncomm.com wrote: Just curious if others have deployed a 3650 Omni and to know if it was effective? We have a few sites that we use 3650 PTP and one with a 120 degree panel that cranks out some decent power. Of course we are always looking for areas that we can break up APs and get some RF separation. I ran into a competitor on the extreme north side of one of our competitors that has a customer using a M365 power bridge. From their registration on FCC the closest sites they have registered are over 20 miles away. Can this be done PtMP on 3650? I have a BH link doing 24 miles on Rockets but havent tried anything this distance PtMP. I assume they have a closer site that's not fully registered on the FCC site as of yet. Anyways, just curious if omni was real effective. Just more or less looking for areas to throw on 15 to 20 subs to break down some overloaded M2 M5 AP. And if so, are you using UBNT antennas or KP or other thanks heith ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] 3650 Omni
Good point re the downtilt. I should have noted the omnis I mentioned being used on the COMPACTs have an electrical downtilt. Patrick Leary M 727.501.3735 [cid:image001.png@01CF531F.350B0540]http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Eric Muehleisen Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2014 11:40 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Omni Doesn't answer your question but, we've use splitters and sector antennas to get around the use of omni's. There are a couple of advantages to sector design. Downtilt being the most important. However, it does cost more tower rent and cable management can be a pain. We've used it with great success. On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 9:55 AM, wi...@mncomm.commailto:wi...@mncomm.com wrote: Just curious if others have deployed a 3650 Omni and to know if it was effective? We have a few sites that we use 3650 PTP and one with a 120 degree panel that cranks out some decent power. Of course we are always looking for areas that we can break up APs and get some RF separation. I ran into a competitor on the extreme north side of one of our competitors that has a customer using a M365 power bridge. From their registration on FCC the closest sites they have registered are over 20 miles away. Can this be done PtMP on 3650? I have a BH link doing 24 miles on Rockets but havent tried anything this distance PtMP. I assume they have a closer site that's not fully registered on the FCC site as of yet. Anyways, just curious if omni was real effective. Just more or less looking for areas to throw on 15 to 20 subs to break down some overloaded M2 M5 AP. And if so, are you using UBNT antennas or KP or other thanks heith ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.orgmailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses. This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses. inline: image001.png___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] 3650 Omni
OMNI = Open (to) Monstrous Noise (and) Interference On 4/8/2014 7:55 AM, wi...@mncomm.com wrote: Just curious if others have deployed a 3650 Omni and to know if it was effective? We have a few sites that we use 3650 PTP and one with a 120 degree panel that cranks out some decent power. Of course we are always looking for areas that we can break up APs and get some RF separation. I ran into a competitor on the extreme north side of one of our competitors that has a customer using a M365 power bridge. From their registration on FCC the closest sites they have registered are over 20 miles away. Can this be done PtMP on 3650? I have a BH link doing 24 miles on Rockets but havent tried anything this distance PtMP. I assume they have a closer site thats not fully registered on the FCC site as of yet. Anyways, just curious if omni was real effective. Just more or less looking for areas to throw on 15 to 20 subs to break down some overloaded M2 M5 AP. And if so, are you using UBNT antennas or KP or other thanks heith ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless -- Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Author (2003) - "Deploying License-Free Wireless Wide-Area Networks" Serving the WISP Community since 1993 760-678-5033 jun...@ask-wi.com ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] 3650 Omni
Best acronym ever. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 1:48 PM, Jack Unger jun...@ask-wi.com wrote: OMNI = Open (to) Monstrous Noise (and) Interference On 4/8/2014 7:55 AM, wi...@mncomm.com wrote: Just curious if others have deployed a 3650 Omni and to know if it was effective? We have a few sites that we use 3650 PTP and one with a 120 degree panel that cranks out some decent power. Of course we are always looking for areas that we can break up APs and get some RF separation. I ran into a competitor on the extreme north side of one of our competitors that has a customer using a M365 power bridge. From their registration on FCC the closest sites they have registered are over 20 miles away. Can this be done PtMP on 3650? I have a BH link doing 24 miles on Rockets but havent tried anything this distance PtMP. I assume they have a closer site that's not fully registered on the FCC site as of yet. Anyways, just curious if omni was real effective. Just more or less looking for areas to throw on 15 to 20 subs to break down some overloaded M2 M5 AP. And if so, are you using UBNT antennas or KP or other thanks heith ___ Wireless mailing listWireless@wispa.orghttp://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless -- Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Author (2003) - Deploying License-Free Wireless Wide-Area Networks Serving the WISP Community since 1993760-678-5033 jun...@ask-wi.com ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] 3650 Omni
I know, but I have not been able to do 2 radios running on the same site that were both 3650 without killing each other. But, I appreciate the abuse again, Jack heith From: Jack Unger Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2014 12:48 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Omni OMNI = Open (to) Monstrous Noise (and) Interference On 4/8/2014 7:55 AM, wi...@mncomm.com wrote: Just curious if others have deployed a 3650 Omni and to know if it was effective? We have a few sites that we use 3650 PTP and one with a 120 degree panel that cranks out some decent power. Of course we are always looking for areas that we can break up APs and get some RF separation. I ran into a competitor on the extreme north side of one of our competitors that has a customer using a M365 power bridge. From their registration on FCC the closest sites they have registered are over 20 miles away. Can this be done PtMP on 3650? I have a BH link doing 24 miles on Rockets but havent tried anything this distance PtMP. I assume they have a closer site that’s not fully registered on the FCC site as of yet. Anyways, just curious if omni was real effective. Just more or less looking for areas to throw on 15 to 20 subs to break down some overloaded M2 M5 AP. And if so, are you using UBNT antennas or KP or other thanks heith ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless -- Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Author (2003) - Deploying License-Free Wireless Wide-Area Networks Serving the WISP Community since 1993 760-678-5033 jun...@ask-wi.com ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless wlEmoticon-winkingsmile[1].png___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] 3650 MHz permission letters?
a...@afmug.com. Cambium (Canopy) posts on this list. On 12/22/2011 03:30 PM, John Buwa wrote: Is there a good canopy list? John Buwa Michiana Wireless,Inc 574-233-7170 Sent from my iPhone On Dec 12, 2011, at 4:12 PM, Michael Hughes mhug...@antelecom.net wrote: SES Americom can be done. It's just not a easy process. Our first agreement with them took more than a year of legal wrangling. Since then we have successfully negotiated agreements with SES for another 5 towers and 3500 CPE. Michael C. Hughes CEO Antelecom, Inc. 661.726.3516 On Monday 12/12/2011 at 12:17, Pat O'Connor wrote: You have to contact who manages the Satellite Earth Station and they usually have an application and various forms to fill out. If you're dealing with SES Americom, have fun. I don't know of one that they have approved. Pat On 12/12/2011 11:20 AM, Fred R. Goldstein wrote: Does anyone have a standard letter to use to ask permission from satellite earth stations to use the 3650 MHz band within the 150 mile exclusion zone? Thanks. -- Fred Goldstein k1io fgoldstein "at" ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ +1 617 795 2701 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3650 MHz permission letters?
Is there a good canopy list? John Buwa Michiana Wireless,Inc 574-233-7170 Sent from my iPhone On Dec 12, 2011, at 4:12 PM, Michael Hughes mhug...@antelecom.net wrote: SES Americom can be done. It's just not a easy process. Our first agreement with them took more than a year of legal wrangling. Since then we have successfully negotiated agreements with SES for another 5 towers and 3500 CPE. Michael C. Hughes CEO Antelecom, Inc. 661.726.3516 On Monday 12/12/2011 at 12:17, Pat O'Connor wrote: You have to contact who manages the Satellite Earth Station and they usually have an application and various forms to fill out. If you're dealing with SES Americom, have fun. I don't know of one that they have approved. Pat On 12/12/2011 11:20 AM, Fred R. Goldstein wrote: Does anyone have a standard letter to use to ask permission from satellite earth stations to use the 3650 MHz band within the 150 mile exclusion zone? Thanks. -- Fred Goldstein k1io fgoldstein at ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ +1 617 795 2701 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3650 MHz permission letters?
I've been hearing more and more about spam filters that are too agressive. Calling may be the best thing to do. On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 12:37 AM, Scottie Arnett sarn...@info-ed.comwrote: In my area, I have to deal with northstarstudios.tv. I have sent emails after emails to them.I guess next is call them direct!?!?!?!? Scottie Arnett President Info-Ed, Inc. Electronics and More 931-243-2101 sarn...@info-ed.com - Original Message - From: Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 3:19 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 MHz permission letters? Thanks for the information. Much obliged. At 12/12/2011 04:12 PM, you wrote: SES Americom can be done. It's just not a easy process. Our first agreement with them took more than a year of legal wrangling. Since then we have successfully negotiated agreements with SES for another 5 towers and 3500 CPE. Michael C. Hughes CEO Antelecom, Inc. 661.726.3516 On Monday 12/12/2011 at 12:17, Pat O'Connor wrote: You have to contact who manages the Satellite Earth Station and they usually have an application and various forms to fill out. If you're dealing with SES Americom, have fun. I don't know of one that they have approved. Pat On 12/12/2011 11:20 AM, Fred R. Goldstein wrote: Does anyone have a standard letter to use to ask permission from satellite earth stations to use the 3650 MHz band within the 150 mile exclusion zone? Thanks. -- Fred Goldsteink1io fgoldstein at ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ +1 617 795 2701 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 MHz permission letters?
Half of my network is in SES land. I finally gave up and am putting my effort into the FCC's new rules. The new rules will hopefully shorten the exclusion zone and will require that they negotiate in good faith. laters, marlon - Original Message - From: Rich _ To: WISPA General List Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2011 9:59 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 MHz permission letters? I've been hearing more and more about spam filters that are too agressive. Calling may be the best thing to do. On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 12:37 AM, Scottie Arnett sarn...@info-ed.com wrote: In my area, I have to deal with northstarstudios.tv. I have sent emails after emails to them.I guess next is call them direct!?!?!?!? Scottie Arnett President Info-Ed, Inc. Electronics and More 931-243-2101 sarn...@info-ed.com - Original Message - From: Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 3:19 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 MHz permission letters? Thanks for the information. Much obliged. At 12/12/2011 04:12 PM, you wrote: SES Americom can be done. It's just not a easy process. Our first agreement with them took more than a year of legal wrangling. Since then we have successfully negotiated agreements with SES for another 5 towers and 3500 CPE. Michael C. Hughes CEO Antelecom, Inc. 661.726.3516 On Monday 12/12/2011 at 12:17, Pat O'Connor wrote: You have to contact who manages the Satellite Earth Station and they usually have an application and various forms to fill out. If you're dealing with SES Americom, have fun. I don't know of one that they have approved. Pat On 12/12/2011 11:20 AM, Fred R. Goldstein wrote: Does anyone have a standard letter to use to ask permission from satellite earth stations to use the 3650 MHz band within the 150 mile exclusion zone? Thanks. -- Fred Goldsteink1io fgoldstein at ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ +1 617 795 2701 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3650 MHz permission letters?
In my area, I have to deal with northstarstudios.tv. I have sent emails after emails to them.I guess next is call them direct!?!?!?!? Scottie Arnett President Info-Ed, Inc. Electronics and More 931-243-2101 sarn...@info-ed.com - Original Message - From: Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 3:19 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 MHz permission letters? Thanks for the information. Much obliged. At 12/12/2011 04:12 PM, you wrote: SES Americom can be done. It's just not a easy process. Our first agreement with them took more than a year of legal wrangling. Since then we have successfully negotiated agreements with SES for another 5 towers and 3500 CPE. Michael C. Hughes CEO Antelecom, Inc. 661.726.3516 On Monday 12/12/2011 at 12:17, Pat O'Connor wrote: You have to contact who manages the Satellite Earth Station and they usually have an application and various forms to fill out. If you're dealing with SES Americom, have fun. I don't know of one that they have approved. Pat On 12/12/2011 11:20 AM, Fred R. Goldstein wrote: Does anyone have a standard letter to use to ask permission from satellite earth stations to use the 3650 MHz band within the 150 mile exclusion zone? Thanks. -- Fred Goldsteink1io fgoldstein at ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ +1 617 795 2701 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 MHz permission letters?
You have to contact who manages the Satellite Earth Station and they usually have an application and various forms to fill out. If you're dealing with SES Americom, have fun. I don't know of one that they have approved. Pat On 12/12/2011 11:20 AM, Fred R. Goldstein wrote: Does anyone have a standard letter to use to ask permission from satellite earth stations to use the 3650 MHz band within the 150 mile exclusion zone? Thanks. -- Fred Goldsteink1io fgoldstein at ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ +1 617 795 2701 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 MHz permission letters?
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 MHz permission letters?
Thanks for the information. Much obliged. At 12/12/2011 04:12 PM, you wrote: SES Americom can be done. It's just not a easy process. Our first agreement with them took more than a year of legal wrangling. Since then we have successfully negotiated agreements with SES for another 5 towers and 3500 CPE. Michael C. Hughes CEO Antelecom, Inc. 661.726.3516 On Monday 12/12/2011 at 12:17, Pat O'Connor wrote: You have to contact who manages the Satellite Earth Station and they usually have an application and various forms to fill out. If you're dealing with SES Americom, have fun. I don't know of one that they have approved. Pat On 12/12/2011 11:20 AM, Fred R. Goldstein wrote: Does anyone have a standard letter to use to ask permission from satellite earth stations to use the 3650 MHz band within the 150 mile exclusion zone? Thanks. -- Fred Goldsteink1io fgoldstein at ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ +1 617 795 2701 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 Deployment
I have it deployed in all those except the hill part. Be glad to talk. Sent from my iPhone4 On Oct 19, 2010, at 1:08 PM, David Hannum d.han...@newerabroadband.com wrote: Hello all, Is anyone who is having success with 3.65GHz in very rural, forrested, hilly areas willing to talk on the phone about it? We're looking at deploying it over 2.4GHz here in the near future. Looking for reasons to or not to from experienced operators. Kind Regards, David Hannum New Era Broadband, LLC 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 Deployment
It¹s not magic by any means. Still have the physics of the signal to deal with. It¹s major advantage is the noise floor. Don¹t expect 3.65 by itself to go through stuff more. -- Justin Wilson j...@mtin.net http://www.mtin.net/blog xISP News http://www.twitter.com/j2sw Follow me on Twitter Wisp Consulting Tower Climbing Network Support From: David Hannum d.han...@newerabroadband.com Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:08:53 -0400 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment Hello all, Is anyone who is having success with 3.65GHz in very rural, forrested, hilly areas willing to talk on the phone about it? We're looking at deploying it over 2.4GHz here in the near future. Looking for reasons to or not to from experienced operators. Kind Regards, David Hannum New Era Broadband, LLC 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 Deployment
It's been suggested that it's as good or better than 900MHz NLOS up to about 4mi. Thoughts? Dave On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Justin Wilson li...@mtin.net wrote: It’s not magic by any means. Still have the physics of the signal to deal with. It’s major advantage is the noise floor. Don’t expect 3.65 by itself to go through stuff more. -- Justin Wilson j...@mtin.net http://www.mtin.net/blog – xISP News http://www.twitter.com/j2sw – Follow me on Twitter Wisp Consulting – Tower Climbing – Network Support -- *From: *David Hannum d.han...@newerabroadband.com *Reply-To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org *Date: *Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:08:53 -0400 *To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org *Subject: *[WISPA] 3650 Deployment Hello all, Is anyone who is having success with 3.65GHz in very rural, forrested, hilly areas willing to talk on the phone about it? We're looking at deploying it over 2.4GHz here in the near future. Looking for reasons to or not to from experienced operators. Kind Regards, David Hannum New Era Broadband, LLC -- 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 Deployment
From what I am hearing, equipment selection can play a vital role. Victoria Proffer - President/CEO www.ShowMeBroadband.com www.StLouisBroadband.com 314-974-5600 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of David Hannum Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 1:58 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment It's been suggested that it's as good or better than 900MHz NLOS up to about 4mi. Thoughts? Dave On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Justin Wilson li...@mtin.net wrote: It's not magic by any means. Still have the physics of the signal to deal with. It's major advantage is the noise floor. Don't expect 3.65 by itself to go through stuff more. -- Justin Wilson j...@mtin.net http://www.mtin.net/blog - xISP News http://www.twitter.com/j2sw - Follow me on Twitter Wisp Consulting - Tower Climbing - Network Support _ From: David Hannum d.han...@newerabroadband.com Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:08:53 -0400 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment Hello all, Is anyone who is having success with 3.65GHz in very rural, forrested, hilly areas willing to talk on the phone about it? We're looking at deploying it over 2.4GHz here in the near future. Looking for reasons to or not to from experienced operators. Kind Regards, David Hannum New Era Broadband, LLC _ 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 Deployment
Through heavy foliage (4 miles and 20 oak trees), when using 3.65 vs 900 Motorola equipment I got better downlink but worse uplink. This was because the CPE is only 2x1 MIMO (has only one TX radio). I believe the use of a true 2x2 MIMO 3.65 CPE will perform better than most 900 systems in some environments. What I would really like to see is a FHSS MIMO 900 system that uses the whole band. With sync and coordinated hopping patterns this could outperform any system out there for foliage penetration and interference avoidance. Things to note: Clean noise floor on 3.65 and most connections were -82db to -88db receive. Noise floor in 900 was -75db so most connections would not link due to noise. 900 was single horizontal polarity. 3.65 was MIMO. 900 is limited to 4 watts EIRP. 3.65 is can use up to 10 watts EIRP in a 10mhz channel. On 10/19/2010 12:10 PM, St. Louis Broadband wrote: From what I am hearing, equipment selection can play a vital role. Victoria Proffer - President/CEO www.ShowMeBroadband.com www.StLouisBroadband.com 314-974-5600 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of David Hannum Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 1:58 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment It's been suggestedthat it's as good or better than900MHz NLOS up to about 4mi. Thoughts? Dave On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Justin Wilson li...@mtin.net wrote: Its not magic by any means. Still have the physics of the signal to deal with. Its major advantage is the noise floor. Dont expect 3.65 by itself to go through stuff more. -- Justin Wilson j...@mtin.net http://www.mtin.net/blog xISP News http://www.twitter.com/j2sw Follow me on Twitter Wisp Consulting Tower Climbing Network Support From: David Hannum d.han...@newerabroadband.com Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:08:53 -0400 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment Hello all, Is anyone who is having success with 3.65GHz in very rural, forrested,hilly areas willing to talk on the phone about it? We're looking at deploying it over 2.4GHz here in the near future. Looking for reasons to or not to from experienced operators. Kind Regards, David Hannum New Era Broadband, LLC WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment
I have a customer at 2 miles that is completely non line of sight that is at -78 if that helps. Sent from my iPhone4 On Oct 19, 2010, at 1:57 PM, David Hannum oujas...@gmail.com wrote: It's been suggested that it's as good or better than 900MHz NLOS up to about 4mi. Thoughts? Dave On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Justin Wilson li...@mtin.net wrote: It’s not magic by any means. Still have the physics of the signal to deal with. It’s major advantage is the noise floor. Don’t expect 3.65 by itself to go through stuff more. -- Justin Wilson j...@mtin.net http://www.mtin.net/blog – xISP News http://www.twitter.com/j2sw – Follow me on Twitter Wisp Consulting – Tower Climbing – Network Support From: David Hannum d.han...@newerabroadband.com Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:08:53 -0400 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment Hello all, Is anyone who is having success with 3.65GHz in very rural, forrested, hilly areas willing to talk on the phone about it? We're looking at deploying it over 2.4GHz here in the near future. Looking for reasons to or not to from experienced operators. Kind Regards, David Hannum New Era Broadband, LLC WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment
Second order diversity antenna systems can make a very big difference in the overall performance too. Brian From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jeremie Chism Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 3:22 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment I have a customer at 2 miles that is completely non line of sight that is at -78 if that helps. Sent from my iPhone4 On Oct 19, 2010, at 1:57 PM, David Hannum oujas...@gmail.com wrote: It's been suggested that it's as good or better than 900MHz NLOS up to about 4mi. Thoughts? Dave On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Justin Wilson li...@mtin.net wrote: It’s not magic by any means. Still have the physics of the signal to deal with. It’s major advantage is the noise floor. Don’t expect 3.65 by itself to go through stuff more. -- Justin Wilson j...@mtin.net http://www.mtin.net/blog – xISP News http://www.twitter.com/j2sw – Follow me on Twitter Wisp Consulting – Tower Climbing – Network Support _ From: David Hannum d.han...@newerabroadband.com Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:08:53 -0400 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment Hello all, Is anyone who is having success with 3.65GHz in very rural, forrested, hilly areas willing to talk on the phone about it? We're looking at deploying it over 2.4GHz here in the near future. Looking for reasons to or not to from experienced operators. Kind Regards, David Hannum New Era Broadband, LLC _ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment
Thanks for the info. We have been, to this point, a Motorola shop. Any thoughts on the Motorola 3650 equipment? Dave On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 4:26 PM, Brian Webster bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com wrote: Second order diversity antenna systems can make a very big difference in the overall performance too. Brian *From:* wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] *On Behalf Of *Jeremie Chism *Sent:* Tuesday, October 19, 2010 3:22 PM *To:* WISPA General List *Subject:* Re: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment I have a customer at 2 miles that is completely non line of sight that is at -78 if that helps. Sent from my iPhone4 On Oct 19, 2010, at 1:57 PM, David Hannum oujas...@gmail.com wrote: It's been suggested that it's as good or better than 900MHz NLOS up to about 4mi. Thoughts? Dave On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Justin Wilson li...@mtin.net wrote: It’s not magic by any means. Still have the physics of the signal to deal with. It’s major advantage is the noise floor. Don’t expect 3.65 by itself to go through stuff more. -- Justin Wilson j...@mtin.net http://www.mtin.net/blog – xISP News http://www.twitter.com/j2sw – Follow me on Twitter Wisp Consulting – Tower Climbing – Network Support -- *From: *David Hannum d.han...@newerabroadband.com *Reply-To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org *Date: *Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:08:53 -0400 *To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org *Subject: *[WISPA] 3650 Deployment Hello all, Is anyone who is having success with 3.65GHz in very rural, forrested, hilly areas willing to talk on the phone about it? We're looking at deploying it over 2.4GHz here in the near future. Looking for reasons to or not to from experienced operators. Kind Regards, David Hannum New Era Broadband, LLC -- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment
There are several flavors of 3650 wimax out there. Motorola definitely has its advantages but there are some draw backs also. I would dig a little deeper into motorola and then look at axxcelera or one of the other ones. Sent from my iPhone4 On Oct 19, 2010, at 8:02 PM, David Hannum oujas...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the info. We have been, to this point, a Motorola shop. Any thoughts on the Motorola 3650 equipment? Dave On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 4:26 PM, Brian Webster bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com wrote: Second order diversity antenna systems can make a very big difference in the overall performance too. Brian From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jeremie Chism Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 3:22 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment I have a customer at 2 miles that is completely non line of sight that is at -78 if that helps. Sent from my iPhone4 On Oct 19, 2010, at 1:57 PM, David Hannum oujas...@gmail.com wrote: It's been suggested that it's as good or better than 900MHz NLOS up to about 4mi. Thoughts? Dave On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Justin Wilson li...@mtin.net wrote: It’s not magic by any means. Still have the physics of the signal to deal with. It’s major advantage is the noise floor. Don’t expect 3.65 by itself to go through stuff more. -- Justin Wilson j...@mtin.net http://www.mtin.net/blog – xISP News http://www.twitter.com/j2sw – Follow me on Twitter Wisp Consulting – Tower Climbing – Network Support From: David Hannum d.han...@newerabroadband.com Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:08:53 -0400 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment Hello all, Is anyone who is having success with 3.65GHz in very rural, forrested, hilly areas willing to talk on the phone about it? We're looking at deploying it over 2.4GHz here in the near future. Looking for reasons to or not to from experienced operators. Kind Regards, David Hannum New Era Broadband, LLC WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 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 and 4.9
If it's anything like Part-15 vs. Part-90 for the XR3 and 3650, then there's actually LESS hoops to go through to use it vs. Part-15. I don't know the details of each of those bands, but it sounds like any statement saying you can't use homebrew is FUD. The FCC permits use of the XR3 in 3650, why wouldn't the XR4 work in 4.9. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: 3-dB Networks wi...@3-db.net Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 4:26 PM To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 I can only quote the MotoMesh Duo today... MotoMesh Solo though is probably more along the lines of what you want... either way your not going to like the price if your trying to do it on the cheap. The sell to a city or county though should work though with more expensive gear because they can get grants, etc. for public safety. 4.9GHz to the car though is going to be hard to do without a Mesh system... and Mesh is costly. I'd hate to be the one to sell a homebrew 4.9GHz system to a government agency and have it not perform as advertised. You also need to be careful... 4.9GHz is part 90 not part-15 so FCC compliance should be high on your list. Daniel White 3-dB Networks http://www.3dbnetworks.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 12:28 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Hmmm, can you price a system like this out? I'll need per tower and per node prices. Out here we'll probably be better off with a less expensive homebrew system due to long term costs though marlon - Original Message - From: 3-dB Networks wi...@3-db.net To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:47 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 That's what the MotoMesh gear is for... the MEA architecture (developed for the military to connector tanks with helicopters) allows the cop car to be traveling at 150MPH and for it to still work. Plus to modems you install in the cars can mesh with the ones in other cars... so if one car can connect to the network but another car 1/4 mile down the road can't... it can mesh through another car to work. I don't think a municipality/county is going to like deploying a homebrew solution for something like this... Moto already has the complete turnkey package available (not that any of it is cheap!) Daniel White 3-dB Networks http://www.3dbnetworks.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 10:32 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Got it. Thanks! Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip? The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a pursuit or code 3 call. The dispatcher could then take control of the car's laptop and push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car. They could also use an ip enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's happening at the call. This would allow much faster response times if something were to happen to the officer on scene. laters, marlon - Original Message - From: Jerry Richardson jrichard...@aircloud.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:02 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Might look at Solectek, they have both 3.65 and 4.9 multipoint solutions. However, why not wait to see what happens with TVWS. Seems that band would be outstanding for mobile use. Since it's your network, you could assign each agency it's own SSID/VLAN which route across your network to the appropriate agency's servers. This way the IP's are not changing as they move from tower to tower - the only delay would be when the subscriber switches towers. Alternately MobileIP allows seamless roaming across multiple networks. __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:35 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 OK, last one. What would you guys use for 3650 gear. I need to deliver very high speeds to lots of users with near 100% reliability. Money matters, but it's not the driving force here. Also, I'm looking for a mobile 4.9 system. We'll have to roam across multiple towers that have multiple ip ranges on them. The idea is not only to keep voip calls running while this happens, but also to always be able to remotely access the mobile pc's. Is there a system that will facilitate this idea (talking mobile broadband access across my 6000 square mile network). Do I have
Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
Got it. Do you know where to go after those grants that the county can get? thanks, marlon - Original Message - From: 3-dB Networks wi...@3-db.net To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 2:26 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 I can only quote the MotoMesh Duo today... MotoMesh Solo though is probably more along the lines of what you want... either way your not going to like the price if your trying to do it on the cheap. The sell to a city or county though should work though with more expensive gear because they can get grants, etc. for public safety. 4.9GHz to the car though is going to be hard to do without a Mesh system... and Mesh is costly. I'd hate to be the one to sell a homebrew 4.9GHz system to a government agency and have it not perform as advertised. You also need to be careful... 4.9GHz is part 90 not part-15 so FCC compliance should be high on your list. Daniel White 3-dB Networks http://www.3dbnetworks.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 12:28 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Hmmm, can you price a system like this out? I'll need per tower and per node prices. Out here we'll probably be better off with a less expensive homebrew system due to long term costs though marlon - Original Message - From: 3-dB Networks wi...@3-db.net To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:47 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 That's what the MotoMesh gear is for... the MEA architecture (developed for the military to connector tanks with helicopters) allows the cop car to be traveling at 150MPH and for it to still work. Plus to modems you install in the cars can mesh with the ones in other cars... so if one car can connect to the network but another car 1/4 mile down the road can't... it can mesh through another car to work. I don't think a municipality/county is going to like deploying a homebrew solution for something like this... Moto already has the complete turnkey package available (not that any of it is cheap!) Daniel White 3-dB Networks http://www.3dbnetworks.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 10:32 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Got it. Thanks! Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip? The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a pursuit or code 3 call. The dispatcher could then take control of the car's laptop and push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car. They could also use an ip enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's happening at the call. This would allow much faster response times if something were to happen to the officer on scene. laters, marlon - Original Message - From: Jerry Richardson jrichard...@aircloud.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:02 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Might look at Solectek, they have both 3.65 and 4.9 multipoint solutions. However, why not wait to see what happens with TVWS. Seems that band would be outstanding for mobile use. Since it's your network, you could assign each agency it's own SSID/VLAN which route across your network to the appropriate agency's servers. This way the IP's are not changing as they move from tower to tower - the only delay would be when the subscriber switches towers. Alternately MobileIP allows seamless roaming across multiple networks. __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:35 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 OK, last one. What would you guys use for 3650 gear. I need to deliver very high speeds to lots of users with near 100% reliability. Money matters, but it's not the driving force here. Also, I'm looking for a mobile 4.9 system. We'll have to roam across multiple towers that have multiple ip ranges on them. The idea is not only to keep voip calls running while this happens, but also to always be able to remotely access the mobile pc's. Is there a system that will facilitate this idea (talking mobile broadband access across my 6000 square mile network). Do I have to create something from scratch? thanks! marlon -- -- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -- -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe
Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
Depends on what agency in the county want the grants, and what state. There is SCADS of money for Fire Departments and 4.9 gear. Don't take your organs to heaven, heaven knows we need them down here! Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today. - Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer o...@odessaoffice.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 9:26 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Got it. Do you know where to go after those grants that the county can get? thanks, marlon - Original Message - From: 3-dB Networks wi...@3-db.net To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 2:26 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 I can only quote the MotoMesh Duo today... MotoMesh Solo though is probably more along the lines of what you want... either way your not going to like the price if your trying to do it on the cheap. The sell to a city or county though should work though with more expensive gear because they can get grants, etc. for public safety. 4.9GHz to the car though is going to be hard to do without a Mesh system... and Mesh is costly. I'd hate to be the one to sell a homebrew 4.9GHz system to a government agency and have it not perform as advertised. You also need to be careful... 4.9GHz is part 90 not part-15 so FCC compliance should be high on your list. Daniel White 3-dB Networks http://www.3dbnetworks.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 12:28 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Hmmm, can you price a system like this out? I'll need per tower and per node prices. Out here we'll probably be better off with a less expensive homebrew system due to long term costs though marlon - Original Message - From: 3-dB Networks wi...@3-db.net To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:47 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 That's what the MotoMesh gear is for... the MEA architecture (developed for the military to connector tanks with helicopters) allows the cop car to be traveling at 150MPH and for it to still work. Plus to modems you install in the cars can mesh with the ones in other cars... so if one car can connect to the network but another car 1/4 mile down the road can't... it can mesh through another car to work. I don't think a municipality/county is going to like deploying a homebrew solution for something like this... Moto already has the complete turnkey package available (not that any of it is cheap!) Daniel White 3-dB Networks http://www.3dbnetworks.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 10:32 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Got it. Thanks! Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip? The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a pursuit or code 3 call. The dispatcher could then take control of the car's laptop and push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car. They could also use an ip enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's happening at the call. This would allow much faster response times if something were to happen to the officer on scene. laters, marlon - Original Message - From: Jerry Richardson jrichard...@aircloud.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:02 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Might look at Solectek, they have both 3.65 and 4.9 multipoint solutions. However, why not wait to see what happens with TVWS. Seems that band would be outstanding for mobile use. Since it's your network, you could assign each agency it's own SSID/VLAN which route across your network to the appropriate agency's servers. This way the IP's are not changing as they move from tower to tower - the only delay would be when the subscriber switches towers. Alternately MobileIP allows seamless roaming across multiple networks. __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:35 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 OK, last one. What would you guys use for 3650 gear. I need to deliver very high speeds to lots of users with near 100% reliability. Money matters, but it's not the driving force here. Also, I'm looking for a mobile 4.9 system. We'll have to roam across multiple towers that have multiple ip ranges on them. The idea is not only to keep voip calls running while this happens, but also to always be able to remotely access the mobile pc's. Is there a system
Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
Very true... Daniel White 3-dB Networks http://www.3dbnetworks.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 11:05 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Yes, but the system doesn't have to fail before the WISP who supplies the homebrew 4.9 system gets blown out of the water. All one person would have to do is point out to the City that the equipment that they have been sold is uncertified and illegal to use per FCC rules. What Police Department IT guy (or Police Chief) is going to accept that and put his own career on the line just because some WISP didn't tell him the truth about the equipment that they sold the Police Department? 3-dB Networks wrote: I'd just hate to be the guy deploying a 4.9GHz homebrew system that the police/fire come to depend on and have it fail on me and someone die because of it. Systems like these should cost a lot of money to be built very well. The FCC would really be the last person I would be concerned about. it's the wrath of the city when a mission critical system like this fails. I've heard a lot of stories from Motorola two-way guys how they could go into meetings and cities would buy their two-way gear and pay the extra price because no one wants to take chances with people's lives. Help the city find the grant money to purchase a system like Moto's. and your going to be the hero big time. Take it one step farther and do a Motomesh Quatro deployment. have grant money pay for the gear. and use the 2.4GHz Wi- Fi coverage you now have to sell service. Since the gear is paid for your ROI is in a much better situation than the average muni-wifi project. Or take it one step further and get the water department to use it for meter reading, etc. At the end of the day money isn't an issue really for something like this. its just about getting the right people together and FINDING the money for it. Daniel White 3-dB Networks http://www.3dbnetworks.com From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 3:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Good point Daniel. Anyone doing 4.9 GHz homebrew would likely lose their business when the FCC came knocking along with the Police Department that was sold the illegal system by the WISP. OUCH!! 3-dB Networks wrote: I can only quote the MotoMesh Duo today... MotoMesh Solo though is probably more along the lines of what you want... either way your not going to like the price if your trying to do it on the cheap. The sell to a city or county though should work though with more expensive gear because they can get grants, etc. for public safety. 4.9GHz to the car though is going to be hard to do without a Mesh system... and Mesh is costly. I'd hate to be the one to sell a homebrew 4.9GHz system to a government agency and have it not perform as advertised. You also need to be careful... 4.9GHz is part 90 not part-15 so FCC compliance should be high on your list. Daniel White 3-dB Networks http://www.3dbnetworks.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 12:28 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Hmmm, can you price a system like this out? I'll need per tower and per node prices. Out here we'll probably be better off with a less expensive homebrew system due to long term costs though marlon - Original Message - From: 3-dB Networks mailto:wi...@3-db.net wi...@3-db.net To: 'WISPA General List' mailto:wireless@wispa.org wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:47 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 That's what the MotoMesh gear is for... the MEA architecture (developed for the military to connector tanks with helicopters) allows the cop car to be traveling at 150MPH and for it to still work. Plus to modems you install in the cars can mesh with the ones in other cars... so if one car can connect to the network but another car 1/4 mile down the road can't... it can mesh through another car to work. I don't think a municipality/county is going to like deploying a homebrew solution for something like this... Moto already has the complete turnkey package available (not that any of it is cheap!) Daniel White 3-dB Networks http://www.3dbnetworks.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 10:32 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Got it. Thanks! Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip? The only reason mobility
Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
I'd have to do research... I've never gone looking for them before. Many guys within Motorola can help though... hit me offlist and I can provide some contacts Daniel White 3-dB Networks http://www.3dbnetworks.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 8:27 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Got it. Do you know where to go after those grants that the county can get? thanks, marlon - Original Message - From: 3-dB Networks wi...@3-db.net To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 2:26 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 I can only quote the MotoMesh Duo today... MotoMesh Solo though is probably more along the lines of what you want... either way your not going to like the price if your trying to do it on the cheap. The sell to a city or county though should work though with more expensive gear because they can get grants, etc. for public safety. 4.9GHz to the car though is going to be hard to do without a Mesh system... and Mesh is costly. I'd hate to be the one to sell a homebrew 4.9GHz system to a government agency and have it not perform as advertised. You also need to be careful... 4.9GHz is part 90 not part-15 so FCC compliance should be high on your list. Daniel White 3-dB Networks http://www.3dbnetworks.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 12:28 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Hmmm, can you price a system like this out? I'll need per tower and per node prices. Out here we'll probably be better off with a less expensive homebrew system due to long term costs though marlon - Original Message - From: 3-dB Networks wi...@3-db.net To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:47 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 That's what the MotoMesh gear is for... the MEA architecture (developed for the military to connector tanks with helicopters) allows the cop car to be traveling at 150MPH and for it to still work. Plus to modems you install in the cars can mesh with the ones in other cars... so if one car can connect to the network but another car 1/4 mile down the road can't... it can mesh through another car to work. I don't think a municipality/county is going to like deploying a homebrew solution for something like this... Moto already has the complete turnkey package available (not that any of it is cheap!) Daniel White 3-dB Networks http://www.3dbnetworks.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 10:32 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Got it. Thanks! Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip? The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a pursuit or code 3 call. The dispatcher could then take control of the car's laptop and push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car. They could also use an ip enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's happening at the call. This would allow much faster response times if something were to happen to the officer on scene. laters, marlon - Original Message - From: Jerry Richardson jrichard...@aircloud.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:02 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Might look at Solectek, they have both 3.65 and 4.9 multipoint solutions. However, why not wait to see what happens with TVWS. Seems that band would be outstanding for mobile use. Since it's your network, you could assign each agency it's own SSID/VLAN which route across your network to the appropriate agency's servers. This way the IP's are not changing as they move from tower to tower - the only delay would be when the subscriber switches towers. Alternately MobileIP allows seamless roaming across multiple networks. __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless- boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:35 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 OK, last one. What would you guys use for 3650 gear. I need to deliver very high speeds to lots of users with near 100% reliability. Money matters, but it's not the driving force here. Also, I'm looking for a mobile 4.9 system. We'll have to roam across multiple towers that have multiple ip ranges on them. The idea is not only to keep voip calls running while this happens, but also to always be able to remotely access the mobile pc's. Is there a system that will facilitate
Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
For 3.65 I'd say you need to look at Aperto and Redline... they seem to be the market leaders. My preference is for Aperto though (and not just because we resell it :-) The only Mobile 4.9GHz systems that I know of are Mesh based. Motorola's MotoMesh with the MEA architecture is probably what your looking for (I'm assuming Police/Fire). You could probably also create something with the new PTMP 4.9GHz gear from Moto... but it's not going to be turnkey by any stretch of the imagination. There isn't that many players in 4.9GHz outside of Point to Point... and I think Moto probably is leaps and bounds ahead of the competition in that space (since they already own the two way business its an easy sell to by the 4.9GHz gear from Moto too). If you want more information... feel free to contact me offlist Marlon (dan...@3-db.net) Daniel White 3-dB Networks http://www.3dbnetworks.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 9:35 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 OK, last one. What would you guys use for 3650 gear. I need to deliver very high speeds to lots of users with near 100% reliability. Money matters, but it's not the driving force here. Also, I'm looking for a mobile 4.9 system. We'll have to roam across multiple towers that have multiple ip ranges on them. The idea is not only to keep voip calls running while this happens, but also to always be able to remotely access the mobile pc's. Is there a system that will facilitate this idea (talking mobile broadband access across my 6000 square mile network). Do I have to create something from scratch? thanks! marlon 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 and 4.9
Might look at Solectek, they have both 3.65 and 4.9 multipoint solutions. However, why not wait to see what happens with TVWS. Seems that band would be outstanding for mobile use. Since it's your network, you could assign each agency it's own SSID/VLAN which route across your network to the appropriate agency's servers. This way the IP's are not changing as they move from tower to tower - the only delay would be when the subscriber switches towers. Alternately MobileIP allows seamless roaming across multiple networks. __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:35 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 OK, last one. What would you guys use for 3650 gear. I need to deliver very high speeds to lots of users with near 100% reliability. Money matters, but it's not the driving force here. Also, I'm looking for a mobile 4.9 system. We'll have to roam across multiple towers that have multiple ip ranges on them. The idea is not only to keep voip calls running while this happens, but also to always be able to remotely access the mobile pc's. Is there a system that will facilitate this idea (talking mobile broadband access across my 6000 square mile network). Do I have to create something from scratch? thanks! marlon 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 and 4.9
The way we have it set up is that each agency - city, county fire, sheriff has it's own SSID on the radio that is assigned to a unique VLAN. The radio handles the VLAN tagging and forwards it either out the Ethernet port or the backhaul radio (if it's a dual radio). We have 11 SSID/VLAN combinations running across the network and it works fine. I am not administering the MobileIP so I would not be the best person to help you with that. __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:32 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Got it. Thanks! Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip? The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a pursuit or code 3 call. The dispatcher could then take control of the car's laptop and push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car. They could also use an ip enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's happening at the call. This would allow much faster response times if something were to happen to the officer on scene. laters, marlon - Original Message - From: Jerry Richardson jrichard...@aircloud.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:02 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Might look at Solectek, they have both 3.65 and 4.9 multipoint solutions. However, why not wait to see what happens with TVWS. Seems that band would be outstanding for mobile use. Since it's your network, you could assign each agency it's own SSID/VLAN which route across your network to the appropriate agency's servers. This way the IP's are not changing as they move from tower to tower - the only delay would be when the subscriber switches towers. Alternately MobileIP allows seamless roaming across multiple networks. __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:35 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 OK, last one. What would you guys use for 3650 gear. I need to deliver very high speeds to lots of users with near 100% reliability. Money matters, but it's not the driving force here. Also, I'm looking for a mobile 4.9 system. We'll have to roam across multiple towers that have multiple ip ranges on them. The idea is not only to keep voip calls running while this happens, but also to always be able to remotely access the mobile pc's. Is there a system that will facilitate this idea (talking mobile broadband access across my 6000 square mile network). Do I have to create something from scratch? thanks! marlon WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
That's what the MotoMesh gear is for... the MEA architecture (developed for the military to connector tanks with helicopters) allows the cop car to be traveling at 150MPH and for it to still work. Plus to modems you install in the cars can mesh with the ones in other cars... so if one car can connect to the network but another car 1/4 mile down the road can't... it can mesh through another car to work. I don't think a municipality/county is going to like deploying a homebrew solution for something like this... Moto already has the complete turnkey package available (not that any of it is cheap!) Daniel White 3-dB Networks http://www.3dbnetworks.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 10:32 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Got it. Thanks! Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip? The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a pursuit or code 3 call. The dispatcher could then take control of the car's laptop and push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car. They could also use an ip enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's happening at the call. This would allow much faster response times if something were to happen to the officer on scene. laters, marlon - Original Message - From: Jerry Richardson jrichard...@aircloud.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:02 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Might look at Solectek, they have both 3.65 and 4.9 multipoint solutions. However, why not wait to see what happens with TVWS. Seems that band would be outstanding for mobile use. Since it's your network, you could assign each agency it's own SSID/VLAN which route across your network to the appropriate agency's servers. This way the IP's are not changing as they move from tower to tower - the only delay would be when the subscriber switches towers. Alternately MobileIP allows seamless roaming across multiple networks. __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:35 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 OK, last one. What would you guys use for 3650 gear. I need to deliver very high speeds to lots of users with near 100% reliability. Money matters, but it's not the driving force here. Also, I'm looking for a mobile 4.9 system. We'll have to roam across multiple towers that have multiple ip ranges on them. The idea is not only to keep voip calls running while this happens, but also to always be able to remotely access the mobile pc's. Is there a system that will facilitate this idea (talking mobile broadband access across my 6000 square mile network). Do I have to create something from scratch? thanks! marlon -- -- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -- -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- -- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -- -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
Are you doing this with mobility though? How are you doing the car installations? What about LOS issues considering the low power of 4.9GHz? Daniel White 3-dB Networks http://www.3dbnetworks.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jerry Richardson Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 10:44 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 The way we have it set up is that each agency - city, county fire, sheriff has it's own SSID on the radio that is assigned to a unique VLAN. The radio handles the VLAN tagging and forwards it either out the Ethernet port or the backhaul radio (if it's a dual radio). We have 11 SSID/VLAN combinations running across the network and it works fine. I am not administering the MobileIP so I would not be the best person to help you with that. __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:32 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Got it. Thanks! Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip? The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a pursuit or code 3 call. The dispatcher could then take control of the car's laptop and push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car. They could also use an ip enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's happening at the call. This would allow much faster response times if something were to happen to the officer on scene. laters, marlon - Original Message - From: Jerry Richardson jrichard...@aircloud.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:02 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Might look at Solectek, they have both 3.65 and 4.9 multipoint solutions. However, why not wait to see what happens with TVWS. Seems that band would be outstanding for mobile use. Since it's your network, you could assign each agency it's own SSID/VLAN which route across your network to the appropriate agency's servers. This way the IP's are not changing as they move from tower to tower - the only delay would be when the subscriber switches towers. Alternately MobileIP allows seamless roaming across multiple networks. __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:35 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 OK, last one. What would you guys use for 3650 gear. I need to deliver very high speeds to lots of users with near 100% reliability. Money matters, but it's not the driving force here. Also, I'm looking for a mobile 4.9 system. We'll have to roam across multiple towers that have multiple ip ranges on them. The idea is not only to keep voip calls running while this happens, but also to always be able to remotely access the mobile pc's. Is there a system that will facilitate this idea (talking mobile broadband access across my 6000 square mile network). Do I have to create something from scratch? thanks! marlon WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless
Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
In this case, it's 2.4GHz to the clients. The cars have Laptops with 3 radios: - Aironet PCMCIA diversity connectors and antennas on the dash - Cellular cards - Low speed radios The system on the laptop automatically tries to connect to WiFi first, then the cellular, then finally the low speed radio if needed. __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of 3-dB Networks Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:57 AM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Are you doing this with mobility though? How are you doing the car installations? What about LOS issues considering the low power of 4.9GHz? Daniel White 3-dB Networks http://www.3dbnetworks.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jerry Richardson Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 10:44 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 The way we have it set up is that each agency - city, county fire, sheriff has it's own SSID on the radio that is assigned to a unique VLAN. The radio handles the VLAN tagging and forwards it either out the Ethernet port or the backhaul radio (if it's a dual radio). We have 11 SSID/VLAN combinations running across the network and it works fine. I am not administering the MobileIP so I would not be the best person to help you with that. __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:32 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Got it. Thanks! Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip? The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a pursuit or code 3 call. The dispatcher could then take control of the car's laptop and push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car. They could also use an ip enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's happening at the call. This would allow much faster response times if something were to happen to the officer on scene. laters, marlon - Original Message - From: Jerry Richardson jrichard...@aircloud.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:02 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Might look at Solectek, they have both 3.65 and 4.9 multipoint solutions. However, why not wait to see what happens with TVWS. Seems that band would be outstanding for mobile use. Since it's your network, you could assign each agency it's own SSID/VLAN which route across your network to the appropriate agency's servers. This way the IP's are not changing as they move from tower to tower - the only delay would be when the subscriber switches towers. Alternately MobileIP allows seamless roaming across multiple networks. __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:35 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 OK, last one. What would you guys use for 3650 gear. I need to deliver very high speeds to lots of users with near 100% reliability. Money matters, but it's not the driving force here. Also, I'm looking for a mobile 4.9 system. We'll have to roam across multiple towers that have multiple ip ranges on them. The idea is not only to keep voip calls running while this happens, but also to always be able to remotely access the mobile pc's. Is there a system that will facilitate this idea (talking mobile broadband access across my 6000 square mile network). Do I have to create something from scratch? thanks! marlon --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org
Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
The network is a mix of Vivato and GO Networks, both of which are out of business. We are going to test Deliberant DuoMesh in a small downtown network to see if it will meet our requirements. __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:46 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Hmmm, that sounds like a great way to do this part of the project. What hardware are you using? thanks, marlon - Original Message - From: Jerry Richardson jrichard...@aircloud.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:43 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 The way we have it set up is that each agency - city, county fire, sheriff has it's own SSID on the radio that is assigned to a unique VLAN. The radio handles the VLAN tagging and forwards it either out the Ethernet port or the backhaul radio (if it's a dual radio). We have 11 SSID/VLAN combinations running across the network and it works fine. I am not administering the MobileIP so I would not be the best person to help you with that. __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:32 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Got it. Thanks! Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip? The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a pursuit or code 3 call. The dispatcher could then take control of the car's laptop and push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car. They could also use an ip enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's happening at the call. This would allow much faster response times if something were to happen to the officer on scene. laters, marlon - Original Message - From: Jerry Richardson jrichard...@aircloud.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:02 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Might look at Solectek, they have both 3.65 and 4.9 multipoint solutions. However, why not wait to see what happens with TVWS. Seems that band would be outstanding for mobile use. Since it's your network, you could assign each agency it's own SSID/VLAN which route across your network to the appropriate agency's servers. This way the IP's are not changing as they move from tower to tower - the only delay would be when the subscriber switches towers. Alternately MobileIP allows seamless roaming across multiple networks. __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:35 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 OK, last one. What would you guys use for 3650 gear. I need to deliver very high speeds to lots of users with near 100% reliability. Money matters, but it's not the driving force here. Also, I'm looking for a mobile 4.9 system. We'll have to roam across multiple towers that have multiple ip ranges on them. The idea is not only to keep voip calls running while this happens, but also to always be able to remotely access the mobile pc's. Is there a system that will facilitate this idea (talking mobile broadband access across my 6000 square mile network). Do I have to create something from scratch? thanks! marlon 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 and 4.9
It's not real mesh though, it uses WDS to bridge traffic from one radio to the next. __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jerry Richardson Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 10:22 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 The network is a mix of Vivato and GO Networks, both of which are out of business. We are going to test Deliberant DuoMesh in a small downtown network to see if it will meet our requirements. __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:46 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Hmmm, that sounds like a great way to do this part of the project. What hardware are you using? thanks, marlon - Original Message - From: Jerry Richardson jrichard...@aircloud.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:43 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 The way we have it set up is that each agency - city, county fire, sheriff has it's own SSID on the radio that is assigned to a unique VLAN. The radio handles the VLAN tagging and forwards it either out the Ethernet port or the backhaul radio (if it's a dual radio). We have 11 SSID/VLAN combinations running across the network and it works fine. I am not administering the MobileIP so I would not be the best person to help you with that. __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:32 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Got it. Thanks! Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip? The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a pursuit or code 3 call. The dispatcher could then take control of the car's laptop and push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car. They could also use an ip enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's happening at the call. This would allow much faster response times if something were to happen to the officer on scene. laters, marlon - Original Message - From: Jerry Richardson jrichard...@aircloud.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:02 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Might look at Solectek, they have both 3.65 and 4.9 multipoint solutions. However, why not wait to see what happens with TVWS. Seems that band would be outstanding for mobile use. Since it's your network, you could assign each agency it's own SSID/VLAN which route across your network to the appropriate agency's servers. This way the IP's are not changing as they move from tower to tower - the only delay would be when the subscriber switches towers. Alternately MobileIP allows seamless roaming across multiple networks. __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:35 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 OK, last one. What would you guys use for 3650 gear. I need to deliver very high speeds to lots of users with near 100% reliability. Money matters, but it's not the driving force here. Also, I'm looking for a mobile 4.9 system. We'll have to roam across multiple towers that have multiple ip ranges on them. The idea is not only to keep voip calls running while this happens, but also to always be able to remotely access the mobile pc's. Is there a system that will facilitate this idea (talking mobile broadband access across my 6000 square mile network). Do I have to create something from scratch? thanks! marlon 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 and 4.9
Hmmm, can you price a system like this out? I'll need per tower and per node prices. Out here we'll probably be better off with a less expensive homebrew system due to long term costs though marlon - Original Message - From: 3-dB Networks wi...@3-db.net To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:47 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 That's what the MotoMesh gear is for... the MEA architecture (developed for the military to connector tanks with helicopters) allows the cop car to be traveling at 150MPH and for it to still work. Plus to modems you install in the cars can mesh with the ones in other cars... so if one car can connect to the network but another car 1/4 mile down the road can't... it can mesh through another car to work. I don't think a municipality/county is going to like deploying a homebrew solution for something like this... Moto already has the complete turnkey package available (not that any of it is cheap!) Daniel White 3-dB Networks http://www.3dbnetworks.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 10:32 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Got it. Thanks! Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip? The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a pursuit or code 3 call. The dispatcher could then take control of the car's laptop and push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car. They could also use an ip enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's happening at the call. This would allow much faster response times if something were to happen to the officer on scene. laters, marlon - Original Message - From: Jerry Richardson jrichard...@aircloud.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:02 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Might look at Solectek, they have both 3.65 and 4.9 multipoint solutions. However, why not wait to see what happens with TVWS. Seems that band would be outstanding for mobile use. Since it's your network, you could assign each agency it's own SSID/VLAN which route across your network to the appropriate agency's servers. This way the IP's are not changing as they move from tower to tower - the only delay would be when the subscriber switches towers. Alternately MobileIP allows seamless roaming across multiple networks. __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:35 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 OK, last one. What would you guys use for 3650 gear. I need to deliver very high speeds to lots of users with near 100% reliability. Money matters, but it's not the driving force here. Also, I'm looking for a mobile 4.9 system. We'll have to roam across multiple towers that have multiple ip ranges on them. The idea is not only to keep voip calls running while this happens, but also to always be able to remotely access the mobile pc's. Is there a system that will facilitate this idea (talking mobile broadband access across my 6000 square mile network). Do I have to create something from scratch? thanks! marlon -- -- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -- -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- -- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -- -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
We're not looking for 100% coverage. We know that won't happen. We'll get as close as we can afford though. As for mobility that's yet to be determined. Back in 2001 when we first did cop car setups mobility wasn't an issue because the car would just keep it's bridged ip addy. This network design has routed towers so I'm not sure. It may be as easy as running multiple ip addys in the car though. laters, marlon - Original Message - From: 3-dB Networks wi...@3-db.net To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:56 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Are you doing this with mobility though? How are you doing the car installations? What about LOS issues considering the low power of 4.9GHz? Daniel White 3-dB Networks http://www.3dbnetworks.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jerry Richardson Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 10:44 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 The way we have it set up is that each agency - city, county fire, sheriff has it's own SSID on the radio that is assigned to a unique VLAN. The radio handles the VLAN tagging and forwards it either out the Ethernet port or the backhaul radio (if it's a dual radio). We have 11 SSID/VLAN combinations running across the network and it works fine. I am not administering the MobileIP so I would not be the best person to help you with that. __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:32 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Got it. Thanks! Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip? The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a pursuit or code 3 call. The dispatcher could then take control of the car's laptop and push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car. They could also use an ip enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's happening at the call. This would allow much faster response times if something were to happen to the officer on scene. laters, marlon - Original Message - From: Jerry Richardson jrichard...@aircloud.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:02 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Might look at Solectek, they have both 3.65 and 4.9 multipoint solutions. However, why not wait to see what happens with TVWS. Seems that band would be outstanding for mobile use. Since it's your network, you could assign each agency it's own SSID/VLAN which route across your network to the appropriate agency's servers. This way the IP's are not changing as they move from tower to tower - the only delay would be when the subscriber switches towers. Alternately MobileIP allows seamless roaming across multiple networks. __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:35 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 OK, last one. What would you guys use for 3650 gear. I need to deliver very high speeds to lots of users with near 100% reliability. Money matters, but it's not the driving force here. Also, I'm looking for a mobile 4.9 system. We'll have to roam across multiple towers that have multiple ip ranges on them. The idea is not only to keep voip calls running while this happens, but also to always be able to remotely access the mobile pc's. Is there a system that will facilitate this idea (talking mobile broadband access across my 6000 square mile network). Do I have to create something from scratch? thanks! marlon 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
Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
I can only quote the MotoMesh Duo today... MotoMesh Solo though is probably more along the lines of what you want... either way your not going to like the price if your trying to do it on the cheap. The sell to a city or county though should work though with more expensive gear because they can get grants, etc. for public safety. 4.9GHz to the car though is going to be hard to do without a Mesh system... and Mesh is costly. I'd hate to be the one to sell a homebrew 4.9GHz system to a government agency and have it not perform as advertised. You also need to be careful... 4.9GHz is part 90 not part-15 so FCC compliance should be high on your list. Daniel White 3-dB Networks http://www.3dbnetworks.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 12:28 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Hmmm, can you price a system like this out? I'll need per tower and per node prices. Out here we'll probably be better off with a less expensive homebrew system due to long term costs though marlon - Original Message - From: 3-dB Networks wi...@3-db.net To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:47 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 That's what the MotoMesh gear is for... the MEA architecture (developed for the military to connector tanks with helicopters) allows the cop car to be traveling at 150MPH and for it to still work. Plus to modems you install in the cars can mesh with the ones in other cars... so if one car can connect to the network but another car 1/4 mile down the road can't... it can mesh through another car to work. I don't think a municipality/county is going to like deploying a homebrew solution for something like this... Moto already has the complete turnkey package available (not that any of it is cheap!) Daniel White 3-dB Networks http://www.3dbnetworks.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 10:32 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Got it. Thanks! Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip? The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a pursuit or code 3 call. The dispatcher could then take control of the car's laptop and push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car. They could also use an ip enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's happening at the call. This would allow much faster response times if something were to happen to the officer on scene. laters, marlon - Original Message - From: Jerry Richardson jrichard...@aircloud.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:02 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Might look at Solectek, they have both 3.65 and 4.9 multipoint solutions. However, why not wait to see what happens with TVWS. Seems that band would be outstanding for mobile use. Since it's your network, you could assign each agency it's own SSID/VLAN which route across your network to the appropriate agency's servers. This way the IP's are not changing as they move from tower to tower - the only delay would be when the subscriber switches towers. Alternately MobileIP allows seamless roaming across multiple networks. __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:35 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 OK, last one. What would you guys use for 3650 gear. I need to deliver very high speeds to lots of users with near 100% reliability. Money matters, but it's not the driving force here. Also, I'm looking for a mobile 4.9 system. We'll have to roam across multiple towers that have multiple ip ranges on them. The idea is not only to keep voip calls running while this happens, but also to always be able to remotely access the mobile pc's. Is there a system that will facilitate this idea (talking mobile broadband access across my 6000 square mile network). Do I have to create something from scratch? thanks! marlon -- -- 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 and 4.9
Good point Daniel. Anyone doing 4.9 GHz "homebrew" would likely lose their business when the FCC came knocking along with the Police Department that was sold the illegal system by the WISP. OUCH!! 3-dB Networks wrote: I can only quote the MotoMesh Duo today... MotoMesh Solo though is probably more along the lines of what you want... either way your not going to like the price if your trying to do it on the cheap. The sell to a city or county though should work though with more expensive gear because they can get grants, etc. for public safety. 4.9GHz to the car though is going to be hard to do without a Mesh system... and Mesh is costly. I'd hate to be the one to sell a homebrew 4.9GHz system to a government agency and have it not perform as advertised. You also need to be careful... 4.9GHz is part 90 not part-15 so FCC compliance should be high on your list. Daniel White 3-dB Networks http://www.3dbnetworks.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 12:28 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Hmmm, can you price a system like this out? I'll need per tower and per node prices. Out here we'll probably be better off with a less expensive homebrew system due to long term costs though marlon - Original Message - From: "3-dB Networks" wi...@3-db.net To: "'WISPA General List'" wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:47 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 That's what the MotoMesh gear is for... the MEA architecture (developed for the military to connector tanks with helicopters) allows the cop car to be traveling at 150MPH and for it to still work. Plus to modems you install in the cars can mesh with the ones in other cars... so if one car can connect to the network but another car 1/4 mile down the road can't... it can mesh through another car to work. I don't think a municipality/county is going to like deploying a homebrew solution for something like this... Moto already has the complete turnkey package available (not that any of it is cheap!) Daniel White 3-dB Networks http://www.3dbnetworks.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 10:32 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Got it. Thanks! Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip? The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a pursuit or code 3 call. The dispatcher could then take control of the car's laptop and push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car. They could also use an ip enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's happening at the call. This would allow much faster response times if something were to happen to the officer on scene. laters, marlon - Original Message - From: "Jerry Richardson" jrichard...@aircloud.com To: "WISPA General List" wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:02 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Might look at Solectek, they have both 3.65 and 4.9 multipoint solutions. However, why not wait to see what happens with TVWS. Seems that band would be outstanding for mobile use. Since it's your network, you could assign each agency it's own SSID/VLAN which route across your network to the appropriate agency's servers. This way the IP's are not changing as they move from tower to tower - the only delay would be when the subscriber switches towers. Alternately MobileIP allows seamless roaming across multiple networks. __ Jerry Richardson airCloud Communications -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:35 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 OK, last one. What would you guys use for 3650 gear. I need to deliver very high speeds to lots of users with near 100% reliability. Money matters, but
Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
I'd just hate to be the guy deploying a 4.9GHz homebrew system that the police/fire come to depend on and have it fail on me and someone die because of it. Systems like these should cost a lot of money to be built very well. The FCC would really be the last person I would be concerned about. it's the wrath of the city when a mission critical system like this fails. I've heard a lot of stories from Motorola two-way guys how they could go into meetings and cities would buy their two-way gear and pay the extra price because no one wants to take chances with people's lives. Help the city find the grant money to purchase a system like Moto's. and your going to be the hero big time. Take it one step farther and do a Motomesh Quatro deployment. have grant money pay for the gear. and use the 2.4GHz Wi-Fi coverage you now have to sell service. Since the gear is paid for your ROI is in a much better situation than the average muni-wifi project. Or take it one step further and get the water department to use it for meter reading, etc. At the end of the day money isn't an issue really for something like this. its just about getting the right people together and FINDING the money for it. Daniel White 3-dB Networks http://www.3dbnetworks.com From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 3:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Good point Daniel. Anyone doing 4.9 GHz homebrew would likely lose their business when the FCC came knocking along with the Police Department that was sold the illegal system by the WISP. OUCH!! 3-dB Networks wrote: I can only quote the MotoMesh Duo today... MotoMesh Solo though is probably more along the lines of what you want... either way your not going to like the price if your trying to do it on the cheap. The sell to a city or county though should work though with more expensive gear because they can get grants, etc. for public safety. 4.9GHz to the car though is going to be hard to do without a Mesh system... and Mesh is costly. I'd hate to be the one to sell a homebrew 4.9GHz system to a government agency and have it not perform as advertised. You also need to be careful... 4.9GHz is part 90 not part-15 so FCC compliance should be high on your list. Daniel White 3-dB Networks http://www.3dbnetworks.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 12:28 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Hmmm, can you price a system like this out? I'll need per tower and per node prices. Out here we'll probably be better off with a less expensive homebrew system due to long term costs though marlon - Original Message - From: 3-dB Networks mailto:wi...@3-db.net wi...@3-db.net To: 'WISPA General List' mailto:wireless@wispa.org wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:47 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 That's what the MotoMesh gear is for... the MEA architecture (developed for the military to connector tanks with helicopters) allows the cop car to be traveling at 150MPH and for it to still work. Plus to modems you install in the cars can mesh with the ones in other cars... so if one car can connect to the network but another car 1/4 mile down the road can't... it can mesh through another car to work. I don't think a municipality/county is going to like deploying a homebrew solution for something like this... Moto already has the complete turnkey package available (not that any of it is cheap!) Daniel White 3-dB Networks http://www.3dbnetworks.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 10:32 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Got it. Thanks! Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip? The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a pursuit or code 3 call. The dispatcher could then take control of the car's laptop and push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car. They could also use an ip enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's happening at the call. This would allow much faster response times if something were to happen to the officer on scene. laters, marlon - Original Message - From: Jerry Richardson mailto:jrichard...@aircloud.com jrichard...@aircloud.com To: WISPA General List mailto:wireless@wispa.org wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:02 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Might look at Solectek, they have both 3.65 and 4.9 multipoint solutions. However, why
Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
These will do what you want http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/routers/ps272/ps6990/product_data_sheet0900aecd804c207b.html John Marlon K. Schafer wrote: OK, last one. What would you guys use for 3650 gear. I need to deliver very high speeds to lots of users with near 100% reliability. Money matters, but it's not the driving force here. Also, I'm looking for a mobile 4.9 system. We'll have to roam across multiple towers that have multiple ip ranges on them. The idea is not only to keep voip calls running while this happens, but also to always be able to remotely access the mobile pc's. Is there a system that will facilitate this idea (talking mobile broadband access across my 6000 square mile network). Do I have to create something from scratch? thanks! marlon 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 and 4.9
Yes, but the system doesn't have to fail before the WISP who supplies the homebrew 4.9 system gets blown out of the water. All one person would have to do is point out to the City that the equipment that they have been sold is uncertified and illegal to use per FCC rules. What Police Department IT guy (or Police Chief) is going to accept that and put his own career on the line just because some WISP didn't tell him the truth about the equipment that they sold the Police Department? 3-dB Networks wrote: I'd just hate to be the guy deploying a 4.9GHz homebrew system that the police/fire come to depend on and have it fail on me and someone die because of it. Systems like these should cost a lot of money to be built very well. The FCC would really be the last person I would be concerned about. it's the wrath of the city when a mission critical system like this fails. I've heard a lot of stories from Motorola two-way guys how they could go into meetings and cities would buy their two-way gear and pay the extra price because no one wants to take chances with people's lives. Help the city find the grant money to purchase a system like Moto's. and your going to be the hero big time. Take it one step farther and do a Motomesh Quatro deployment. have grant money pay for the gear. and use the 2.4GHz Wi-Fi coverage you now have to sell service. Since the gear is paid for your ROI is in a much better situation than the average muni-wifi project. Or take it one step further and get the water department to use it for meter reading, etc. At the end of the day money isn't an issue really for something like this. its just about getting the right people together and FINDING the money for it. Daniel White 3-dB Networks http://www.3dbnetworks.com From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 3:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Good point Daniel. Anyone doing 4.9 GHz homebrew would likely lose their business when the FCC came knocking along with the Police Department that was sold the illegal system by the WISP. OUCH!! 3-dB Networks wrote: I can only quote the MotoMesh Duo today... MotoMesh Solo though is probably more along the lines of what you want... either way your not going to like the price if your trying to do it on the cheap. The sell to a city or county though should work though with more expensive gear because they can get grants, etc. for public safety. 4.9GHz to the car though is going to be hard to do without a Mesh system... and Mesh is costly. I'd hate to be the one to sell a homebrew 4.9GHz system to a government agency and have it not perform as advertised. You also need to be careful... 4.9GHz is part 90 not part-15 so FCC compliance should be high on your list. Daniel White 3-dB Networks http://www.3dbnetworks.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 12:28 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Hmmm, can you price a system like this out? I'll need per tower and per node prices. Out here we'll probably be better off with a less expensive homebrew system due to long term costs though marlon - Original Message - From: 3-dB Networks mailto:wi...@3-db.net wi...@3-db.net To: 'WISPA General List' mailto:wireless@wispa.org wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:47 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 That's what the MotoMesh gear is for... the MEA architecture (developed for the military to connector tanks with helicopters) allows the cop car to be traveling at 150MPH and for it to still work. Plus to modems you install in the cars can mesh with the ones in other cars... so if one car can connect to the network but another car 1/4 mile down the road can't... it can mesh through another car to work. I don't think a municipality/county is going to like deploying a homebrew solution for something like this... Moto already has the complete turnkey package available (not that any of it is cheap!) Daniel White 3-dB Networks http://www.3dbnetworks.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 10:32 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9 Got it. Thanks! Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip? The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a pursuit or code 3 call. The dispatcher could then take control
Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage
On Dec 2, 2008, at 10:08 AM, Mike Hammett wrote: Have we gotten any reports how 3650 works with foliage? 3650 sucks with foliage and more power doesn't help. Yeah it is that bad. -Matt 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 Foliage
Have we gotten any reports how 3650 works with foliage? It doesn't Would MIMO have any affect on foliage penetration ability? Sure, it might help, but 700 would help more -Charles This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivery of the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone at 630-344-1586. 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 Foliage
Well right. I could only assume that 3650 is better than 5.x GHz, but sometimes you match something's... I think natural frequency is the term I'm looking for. Like how 70 - 80 GHz gear goes farther than 60 GHz, because 60 GHz is the natural frequency of oxygen. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Charles Wu (CTI) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 9:53 AM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage Have we gotten any reports how 3650 works with foliage? It doesn't Would MIMO have any affect on foliage penetration ability? Sure, it might help, but 700 would help more -Charles This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivery of the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone at 630-344-1586. 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 Foliage
http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/~anita/web/paperwork/currently%20organizing/Military%20EW%20%20Handbook%20Excerpt/rf_absor.pdf http://www.rfcafe.com/references/electrical/atm-absorption.htm Patrick Shoemaker Vector Data Systems LLC [EMAIL PROTECTED] office: (301) 358-1690 x36 http://www.vectordatasystems.com Mike Hammett wrote: Well right. I could only assume that 3650 is better than 5.x GHz, but sometimes you match something's... I think natural frequency is the term I'm looking for. Like how 70 - 80 GHz gear goes farther than 60 GHz, because 60 GHz is the natural frequency of oxygen. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Charles Wu (CTI) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 9:53 AM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage Have we gotten any reports how 3650 works with foliage? It doesn't Would MIMO have any affect on foliage penetration ability? Sure, it might help, but 700 would help more -Charles This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivery of the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone at 630-344-1586. 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 Foliage
So according to the document from Hawaii, 3.6 GHz should have lower atmospheric attenuation (I'm assuming this is similar or the same to free space loss) than 2.4 GHz. I'm not at sea level, but I am by no means at 9150 meters! Because water is the molecule at play here, that would also show a difference in foliage penetration. Not trying to go through a forest or anything, but wondering how it would handle a tree or two. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Patrick Shoemaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 10:10 AM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/~anita/web/paperwork/currently%20organizing/Military%20EW%20%20Handbook%20Excerpt/rf_absor.pdf http://www.rfcafe.com/references/electrical/atm-absorption.htm Patrick Shoemaker Vector Data Systems LLC [EMAIL PROTECTED] office: (301) 358-1690 x36 http://www.vectordatasystems.com Mike Hammett wrote: Well right. I could only assume that 3650 is better than 5.x GHz, but sometimes you match something's... I think natural frequency is the term I'm looking for. Like how 70 - 80 GHz gear goes farther than 60 GHz, because 60 GHz is the natural frequency of oxygen. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Charles Wu (CTI) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 9:53 AM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage Have we gotten any reports how 3650 works with foliage? It doesn't Would MIMO have any affect on foliage penetration ability? Sure, it might help, but 700 would help more -Charles This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivery of the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone at 630-344-1586. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage
Our coverage looks like 2.4 GHz coverage in the same environment with the exception of much lower noise floor which helps extend link budgets slightly and help increase reliability at the edge of the coverage area. Scriv On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 10:28 AM, Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: So according to the document from Hawaii, 3.6 GHz should have lower atmospheric attenuation (I'm assuming this is similar or the same to free space loss) than 2.4 GHz. I'm not at sea level, but I am by no means at 9150 meters! Because water is the molecule at play here, that would also show a difference in foliage penetration. Not trying to go through a forest or anything, but wondering how it would handle a tree or two. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Patrick Shoemaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 10:10 AM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/~anita/web/paperwork/currently%20organizing/Military%20EW%20%20Handbook%20Excerpt/rf_absor.pdfhttp://www.phys.hawaii.edu/%7Eanita/web/paperwork/currently%20organizing/Military%20EW%20%20Handbook%20Excerpt/rf_absor.pdf http://www.rfcafe.com/references/electrical/atm-absorption.htm Patrick Shoemaker Vector Data Systems LLC [EMAIL PROTECTED] office: (301) 358-1690 x36 http://www.vectordatasystems.com Mike Hammett wrote: Well right. I could only assume that 3650 is better than 5.x GHz, but sometimes you match something's... I think natural frequency is the term I'm looking for. Like how 70 - 80 GHz gear goes farther than 60 GHz, because 60 GHz is the natural frequency of oxygen. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Charles Wu (CTI) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 9:53 AM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage Have we gotten any reports how 3650 works with foliage? It doesn't Would MIMO have any affect on foliage penetration ability? Sure, it might help, but 700 would help more -Charles This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivery of the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone at 630-344-1586. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage
Our coverage looks like 2.4 GHz coverage in the same environment with the exception of much lower noise floor which helps extend link budgets slightly and help increase reliability at the edge of the coverage area. Scriv We do get some tree penetration with Canopy 2.4 and reflectors. We get virtually no tree penetration with 5.7 though. I was thinking 3.6x with higher power might punch through some trees as well. 900 definitely goes through trees but the band is just so trashed. Matt 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 Foliage
We see on average 9dB less signal with 3650 than 2400 NLOS with all things being equal. -Matt On Dec 2, 2008, at 11:42 AM, John Scrivner wrote: Our coverage looks like 2.4 GHz coverage in the same environment with the exception of much lower noise floor which helps extend link budgets slightly and help increase reliability at the edge of the coverage area. Scriv On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 10:28 AM, Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So according to the document from Hawaii, 3.6 GHz should have lower atmospheric attenuation (I'm assuming this is similar or the same to free space loss) than 2.4 GHz. I'm not at sea level, but I am by no means at 9150 meters! Because water is the molecule at play here, that would also show a difference in foliage penetration. Not trying to go through a forest or anything, but wondering how it would handle a tree or two. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Patrick Shoemaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 10:10 AM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/~anita/web/paperwork/currently%20organizing/Military%20EW%20%20Handbook%20Excerpt/rf_absor.pdf http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/%7Eanita/web/paperwork/currently%20organizing/Military%20EW%20%20Handbook%20Excerpt/rf_absor.pdf http://www.rfcafe.com/references/electrical/atm-absorption.htm Patrick Shoemaker Vector Data Systems LLC [EMAIL PROTECTED] office: (301) 358-1690 x36 http://www.vectordatasystems.com Mike Hammett wrote: Well right. I could only assume that 3650 is better than 5.x GHz, but sometimes you match something's... I think natural frequency is the term I'm looking for. Like how 70 - 80 GHz gear goes farther than 60 GHz, because 60 GHz is the natural frequency of oxygen. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Charles Wu (CTI) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 9:53 AM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage Have we gotten any reports how 3650 works with foliage? It doesn't Would MIMO have any affect on foliage penetration ability? Sure, it might help, but 700 would help more -Charles This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivery of the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone at 630-344-1586. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives
Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage
With Trango and MT (compex and ubnt) I get minimal tree penetration. On 12/2/08, Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We see on average 9dB less signal with 3650 than 2400 NLOS with all things being equal. -Matt On Dec 2, 2008, at 11:42 AM, John Scrivner wrote: Our coverage looks like 2.4 GHz coverage in the same environment with the exception of much lower noise floor which helps extend link budgets slightly and help increase reliability at the edge of the coverage area. Scriv On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 10:28 AM, Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So according to the document from Hawaii, 3.6 GHz should have lower atmospheric attenuation (I'm assuming this is similar or the same to free space loss) than 2.4 GHz. I'm not at sea level, but I am by no means at 9150 meters! Because water is the molecule at play here, that would also show a difference in foliage penetration. Not trying to go through a forest or anything, but wondering how it would handle a tree or two. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Patrick Shoemaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 10:10 AM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/~anita/web/paperwork/currently%20organizing/Military%20EW%20%20Handbook%20Excerpt/rf_absor.pdf http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/%7Eanita/web/paperwork/currently%20organizing/Military%20EW%20%20Handbook%20Excerpt/rf_absor.pdf http://www.rfcafe.com/references/electrical/atm-absorption.htm Patrick Shoemaker Vector Data Systems LLC [EMAIL PROTECTED] office: (301) 358-1690 x36 http://www.vectordatasystems.com Mike Hammett wrote: Well right. I could only assume that 3650 is better than 5.x GHz, but sometimes you match something's... I think natural frequency is the term I'm looking for. Like how 70 - 80 GHz gear goes farther than 60 GHz, because 60 GHz is the natural frequency of oxygen. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Charles Wu (CTI) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 9:53 AM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage Have we gotten any reports how 3650 works with foliage? It doesn't Would MIMO have any affect on foliage penetration ability? Sure, it might help, but 700 would help more -Charles This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivery of the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone at 630-344-1586. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage
Matt, Would you not agree that you probably have at least 9 db better noise figures than 2.4 at the same distance where you are seeing 9 db less signal? That is what I was trying to illustrate in my post. Even though the signal drops a little more in the 3650 coverage area than 2.4 we see roughly equivalent coverage areas due to lower noise floor and hence better SNR at the edge of the coverage area. Matt, I seem to remember a post from you recently where you were touting a link through 4 miles of tress with 3650. Was I not reading that correctly? Scriv On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 11:03 AM, Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We see on average 9dB less signal with 3650 than 2400 NLOS with all things being equal. -Matt On Dec 2, 2008, at 11:42 AM, John Scrivner wrote: Our coverage looks like 2.4 GHz coverage in the same environment with the exception of much lower noise floor which helps extend link budgets slightly and help increase reliability at the edge of the coverage area. Scriv On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 10:28 AM, Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So according to the document from Hawaii, 3.6 GHz should have lower atmospheric attenuation (I'm assuming this is similar or the same to free space loss) than 2.4 GHz. I'm not at sea level, but I am by no means at 9150 meters! Because water is the molecule at play here, that would also show a difference in foliage penetration. Not trying to go through a forest or anything, but wondering how it would handle a tree or two. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Patrick Shoemaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 10:10 AM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/~anita/web/paperwork/currently%20organizing/Military%20EW%20%20Handbook%20Excerpt/rf_absor.pdfhttp://www.phys.hawaii.edu/%7Eanita/web/paperwork/currently%20organizing/Military%20EW%20%20Handbook%20Excerpt/rf_absor.pdf http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/%7Eanita/web/paperwork/currently%20organizing/Military%20EW%20%20Handbook%20Excerpt/rf_absor.pdf http://www.rfcafe.com/references/electrical/atm-absorption.htm Patrick Shoemaker Vector Data Systems LLC [EMAIL PROTECTED] office: (301) 358-1690 x36 http://www.vectordatasystems.com Mike Hammett wrote: Well right. I could only assume that 3650 is better than 5.x GHz, but sometimes you match something's... I think natural frequency is the term I'm looking for. Like how 70 - 80 GHz gear goes farther than 60 GHz, because 60 GHz is the natural frequency of oxygen. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Charles Wu (CTI) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 9:53 AM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage Have we gotten any reports how 3650 works with foliage? It doesn't Would MIMO have any affect on foliage penetration ability? Sure, it might help, but 700 would help more -Charles This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivery of the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone at 630-344-1586. 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
Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage
We have many 3.65GHz WiMAX Base Stations deployed and propagation has been real positive even through some foliage. Picture1 - http://www.wirelessconnections.net/index.php?option=com_shared_private_space task=showfilefileid=117 Picture2 - http://www.wirelessconnections.net/index.php?option=com_shared_private_space task=showfilefileid=118 Picture3 - http://www.wirelessconnections.net/index.php?option=com_shared_private_space task=showfilefileid=119 The above pictures are from a shot we had in Texas to a 3.65 Base Station, I have more tree pictures. The customer had an older original Alvarion VL CPE at 5.8GHz. They installed the VL on a 40 ft guyed mast pole, to get good SNR. At 3.65 GHz from street level(12ft AGL) beside the house we had -75 dBm and downlink/uplink at 64QAM/16QAM respectively we pulled 6Mb/3Mb and perfect Voice calls from the truck. The WISP is thrilled with their coverage in the small town even through foliage. As you can see we shot between two pine trees and through the other trees. At this site we were almost 1.1 Miles away. I would classify the foliage as light. The key to everything is defining the word foliage. How dense is the foliage? How tall? How much power at the Base Station and CPE? Diversity? How far away are you from the Base Station? MIMO or second/fourth order diversity at 3.65Ghz is not being done at the CPE level yet and only on select type of Base Stations. At the Base Stations with Second or Fourth order diversity we see greatly improved uplink capabilities and a lot better connectivity in NLOS environments because of the improved Uplinks. Passing reliable data at -85 to -92dBm is obtainable, although I highly recommend only installing clients with good signal strength. Most systems require -74 to -78dBm or better to achieve reliable full burst rates(64QAM3/4)...When CPE become available with MIMO we can expect even better sensitivity in the Downlink also. It becomes a question on how long it takes the vendors to implement 802.16e flavored in 3.65GHz., Mid/Late 2009 is my bet. We can build an RF system at any frequency that can get through foliage, it comes down to how much do you want to spend to get that type of coverage within your areas terrain. Thinking 3.65GHz can cover through foliage at long range is a myth. And I understand that most operators want to cover 50 miles NLOS from a single tower site at 75' AGL... 700 MHZ can work better if you own that spectrum for use? 3.65GHz is open to about anyone. Thanks, John Rock Director of Operations - Senior Engineer Wireless Connections 166 Milan Ave., Norwalk, Oh. 44857 ACCessing the Future Today!! ofc. 419.660.6100 cell 419-706-7356 fax 419-668-4077 http://www.wirelessconnections.net This transmission and any files attached to it, may contain confidential and/or privileged information and intended only for the named recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction, retransmission, dissemination, disclosure, copying or any use of the information or files contained is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply transmission and delete this electronic mail. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 10:09 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage Have we gotten any reports how 3650 works with foliage? Would MIMO have any affect on foliage penetration ability? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage
Who said anything about using 802.16? ;-) I generally don't install a customer that has signal worse than -80. I want to maintain full modulation as best as possible. Can't expect to service too many customers if everyone has -88 signal. I'm just looking to be able to go through a single tree row of trees on a fence line or maybe a small cluster... no forests. ;-) - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: John Rock [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 11:21 AM To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage We have many 3.65GHz WiMAX Base Stations deployed and propagation has been real positive even through some foliage. Picture1 - http://www.wirelessconnections.net/index.php?option=com_shared_private_space task=showfilefileid=117 Picture2 - http://www.wirelessconnections.net/index.php?option=com_shared_private_space task=showfilefileid=118 Picture3 - http://www.wirelessconnections.net/index.php?option=com_shared_private_space task=showfilefileid=119 The above pictures are from a shot we had in Texas to a 3.65 Base Station, I have more tree pictures. The customer had an older original Alvarion VL CPE at 5.8GHz. They installed the VL on a 40 ft guyed mast pole, to get good SNR. At 3.65 GHz from street level(12ft AGL) beside the house we had -75 dBm and downlink/uplink at 64QAM/16QAM respectively we pulled 6Mb/3Mb and perfect Voice calls from the truck. The WISP is thrilled with their coverage in the small town even through foliage. As you can see we shot between two pine trees and through the other trees. At this site we were almost 1.1 Miles away. I would classify the foliage as light. The key to everything is defining the word foliage. How dense is the foliage? How tall? How much power at the Base Station and CPE? Diversity? How far away are you from the Base Station? MIMO or second/fourth order diversity at 3.65Ghz is not being done at the CPE level yet and only on select type of Base Stations. At the Base Stations with Second or Fourth order diversity we see greatly improved uplink capabilities and a lot better connectivity in NLOS environments because of the improved Uplinks. Passing reliable data at -85 to -92dBm is obtainable, although I highly recommend only installing clients with good signal strength. Most systems require -74 to -78dBm or better to achieve reliable full burst rates(64QAM3/4)...When CPE become available with MIMO we can expect even better sensitivity in the Downlink also. It becomes a question on how long it takes the vendors to implement 802.16e flavored in 3.65GHz., Mid/Late 2009 is my bet. We can build an RF system at any frequency that can get through foliage, it comes down to how much do you want to spend to get that type of coverage within your areas terrain. Thinking 3.65GHz can cover through foliage at long range is a myth. And I understand that most operators want to cover 50 miles NLOS from a single tower site at 75' AGL... 700 MHZ can work better if you own that spectrum for use? 3.65GHz is open to about anyone. Thanks, John Rock Director of Operations - Senior Engineer Wireless Connections 166 Milan Ave., Norwalk, Oh. 44857 ACCessing the Future Today!! ofc. 419.660.6100 cell 419-706-7356 fax 419-668-4077 http://www.wirelessconnections.net This transmission and any files attached to it, may contain confidential and/or privileged information and intended only for the named recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction, retransmission, dissemination, disclosure, copying or any use of the information or files contained is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply transmission and delete this electronic mail. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 10:09 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage Have we gotten any reports how 3650 works with foliage? Would MIMO have any affect on foliage penetration ability? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org
Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage
There is the rub of course. In Atlanta, we see on average about -65 for noise in 2400, while there is no noise in 3650. SNR is important, but for the purposes of helping other WISPs understand how 3650 does through foliage I thought it better to limit the discussion to signal as noise varies by market. We have done longer links NLOS with 3650, but I would say .5 miles is the average we can get away with. -Matt On Dec 2, 2008, at 12:18 PM, John Scrivner wrote: Matt, Would you not agree that you probably have at least 9 db better noise figures than 2.4 at the same distance where you are seeing 9 db less signal? That is what I was trying to illustrate in my post. Even though the signal drops a little more in the 3650 coverage area than 2.4 we see roughly equivalent coverage areas due to lower noise floor and hence better SNR at the edge of the coverage area. Matt, I seem to remember a post from you recently where you were touting a link through 4 miles of tress with 3650. Was I not reading that correctly? Scriv On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 11:03 AM, Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We see on average 9dB less signal with 3650 than 2400 NLOS with all things being equal. -Matt On Dec 2, 2008, at 11:42 AM, John Scrivner wrote: Our coverage looks like 2.4 GHz coverage in the same environment with the exception of much lower noise floor which helps extend link budgets slightly and help increase reliability at the edge of the coverage area. Scriv On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 10:28 AM, Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So according to the document from Hawaii, 3.6 GHz should have lower atmospheric attenuation (I'm assuming this is similar or the same to free space loss) than 2.4 GHz. I'm not at sea level, but I am by no means at 9150 meters! Because water is the molecule at play here, that would also show a difference in foliage penetration. Not trying to go through a forest or anything, but wondering how it would handle a tree or two. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Patrick Shoemaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 10:10 AM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/~anita/web/paperwork/currently%20organizing/Military%20EW%20%20Handbook%20Excerpt/rf_absor.pdf http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/%7Eanita/web/paperwork/currently%20organizing/Military%20EW%20%20Handbook%20Excerpt/rf_absor.pdf http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/%7Eanita/web/paperwork/currently%20organizing/Military%20EW%20%20Handbook%20Excerpt/rf_absor.pdf http://www.rfcafe.com/references/electrical/atm-absorption.htm Patrick Shoemaker Vector Data Systems LLC [EMAIL PROTECTED] office: (301) 358-1690 x36 http://www.vectordatasystems.com Mike Hammett wrote: Well right. I could only assume that 3650 is better than 5.x GHz, but sometimes you match something's... I think natural frequency is the term I'm looking for. Like how 70 - 80 GHz gear goes farther than 60 GHz, because 60 GHz is the natural frequency of oxygen. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Charles Wu (CTI) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 9:53 AM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage Have we gotten any reports how 3650 works with foliage? It doesn't Would MIMO have any affect on foliage penetration ability? Sure, it might help, but 700 would help more -Charles This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivery of the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone at 630-344-1586. 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
Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage
On Dec 2, 2008, at 12:33 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: Who said anything about using 802.16? ;-) I generally don't install a customer that has signal worse than -80. I want to maintain full modulation as best as possible. Can't expect to service too many customers if everyone has -88 signal. With WiMAX you can. We see full modulation at -86. -Matt 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 Foliage
okay, that is better than the manufacturers were telling me, or maybe they just didn't understand what I was getting at... or maybe I discounted something they said because they were telling me 75 miles at 75 megabit... okay, no one said that, but they exagerated. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 11:56 AM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage On Dec 2, 2008, at 12:33 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: Who said anything about using 802.16? ;-) I generally don't install a customer that has signal worse than -80. I want to maintain full modulation as best as possible. Can't expect to service too many customers if everyone has -88 signal. With WiMAX you can. We see full modulation at -86. -Matt 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 Foliage
John, Interesting data. However, any data on how those links performed on rainy days? The deal with Foliage is that wet foliage causes a lot more loss than dry foliage or wet air. I can give an example of 5.8Ghz that might have 1db of loss in a rain storm, but in a heavy rain 900Mhz might have had 15 db more of loss through foliage than when its dry. (obviously I do not have an apples to apples comparision since we use 900 where we have foliage and 5.8 where we do not.) So Sure 3650 does OK when its dry, but in rain? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: John Rock [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 12:21 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage We have many 3.65GHz WiMAX Base Stations deployed and propagation has been real positive even through some foliage. Picture1 - http://www.wirelessconnections.net/index.php?option=com_shared_private_space task=showfilefileid=117 Picture2 - http://www.wirelessconnections.net/index.php?option=com_shared_private_space task=showfilefileid=118 Picture3 - http://www.wirelessconnections.net/index.php?option=com_shared_private_space task=showfilefileid=119 The above pictures are from a shot we had in Texas to a 3.65 Base Station, I have more tree pictures. The customer had an older original Alvarion VL CPE at 5.8GHz. They installed the VL on a 40 ft guyed mast pole, to get good SNR. At 3.65 GHz from street level(12ft AGL) beside the house we had -75 dBm and downlink/uplink at 64QAM/16QAM respectively we pulled 6Mb/3Mb and perfect Voice calls from the truck. The WISP is thrilled with their coverage in the small town even through foliage. As you can see we shot between two pine trees and through the other trees. At this site we were almost 1.1 Miles away. I would classify the foliage as light. The key to everything is defining the word foliage. How dense is the foliage? How tall? How much power at the Base Station and CPE? Diversity? How far away are you from the Base Station? MIMO or second/fourth order diversity at 3.65Ghz is not being done at the CPE level yet and only on select type of Base Stations. At the Base Stations with Second or Fourth order diversity we see greatly improved uplink capabilities and a lot better connectivity in NLOS environments because of the improved Uplinks. Passing reliable data at -85 to -92dBm is obtainable, although I highly recommend only installing clients with good signal strength. Most systems require -74 to -78dBm or better to achieve reliable full burst rates(64QAM3/4)...When CPE become available with MIMO we can expect even better sensitivity in the Downlink also. It becomes a question on how long it takes the vendors to implement 802.16e flavored in 3.65GHz., Mid/Late 2009 is my bet. We can build an RF system at any frequency that can get through foliage, it comes down to how much do you want to spend to get that type of coverage within your areas terrain. Thinking 3.65GHz can cover through foliage at long range is a myth. And I understand that most operators want to cover 50 miles NLOS from a single tower site at 75' AGL... 700 MHZ can work better if you own that spectrum for use? 3.65GHz is open to about anyone. Thanks, John Rock Director of Operations - Senior Engineer Wireless Connections 166 Milan Ave., Norwalk, Oh. 44857 ACCessing the Future Today!! ofc. 419.660.6100 cell 419-706-7356 fax 419-668-4077 http://www.wirelessconnections.net This transmission and any files attached to it, may contain confidential and/or privileged information and intended only for the named recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction, retransmission, dissemination, disclosure, copying or any use of the information or files contained is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply transmission and delete this electronic mail. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 10:09 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage Have we gotten any reports how 3650 works with foliage? Would MIMO have any affect on foliage penetration ability? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org
Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?
Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE wrote: Charles...As I found out, Appendix D is just ONE way to do those calculations. Can you expand on this a bit? Is there another way they should be done? Or are there different conclusions one can reach by doing them differently (ie you follow the method in appendix d and the earth station uses some other method to invalidate your data)? Is this something to be concerned about? Thanks! Charles 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 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?
I haven't looked at Appendix D in a while, but I don't think it takes into account topology. Ground works really well at stopping noise. -Matt On Aug 1, 2008, at 11:08 AM, Charles Wyble wrote: Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE wrote: Charles...As I found out, Appendix D is just ONE way to do those calculations. Can you expand on this a bit? Is there another way they should be done? Or are there different conclusions one can reach by doing them differently (ie you follow the method in appendix d and the earth station uses some other method to invalidate your data)? Is this something to be concerned about? Thanks! Charles 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/ -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by Rapid Link, and is believed to be clean. 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 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?
* Charles Wyble wrote, On 8/1/2008 11:08 AM: Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE wrote: Charles...As I found out, Appendix D is just ONE way to do those calculations. Can you expand on this a bit? Is there another way they should be done? Or are there different conclusions one can reach by doing them differently (ie you follow the method in appendix d and the earth station uses some other method to invalidate your data)? Is this something to be concerned about? Hi Charles...from my talks with the WTB folks they indicated that Appendix D was just one way to get there from here so to speak. I do not know if COmsearch et al are using this procedure or something else. Leon 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 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?
Doug Ratcliffe wrote: I've read your blogs and have been keeping up with them. What I can't seem to find is the ULS registrations for the actual earth satellite stations. It seems like most other ULS entires, they have a contact address and a person's name. I did a Geosearch of Orange County, FL (the Sprint Communications Orlando, FL county) using Frequencies 3500 to 5000mhz (All Service Types), and found nothing but a cancelled point to point license for ATT. Check out http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/General_Menu_Reports/filenum.cfm to search by file number. I'm reading over the applications now. Lots of good info which you will need for base station placement calculations (try saying that 3 times fast) located appendix D of the frequency rules document. I don't know the formal name of that document. 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 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?
You can't use ULS for earth stations. Earth stations are covered by the international bureau as opposed to the wireless bureau. -Matt On Jul 27, 2008, at 6:52 PM, Doug Ratcliffe wrote: I've read your blogs and have been keeping up with them. What I can't seem to find is the ULS registrations for the actual earth satellite stations. It seems like most other ULS entires, they have a contact address and a person's name. I did a Geosearch of Orange County, FL (the Sprint Communications Orlando, FL county) using Frequencies 3500 to 5000mhz (All Service Types), and found nothing but a cancelled point to point license for ATT. A quick search of the FCC site for Sprint's filing # (SESRWL2000101902129) finds nothing but the mention in the FCC 3650 FSS list. If I were to call the FCC with that number would they be able to provide me contact information for that company that pertains to the FSS department? I wonder if creating a website that documented all the FSS contact info, combined with map distance, automatic EIRP / bearing calculations (i.e. the stuff the FCC talks about in their 3650 document), would be beneficial to the other WISPs who want to serve the 125 million people who live INSIDE of these zones. It seems silly, like a 5-10W transmitter pointing the opposite direction would even make a difference - you would think the FCC would have integrated distance AND antenna direction when it comes to base station registration... Florida is flat. At 105km, I would need to have at least a 450 foot tower or higher on both ends to even send a signal that far. 45 miles ended up needing over 400ft on both ends. It's not like I want to broadcast 3650 from the top of a 10,000 foot mountain peak. - Original Message - From: Charles Wyble [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 6:20 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...? Doug Ratcliffe wrote: Has anyone gotten any headway on company negotiations in protected zones? Almost all of the zones near me (105km is the closest to the SW, 146.7km next closest to the South) and I have no desire to point coverage in that direction - mainly north and northwest. But according to the FCC, I'd be dealing with Sprint, and Harris Corporation - these people don't even have phone numbers on their web sites for any departments that would look like they would even know what I was talking about. I have done several blog posts on this subject: http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/satellite-related-brain-dump.html http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/80211y-3650-mhz-in-southern-california.html http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/3650mhz-southern-california-malibu.html http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/3650mhz-southern-california-malibu_05.html Hope that helps. And even if I found a human being, it seems unlikely I'd talk to anyone with the power to make a real decision. Indeed. Is this something best sent from a telecommunications attorney to their FCC attorney of record? Is the consent more like a contract? Would they be able to charge me for consent (like a spectrum lease)? Is this like asking for keys to the space shuttle? Excellent questions. Hopefully someone here can help. -- Charles Wyble (818) 280 - 7059 http://charlesnw.blogspot.com CTO Known Element Enterprises / SoCal WiFI project 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/ -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by Rapid Link, and is believed to be clean. 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 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?
So how do we find the contact information on the international bureau's filings? - Original Message - From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, July 28, 2008 8:58 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...? You can't use ULS for earth stations. Earth stations are covered by the international bureau as opposed to the wireless bureau. -Matt On Jul 27, 2008, at 6:52 PM, Doug Ratcliffe wrote: I've read your blogs and have been keeping up with them. What I can't seem to find is the ULS registrations for the actual earth satellite stations. It seems like most other ULS entires, they have a contact address and a person's name. I did a Geosearch of Orange County, FL (the Sprint Communications Orlando, FL county) using Frequencies 3500 to 5000mhz (All Service Types), and found nothing but a cancelled point to point license for ATT. A quick search of the FCC site for Sprint's filing # (SESRWL2000101902129) finds nothing but the mention in the FCC 3650 FSS list. If I were to call the FCC with that number would they be able to provide me contact information for that company that pertains to the FSS department? I wonder if creating a website that documented all the FSS contact info, combined with map distance, automatic EIRP / bearing calculations (i.e. the stuff the FCC talks about in their 3650 document), would be beneficial to the other WISPs who want to serve the 125 million people who live INSIDE of these zones. It seems silly, like a 5-10W transmitter pointing the opposite direction would even make a difference - you would think the FCC would have integrated distance AND antenna direction when it comes to base station registration... Florida is flat. At 105km, I would need to have at least a 450 foot tower or higher on both ends to even send a signal that far. 45 miles ended up needing over 400ft on both ends. It's not like I want to broadcast 3650 from the top of a 10,000 foot mountain peak. - Original Message - From: Charles Wyble [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 6:20 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...? Doug Ratcliffe wrote: Has anyone gotten any headway on company negotiations in protected zones? Almost all of the zones near me (105km is the closest to the SW, 146.7km next closest to the South) and I have no desire to point coverage in that direction - mainly north and northwest. But according to the FCC, I'd be dealing with Sprint, and Harris Corporation - these people don't even have phone numbers on their web sites for any departments that would look like they would even know what I was talking about. I have done several blog posts on this subject: http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/satellite-related-brain-dump.html http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/80211y-3650-mhz-in-southern-california.html http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/3650mhz-southern-california-malibu.html http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/3650mhz-southern-california-malibu_05.html Hope that helps. And even if I found a human being, it seems unlikely I'd talk to anyone with the power to make a real decision. Indeed. Is this something best sent from a telecommunications attorney to their FCC attorney of record? Is the consent more like a contract? Would they be able to charge me for consent (like a spectrum lease)? Is this like asking for keys to the space shuttle? Excellent questions. Hopefully someone here can help. -- Charles Wyble (818) 280 - 7059 http://charlesnw.blogspot.com CTO Known Element Enterprises / SoCal WiFI project 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/ -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by Rapid Link, and is believed to be clean. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org
Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?
If I knew a central place to get actual contact information for FSS owners I would share it. The few that I have contacted thus far are all administrative. -Matt On Jul 28, 2008, at 10:21 AM, Doug Ratcliffe wrote: So how do we find the contact information on the international bureau's filings? - Original Message - From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, July 28, 2008 8:58 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...? You can't use ULS for earth stations. Earth stations are covered by the international bureau as opposed to the wireless bureau. -Matt On Jul 27, 2008, at 6:52 PM, Doug Ratcliffe wrote: I've read your blogs and have been keeping up with them. What I can't seem to find is the ULS registrations for the actual earth satellite stations. It seems like most other ULS entires, they have a contact address and a person's name. I did a Geosearch of Orange County, FL (the Sprint Communications Orlando, FL county) using Frequencies 3500 to 5000mhz (All Service Types), and found nothing but a cancelled point to point license for ATT. A quick search of the FCC site for Sprint's filing # (SESRWL2000101902129) finds nothing but the mention in the FCC 3650 FSS list. If I were to call the FCC with that number would they be able to provide me contact information for that company that pertains to the FSS department? I wonder if creating a website that documented all the FSS contact info, combined with map distance, automatic EIRP / bearing calculations (i.e. the stuff the FCC talks about in their 3650 document), would be beneficial to the other WISPs who want to serve the 125 million people who live INSIDE of these zones. It seems silly, like a 5-10W transmitter pointing the opposite direction would even make a difference - you would think the FCC would have integrated distance AND antenna direction when it comes to base station registration... Florida is flat. At 105km, I would need to have at least a 450 foot tower or higher on both ends to even send a signal that far. 45 miles ended up needing over 400ft on both ends. It's not like I want to broadcast 3650 from the top of a 10,000 foot mountain peak. - Original Message - From: Charles Wyble [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 6:20 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...? Doug Ratcliffe wrote: Has anyone gotten any headway on company negotiations in protected zones? Almost all of the zones near me (105km is the closest to the SW, 146.7km next closest to the South) and I have no desire to point coverage in that direction - mainly north and northwest. But according to the FCC, I'd be dealing with Sprint, and Harris Corporation - these people don't even have phone numbers on their web sites for any departments that would look like they would even know what I was talking about. I have done several blog posts on this subject: http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/satellite-related-brain-dump.html http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/80211y-3650-mhz-in-southern-california.html http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/3650mhz-southern-california-malibu.html http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/3650mhz-southern-california-malibu_05.html Hope that helps. And even if I found a human being, it seems unlikely I'd talk to anyone with the power to make a real decision. Indeed. Is this something best sent from a telecommunications attorney to their FCC attorney of record? Is the consent more like a contract? Would they be able to charge me for consent (like a spectrum lease)? Is this like asking for keys to the space shuttle? Excellent questions. Hopefully someone here can help. -- Charles Wyble (818) 280 - 7059 http://charlesnw.blogspot.com CTO Known Element Enterprises / SoCal WiFI project 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/ -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by Rapid Link, and is believed to be clean
Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?
This site has the basic locations and shows their radius coverage. http://zing.naviciti.com/ You can also contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] for the contact info on any of those sites. David On 7/28/08 10:21 AM, Doug Radcliffe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So how do we find the contact information on the international bureau's filings? - Original Message - From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, July 28, 2008 8:58 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...? You can't use ULS for earth stations. Earth stations are covered by the international bureau as opposed to the wireless bureau. -Matt On Jul 27, 2008, at 6:52 PM, Doug Ratcliffe wrote: I've read your blogs and have been keeping up with them. What I can't seem to find is the ULS registrations for the actual earth satellite stations. It seems like most other ULS entires, they have a contact address and a person's name. I did a Geosearch of Orange County, FL (the Sprint Communications Orlando, FL county) using Frequencies 3500 to 5000mhz (All Service Types), and found nothing but a cancelled point to point license for ATT. A quick search of the FCC site for Sprint's filing # (SESRWL2000101902129) finds nothing but the mention in the FCC 3650 FSS list. If I were to call the FCC with that number would they be able to provide me contact information for that company that pertains to the FSS department? I wonder if creating a website that documented all the FSS contact info, combined with map distance, automatic EIRP / bearing calculations (i.e. the stuff the FCC talks about in their 3650 document), would be beneficial to the other WISPs who want to serve the 125 million people who live INSIDE of these zones. It seems silly, like a 5-10W transmitter pointing the opposite direction would even make a difference - you would think the FCC would have integrated distance AND antenna direction when it comes to base station registration... Florida is flat. At 105km, I would need to have at least a 450 foot tower or higher on both ends to even send a signal that far. 45 miles ended up needing over 400ft on both ends. It's not like I want to broadcast 3650 from the top of a 10,000 foot mountain peak. - Original Message - From: Charles Wyble [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 6:20 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...? Doug Ratcliffe wrote: Has anyone gotten any headway on company negotiations in protected zones? Almost all of the zones near me (105km is the closest to the SW, 146.7km next closest to the South) and I have no desire to point coverage in that direction - mainly north and northwest. But according to the FCC, I'd be dealing with Sprint, and Harris Corporation - these people don't even have phone numbers on their web sites for any departments that would look like they would even know what I was talking about. I have done several blog posts on this subject: http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/satellite-related-brain-dump.html http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/80211y-3650-mhz-in-southern-californi a.html http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/3650mhz-southern-california-malibu.ht ml http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/3650mhz-southern-california-malibu_05 .html Hope that helps. And even if I found a human being, it seems unlikely I'd talk to anyone with the power to make a real decision. Indeed. Is this something best sent from a telecommunications attorney to their FCC attorney of record? Is the consent more like a contract? Would they be able to charge me for consent (like a spectrum lease)? Is this like asking for keys to the space shuttle? Excellent questions. Hopefully someone here can help. -- Charles Wyble (818) 280 - 7059 http://charlesnw.blogspot.com CTO Known Element Enterprises / SoCal WiFI project --- - 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/ -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by Rapid Link, and is believed to be clean
Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?
David Peterson wrote: This site has the basic locations and shows their radius coverage. http://zing.naviciti.com/ You can also contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] for the contact info on any of those sites. If they have the info, why don't they put it on the map? Isn't that kind of the point of the mash up? :) I was quite frustrated with the lack of information on that map (I found it some time ago). I have also put up a mash up of the stations in SoCal. http://tinyurl.com/5hjky4 What info I have (in my blog posts) is linked to from the map. If anyone has info on ground stations (both for ones I have and ones I don't) I'll happily expand my mash up, and link back to the page with info (and I'll host the info page if you like as well). David -- Charles Wyble (818) 280 - 7059 http://charlesnw.blogspot.com CTO Known Element Enterprises / SoCal WiFI project 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 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?
I think it was just a matter of getting around to it. I am ccing him if you would like to collaborate with him on getting the info to the community. David On 7/28/08 12:01 PM, Charles Wyble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: David Peterson wrote: This site has the basic locations and shows their radius coverage. http://zing.naviciti.com/ You can also contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] for the contact info on any of those sites. If they have the info, why don't they put it on the map? Isn't that kind of the point of the mash up? :) I was quite frustrated with the lack of information on that map (I found it some time ago). I have also put up a mash up of the stations in SoCal. http://tinyurl.com/5hjky4 What info I have (in my blog posts) is linked to from the map. If anyone has info on ground stations (both for ones I have and ones I don't) I'll happily expand my mash up, and link back to the page with info (and I'll host the info page if you like as well). David 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 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?
Doug Ratcliffe wrote: Has anyone gotten any headway on company negotiations in protected zones? Almost all of the zones near me (105km is the closest to the SW, 146.7km next closest to the South) and I have no desire to point coverage in that direction - mainly north and northwest. But according to the FCC, I'd be dealing with Sprint, and Harris Corporation - these people don't even have phone numbers on their web sites for any departments that would look like they would even know what I was talking about. I have done several blog posts on this subject: http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/satellite-related-brain-dump.html http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/80211y-3650-mhz-in-southern-california.html http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/3650mhz-southern-california-malibu.html http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/3650mhz-southern-california-malibu_05.html Hope that helps. And even if I found a human being, it seems unlikely I'd talk to anyone with the power to make a real decision. Indeed. Is this something best sent from a telecommunications attorney to their FCC attorney of record? Is the consent more like a contract? Would they be able to charge me for consent (like a spectrum lease)? Is this like asking for keys to the space shuttle? Excellent questions. Hopefully someone here can help. -- Charles Wyble (818) 280 - 7059 http://charlesnw.blogspot.com CTO Known Element Enterprises / SoCal WiFI project 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 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?
I've read your blogs and have been keeping up with them. What I can't seem to find is the ULS registrations for the actual earth satellite stations. It seems like most other ULS entires, they have a contact address and a person's name. I did a Geosearch of Orange County, FL (the Sprint Communications Orlando, FL county) using Frequencies 3500 to 5000mhz (All Service Types), and found nothing but a cancelled point to point license for ATT. A quick search of the FCC site for Sprint's filing # (SESRWL2000101902129) finds nothing but the mention in the FCC 3650 FSS list. If I were to call the FCC with that number would they be able to provide me contact information for that company that pertains to the FSS department? I wonder if creating a website that documented all the FSS contact info, combined with map distance, automatic EIRP / bearing calculations (i.e. the stuff the FCC talks about in their 3650 document), would be beneficial to the other WISPs who want to serve the 125 million people who live INSIDE of these zones. It seems silly, like a 5-10W transmitter pointing the opposite direction would even make a difference - you would think the FCC would have integrated distance AND antenna direction when it comes to base station registration... Florida is flat. At 105km, I would need to have at least a 450 foot tower or higher on both ends to even send a signal that far. 45 miles ended up needing over 400ft on both ends. It's not like I want to broadcast 3650 from the top of a 10,000 foot mountain peak. - Original Message - From: Charles Wyble [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 6:20 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...? Doug Ratcliffe wrote: Has anyone gotten any headway on company negotiations in protected zones? Almost all of the zones near me (105km is the closest to the SW, 146.7km next closest to the South) and I have no desire to point coverage in that direction - mainly north and northwest. But according to the FCC, I'd be dealing with Sprint, and Harris Corporation - these people don't even have phone numbers on their web sites for any departments that would look like they would even know what I was talking about. I have done several blog posts on this subject: http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/satellite-related-brain-dump.html http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/80211y-3650-mhz-in-southern-california.html http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/3650mhz-southern-california-malibu.html http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/3650mhz-southern-california-malibu_05.html Hope that helps. And even if I found a human being, it seems unlikely I'd talk to anyone with the power to make a real decision. Indeed. Is this something best sent from a telecommunications attorney to their FCC attorney of record? Is the consent more like a contract? Would they be able to charge me for consent (like a spectrum lease)? Is this like asking for keys to the space shuttle? Excellent questions. Hopefully someone here can help. -- Charles Wyble (818) 280 - 7059 http://charlesnw.blogspot.com CTO Known Element Enterprises / SoCal WiFI project 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 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?
In a couple years NASA's not going to be using the shuttles anymore, so they'll be easier to get a hold of. ;-) -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Doug Ratcliffe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 5:16 PM Subject: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...? Has anyone gotten any headway on company negotiations in protected zones? Almost all of the zones near me (105km is the closest to the SW, 146.7km next closest to the South) and I have no desire to point coverage in that direction - mainly north and northwest. But according to the FCC, I'd be dealing with Sprint, and Harris Corporation - these people don't even have phone numbers on their web sites for any departments that would look like they would even know what I was talking about. And even if I found a human being, it seems unlikely I'd talk to anyone with the power to make a real decision. Is this something best sent from a telecommunications attorney to their FCC attorney of record? Is the consent more like a contract? Would they be able to charge me for consent (like a spectrum lease)? Is this like asking for keys to the space shuttle? 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 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?
Doug Ratcliffe wrote: Has anyone gotten any headway on company negotiations in protected zones? For better or for worse my blog posts seem to be the only material of substance I can find on the subject. I wish that wasn't the case. :) Almost all of the zones near me (105km is the closest to the SW, 146.7km next closest to the South) and I have no desire to point coverage in that direction - mainly north and northwest. Have you seen appendix D of the ruling ( located at http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-56A1.pdf%20 ) It mentions the fact that the 150Km zones are for the worse possible configuration. I have a friend of mine who is a math wizard doing some calculations on the zones and figuring out where base stations can be located. Two data sets are of interest 1) Location of a 3650 base station in an exclusion zone 2) Location of a 3650 base station inside multiple (overlapping) exclusion zones. Obviously the zones are far to broad, as existing satellite ground stations are operating in overlapping zones without interference. Naturally when his calculations are complete I will post the full data set. But according to the FCC, I'd be dealing with Sprint, and Harris Corporation - these people don't even have phone numbers on their web sites for any departments that would look like they would even know what I was talking about. Naturally. I would suggest networking with individuals from the societies I link to in my blog post. They would seem to be the ones who could provide the technical contacts and validation. And even if I found a human being, it seems unlikely I'd talk to anyone with the power to make a real decision. Hmmm. I have a sneaky evil plan that just might work. It's a sort of backwards way of doing things. There is a company that offers monitoring service for the 3650Mhz registrations. They sell this to earth station operators. Once someone registers inside the exclusion zone they contact them. I discovered this the other day and am now unable to locate it. Some people to talk to might be http://www.suirg.org/ ? Think of them ass the satellite mafia? :) For now I have tabled pursuit of spectrum access until any significant events occur, or the availability of 802.11y equipment. Whichever comes first. Is this something best sent from a telecommunications attorney to their FCC attorney of record? That's an interesting question. In my original post on this subject to the list someone mentioned they had negotiated access. When I asked for further detail I didn't receive any more information. Is the consent more like a contract? Would they be able to charge me for consent (like a spectrum lease)? Unfortunately all the FCC spells out is a requirement for negotiation in good faith. I am not sure what on earth in good faith means. Is this like asking for keys to the space shuttle? You could probably get the nuclear launch codes that a marine carries for the President easier then spectrum access. I would love to be proven wrong. I sent a letter to the two names mentioned on the ruling, regarding the subject of gaining spectrum access. A copy of the letter can be found here: http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/fcc-engagement.html I have yet to hear back from either of them. :) If I obtain any more information from the various information loops I'm plugged into, I will blog it and post here. Also I am going to track down that registration monitoring service now. Might be far easier to simply register and have them come to you? -- Charles Wyble (818) 280 - 7059 http://charlesnw.blogspot.com CTO Known Element Enterprises / SoCal WiFI project 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 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?
Hi Doug...I've been doing this since January and it's been very slow. Comsearch seems to rep many of the FSSes. As soon as I have more info on where we are I'll post it or you can contact me off list. Thanks leon * Doug Ratcliffe wrote, On 7/27/2008 6:16 PM: Has anyone gotten any headway on company negotiations in protected zones? Almost all of the zones near me (105km is the closest to the SW, 146.7km next closest to the South) and I have no desire to point coverage in that direction - mainly north and northwest. But according to the FCC, I'd be dealing with Sprint, and Harris Corporation - these people don't even have phone numbers on their web sites for any departments that would look like they would even know what I was talking about. And even if I found a human being, it seems unlikely I'd talk to anyone with the power to make a real decision. Is this something best sent from a telecommunications attorney to their FCC attorney of record? Is the consent more like a contract? Would they be able to charge me for consent (like a spectrum lease)? Is this like asking for keys to the space shuttle? 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 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?
Yep. We have 4 grandfathered sites in our region. One signed off, one is deactive with the license surendered, one is att, and the 4th is sprint. I hope to have sprint and att signed off in the next 30 days --- airCloud Communications Jerry Richardson 925-260-4119 Sent Mobile -Original Message- From: Doug Ratcliffe [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 3:15 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...? Has anyone gotten any headway on company negotiations in protected zones? Almost all of the zones near me (105km is the closest to the SW, 146.7km next closest to the South) and I have no desire to point coverage in that direction - mainly north and northwest. But according to the FCC, I'd be dealing with Sprint, and Harris Corporation - these people don't even have phone numbers on their web sites for any departments that would look like they would even know what I was talking about. And even if I found a human being, it seems unlikely I'd talk to anyone with the power to make a real decision. Is this something best sent from a telecommunications attorney to their FCC attorney of record? Is the consent more like a contract? Would they be able to charge me for consent (like a spectrum lease)? Is this like asking for keys to the space shuttle? 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 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?
I used to live in Boca Raton and my ham repeater is still on the air down there. We're also doing some 3650 in Florida as well. Currently we're 4 miles just west of the 150km zone so we're in the clear. I've had numerous calls with higherups at the WTB on this over the last few months. Leon * Doug Ratcliffe wrote, On 7/27/2008 6:52 PM: I've read your blogs and have been keeping up with them. What I can't seem to find is the ULS registrations for the actual earth satellite stations. It seems like most other ULS entires, they have a contact address and a person's name. I did a Geosearch of Orange County, FL (the Sprint Communications Orlando, FL county) using Frequencies 3500 to 5000mhz (All Service Types), and found nothing but a cancelled point to point license for ATT. A quick search of the FCC site for Sprint's filing # (SESRWL2000101902129) finds nothing but the mention in the FCC 3650 FSS list. If I were to call the FCC with that number would they be able to provide me contact information for that company that pertains to the FSS department? I wonder if creating a website that documented all the FSS contact info, combined with map distance, automatic EIRP / bearing calculations (i.e. the stuff the FCC talks about in their 3650 document), would be beneficial to the other WISPs who want to serve the 125 million people who live INSIDE of these zones. It seems silly, like a 5-10W transmitter pointing the opposite direction would even make a difference - you would think the FCC would have integrated distance AND antenna direction when it comes to base station registration... Florida is flat. At 105km, I would need to have at least a 450 foot tower or higher on both ends to even send a signal that far. 45 miles ended up needing over 400ft on both ends. It's not like I want to broadcast 3650 from the top of a 10,000 foot mountain peak. - Original Message - From: Charles Wyble [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 6:20 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...? Doug Ratcliffe wrote: Has anyone gotten any headway on company negotiations in protected zones? Almost all of the zones near me (105km is the closest to the SW, 146.7km next closest to the South) and I have no desire to point coverage in that direction - mainly north and northwest. But according to the FCC, I'd be dealing with Sprint, and Harris Corporation - these people don't even have phone numbers on their web sites for any departments that would look like they would even know what I was talking about. I have done several blog posts on this subject: http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/satellite-related-brain-dump.html http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/80211y-3650-mhz-in-southern-california.html http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/3650mhz-southern-california-malibu.html http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/3650mhz-southern-california-malibu_05.html Hope that helps. And even if I found a human being, it seems unlikely I'd talk to anyone with the power to make a real decision. Indeed. Is this something best sent from a telecommunications attorney to their FCC attorney of record? Is the consent more like a contract? Would they be able to charge me for consent (like a spectrum lease)? Is this like asking for keys to the space shuttle? Excellent questions. Hopefully someone here can help. -- Charles Wyble (818) 280 - 7059 http://charlesnw.blogspot.com CTO Known Element Enterprises / SoCal WiFI project 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 PtP equipment
LigoWave is planning one, but has not announced any details. This is from their website: LigoPTP devices provide high throughput, Point-to-Point connectivity for backhaul applications on a variety of frequencies. With LigoWave's proprietary software mechanism utilizing Selective Repeat ARQ technology (TDD), LigoPTP devices enable actual TCP throughput of up to 70 Mbps. Current products are available in 5 GHz and 900 MHz connectorized and integrated antenna models, but stay tuned for our PtP offerings in the 2.4 GHz and 3.65 GHz spectrums! I have been impressed with the price/performance of the 5 G and 900 stuff so far. On Jun 30, 2008, at 12:33 PM, Jason Hensley wrote: I think we had a thread on this awhile back, maybe not, but is there anyone offering a 3650 PtP product? Is there enough interest in this to maybe prompt a manf. to get busy on this? For me, I need a move my backhauls out of the messy and noisy 5ghz and this would be ideal. I don't have any short term plans to start doing 3650 PtMP, and honestly probably won't for awhile - but that could change. Whatcha think guys? 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/ inline: ctilogo200.jpg Bo Ring Account Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED] cell: 630-743-1162 • office: 312-205-2515 16W235 83rd Street, Suite A, Burr Ridge, IL 60527 • tel: 773.667.4585 fax: 773.326.4641 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 PtP equipment
Is their 900 mhz stuff fcc certified? Randy Bo Ring wrote: LigoWave is planning one, but has not announced any details. This is from their website: LigoPTP devices provide high throughput, Point-to-Point connectivity for backhaul applications on a variety of frequencies. With LigoWave's proprietary software mechanism utilizing Selective Repeat ARQ technology (TDD), LigoPTP devices enable actual TCP throughput of up to 70 Mbps. Current products are available in 5 GHz and 900 MHz connectorized and integrated antenna models, but stay tuned for our PtP offerings in the 2.4 GHz and 3.65 GHz spectrums! I have been impressed with the price/performance of the 5 G and 900 stuff so far. On Jun 30, 2008, at 12:33 PM, Jason Hensley wrote: I think we had a thread on this awhile back, maybe not, but is there anyone offering a 3650 PtP product? Is there enough interest in this to maybe prompt a manf. to get busy on this? For me, I need a move my backhauls out of the messy and noisy 5ghz and this would be ideal. I don't have any short term plans to start doing 3650 PtMP, and honestly probably won't for awhile - but that could change. Whatcha think guys? 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/ Bo Ring Account Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED] cell: 630-743-1162 • office: 312-205-2515 16W235 83rd Street, Suite A, Burr Ridge, IL 60527 • tel: 773.667.4585 fax: 773.326.4641 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/ -- 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 PtP equipment
Hi Randy, Yes, the LigoWave 900MHz products are all FCC certified. -Matt On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 15:26 -0600, Randy Cosby wrote: Is their 900 mhz stuff fcc certified? Randy Bo Ring wrote: LigoWave is planning one, but has not announced any details. This is from their website: LigoPTP devices provide high throughput, Point-to-Point connectivity for backhaul applications on a variety of frequencies. With LigoWave's proprietary software mechanism utilizing Selective Repeat ARQ technology (TDD), LigoPTP devices enable actual TCP throughput of up to 70 Mbps. Current products are available in 5 GHz and 900 MHz connectorized and integrated antenna models, but stay tuned for our PtP offerings in the 2.4 GHz and 3.65 GHz spectrums! I have been impressed with the price/performance of the 5 G and 900 stuff so far. On Jun 30, 2008, at 12:33 PM, Jason Hensley wrote: I think we had a thread on this awhile back, maybe not, but is there anyone offering a 3650 PtP product? Is there enough interest in this to maybe prompt a manf. to get busy on this? For me, I need a move my backhauls out of the messy and noisy 5ghz and this would be ideal. I don't have any short term plans to start doing 3650 PtMP, and honestly probably won't for awhile - but that could change. Whatcha think guys? 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/ Bo Ring Account Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED] cell: 630-743-1162 • office: 312-205-2515 16W235 83rd Street, Suite A, Burr Ridge, IL 60527 • tel: 773.667.4585 fax: 773.326.4641 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 locations KML
Wow, Enbridge sure has a lot of those things... They've either got a pipeline or are building a pipeline near here. -- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 9:12 AM Subject: [WISPA] 3650 locations KML In case anyone is interested. -Matt 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
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
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
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
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' wireless@wispa.org 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
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' wireless@wispa.org 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
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 wireless@wispa.org 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' wireless@wispa.org 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
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 wireless@wispa.org 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' wireless@wispa.org 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
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=1451start=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 interference with other users. That means if you are there first and someone interferes with you then they broke the law and it is their duty to fix it. Also, since everyone must register base
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. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Randy Cosby [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org 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=1451start=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
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. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Randy Cosby [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org 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=1451start=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
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 wireless@wispa.org 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. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Randy Cosby [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org 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=1451start=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
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. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Randy Cosby [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org 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=1451start=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
Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations (was: Rapid Link Launches WiMax)
Yes. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Doug Ratcliffe [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org 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
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. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org 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. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Randy Cosby [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org 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=1451start=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
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=COPYRequestTimeout=500application_id=930658fcc_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=27980switch=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
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 PtMP vs. 2.4 PtMP
Steve, Thanks for the clarification and comments. There is always a lot of conjecture on some of these subjects that the normal man who has never held an experimental license holds as truths, but in reality is not totally true at all. I (as I am sure others) appreciate the time you take to get the facts straight on some of the subjects that come up on list. Continue educating us and keep us in line! :) Thanks Mac Dearman -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Stroh Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 10:53 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 PtMP vs. 2.4 PtMP An experimental license allows you to test systems, spectrum, or techniques that otherwise aren't normally allowed. I know of a number of service providers that used their 3650 experimental licenses for commercial service. As I understand it, commercial operations aren't DISALLOWED by the Part 5 experimental license rules. What those rules DO state is that the Part 5 license doesn't give you any special preference whatsoever when the FCC deems that the period of your experimental license is up... like it would be now that the 3650 rules are set and commercial service is commencing. Those experimental deployments that I heard about were PMP for backhaul and for access for business customers; I haven't heard of any 3650 residential deployments, though that would be feasible using 3.5 Fixed WiMAX CPE that has been updated for 3650 rules. It was kept pretty quiet, except with the vendors that were supplying experimentally compliant 3650 gear, but there were MANY larger Broadband Wireless Internet Access Service Providers who used experimental licenses similar to Covad's rationale quoted in Dylan Oliver's message. While all those deployments had to be similarly couched in yes, we acknowledge it's experimental... language, they all used such systems for commercial, revenue service... THAT was the experiment - to see if it was feasible, economical, and reliable. It worked; looks like 3650 will be quite the success, especially with the mandated coordination / non-interference between competing service providers in urban areas. Thanks, Steve On Nov 19, 2007 12:39 PM, Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Those of that have using experimental licenses only got to test things such as propagation. We where not allowed to provide commercial services. Anyone who might have used their license incorrectly is certainly not going to admit to it on a public list. Therefore, your question cannot be answered. -Matt -- Steve Stroh Editor / Analyst, Stroh Publications LLC 425-939-0076 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | www.stevestroh.com --- - WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ --- - WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3650 PtMP vs. 2.4 PtMP
Steve Stroh wrote: I know of a number of service providers that used their 3650 experimental licenses for commercial service. As I understand it, commercial operations aren't DISALLOWED by the Part 5 experimental license rules. What those rules DO state is that the Part 5 license doesn't give you any special preference whatsoever when the FCC deems that the period of your experimental license is up... like it would be now that the 3650 rules are set and commercial service is commencing. I am aware that some operators attempted to apply section 5.3j as a way to providing commercial services using their experimental license. I have included the relevant language below. Theoretically, if the operator owns the equipment and informs the customer that their service is an experiment and is strictly temporary then the operator could use 3650. Without arguing whether any reasonable customer would accept those conditions. How do you collect revenue on such a customer? When we sell internet and/or phone service to a customer they sign a contract that lays out what service(s) we are providing them, the term, and ultimately how much the customer owes us. Contract terms are a two way street. In this case, that means if you have to shutdown the experiment before the end of the contract term you as an operator are in default of your contract. This means of course that you cannot have a term associated with the service. This leads to a very specialized contract or worse no contract. Again, what customer signs up for a situation like this? Sec. 5.93 Limited market studies. Unless otherwise stated in the instrument of authorization, licenses granted for the purpose of limited market studies pursuant to Sec. 5.3(j) of this part are subject to the following conditions: (a) All transmitting and/or receiving equipment used in the study shall be owned by the licensee. (b) The licensee is responsible for informing anyone participating in the experiment that the service or device is granted under an experimental authorization and is strictly temporary. (c) The size and scope of the experiment are subject to limitations as the Commission shall establish on a case-by-case basis. If the Commission subsequently determines that a market study is not so limited, the study shall be immediately terminated -Matt 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 PtMP vs. 2.4 PtMP
As I remember the rules for the experimental license applications, it specifically says that they can't be used for commercial purposes. But it really doesn't matter, the FCC knew what was being done with the bands and wanted to see what would happen anyway. laters, marlon - Original Message - From: Steve Stroh [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 8:53 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 PtMP vs. 2.4 PtMP An experimental license allows you to test systems, spectrum, or techniques that otherwise aren't normally allowed. I know of a number of service providers that used their 3650 experimental licenses for commercial service. As I understand it, commercial operations aren't DISALLOWED by the Part 5 experimental license rules. What those rules DO state is that the Part 5 license doesn't give you any special preference whatsoever when the FCC deems that the period of your experimental license is up... like it would be now that the 3650 rules are set and commercial service is commencing. Those experimental deployments that I heard about were PMP for backhaul and for access for business customers; I haven't heard of any 3650 residential deployments, though that would be feasible using 3.5 Fixed WiMAX CPE that has been updated for 3650 rules. It was kept pretty quiet, except with the vendors that were supplying experimentally compliant 3650 gear, but there were MANY larger Broadband Wireless Internet Access Service Providers who used experimental licenses similar to Covad's rationale quoted in Dylan Oliver's message. While all those deployments had to be similarly couched in yes, we acknowledge it's experimental... language, they all used such systems for commercial, revenue service... THAT was the experiment - to see if it was feasible, economical, and reliable. It worked; looks like 3650 will be quite the success, especially with the mandated coordination / non-interference between competing service providers in urban areas. Thanks, Steve On Nov 19, 2007 12:39 PM, Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Those of that have using experimental licenses only got to test things such as propagation. We where not allowed to provide commercial services. Anyone who might have used their license incorrectly is certainly not going to admit to it on a public list. Therefore, your question cannot be answered. -Matt -- Steve Stroh Editor / Analyst, Stroh Publications LLC 425-939-0076 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | www.stevestroh.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] 3650 PtMP vs. 2.4 PtMP
It does matter though. If the rules state that you can not do something, don't do it, it is really simple. I never read the rules, and never applied for one. The thing people need to understand is the FCC is probably the last person, next to the IRS, that you want watching you. The FCC knows what was going on, and they took notes I am sure, someday it could come to bite all of us in the but.. Mike Bushard, Jr Wisper Wireless Solutions, LLC 320-256-WISP (9477) 320-256-9478 Fax -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 9:47 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 PtMP vs. 2.4 PtMP As I remember the rules for the experimental license applications, it specifically says that they can't be used for commercial purposes. But it really doesn't matter, the FCC knew what was being done with the bands and wanted to see what would happen anyway. laters, marlon - Original Message - From: Steve Stroh [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 8:53 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 PtMP vs. 2.4 PtMP An experimental license allows you to test systems, spectrum, or techniques that otherwise aren't normally allowed. I know of a number of service providers that used their 3650 experimental licenses for commercial service. As I understand it, commercial operations aren't DISALLOWED by the Part 5 experimental license rules. What those rules DO state is that the Part 5 license doesn't give you any special preference whatsoever when the FCC deems that the period of your experimental license is up... like it would be now that the 3650 rules are set and commercial service is commencing. Those experimental deployments that I heard about were PMP for backhaul and for access for business customers; I haven't heard of any 3650 residential deployments, though that would be feasible using 3.5 Fixed WiMAX CPE that has been updated for 3650 rules. It was kept pretty quiet, except with the vendors that were supplying experimentally compliant 3650 gear, but there were MANY larger Broadband Wireless Internet Access Service Providers who used experimental licenses similar to Covad's rationale quoted in Dylan Oliver's message. While all those deployments had to be similarly couched in yes, we acknowledge it's experimental... language, they all used such systems for commercial, revenue service... THAT was the experiment - to see if it was feasible, economical, and reliable. It worked; looks like 3650 will be quite the success, especially with the mandated coordination / non-interference between competing service providers in urban areas. Thanks, Steve On Nov 19, 2007 12:39 PM, Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Those of that have using experimental licenses only got to test things such as propagation. We where not allowed to provide commercial services. Anyone who might have used their license incorrectly is certainly not going to admit to it on a public list. Therefore, your question cannot be answered. -Matt -- Steve Stroh Editor / Analyst, Stroh Publications LLC 425-939-0076 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | www.stevestroh.com WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
