Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp
LOL!!! @ size matters There's someone, not sure who, going around to every forum that talks about 3650 and says it's unlicensed and that you do whatever you want there... They've been on the DSLReports forums, and Ubiquiti, to specify two I remember for sure.It reads almost like prepared stuff, as if someone's out to deliberately spread misinformation. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 2:45 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Other vendors of 3.65 GHz gear told me size doesn't matter. I guess that's what I get for listening to that phrase, no matter who's right. ;-) - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: rea...@muddyfrogwater.us Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 12:36 AM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Antenna gain does matter. UBNT has only one certified antenna combination - or did back when I first filed for the license. Useful only for P2P, actually. You have to specificy EIRP, which UBNT's grant details, using the antenna specified. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 9:38 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Not mine, but http://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/licenseLocDetail.jsp?keyLoc=15533393licKey=2969764rsc=NN That's a Ubiquiti XR3. It doesn't say Mikrotik or Star-OS or Ikarus or because it doesn't matter. Nor does antenna gain. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: John Scrivner j...@scrivner.com Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 8:34 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp So Reader, are you saying you have a 3.65 GHz license and have registered your 3.65 GHz access points and end user locations through the FCC ULS? I did not recall seeing a Star OS 3.65 FCC certified system. You are required to use FCC certified equipment and to register every AP and customer location using this band. If you do not then you are breaking the law. Since you are using WISPA list resources to discuss this as a system option for 3.65 GHz I expect to see a full answer from you here on this. Scriv On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 10:42 AM, rea...@muddyfrogwater.us wrote: I am. Works ok. Using Star-OS. I use ok to designate an unenthusiastic, but affirmative statement that it works. 3.65 seems to have unique propagation qualities that are affected by snow, rain, and fog, moreso than 5 or 2.4. Or, that's how it seems. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Brian Rohrbacher br...@reliableinter.net To: Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 7:29 AM Subject: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Anyone using 3.65 for ptp? What is available? Can ubiquiti's cards be used in mikrotik? brian WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless
Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp
I dunno who to ask, I think even if you ask the FCC you might get a slightly muddled answer. I just used exactly what was certified including the enclosure used, and followed the rest of the requirements as best I could. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Scott Carullo sc...@brevardwireless.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 5:47 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Who has the final word on this? I've been told by testing laboratories that do testing for the FCC that this is not the case... They said if the radio card (5Ghz when I asked but for this discussion it doesn't matter) had been approved with an antenna then you could use the same or less db like antenna and you were good to go - assuming the card manufacturer (like ubiquity) had had appropriate testing completed and filed with FCC. It sure is difficult for any of us to make heads or tales out of what can or can't be done because everyone has a different opinion - even the people at the top of the food chain I guess. Who's right? And how am I supposed to know? Scott Carullo Brevard Wireless 321-205-1100 x102 Original Message From: Harold Bledsoe hbled...@deliberant.net Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 2:21 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp I think the confusion on this comes from the fact that for the P90 licensing process, only the transmitter information is collected. Remember that even with Part 90 devices, they still must comply with Part 15 requirements for unintentional radiators. This is covered with a Declaration of Conformity for the system typically. So the previous example of the XR3 + ARC + RB411 + PoE (sic) is technically only legal if it meets all Part 90 requirements (which it should according to the test report on file at the FCC) as well as Part 15 requirements for unintentional radiators. In this case, a Declaration of Conformity should be on file at the assembler's location. This is why the label is important. This kind of system built from modular components should include a label with a manufacturer name/model number, the contains FCC ID: xx, and the 2 required statements about unintentional interference. This information tells anyone including the FCC who to contact for intentional emission issues (P-90 in this example) as well as unintentional emission issues (P-15 in this case). If there is no label on there, then it is illegal by default. Then if there are problems with the intentional radiator, it is the module maker's problem (assuming the integration instructions were followed properly). Finally if there are problems with the unintentional emissions, it is the system assembler's problem. I know, I knowthis is a licensed, Part 90 band. So why does Part 15 even matter? Simply put, P-90 covers the transmitter, P-15 covers the rest of the crap spewing from the device in the rest of the spectrum. :-) -Hal -Original Message- From: David E. Smith d...@mvn.net Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2009 18:05:36 GMT My system is fully licensed. How did you get your combination of XR3 + Routerboard 400 series + Mikrotik RouterOS 3.x + whatever antenna certified? What's the process like, and how much did it cost?Or did you just buy the kit from someone else who went through the certification process? If so, from whom? I'd be willing to pay a small premium over the price of all those parts just to avoid the legal heat.David SmithMVN.net WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless
Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp
As I see it, there are two sources of information on FCC matters. 1. Those people (onlist) who have the most experience with an issue (be it 3.65 or any other issue). Experience still adds up to knowledge. Anything less is just guessing. Put your faith in those that you trust who have experience with an issue, whatever the issue is. 2. Your FCC attorney. FCC matters are, at base, a matter of law. jack rea...@muddyfrogwater.us wrote: I dunno who to ask, I think even if you ask the FCC you might get a slightly muddled answer. I just used exactly what was certified including the enclosure used, and followed the rest of the requirements as best I could. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: "Scott Carullo" sc...@brevardwireless.com To: "WISPA General List" wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 5:47 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Who has the final word on this? I've been told by testing laboratories that do testing for the FCC that this is not the case... They said if the radio card (5Ghz when I asked but for this discussion it doesn't matter) had been approved with an antenna then you could use the same or less db like antenna and you were good to go - assuming the card manufacturer (like ubiquity) had had appropriate testing completed and filed with FCC. It sure is difficult for any of us to make heads or tales out of what can or can't be done because everyone has a different opinion - even the people at the top of the food chain I guess. Who's right? And how am I supposed to know? Scott Carullo Brevard Wireless 321-205-1100 x102 Original Message From: "Harold Bledsoe" hbled...@deliberant.net Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 2:21 PM To: "WISPA General List" wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp I think the confusion on this comes from the fact that for the P90 licensing process, only the transmitter information is collected. Remember that even with Part 90 devices, they still must comply with Part 15 requirements for unintentional radiators. This is covered with a Declaration of Conformity for the system typically. So the previous example of the XR3 + ARC + RB411 + PoE (sic) is technically only legal if it meets all Part 90 requirements (which it should according to the test report on file at the FCC) as well as Part 15 requirements for unintentional radiators. In this case, a Declaration of Conformity should be on file at the assembler's location. This is why the label is important. This kind of system built from modular components should include a label with a manufacturer name/model number, the contains FCC ID: xx, and the 2 required statements about unintentional interference. This information tells anyone including the FCC who to contact for intentional emission issues (P-90 in this example) as well as unintentional emission issues (P-15 in this case). If there is no label on there, then it is illegal by default. Then if there are problems with the intentional radiator, it is the module maker's problem (assuming the integration instructions were followed properly). Finally if there are problems with the unintentional emissions, it is the system assembler's problem. I know, I knowthis is a licensed, Part 90 band. So why does Part 15 even matter? Simply put, P-90 covers the transmitter, P-15 covers the rest of the crap spewing from the device in the rest of the spectrum. :-) -Hal -Original Message- From: David E. Smith d...@mvn.net Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2009 18:05:36 GMT My system is fully licensed. How did you get your combination of "XR3 + Routerboard 400 series + Mikrotik RouterOS 3.x + whatever antenna" certified? What's the process like, and how much did it cost?Or did you just buy the kit from someone else who went through the certification process? If so, from whom? I'd be willing to pay a small premium over the price of "all those parts" just to avoid the legal heat.David SmithMVN.net WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/
Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp
There is also have a difference between accepted interpretations and trying to argue new interpretations. I would say you an attorney if you want to push through a new interpretation. While it may be supported in current law, unless there is a precedent then you are going to have to argue for it and win approval. Too often people like to argue in their own minds how something should be interpreted and then run with it. -Matt On Mar 9, 2009, at 4:48 PM, Jack Unger wrote: As I see it, there are two sources of information on FCC matters. 1. Those people (onlist) who have the most experience with an issue (be it 3.65 or any other issue). Experience still adds up to knowledge. Anything less is just guessing. Put your faith in those that you trust who have experience with an issue, whatever the issue is. 2. Your FCC attorney. FCC matters are, at base, a matter of law. jack rea...@muddyfrogwater.us wrote: I dunno who to ask, I think even if you ask the FCC you might get a slightly muddled answer. I just used exactly what was certified including the enclosure used, and followed the rest of the requirements as best I could. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Scott Carullo sc...@brevardwireless.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 5:47 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Who has the final word on this? I've been told by testing laboratories that do testing for the FCC that this is not the case... They said if the radio card (5Ghz when I asked but for this discussion it doesn't matter) had been approved with an antenna then you could use the same or less db like antenna and you were good to go - assuming the card manufacturer (like ubiquity) had had appropriate testing completed and filed with FCC. It sure is difficult for any of us to make heads or tales out of what can or can't be done because everyone has a different opinion - even the people at the top of the food chain I guess. Who's right? And how am I supposed to know? Scott Carullo Brevard Wireless 321-205-1100 x102 Original Message From: Harold Bledsoe hbled...@deliberant.net Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 2:21 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp I think the confusion on this comes from the fact that for the P90 licensing process, only the transmitter information is collected. Remember that even with Part 90 devices, they still must comply with Part 15 requirements for unintentional radiators. This is covered with a Declaration of Conformity for the system typically. So the previous example of the XR3 + ARC + RB411 + PoE (sic) is technically only legal if it meets all Part 90 requirements (which it should according to the test report on file at the FCC) as well as Part 15 requirements for unintentional radiators. In this case, a Declaration of Conformity should be on file at the assembler's location. This is why the label is important. This kind of system built from modular components should include a label with a manufacturer name/model number, the contains FCC ID: xx, and the 2 required statements about unintentional interference. This information tells anyone including the FCC who to contact for intentional emission issues (P-90 in this example) as well as unintentional emission issues (P-15 in this case). If there is no label on there, then it is illegal by default. Then if there are problems with the intentional radiator, it is the module maker's problem (assuming the integration instructions were followed properly). Finally if there are problems with the unintentional emissions, it is the system assembler's problem. I know, I knowthis is a licensed, Part 90 band. So why does Part 15 even matter? Simply put, P-90 covers the transmitter, P-15 covers the rest of the crap spewing from the device in the rest of the spectrum. :-) -Hal -Original Message- From: David E. Smith d...@mvn.net Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2009 18:05:36 GMT My system is fully licensed. How did you get your combination of XR3 + Routerboard 400 series + Mikrotik RouterOS 3.x + whatever antenna certified? What's the process like, and how much did it cost?Or did you just buy the kit from someone else who went through the certification process? If so, from whom? I'd be willing to pay a small premium over the price of all those parts just to avoid the legal heat.David SmithMVN.net WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org
Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp
Of course, Jack. Part of what adds up to confusion is that there's always questions that come up that don't have particularly clear answers by just reading the rules. And the rules are very short and to the point. It's easy to read them (the ones for 3650) through in a relatively short period of time, and yet still have answers. That's when interpretation of the rules comes into play, often in a very technological context, and I'd say a lawyer's not going to be a lot of help, unless he's technically at engineer level, and I'm not sure that all the FCC personell have been even asked all the questions, yet, that us creative types can dream up. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Jack Unger jun...@ask-wi.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 1:48 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp As I see it, there are two sources of information on FCC matters. 1. Those people (onlist) who have the most experience with an issue (be it 3.65 or any other issue). Experience still adds up to knowledge. Anything less is just guessing. Put your faith in those that you trust who have experience with an issue, whatever the issue is. 2. Your FCC attorney. FCC matters are, at base, a matter of law. jack rea...@muddyfrogwater.us wrote: I dunno who to ask, I think even if you ask the FCC you might get a slightly muddled answer. I just used exactly what was certified including the enclosure used, and followed the rest of the requirements as best I could. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Scott Carullo sc...@brevardwireless.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 5:47 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Who has the final word on this? I've been told by testing laboratories that do testing for the FCC that this is not the case... They said if the radio card (5Ghz when I asked but for this discussion it doesn't matter) had been approved with an antenna then you could use the same or less db like antenna and you were good to go - assuming the card manufacturer (like ubiquity) had had appropriate testing completed and filed with FCC. It sure is difficult for any of us to make heads or tales out of what can or can't be done because everyone has a different opinion - even the people at the top of the food chain I guess. Who's right? And how am I supposed to know? Scott Carullo Brevard Wireless 321-205-1100 x102 Original Message From: Harold Bledsoe hbled...@deliberant.net Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 2:21 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp I think the confusion on this comes from the fact that for the P90 licensing process, only the transmitter information is collected. Remember that even with Part 90 devices, they still must comply with Part 15 requirements for unintentional radiators. This is covered with a Declaration of Conformity for the system typically. So the previous example of the XR3 + ARC + RB411 + PoE (sic) is technically only legal if it meets all Part 90 requirements (which it should according to the test report on file at the FCC) as well as Part 15 requirements for unintentional radiators. In this case, a Declaration of Conformity should be on file at the assembler's location. This is why the label is important. This kind of system built from modular components should include a label with a manufacturer name/model number, the contains FCC ID: xx, and the 2 required statements about unintentional interference. This information tells anyone including the FCC who to contact for intentional emission issues (P-90 in this example) as well as unintentional emission issues (P-15 in this case). If there is no label on there, then it is illegal by default. Then if there are problems with the intentional radiator, it is the module maker's problem (assuming the integration instructions were followed properly). Finally if there are problems with the unintentional emissions, it is the system assembler's problem. I know, I knowthis is a licensed, Part 90 band. So why does Part 15 even matter? Simply put, P-90 covers the transmitter, P-15 covers the rest of the crap spewing from the device in the rest of the spectrum. :-) -Hal -Original Message- From: David E. Smith d...@mvn.net Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2009 18:05:36 GMT My system is fully licensed. How did you get your combination of XR3 + Routerboard 400 series + Mikrotik RouterOS 3.x + whatever antenna certified? What's the process like, and how much did it cost?Or did you just buy the kit from someone else who went through the certification process? If so, from whom? I'd
Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp
I'm sure some on this list would call you quite creative. ;-) - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: rea...@muddyfrogwater.us Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 4:01 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Of course, Jack. Part of what adds up to confusion is that there's always questions that come up that don't have particularly clear answers by just reading the rules. And the rules are very short and to the point. It's easy to read them (the ones for 3650) through in a relatively short period of time, and yet still have answers. That's when interpretation of the rules comes into play, often in a very technological context, and I'd say a lawyer's not going to be a lot of help, unless he's technically at engineer level, and I'm not sure that all the FCC personell have been even asked all the questions, yet, that us creative types can dream up. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Jack Unger jun...@ask-wi.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 1:48 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp As I see it, there are two sources of information on FCC matters. 1. Those people (onlist) who have the most experience with an issue (be it 3.65 or any other issue). Experience still adds up to knowledge. Anything less is just guessing. Put your faith in those that you trust who have experience with an issue, whatever the issue is. 2. Your FCC attorney. FCC matters are, at base, a matter of law. jack rea...@muddyfrogwater.us wrote: I dunno who to ask, I think even if you ask the FCC you might get a slightly muddled answer. I just used exactly what was certified including the enclosure used, and followed the rest of the requirements as best I could. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Scott Carullo sc...@brevardwireless.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 5:47 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Who has the final word on this? I've been told by testing laboratories that do testing for the FCC that this is not the case... They said if the radio card (5Ghz when I asked but for this discussion it doesn't matter) had been approved with an antenna then you could use the same or less db like antenna and you were good to go - assuming the card manufacturer (like ubiquity) had had appropriate testing completed and filed with FCC. It sure is difficult for any of us to make heads or tales out of what can or can't be done because everyone has a different opinion - even the people at the top of the food chain I guess. Who's right? And how am I supposed to know? Scott Carullo Brevard Wireless 321-205-1100 x102 Original Message From: Harold Bledsoe hbled...@deliberant.net Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 2:21 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp I think the confusion on this comes from the fact that for the P90 licensing process, only the transmitter information is collected. Remember that even with Part 90 devices, they still must comply with Part 15 requirements for unintentional radiators. This is covered with a Declaration of Conformity for the system typically. So the previous example of the XR3 + ARC + RB411 + PoE (sic) is technically only legal if it meets all Part 90 requirements (which it should according to the test report on file at the FCC) as well as Part 15 requirements for unintentional radiators. In this case, a Declaration of Conformity should be on file at the assembler's location. This is why the label is important. This kind of system built from modular components should include a label with a manufacturer name/model number, the contains FCC ID: xx, and the 2 required statements about unintentional interference. This information tells anyone including the FCC who to contact for intentional emission issues (P-90 in this example) as well as unintentional emission issues (P-15 in this case). If there is no label on there, then it is illegal by default. Then if there are problems with the intentional radiator, it is the module maker's problem (assuming the integration instructions were followed properly). Finally if there are problems with the unintentional emissions, it is the system assembler's problem. I know, I knowthis is a licensed, Part 90 band. So why does Part 15 even matter? Simply put, P-90 covers the transmitter, P-15 covers the rest of the crap spewing from the device in the rest of the spectrum. :-) -Hal -Original Message- From: David E. Smith d...@mvn.net Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Date: Sat, 07
Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp
Your statement confuses me. Yes, there are EIRP maximums, but what I was saying still holds true. On one side alone, a higher gain antenna will listen to the remote side better, compensating for lower transmit power. That's why Canopy 5.2 is lucky to go 2 miles, yet you can achieve over 20 miles staying within 36 dB EIRP by using say an 8' dish on both sides. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: John Rock jo...@wirelessconnections.net Sent: Sunday, March 08, 2009 6:56 PM To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp EIRP is equivalent in measurements... John Rock Director of Operations - Senior Engineer Wireless Connections 166 Milan Ave., Norwalk, Oh. 44857 ACCessing the Future Today!! ofc. 419.660.6100 cell 419-706-7356 fax 419-668-4077 http://www.wirelessconnections.net This transmission and any files attached to it, may contain confidential and/or privileged information and intended only for the named recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction, retransmission, dissemination, disclosure, copying or any use of the information or files contained is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply transmission and delete this electronic mail. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 4:48 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Lower your transmit power, duh. You go a hell of a lot further with a 0 db radio and 36 db of antenna than 30 db of radio and 6 db of antenna. That do you think negative db values are for? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Matt Hardy mha...@ligowave.com Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 7:41 AM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Yes for the 3.65GHz band, antenna gain does matter, because the band is EIRP restricted. For instance, for the XR3, if you look on the grant: https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COPYRe questTimeout=500application_id=930658fcc_id=SWX-XR3B The maximum output (in watts) is 4.2, 4.7, and 4.7 for emission designators (4M24D7D,8M44D7D,17M2D7D), or 5/10/20 MHz channel bandwidths respectively. Thats ~ 36dBm total *EIRP* If you look at the test report: https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/oet/forms/blobs/retrieve.cgi?attachment_id=90 0106native_or_pdf=pdf (Page 36) It shows the max tx power tested by the FCC Lab which still met spectral density requirements. If you are using the XR3 at the allowed max txpower (~18dBm), you must use less than or equal an 18dBI antenna. (This should be specified in the user manuals you received when you purchased the XR3) Hope that helps... -Matt rea...@muddyfrogwater.us wrote: Antenna gain does matter. UBNT has only one certified antenna combination - or did back when I first filed for the license. Useful only for P2P, actually. You have to specificy EIRP, which UBNT's grant details, using the antenna specified. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 9:38 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Not mine, but http://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/licenseLocDetail.jsp?keyLoc=155333 93licKey=2969764rsc=NN That's a Ubiquiti XR3. It doesn't say Mikrotik or Star-OS or Ikarus or because it doesn't matter. Nor does antenna gain. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: John Scrivner j...@scrivner.com Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 8:34 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp So Reader, are you saying you have a 3.65 GHz license and have registered your 3.65 GHz access points and end user locations through the FCC ULS? I did not recall seeing a Star OS 3.65 FCC certified system. You are required to use FCC certified equipment and to register every AP and customer location using this band. If you do not then you are breaking the law. Since you are using WISPA list resources to discuss this as a system option for 3.65 GHz I expect to see a full answer from you here on this. Scriv On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 10:42 AM, rea...@muddyfrogwater.us wrote: I am. Works ok. Using Star-OS. I use ok to designate an unenthusiastic, but affirmative statement that it works. 3.65 seems to have unique propagation qualities that are affected by snow, rain, and fog, moreso than 5 or 2.4
Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp
Sh Don't tell the good secrets Mike! marlon - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 2:22 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Your statement confuses me. Yes, there are EIRP maximums, but what I was saying still holds true. On one side alone, a higher gain antenna will listen to the remote side better, compensating for lower transmit power. That's why Canopy 5.2 is lucky to go 2 miles, yet you can achieve over 20 miles staying within 36 dB EIRP by using say an 8' dish on both sides. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: John Rock jo...@wirelessconnections.net Sent: Sunday, March 08, 2009 6:56 PM To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp EIRP is equivalent in measurements... John Rock Director of Operations - Senior Engineer Wireless Connections 166 Milan Ave., Norwalk, Oh. 44857 ACCessing the Future Today!! ofc. 419.660.6100 cell 419-706-7356 fax 419-668-4077 http://www.wirelessconnections.net This transmission and any files attached to it, may contain confidential and/or privileged information and intended only for the named recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction, retransmission, dissemination, disclosure, copying or any use of the information or files contained is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply transmission and delete this electronic mail. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 4:48 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Lower your transmit power, duh. You go a hell of a lot further with a 0 db radio and 36 db of antenna than 30 db of radio and 6 db of antenna. That do you think negative db values are for? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Matt Hardy mha...@ligowave.com Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 7:41 AM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Yes for the 3.65GHz band, antenna gain does matter, because the band is EIRP restricted. For instance, for the XR3, if you look on the grant: https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COPYRe questTimeout=500application_id=930658fcc_id=SWX-XR3B The maximum output (in watts) is 4.2, 4.7, and 4.7 for emission designators (4M24D7D,8M44D7D,17M2D7D), or 5/10/20 MHz channel bandwidths respectively. Thats ~ 36dBm total *EIRP* If you look at the test report: https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/oet/forms/blobs/retrieve.cgi?attachment_id=90 0106native_or_pdf=pdf (Page 36) It shows the max tx power tested by the FCC Lab which still met spectral density requirements. If you are using the XR3 at the allowed max txpower (~18dBm), you must use less than or equal an 18dBI antenna. (This should be specified in the user manuals you received when you purchased the XR3) Hope that helps... -Matt rea...@muddyfrogwater.us wrote: Antenna gain does matter. UBNT has only one certified antenna combination - or did back when I first filed for the license. Useful only for P2P, actually. You have to specificy EIRP, which UBNT's grant details, using the antenna specified. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 9:38 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Not mine, but http://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/licenseLocDetail.jsp?keyLoc=155333 93licKey=2969764rsc=NN That's a Ubiquiti XR3. It doesn't say Mikrotik or Star-OS or Ikarus or because it doesn't matter. Nor does antenna gain. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: John Scrivner j...@scrivner.com Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 8:34 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp So Reader, are you saying you have a 3.65 GHz license and have registered your 3.65 GHz access points and end user locations through the FCC ULS? I did not recall seeing a Star OS 3.65 FCC certified system. You are required to use FCC certified equipment and to register every AP and customer location using this band. If you do not then you are breaking the law. Since you are using WISPA list resources to discuss this as a system option for 3.65 GHz I expect to see a full answer from you here on this. Scriv On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 10:42 AM, rea...@muddyfrogwater.us
Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp
I think the main confusion here is people are mixing up the Part 15 rules and the part 90 rules. Part 15 the whole system has to be type certified. In Part 90 the transmitter has to be certified along with other regulations. Part 90 is a different ball game people, it is licensed and WILL be enforced. Find the rules, read the rules and talk to a lawyer in the industry if you have any confusion. Your business maybe at stake if you mess up. Anthony Will Broadband Corp e...@wisp-router.com wrote: That is my understanding as well from talking with a certification lab. Lower and equal gain antennas of same type as certified are allowed to be substituted by the manufacturer. /Eje Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile -Original Message- From: lakel...@gbcx.net Date: Sun, 8 Mar 2009 00:52:36 To: sc...@brevardwireless.com; WISPA General Listwireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp As per the FCC only the anufacturer can make the determination which antenna is similar in specifications. Otherwise it needs FCC certification as a system. That was from the horses mouth about 18 months ago Bob Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: Scott Carullo sc...@brevardwireless.com Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 19:47:42 To: WISPA General Listwireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Who has the final word on this? I've been told by testing laboratories that do testing for the FCC that this is not the case... They said if the radio card (5Ghz when I asked but for this discussion it doesn't matter) had been approved with an antenna then you could use the same or less db like antenna and you were good to go - assuming the card manufacturer (like ubiquity) had had appropriate testing completed and filed with FCC. It sure is difficult for any of us to make heads or tales out of what can or can't be done because everyone has a different opinion - even the people at the top of the food chain I guess. Who's right? And how am I supposed to know? Scott Carullo Brevard Wireless 321-205-1100 x102 Original Message From: Harold Bledsoe hbled...@deliberant.net Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 2:21 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp I think the confusion on this comes from the fact that for the P90 licensing process, only the transmitter information is collected. Remember that even with Part 90 devices, they still must comply with Part 15 requirements for unintentional radiators. This is covered with a Declaration of Conformity for the system typically. So the previous example of the XR3 + ARC + RB411 + PoE (sic) is technically only legal if it meets all Part 90 requirements (which it should according to the test report on file at the FCC) as well as Part 15 requirements for unintentional radiators. In this case, a Declaration of Conformity should be on file at the assembler's location. This is why the label is important. This kind of system built from modular components should include a label with a manufacturer name/model number, the contains FCC ID: xx, and the 2 required statements about unintentional interference. This information tells anyone including the FCC who to contact for intentional emission issues (P-90 in this example) as well as unintentional emission issues (P-15 in this case). If there is no label on there, then it is illegal by default. Then if there are problems with the intentional radiator, it is the module maker's problem (assuming the integration instructions were followed properly). Finally if there are problems with the unintentional emissions, it is the system assembler's problem. I know, I knowthis is a licensed, Part 90 band. So why does Part 15 even matter? Simply put, P-90 covers the transmitter, P-15 covers the rest of the crap spewing from the device in the rest of the spectrum. :-) -Hal -Original Message- From: David E. Smith d...@mvn.net Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2009 18:05:36 GMT My system is fully licensed. How did you get your combination of XR3 + Routerboard 400 series + Mikrotik RouterOS 3.x + whatever antenna certified? What's the process like, and how much did it cost?Or did you just buy the kit from someone else who went through the certification process? If so, from whom? I'd be willing to pay a small premium over the price of all those parts just to avoid the legal heat.David SmithMVN.net WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org
Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp
EIRP is equivalent in measurements... John Rock Director of Operations - Senior Engineer Wireless Connections 166 Milan Ave., Norwalk, Oh. 44857 ACCessing the Future Today!! ofc. 419.660.6100 cell 419-706-7356 fax 419-668-4077 http://www.wirelessconnections.net This transmission and any files attached to it, may contain confidential and/or privileged information and intended only for the named recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction, retransmission, dissemination, disclosure, copying or any use of the information or files contained is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply transmission and delete this electronic mail. -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 4:48 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Lower your transmit power, duh. You go a hell of a lot further with a 0 db radio and 36 db of antenna than 30 db of radio and 6 db of antenna. That do you think negative db values are for? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Matt Hardy mha...@ligowave.com Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 7:41 AM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Yes for the 3.65GHz band, antenna gain does matter, because the band is EIRP restricted. For instance, for the XR3, if you look on the grant: https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COPYRe questTimeout=500application_id=930658fcc_id=SWX-XR3B The maximum output (in watts) is 4.2, 4.7, and 4.7 for emission designators (4M24D7D,8M44D7D,17M2D7D), or 5/10/20 MHz channel bandwidths respectively. Thats ~ 36dBm total *EIRP* If you look at the test report: https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/oet/forms/blobs/retrieve.cgi?attachment_id=90 0106native_or_pdf=pdf (Page 36) It shows the max tx power tested by the FCC Lab which still met spectral density requirements. If you are using the XR3 at the allowed max txpower (~18dBm), you must use less than or equal an 18dBI antenna. (This should be specified in the user manuals you received when you purchased the XR3) Hope that helps... -Matt rea...@muddyfrogwater.us wrote: Antenna gain does matter. UBNT has only one certified antenna combination - or did back when I first filed for the license. Useful only for P2P, actually. You have to specificy EIRP, which UBNT's grant details, using the antenna specified. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 9:38 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Not mine, but http://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/licenseLocDetail.jsp?keyLoc=155333 93licKey=2969764rsc=NN That's a Ubiquiti XR3. It doesn't say Mikrotik or Star-OS or Ikarus or because it doesn't matter. Nor does antenna gain. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: John Scrivner j...@scrivner.com Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 8:34 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp So Reader, are you saying you have a 3.65 GHz license and have registered your 3.65 GHz access points and end user locations through the FCC ULS? I did not recall seeing a Star OS 3.65 FCC certified system. You are required to use FCC certified equipment and to register every AP and customer location using this band. If you do not then you are breaking the law. Since you are using WISPA list resources to discuss this as a system option for 3.65 GHz I expect to see a full answer from you here on this. Scriv On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 10:42 AM, rea...@muddyfrogwater.us wrote: I am. Works ok. Using Star-OS. I use ok to designate an unenthusiastic, but affirmative statement that it works. 3.65 seems to have unique propagation qualities that are affected by snow, rain, and fog, moreso than 5 or 2.4. Or, that's how it seems. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Brian Rohrbacher br...@reliableinter.net To: Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 7:29 AM Subject: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Anyone using 3.65 for ptp? What is available? Can ubiquiti's cards be used in mikrotik? brian WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe
Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp
Yes for the 3.65GHz band, antenna gain does matter, because the band is EIRP restricted. For instance, for the XR3, if you look on the grant: https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COPYRequestTimeout=500application_id=930658fcc_id=SWX-XR3B The maximum output (in watts) is 4.2, 4.7, and 4.7 for emission designators (4M24D7D,8M44D7D,17M2D7D), or 5/10/20 MHz channel bandwidths respectively. Thats ~ 36dBm total *EIRP* If you look at the test report: https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/oet/forms/blobs/retrieve.cgi?attachment_id=900106native_or_pdf=pdf (Page 36) It shows the max tx power tested by the FCC Lab which still met spectral density requirements. If you are using the XR3 at the allowed max txpower (~18dBm), you must use less than or equal an 18dBI antenna. (This should be specified in the user manuals you received when you purchased the XR3) Hope that helps... -Matt rea...@muddyfrogwater.us wrote: Antenna gain does matter. UBNT has only one certified antenna combination - or did back when I first filed for the license. Useful only for P2P, actually. You have to specificy EIRP, which UBNT's grant details, using the antenna specified. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 9:38 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Not mine, but http://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/licenseLocDetail.jsp?keyLoc=15533393licKey=2969764rsc=NN That's a Ubiquiti XR3. It doesn't say Mikrotik or Star-OS or Ikarus or because it doesn't matter. Nor does antenna gain. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: John Scrivner j...@scrivner.com Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 8:34 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp So Reader, are you saying you have a 3.65 GHz license and have registered your 3.65 GHz access points and end user locations through the FCC ULS? I did not recall seeing a Star OS 3.65 FCC certified system. You are required to use FCC certified equipment and to register every AP and customer location using this band. If you do not then you are breaking the law. Since you are using WISPA list resources to discuss this as a system option for 3.65 GHz I expect to see a full answer from you here on this. Scriv On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 10:42 AM, rea...@muddyfrogwater.us wrote: I am. Works ok. Using Star-OS. I use ok to designate an unenthusiastic, but affirmative statement that it works. 3.65 seems to have unique propagation qualities that are affected by snow, rain, and fog, moreso than 5 or 2.4. Or, that's how it seems. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Brian Rohrbacher br...@reliableinter.net To: Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 7:29 AM Subject: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Anyone using 3.65 for ptp? What is available? Can ubiquiti's cards be used in mikrotik? brian WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http
Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp
My system is fully licensed.How did you get your combination of XR3 + Routerboard 400 series + Mikrotik RouterOS 3.x + whatever antenna certified? What's the process like, and how much did it cost?Or did you just buy the kit from someone else who went through the certification process? If so, from whom? I'd be willing to pay a small premium over the price of all those parts just to avoid the legal heat.David SmithMVN.net WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp
I think the confusion on this comes from the fact that for the P90 licensing process, only the transmitter information is collected. Remember that even with Part 90 devices, they still must comply with Part 15 requirements for unintentional radiators. This is covered with a Declaration of Conformity for the system typically. So the previous example of the XR3 + ARC + RB411 + PoE (sic) is technically only legal if it meets all Part 90 requirements (which it should according to the test report on file at the FCC) as well as Part 15 requirements for unintentional radiators. In this case, a Declaration of Conformity should be on file at the assembler's location. This is why the label is important. This kind of system built from modular components should include a label with a manufacturer name/model number, the contains FCC ID: xx, and the 2 required statements about unintentional interference. This information tells anyone including the FCC who to contact for intentional emission issues (P-90 in this example) as well as unintentional emission issues (P-15 in this case). If there is no label on there, then it is illegal by default. Then if there are problems with the intentional radiator, it is the module maker's problem (assuming the integration instructions were followed properly). Finally if there are problems with the unintentional emissions, it is the system assembler's problem. I know, I knowthis is a licensed, Part 90 band. So why does Part 15 even matter? Simply put, P-90 covers the transmitter, P-15 covers the rest of the crap spewing from the device in the rest of the spectrum. :-) -Hal -Original Message- From: David E. Smith d...@mvn.net Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2009 18:05:36 GMT My system is fully licensed. How did you get your combination of XR3 + Routerboard 400 series + Mikrotik RouterOS 3.x + whatever antenna certified? What's the process like, and how much did it cost?Or did you just buy the kit from someone else who went through the certification process? If so, from whom? I'd be willing to pay a small premium over the price of all those parts just to avoid the legal heat.David SmithMVN.net WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp
Other vendors of 3.65 GHz gear told me size doesn't matter. I guess that's what I get for listening to that phrase, no matter who's right. ;-) - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: rea...@muddyfrogwater.us Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 12:36 AM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Antenna gain does matter. UBNT has only one certified antenna combination - or did back when I first filed for the license. Useful only for P2P, actually. You have to specificy EIRP, which UBNT's grant details, using the antenna specified. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 9:38 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Not mine, but http://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/licenseLocDetail.jsp?keyLoc=15533393licKey=2969764rsc=NN That's a Ubiquiti XR3. It doesn't say Mikrotik or Star-OS or Ikarus or because it doesn't matter. Nor does antenna gain. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: John Scrivner j...@scrivner.com Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 8:34 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp So Reader, are you saying you have a 3.65 GHz license and have registered your 3.65 GHz access points and end user locations through the FCC ULS? I did not recall seeing a Star OS 3.65 FCC certified system. You are required to use FCC certified equipment and to register every AP and customer location using this band. If you do not then you are breaking the law. Since you are using WISPA list resources to discuss this as a system option for 3.65 GHz I expect to see a full answer from you here on this. Scriv On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 10:42 AM, rea...@muddyfrogwater.us wrote: I am. Works ok. Using Star-OS. I use ok to designate an unenthusiastic, but affirmative statement that it works. 3.65 seems to have unique propagation qualities that are affected by snow, rain, and fog, moreso than 5 or 2.4. Or, that's how it seems. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Brian Rohrbacher br...@reliableinter.net To: Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 7:29 AM Subject: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Anyone using 3.65 for ptp? What is available? Can ubiquiti's cards be used in mikrotik? brian WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo
Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp
Lower your transmit power, duh. You go a hell of a lot further with a 0 db radio and 36 db of antenna than 30 db of radio and 6 db of antenna. That do you think negative db values are for? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Matt Hardy mha...@ligowave.com Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 7:41 AM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Yes for the 3.65GHz band, antenna gain does matter, because the band is EIRP restricted. For instance, for the XR3, if you look on the grant: https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COPYRequestTimeout=500application_id=930658fcc_id=SWX-XR3B The maximum output (in watts) is 4.2, 4.7, and 4.7 for emission designators (4M24D7D,8M44D7D,17M2D7D), or 5/10/20 MHz channel bandwidths respectively. Thats ~ 36dBm total *EIRP* If you look at the test report: https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/oet/forms/blobs/retrieve.cgi?attachment_id=900106native_or_pdf=pdf (Page 36) It shows the max tx power tested by the FCC Lab which still met spectral density requirements. If you are using the XR3 at the allowed max txpower (~18dBm), you must use less than or equal an 18dBI antenna. (This should be specified in the user manuals you received when you purchased the XR3) Hope that helps... -Matt rea...@muddyfrogwater.us wrote: Antenna gain does matter. UBNT has only one certified antenna combination - or did back when I first filed for the license. Useful only for P2P, actually. You have to specificy EIRP, which UBNT's grant details, using the antenna specified. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 9:38 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Not mine, but http://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/licenseLocDetail.jsp?keyLoc=15533393licKey=2969764rsc=NN That's a Ubiquiti XR3. It doesn't say Mikrotik or Star-OS or Ikarus or because it doesn't matter. Nor does antenna gain. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: John Scrivner j...@scrivner.com Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 8:34 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp So Reader, are you saying you have a 3.65 GHz license and have registered your 3.65 GHz access points and end user locations through the FCC ULS? I did not recall seeing a Star OS 3.65 FCC certified system. You are required to use FCC certified equipment and to register every AP and customer location using this band. If you do not then you are breaking the law. Since you are using WISPA list resources to discuss this as a system option for 3.65 GHz I expect to see a full answer from you here on this. Scriv On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 10:42 AM, rea...@muddyfrogwater.us wrote: I am. Works ok. Using Star-OS. I use ok to designate an unenthusiastic, but affirmative statement that it works. 3.65 seems to have unique propagation qualities that are affected by snow, rain, and fog, moreso than 5 or 2.4. Or, that's how it seems. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Brian Rohrbacher br...@reliableinter.net To: Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 7:29 AM Subject: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Anyone using 3.65 for ptp? What is available? Can ubiquiti's cards be used in mikrotik? brian WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA
Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp
As per the FCC only the anufacturer can make the determination which antenna is similar in specifications. Otherwise it needs FCC certification as a system. That was from the horses mouth about 18 months ago Bob Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: Scott Carullo sc...@brevardwireless.com Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 19:47:42 To: WISPA General Listwireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Who has the final word on this? I've been told by testing laboratories that do testing for the FCC that this is not the case... They said if the radio card (5Ghz when I asked but for this discussion it doesn't matter) had been approved with an antenna then you could use the same or less db like antenna and you were good to go - assuming the card manufacturer (like ubiquity) had had appropriate testing completed and filed with FCC. It sure is difficult for any of us to make heads or tales out of what can or can't be done because everyone has a different opinion - even the people at the top of the food chain I guess. Who's right? And how am I supposed to know? Scott Carullo Brevard Wireless 321-205-1100 x102 Original Message From: Harold Bledsoe hbled...@deliberant.net Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 2:21 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp I think the confusion on this comes from the fact that for the P90 licensing process, only the transmitter information is collected. Remember that even with Part 90 devices, they still must comply with Part 15 requirements for unintentional radiators. This is covered with a Declaration of Conformity for the system typically. So the previous example of the XR3 + ARC + RB411 + PoE (sic) is technically only legal if it meets all Part 90 requirements (which it should according to the test report on file at the FCC) as well as Part 15 requirements for unintentional radiators. In this case, a Declaration of Conformity should be on file at the assembler's location. This is why the label is important. This kind of system built from modular components should include a label with a manufacturer name/model number, the contains FCC ID: xx, and the 2 required statements about unintentional interference. This information tells anyone including the FCC who to contact for intentional emission issues (P-90 in this example) as well as unintentional emission issues (P-15 in this case). If there is no label on there, then it is illegal by default. Then if there are problems with the intentional radiator, it is the module maker's problem (assuming the integration instructions were followed properly). Finally if there are problems with the unintentional emissions, it is the system assembler's problem. I know, I knowthis is a licensed, Part 90 band. So why does Part 15 even matter? Simply put, P-90 covers the transmitter, P-15 covers the rest of the crap spewing from the device in the rest of the spectrum. :-) -Hal -Original Message- From: David E. Smith d...@mvn.net Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2009 18:05:36 GMT My system is fully licensed. How did you get your combination of XR3 + Routerboard 400 series + Mikrotik RouterOS 3.x + whatever antenna certified? What's the process like, and how much did it cost?Or did you just buy the kit from someone else who went through the certification process? If so, from whom? I'd be willing to pay a small premium over the price of all those parts just to avoid the legal heat.David SmithMVN.net WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today
Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp
That is my understanding as well from talking with a certification lab. Lower and equal gain antennas of same type as certified are allowed to be substituted by the manufacturer. /Eje Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile -Original Message- From: lakel...@gbcx.net Date: Sun, 8 Mar 2009 00:52:36 To: sc...@brevardwireless.com; WISPA General Listwireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp As per the FCC only the anufacturer can make the determination which antenna is similar in specifications. Otherwise it needs FCC certification as a system. That was from the horses mouth about 18 months ago Bob Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: Scott Carullo sc...@brevardwireless.com Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 19:47:42 To: WISPA General Listwireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Who has the final word on this? I've been told by testing laboratories that do testing for the FCC that this is not the case... They said if the radio card (5Ghz when I asked but for this discussion it doesn't matter) had been approved with an antenna then you could use the same or less db like antenna and you were good to go - assuming the card manufacturer (like ubiquity) had had appropriate testing completed and filed with FCC. It sure is difficult for any of us to make heads or tales out of what can or can't be done because everyone has a different opinion - even the people at the top of the food chain I guess. Who's right? And how am I supposed to know? Scott Carullo Brevard Wireless 321-205-1100 x102 Original Message From: Harold Bledsoe hbled...@deliberant.net Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 2:21 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp I think the confusion on this comes from the fact that for the P90 licensing process, only the transmitter information is collected. Remember that even with Part 90 devices, they still must comply with Part 15 requirements for unintentional radiators. This is covered with a Declaration of Conformity for the system typically. So the previous example of the XR3 + ARC + RB411 + PoE (sic) is technically only legal if it meets all Part 90 requirements (which it should according to the test report on file at the FCC) as well as Part 15 requirements for unintentional radiators. In this case, a Declaration of Conformity should be on file at the assembler's location. This is why the label is important. This kind of system built from modular components should include a label with a manufacturer name/model number, the contains FCC ID: xx, and the 2 required statements about unintentional interference. This information tells anyone including the FCC who to contact for intentional emission issues (P-90 in this example) as well as unintentional emission issues (P-15 in this case). If there is no label on there, then it is illegal by default. Then if there are problems with the intentional radiator, it is the module maker's problem (assuming the integration instructions were followed properly). Finally if there are problems with the unintentional emissions, it is the system assembler's problem. I know, I knowthis is a licensed, Part 90 band. So why does Part 15 even matter? Simply put, P-90 covers the transmitter, P-15 covers the rest of the crap spewing from the device in the rest of the spectrum. :-) -Hal -Original Message- From: David E. Smith d...@mvn.net Reply-To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2009 18:05:36 GMT My system is fully licensed. How did you get your combination of XR3 + Routerboard 400 series + Mikrotik RouterOS 3.x + whatever antenna certified? What's the process like, and how much did it cost?Or did you just buy the kit from someone else who went through the certification process? If so, from whom? I'd be willing to pay a small premium over the price of all those parts just to avoid the legal heat.David SmithMVN.net WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA
Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp
So Reader, are you saying you have a 3.65 GHz license and have registered your 3.65 GHz access points and end user locations through the FCC ULS? I did not recall seeing a Star OS 3.65 FCC certified system. You are required to use FCC certified equipment and to register every AP and customer location using this band. If you do not then you are breaking the law. Since you are using WISPA list resources to discuss this as a system option for 3.65 GHz I expect to see a full answer from you here on this. Scriv On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 10:42 AM, rea...@muddyfrogwater.us wrote: I am. Works ok. Using Star-OS. I use ok to designate an unenthusiastic, but affirmative statement that it works. 3.65 seems to have unique propagation qualities that are affected by snow, rain, and fog, moreso than 5 or 2.4. Or, that's how it seems. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Brian Rohrbacher br...@reliableinter.net To: Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 7:29 AM Subject: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Anyone using 3.65 for ptp? What is available? Can ubiquiti's cards be used in mikrotik? brian WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp
Have they managed to get the FCC to release the full 50 MHz channel space for this product yet? Scriv On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 10:36 AM, Matt Liotta mlio...@r337.com wrote: We've been using the AN80 3.65 PtP with great success. -Matt On Mar 3, 2009, at 10:29 AM, Brian Rohrbacher wrote: Anyone using 3.65 for ptp? What is available? Can ubiquiti's cards be used in mikrotik? brian WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp
The FCC ULS requires that you enter the FCC ID of the radio that is being used, along with it's characteristics. That is easily done with an XR3 card. No where during the registration process does it say the radio and antenna and everything else has to be certified as a "system". I can complete a perfectly legal 3.65 registration filing, answering every single question honestly, using an XR3 card, inside an ARC antenna/enclosure with an RB411 board. Travis Microserv John Scrivner wrote: So Reader, are you saying you have a 3.65 GHz license and have registered your 3.65 GHz access points and end user locations through the FCC ULS? I did not recall seeing a Star OS 3.65 FCC certified system. You are required to use FCC certified equipment and to register every AP and customer location using this band. If you do not then you are breaking the law. Since you are using WISPA list resources to discuss this as a system option for 3.65 GHz I expect to see a full answer from you here on this. Scriv On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 10:42 AM, rea...@muddyfrogwater.us wrote: I am. Works ok. Using Star-OS. I use "ok" to designate an unenthusiastic, but affirmative statement that it works. 3.65 seems to have unique propagation qualities that are affected by snow, rain, and fog, moreso than 5 or 2.4. Or, that's how it seems. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: "Brian Rohrbacher" br...@reliableinter.net To: "Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization" wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 7:29 AM Subject: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Anyone using 3.65 for ptp? What is available? Can ubiquiti's cards be used in mikrotik? brian WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp
I did not realize there was as FCC emission designator and grant of approval assigned to that radio. I would love to read the FCC approval on that radio. Do you happen to have a link to that? I previously sent out a step by step guide for everyone to use for registering their AP and client locations using the Redline system as an example. It was a doc we worked on at MVN for about a month and sent it to the FCC for their approval. It was given out for free to our paid up WISPA members to save them the month work we spent in making sure we did our filings by the book. I would not expect that you have anything like that but would you care to share what the specific details (emission designator, FCC grant #, etc.) are that you have used for your location filings using the XR3? Thank you, John Scrivner On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 10:07 PM, Travis Johnson t...@ida.net wrote: The FCC ULS requires that you enter the FCC ID of the radio that is being used, along with it's characteristics. That is easily done with an XR3 card. No where during the registration process does it say the radio and antenna and everything else has to be certified as a system. I can complete a perfectly legal 3.65 registration filing, answering every single question honestly, using an XR3 card, inside an ARC antenna/enclosure with an RB411 board. Travis Microserv John Scrivner wrote: So Reader, are you saying you have a 3.65 GHz license and have registered your 3.65 GHz access points and end user locations through the FCC ULS? I did not recall seeing a Star OS 3.65 FCC certified system. You are required to use FCC certified equipment and to register every AP and customer location using this band. If you do not then you are breaking the law. Since you are using WISPA list resources to discuss this as a system option for 3.65 GHz I expect to see a full answer from you here on this. Scriv On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 10:42 AM, rea...@muddyfrogwater.us wrote: I am. Works ok. Using Star-OS. I use ok to designate an unenthusiastic, but affirmative statement that it works. 3.65 seems to have unique propagation qualities that are affected by snow, rain, and fog, moreso than 5 or 2.4. Or, that's how it seems. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Brian Rohrbacher br...@reliableinter.net To: Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 7:29 AM Subject: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Anyone using 3.65 for ptp? What is available? Can ubiquiti's cards be used in mikrotik? brian WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp
Not mine, but http://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/licenseLocDetail.jsp?keyLoc=15533393licKey=2969764rsc=NN That's a Ubiquiti XR3. It doesn't say Mikrotik or Star-OS or Ikarus or because it doesn't matter. Nor does antenna gain. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: John Scrivner j...@scrivner.com Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 8:34 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp So Reader, are you saying you have a 3.65 GHz license and have registered your 3.65 GHz access points and end user locations through the FCC ULS? I did not recall seeing a Star OS 3.65 FCC certified system. You are required to use FCC certified equipment and to register every AP and customer location using this band. If you do not then you are breaking the law. Since you are using WISPA list resources to discuss this as a system option for 3.65 GHz I expect to see a full answer from you here on this. Scriv On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 10:42 AM, rea...@muddyfrogwater.us wrote: I am. Works ok. Using Star-OS. I use ok to designate an unenthusiastic, but affirmative statement that it works. 3.65 seems to have unique propagation qualities that are affected by snow, rain, and fog, moreso than 5 or 2.4. Or, that's how it seems. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Brian Rohrbacher br...@reliableinter.net To: Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 7:29 AM Subject: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Anyone using 3.65 for ptp? What is available? Can ubiquiti's cards be used in mikrotik? brian WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp
My system is fully licensed. Please don't use your ignorance to try to insult me in public. I suggest you attempt, for once, to know exactly what you're talking about before you go start demanding I do a damn thing for you. The FCC grant for the equipment I have in use occurred about 8-10 months ago. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: John Scrivner j...@scrivner.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 6:34 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp So Reader, are you saying you have a 3.65 GHz license and have registered your 3.65 GHz access points and end user locations through the FCC ULS? I did not recall seeing a Star OS 3.65 FCC certified system. You are required to use FCC certified equipment and to register every AP and customer location using this band. If you do not then you are breaking the law. Since you are using WISPA list resources to discuss this as a system option for 3.65 GHz I expect to see a full answer from you here on this. Scriv On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 10:42 AM, rea...@muddyfrogwater.us wrote: I am. Works ok. Using Star-OS. I use ok to designate an unenthusiastic, but affirmative statement that it works. 3.65 seems to have unique propagation qualities that are affected by snow, rain, and fog, moreso than 5 or 2.4. Or, that's how it seems. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Brian Rohrbacher br...@reliableinter.net To: Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 7:29 AM Subject: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Anyone using 3.65 for ptp? What is available? Can ubiquiti's cards be used in mikrotik? brian WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp
Ok, smart alec. Call sign: WQJC592 It's all there in black and white. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: John Scrivner j...@scrivner.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 8:17 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp I did not realize there was as FCC emission designator and grant of approval assigned to that radio. I would love to read the FCC approval on that radio. Do you happen to have a link to that? I previously sent out a step by step guide for everyone to use for registering their AP and client locations using the Redline system as an example. It was a doc we worked on at MVN for about a month and sent it to the FCC for their approval. It was given out for free to our paid up WISPA members to save them the month work we spent in making sure we did our filings by the book. I would not expect that you have anything like that but would you care to share what the specific details (emission designator, FCC grant #, etc.) are that you have used for your location filings using the XR3? Thank you, John Scrivner On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 10:07 PM, Travis Johnson t...@ida.net wrote: The FCC ULS requires that you enter the FCC ID of the radio that is being used, along with it's characteristics. That is easily done with an XR3 card. No where during the registration process does it say the radio and antenna and everything else has to be certified as a system. I can complete a perfectly legal 3.65 registration filing, answering every single question honestly, using an XR3 card, inside an ARC antenna/enclosure with an RB411 board. Travis Microserv John Scrivner wrote: So Reader, are you saying you have a 3.65 GHz license and have registered your 3.65 GHz access points and end user locations through the FCC ULS? I did not recall seeing a Star OS 3.65 FCC certified system. You are required to use FCC certified equipment and to register every AP and customer location using this band. If you do not then you are breaking the law. Since you are using WISPA list resources to discuss this as a system option for 3.65 GHz I expect to see a full answer from you here on this. Scriv On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 10:42 AM, rea...@muddyfrogwater.us wrote: I am. Works ok. Using Star-OS. I use ok to designate an unenthusiastic, but affirmative statement that it works. 3.65 seems to have unique propagation qualities that are affected by snow, rain, and fog, moreso than 5 or 2.4. Or, that's how it seems. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Brian Rohrbacher br...@reliableinter.net To: Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 7:29 AM Subject: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Anyone using 3.65 for ptp? What is available? Can ubiquiti's cards be used in mikrotik? brian WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless
Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp
Antenna gain does matter. UBNT has only one certified antenna combination - or did back when I first filed for the license. Useful only for P2P, actually. You have to specificy EIRP, which UBNT's grant details, using the antenna specified. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 9:38 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Not mine, but http://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/licenseLocDetail.jsp?keyLoc=15533393licKey=2969764rsc=NN That's a Ubiquiti XR3. It doesn't say Mikrotik or Star-OS or Ikarus or because it doesn't matter. Nor does antenna gain. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: John Scrivner j...@scrivner.com Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 8:34 PM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp So Reader, are you saying you have a 3.65 GHz license and have registered your 3.65 GHz access points and end user locations through the FCC ULS? I did not recall seeing a Star OS 3.65 FCC certified system. You are required to use FCC certified equipment and to register every AP and customer location using this band. If you do not then you are breaking the law. Since you are using WISPA list resources to discuss this as a system option for 3.65 GHz I expect to see a full answer from you here on this. Scriv On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 10:42 AM, rea...@muddyfrogwater.us wrote: I am. Works ok. Using Star-OS. I use ok to designate an unenthusiastic, but affirmative statement that it works. 3.65 seems to have unique propagation qualities that are affected by snow, rain, and fog, moreso than 5 or 2.4. Or, that's how it seems. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Brian Rohrbacher br...@reliableinter.net To: Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 7:29 AM Subject: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Anyone using 3.65 for ptp? What is available? Can ubiquiti's cards be used in mikrotik? brian WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp
This guy says he is using them but having problems - didn't read into anything more then 411 board and xr3 http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=7t=29063p=145580hilit=xr3#p145580 Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly. --- Henry Spencer On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 10:29 AM, Brian Rohrbacher br...@reliableinter.netwrote: Anyone using 3.65 for ptp? What is available? Can ubiquiti's cards be used in mikrotik? brian WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp
Redline has a 3.65 ptp with their an80. Mike Goicoechea -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Brian Rohrbacher Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 9:29 AM To: Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization Subject: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Anyone using 3.65 for ptp? What is available? Can ubiquiti's cards be used in mikrotik? brian WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp
Redline and Ligowave both have gear available. Daniel White 3-dB Networks http://www.3dbnetworks.com -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Brian Rohrbacher Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:29 AM To: Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization Subject: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Anyone using 3.65 for ptp? What is available? Can ubiquiti's cards be used in mikrotik? brian WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp
I am. Works ok. Using Star-OS. I use ok to designate an unenthusiastic, but affirmative statement that it works.3.65 seems to have unique propagation qualities that are affected by snow, rain, and fog, moreso than 5 or 2.4. Or, that's how it seems. insert witty tagline here - Original Message - From: Brian Rohrbacher br...@reliableinter.net To: Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 7:29 AM Subject: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Anyone using 3.65 for ptp? What is available? Can ubiquiti's cards be used in mikrotik? brian WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp
Yes they can. Ligowave also offers a PtP product. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- From: Brian Rohrbacher br...@reliableinter.net Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 9:29 AM To: Conversations over a new WISP Trade Organization wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] 3.65 ptp Anyone using 3.65 for ptp? What is available? Can ubiquiti's cards be used in mikrotik? brian WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
