RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces
Agreed.. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 12:19 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces Well, either way, if it's an ap that talks to more than one client, it's max eirp is 4 watts. 36dB laters, marlon - Original Message - From: Chadd Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 10:00 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces Sorry, The signal was in the -70's not right at -70. It was mid to upper -70's from what I figured up they were putting out around 43dBm EIRP. I could also see the SSID of the AP so I know what town it was located in and it was/is a sectorized POP that would be around 30dBm radio input to a 14-15dBi antenna or a 26dBm radio input to a 17-18dBi antenna. Thanks, Chadd That's 4 watts. At 39 dB you'd be at 8 watts. At 40 it would be around 10 watts. Are you SURE that the remote tower you're seeing at -70 is really 20 miles out? To pick that up with a -70 rssi from a 9 dB antenna would require an amazing amount of power. It was very common for a long time to see Hyperlink and a couple of other amp manufacturers sell 1 watt amps (30 dB) and 15 dB omni antennas. Even with that config I show an rssi of -76. I guess they could be running a 2 watt amp and a 18 dB panel of some kind. But I'd find that very unusual. -- 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] TV white spaces
Chadd, I did some checking, and I found I have eight towers within 10 miles of your north tower at your house, and five towers within 10 miles of your Carlyle pop. You are at the edge of our coverage area, and I haven't had the opportunity to meet with you yet. I would be interested in finding more about this illegal AP in our mutual area. I run all of my pops at 40db or less, so I know it is not one of mine. I have had suspicions about some of our competitors, but I am not aware of any of them being active on the lists. Maybe we should get together for lunch sometime. Call me anytime. Call me at 618-206-4190 Or skype mike.delp Mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chadd Thompson Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 5:50 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces In our area So IL/metro St.Louis there are some large guys who are in no way shape or form legal, over power limits and the whole 9 yards. I can see other WISP Omni POP's with signal levels in the -70's from over 20 miles away using a 9dBi on my end, figure up what the EIRP on that is. The one in this case is a well know respected WISP that visits the popular lists, I always hope that he doesn't know that is going on and one of his guys is responsible but I have never taken the time to call them up and talk to them about it either. I don't know of any WISP's in this area about 10 that I know of including myself who are 100% legal when it comes to using only certified equipment. Most I think stay within power limits and equivalent antennas The other issue I see in our area is all the new start up WISP's who know nothing about the industry, the rules, networking, and don't know squat about RF. These guys are going to be our Achilles heal IMHO. There are too many vendors selling stuff and they are not concerned in the least bit whether the guys they are selling to know anything about Part15 rules. When I started four years ago it seemed like there were not near as many uncertified options as there are today so I came into the industry using certified equipment and knew what the rules were. It's too easy to buy 802.xx equipment throw it up on a pole and sell internet to a few users, more than likely they are not going to be successful but it still hurts everyone of us. I admit I am a glass half empty kind of guy, but I don't think there we are going to have any usable spectrum within the next one to two years because of stuff like this. Chadd -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 5:16 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces I agree that MOST wisps are likely compliant. Unfortuneately, it won't stay that way, if we let the industry slowly deteriorate and slide. I think compliance is a message that continually needs to be revisited, sorta like speed bumps. Its easy to not realize you are speeding, yet we all know where the speedometer is located. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.29/673 - Release Date: 2/6/2007 5:52 PM -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces
Am I missing something, or is 36 dBm EIRP our limit? On 2/7/07, Mike Delp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Chadd, I did some checking, and I found I have eight towers within 10 miles of your north tower at your house, and five towers within 10 miles of your Carlyle pop. You are at the edge of our coverage area, and I haven't had the opportunity to meet with you yet. I would be interested in finding more about this illegal AP in our mutual area. I run all of my pops at 40db or less, so I know it is not one of mine. I have had suspicions about some of our competitors, but I am not aware of any of them being active on the lists. Maybe we should get together for lunch sometime. Call me anytime. -- Dylan Oliver Primaverity, LLC -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces
+ 36 dBm EIRP Dylan Oliver wrote: Am I missing something, or is 36 dBm EIRP our limit? On 2/7/07, Mike Delp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Chadd, I did some checking, and I found I have eight towers within 10 miles of your north tower at your house, and five towers within 10 miles of your Carlyle pop. You are at the edge of our coverage area, and I haven't had the opportunity to meet with you yet. I would be interested in finding more about this illegal AP in our mutual area. I run all of my pops at 40db or less, so I know it is not one of mine. I have had suspicions about some of our competitors, but I am not aware of any of them being active on the lists. Maybe we should get together for lunch sometime. Call me anytime. -- Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993 Author of the WISP Handbook - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting Newsletters Downloadable from http://ask-wi.com/newsletters.html Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220 www.ask-wi.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces
Yes 36 dBm. Thanks, Chadd -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dylan Oliver Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 12:00 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces Am I missing something, or is 36 dBm EIRP our limit? On 2/7/07, Mike Delp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Chadd, I did some checking, and I found I have eight towers within 10 miles of your north tower at your house, and five towers within 10 miles of your Carlyle pop. You are at the edge of our coverage area, and I haven't had the opportunity to meet with you yet. I would be interested in finding more about this illegal AP in our mutual area. I run all of my pops at 40db or less, so I know it is not one of mine. I have had suspicions about some of our competitors, but I am not aware of any of them being active on the lists. Maybe we should get together for lunch sometime. Call me anytime. -- Dylan Oliver Primaverity, LLC -- 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] TV white spaces
Not sure what post referring to. Yes, 36 dbi is our limit for standard PtMP APs. But CPEs, and PTP links can go much higher in 2.4G and 5.8G. Mimo (smart antenna) Systems also now are allowed an additional 8db in AP TX power. Unfortuneately, the FCC defines PtP as a link that has 2 endpoints only, and not reference to a specifc antenna beamwidth. From what I understand, although not confirmed, and not likely advisable, a PTP link could result in a radio link with an OMNI on each end, if configured to only allow 1 association (the other radio). Doesn't mean FCC would Give an equipment certification for that. Could a single person, who wanted to install a personal private individual Mobile link/network for himself, run under PTP rules and an Omni, at the expense of the rest of the world? Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Dylan Oliver [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 12:59 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces Am I missing something, or is 36 dBm EIRP our limit? On 2/7/07, Mike Delp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Chadd, I did some checking, and I found I have eight towers within 10 miles of your north tower at your house, and five towers within 10 miles of your Carlyle pop. You are at the edge of our coverage area, and I haven't had the opportunity to meet with you yet. I would be interested in finding more about this illegal AP in our mutual area. I run all of my pops at 40db or less, so I know it is not one of mine. I have had suspicions about some of our competitors, but I am not aware of any of them being active on the lists. Maybe we should get together for lunch sometime. Call me anytime. -- Dylan Oliver Primaverity, LLC -- 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] TV white spaces
Sorry, The signal was in the -70's not right at -70. It was mid to upper -70's from what I figured up they were putting out around 43dBm EIRP. I could also see the SSID of the AP so I know what town it was located in and it was/is a sectorized POP that would be around 30dBm radio input to a 14-15dBi antenna or a 26dBm radio input to a 17-18dBi antenna. Thanks, Chadd That's 4 watts. At 39 dB you'd be at 8 watts. At 40 it would be around 10 watts. Are you SURE that the remote tower you're seeing at -70 is really 20 miles out? To pick that up with a -70 rssi from a 9 dB antenna would require an amazing amount of power. It was very common for a long time to see Hyperlink and a couple of other amp manufacturers sell 1 watt amps (30 dB) and 15 dB omni antennas. Even with that config I show an rssi of -76. I guess they could be running a 2 watt amp and a 18 dB panel of some kind. But I'd find that very unusual. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces
Well, either way, if it's an ap that talks to more than one client, it's max eirp is 4 watts. 36dB laters, marlon - Original Message - From: Chadd Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 10:00 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces Sorry, The signal was in the -70's not right at -70. It was mid to upper -70's from what I figured up they were putting out around 43dBm EIRP. I could also see the SSID of the AP so I know what town it was located in and it was/is a sectorized POP that would be around 30dBm radio input to a 14-15dBi antenna or a 26dBm radio input to a 17-18dBi antenna. Thanks, Chadd That's 4 watts. At 39 dB you'd be at 8 watts. At 40 it would be around 10 watts. Are you SURE that the remote tower you're seeing at -70 is really 20 miles out? To pick that up with a -70 rssi from a 9 dB antenna would require an amazing amount of power. It was very common for a long time to see Hyperlink and a couple of other amp manufacturers sell 1 watt amps (30 dB) and 15 dB omni antennas. Even with that config I show an rssi of -76. I guess they could be running a 2 watt amp and a 18 dB panel of some kind. But I'd find that very unusual. -- 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] TV white spaces
I hope it does go UL, but I have also heard some recent rumblings that the FCC is concerned with what seems like a widespread deterioration of WISPs following the rules. The phrase I recall is something along the lines of Damn it, these things are not guidelines. From my view it is true. I see it in conversations that go beyond the usual, if you just stay within the power no one cares to now where people seem to via the STA process as a round-about tool to get access to and use spectrum that does not commercially exist. Letting loose the same level of abuse in the TV bands is something that will cause real problems for the FCC should broadcasters be affected. The WISP industry must do a better job of policing itself and discouraging the slippery slope. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 11:22 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces Steve, I appreciate your insight into the possibility that license-exempt white space use might actually materialize. I very much hope that it does. jack Steve Stroh wrote: Jack: Consider... To the television broadcasters, WISPs using this spectrum in a we'll stay out of the way of any television broadcasting activity manner is the lesser of several other evils; television broadcasting has been steadily losing ground now; first 800 MHz was carved out of Channels 70-83, and now the 700 MHz bands are being carved out of Channels 52-69. The trend is clear, and while it's one thing for powerful terrestrial broadcasting to share spectrum with low-power license-exempt usage, it's quite another for communications use to do the same. If the broadcasters play things right (and it appears they are bending towards white space license-exempt usage, but very much on THEIR terms...) the license-exempt usage of television white space may serve to pollute the remaining television broadcast spectrum sufficiently to prevent future reallocation (for at least another decade or so). Intel, Microsoft, Cisco are some of the names being bandied about as advocates for license-exempt use of white space television broadcast spectrum. Thanks, Steve On Jan 24, 2007, at Jan 24 09:21 AM, Jack Unger wrote: Likelihood of unlicensed??? My guess is that the established communications carriers and the broadcasters will fight the concept of license-free use of this space. I expect it will come down to who lobbies Congress most effectively. -- Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993 Author of the WISP Handbook - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting Newsletters Downloadable from http://ask-wi.com/newsletters.html Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220 www.ask-wi.com --- Steve Stroh 425-939-0076 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Writing about BWIA again! - www.bwianews.com -- Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993 Author of the WISP Handbook - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting Newsletters Downloadable from http://ask-wi.com/newsletters.html Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220 www.ask-wi.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses(190). This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses(43). This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces
All, Remember, it only takes a few bad apples to make the whole industry look bad. Think about that the next time anyone wants to complain about the rules. Regards, Dawn DiPietro Patrick Leary wrote: I hope it does go UL, but I have also heard some recent rumblings that the FCC is concerned with what seems like a widespread deterioration of WISPs following the rules. The phrase I recall is something along the lines of Damn it, these things are not guidelines. From my view it is true. I see it in conversations that go beyond the usual, if you just stay within the power no one cares to now where people seem to via the STA process as a round-about tool to get access to and use spectrum that does not commercially exist. Letting loose the same level of abuse in the TV bands is something that will cause real problems for the FCC should broadcasters be affected. The WISP industry must do a better job of policing itself and discouraging the slippery slope. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 11:22 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces Steve, I appreciate your insight into the possibility that license-exempt white space use might actually materialize. I very much hope that it does. jack Steve Stroh wrote: Jack: Consider... To the television broadcasters, WISPs using this spectrum in a we'll stay out of the way of any television broadcasting activity manner is the lesser of several other evils; television broadcasting has been steadily losing ground now; first 800 MHz was carved out of Channels 70-83, and now the 700 MHz bands are being carved out of Channels 52-69. The trend is clear, and while it's one thing for powerful terrestrial broadcasting to share spectrum with low-power license-exempt usage, it's quite another for communications use to do the same. If the broadcasters play things right (and it appears they are bending towards white space license-exempt usage, but very much on THEIR terms...) the license-exempt usage of television white space may serve to pollute the remaining television broadcast spectrum sufficiently to prevent future reallocation (for at least another decade or so). Intel, Microsoft, Cisco are some of the names being bandied about as advocates for license-exempt use of white space television broadcast spectrum. Thanks, Steve On Jan 24, 2007, at Jan 24 09:21 AM, Jack Unger wrote: Likelihood of unlicensed??? My guess is that the established communications carriers and the broadcasters will fight the concept of license-free use of this space. I expect it will come down to who lobbies Congress most effectively. -- Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993 Author of the WISP Handbook - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting Newsletters Downloadable from http://ask-wi.com/newsletters.html Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220 www.ask-wi.com --- Steve Stroh 425-939-0076 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Writing about BWIA again! - www.bwianews.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces
can you elaborate on HAD offers ... please? Thanks. Mario Steve Stroh wrote: You've HAD offers that have been refused... Thanks, Steve On Jan 24, 2007, at Jan 24 07:10 PM, Marlon K. Schafer wrote: WISPA has been working on this for a couple of years now. Independently and with Cisco, New America, Media Access Project and I've recently had talks with the 802.22 (ieee white spaces standards group) folks. As always, we need more bodies to go a better job. laters, marlon --- Steve Stroh 425-939-0076 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Writing about BWIA again! - www.bwianews.com --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] TV white spaces
Yeah, for sure. However, the FCC must take some credit for that problem Patrick. How many times have you been told that operator a has turned in operator b for an illegal network and never heard a peep out of the FCC? laters, Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Patrick Leary [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 8:49 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces I hope it does go UL, but I have also heard some recent rumblings that the FCC is concerned with what seems like a widespread deterioration of WISPs following the rules. The phrase I recall is something along the lines of Damn it, these things are not guidelines. From my view it is true. I see it in conversations that go beyond the usual, if you just stay within the power no one cares to now where people seem to via the STA process as a round-about tool to get access to and use spectrum that does not commercially exist. Letting loose the same level of abuse in the TV bands is something that will cause real problems for the FCC should broadcasters be affected. The WISP industry must do a better job of policing itself and discouraging the slippery slope. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 11:22 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces Steve, I appreciate your insight into the possibility that license-exempt white space use might actually materialize. I very much hope that it does. jack Steve Stroh wrote: Jack: Consider... To the television broadcasters, WISPs using this spectrum in a we'll stay out of the way of any television broadcasting activity manner is the lesser of several other evils; television broadcasting has been steadily losing ground now; first 800 MHz was carved out of Channels 70-83, and now the 700 MHz bands are being carved out of Channels 52-69. The trend is clear, and while it's one thing for powerful terrestrial broadcasting to share spectrum with low-power license-exempt usage, it's quite another for communications use to do the same. If the broadcasters play things right (and it appears they are bending towards white space license-exempt usage, but very much on THEIR terms...) the license-exempt usage of television white space may serve to pollute the remaining television broadcast spectrum sufficiently to prevent future reallocation (for at least another decade or so). Intel, Microsoft, Cisco are some of the names being bandied about as advocates for license-exempt use of white space television broadcast spectrum. Thanks, Steve On Jan 24, 2007, at Jan 24 09:21 AM, Jack Unger wrote: Likelihood of unlicensed??? My guess is that the established communications carriers and the broadcasters will fight the concept of license-free use of this space. I expect it will come down to who lobbies Congress most effectively. -- Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993 Author of the WISP Handbook - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting Newsletters Downloadable from http://ask-wi.com/newsletters.html Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220 www.ask-wi.com --- Steve Stroh 425-939-0076 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Writing about BWIA again! - www.bwianews.com -- Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993 Author of the WISP Handbook - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting Newsletters Downloadable from http://ask-wi.com/newsletters.html Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220 www.ask-wi.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses(190). This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses(43
Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces
Feel free to complain all you like. It is advocating breaking the rules which will lead to problems. I do not like some rules either but you have to follow the rules or face losing your right to be in business. Scriv Dawn DiPietro wrote: All, Remember, it only takes a few bad apples to make the whole industry look bad. Think about that the next time anyone wants to complain about the rules. Regards, Dawn DiPietro Patrick Leary wrote: I hope it does go UL, but I have also heard some recent rumblings that the FCC is concerned with what seems like a widespread deterioration of WISPs following the rules. The phrase I recall is something along the lines of Damn it, these things are not guidelines. From my view it is true. I see it in conversations that go beyond the usual, if you just stay within the power no one cares to now where people seem to via the STA process as a round-about tool to get access to and use spectrum that does not commercially exist. Letting loose the same level of abuse in the TV bands is something that will cause real problems for the FCC should broadcasters be affected. The WISP industry must do a better job of policing itself and discouraging the slippery slope. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 11:22 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces Steve, I appreciate your insight into the possibility that license-exempt white space use might actually materialize. I very much hope that it does. jack Steve Stroh wrote: Jack: Consider... To the television broadcasters, WISPs using this spectrum in a we'll stay out of the way of any television broadcasting activity manner is the lesser of several other evils; television broadcasting has been steadily losing ground now; first 800 MHz was carved out of Channels 70-83, and now the 700 MHz bands are being carved out of Channels 52-69. The trend is clear, and while it's one thing for powerful terrestrial broadcasting to share spectrum with low-power license-exempt usage, it's quite another for communications use to do the same. If the broadcasters play things right (and it appears they are bending towards white space license-exempt usage, but very much on THEIR terms...) the license-exempt usage of television white space may serve to pollute the remaining television broadcast spectrum sufficiently to prevent future reallocation (for at least another decade or so). Intel, Microsoft, Cisco are some of the names being bandied about as advocates for license-exempt use of white space television broadcast spectrum. Thanks, Steve On Jan 24, 2007, at Jan 24 09:21 AM, Jack Unger wrote: Likelihood of unlicensed??? My guess is that the established communications carriers and the broadcasters will fight the concept of license-free use of this space. I expect it will come down to who lobbies Congress most effectively. -- Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993 Author of the WISP Handbook - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting Newsletters Downloadable from http://ask-wi.com/newsletters.html Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220 www.ask-wi.com --- Steve Stroh 425-939-0076 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Writing about BWIA again! - www.bwianews.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces
I understand and agree, but that's all the more reason why WISPs need to police themselves because the public impression and liabilities are there just as well. Sometimes I wonder if the FCC is not content to let WISPs sort of stay partially self-destructing. It gives them and the major operators an ace in the hole against WISPs if and when they need it. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 10:14 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces Yeah, for sure. However, the FCC must take some credit for that problem Patrick. How many times have you been told that operator a has turned in operator b for an illegal network and never heard a peep out of the FCC? laters, Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Patrick Leary [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 8:49 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces I hope it does go UL, but I have also heard some recent rumblings that the FCC is concerned with what seems like a widespread deterioration of WISPs following the rules. The phrase I recall is something along the lines of Damn it, these things are not guidelines. From my view it is true. I see it in conversations that go beyond the usual, if you just stay within the power no one cares to now where people seem to via the STA process as a round-about tool to get access to and use spectrum that does not commercially exist. Letting loose the same level of abuse in the TV bands is something that will cause real problems for the FCC should broadcasters be affected. The WISP industry must do a better job of policing itself and discouraging the slippery slope. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 11:22 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces Steve, I appreciate your insight into the possibility that license-exempt white space use might actually materialize. I very much hope that it does. jack Steve Stroh wrote: Jack: Consider... To the television broadcasters, WISPs using this spectrum in a we'll stay out of the way of any television broadcasting activity manner is the lesser of several other evils; television broadcasting has been steadily losing ground now; first 800 MHz was carved out of Channels 70-83, and now the 700 MHz bands are being carved out of Channels 52-69. The trend is clear, and while it's one thing for powerful terrestrial broadcasting to share spectrum with low-power license-exempt usage, it's quite another for communications use to do the same. If the broadcasters play things right (and it appears they are bending towards white space license-exempt usage, but very much on THEIR terms...) the license-exempt usage of television white space may serve to pollute the remaining television broadcast spectrum sufficiently to prevent future reallocation (for at least another decade or so). Intel, Microsoft, Cisco are some of the names being bandied about as advocates for license-exempt use of white space television broadcast spectrum. Thanks, Steve On Jan 24, 2007, at Jan 24 09:21 AM, Jack Unger wrote: Likelihood of unlicensed??? My guess is that the established communications carriers and the broadcasters will fight the concept of license-free use of this space. I expect it will come down to who lobbies Congress most effectively. -- Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993 Author of the WISP Handbook - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting Newsletters Downloadable from http://ask-wi.com/newsletters.html Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220 www.ask-wi.com --- Steve Stroh 425-939-0076 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Writing about BWIA again! - www.bwianews.com -- Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993 Author of the WISP Handbook - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting Newsletters Downloadable from http://ask-wi.com/newsletters.html Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220 www.ask-wi.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless
Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces
Patrick, what is Alvarion doing as a corporation to police the majority of BWIA vendors who now pollute our industry with uncertified gear? These are your peers. Do you like being stereotyped with them? Your stereotyping of WISP operators as being predominantly illegal and the source of the problem is not accurate or fair and I want it to stop. The majority of the WISPs out there are trying to do right. It is the vendors who are the real problem. The majority of vendors ignore the law. The last gear purchase I made was for an Alvarion B100 backhaul link which is due in here today. It is certified but now I wonder if buying from a vendor who stereotypes the industry is a good idea. Maybe I made a mistake buying from your company? By the way, the slam about 4.9 GHz is completely erroneous and you need to apologize. The vast majority of WISPs stay the hell away from 4.9 and other bands which we are not allowed in. You need to watch your tack on this public list. Being a paid vendor member does not give you the right to sling mud or FUD. Scriv Patrick Leary wrote: I understand and agree, but that's all the more reason why WISPs need to police themselves because the public impression and liabilities are there just as well. Sometimes I wonder if the FCC is not content to let WISPs sort of stay partially self-destructing. It gives them and the major operators an ace in the hole against WISPs if and when they need it. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 10:14 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces Yeah, for sure. However, the FCC must take some credit for that problem Patrick. How many times have you been told that operator a has turned in operator b for an illegal network and never heard a peep out of the FCC? laters, Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Patrick Leary [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 8:49 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces I hope it does go UL, but I have also heard some recent rumblings that the FCC is concerned with what seems like a widespread deterioration of WISPs following the rules. The phrase I recall is something along the lines of Damn it, these things are not guidelines. From my view it is true. I see it in conversations that go beyond the usual, if you just stay within the power no one cares to now where people seem to via the STA process as a round-about tool to get access to and use spectrum that does not commercially exist. Letting loose the same level of abuse in the TV bands is something that will cause real problems for the FCC should broadcasters be affected. The WISP industry must do a better job of policing itself and discouraging the slippery slope. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 11:22 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces Steve, I appreciate your insight into the possibility that license-exempt white space use might actually materialize. I very much hope that it does. jack Steve Stroh wrote: Jack: Consider... To the television broadcasters, WISPs using this spectrum in a we'll stay out of the way of any television broadcasting activity manner is the lesser of several other evils; television broadcasting has been steadily losing ground now; first 800 MHz was carved out of Channels 70-83, and now the 700 MHz bands are being carved out of Channels 52-69. The trend is clear, and while it's one thing for powerful terrestrial broadcasting to share spectrum with low-power license-exempt usage, it's quite another for communications use to do the same. If the broadcasters play things right (and it appears they are bending towards white space license-exempt usage, but very much on THEIR terms...) the license-exempt usage of television white space may serve to pollute the remaining television broadcast spectrum sufficiently to prevent future reallocation (for at least another decade or so). Intel, Microsoft, Cisco are some of the names being bandied about as advocates for license-exempt use of white space television broadcast spectrum. Thanks, Steve On Jan 24, 2007, at Jan 24 09:21 AM, Jack Unger wrote: Likelihood
Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces
Scriv, The squeaky wheel gets the attention. Not the kind of attention this industry needs. Some seem so adamant about these rules you have to wonder if they are following them or not. Even if this is not the case, why add doubt? Regards, Dawn DiPietro John Scrivner wrote: Feel free to complain all you like. It is advocating breaking the rules which will lead to problems. I do not like some rules either but you have to follow the rules or face losing your right to be in business. Scriv Dawn DiPietro wrote: All, Remember, it only takes a few bad apples to make the whole industry look bad. Think about that the next time anyone wants to complain about the rules. Regards, Dawn DiPietro Patrick Leary wrote: I hope it does go UL, but I have also heard some recent rumblings that the FCC is concerned with what seems like a widespread deterioration of WISPs following the rules. The phrase I recall is something along the lines of Damn it, these things are not guidelines. From my view it is true. I see it in conversations that go beyond the usual, if you just stay within the power no one cares to now where people seem to via the STA process as a round-about tool to get access to and use spectrum that does not commercially exist. Letting loose the same level of abuse in the TV bands is something that will cause real problems for the FCC should broadcasters be affected. The WISP industry must do a better job of policing itself and discouraging the slippery slope. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jack Unger Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 11:22 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces Steve, I appreciate your insight into the possibility that license-exempt white space use might actually materialize. I very much hope that it does. jack Steve Stroh wrote: Jack: Consider... To the television broadcasters, WISPs using this spectrum in a we'll stay out of the way of any television broadcasting activity manner is the lesser of several other evils; television broadcasting has been steadily losing ground now; first 800 MHz was carved out of Channels 70-83, and now the 700 MHz bands are being carved out of Channels 52-69. The trend is clear, and while it's one thing for powerful terrestrial broadcasting to share spectrum with low-power license-exempt usage, it's quite another for communications use to do the same. If the broadcasters play things right (and it appears they are bending towards white space license-exempt usage, but very much on THEIR terms...) the license-exempt usage of television white space may serve to pollute the remaining television broadcast spectrum sufficiently to prevent future reallocation (for at least another decade or so). Intel, Microsoft, Cisco are some of the names being bandied about as advocates for license-exempt use of white space television broadcast spectrum. Thanks, Steve On Jan 24, 2007, at Jan 24 09:21 AM, Jack Unger wrote: Likelihood of unlicensed??? My guess is that the established communications carriers and the broadcasters will fight the concept of license-free use of this space. I expect it will come down to who lobbies Congress most effectively. -- Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993 Author of the WISP Handbook - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting Newsletters Downloadable from http://ask-wi.com/newsletters.html Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220 www.ask-wi.com --- Steve Stroh 425-939-0076 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Writing about BWIA again! - www.bwianews.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces
John, I have railed against illegal vendors for years -- before you put up your first link. I (in official corporate capacity) have met with officials on the topic. I (in official corporate capacity) have met with lawyers on the topic. I have publicly spoken out at events on the topic. Who is stereotyping? I have said many and that's the truth and it's not even a debate. What's trying to do right? One either follows the rules or does not. No FUD being slung here. On the 4.9 issue I filed that question and deal with that assumption quite a bit. I suspect your definition of WISP is more narrow than mine. Mine includes ANY entity providing services with wireless broadband gear. There are utility-based WISPs, telco WISPs, large funded WISPs, Mom and Pop WISPs, rural WISPs, etc. The fact is that the public is not able and does not differentiate between all the competing groups of WISPs and groups like WISPA should understand that. You want it to stop, John? Well, you have the power to censure your list from those you disagree with. You will have to mute dissent then, as I will not subdue my opinion on the topic because you wield power. Has does one best use their power John? To silence rational opinion one disagrees with? Must we all be sensitive or averse to differing from your opinion? Should I watch my back and wait to be called into the corner office for expressing my qualified opinion because you want it to stop? Patrick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Scrivner Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 12:47 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces Patrick, what is Alvarion doing as a corporation to police the majority of BWIA vendors who now pollute our industry with uncertified gear? These are your peers. Do you like being stereotyped with them? Your stereotyping of WISP operators as being predominantly illegal and the source of the problem is not accurate or fair and I want it to stop. The majority of the WISPs out there are trying to do right. It is the vendors who are the real problem. The majority of vendors ignore the law. The last gear purchase I made was for an Alvarion B100 backhaul link which is due in here today. It is certified but now I wonder if buying from a vendor who stereotypes the industry is a good idea. Maybe I made a mistake buying from your company? By the way, the slam about 4.9 GHz is completely erroneous and you need to apologize. The vast majority of WISPs stay the hell away from 4.9 and other bands which we are not allowed in. You need to watch your tack on this public list. Being a paid vendor member does not give you the right to sling mud or FUD. Scriv Patrick Leary wrote: I understand and agree, but that's all the more reason why WISPs need to police themselves because the public impression and liabilities are there just as well. a Sometimes I wonder if the FCC is not content to let WISPs sort of stay partially self-destructing. It gives them and the major operators an ace in the hole against WISPs if and when they need it. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 10:14 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces Yeah, for sure. However, the FCC must take some credit for that problem Patrick. How many times have you been told that operator a has turned in operator b for an illegal network and never heard a peep out of the FCC? laters, Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Patrick Leary [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 8:49 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces I hope it does go UL, but I have also heard some recent rumblings that the FCC is concerned with what seems like a widespread deterioration of WISPs following the rules. The phrase I recall is something along the lines of Damn it, these things are not guidelines. From my view it is true. I see it in conversations that go beyond the usual, if you just stay within the power no one cares to now where people seem to via the STA process as a round-about tool to get access to and use spectrum that does not commercially exist. Letting loose the same level of abuse in the TV bands is something that will cause real problems for the FCC should broadcasters be affected. The WISP industry must do a better job of policing itself and discouraging the slippery slope. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628
RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces
Patrick, Does your boss know you are taking on the industry you are trying to sell to? I agree with John, know when to back off and realize what a vendor is supposed to know buyer is right. Not to speak for John but you taking on John again should really make him want to return equipment and it certainly has affected my desire to by Alvarion. You came after me once and it certainly soured my desire to deal with your company as I admitted to Marlon. I have learned the hard way that I can't force my opinion on people and hell I'm an owner not a supplier. I've probably already said too much but I can just feel the same thought I had before when I was in your crosshairs and that was 'this is no way for a vendor to act'. Forbes John, I have railed against illegal vendors for years -- before you put up your first link. I (in official corporate capacity) have met with officials on the topic. I (in official corporate capacity) have met with lawyers on the topic. I have publicly spoken out at events on the topic. Who is stereotyping? I have said many and that's the truth and it's not even a debate. What's trying to do right? One either follows the rules or does not. No FUD being slung here. On the 4.9 issue I filed that question and deal with that assumption quite a bit. I suspect your definition of WISP is more narrow than mine. Mine includes ANY entity providing services with wireless broadband gear. There are utility-based WISPs, telco WISPs, large funded WISPs, Mom and Pop WISPs, rural WISPs, etc. The fact is that the public is not able and does not differentiate between all the competing groups of WISPs and groups like WISPA should understand that. You want it to stop, John? Well, you have the power to censure your list from those you disagree with. You will have to mute dissent then, as I will not subdue my opinion on the topic because you wield power. Has does one best use their power John? To silence rational opinion one disagrees with? Must we all be sensitive or averse to differing from your opinion? Should I watch my back and wait to be called into the corner office for expressing my qualified opinion because you want it to stop? Patrick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Scrivner Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 12:47 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces Patrick, what is Alvarion doing as a corporation to police the majority of BWIA vendors who now pollute our industry with uncertified gear? These are your peers. Do you like being stereotyped with them? Your stereotyping of WISP operators as being predominantly illegal and the source of the problem is not accurate or fair and I want it to stop. The majority of the WISPs out there are trying to do right. It is the vendors who are the real problem. The majority of vendors ignore the law. The last gear purchase I made was for an Alvarion B100 backhaul link which is due in here today. It is certified but now I wonder if buying from a vendor who stereotypes the industry is a good idea. Maybe I made a mistake buying from your company? By the way, the slam about 4.9 GHz is completely erroneous and you need to apologize. The vast majority of WISPs stay the hell away from 4.9 and other bands which we are not allowed in. You need to watch your tack on this public list. Being a paid vendor member does not give you the right to sling mud or FUD. Scriv Patrick Leary wrote: I understand and agree, but that's all the more reason why WISPs need to police themselves because the public impression and liabilities are there just as well. a Sometimes I wonder if the FCC is not content to let WISPs sort of stay partially self-destructing. It gives them and the major operators an ace in the hole against WISPs if and when they need it. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 10:14 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces Yeah, for sure. However, the FCC must take some credit for that problem Patrick. How many times have you been told that operator a has turned in operator b for an illegal network and never heard a peep out of the FCC? laters, Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Patrick Leary [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 8:49 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] TV
RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces
Somebody turn the flip'n moderation back on! Patrick, let's be clear; you're motivation is driven only by pushing more Alvarion boxes off the shelf. Don't try to play the white knight here under the guise of looking out for everyone. You're a company man simply after what puts food on your table. Frankly there is nothing wrong with that, but for everyone's stomach please just state it for what it really is. John, I'm not sure where you are headed with your comments. I'm sure the B100 is a fine PtP radio set and will meet your requirements. I agree with Jack Unger's post.threatening to boycott product because of a sales rep's comments? Best, Brad -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Forbes Mercy Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 3:35 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces Patrick, Does your boss know you are taking on the industry you are trying to sell to? I agree with John, know when to back off and realize what a vendor is supposed to know buyer is right. Not to speak for John but you taking on John again should really make him want to return equipment and it certainly has affected my desire to by Alvarion. You came after me once and it certainly soured my desire to deal with your company as I admitted to Marlon. I have learned the hard way that I can't force my opinion on people and hell I'm an owner not a supplier. I've probably already said too much but I can just feel the same thought I had before when I was in your crosshairs and that was 'this is no way for a vendor to act'. Forbes John, I have railed against illegal vendors for years -- before you put up your first link. I (in official corporate capacity) have met with officials on the topic. I (in official corporate capacity) have met with lawyers on the topic. I have publicly spoken out at events on the topic. Who is stereotyping? I have said many and that's the truth and it's not even a debate. What's trying to do right? One either follows the rules or does not. No FUD being slung here. On the 4.9 issue I filed that question and deal with that assumption quite a bit. I suspect your definition of WISP is more narrow than mine. Mine includes ANY entity providing services with wireless broadband gear. There are utility-based WISPs, telco WISPs, large funded WISPs, Mom and Pop WISPs, rural WISPs, etc. The fact is that the public is not able and does not differentiate between all the competing groups of WISPs and groups like WISPA should understand that. You want it to stop, John? Well, you have the power to censure your list from those you disagree with. You will have to mute dissent then, as I will not subdue my opinion on the topic because you wield power. Has does one best use their power John? To silence rational opinion one disagrees with? Must we all be sensitive or averse to differing from your opinion? Should I watch my back and wait to be called into the corner office for expressing my qualified opinion because you want it to stop? Patrick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Scrivner Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 12:47 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces Patrick, what is Alvarion doing as a corporation to police the majority of BWIA vendors who now pollute our industry with uncertified gear? These are your peers. Do you like being stereotyped with them? Your stereotyping of WISP operators as being predominantly illegal and the source of the problem is not accurate or fair and I want it to stop. The majority of the WISPs out there are trying to do right. It is the vendors who are the real problem. The majority of vendors ignore the law. The last gear purchase I made was for an Alvarion B100 backhaul link which is due in here today. It is certified but now I wonder if buying from a vendor who stereotypes the industry is a good idea. Maybe I made a mistake buying from your company? By the way, the slam about 4.9 GHz is completely erroneous and you need to apologize. The vast majority of WISPs stay the hell away from 4.9 and other bands which we are not allowed in. You need to watch your tack on this public list. Being a paid vendor member does not give you the right to sling mud or FUD. Scriv Patrick Leary wrote: I understand and agree, but that's all the more reason why WISPs need to police themselves because the public impression and liabilities are there just as well. a Sometimes I wonder if the FCC is not content to let WISPs sort of stay partially self-destructing. It gives them and the major operators an ace in the hole against WISPs if and when they need it. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED
Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces
I got my blood pressure up. I am sorry. Say whatever you like. One condition please. Make sure you have some basis in fact for saying many or most WISPs do anything illegal or we will have this battle another day. Scriv Patrick Leary wrote: John, I have railed against illegal vendors for years -- before you put up your first link. I (in official corporate capacity) have met with officials on the topic. I (in official corporate capacity) have met with lawyers on the topic. I have publicly spoken out at events on the topic. Who is stereotyping? I have said many and that's the truth and it's not even a debate. What's trying to do right? One either follows the rules or does not. No FUD being slung here. On the 4.9 issue I filed that question and deal with that assumption quite a bit. I suspect your definition of WISP is more narrow than mine. Mine includes ANY entity providing services with wireless broadband gear. There are utility-based WISPs, telco WISPs, large funded WISPs, Mom and Pop WISPs, rural WISPs, etc. The fact is that the public is not able and does not differentiate between all the competing groups of WISPs and groups like WISPA should understand that. You want it to stop, John? Well, you have the power to censure your list from those you disagree with. You will have to mute dissent then, as I will not subdue my opinion on the topic because you wield power. Has does one best use their power John? To silence rational opinion one disagrees with? Must we all be sensitive or averse to differing from your opinion? Should I watch my back and wait to be called into the corner office for expressing my qualified opinion because you want it to stop? Patrick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Scrivner Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 12:47 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces Patrick, what is Alvarion doing as a corporation to police the majority of BWIA vendors who now pollute our industry with uncertified gear? These are your peers. Do you like being stereotyped with them? Your stereotyping of WISP operators as being predominantly illegal and the source of the problem is not accurate or fair and I want it to stop. The majority of the WISPs out there are trying to do right. It is the vendors who are the real problem. The majority of vendors ignore the law. The last gear purchase I made was for an Alvarion B100 backhaul link which is due in here today. It is certified but now I wonder if buying from a vendor who stereotypes the industry is a good idea. Maybe I made a mistake buying from your company? By the way, the slam about 4.9 GHz is completely erroneous and you need to apologize. The vast majority of WISPs stay the hell away from 4.9 and other bands which we are not allowed in. You need to watch your tack on this public list. Being a paid vendor member does not give you the right to sling mud or FUD. Scriv Patrick Leary wrote: I understand and agree, but that's all the more reason why WISPs need to police themselves because the public impression and liabilities are there just as well. a Sometimes I wonder if the FCC is not content to let WISPs sort of stay partially self-destructing. It gives them and the major operators an ace in the hole against WISPs if and when they need it. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 10:14 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces Yeah, for sure. However, the FCC must take some credit for that problem Patrick. How many times have you been told that operator a has turned in operator b for an illegal network and never heard a peep out of the FCC? laters, Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Patrick Leary [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 8:49 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces I hope it does go UL, but I have also heard some recent rumblings that the FCC is concerned with what seems like a widespread deterioration of WISPs following the rules. The phrase I recall is something along the lines of Damn it, these things are not guidelines. From my view it is true. I see it in conversations that go beyond the usual, if you just stay within the power no one cares to now where people seem to via the STA process as a round-about tool to get access to and use spectrum that does not commercially exist
Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces
Scriv and contributers to thread, I think you are off base on your replies to Patrick. Patrick made fair points. He made a generalized comment based, and did not make specific accusation to specific individual. I am personaly aware of many WISPs and vendors that bend the rules both intentially and unintentionally. If there is on individual that can point fingers without risk of creating a double standard, its Patrick. Alvarion is one of the few Manufacturers that clearly follow the rules. One of the reasons I like Alvarion product, is that I know that if I use it, I don't have to think about the rules anymore, as they got it taken care of for me. As WISPs we have been fighting for more leanient rules, but as the rules become more leanient, they become more confusing to understand and confirm compliance. How many cards are spec'd at +/- 3db? How many WISPs plug in a Spectrum analyzer after installing a base station to confirm proper operation of an AP sector? The FCC has trusted us to police ourselves to stay legal. Sometimes WISPs do the things they need to do, because they need to do it, but that does not make it legal. Two of the biggest examples are StarOS and Mikrotik, and OEM gear. This gear is great flexible gear, that WISPs have lobbied hard for, and can't ignore. But when is someone going to take the initiative to Legally certify combinations of the gear? I can barely keep all the power stuff straight, and I'm a 6 year veteran. How is the average newbie going to keep it straight? With added flexibilty, it created the need for added caution and attention. In general WISPA has promoted compliance and legality, but that does not mean everyone follows the direction, not that the industry won't slide off path, if we forget to keep on top of compliance. I have to agree in full with Patrick. Maybe compliance may not happen as fast as technology and innovation, but at minimum we must be working in the direction of compliance. As mentioned by one of you, its not only WISPs, its also Vendors. But protections were already in place to enforce vendor compliance. Self-enforcing WISP compliance, is what responsibility we were given. I like to look at an analagee the FCC uses. For every complaint the FCC gets, they predict their are like 5000 others with the same problem that didn't. Or for every vote they get, they assume 5000 agree that didn;t vote. Something to that nature. So maybe the same is inferred with compliance? For every person that was caught, how many went uncaught? I'm in no way promoting a higher level of inforcement/policing from the FCC, but Its mandatory that we alway challenge ourselves and peers to be compliant the best we can. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 3:47 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces Patrick, what is Alvarion doing as a corporation to police the majority of BWIA vendors who now pollute our industry with uncertified gear? These are your peers. Do you like being stereotyped with them? Your stereotyping of WISP operators as being predominantly illegal and the source of the problem is not accurate or fair and I want it to stop. The majority of the WISPs out there are trying to do right. It is the vendors who are the real problem. The majority of vendors ignore the law. The last gear purchase I made was for an Alvarion B100 backhaul link which is due in here today. It is certified but now I wonder if buying from a vendor who stereotypes the industry is a good idea. Maybe I made a mistake buying from your company? By the way, the slam about 4.9 GHz is completely erroneous and you need to apologize. The vast majority of WISPs stay the hell away from 4.9 and other bands which we are not allowed in. You need to watch your tack on this public list. Being a paid vendor member does not give you the right to sling mud or FUD. Scriv Patrick Leary wrote: I understand and agree, but that's all the more reason why WISPs need to police themselves because the public impression and liabilities are there just as well. Sometimes I wonder if the FCC is not content to let WISPs sort of stay partially self-destructing. It gives them and the major operators an ace in the hole against WISPs if and when they need it. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 10:14 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces Yeah, for sure. However, the FCC must take some credit for that problem Patrick. How many times have you been told that operator a has turned in operator b for an illegal network
Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces
I agree that MOST wisps are likely compliant. Unfortuneately, it won't stay that way, if we let the industry slowly deteriorate and slide. I think compliance is a message that continually needs to be revisited, sorta like speed bumps. Its easy to not realize you are speeding, yet we all know where the speedometer is located. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 5:21 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces I got my blood pressure up. I am sorry. Say whatever you like. One condition please. Make sure you have some basis in fact for saying many or most WISPs do anything illegal or we will have this battle another day. Scriv Patrick Leary wrote: John, I have railed against illegal vendors for years -- before you put up your first link. I (in official corporate capacity) have met with officials on the topic. I (in official corporate capacity) have met with lawyers on the topic. I have publicly spoken out at events on the topic. Who is stereotyping? I have said many and that's the truth and it's not even a debate. What's trying to do right? One either follows the rules or does not. No FUD being slung here. On the 4.9 issue I filed that question and deal with that assumption quite a bit. I suspect your definition of WISP is more narrow than mine. Mine includes ANY entity providing services with wireless broadband gear. There are utility-based WISPs, telco WISPs, large funded WISPs, Mom and Pop WISPs, rural WISPs, etc. The fact is that the public is not able and does not differentiate between all the competing groups of WISPs and groups like WISPA should understand that. You want it to stop, John? Well, you have the power to censure your list from those you disagree with. You will have to mute dissent then, as I will not subdue my opinion on the topic because you wield power. Has does one best use their power John? To silence rational opinion one disagrees with? Must we all be sensitive or averse to differing from your opinion? Should I watch my back and wait to be called into the corner office for expressing my qualified opinion because you want it to stop? Patrick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Scrivner Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 12:47 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces Patrick, what is Alvarion doing as a corporation to police the majority of BWIA vendors who now pollute our industry with uncertified gear? These are your peers. Do you like being stereotyped with them? Your stereotyping of WISP operators as being predominantly illegal and the source of the problem is not accurate or fair and I want it to stop. The majority of the WISPs out there are trying to do right. It is the vendors who are the real problem. The majority of vendors ignore the law. The last gear purchase I made was for an Alvarion B100 backhaul link which is due in here today. It is certified but now I wonder if buying from a vendor who stereotypes the industry is a good idea. Maybe I made a mistake buying from your company? By the way, the slam about 4.9 GHz is completely erroneous and you need to apologize. The vast majority of WISPs stay the hell away from 4.9 and other bands which we are not allowed in. You need to watch your tack on this public list. Being a paid vendor member does not give you the right to sling mud or FUD. Scriv Patrick Leary wrote: I understand and agree, but that's all the more reason why WISPs need to police themselves because the public impression and liabilities are there just as well. a Sometimes I wonder if the FCC is not content to let WISPs sort of stay partially self-destructing. It gives them and the major operators an ace in the hole against WISPs if and when they need it. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 10:14 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces Yeah, for sure. However, the FCC must take some credit for that problem Patrick. How many times have you been told that operator a has turned in operator b for an illegal network and never heard a peep out of the FCC? laters, Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam - Original Message - From: Patrick Leary [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 8:49
RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces
In our area So IL/metro St.Louis there are some large guys who are in no way shape or form legal, over power limits and the whole 9 yards. I can see other WISP Omni POP's with signal levels in the -70's from over 20 miles away using a 9dBi on my end, figure up what the EIRP on that is. The one in this case is a well know respected WISP that visits the popular lists, I always hope that he doesn't know that is going on and one of his guys is responsible but I have never taken the time to call them up and talk to them about it either. I don't know of any WISP's in this area about 10 that I know of including myself who are 100% legal when it comes to using only certified equipment. Most I think stay within power limits and equivalent antennas The other issue I see in our area is all the new start up WISP's who know nothing about the industry, the rules, networking, and don't know squat about RF. These guys are going to be our Achilles heal IMHO. There are too many vendors selling stuff and they are not concerned in the least bit whether the guys they are selling to know anything about Part15 rules. When I started four years ago it seemed like there were not near as many uncertified options as there are today so I came into the industry using certified equipment and knew what the rules were. It's too easy to buy 802.xx equipment throw it up on a pole and sell internet to a few users, more than likely they are not going to be successful but it still hurts everyone of us. I admit I am a glass half empty kind of guy, but I don't think there we are going to have any usable spectrum within the next one to two years because of stuff like this. Chadd -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 5:16 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces I agree that MOST wisps are likely compliant. Unfortuneately, it won't stay that way, if we let the industry slowly deteriorate and slide. I think compliance is a message that continually needs to be revisited, sorta like speed bumps. Its easy to not realize you are speeding, yet we all know where the speedometer is located. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces
I never used the word most my friend, I said many and being on the receiving side of these questions and monitoring about 8 lists total I see them there as well. One makes a phenomenon, several a coincidence, numerous examples I've personally encountered and from Clearwire-sized WISPs to the smallest represent a trend that to me qualifies as many. My posts are often intended to be provocative and to raise the occasional hair and e-mail by nature is a bit of an amplifier in terms of tone. I do come across far more strident in e-mail than in person too. But, we all also know that it takes an awful lot of pushing to move the WISP market in any one direction; that is doubly hard when pushing into the wind. Others are free to disparage and call into question my motives. That's fine. But regardless of one's opinions about my motives, are the issues on the table real or imagined? As for not buying because you don't like my opinions, that is an unpleasant consequence, but for every one that has made that decision I can assure you that there is likely at least two others for whom my passion and dogged commitment to this market, its vitality, and its external perception is a positive. I don't pick my or reject people as friends because they dare to confront me or call me to the carpet. I want people to tell me I've got a booger in my nose. I know the easy thing to do is to ignore the booger (no one gets in trouble for not saying it). I also don't subscribe to the philosophy that the customer is always right. I view a big part of my role to be an educator, to provoke thought, to make my customers better and more successful. Sometimes that means explaining when they might be mistaken and why it matters. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Scrivner Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 2:22 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces I got my blood pressure up. I am sorry. Say whatever you like. One condition please. Make sure you have some basis in fact for saying many or most WISPs do anything illegal or we will have this battle another day. Scriv Patrick Leary wrote: John, I have railed against illegal vendors for years -- before you put up your first link. I (in official corporate capacity) have met with officials on the topic. I (in official corporate capacity) have met with lawyers on the topic. I have publicly spoken out at events on the topic. Who is stereotyping? I have said many and that's the truth and it's not even a debate. What's trying to do right? One either follows the rules or does not. No FUD being slung here. On the 4.9 issue I filed that question and deal with that assumption quite a bit. I suspect your definition of WISP is more narrow than mine. Mine includes ANY entity providing services with wireless broadband gear. There are utility-based WISPs, telco WISPs, large funded WISPs, Mom and Pop WISPs, rural WISPs, etc. The fact is that the public is not able and does not differentiate between all the competing groups of WISPs and groups like WISPA should understand that. You want it to stop, John? Well, you have the power to censure your list from those you disagree with. You will have to mute dissent then, as I will not subdue my opinion on the topic because you wield power. Has does one best use their power John? To silence rational opinion one disagrees with? Must we all be sensitive or averse to differing from your opinion? Should I watch my back and wait to be called into the corner office for expressing my qualified opinion because you want it to stop? Patrick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Scrivner Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 12:47 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces Patrick, what is Alvarion doing as a corporation to police the majority of BWIA vendors who now pollute our industry with uncertified gear? These are your peers. Do you like being stereotyped with them? Your stereotyping of WISP operators as being predominantly illegal and the source of the problem is not accurate or fair and I want it to stop. The majority of the WISPs out there are trying to do right. It is the vendors who are the real problem. The majority of vendors ignore the law. The last gear purchase I made was for an Alvarion B100 backhaul link which is due in here today. It is certified but now I wonder if buying from a vendor who stereotypes the industry is a good idea. Maybe I made a mistake buying from your company? By the way, the slam about 4.9 GHz is completely erroneous and you need to apologize. The vast majority of WISPs stay the hell away from 4.9 and other bands which we are not allowed in. You need to watch your tack on this public list. Being a paid vendor member does not give you
Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces
I don't know how you expect the industry to police itself when the FCC acts deaf. Next time you encounter a damnit remark, add state government to the list of not playing nice. Our footprint is the Florida Keys. Last year the department of transportation decided to erect giant poles down the center of our one highway to put up signs to tell us whether our highway was busy or not and suggest no alternate route when it was (it's our only road). They used 5.8GHz DSSS and 2.4GHz DSSS both for the poles to talk to each other. Grid antennas polluted the spectrum even more. Because of the narrow geographic nature of the islands and the highway being in the center, one can't even use a 5.8GHz cordless phone inside their home anymore. When we called Tallahassee to complain, the head of the DoT IT dept wanted to know why we weren't using 4.9GHz for the buoy link the signs killed. WISPs aren't the only ones shitting in their nests. Every day they pile it higher and one just has to figure out another way around the edges. - cw Patrick Leary wrote: No FUD being slung here. On the 4.9 issue I filed that question and deal with that assumption quite a bit. I suspect your definition of WISP is more narrow than mine. Mine includes ANY entity providing services with wireless broadband gear. There are utility-based WISPs, telco WISPs, large funded WISPs, Mom and Pop WISPs, rural WISPs, etc. The fact is that the public is not able and does not differentiate between all the competing groups of WISPs and groups like WISPA should understand that. - Original Message - I hope it does go UL, but I have also heard some recent rumblings that the FCC is concerned with what seems like a widespread deterioration of WISPs following the rules. The phrase I recall is something along the lines of Damn it, these things are not guidelines. From my view it is true. I see it in conversations that go beyond the usual, if you just stay within the power no one cares to now where people seem to via the STA process as a round-about tool to get access to and use spectrum that does not commercially exist. Letting loose the same level of abuse in the TV bands is something that will cause real problems for the FCC should broadcasters be affected. The WISP industry must do a better job of policing itself and discouraging the slippery slope. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces
All too true and I hate that for you -- as if your business is not tough enough to manage. Surely the work of some trusted consultant. That's why I cringe when I hear someone talks about cities or states going to the historic consultants to get design, etc. help. The only qualified consultants I have even met in this business are a select crop of actual WISPs, a tiny smattering of VARs, and the vendors that live in the space. Patrick Leary -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of cw Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 5:36 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces I don't know how you expect the industry to police itself when the FCC acts deaf. Next time you encounter a damnit remark, add state government to the list of not playing nice. Our footprint is the Florida Keys. Last year the department of transportation decided to erect giant poles down the center of our one highway to put up signs to tell us whether our highway was busy or not and suggest no alternate route when it was (it's our only road). They used 5.8GHz DSSS and 2.4GHz DSSS both for the poles to talk to each other. Grid antennas polluted the spectrum even more. Because of the narrow geographic nature of the islands and the highway being in the center, one can't even use a 5.8GHz cordless phone inside their home anymore. When we called Tallahassee to complain, the head of the DoT IT dept wanted to know why we weren't using 4.9GHz for the buoy link the signs killed. WISPs aren't the only ones shitting in their nests. Every day they pile it higher and one just has to figure out another way around the edges. - cw Patrick Leary wrote: No FUD being slung here. On the 4.9 issue I filed that question and deal with that assumption quite a bit. I suspect your definition of WISP is more narrow than mine. Mine includes ANY entity providing services with wireless broadband gear. There are utility-based WISPs, telco WISPs, large funded WISPs, Mom and Pop WISPs, rural WISPs, etc. The fact is that the public is not able and does not differentiate between all the competing groups of WISPs and groups like WISPA should understand that. - Original Message - I hope it does go UL, but I have also heard some recent rumblings that the FCC is concerned with what seems like a widespread deterioration of WISPs following the rules. The phrase I recall is something along the lines of Damn it, these things are not guidelines. From my view it is true. I see it in conversations that go beyond the usual, if you just stay within the power no one cares to now where people seem to via the STA process as a round-about tool to get access to and use spectrum that does not commercially exist. Letting loose the same level of abuse in the TV bands is something that will cause real problems for the FCC should broadcasters be affected. The WISP industry must do a better job of policing itself and discouraging the slippery slope. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses(190). This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses(42). This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces
DOT is ***supposed*** to switch to DSRC for this. DSRC was allocated 75MHz at 5.9Ghz just above the U-NII band based on roadway highway needs such as this DOT application. I participated in DSRC formulation enough to know that DOT had been experimenting with UL for years for highway signage applications in anticipation of DSRC. I believe there's a good case to be made that they should migrate away from UL as soon as DSRC equipment is available ... but alas I don't think it's available yet. This would be an appropriate topic for a wispa position. - Original Message - From: cw To: WISPA General List Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 7:35 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces I don't know how you expect the industry to police itself when the FCC acts deaf. Next time you encounter a damnit remark, add state government to the list of not playing nice. Our footprint is the Florida Keys. Last year the department of transportation decided to erect giant poles down the center of our one highway to put up signs to tell us whether our highway was busy or not and suggest no alternate route when it was (it's our only road). They used 5.8GHz DSSS and 2.4GHz DSSS both for the poles to talk to each other. Grid antennas polluted the spectrum even more. Because of the narrow geographic nature of the islands and the highway being in the center, one can't even use a 5.8GHz cordless phone inside their home anymore. When we called Tallahassee to complain, the head of the DoT IT dept wanted to know why we weren't using 4.9GHz for the buoy link the signs killed. WISPs aren't the only ones shitting in their nests. Every day they pile it higher and one just has to figure out another way around the edges. - cw Patrick Leary wrote: No FUD being slung here. On the 4.9 issue I filed that question and deal with that assumption quite a bit. I suspect your definition of WISP is more narrow than mine. Mine includes ANY entity providing services with wireless broadband gear. There are utility-based WISPs, telco WISPs, large funded WISPs, Mom and Pop WISPs, rural WISPs, etc. The fact is that the public is not able and does not differentiate between all the competing groups of WISPs and groups like WISPA should understand that. - Original Message - I hope it does go UL, but I have also heard some recent rumblings that the FCC is concerned with what seems like a widespread deterioration of WISPs following the rules. The phrase I recall is something along the lines of Damn it, these things are not guidelines. From my view it is true. I see it in conversations that go beyond the usual, if you just stay within the power no one cares to now where people seem to via the STA process as a round-about tool to get access to and use spectrum that does not commercially exist. Letting loose the same level of abuse in the TV bands is something that will cause real problems for the FCC should broadcasters be affected. The WISP industry must do a better job of policing itself and discouraging the slippery slope. -- 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] TV white spaces
You've HAD offers that have been refused... Thanks, Steve On Jan 24, 2007, at Jan 24 07:10 PM, Marlon K. Schafer wrote: WISPA has been working on this for a couple of years now. Independently and with Cisco, New America, Media Access Project and I've recently had talks with the 802.22 (ieee white spaces standards group) folks. As always, we need more bodies to go a better job. laters, marlon --- Steve Stroh 425-939-0076 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Writing about BWIA again! - www.bwianews.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces
Patrick is correct - Flarion was working on 802.20 (full mobility broadband) which, with the borging of Flarion by Qualcomm, has essentially terminated. Mobile Broadband standards work now seems to have shifted fully over to 802.16e / Mobile WiMAX (which will be 100% licensed spectrum.) I'll answer the last question on another post. Thanks, Steve On Jan 24, 2007, at Jan 24 10:12 AM, John Scrivner wrote: I knew there was an 802.22 effort but I had no idea that it was geared for any particular spectrum until now. Glad to hear the efforts are underway. Isn't Flarion's IP based closely on what will be 802.22? Was there an earlier effort for 802.22 standards development that was spectrum agnostic? This caught me completely by surprise. Thanks for the info Steve and welcome back to writing for our industry. We missed your crystal ball. :-) Steve, could you send us a link(s) to where we can find what you are writing these days? Thanks, Scriv --- Steve Stroh 425-939-0076 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Writing about BWIA again! - www.bwianews.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces
Steve, I appreciate your insight into the possibility that license-exempt white space use might actually materialize. I very much hope that it does. jack Steve Stroh wrote: Jack: Consider... To the television broadcasters, WISPs using this spectrum in a we'll stay out of the way of any television broadcasting activity manner is the lesser of several other evils; television broadcasting has been steadily losing ground now; first 800 MHz was carved out of Channels 70-83, and now the 700 MHz bands are being carved out of Channels 52-69. The trend is clear, and while it's one thing for powerful terrestrial broadcasting to share spectrum with low-power license-exempt usage, it's quite another for communications use to do the same. If the broadcasters play things right (and it appears they are bending towards white space license-exempt usage, but very much on THEIR terms...) the license-exempt usage of television white space may serve to pollute the remaining television broadcast spectrum sufficiently to prevent future reallocation (for at least another decade or so). Intel, Microsoft, Cisco are some of the names being bandied about as advocates for license-exempt use of white space television broadcast spectrum. Thanks, Steve On Jan 24, 2007, at Jan 24 09:21 AM, Jack Unger wrote: Likelihood of unlicensed??? My guess is that the established communications carriers and the broadcasters will fight the concept of license-free use of this space. I expect it will come down to who lobbies Congress most effectively. -- Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993 Author of the WISP Handbook - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting Newsletters Downloadable from http://ask-wi.com/newsletters.html Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220 www.ask-wi.com --- Steve Stroh 425-939-0076 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Writing about BWIA again! - www.bwianews.com -- Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993 Author of the WISP Handbook - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting Newsletters Downloadable from http://ask-wi.com/newsletters.html Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220 www.ask-wi.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces
Any info through the grapevine about the likelihood of this spectrum becoming unlicensed? Then, I suppose a standard will have to be drafted and approved before we see any gear. So is that a couple of years if we're lucky before we can use sub-700Mhz to penetrate through trees in rural America? Thanks. Mario Dawn DiPietro wrote: All, This might clear up some confusion about which spectrum might become unlicensed. As quoted from the press release; The WIN Act specifically requires the FCC to permit license-free use of the unassigned broadcast spectrum between 54MHz and 698 MHz within 180 days of enactment. This legislation will enable entrepreneurs to provide affordable, competitive high-speed wireless broadband services in areas that otherwise have no connectivity to broadband Internet. Links below; http://kerry.senate.gov/v3/cfm/record.cfm?id=267392 http://www.newamerica.net/programs/wireless_future Regards, Dawn DiPietro -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces
What kind of speed can be obtained on such low frequencies? -RickG On 1/24/07, John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The standard (as far as how gear can operate in the bands) has been created through the NPRM known as 04-186 which has gone through about 3 years of the FCC meat grinder. There is no IEEE standard or anything like that but the rules are as clear as any other unlicensed standard. Companies like Intel, Cisco, etc. have equipment designed and built which they say can be used to deliver unlicensed broadband in these spaces today. They are being tight-lipped about it though. Scriv Mario Pommier wrote: Any info through the grapevine about the likelihood of this spectrum becoming unlicensed? Then, I suppose a standard will have to be drafted and approved before we see any gear. So is that a couple of years if we're lucky before we can use sub-700Mhz to penetrate through trees in rural America? Thanks. Mario Dawn DiPietro wrote: All, This might clear up some confusion about which spectrum might become unlicensed. As quoted from the press release; The WIN Act specifically requires the FCC to permit license-free use of the unassigned broadcast spectrum between 54MHz and 698 MHz within 180 days of enactment. This legislation will enable entrepreneurs to provide affordable, competitive high-speed wireless broadband services in areas that otherwise have no connectivity to broadband Internet. Links below; http://kerry.senate.gov/v3/cfm/record.cfm?id=267392 http://www.newamerica.net/programs/wireless_future Regards, Dawn DiPietro -- 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] TV white spaces
John: There IS an IEEE standard in the works for the TV whitespaces - 802.22 - http://www.ieee802.org/22/ Thanks, Steve On Jan 24, 2007, at Jan 24 07:55 AM, John Scrivner wrote: The standard (as far as how gear can operate in the bands) has been created through the NPRM known as 04-186 which has gone through about 3 years of the FCC meat grinder. There is no IEEE standard or anything like that but the rules are as clear as any other unlicensed standard. Companies like Intel, Cisco, etc. have equipment designed and built which they say can be used to deliver unlicensed broadband in these spaces today. They are being tight- lipped about it though. Scriv --- Steve Stroh 425-939-0076 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | www.stevestroh.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces
This spectrum is the Goose's Golden egg for all of us in VERY rural areas. It will absolutely revolutionize N. Louisiana as far as internet/intranet access. We cover about ~12% of Louisiana, but cant reach but about 4 out 10 when we do site surveys. Steve - - you are always full of info and remain to be a WISPs #1 proponent!! Thanks for all you do. Mac Dearman -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Stroh Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 10:45 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces John: There IS an IEEE standard in the works for the TV whitespaces - 802.22 - http://www.ieee802.org/22/ Thanks, Steve On Jan 24, 2007, at Jan 24 07:55 AM, John Scrivner wrote: The standard (as far as how gear can operate in the bands) has been created through the NPRM known as 04-186 which has gone through about 3 years of the FCC meat grinder. There is no IEEE standard or anything like that but the rules are as clear as any other unlicensed standard. Companies like Intel, Cisco, etc. have equipment designed and built which they say can be used to deliver unlicensed broadband in these spaces today. They are being tight- lipped about it though. Scriv --- Steve Stroh 425-939-0076 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | www.stevestroh.com -- 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] TV white spaces
Likelihood of unlicensed??? My guess is that the established communications carriers and the broadcasters will fight the concept of license-free use of this space. I expect it will come down to who lobbies Congress most effectively. Mario Pommier wrote: Any info through the grapevine about the likelihood of this spectrum becoming unlicensed? Then, I suppose a standard will have to be drafted and approved before we see any gear. So is that a couple of years if we're lucky before we can use sub-700Mhz to penetrate through trees in rural America? Thanks. Mario Dawn DiPietro wrote: All, This might clear up some confusion about which spectrum might become unlicensed. As quoted from the press release; The WIN Act specifically requires the FCC to permit license-free use of the unassigned broadcast spectrum between 54MHz and 698 MHz within 180 days of enactment. This legislation will enable entrepreneurs to provide affordable, competitive high-speed wireless broadband services in areas that otherwise have no connectivity to broadband Internet. Links below; http://kerry.senate.gov/v3/cfm/record.cfm?id=267392 http://www.newamerica.net/programs/wireless_future Regards, Dawn DiPietro -- Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993 Author of the WISP Handbook - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting Newsletters Downloadable from http://ask-wi.com/newsletters.html Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220 www.ask-wi.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces
It depends on the depth of modulation used and other factors. In a 6 meg TV channel space I am guessing you could easily see 15 to 20 megabit aggregate throughput over a good coverage area. (Maybe 3 miles radius?) NOTE: The above are generalized best guesses on my part as I have never even seen one of these radios yet. DOCSIS standards provide some basis for conjecture of possible speeds within TV channel space. Google DOCSIS and most notably ARRIS DOCSIS for more thorough basis to estimate speeds and coverage areas for wireless data transmission within TV channel spaces. Scriv RickG wrote: What kind of speed can be obtained on such low frequencies? -RickG On 1/24/07, John Scrivner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The standard (as far as how gear can operate in the bands) has been created through the NPRM known as 04-186 which has gone through about 3 years of the FCC meat grinder. There is no IEEE standard or anything like that but the rules are as clear as any other unlicensed standard. Companies like Intel, Cisco, etc. have equipment designed and built which they say can be used to deliver unlicensed broadband in these spaces today. They are being tight-lipped about it though. Scriv Mario Pommier wrote: Any info through the grapevine about the likelihood of this spectrum becoming unlicensed? Then, I suppose a standard will have to be drafted and approved before we see any gear. So is that a couple of years if we're lucky before we can use sub-700Mhz to penetrate through trees in rural America? Thanks. Mario Dawn DiPietro wrote: All, This might clear up some confusion about which spectrum might become unlicensed. As quoted from the press release; The WIN Act specifically requires the FCC to permit license-free use of the unassigned broadcast spectrum between 54MHz and 698 MHz within 180 days of enactment. This legislation will enable entrepreneurs to provide affordable, competitive high-speed wireless broadband services in areas that otherwise have no connectivity to broadband Internet. Links below; http://kerry.senate.gov/v3/cfm/record.cfm?id=267392 http://www.newamerica.net/programs/wireless_future Regards, Dawn DiPietro -- 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] TV white spaces
I knew there was an 802.22 effort but I had no idea that it was geared for any particular spectrum until now. Glad to hear the efforts are underway. Isn't Flarion's IP based closely on what will be 802.22? Was there an earlier effort for 802.22 standards development that was spectrum agnostic? This caught me completely by surprise. Thanks for the info Steve and welcome back to writing for our industry. We missed your crystal ball. :-) Steve, could you send us a link(s) to where we can find what you are writing these days? Thanks, Scriv Steve Stroh wrote: John: There IS an IEEE standard in the works for the TV whitespaces - 802.22 - http://www.ieee802.org/22/ Thanks, Steve On Jan 24, 2007, at Jan 24 07:55 AM, John Scrivner wrote: The standard (as far as how gear can operate in the bands) has been created through the NPRM known as 04-186 which has gone through about 3 years of the FCC meat grinder. There is no IEEE standard or anything like that but the rules are as clear as any other unlicensed standard. Companies like Intel, Cisco, etc. have equipment designed and built which they say can be used to deliver unlicensed broadband in these spaces today. They are being tight- lipped about it though. Scriv --- Steve Stroh 425-939-0076 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | www.stevestroh.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces
Flarion's (QCOM) IP was to be the basis for 802.20, not 802.22. The effort by 802.22 has ALWAYS been rural-focused, and thus the sub 1 GHz bands, specifically the white spaces/TV bands. Patrick Leary AVP WISP Markets Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Scrivner Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 10:13 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces I knew there was an 802.22 effort but I had no idea that it was geared for any particular spectrum until now. Glad to hear the efforts are underway. Isn't Flarion's IP based closely on what will be 802.22? Was there an earlier effort for 802.22 standards development that was spectrum agnostic? This caught me completely by surprise. Thanks for the info Steve and welcome back to writing for our industry. We missed your crystal ball. :-) Steve, could you send us a link(s) to where we can find what you are writing these days? Thanks, Scriv Steve Stroh wrote: John: There IS an IEEE standard in the works for the TV whitespaces - 802.22 - http://www.ieee802.org/22/ Thanks, Steve On Jan 24, 2007, at Jan 24 07:55 AM, John Scrivner wrote: The standard (as far as how gear can operate in the bands) has been created through the NPRM known as 04-186 which has gone through about 3 years of the FCC meat grinder. There is no IEEE standard or anything like that but the rules are as clear as any other unlicensed standard. Companies like Intel, Cisco, etc. have equipment designed and built which they say can be used to deliver unlicensed broadband in these spaces today. They are being tight- lipped about it though. Scriv --- Steve Stroh 425-939-0076 | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | www.stevestroh.com -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses(190). This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses(43). This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals computer viruses. -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces
WISPA has been working on this for a couple of years now. Independently and with Cisco, New America, Media Access Project and I've recently had talks with the 802.22 (ieee white spaces standards group) folks. As always, we need more bodies to go a better job. laters, marlon - Original Message - From: Mario Pommier [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 6:53 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces Any info through the grapevine about the likelihood of this spectrum becoming unlicensed? Then, I suppose a standard will have to be drafted and approved before we see any gear. So is that a couple of years if we're lucky before we can use sub-700Mhz to penetrate through trees in rural America? Thanks. Mario Dawn DiPietro wrote: All, This might clear up some confusion about which spectrum might become unlicensed. As quoted from the press release; The WIN Act specifically requires the FCC to permit license-free use of the unassigned broadcast spectrum between 54MHz and 698 MHz within 180 days of enactment. This legislation will enable entrepreneurs to provide affordable, competitive high-speed wireless broadband services in areas that otherwise have no connectivity to broadband Internet. Links below; http://kerry.senate.gov/v3/cfm/record.cfm?id=267392 http://www.newamerica.net/programs/wireless_future Regards, Dawn DiPietro -- 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] tv white spaces update and a question for you guys
I do not know what you are asking. Marlon and I were debating what type of system we should try to get the FCC to allow us to use as a test bed system for experimentation with unused television channel space as a platform for broadband delivery. I think we are all talking about the same thing here but I am not sure what you are asking. Scriv Mario Pommier wrote: if you want to test tv-band spectrum penetration in rural areas -- read, with lots of trees -- that's where testing needs to take place. I'm sure there's a lot of us who operate in areas that qualify for this kind of signal obstruction. what do you mean by wispa officially supports? Mario John Scrivner wrote: I would think a better approach would be to work with Intel or another company who is already building prototypes to get a test system built and have WISPs become the operations portion of a test for this type of technology. A converted WiFi unit will not have any of the existing GPS or sniffing capabilities required in the NPRM. If we are going to become part of the solution then we need to have something capable of doing what is being asked in the NPRM. Scriv Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: Hi All, http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1813A1.doc Looks like we're still TWO years away from being able to use the white spaces. In a month we'll see the first draft rules from the FCC. It looks like what they want to do is to get some testing data. I'd like to propose to them that we be allowed to build a few test systems using 2.4 ghz to tv band converters. Similar to the 2.4 to 900mhz converters. I think it's important to have the support of WISPA on this, officially. Thoughts? Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! 64.146.146.12 (net meeting) www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam --- [This e-mail was scanned for viruses by our AntiVirus Protection System] -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] tv white spaces update and a question for you guys
Marlon, I'm rather surprised that you would even mention 2.4GHz(wifi I assume) as a possible technology to use in these bands. Now that they have cellular technologies specifically designed for BWA purposes (Canopy and WIMAX are good examples) and given the possibility of a fresh start to using this spectrum, using an unarguably inferior technology for BWA like wifi just doesn't make sense. You end up with the craziness we have right now in the current bands. If testing data for equipment operation in that band is needed, you could probably obtain this information from a few companies off the top of my head like Qualcomm(Flash-OFDM), IPwireless(TD-CDMA) and Airspan(WIMAX and proprietary), that currently have experience w/ 700MHz. IMO if they ever release a 'WISP band'(which I would be surprised), they need to have a GPS synchronized transmission cycle as a requirement... Here's an idea, make WIMAX as the accepted technology for that spectrum. Then all you need is the WISP(s) in the area to coordinate transmission cycles to minimize interference potential. That leads to a whole other subject, if a 'wisp-band' were opened up, the WISP industry could potentially be a whole new ball-game...think companies(AOL, Speakeasy, Covad, etc) spending 10s of millions to go regional/nation-wide that you would otherwise potentially not have to compete against. Now THAT would be interesting :-) Jon Langeler Michwave Tech. Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: Hi All, http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1813A1.doc Looks like we're still TWO years away from being able to use the white spaces. In a month we'll see the first draft rules from the FCC. It looks like what they want to do is to get some testing data. I'd like to propose to them that we be allowed to build a few test systems using 2.4 ghz to tv band converters. Similar to the 2.4 to 900mhz converters. I think it's important to have the support of WISPA on this, officially. Thoughts? Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services 42846865 (icq)And I run my own wisp! 64.146.146.12 (net meeting) www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
RE: [WISPA] tv white spaces update and a question for you guys
Ron, Where did this relevant paragraph come from? I like the mention of me but I can't take credit for it. I use the information from the FCC data, just happen to be pretty good at mapping the information. Most people could do a simple search channel by channel in the FCC database and get maps. This requirement should be easy to meet. I have said before that we should also be able to use the methods yet to be approved for 5.4 GHz stuff. If it's good enough not to broadcast over radar it should work for TV stations too. The idea of some FM or TV station sending some control signal scares me. That's like leaving the mouse in charge of the cheese factory. Who gets a say in what they put on that control channel. Spectrum sensing should be a no brainer and would work fine. It still irks the crap out of me that they worry about this anyway. So few people receive signals off the air that they won't notice any low power spread spectrum signals. Politicsat least all these failed muni projects will force some spectrum policy though. It'll take a couple of years but it'll happen. Thank You, Brian Webster www.wirelessmapping.com -Original Message-From: Ron Wallace [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2006 4:25 PMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: Re: [WISPA] tv white spaces update and a question for you guys Here is the relevant paragraph. "The Notice proposed to require that fixed unlicensed devices incorporate a geo-location method such as GPS or be professionally installed, and that they access a database to identify vacant channels at their location. It proposed to require that portable unlicensed devices operate only when they receive a control signal from a source such as an FM or TV station that identifies the vacant TV channels in that particular area. The Commission also sought comment on the use of spectrum sensing to identify vacant TV channels, but did not propose any specific technical requirements for devices that use spectrum sensing." The GPS requirement does not seem to present a problem, for Fixed Wireless, many GPs devices cna be incorporated into any PC. As for a data base that exists and is available from Brian Webster [EMAIL PROTECTED] , or could be accomodated to ID vacant channels at a given location. If this is all that is required the information is already available. For "Portable Unlicensed devices" the requirement is more difficult, I admit. But to runa test for fixed unlicensed devices this should be much more straight forward. What do you guys think? Ron Wallace Hahnron, Inc. 220 S. Jackson Dt. Addison, MI 49220 Phone: (517)547-8410 Mobile: (517)605-4542 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]-Original Message-From: John Scrivner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2006 01:17 PMTo: 'WISPA General List'Subject: Re: [WISPA] tv white spaces update and a question for you guysI would think a better approach would be to work with Intel or another company who is already building prototypes to get a test system built and have WISPs become the operations portion of a test for this type of technology. A converted WiFi unit will not have any of the existing GPS or sniffing capabilities required in the NPRM. If we are going to become part of the solution then we need to have something capable of doing what is being asked in the NPRM.ScrivMarlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote: Hi All, http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-1813A1.doc Looks like we're still TWO years away from being able to use the white spaces. In a month we'll see the first draft rules from the FCC. It looks like what they want to do is to get some testing data. I'd like to propose to them that we be allowed to build a few test systems using 2.4 ghz to tv band converters. Similar to the 2.4 to 900mhz converters. I think it's important to have the support of WISPA on this, officially. Thoughts? Marlon (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales (408) 907-6910 (Vonage) Consulting services 42846865 (icq) And I run my own wisp! 64.146.146.12 (net meeting) www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam-- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.orgSubscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wirelessArchives: 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/
