Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

2006-08-18 Thread John Scrivner
The rules state that any radio / antenna combination has to either be a 
certified system or that a substitute antenna used would have to meet 
the same specs as one used for certification in a system. Many think 
that this means anything goes. The truth is that there are almost 
certainly a good bit of installed systems which would not pass FCC 
enforcement inspection. Many believe that following maximum EIRP rules 
is the only requirement. This is not so. It is a good practice if you 
are not following the rules but that does not mean it is legal. Another 
common belief is that anything goes is the rule of thumb due to the 
general lack of enforcement in unlicensed bands. This is unfortunate and 
further illustrates the need for our industry to mature.


Part of this maturity process should start by operators demanding to see 
FCC certifications for the systems they buy. It is tough for operators 
to remain compliant when so few systems are certified. Another step 
should be that manufacturers certify their systems with commonly used 
antenna / radio configurations every time they release a product. 
Finally, distributors need to demand that all systems they sell meet 
certification requirements. The fact is that certification is not 
terribly costly or complicated and should be a step taken by all 
manufacturers and eventually all of us. If anyone here represents 
manufacturers who certify all their systems then now would be a good 
time to toot your horn.


I believe the day will likely come that the FCC will inspect WISP 
systems. It took them about 20 years to start cracking down on the cable 
television industry for signal leakage and other infractions. Something 
tells me this industry will not have to wait that long. Of course the 
decision to follow the rules is inevitably up to each person. I would 
like to think we all will be compliant in the future but this is an 
unrealistic goal I am sure if manufacturers do not take a leadership 
role in this effort. WISPA stops short of demanding that members do 
anything but I will say, as President of WISPA, we should all try to 
follow the law regarding this industry. No industry association could 
expect to have impact in policy and legislative efforts if they took the 
stand that shirking the law is a correct course of action.

Scriv


chris cooper wrote:

It sounds like several of you here build your own radios and use off 
the shelf antennas.  So if I buy a board, cards and an antenna what 
are my obligations to FCC as far as having a certified system in 
production?  Thanks for the education


 


Chris


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


RE: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

2006-08-18 Thread Patrick Leary
John is 100% accurate. Also, with respect to using your own antenna, even
with that new relaxation of the rules, it ONLY applies to manufacturers, NOT
operators. What is does is to enable manufacturers to self-certify
additional antennas so long as the power is the same or less as the
originally certified version AND the beam pattern is fundamentally similar. 

This rule does NOT permit operators to use whatever antennas they like.

As always, I know from 1st hand direct questioning of those FCC staffers who
wrote the rule revision. This is not hearsay, my assumption or my
interpretation.

Patrick Leary
AVP Marketing
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 11:31 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

The rules state that any radio / antenna combination has to either be a 
certified system or that a substitute antenna used would have to meet 
the same specs as one used for certification in a system. Many think 
that this means anything goes. The truth is that there are almost 
certainly a good bit of installed systems which would not pass FCC 
enforcement inspection. Many believe that following maximum EIRP rules 
is the only requirement. This is not so. It is a good practice if you 
are not following the rules but that does not mean it is legal. Another 
common belief is that anything goes is the rule of thumb due to the 
general lack of enforcement in unlicensed bands. This is unfortunate and 
further illustrates the need for our industry to mature.

Part of this maturity process should start by operators demanding to see 
FCC certifications for the systems they buy. It is tough for operators 
to remain compliant when so few systems are certified. Another step 
should be that manufacturers certify their systems with commonly used 
antenna / radio configurations every time they release a product. 
Finally, distributors need to demand that all systems they sell meet 
certification requirements. The fact is that certification is not 
terribly costly or complicated and should be a step taken by all 
manufacturers and eventually all of us. If anyone here represents 
manufacturers who certify all their systems then now would be a good 
time to toot your horn.

I believe the day will likely come that the FCC will inspect WISP 
systems. It took them about 20 years to start cracking down on the cable 
television industry for signal leakage and other infractions. Something 
tells me this industry will not have to wait that long. Of course the 
decision to follow the rules is inevitably up to each person. I would 
like to think we all will be compliant in the future but this is an 
unrealistic goal I am sure if manufacturers do not take a leadership 
role in this effort. WISPA stops short of demanding that members do 
anything but I will say, as President of WISPA, we should all try to 
follow the law regarding this industry. No industry association could 
expect to have impact in policy and legislative efforts if they took the 
stand that shirking the law is a correct course of action.
Scriv


chris cooper wrote:

 It sounds like several of you here build your own radios and use off 
 the shelf antennas.  So if I buy a board, cards and an antenna what 
 are my obligations to FCC as far as having a certified system in 
 production?  Thanks for the education

  

 Chris

-- 
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(191).








 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals  computer
viruses(42).





-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

2006-08-18 Thread Tom DeReggi



Take note that there are different legalities based 
on wether you are manufacturering/selling a product versus using it for 
your own use on your property.
And if its your customers propery versus 
yours. 

The only other advice that I have, is that if you 
are providing uncertified solutions, you better be darn sure it is a solution 
that would comply if the steps were taken, and you were ever asked to certify 
it. For example, If you installed 1000 uncertified systems that were jsut 
about the same, the only thing you'd need to do to correct the problem, is pay 
someone to certify the combination of products, for $10,000.Much 
more cost effective than pulling all your gear down and loosing 
customers.

That was one of the scares with Mikrotik last 
month, when nobody would assume Routerboards would not be uncertifiable, but 
with a 48V PS, its uncertain if it would be able to.
Hopefully, they are working to verify and fix the 
issue.

There is a lot more flexibilty now, which allows us 
to use functonal equivellents, but someone is responsible for making that 
determination.
Its the manufacturer, or the integrater claiming to 
be the manufacturer for the OEM product that is taking on the 
liabilty.

One of the reasons I chose Trango for 95% of my 
network, is I started the business with the goal for eventual sale, and didn't 
want to take the liabilty of not having a legal system.

Because I am not a attorney, I wont say more than 
that on this topic.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, IncIntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband



  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  chris 
  cooper 
  To: 'WISPA General List' 
  Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 2:05 
  PM
  Subject: [WISPA] roll your own 
  radios..
  
  
  It sounds like several of you here 
  build your own radios and use off the shelf antennas. So if I buy a 
  board, cards and an antenna what are my obligations to FCC as far as having a 
  certified system in production? Thanks for the 
  education
  
  Chris
  
  

  -- 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/


Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

2006-08-18 Thread Jack Unger

John,

Should WISPA consider publishing on our website a list of certification 
labs? It seems that our industry needs someone to step up and take on a 
leadership role and WISPA seems (to me anyway) to be the perfect 
organization to perform this role.


We could start by simply polling our list members to see which labs 
anyone has used and been satisfied with.


OK, speak up guys (and gals). What lab or labs have you researched or used?
  jack


John Scrivner wrote:

The rules state that any radio / antenna combination has to either be a 
certified system or that a substitute antenna used would have to meet 
the same specs as one used for certification in a system. Many think 
that this means anything goes. The truth is that there are almost 
certainly a good bit of installed systems which would not pass FCC 
enforcement inspection. Many believe that following maximum EIRP rules 
is the only requirement. This is not so. It is a good practice if you 
are not following the rules but that does not mean it is legal. Another 
common belief is that anything goes is the rule of thumb due to the 
general lack of enforcement in unlicensed bands. This is unfortunate and 
further illustrates the need for our industry to mature.


Part of this maturity process should start by operators demanding to see 
FCC certifications for the systems they buy. It is tough for operators 
to remain compliant when so few systems are certified. Another step 
should be that manufacturers certify their systems with commonly used 
antenna / radio configurations every time they release a product. 
Finally, distributors need to demand that all systems they sell meet 
certification requirements. The fact is that certification is not 
terribly costly or complicated and should be a step taken by all 
manufacturers and eventually all of us. If anyone here represents 
manufacturers who certify all their systems then now would be a good 
time to toot your horn.


I believe the day will likely come that the FCC will inspect WISP 
systems. It took them about 20 years to start cracking down on the cable 
television industry for signal leakage and other infractions. Something 
tells me this industry will not have to wait that long. Of course the 
decision to follow the rules is inevitably up to each person. I would 
like to think we all will be compliant in the future but this is an 
unrealistic goal I am sure if manufacturers do not take a leadership 
role in this effort. WISPA stops short of demanding that members do 
anything but I will say, as President of WISPA, we should all try to 
follow the law regarding this industry. No industry association could 
expect to have impact in policy and legislative efforts if they took the 
stand that shirking the law is a correct course of action.

Scriv


chris cooper wrote:

It sounds like several of you here build your own radios and use off 
the shelf antennas.  So if I buy a board, cards and an antenna what 
are my obligations to FCC as far as having a certified system in 
production?  Thanks for the education


 


Chris



--
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] roll your own radios..

2006-08-18 Thread Tom DeReggi

Patrick,

Not exactly. What you said is mostly true, and to the letter of the original 
text, but there are added flexibilties.


It doesn't need to be the antenna that the manufacturer actually sells. For 
example, if the manufacturer OEMed a MTI antenna for certification, 
operators can now use the functional MTI antenna bought direct.  Also in 
face to face meetings, even though not the written text, we asked if 
operators could take responsibilty for determining the functional 
equivellent.  They responded that the reason the Manufacturers were required 
to be the one, is that there had to be someone to take responsibilty, where 
it was inforcable to comply.  It was a grey area, but FCC staff stated that 
if the operator took responsibility, it could be feasible that it was 
allowed for the Operator to make the substitution.  The arguement is as 
integrators we have the abilty to get certifications just like 
Manufacturers.   So really the letter of the law was that who ever got the 
gear certified originally, would ahve the abilty to make the modifications 
of whats considered functional equivellent.  What this meant was that if an 
Operator isntalled an uncertifed network, but used gear that could be 
certified, meaning making qualified decisions, it was within the Operators 
power to correct the violation, by getting the components certified. 
Although the politically correct method would be to certify the gear 
combination a head of time.  But my point is its not just the manufacturer 
that has the master decission.


With that said, its rare that a operator would want to go through the cost 
of certification, when the manufacturer already did, if the manufacturer now 
also had cost effective ways to make decissions on what gear is acceptable 
to use under the certification, and manufacturers had fair pricing on 
antenna gear, to take away the motive for someone to self certify.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Patrick Leary [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 3:29 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] roll your own radios..



John is 100% accurate. Also, with respect to using your own antenna, even
with that new relaxation of the rules, it ONLY applies to manufacturers, 
NOT

operators. What is does is to enable manufacturers to self-certify
additional antennas so long as the power is the same or less as the
originally certified version AND the beam pattern is fundamentally 
similar.


This rule does NOT permit operators to use whatever antennas they like.

As always, I know from 1st hand direct questioning of those FCC staffers 
who

wrote the rule revision. This is not hearsay, my assumption or my
interpretation.

Patrick Leary
AVP Marketing
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 11:31 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

The rules state that any radio / antenna combination has to either be a
certified system or that a substitute antenna used would have to meet
the same specs as one used for certification in a system. Many think
that this means anything goes. The truth is that there are almost
certainly a good bit of installed systems which would not pass FCC
enforcement inspection. Many believe that following maximum EIRP rules
is the only requirement. This is not so. It is a good practice if you
are not following the rules but that does not mean it is legal. Another
common belief is that anything goes is the rule of thumb due to the
general lack of enforcement in unlicensed bands. This is unfortunate and
further illustrates the need for our industry to mature.

Part of this maturity process should start by operators demanding to see
FCC certifications for the systems they buy. It is tough for operators
to remain compliant when so few systems are certified. Another step
should be that manufacturers certify their systems with commonly used
antenna / radio configurations every time they release a product.
Finally, distributors need to demand that all systems they sell meet
certification requirements. The fact is that certification is not
terribly costly or complicated and should be a step taken by all
manufacturers and eventually all of us. If anyone here represents
manufacturers who certify all their systems then now would be a good
time to toot your horn.

I believe the day will likely come that the FCC will inspect WISP
systems. It took them about 20 years to start cracking down on the cable
television industry for signal leakage and other infractions. Something
tells me this industry will not have to wait that long. Of course the
decision to follow the rules is inevitably up to each person. I would
like to think we all will be compliant in the future

RE: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

2006-08-18 Thread Patrick Leary
For sure. It has nothing to do with how the antenna is sold or sourced. What
is clear however is that as operators, you do not have the choice. Such
flexibility is ONLY given to the manufacturers. I was in the room where
Marlon pressed them on this point hard and they would not bend. For the FCC,
they still refused to open what they see as a Pandora's Box in terms of
letting operators make their own choices in terms of antennas. We all were a
bit surprised by this, though I understand their issue.

Patrick Leary
AVP Marketing
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 1:24 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

Patrick,

Not exactly. What you said is mostly true, and to the letter of the original

text, but there are added flexibilties.

It doesn't need to be the antenna that the manufacturer actually sells. For 
example, if the manufacturer OEMed a MTI antenna for certification, 
operators can now use the functional MTI antenna bought direct.  Also in 
face to face meetings, even though not the written text, we asked if 
operators could take responsibilty for determining the functional 
equivellent.  They responded that the reason the Manufacturers were required

to be the one, is that there had to be someone to take responsibilty, where 
it was inforcable to comply.  It was a grey area, but FCC staff stated that 
if the operator took responsibility, it could be feasible that it was 
allowed for the Operator to make the substitution.  The arguement is as 
integrators we have the abilty to get certifications just like 
Manufacturers.   So really the letter of the law was that who ever got the 
gear certified originally, would ahve the abilty to make the modifications 
of whats considered functional equivellent.  What this meant was that if an 
Operator isntalled an uncertifed network, but used gear that could be 
certified, meaning making qualified decisions, it was within the Operators 
power to correct the violation, by getting the components certified. 
Although the politically correct method would be to certify the gear 
combination a head of time.  But my point is its not just the manufacturer 
that has the master decission.

With that said, its rare that a operator would want to go through the cost 
of certification, when the manufacturer already did, if the manufacturer now

also had cost effective ways to make decissions on what gear is acceptable 
to use under the certification, and manufacturers had fair pricing on 
antenna gear, to take away the motive for someone to self certify.

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Patrick Leary [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 3:29 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] roll your own radios..


 John is 100% accurate. Also, with respect to using your own antenna, even
 with that new relaxation of the rules, it ONLY applies to manufacturers, 
 NOT
 operators. What is does is to enable manufacturers to self-certify
 additional antennas so long as the power is the same or less as the
 originally certified version AND the beam pattern is fundamentally 
 similar.

 This rule does NOT permit operators to use whatever antennas they like.

 As always, I know from 1st hand direct questioning of those FCC staffers 
 who
 wrote the rule revision. This is not hearsay, my assumption or my
 interpretation.

 Patrick Leary
 AVP Marketing
 Alvarion, Inc.
 o: 650.314.2628
 c: 760.580.0080
 Vonage: 650.641.1243

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of John Scrivner
 Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 11:31 AM
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

 The rules state that any radio / antenna combination has to either be a
 certified system or that a substitute antenna used would have to meet
 the same specs as one used for certification in a system. Many think
 that this means anything goes. The truth is that there are almost
 certainly a good bit of installed systems which would not pass FCC
 enforcement inspection. Many believe that following maximum EIRP rules
 is the only requirement. This is not so. It is a good practice if you
 are not following the rules but that does not mean it is legal. Another
 common belief is that anything goes is the rule of thumb due to the
 general lack of enforcement in unlicensed bands. This is unfortunate and
 further illustrates the need for our industry to mature.

 Part of this maturity process should start by operators demanding to see
 FCC certifications for the systems they buy. It is tough for operators
 to remain compliant when so few systems are certified. Another step
 should be that manufacturers certify their systems with commonly

Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

2006-08-18 Thread John Scrivner
This sounds like a good idea. I am sure we could add a link to a listing 
of certification labs. We also need to push manufacturers to certify. 
Without some pressure from us the certification will just look like more 
cost with little to gain to manufacturers. Pressure from customers would 
make this more of a requirement than what it seems to be now. If we all 
insist on certs then the overall cost for this would be negligible.

Scriv



Jack Unger wrote:


John,

Should WISPA consider publishing on our website a list of 
certification labs? It seems that our industry needs someone to step 
up and take on a leadership role and WISPA seems (to me anyway) to be 
the perfect organization to perform this role.


We could start by simply polling our list members to see which labs 
anyone has used and been satisfied with.


OK, speak up guys (and gals). What lab or labs have you researched or 
used?

  jack


John Scrivner wrote:

The rules state that any radio / antenna combination has to either be 
a certified system or that a substitute antenna used would have to 
meet the same specs as one used for certification in a system. Many 
think that this means anything goes. The truth is that there are 
almost certainly a good bit of installed systems which would not pass 
FCC enforcement inspection. Many believe that following maximum EIRP 
rules is the only requirement. This is not so. It is a good practice 
if you are not following the rules but that does not mean it is 
legal. Another common belief is that anything goes is the rule of 
thumb due to the general lack of enforcement in unlicensed bands. 
This is unfortunate and further illustrates the need for our industry 
to mature.


Part of this maturity process should start by operators demanding to 
see FCC certifications for the systems they buy. It is tough for 
operators to remain compliant when so few systems are certified. 
Another step should be that manufacturers certify their systems with 
commonly used antenna / radio configurations every time they release 
a product. Finally, distributors need to demand that all systems they 
sell meet certification requirements. The fact is that certification 
is not terribly costly or complicated and should be a step taken by 
all manufacturers and eventually all of us. If anyone here represents 
manufacturers who certify all their systems then now would be a good 
time to toot your horn.


I believe the day will likely come that the FCC will inspect WISP 
systems. It took them about 20 years to start cracking down on the 
cable television industry for signal leakage and other infractions. 
Something tells me this industry will not have to wait that long. Of 
course the decision to follow the rules is inevitably up to each 
person. I would like to think we all will be compliant in the future 
but this is an unrealistic goal I am sure if manufacturers do not 
take a leadership role in this effort. WISPA stops short of demanding 
that members do anything but I will say, as President of WISPA, we 
should all try to follow the law regarding this industry. No industry 
association could expect to have impact in policy and legislative 
efforts if they took the stand that shirking the law is a correct 
course of action.

Scriv


chris cooper wrote:

It sounds like several of you here build your own radios and use off 
the shelf antennas.  So if I buy a board, cards and an antenna what 
are my obligations to FCC as far as having a certified system in 
production?  Thanks for the education


 


Chris




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


RE: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

2006-08-18 Thread Patrick Leary
We have a pretty vigorous approved third party antenna list, but I believe
we are somewhat of the exception in terms of this facility.

Patrick Leary
AVP Marketing
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 1:58 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

This sounds like a good idea. I am sure we could add a link to a listing 
of certification labs. We also need to push manufacturers to certify. 
Without some pressure from us the certification will just look like more 
cost with little to gain to manufacturers. Pressure from customers would 
make this more of a requirement than what it seems to be now. If we all 
insist on certs then the overall cost for this would be negligible.
Scriv



Jack Unger wrote:

 John,

 Should WISPA consider publishing on our website a list of 
 certification labs? It seems that our industry needs someone to step 
 up and take on a leadership role and WISPA seems (to me anyway) to be 
 the perfect organization to perform this role.

 We could start by simply polling our list members to see which labs 
 anyone has used and been satisfied with.

 OK, speak up guys (and gals). What lab or labs have you researched or 
 used?
   jack


 John Scrivner wrote:

 The rules state that any radio / antenna combination has to either be 
 a certified system or that a substitute antenna used would have to 
 meet the same specs as one used for certification in a system. Many 
 think that this means anything goes. The truth is that there are 
 almost certainly a good bit of installed systems which would not pass 
 FCC enforcement inspection. Many believe that following maximum EIRP 
 rules is the only requirement. This is not so. It is a good practice 
 if you are not following the rules but that does not mean it is 
 legal. Another common belief is that anything goes is the rule of 
 thumb due to the general lack of enforcement in unlicensed bands. 
 This is unfortunate and further illustrates the need for our industry 
 to mature.

 Part of this maturity process should start by operators demanding to 
 see FCC certifications for the systems they buy. It is tough for 
 operators to remain compliant when so few systems are certified. 
 Another step should be that manufacturers certify their systems with 
 commonly used antenna / radio configurations every time they release 
 a product. Finally, distributors need to demand that all systems they 
 sell meet certification requirements. The fact is that certification 
 is not terribly costly or complicated and should be a step taken by 
 all manufacturers and eventually all of us. If anyone here represents 
 manufacturers who certify all their systems then now would be a good 
 time to toot your horn.

 I believe the day will likely come that the FCC will inspect WISP 
 systems. It took them about 20 years to start cracking down on the 
 cable television industry for signal leakage and other infractions. 
 Something tells me this industry will not have to wait that long. Of 
 course the decision to follow the rules is inevitably up to each 
 person. I would like to think we all will be compliant in the future 
 but this is an unrealistic goal I am sure if manufacturers do not 
 take a leadership role in this effort. WISPA stops short of demanding 
 that members do anything but I will say, as President of WISPA, we 
 should all try to follow the law regarding this industry. No industry 
 association could expect to have impact in policy and legislative 
 efforts if they took the stand that shirking the law is a correct 
 course of action.
 Scriv


 chris cooper wrote:

 It sounds like several of you here build your own radios and use off 
 the shelf antennas.  So if I buy a board, cards and an antenna what 
 are my obligations to FCC as far as having a certified system in 
 production?  Thanks for the education

  

 Chris


-- 
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(191).








 
 


This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals  computer
viruses(42).





-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

2006-08-18 Thread Matt Liotta
No need to push manufactures when you can just not buy their product. 
Why would you want to take the business risk of not buying a certified 
radio? I mean Trango sells radios plenty cheap and they're certified. 
Canopy is also cheap and also certified.


-Matt

John Scrivner wrote:
This sounds like a good idea. I am sure we could add a link to a 
listing of certification labs. We also need to push manufacturers to 
certify. Without some pressure from us the certification will just 
look like more cost with little to gain to manufacturers. Pressure 
from customers would make this more of a requirement than what it 
seems to be now. If we all insist on certs then the overall cost for 
this would be negligible.

Scriv



Jack Unger wrote:


John,

Should WISPA consider publishing on our website a list of 
certification labs? It seems that our industry needs someone to step 
up and take on a leadership role and WISPA seems (to me anyway) to be 
the perfect organization to perform this role.


We could start by simply polling our list members to see which labs 
anyone has used and been satisfied with.


OK, speak up guys (and gals). What lab or labs have you researched or 
used?

  jack


John Scrivner wrote:

The rules state that any radio / antenna combination has to either 
be a certified system or that a substitute antenna used would have 
to meet the same specs as one used for certification in a system. 
Many think that this means anything goes. The truth is that there 
are almost certainly a good bit of installed systems which would not 
pass FCC enforcement inspection. Many believe that following maximum 
EIRP rules is the only requirement. This is not so. It is a good 
practice if you are not following the rules but that does not mean 
it is legal. Another common belief is that anything goes is the 
rule of thumb due to the general lack of enforcement in unlicensed 
bands. This is unfortunate and further illustrates the need for our 
industry to mature.


Part of this maturity process should start by operators demanding to 
see FCC certifications for the systems they buy. It is tough for 
operators to remain compliant when so few systems are certified. 
Another step should be that manufacturers certify their systems with 
commonly used antenna / radio configurations every time they release 
a product. Finally, distributors need to demand that all systems 
they sell meet certification requirements. The fact is that 
certification is not terribly costly or complicated and should be a 
step taken by all manufacturers and eventually all of us. If anyone 
here represents manufacturers who certify all their systems then now 
would be a good time to toot your horn.


I believe the day will likely come that the FCC will inspect WISP 
systems. It took them about 20 years to start cracking down on the 
cable television industry for signal leakage and other infractions. 
Something tells me this industry will not have to wait that long. Of 
course the decision to follow the rules is inevitably up to each 
person. I would like to think we all will be compliant in the future 
but this is an unrealistic goal I am sure if manufacturers do not 
take a leadership role in this effort. WISPA stops short of 
demanding that members do anything but I will say, as President of 
WISPA, we should all try to follow the law regarding this industry. 
No industry association could expect to have impact in policy and 
legislative efforts if they took the stand that shirking the law is 
a correct course of action.

Scriv


chris cooper wrote:

It sounds like several of you here build your own radios and use 
off the shelf antennas.  So if I buy a board, cards and an antenna 
what are my obligations to FCC as far as having a certified system 
in production?  Thanks for the education


 


Chris





--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

2006-08-18 Thread Jason

All,

   $0.02:  A while back there was a discussion (The FCC even included 
it in the latest dialog about part 15, I think) about the possibility of 
a person becoming certified to work with unlicensed equipment.  If this 
afforded a person a real advantage (say being able to mix and match 
components as long as you do the math and take measurements, etc) why 
wasn't it pursued?  *Marlon,* I think you commented about this a few 
months back...  I would jump at the chance of becoming an Unlicensed 
Tech. and having freedom to build exactly what I need.


   As far as the Antenna/radio-roll-your-own thing: doesn't the antenna 
still have to appear in the manual issued by the manufacturer of the 
radio as an acceptable replacement.  I've been told by some WISPS that 
have spoken with the FCC that it does...



Jason

Jack Unger wrote:

John,

Should WISPA consider publishing on our website a list of 
certification labs? It seems that our industry needs someone to step 
up and take on a leadership role and WISPA seems (to me anyway) to be 
the perfect organization to perform this role.


We could start by simply polling our list members to see which labs 
anyone has used and been satisfied with.


OK, speak up guys (and gals). What lab or labs have you researched or 
used?

  jack


John Scrivner wrote:

The rules state that any radio / antenna combination has to either be 
a certified system or that a substitute antenna used would have to 
meet the same specs as one used for certification in a system. Many 
think that this means anything goes. The truth is that there are 
almost certainly a good bit of installed systems which would not pass 
FCC enforcement inspection. Many believe that following maximum EIRP 
rules is the only requirement. This is not so. It is a good practice 
if you are not following the rules but that does not mean it is 
legal. Another common belief is that anything goes is the rule of 
thumb due to the general lack of enforcement in unlicensed bands. 
This is unfortunate and further illustrates the need for our industry 
to mature.


Part of this maturity process should start by operators demanding to 
see FCC certifications for the systems they buy. It is tough for 
operators to remain compliant when so few systems are certified. 
Another step should be that manufacturers certify their systems with 
commonly used antenna / radio configurations every time they release 
a product. Finally, distributors need to demand that all systems they 
sell meet certification requirements. The fact is that certification 
is not terribly costly or complicated and should be a step taken by 
all manufacturers and eventually all of us. If anyone here represents 
manufacturers who certify all their systems then now would be a good 
time to toot your horn.


I believe the day will likely come that the FCC will inspect WISP 
systems. It took them about 20 years to start cracking down on the 
cable television industry for signal leakage and other infractions. 
Something tells me this industry will not have to wait that long. Of 
course the decision to follow the rules is inevitably up to each 
person. I would like to think we all will be compliant in the future 
but this is an unrealistic goal I am sure if manufacturers do not 
take a leadership role in this effort. WISPA stops short of demanding 
that members do anything but I will say, as President of WISPA, we 
should all try to follow the law regarding this industry. No industry 
association could expect to have impact in policy and legislative 
efforts if they took the stand that shirking the law is a correct 
course of action.

Scriv


chris cooper wrote:

It sounds like several of you here build your own radios and use off 
the shelf antennas.  So if I buy a board, cards and an antenna what 
are my obligations to FCC as far as having a certified system in 
production?  Thanks for the education


 


Chris




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

2006-08-18 Thread Jack Unger

Patrick,

From my perspective, Alvarion HAS set a pretty high standard in terms 
of marketing certified equipment. Can you research the certification 
labs that Alvarion has used and give us the names of those labs so that 
others will know where to go for reliable certification services?


Thanks,
jack


Patrick Leary wrote:

We have a pretty vigorous approved third party antenna list, but I believe
we are somewhat of the exception in terms of this facility.

Patrick Leary
AVP Marketing
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 1:58 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

This sounds like a good idea. I am sure we could add a link to a listing 
of certification labs. We also need to push manufacturers to certify. 
Without some pressure from us the certification will just look like more 
cost with little to gain to manufacturers. Pressure from customers would 
make this more of a requirement than what it seems to be now. If we all 
insist on certs then the overall cost for this would be negligible.

Scriv



Jack Unger wrote:



John,

Should WISPA consider publishing on our website a list of 
certification labs? It seems that our industry needs someone to step 
up and take on a leadership role and WISPA seems (to me anyway) to be 
the perfect organization to perform this role.


We could start by simply polling our list members to see which labs 
anyone has used and been satisfied with.


OK, speak up guys (and gals). What lab or labs have you researched or 
used?

 jack


John Scrivner wrote:


The rules state that any radio / antenna combination has to either be 
a certified system or that a substitute antenna used would have to 
meet the same specs as one used for certification in a system. Many 
think that this means anything goes. The truth is that there are 
almost certainly a good bit of installed systems which would not pass 
FCC enforcement inspection. Many believe that following maximum EIRP 
rules is the only requirement. This is not so. It is a good practice 
if you are not following the rules but that does not mean it is 
legal. Another common belief is that anything goes is the rule of 
thumb due to the general lack of enforcement in unlicensed bands. 
This is unfortunate and further illustrates the need for our industry 
to mature.


Part of this maturity process should start by operators demanding to 
see FCC certifications for the systems they buy. It is tough for 
operators to remain compliant when so few systems are certified. 
Another step should be that manufacturers certify their systems with 
commonly used antenna / radio configurations every time they release 
a product. Finally, distributors need to demand that all systems they 
sell meet certification requirements. The fact is that certification 
is not terribly costly or complicated and should be a step taken by 
all manufacturers and eventually all of us. If anyone here represents 
manufacturers who certify all their systems then now would be a good 
time to toot your horn.


I believe the day will likely come that the FCC will inspect WISP 
systems. It took them about 20 years to start cracking down on the 
cable television industry for signal leakage and other infractions. 
Something tells me this industry will not have to wait that long. Of 
course the decision to follow the rules is inevitably up to each 
person. I would like to think we all will be compliant in the future 
but this is an unrealistic goal I am sure if manufacturers do not 
take a leadership role in this effort. WISPA stops short of demanding 
that members do anything but I will say, as President of WISPA, we 
should all try to follow the law regarding this industry. No industry 
association could expect to have impact in policy and legislative 
efforts if they took the stand that shirking the law is a correct 
course of action.

Scriv


chris cooper wrote:


It sounds like several of you here build your own radios and use off 
the shelf antennas.  So if I buy a board, cards and an antenna what 
are my obligations to FCC as far as having a certified system in 
production?  Thanks for the education




Chris





--
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] roll your own radios..

2006-08-18 Thread Jack Unger

Matt,

I agree with John's suggestion that we need to push manufacturers to 
certify. We could request that manufacturers indicate the certification 
status of their equipment on their websites, their spec sheets, and 
their advertising material. We could even create the artwork and make 
available to the industry a Part 15 FCC-Certified Equipment logo at no 
charge.


You ask - Why would we need to push manufacturers when a WISP could 
just NOT buy a non-certified product? Because half of the WISPs out 
there don't even realize that certification is required by law. WISPA 
can perform a valuable public service by simply providing knowledge and 
education for the WISP community and also by facilitating the means for 
manufacturers to get the certification accomplished (publishing the list 
of certification labs).


The alternative is for each of us to completely ignore the issue, which 
is the same as us saying (pick your favorite, vote for all the apply)


1. Laws are made to be broken
2. Laws are made to be ignored
2. Laws are for other people, not for me
3. Ignorance of the law is my excuse for breaking the law
4. If nobody enforces it, it's not a law
5. Jack, Joe, John, Jim, James, and Jean aren't following the law so 
why should I

6. Add your own favorite excuse here.

Our role is not enforcement, but education and leadership. By our 
actions, we can benefit WISPs, manufacturers, and WISP customers. By 
playing this role responsibly, our industry gains not just greater 
freedom from interference but greater credibility with the public, the 
Congress, the news media, and the FCC.


jack


Matt Liotta wrote:

No need to push manufactures when you can just not buy their product. 
Why would you want to take the business risk of not buying a certified 
radio? I mean Trango sells radios plenty cheap and they're certified. 
Canopy is also cheap and also certified.


-Matt

John Scrivner wrote:

This sounds like a good idea. I am sure we could add a link to a 
listing of certification labs. We also need to push manufacturers to 
certify. Without some pressure from us the certification will just 
look like more cost with little to gain to manufacturers. Pressure 
from customers would make this more of a requirement than what it 
seems to be now. If we all insist on certs then the overall cost for 
this would be negligible.

Scriv



Jack Unger wrote:


John,

Should WISPA consider publishing on our website a list of 
certification labs? It seems that our industry needs someone to step 
up and take on a leadership role and WISPA seems (to me anyway) to be 
the perfect organization to perform this role.


We could start by simply polling our list members to see which labs 
anyone has used and been satisfied with.


OK, speak up guys (and gals). What lab or labs have you researched or 
used?

  jack


John Scrivner wrote:

The rules state that any radio / antenna combination has to either 
be a certified system or that a substitute antenna used would have 
to meet the same specs as one used for certification in a system. 
Many think that this means anything goes. The truth is that there 
are almost certainly a good bit of installed systems which would not 
pass FCC enforcement inspection. Many believe that following maximum 
EIRP rules is the only requirement. This is not so. It is a good 
practice if you are not following the rules but that does not mean 
it is legal. Another common belief is that anything goes is the 
rule of thumb due to the general lack of enforcement in unlicensed 
bands. This is unfortunate and further illustrates the need for our 
industry to mature.


Part of this maturity process should start by operators demanding to 
see FCC certifications for the systems they buy. It is tough for 
operators to remain compliant when so few systems are certified. 
Another step should be that manufacturers certify their systems with 
commonly used antenna / radio configurations every time they release 
a product. Finally, distributors need to demand that all systems 
they sell meet certification requirements. The fact is that 
certification is not terribly costly or complicated and should be a 
step taken by all manufacturers and eventually all of us. If anyone 
here represents manufacturers who certify all their systems then now 
would be a good time to toot your horn.


I believe the day will likely come that the FCC will inspect WISP 
systems. It took them about 20 years to start cracking down on the 
cable television industry for signal leakage and other infractions. 
Something tells me this industry will not have to wait that long. Of 
course the decision to follow the rules is inevitably up to each 
person. I would like to think we all will be compliant in the future 
but this is an unrealistic goal I am sure if manufacturers do not 
take a leadership role in this effort. WISPA stops short of 
demanding that members do anything but I will say, as President of 
WISPA, we should all try to 

RE: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

2006-08-18 Thread Patrick Leary
That's easy. From the FCC site:
https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/oet/cf/eas/reports/TestFirmSearchResult.cfm

And here is the search location:
https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/oet/cf/eas/reports/TestFirmSearch.cfm


Patrick Leary
AVP Marketing
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 2:35 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

Patrick,

 From my perspective, Alvarion HAS set a pretty high standard in terms 
of marketing certified equipment. Can you research the certification 
labs that Alvarion has used and give us the names of those labs so that 
others will know where to go for reliable certification services?

Thanks,
 jack


Patrick Leary wrote:
 We have a pretty vigorous approved third party antenna list, but I believe
 we are somewhat of the exception in terms of this facility.
 
 Patrick Leary
 AVP Marketing
 Alvarion, Inc.
 o: 650.314.2628
 c: 760.580.0080
 Vonage: 650.641.1243
 
 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of John Scrivner
 Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 1:58 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..
 
 This sounds like a good idea. I am sure we could add a link to a listing 
 of certification labs. We also need to push manufacturers to certify. 
 Without some pressure from us the certification will just look like more 
 cost with little to gain to manufacturers. Pressure from customers would 
 make this more of a requirement than what it seems to be now. If we all 
 insist on certs then the overall cost for this would be negligible.
 Scriv
 
 
 
 Jack Unger wrote:
 
 
John,

Should WISPA consider publishing on our website a list of 
certification labs? It seems that our industry needs someone to step 
up and take on a leadership role and WISPA seems (to me anyway) to be 
the perfect organization to perform this role.

We could start by simply polling our list members to see which labs 
anyone has used and been satisfied with.

OK, speak up guys (and gals). What lab or labs have you researched or 
used?
  jack


John Scrivner wrote:


The rules state that any radio / antenna combination has to either be 
a certified system or that a substitute antenna used would have to 
meet the same specs as one used for certification in a system. Many 
think that this means anything goes. The truth is that there are 
almost certainly a good bit of installed systems which would not pass 
FCC enforcement inspection. Many believe that following maximum EIRP 
rules is the only requirement. This is not so. It is a good practice 
if you are not following the rules but that does not mean it is 
legal. Another common belief is that anything goes is the rule of 
thumb due to the general lack of enforcement in unlicensed bands. 
This is unfortunate and further illustrates the need for our industry 
to mature.

Part of this maturity process should start by operators demanding to 
see FCC certifications for the systems they buy. It is tough for 
operators to remain compliant when so few systems are certified. 
Another step should be that manufacturers certify their systems with 
commonly used antenna / radio configurations every time they release 
a product. Finally, distributors need to demand that all systems they 
sell meet certification requirements. The fact is that certification 
is not terribly costly or complicated and should be a step taken by 
all manufacturers and eventually all of us. If anyone here represents 
manufacturers who certify all their systems then now would be a good 
time to toot your horn.

I believe the day will likely come that the FCC will inspect WISP 
systems. It took them about 20 years to start cracking down on the 
cable television industry for signal leakage and other infractions. 
Something tells me this industry will not have to wait that long. Of 
course the decision to follow the rules is inevitably up to each 
person. I would like to think we all will be compliant in the future 
but this is an unrealistic goal I am sure if manufacturers do not 
take a leadership role in this effort. WISPA stops short of demanding 
that members do anything but I will say, as President of WISPA, we 
should all try to follow the law regarding this industry. No industry 
association could expect to have impact in policy and legislative 
efforts if they took the stand that shirking the law is a correct 
course of action.
Scriv


chris cooper wrote:


It sounds like several of you here build your own radios and use off 
the shelf antennas.  So if I buy a board, cards and an antenna what 
are my obligations to FCC as far as having a certified system in 
production?  Thanks for the education

 

Chris



-- 
Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993

RE: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

2006-08-18 Thread Patrick Leary
Disregard the first link. Instead, just type U.S. in the country field and
hit enter within the search page. You will pull up 149 labs. 

WISPA should not re-create the wheel. The FCC site has a wealth of great
info and WISPA should simply link to it. It will also get WISPs in the habit
of going to the FCC site (and using the WISPA site as another resource for
them.

Patrick Leary
AVP Marketing
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Patrick Leary
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 2:37 PM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: RE: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

That's easy. From the FCC site:
https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/oet/cf/eas/reports/TestFirmSearchResult.cfm

And here is the search location:
https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/oet/cf/eas/reports/TestFirmSearch.cfm


Patrick Leary
AVP Marketing
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 2:35 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

Patrick,

 From my perspective, Alvarion HAS set a pretty high standard in terms 
of marketing certified equipment. Can you research the certification 
labs that Alvarion has used and give us the names of those labs so that 
others will know where to go for reliable certification services?

Thanks,
 jack


Patrick Leary wrote:
 We have a pretty vigorous approved third party antenna list, but I believe
 we are somewhat of the exception in terms of this facility.
 
 Patrick Leary
 AVP Marketing
 Alvarion, Inc.
 o: 650.314.2628
 c: 760.580.0080
 Vonage: 650.641.1243
 
 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of John Scrivner
 Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 1:58 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..
 
 This sounds like a good idea. I am sure we could add a link to a listing 
 of certification labs. We also need to push manufacturers to certify. 
 Without some pressure from us the certification will just look like more 
 cost with little to gain to manufacturers. Pressure from customers would 
 make this more of a requirement than what it seems to be now. If we all 
 insist on certs then the overall cost for this would be negligible.
 Scriv
 
 
 
 Jack Unger wrote:
 
 
John,

Should WISPA consider publishing on our website a list of 
certification labs? It seems that our industry needs someone to step 
up and take on a leadership role and WISPA seems (to me anyway) to be 
the perfect organization to perform this role.

We could start by simply polling our list members to see which labs 
anyone has used and been satisfied with.

OK, speak up guys (and gals). What lab or labs have you researched or 
used?
  jack


John Scrivner wrote:


The rules state that any radio / antenna combination has to either be 
a certified system or that a substitute antenna used would have to 
meet the same specs as one used for certification in a system. Many 
think that this means anything goes. The truth is that there are 
almost certainly a good bit of installed systems which would not pass 
FCC enforcement inspection. Many believe that following maximum EIRP 
rules is the only requirement. This is not so. It is a good practice 
if you are not following the rules but that does not mean it is 
legal. Another common belief is that anything goes is the rule of 
thumb due to the general lack of enforcement in unlicensed bands. 
This is unfortunate and further illustrates the need for our industry 
to mature.

Part of this maturity process should start by operators demanding to 
see FCC certifications for the systems they buy. It is tough for 
operators to remain compliant when so few systems are certified. 
Another step should be that manufacturers certify their systems with 
commonly used antenna / radio configurations every time they release 
a product. Finally, distributors need to demand that all systems they 
sell meet certification requirements. The fact is that certification 
is not terribly costly or complicated and should be a step taken by 
all manufacturers and eventually all of us. If anyone here represents 
manufacturers who certify all their systems then now would be a good 
time to toot your horn.

I believe the day will likely come that the FCC will inspect WISP 
systems. It took them about 20 years to start cracking down on the 
cable television industry for signal leakage and other infractions. 
Something tells me this industry will not have to wait that long. Of 
course the decision to follow the rules is inevitably up to each 
person. I would like to think we all will be compliant in the future 
but this is an unrealistic goal I am sure if manufacturers do not 
take a leadership role in this effort. WISPA stops short of demanding 
that members do

Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

2006-08-18 Thread Matt Liotta

Jack Unger wrote:
You ask - Why would we need to push manufacturers when a WISP could 
just NOT buy a non-certified product? Because half of the WISPs out 
there don't even realize that certification is required by law. WISPA 
can perform a valuable public service by simply providing knowledge 
and education for the WISP community and also by facilitating the 
means for manufacturers to get the certification accomplished 
(publishing the list of certification labs).


First of all, there is no way our small group is going to influence 
manufactures of non-certified gear. We already don't buy from those 
manufactures, so it is not impacting their sales. Second, if WISPs don't 
know that certification is a requirement then why would certified gear 
appeal to them?


-Matt
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

2006-08-18 Thread Jack Unger

Patrick - Thank you.


Patrick Leary wrote:


That's easy. From the FCC site:
https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/oet/cf/eas/reports/TestFirmSearchResult.cfm


The above link didn't work for me.


And here is the search location:
https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/oet/cf/eas/reports/TestFirmSearch.cfm


This link is great! I put CA (California) and Accredited into the 
search criteria and the FCC site returned 30 hits for certification labs 
in CA. Fantastic!


I would propose that WISPA include this FCC link on the new website.

jack




Patrick Leary
AVP Marketing
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 2:35 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

Patrick,

 From my perspective, Alvarion HAS set a pretty high standard in terms 
of marketing certified equipment. Can you research the certification 
labs that Alvarion has used and give us the names of those labs so that 
others will know where to go for reliable certification services?


Thanks,
 jack


Patrick Leary wrote:


We have a pretty vigorous approved third party antenna list, but I believe
we are somewhat of the exception in terms of this facility.

Patrick Leary
AVP Marketing
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 1:58 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

This sounds like a good idea. I am sure we could add a link to a listing 
of certification labs. We also need to push manufacturers to certify. 
Without some pressure from us the certification will just look like more 
cost with little to gain to manufacturers. Pressure from customers would 
make this more of a requirement than what it seems to be now. If we all 
insist on certs then the overall cost for this would be negligible.

Scriv



Jack Unger wrote:




John,

Should WISPA consider publishing on our website a list of 
certification labs? It seems that our industry needs someone to step 
up and take on a leadership role and WISPA seems (to me anyway) to be 
the perfect organization to perform this role.


We could start by simply polling our list members to see which labs 
anyone has used and been satisfied with.


OK, speak up guys (and gals). What lab or labs have you researched or 
used?

jack


John Scrivner wrote:



The rules state that any radio / antenna combination has to either be 
a certified system or that a substitute antenna used would have to 
meet the same specs as one used for certification in a system. Many 
think that this means anything goes. The truth is that there are 
almost certainly a good bit of installed systems which would not pass 
FCC enforcement inspection. Many believe that following maximum EIRP 
rules is the only requirement. This is not so. It is a good practice 
if you are not following the rules but that does not mean it is 
legal. Another common belief is that anything goes is the rule of 
thumb due to the general lack of enforcement in unlicensed bands. 
This is unfortunate and further illustrates the need for our industry 
to mature.


Part of this maturity process should start by operators demanding to 
see FCC certifications for the systems they buy. It is tough for 
operators to remain compliant when so few systems are certified. 
Another step should be that manufacturers certify their systems with 
commonly used antenna / radio configurations every time they release 
a product. Finally, distributors need to demand that all systems they 
sell meet certification requirements. The fact is that certification 
is not terribly costly or complicated and should be a step taken by 
all manufacturers and eventually all of us. If anyone here represents 
manufacturers who certify all their systems then now would be a good 
time to toot your horn.


I believe the day will likely come that the FCC will inspect WISP 
systems. It took them about 20 years to start cracking down on the 
cable television industry for signal leakage and other infractions. 
Something tells me this industry will not have to wait that long. Of 
course the decision to follow the rules is inevitably up to each 
person. I would like to think we all will be compliant in the future 
but this is an unrealistic goal I am sure if manufacturers do not 
take a leadership role in this effort. WISPA stops short of demanding 
that members do anything but I will say, as President of WISPA, we 
should all try to follow the law regarding this industry. No industry 
association could expect to have impact in policy and legislative 
efforts if they took the stand that shirking the law is a correct 
course of action.

Scriv


chris cooper wrote:



It sounds like several of you here build your own radios and use off

Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

2006-08-18 Thread Jack Unger

Matt,

My response to your questions are inline, below.

jack


Matt Liotta wrote:


Jack Unger wrote:

You ask - Why would we need to push manufacturers when a WISP could 
just NOT buy a non-certified product? Because half of the WISPs out 
there don't even realize that certification is required by law. WISPA 
can perform a valuable public service by simply providing knowledge 
and education for the WISP community and also by facilitating the 
means for manufacturers to get the certification accomplished 
(publishing the list of certification labs).


First of all, there is no way our small group is going to influence 
manufactures of non-certified gear. We already don't buy from those 
manufactures, so it is not impacting their sales. 


First, our small group can certainly influence manufacturers. The 
voice of an industry trade organization (which is what we are) carries a 
lot of weight if we simply decide to use that voice to speak out. Only 
if we say nothing, will our voice carry no weight. In that case, we 
might as well cease to exist.


Second, I'd venture a guess that many WISPA members DO sometimes buy 
non-certified equipment. We can't make a blanket statement that all 
WISPA members buy only certified equipment. Even if it were true that 
all WISPA members bought only certified equipment (and I'll bet you a 
steak dinner that it's not true) what about all the other WISPs and 
WISP-industry providers who are on our mailing lists and who are 
influenced by what we say and do? Is it WISPA's job to stand up for 
what's legal and what's right or should WISPA just say Forget it, we 
don't care, it's not our job, and we're too busy.


Article IV of the WISPA Code of Ethics says:

 ARTICLE IV
We will strive to broaden public understanding and enhance public regard 
and confidence in our Industry 


Educating our industry and the public is certainly in keeping with our 
Charter.



Second, if WISPs don't
know that certification is a requirement then why would certified gear 
appeal to them?


I submit that it's part of our job to educate the industry. If WISPs 
don't know that certification is a requirement, then IT'S OUR JOB to 
help them learn. Once they know the laws of the industry that they are 
joining then they will want to buy certified equipment.


By the way, who would start a business in an industry and then not want 
to know the laws that regulate that industry? How far would I get (and 
how smart would I be) if I opened a new restaurant in your neighborhood 
but I didn't stop long enough to learn about the sanitation laws in your 
city? Would you feel confident bringing your new girlfriend to my 
restaurant on Friday night?


jack



-Matt


--
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] roll your own radios..

2006-08-18 Thread Tom DeReggi
I was in the room where Marlon pressed them on this point hard and they 
would not bend.


http://www.rapiddsl.net/latest_news/FccVisitOct2004.htm

Thats right, you were there Patrick. (PS. Your wherever Wireless goes, DSL 
follows speach rocked!)  And you are right, Marlon was pressing hard, and 
they were not bending on giving operator's control (the pandora's box) in 
most of the meeting.  And the original intent was to make it easier and more 
cost effective for manufacturers to add complete product lines under their 
existing certifications.


But towards the end, I felt a little bend. The relevant part is why they 
didn't want to bend. What would make it a Pandora's box? It was 
accountabilty and the ease of breaking the rules. Its the reason they also 
refused to bend on the unique connector rule.  (Technically, which would 
make every N connector based radio an uncertifiable system, if they lived to 
the letter of their rules.).   Where it was getting grey, is questions were 
asked like, what if What makes it a grey area are things like, What is the 
definition of Manufacturer ?


Sure its clear that Alvarion is the Manufacturer of a BH40 and holds the 
certification of that radio platform, and the responsible party, and 
Alvarion is appropriate to decide what is and isn't and equivellent product 
to meet certification under its certification.  I don't deny that.


But who is the manufacturer of an uncertified system? Atheros? WRAP? The 
Operator? Who is responsible to certify the system? Its not spare parts 
manufacturers. The line of who is a manufacturer, who is a provider, and who 
is a reseller is getting blurred.  And what qualifies as a method of a 
Manufacturer giving approval of what's certifyable? If an operator calls a 
Manufacturer and asks is this PacWireless dish of the same power or less as 
the originally certified version AND the beam pattern is fundamentally 
similar, and they say yes, is the operator free to proceed? Who is the 
authoritary person from the manufacturer able to do so?  And what proof 
needs to be given that such permission was granted?  And if you violate, 
what are the penalties if you comply after the fact?  Details were left out. 
It all boils down to someone is going to be held responsible, when output of 
a system violates allowable specfications.  And the way the rule is written, 
they have the abilty to hold people accountable.  But the intent was not to 
prevent innovation by responsible WISPs.


The general census was, which will never be found in print, was if its in 
legal limits, the FCC police aint comming to knock on your door.  But the 
second someone complains, and you weren't within specification, they were 
comming after you.


What I will say, is I appreciate Alvarions effort to certify a variety of 
antennas and make available list of certified antenna lines for their 
products, which I beleive they have, so WISPs that use the Product don't 
have to worry about certification and compliance issues.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Patrick Leary [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 4:25 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] roll your own radios..


For sure. It has nothing to do with how the antenna is sold or sourced. 
What

is clear however is that as operators, you do not have the choice. Such
flexibility is ONLY given to the manufacturers. I was in the room where
Marlon pressed them on this point hard and they would not bend. For the 
FCC,

they still refused to open what they see as a Pandora's Box in terms of
letting operators make their own choices in terms of antennas. We all were 
a

bit surprised by this, though I understand their issue.

Patrick Leary
AVP Marketing
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 1:24 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

Patrick,

Not exactly. What you said is mostly true, and to the letter of the 
original


text, but there are added flexibilties.

It doesn't need to be the antenna that the manufacturer actually sells. 
For

example, if the manufacturer OEMed a MTI antenna for certification,
operators can now use the functional MTI antenna bought direct.  Also in
face to face meetings, even though not the written text, we asked if
operators could take responsibilty for determining the functional
equivellent.  They responded that the reason the Manufacturers were 
required


to be the one, is that there had to be someone to take responsibilty, 
where
it was inforcable to comply.  It was a grey area, but FCC staff stated 
that

if the operator took responsibility, it could be feasible that it was
allowed for the Operator to make the substitution.  The arguement is as
integrators we have the abilty

Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

2006-08-18 Thread Matt Liotta

Jack Unger wrote:
First, our small group can certainly influence manufacturers. The 
voice of an industry trade organization (which is what we are) carries 
a lot of weight if we simply decide to use that voice to speak out. 
Only if we say nothing, will our voice carry no weight. In that case, 
we might as well cease to exist.


We can influence manufacturers by explaining what we want them to 
produce and if they produce it we will buy it. Take for example the 
whole thread on MTU size, which seemed to get at least one manufacture 
to take notice. That however is because they could actually lose sales 
if they don't pay attention to our needs. I personally don't see any 
benefit provided by current non-certified gear, so its not like I will 
start buying the gear if it was certified. Therefore, what incentive 
would such a manufacture have knowing my position? I guess a better 
question is what benefit does non-certified gear have over certified 
gear? I personally don't see the benefit, so why waste time trying to 
convince the manufacture to certify it?
Second, I'd venture a guess that many WISPA members DO sometimes buy 
non-certified equipment. We can't make a blanket statement that all 
WISPA members buy only certified equipment. Even if it were true that 
all WISPA members bought only certified equipment (and I'll bet you a 
steak dinner that it's not true) what about all the other WISPs and 
WISP-industry providers who are on our mailing lists and who are 
influenced by what we say and do? Is it WISPA's job to stand up for 
what's legal and what's right or should WISPA just say Forget it, we 
don't care, it's not our job, and we're too busy.


I am all for standing up for what is legal, but what does that mean in 
practical terms for WISPA?
I submit that it's part of our job to educate the industry. If WISPs 
don't know that certification is a requirement, then IT'S OUR JOB to 
help them learn. Once they know the laws of the industry that they are 
joining then they will want to buy certified equipment.



Why is it our job?
By the way, who would start a business in an industry and then not 
want to know the laws that regulate that industry? How far would I get 
(and how smart would I be) if I opened a new restaurant in your 
neighborhood but I didn't stop long enough to learn about the 
sanitation laws in your city? Would you feel confident bringing your 
new girlfriend to my restaurant on Friday night?


Those are interesting questions that don't seem to apply to my position. 
A more analogical question would be should the other restaurants help 
you learn what you are unwilling to do on your own? How long will a 
business survive with such an attitude? Why not just wait for them to 
die on their own?


-Matt
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

2006-08-18 Thread Tom DeReggi
Because its certified system, not certified radio.  Many of the 
manufacturers do not provide antennas that are always available.
Just this month, Trangos DSS dishes were not available, it was buy your own, 
or don't earn revenue for a month.


Or use a Andrews 3 ft dish with better RF characteristics for avoiding 
interference with/to others, apposed to the inconsistent certified brand 
that have higher wind load and higher price.
Sometimes the more responsible thing to do is to use the better choice, even 
if uncertified.  Because times change quick, and manufactuers do not always 
keep up.  If more manufacturers tested common antennas more quickly, this 
problem/thread would not exist.
But why should the manufacturer eat the cost to test antenna manufacturer's 
products, why not antenna manufacturers test with the radios?


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Matt Liotta [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 5:02 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..


No need to push manufactures when you can just not buy their product. Why 
would you want to take the business risk of not buying a certified radio? 
I mean Trango sells radios plenty cheap and they're certified. Canopy is 
also cheap and also certified.


-Matt

John Scrivner wrote:
This sounds like a good idea. I am sure we could add a link to a listing 
of certification labs. We also need to push manufacturers to certify. 
Without some pressure from us the certification will just look like more 
cost with little to gain to manufacturers. Pressure from customers would 
make this more of a requirement than what it seems to be now. If we all 
insist on certs then the overall cost for this would be negligible.

Scriv



Jack Unger wrote:


John,

Should WISPA consider publishing on our website a list of certification 
labs? It seems that our industry needs someone to step up and take on a 
leadership role and WISPA seems (to me anyway) to be the perfect 
organization to perform this role.


We could start by simply polling our list members to see which labs 
anyone has used and been satisfied with.


OK, speak up guys (and gals). What lab or labs have you researched or 
used?

  jack


John Scrivner wrote:

The rules state that any radio / antenna combination has to either be a 
certified system or that a substitute antenna used would have to meet 
the same specs as one used for certification in a system. Many think 
that this means anything goes. The truth is that there are almost 
certainly a good bit of installed systems which would not pass FCC 
enforcement inspection. Many believe that following maximum EIRP rules 
is the only requirement. This is not so. It is a good practice if you 
are not following the rules but that does not mean it is legal. Another 
common belief is that anything goes is the rule of thumb due to the 
general lack of enforcement in unlicensed bands. This is unfortunate 
and further illustrates the need for our industry to mature.


Part of this maturity process should start by operators demanding to 
see FCC certifications for the systems they buy. It is tough for 
operators to remain compliant when so few systems are certified. 
Another step should be that manufacturers certify their systems with 
commonly used antenna / radio configurations every time they release a 
product. Finally, distributors need to demand that all systems they 
sell meet certification requirements. The fact is that certification is 
not terribly costly or complicated and should be a step taken by all 
manufacturers and eventually all of us. If anyone here represents 
manufacturers who certify all their systems then now would be a good 
time to toot your horn.


I believe the day will likely come that the FCC will inspect WISP 
systems. It took them about 20 years to start cracking down on the 
cable television industry for signal leakage and other infractions. 
Something tells me this industry will not have to wait that long. Of 
course the decision to follow the rules is inevitably up to each 
person. I would like to think we all will be compliant in the future 
but this is an unrealistic goal I am sure if manufacturers do not take 
a leadership role in this effort. WISPA stops short of demanding that 
members do anything but I will say, as President of WISPA, we should 
all try to follow the law regarding this industry. No industry 
association could expect to have impact in policy and legislative 
efforts if they took the stand that shirking the law is a correct 
course of action.

Scriv


chris cooper wrote:

It sounds like several of you here build your own radios and use off 
the shelf antennas.  So if I buy a board, cards and an antenna what 
are my obligations to FCC as far as having a certified system in 
production?  Thanks for the education



Chris





--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

2006-08-18 Thread Tom DeReggi

Jack,

One thing that is undisputable, is that Manufacturers have been given the 
power to make their list of equivellent products that would be certified and 
now its super cheap for them to do it with the relaxed rules.  I agree, the 
best method to solve this problem is to encourage our manufacturers to 
certiy more antennas, or authorize their use as acceptible equivellent 
replacements.


I also believe educating the public on the best way to certify is a great 
idea, and one that has been around for a few years but not yet followed 
through on.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 5:35 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..



Matt,

I agree with John's suggestion that we need to push manufacturers to 
certify. We could request that manufacturers indicate the certification 
status of their equipment on their websites, their spec sheets, and their 
advertising material. We could even create the artwork and make available 
to the industry a Part 15 FCC-Certified Equipment logo at no charge.


You ask - Why would we need to push manufacturers when a WISP could just 
NOT buy a non-certified product? Because half of the WISPs out there 
don't even realize that certification is required by law. WISPA can 
perform a valuable public service by simply providing knowledge and 
education for the WISP community and also by facilitating the means for 
manufacturers to get the certification accomplished (publishing the list 
of certification labs).


The alternative is for each of us to completely ignore the issue, which is 
the same as us saying (pick your favorite, vote for all the apply)


1. Laws are made to be broken
2. Laws are made to be ignored
2. Laws are for other people, not for me
3. Ignorance of the law is my excuse for breaking the law
4. If nobody enforces it, it's not a law
5. Jack, Joe, John, Jim, James, and Jean aren't following the law so why 
should I

6. Add your own favorite excuse here.

Our role is not enforcement, but education and leadership. By our actions, 
we can benefit WISPs, manufacturers, and WISP customers. By playing this 
role responsibly, our industry gains not just greater freedom from 
interference but greater credibility with the public, the Congress, the 
news media, and the FCC.


jack


Matt Liotta wrote:

No need to push manufactures when you can just not buy their product. Why 
would you want to take the business risk of not buying a certified radio? 
I mean Trango sells radios plenty cheap and they're certified. Canopy is 
also cheap and also certified.


-Matt

John Scrivner wrote:

This sounds like a good idea. I am sure we could add a link to a listing 
of certification labs. We also need to push manufacturers to certify. 
Without some pressure from us the certification will just look like more 
cost with little to gain to manufacturers. Pressure from customers would 
make this more of a requirement than what it seems to be now. If we all 
insist on certs then the overall cost for this would be negligible.

Scriv



Jack Unger wrote:


John,

Should WISPA consider publishing on our website a list of certification 
labs? It seems that our industry needs someone to step up and take on a 
leadership role and WISPA seems (to me anyway) to be the perfect 
organization to perform this role.


We could start by simply polling our list members to see which labs 
anyone has used and been satisfied with.


OK, speak up guys (and gals). What lab or labs have you researched or 
used?

  jack


John Scrivner wrote:

The rules state that any radio / antenna combination has to either be 
a certified system or that a substitute antenna used would have to 
meet the same specs as one used for certification in a system. Many 
think that this means anything goes. The truth is that there are 
almost certainly a good bit of installed systems which would not pass 
FCC enforcement inspection. Many believe that following maximum EIRP 
rules is the only requirement. This is not so. It is a good practice 
if you are not following the rules but that does not mean it is legal. 
Another common belief is that anything goes is the rule of thumb due 
to the general lack of enforcement in unlicensed bands. This is 
unfortunate and further illustrates the need for our industry to 
mature.


Part of this maturity process should start by operators demanding to 
see FCC certifications for the systems they buy. It is tough for 
operators to remain compliant when so few systems are certified. 
Another step should be that manufacturers certify their systems with 
commonly used antenna / radio configurations every time they release a 
product. Finally, distributors need to demand that all systems they 
sell meet certification requirements. The fact is that certification 
is not terribly costly or complicated and should

Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

2006-08-18 Thread Ron Wallace
Patrick,

Man, you coughed those URLs up pretty fast. Thanks for your participation in this list, you always have something educational, and you share your knowledge openly. Glsd you decided to come back.
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: Patrick Leary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 05:37 PMTo: ''WISPA General List''Subject: RE: [WISPA] roll your own radios..That's easy. From the FCC site:https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/oet/cf/eas/reports/TestFirmSearchResult.cfmAnd here is the search location:https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/oet/cf/eas/reports/TestFirmSearch.cfmPatrick LearyAVP MarketingAlvarion, Inc.o: 650.314.2628c: 760.580.0080Vonage: 650.641.1243-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] OnBehalf Of Jack UngerSent: Friday, August 18, 2006 2:35 PMTo: WISPA General ListSubject: Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..Patrick, From my perspective, Alvarion HAS set a pretty high standard in terms of marketing certified equipment. Can you research the certification labs that Alvarion has used and give us the names of those labs so that others will know where to go for reliable certification services?Thanks, jackPatrick Leary wrote: We have a pretty vigorous approved third party antenna list, but I believe we are somewhat of the exception in terms of this facility.  Patrick Leary AVP Marketing Alvarion, Inc. o: 650.314.2628 c: 760.580.0080 Vonage: 650.641.1243  -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Scrivner Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 1:58 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..  This sounds like a good idea. I am sure we could add a link to a listing  of certification labs. We also need to push manufacturers to certify.  Without some pressure from us the certification will just look like more  cost with little to gain to manufacturers. Pressure from customers would  make this more of a requirement than what it seems to be now. If we all  insist on certs then the overall cost for this would be negligible. ScrivJack Unger wrote:  John,Should WISPA consider publishing on our website a list of certification labs? It seems that our industry needs someone to step up and take on a leadership role and WISPA seems (to me anyway) to be the perfect organization to perform this role.We could start by simply polling our list members to see which labs anyone has used and been satisfied with.OK, speak up guys (and gals). What lab or labs have you researched or used? jackJohn Scrivner wrote:The rules state that any radio / antenna combination has to either be a certified system or that a substitute antenna used would have to meet the same specs as one used for certification in a system. Many think that this means "anything goes". The truth is that there are almost certainly a good bit of installed systems which would not pass FCC enforcement inspection. Many believe that following maximum EIRP rules is the only requirement. This is not so. It is a good practice if you are not following the rules but that does not mean it is legal. Another common belief is that "anything goes" is the rule of thumb due to the general lack of enforcement in unlicensed bands. This is unfortunate and further illustrates the need for our industry to mature.Part of this maturity process should start by operators demanding to see FCC certifications for the systems they buy. It is tough for operators to remain compliant when so few systems are certified. Another step should be that manufacturers certify their systems with commonly used antenna / radio configurations every time they release a product. Finally, distributors need to demand that all systems they sell meet certification requirements. The fact is that certification is not terribly costly or complicated and should be a step taken by all manufacturers and eventually all of us. If anyone here represents manufacturers who certify all their systems then now would be a good time to toot your horn.I believe the day will likely come that the FCC will inspect WISP systems. It took them about 20 years to start cracking down on the cable television industry for signal leakage and other infractions. Something tells me this industry will not have to wait that long. Of course the decision to follow the rules is inevitably up to each person. I would like to think we all will be compliant in the future but this is an unrealistic goal I am sure if manufacturers do not take a leadership role in this effort. WISPA stops short of demanding that members do anything but I will say, as President of WISPA, we should all try to follow the law regarding this industry. No industry association could expect to have impact in policy and legislative efforts if they took the stand that shirking the law

RE: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

2006-08-18 Thread Patrick Leary








Ron, I did not know them offhand, but I
have faith both in the wealth of info on the FCCs site and in the
ability of a well-phrased Google search to find the right page!





Patrick Leary

AVP Marketing

Alvarion, Inc.

o: 650.314.2628

c: 760.580.0080

Vonage: 650.641.1243











From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Ron Wallace
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 4:31
PM
To: WISPA
 General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] roll your own
radios..







Patrick,











Man, you coughed those URLs up pretty fast. Thanks
for your participation in this list, you always have something educational, and
you share your knowledge openly. Glsd you decided to come back.









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: Patrick Leary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 05:37 PM
To: ''WISPA General List''
Subject: RE: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

That's easy. From the FCC site:
https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/oet/cf/eas/reports/TestFirmSearchResult.cfm

And here is the search location:
https://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/oet/cf/eas/reports/TestFirmSearch.cfm


Patrick Leary
AVP Marketing
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 2:35 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

Patrick,

 From my perspective, Alvarion HAS set a pretty high standard in terms 
of marketing certified equipment. Can you research the certification 
labs that Alvarion has used and give us the names of those labs so that 
others will know where to go for reliable certification services?

Thanks,
 jack


Patrick Leary wrote:
 We have a pretty vigorous approved third party antenna list, but I
believe
 we are somewhat of the exception in terms of this facility.
 
 Patrick Leary
 AVP Marketing
 Alvarion, Inc.
 o: 650.314.2628
 c: 760.580.0080
 Vonage: 650.641.1243
 
 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
 Behalf Of John Scrivner
 Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 1:58 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..
 
 This sounds like a good idea. I am sure we could add a link to a
listing 
 of certification labs. We also need to push manufacturers to certify. 
 Without some pressure from us the certification will just look like
more 
 cost with little to gain to manufacturers. Pressure from customers
would 
 make this more of a requirement than what it seems to be now. If we
all 
 insist on certs then the overall cost for this would be negligible.
 Scriv
 
 
 
 Jack Unger wrote:
 
 
John,

Should WISPA consider publishing on our website a list of 
certification labs? It seems that our industry needs someone to
step 
up and take on a leadership role and WISPA seems (to me anyway) to
be 
the perfect organization to perform this role.

We could start by simply polling our list members to see which labs

anyone has used and been satisfied with.

OK, speak up guys (and gals). What lab or labs have you researched
or 
used?
 jack


John Scrivner wrote:


The rules state that any radio / antenna combination has to
either be 
a certified system or that a substitute antenna used would have
to 
meet the same specs as one used for certification in a system.
Many 
think that this means anything goes. The truth is
that there are 
almost certainly a good bit of installed systems which would
not pass 
FCC enforcement inspection. Many believe that following maximum
EIRP 
rules is the only requirement. This is not so. It is a good
practice 
if you are not following the rules but that does not mean it is

legal. Another common belief is that anything goes
is the rule of 
thumb due to the general lack of enforcement in unlicensed
bands. 
This is unfortunate and further illustrates the need for our
industry 
to mature.

Part of this maturity process should start by operators
demanding to 
see FCC certifications for the systems they buy. It is tough
for 
operators to remain compliant when so few systems are
certified. 
Another step should be that manufacturers certify their systems
with 
commonly used antenna / radio configurations every time they
release 
a product. Finally, distributors need to demand that all
systems they 
sell meet certification requirements. The fact is that
certification 
is not terribly costly or complicated and should be a step
taken by 
all manufacturers and eventually all of us. If anyone here
represents 
manufacturers who certify all their systems then now would be a
good 
time to toot your horn.

I believe the day will likely come that the FCC will inspect
WISP 
systems. It took them about 20 years to start cracking down on
the 
cable television industry for signal leakage and other
infractions

Re: [WISPA] roll your own radios..

2006-08-18 Thread Tom DeReggi

Patrick,

You are right on target, I agree with everything that you have just said.


I would like to see an
independent body that could provide WISP technician certification that the
FCC could accept


Great Idea.


Let me ask you this: would you willingly warranty and support your end
user's end-to-end experience across your network from the desktops to the
Internet while also permitting the user to implement whatever router,
switch, etc. he/she wanted?


No, which is why I fully understand your view as manufacturer.   But you are 
making the assumption that it is the manufacturer warranteeing and 
supporting the product.  Just because Alvarion does a good job at it, 
doesn't mean it applies to all.  Many WISPs do not rely on the support from 
their manufacturers, they instead decide to educate themselves, and take 
control of their own destiny, and need to have the abilty and freedom to 
support their clientel optimally. If I am the one doing the support, I need 
some control.  Way to many times a WISP is held back in progress waiting and 
waiting on their manufacturers that do not come through or do not act with 
the same time table and priority as the WISP has done, and it has to do with 
who has the heavy cash invested that is getting wasted. When its the WISP's 
money at risk, and not the manufacturers, the manufacturer doesn't seem to 
rush.  The day my choice of manufacturers outperform my time tables and 
beats me to the solution, I'll give in to them and follow suit to the 
manufacturer's suggested recommendations.FCC certification is important, 
but so is success, and this is a time to market industry.  I have nothing 
but respect for the FCC, FCC power rules, and the vendors and providers that 
follow them, but I do not have a lot of respect for a sticker or for people 
that hold back an eager industry or waste my money.  That comment was not 
directed at any specific manufacturer or regulating body.


Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL  Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: Patrick Leary [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 7:06 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] roll your own radios..


Hi Tom, I remember our nice little seafood feast afterward too (is George on
the WISPA list also?). As I recall, the conversation revolved around
certified gear. The rules change they made did not include or cover
uncertified systems, because I would assume, by definition, they do not
exist as part of the legal process. In other words, the FCC was not trying
to make life of law breakers even easier. They were trying to improve the
flexibility so manufacturers could be more responsive to customer needs by
getting more antenna choices included within the manufacturers master system
certification. Basically, all they did was relax a little the existing
permissive change rules.

I believe the FCC was reluctant to give operators carte blanche, because it
would be a strain on resources to track accountability and enforcement.
Reigning in a few manufacturers who have major incentive to follow the rules
is a lot different than trying to keep track of thousands of WISPs, many
already flying under the radar (not filing form 477, etc.) AND many of whom
who have already shown a massive propensity to ignore -- willfully or
ignorantly -- the rules as they are. Use whatever clich├ęs you want --
asking the fox to guard the hen house, giving the inmates the keys to the
asylum,...they all apply. I think you have to acknowledge that the abuse is
rampant and one of the only reasons it is less rampant now is that so many
systems come integrated with antennas, PoE, and high power (internal
integrated amps).


From the vendors standpoint, I understand the FCC position and I also

understand the quality (and legal) WISPs position. I would like to see an
independent body that could provide WISP technician certification that the
FCC could accept (and hold accountable), much like a PE needs to sign off on
certain design documents in many mechanical fields. I envisioned such a
thing a few years ago, using the BICSII RCDD as the model.

Anyway, also a vendor I am relieved too that operators cannot make their own
choices in the sense of the nightmare this would create for both system
performance (e.g. MAJOR tech support costs and head aches) and warranty
issues. You cannot fathom the massive costs we'd incur as every WISP making
its own antenna choice came to us about performance, capacity, and coverage
issues for which the antenna plays such a key role. How could we answer
questions? How could we assert performance specs? How could we predict
coverage and capacity? How could we advise about co-location issues? Etc. ad
nauseum.

Let me ask you this: would you willingly warranty and support your end
user's end-to-end experience across your network from the desktops to the
Internet while also permitting the user to implement whatever router,
switch, etc