RE: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

[michael mulcay]

Tom/Charles

The whole objective is to increase the effective use of spectrum under
the existing rules.  NO WAIVERS, NO RULE CHANGES and NO INCREASED
INTERFERENCE. 

To maintain the existing frequency coordination efficiencies "the path"
antennas must meet CAT A (or B) and their size will be large. It is the
"wasted" side lobe radiation that can be put to productive use with
subordinated paths where the radiation from the Distributed Radiating
Elements (DREs) at the input to any victim receiver is always below the
coordinated interference or 6dB below the victim receiver's thermal
noise. The size shape etc of the DRE can be any size or shape (small)
providing all the network criteria is satisfied.

Mike

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2007 9:52 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

I'd also add, I'm not certain everyone wants the antenna beamwidth 
requirements waived on these protected bands.

I HIGHLY support NOT lowering the antenna size requirement for 11Ghz, as

anything smaller than its at today, just compromises long haul backhaul 
applications, in which WISPs do not have many option for long haul. At
8-10 
miles, a couple extra Degrees of beamwidth is capable of interfering
with a 
much wide length of area in the city effected.  Although, I'd like to
see 
6Ghz lowered to 4 ft dishes.  There isn't a landlord in their right mind

that would allow a 6 ft antenna installed on their roof.
Or maybe a nicely designed 3 ft model, possibly acceptable.

Not that I'm not for concurrent coordination.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Charles Wu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2007 1:03 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice


But what about the 36 / 38 dBi antenna rule for 4 & 6 GHz?  The SIA is
all over Fibertower's 2' request in 11 GHz...imagine 4 GHz, which could
knock out a lot of C-band downlinks (now, not being a satellite expert,
I'm not sure of the current usage of this channel, but being that the
SIA has tons of , I'm sure they'll raise up a storm)

That said, I think you need to get the antenna beamwidth requirements
waives / relaxed first...even if concurrent coordination passes, I don't
think anyone will want to be installing 6' dishes on people's houses...

-Charles


---
WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.com


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of michael mulcay
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 11:09 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

Charles,

The request for a declaratory ruling applies to all frequency bands. The
bands of immediate interest are 3.7 to 4.2GHz and 5.9 to 6.4GHz (an easy
freq change for WiMax, 3.5GHz to 4GHz band and 5.8GHz to 6GHz band)where
the subordinated link antenna sizes drop from 8ft and 6ft to as low as
1ft flat panel.

Mike

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Charles Wu
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 5:51 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

Wouldn't you be better off lowering antenna size requirement for the 3.7
GHz band first?
No one (specifically WiMAX) is going to make anything cheap for 18 or 23
GHz

-Charles

---
WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.com


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of michael mulcay
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 12:12 PM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

Last week the FCC1 issued a Public Notice seeking comments on Wireless
Strategies request for a declaratory ruling regarding (concurrent)
coordination of microwave links under Part 101 of the Commission's
rules.

The amount of microwave spectrum is finite and it is in everyone's
interest to seek ways to increase the effective use the existing
spectrum. Unfortunately, there may be those who have a vested interest
in maintaining the status quo and who will attempt to stifle innovation.

Innovation is one of the few ways that small companies can compete with
large established companies and that is why we believe this is a one
time opportunity for WISPs to join the big league as regards the ability
to obtain licensed spectrum which can support low cost 802.16-based
(WiMax) equipment with small antenna elements to provide licensed
backhaul and broadband services to hundreds of additional subscribers,
through frequency reuse without causing any additional harmful
interference.

It would be a great help if WISPA as a group and i

Re: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

[Tom DeReggi]

I'd also add, I'm not certain everyone wants the antenna beamwidth 
requirements waived on these protected bands.


I HIGHLY support NOT lowering the antenna size requirement for 11Ghz, as 
anything smaller than its at today, just compromises long haul backhaul 
applications, in which WISPs do not have many option for long haul. At 8-10 
miles, a couple extra Degrees of beamwidth is capable of interfering with a 
much wide length of area in the city effected.  Although, I'd like to see 
6Ghz lowered to 4 ft dishes.  There isn't a landlord in their right mind 
that would allow a 6 ft antenna installed on their roof.

Or maybe a nicely designed 3 ft model, possibly acceptable.

Not that I'm not for concurrent coordination.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "Charles Wu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2007 1:03 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice


But what about the 36 / 38 dBi antenna rule for 4 & 6 GHz?  The SIA is
all over Fibertower's 2' request in 11 GHz...imagine 4 GHz, which could
knock out a lot of C-band downlinks (now, not being a satellite expert,
I'm not sure of the current usage of this channel, but being that the
SIA has tons of , I'm sure they'll raise up a storm)

That said, I think you need to get the antenna beamwidth requirements
waives / relaxed first...even if concurrent coordination passes, I don't
think anyone will want to be installing 6' dishes on people's houses...

-Charles


---
WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.com


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of michael mulcay
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 11:09 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

Charles,

The request for a declaratory ruling applies to all frequency bands. The
bands of immediate interest are 3.7 to 4.2GHz and 5.9 to 6.4GHz (an easy
freq change for WiMax, 3.5GHz to 4GHz band and 5.8GHz to 6GHz band)where
the subordinated link antenna sizes drop from 8ft and 6ft to as low as
1ft flat panel.

Mike

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Charles Wu
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 5:51 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

Wouldn't you be better off lowering antenna size requirement for the 3.7
GHz band first?
No one (specifically WiMAX) is going to make anything cheap for 18 or 23
GHz

-Charles

---
WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.com


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of michael mulcay
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 12:12 PM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

Last week the FCC1 issued a Public Notice seeking comments on Wireless
Strategies request for a declaratory ruling regarding (concurrent)
coordination of microwave links under Part 101 of the Commission's
rules.

The amount of microwave spectrum is finite and it is in everyone's
interest to seek ways to increase the effective use the existing
spectrum. Unfortunately, there may be those who have a vested interest
in maintaining the status quo and who will attempt to stifle innovation.

Innovation is one of the few ways that small companies can compete with
large established companies and that is why we believe this is a one
time opportunity for WISPs to join the big league as regards the ability
to obtain licensed spectrum which can support low cost 802.16-based
(WiMax) equipment with small antenna elements to provide licensed
backhaul and broadband services to hundreds of additional subscribers,
through frequency reuse without causing any additional harmful
interference.

It would be a great help if WISPA as a group and individual WISPs file
comments in support of the request for a declaratory ruling, especially
as there is everything to gain and nothing to lose.

The Comment deadline is July 19, 2007. Comments can be filed via the
FCC's  ECFS or by regular mail. Details are on the FCC's web site.

Thanks in advance,

Mike

1. FCC links:
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2697A1.doc>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2697A1.pdf>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2697A1.txt>





--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wi

RE: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice - ugh...didn't read close enough

[Charles Wu]

Mike,

Can you explain your plan on getting 1' panels passed in the 4 & 6 GHz
bands?

-Charles 


---
WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.com 


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of michael mulcay
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 11:09 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

Charles,

The request for a declaratory ruling applies to all frequency bands. The
bands of immediate interest are 3.7 to 4.2GHz and 5.9 to 6.4GHz (an easy
freq change for WiMax, 3.5GHz to 4GHz band and 5.8GHz to 6GHz band)where
the subordinated link antenna sizes drop from 8ft and 6ft to as low as
1ft flat panel.

Mike

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Charles Wu
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 5:51 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

Wouldn't you be better off lowering antenna size requirement for the 3.7
GHz band first?
No one (specifically WiMAX) is going to make anything cheap for 18 or 23
GHz

-Charles

---
WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.com 


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of michael mulcay
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 12:12 PM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

Last week the FCC1 issued a Public Notice seeking comments on Wireless
Strategies request for a declaratory ruling regarding (concurrent)
coordination of microwave links under Part 101 of the Commission's
rules. 
 
The amount of microwave spectrum is finite and it is in everyone's
interest to seek ways to increase the effective use the existing
spectrum. Unfortunately, there may be those who have a vested interest
in maintaining the status quo and who will attempt to stifle innovation.
 
Innovation is one of the few ways that small companies can compete with
large established companies and that is why we believe this is a one
time opportunity for WISPs to join the big league as regards the ability
to obtain licensed spectrum which can support low cost 802.16-based
(WiMax) equipment with small antenna elements to provide licensed
backhaul and broadband services to hundreds of additional subscribers,
through frequency reuse without causing any additional harmful
interference. 
 
It would be a great help if WISPA as a group and individual WISPs file
comments in support of the request for a declaratory ruling, especially
as there is everything to gain and nothing to lose.
 
The Comment deadline is July 19, 2007. Comments can be filed via the
FCC's  ECFS or by regular mail. Details are on the FCC's web site.
 
Thanks in advance,
 
Mike
 
1. FCC links: 
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2697A1.doc>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2697A1.pdf>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2697A1.txt> 
 
 
 
 
 
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

[Charles Wu]

But what about the 36 / 38 dBi antenna rule for 4 & 6 GHz?  The SIA is
all over Fibertower's 2' request in 11 GHz...imagine 4 GHz, which could
knock out a lot of C-band downlinks (now, not being a satellite expert,
I'm not sure of the current usage of this channel, but being that the
SIA has tons of , I'm sure they'll raise up a storm)

That said, I think you need to get the antenna beamwidth requirements
waives / relaxed first...even if concurrent coordination passes, I don't
think anyone will want to be installing 6' dishes on people's houses...

-Charles 


---
WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.com 


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of michael mulcay
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 11:09 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

Charles,

The request for a declaratory ruling applies to all frequency bands. The
bands of immediate interest are 3.7 to 4.2GHz and 5.9 to 6.4GHz (an easy
freq change for WiMax, 3.5GHz to 4GHz band and 5.8GHz to 6GHz band)where
the subordinated link antenna sizes drop from 8ft and 6ft to as low as
1ft flat panel.

Mike

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Charles Wu
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 5:51 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

Wouldn't you be better off lowering antenna size requirement for the 3.7
GHz band first?
No one (specifically WiMAX) is going to make anything cheap for 18 or 23
GHz

-Charles

---
WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.com 


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of michael mulcay
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 12:12 PM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

Last week the FCC1 issued a Public Notice seeking comments on Wireless
Strategies request for a declaratory ruling regarding (concurrent)
coordination of microwave links under Part 101 of the Commission's
rules. 
 
The amount of microwave spectrum is finite and it is in everyone's
interest to seek ways to increase the effective use the existing
spectrum. Unfortunately, there may be those who have a vested interest
in maintaining the status quo and who will attempt to stifle innovation.
 
Innovation is one of the few ways that small companies can compete with
large established companies and that is why we believe this is a one
time opportunity for WISPs to join the big league as regards the ability
to obtain licensed spectrum which can support low cost 802.16-based
(WiMax) equipment with small antenna elements to provide licensed
backhaul and broadband services to hundreds of additional subscribers,
through frequency reuse without causing any additional harmful
interference. 
 
It would be a great help if WISPA as a group and individual WISPs file
comments in support of the request for a declaratory ruling, especially
as there is everything to gain and nothing to lose.
 
The Comment deadline is July 19, 2007. Comments can be filed via the
FCC's  ECFS or by regular mail. Details are on the FCC's web site.
 
Thanks in advance,
 
Mike
 
1. FCC links: 
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2697A1.doc>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2697A1.pdf>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2697A1.txt> 
 
 
 
 
 
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

[michael mulcay]

Charles,

The request for a declaratory ruling applies to all frequency bands. The
bands of immediate interest are 3.7 to 4.2GHz and 5.9 to 6.4GHz (an easy
freq change for WiMax, 3.5GHz to 4GHz band and 5.8GHz to 6GHz band)where
the subordinated link antenna sizes drop from 8ft and 6ft to as low as
1ft flat panel.

Mike

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Charles Wu
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2007 5:51 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

Wouldn't you be better off lowering antenna size requirement for the 3.7
GHz band first?
No one (specifically WiMAX) is going to make anything cheap for 18 or 23
GHz

-Charles

---
WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.com 


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of michael mulcay
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 12:12 PM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

Last week the FCC1 issued a Public Notice seeking comments on Wireless
Strategies request for a declaratory ruling regarding (concurrent)
coordination of microwave links under Part 101 of the Commission's
rules. 
 
The amount of microwave spectrum is finite and it is in everyone's
interest to seek ways to increase the effective use the existing
spectrum. Unfortunately, there may be those who have a vested interest
in maintaining the status quo and who will attempt to stifle innovation.
 
Innovation is one of the few ways that small companies can compete with
large established companies and that is why we believe this is a one
time opportunity for WISPs to join the big league as regards the ability
to obtain licensed spectrum which can support low cost 802.16-based
(WiMax) equipment with small antenna elements to provide licensed
backhaul and broadband services to hundreds of additional subscribers,
through frequency reuse without causing any additional harmful
interference. 
 
It would be a great help if WISPA as a group and individual WISPs file
comments in support of the request for a declaratory ruling, especially
as there is everything to gain and nothing to lose.
 
The Comment deadline is July 19, 2007. Comments can be filed via the
FCC's  ECFS or by regular mail. Details are on the FCC's web site.
 
Thanks in advance,
 
Mike
 
1. FCC links: 
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2697A1.doc>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2697A1.pdf>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2697A1.txt> 
 
 
 
 
 
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

[Charles Wu]

Wouldn't you be better off lowering antenna size requirement for the 3.7
GHz band first?
No one (specifically WiMAX) is going to make anything cheap for 18 or 23
GHz

-Charles

---
WiNOG Wireless Roadshows
Coming to a City Near You
http://www.winog.com 


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of michael mulcay
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 12:12 PM
To: wireless@wispa.org
Subject: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

Last week the FCC1 issued a Public Notice seeking comments on Wireless
Strategies request for a declaratory ruling regarding (concurrent)
coordination of microwave links under Part 101 of the Commission's
rules. 
 
The amount of microwave spectrum is finite and it is in everyone's
interest to seek ways to increase the effective use the existing
spectrum. Unfortunately, there may be those who have a vested interest
in maintaining the status quo and who will attempt to stifle innovation.
 
Innovation is one of the few ways that small companies can compete with
large established companies and that is why we believe this is a one
time opportunity for WISPs to join the big league as regards the ability
to obtain licensed spectrum which can support low cost 802.16-based
(WiMax) equipment with small antenna elements to provide licensed
backhaul and broadband services to hundreds of additional subscribers,
through frequency reuse without causing any additional harmful
interference. 
 
It would be a great help if WISPA as a group and individual WISPs file
comments in support of the request for a declaratory ruling, especially
as there is everything to gain and nothing to lose.
 
The Comment deadline is July 19, 2007. Comments can be filed via the
FCC's  ECFS or by regular mail. Details are on the FCC's web site.
 
Thanks in advance,
 
Mike
 
1. FCC links: 


 
 
 
 
 
 
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

[Frank Muto]

For those interested in how easy the process is, the FCC has a good amount 
of information available.


Electronic Comment Filing System - http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/




Frank Muto
Co-founder -  Washington Bureau for ISP Advocacy - WBIA
www.wbia.us







- Original Message - 
From: "michael mulcay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 4:53 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice



Felix,

Yes, a "Citizen at Large" can provide comment and the concept of
"public-private" networks with WISPs would make a very powerful argument
in support.

Thanks

Mike

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Felix A. Lopez
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 9:52 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

Mike - Can "Citizens at Large" provide comment too?  I
am involved in volunteer wireless project for a local
school district in my area.  The CTO is always seeking
ways to do wireless on a limited budget.  We already
have problems with interference in a confined urban
space and hypothesized a licenced 802.16 with a local
WiSP network would help define a "public-private"
network for the students.  It is just hypothetical but
I can see the reasoning in support of comments for
this declaration at the FCC.

Any thoughts apreciated.

Felix
Wireless Practioneer
--- michael mulcay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:


Last week the FCC1 issued a Public Notice seeking
comments on Wireless
Strategies request for a declaratory ruling
regarding (concurrent)
coordination of microwave links under Part 101 of
the Commission's
rules.

The amount of microwave spectrum is finite and it is
in everyone's
interest to seek ways to increase the effective use
the existing
spectrum. Unfortunately, there may be those who have
a vested interest
in maintaining the status quo and who will attempt
to stifle innovation.

Innovation is one of the few ways that small
companies can compete with
large established companies and that is why we
believe this is a one
time opportunity for WISPs to join the big league as
regards the ability
to obtain licensed spectrum which can support low
cost 802.16-based
(WiMax) equipment with small antenna elements to
provide licensed
backhaul and broadband services to hundreds of
additional subscribers,
through frequency reuse without causing any
additional harmful
interference.

It would be a great help if WISPA as a group and
individual WISPs file
comments in support of the request for a declaratory
ruling, especially
as there is everything to gain and nothing to lose.

The Comment deadline is July 19, 2007. Comments can
be filed via the
FCC's  ECFS or by regular mail. Details are on the
FCC's web site.

Thanks in advance,

Mike

1. FCC links:


<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2697A1.doc>



<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2697A1.pdf>



<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2697A1.txt>


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

RE: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

[michael mulcay]

Felix,

Yes, a "Citizen at Large" can provide comment and the concept of
"public-private" networks with WISPs would make a very powerful argument
in support.

Thanks

Mike

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Felix A. Lopez
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 9:52 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

Mike - Can "Citizens at Large" provide comment too?  I
am involved in volunteer wireless project for a local
school district in my area.  The CTO is always seeking
ways to do wireless on a limited budget.  We already
have problems with interference in a confined urban
space and hypothesized a licenced 802.16 with a local
WiSP network would help define a "public-private"
network for the students.  It is just hypothetical but
I can see the reasoning in support of comments for
this declaration at the FCC.

Any thoughts apreciated.

Felix
Wireless Practioneer
--- michael mulcay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

> Last week the FCC1 issued a Public Notice seeking
> comments on Wireless
> Strategies request for a declaratory ruling
> regarding (concurrent)
> coordination of microwave links under Part 101 of
> the Commission's
> rules. 
>  
> The amount of microwave spectrum is finite and it is
> in everyone's
> interest to seek ways to increase the effective use
> the existing
> spectrum. Unfortunately, there may be those who have
> a vested interest
> in maintaining the status quo and who will attempt
> to stifle innovation.
>  
> Innovation is one of the few ways that small
> companies can compete with
> large established companies and that is why we
> believe this is a one
> time opportunity for WISPs to join the big league as
> regards the ability
> to obtain licensed spectrum which can support low
> cost 802.16-based
> (WiMax) equipment with small antenna elements to
> provide licensed
> backhaul and broadband services to hundreds of
> additional subscribers,
> through frequency reuse without causing any
> additional harmful
> interference. 
>  
> It would be a great help if WISPA as a group and
> individual WISPs file
> comments in support of the request for a declaratory
> ruling, especially
> as there is everything to gain and nothing to lose.
>  
> The Comment deadline is July 19, 2007. Comments can
> be filed via the
> FCC's  ECFS or by regular mail. Details are on the
> FCC's web site.
>  
> Thanks in advance,
>  
> Mike
>  
> 1. FCC links: 
>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2697A1.doc>
>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2697A1.pdf>
>
<http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-2697A1.txt>
> 
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
> -- 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 



 


Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles.
Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/ 
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] FCC Public Notice

[Felix A. Lopez]

Mike - Can "Citizens at Large" provide comment too?  I
am involved in volunteer wireless project for a local
school district in my area.  The CTO is always seeking
ways to do wireless on a limited budget.  We already
have problems with interference in a confined urban
space and hypothesized a licenced 802.16 with a local
WiSP network would help define a "public-private"
network for the students.  It is just hypothetical but
I can see the reasoning in support of comments for
this declaration at the FCC.

Any thoughts apreciated.

Felix
Wireless Practioneer
--- michael mulcay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

> Last week the FCC1 issued a Public Notice seeking
> comments on Wireless
> Strategies request for a declaratory ruling
> regarding (concurrent)
> coordination of microwave links under Part 101 of
> the Commission's
> rules. 
>  
> The amount of microwave spectrum is finite and it is
> in everyone's
> interest to seek ways to increase the effective use
> the existing
> spectrum. Unfortunately, there may be those who have
> a vested interest
> in maintaining the status quo and who will attempt
> to stifle innovation.
>  
> Innovation is one of the few ways that small
> companies can compete with
> large established companies and that is why we
> believe this is a one
> time opportunity for WISPs to join the big league as
> regards the ability
> to obtain licensed spectrum which can support low
> cost 802.16-based
> (WiMax) equipment with small antenna elements to
> provide licensed
> backhaul and broadband services to hundreds of
> additional subscribers,
> through frequency reuse without causing any
> additional harmful
> interference. 
>  
> It would be a great help if WISPA as a group and
> individual WISPs file
> comments in support of the request for a declaratory
> ruling, especially
> as there is everything to gain and nothing to lose.
>  
> The Comment deadline is July 19, 2007. Comments can
> be filed via the
> FCC's  ECFS or by regular mail. Details are on the
> FCC's web site.
>  
> Thanks in advance,
>  
> Mike
>  
> 1. FCC links: 
>

>

>

> 
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
> -- 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 



  

Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles. Visit the 
Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/ 
-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/