Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations

2008-06-05 Thread Kurt Fankhauser
Exactly, with that attitude from the FCC then all of my network is 100% FCC
certified because all the radio's have an FCC number on them, I would just
have to put that number on the outside of the rootenna.

Kurt Fankhauser
WAVELINC
P.O. Box 126
Bucyrus, OH 44820
419-562-6405
www.wavelinc.com
 
 
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Butch Evans
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 11:57 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations

On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, Kyle Duren wrote:

*Response: *

Since the device is already certified, it can be installed into a 
final basestation without further approval, as long as the FCCID 
label is attached on the outside of the final product.  However, if 
your company wishes to obtain it's own FCC number for the final 
product, then you must apply for an original FCCID.

WOW!  I wonder if this type of flexibility carries over to 2.4 and 
5gig.  I know this has been a REALLY contentious question, but if 
that's the response in 3.65, I have to question the reality of FCC 
views in other bands that are NOT licensed.

-- 

*Butch Evans*Professional Network Consultation *
*Network Engineering*MikroTik RouterOS *
*573-276-2879   *ImageStream   *
*http://www.butchevans.com/ *StarOS and MORE   *
*Mikrotik Certified Consultant  *Wired or Wireless Networks*





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations

2008-06-05 Thread Randy Cosby
Well, let's ask! :)

I assume part-15 rules are written quite a bit differently on this 
matter than part-90, but hey, why not ask?

Randy


Kurt Fankhauser wrote:
 Exactly, with that attitude from the FCC then all of my network is 100% FCC
 certified because all the radio's have an FCC number on them, I would just
 have to put that number on the outside of the rootenna.

 Kurt Fankhauser
 WAVELINC
 P.O. Box 126
 Bucyrus, OH 44820
 419-562-6405
 www.wavelinc.com
  
  
 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Butch Evans
 Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 11:57 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations

 On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, Kyle Duren wrote:

   
 *Response: *
 

   
 Since the device is already certified, it can be installed into a 
 final basestation without further approval, as long as the FCCID 
 label is attached on the outside of the final product.  However, if 
 your company wishes to obtain it's own FCC number for the final 
 product, then you must apply for an original FCCID.
 

 WOW!  I wonder if this type of flexibility carries over to 2.4 and 
 5gig.  I know this has been a REALLY contentious question, but if 
 that's the response in 3.65, I have to question the reality of FCC 
 views in other bands that are NOT licensed.

   

-- 
Randy Cosby
Vice President
InfoWest, Inc

office: 435-773-6071





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations

2008-06-05 Thread Anthony Will
Not to burst a bubble but the special type certification that is part 
of part-15 was created for unlicensed solutions.  Most license holders 
are responsible for the equipment that is in use. Thus the equipment is 
only certified to meet special regs of the band, unlike unlicensed where 
the majority of the responsibility is on the manufacture. 

Anthony Will
Broadband Corp.
http://www.broadband-mn.com



Kurt Fankhauser wrote:
 Exactly, with that attitude from the FCC then all of my network is 100% FCC
 certified because all the radio's have an FCC number on them, I would just
 have to put that number on the outside of the rootenna.

 Kurt Fankhauser
 WAVELINC
 P.O. Box 126
 Bucyrus, OH 44820
 419-562-6405
 www.wavelinc.com
  
  
 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Butch Evans
 Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 11:57 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations

 On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, Kyle Duren wrote:

   
 *Response: *
 

   
 Since the device is already certified, it can be installed into a 
 final basestation without further approval, as long as the FCCID 
 label is attached on the outside of the final product.  However, if 
 your company wishes to obtain it's own FCC number for the final 
 product, then you must apply for an original FCCID.
 

 WOW!  I wonder if this type of flexibility carries over to 2.4 and 
 5gig.  I know this has been a REALLY contentious question, but if 
 that's the response in 3.65, I have to question the reality of FCC 
 views in other bands that are NOT licensed.

   



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations

2008-06-05 Thread Tom Sharples
That is true only if the original modular radio was tested with an antenna 
of equal or greater gain. You'll want to look at the FCC filings that go 
with that radio; bring up the detail page and look at the test photos. Quite 
often you'll find that these modular radios were only tested with a low-gain 
rubber-duck omni.

Tom Sharples
Qorvus Systems, Inc.

- Original Message - 
From: Kurt Fankhauser [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 6:48 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations


 Exactly, with that attitude from the FCC then all of my network is 100% 
 FCC
 certified because all the radio's have an FCC number on them, I would just
 have to put that number on the outside of the rootenna.

 Kurt Fankhauser
 WAVELINC
 P.O. Box 126
 Bucyrus, OH 44820
 419-562-6405
 www.wavelinc.com


 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Butch Evans
 Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 11:57 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations

 On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, Kyle Duren wrote:

*Response: *

Since the device is already certified, it can be installed into a
final basestation without further approval, as long as the FCCID
label is attached on the outside of the final product.  However, if
your company wishes to obtain it's own FCC number for the final
product, then you must apply for an original FCCID.

 WOW!  I wonder if this type of flexibility carries over to 2.4 and
 5gig.  I know this has been a REALLY contentious question, but if
 that's the response in 3.65, I have to question the reality of FCC
 views in other bands that are NOT licensed.

 -- 
 
 *Butch Evans *Professional Network Consultation *
 *Network Engineering *MikroTik RouterOS*
 *573-276-2879 *ImageStream   *
 *http://www.butchevans.com/ *StarOS and MORE   *
 *Mikrotik Certified Consultant *Wired or Wireless Networks*
 


 
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations

2008-06-05 Thread Jack Unger
Right. The WISP then has the option of sending the AP or CPE to a 
certification lab with several different types of higher-gain outdoor 
antennas to get a new FCC ID number (a new certification) in /*your*/ 
company name. The cost is less than certifying without using the 
already-certified card because many of the RF tests do not need to be 
repeated because they were already done by the original manufacturer. 
The cost to do this depends on the number of antenna types tested but 
could run between $1800 (one or two antennas) to $2800 (more antennas).

jack


Tom Sharples wrote:
 That is true only if the original modular radio was tested with an antenna 
 of equal or greater gain. You'll want to look at the FCC filings that go 
 with that radio; bring up the detail page and look at the test photos. Quite 
 often you'll find that these modular radios were only tested with a low-gain 
 rubber-duck omni.

 Tom Sharples
 Qorvus Systems, Inc.

 - Original Message - 
 From: Kurt Fankhauser [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 6:48 AM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations


   
 Exactly, with that attitude from the FCC then all of my network is 100% 
 FCC
 certified because all the radio's have an FCC number on them, I would just
 have to put that number on the outside of the rootenna.

 Kurt Fankhauser
 WAVELINC
 P.O. Box 126
 Bucyrus, OH 44820
 419-562-6405
 www.wavelinc.com


 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Butch Evans
 Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 11:57 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations

 On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, Kyle Duren wrote:

 
 *Response: *
   
 Since the device is already certified, it can be installed into a
 final basestation without further approval, as long as the FCCID
 label is attached on the outside of the final product.  However, if
 your company wishes to obtain it's own FCC number for the final
 product, then you must apply for an original FCCID.
   
 WOW!  I wonder if this type of flexibility carries over to 2.4 and
 5gig.  I know this has been a REALLY contentious question, but if
 that's the response in 3.65, I have to question the reality of FCC
 views in other bands that are NOT licensed.

 -- 
 
 *Butch Evans *Professional Network Consultation *
 *Network Engineering *MikroTik RouterOS*
 *573-276-2879 *ImageStream   *
 *http://www.butchevans.com/ *StarOS and MORE   *
 *Mikrotik Certified Consultant *Wired or Wireless Networks*
 


 
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 
  
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



   

-- 
Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993
Cisco Press Author - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs
Vendor-Neutral Wireless Design-Training-Troubleshooting-Consulting
FCC License # PG-12-25133 Profile http://www.linkedin.com/in/jackunger
Phone 818-227-4220  Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations

2008-06-05 Thread Chuck McCown - 2
You cannot get anything certified without the schematic, block diagram, and 
other pieces of information that you may not be able to get from the 
manufacturer.  If the manufacturer does not cooperate, there isn't any way a 
WISP can obtain the certification.  Moreover, the RF tests do have to be 
tested due to the prospect of the out of band emissions changing with a 
change of antenna.  I have been through this several times.
- Original Message - 
From: Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 12:55 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations


 Right. The WISP then has the option of sending the AP or CPE to a
 certification lab with several different types of higher-gain outdoor
 antennas to get a new FCC ID number (a new certification) in /*your*/
 company name. The cost is less than certifying without using the
 already-certified card because many of the RF tests do not need to be
 repeated because they were already done by the original manufacturer.
 The cost to do this depends on the number of antenna types tested but
 could run between $1800 (one or two antennas) to $2800 (more antennas).

 jack


 Tom Sharples wrote:
 That is true only if the original modular radio was tested with an 
 antenna
 of equal or greater gain. You'll want to look at the FCC filings that go
 with that radio; bring up the detail page and look at the test photos. 
 Quite
 often you'll find that these modular radios were only tested with a 
 low-gain
 rubber-duck omni.

 Tom Sharples
 Qorvus Systems, Inc.

 - Original Message - 
 From: Kurt Fankhauser [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 6:48 AM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations



 Exactly, with that attitude from the FCC then all of my network is 100%
 FCC
 certified because all the radio's have an FCC number on them, I would 
 just
 have to put that number on the outside of the rootenna.

 Kurt Fankhauser
 WAVELINC
 P.O. Box 126
 Bucyrus, OH 44820
 419-562-6405
 www.wavelinc.com


 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Butch Evans
 Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 11:57 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations

 On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, Kyle Duren wrote:


 *Response: *

 Since the device is already certified, it can be installed into a
 final basestation without further approval, as long as the FCCID
 label is attached on the outside of the final product.  However, if
 your company wishes to obtain it's own FCC number for the final
 product, then you must apply for an original FCCID.

 WOW!  I wonder if this type of flexibility carries over to 2.4 and
 5gig.  I know this has been a REALLY contentious question, but if
 that's the response in 3.65, I have to question the reality of FCC
 views in other bands that are NOT licensed.

 -- 
 
 *Butch Evans *Professional Network Consultation *
 *Network Engineering *MikroTik RouterOS*
 *573-276-2879 *ImageStream   *
 *http://www.butchevans.com/ *StarOS and MORE   *
 *Mikrotik Certified Consultant *Wired or Wireless Networks*
 


 
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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




 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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





 -- 
 Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
 Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993
 Cisco Press Author - Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs
 Vendor-Neutral Wireless Design-Training-Troubleshooting-Consulting
 FCC License # PG-12-25133 Profile http://www.linkedin.com/in/jackunger
 Phone 818-227-4220  Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]





 
 WISPA Wants You

Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations

2008-06-05 Thread Jack Unger
Chuck,

My point was that if the RF module has already received a modular 
certification but with a low-gain antenna then the process process of 
obtaining certification with additional (typically higher-gain outdoor) 
antennas is shortened. Typically in this instance, the original card 
manufacturer has obtained the original modular certification with the 
intent of promoting the sales of the card in a variety of different 
types of certified equipment. In other words, the card manufacturer is 
being cooperative. If you are paying your certification lab to run the 
same complete series of RF tests on a variety of equipment models that 
use the same modularly-certified card then you may be paying them too 
much. Feel free to hit me up offline so we can compare notes.

jack


Chuck McCown - 2 wrote:
 You cannot get anything certified without the schematic, block diagram, and 
 other pieces of information that you may not be able to get from the 
 manufacturer.  If the manufacturer does not cooperate, there isn't any way a 
 WISP can obtain the certification.  Moreover, the RF tests do have to be 
 tested due to the prospect of the out of band emissions changing with a 
 change of antenna.  I have been through this several times.
 - Original Message - 
 From: Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 12:55 PM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations


   
 Right. The WISP then has the option of sending the AP or CPE to a
 certification lab with several different types of higher-gain outdoor
 antennas to get a new FCC ID number (a new certification) in /*your*/
 company name. The cost is less than certifying without using the
 already-certified card because many of the RF tests do not need to be
 repeated because they were already done by the original manufacturer.
 The cost to do this depends on the number of antenna types tested but
 could run between $1800 (one or two antennas) to $2800 (more antennas).

 jack


 Tom Sharples wrote:
 
 That is true only if the original modular radio was tested with an 
 antenna
 of equal or greater gain. You'll want to look at the FCC filings that go
 with that radio; bring up the detail page and look at the test photos. 
 Quite
 often you'll find that these modular radios were only tested with a 
 low-gain
 rubber-duck omni.

 Tom Sharples
 Qorvus Systems, Inc.

 - Original Message - 
 From: Kurt Fankhauser [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 6:48 AM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations



   
 Exactly, with that attitude from the FCC then all of my network is 100%
 FCC
 certified because all the radio's have an FCC number on them, I would 
 just
 have to put that number on the outside of the rootenna.

 Kurt Fankhauser
 WAVELINC
 P.O. Box 126
 Bucyrus, OH 44820
 419-562-6405
 www.wavelinc.com


 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
 Behalf Of Butch Evans
 Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 11:57 PM
 To: WISPA General List
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations

 On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, Kyle Duren wrote:


 
 *Response: *

 Since the device is already certified, it can be installed into a
 final basestation without further approval, as long as the FCCID
 label is attached on the outside of the final product.  However, if
 your company wishes to obtain it's own FCC number for the final
 product, then you must apply for an original FCCID.

   
 WOW!  I wonder if this type of flexibility carries over to 2.4 and
 5gig.  I know this has been a REALLY contentious question, but if
 that's the response in 3.65, I have to question the reality of FCC
 views in other bands that are NOT licensed.

 -- 
 
 *Butch Evans *Professional Network Consultation *
 *Network Engineering *MikroTik RouterOS*
 *573-276-2879 *ImageStream   *
 *http://www.butchevans.com/ *StarOS and MORE   *
 *Mikrotik Certified Consultant *Wired or Wireless Networks*
 


 
 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



 
 WISPA Wants You! Join today!
 http://signup.wispa.org/
 

 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations (was: Rapid Link Launches WiMax)

2008-06-04 Thread Randy Cosby
I had a feeling this would unleash a can of worms. 

I'm the one who registered the locations.  My first location (my office 
rooftop) was done purely as an academic exercise to see what exactly was 
required.  I had hoped the FCC would come back and say, you need to do 
X Y and Z before this is acceptable. I would have been fine with that 
and taken that into consideration in my feasibility study.  They did not. 

Since then, there has been some further digging to clarify some 
questions that were brought up by this approval.  From what I 
understand, using the XR3, MT and an 18dbi antenna (or smaller) is 
approved as far as Part 90 goes.  See 
http://forum.ubnt.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1451start=14 for clarification.

Now, if you were to go out and SELL that bundle as a product, I would 
think there would need to be further licensing 
(http://www.fcc.gov/oet/ea/ ) to be approved. Hana Wireless ( 
http://www.streakwave.com/mmSWAVE1/Video/HW3.pdf ) is selling pretty 
much the same kit I made myself, but I do NOT see any OET approvals for 
them.   I hear other WISPS are using the Hana units, but I see nothing 
of the sort registered in ULS, so I would think they are not legal.

If I use any of these, they will be for PTP links.  Because the XR3 was 
only approved for 18dBi antennas, and has a max output of 25dbm (see 
*http://tinyurl.com/4jpndg *,
 http://ubnt.com/downloads/ubi_mtik_power.pdf ) and assuming .5 dB loss 
for the jumper cable, at slow speeds we're only going to get a 42.5 dBm 
or 17.8 watts, not the full 20 watts allowed under the rules in a 20 mhz 
channel.   If you want  to run  at full 54 mbps, you will only get 18 
dBm on the radio,  plus 18 on the antenna, or 35.5 dbm, or 3.5 watts.  
Not the ideal PTP solution.

So is it moral or legal to run it?  I'm glad this has stirred some 
debate and further clarifications.  I'd like to see 802.11Y moved along 
and put into MT and the cards, that would help open up lots of other 
non-wimax possibilities.  For now, it is what it is.  I've seen nothing 
to indicate it is illegal.  Is it unwise?

I honestly am interested in hearing verifiable refutations to anything 
I've found so far.  I want to do what is legal, as well as wise.

Randy




Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE wrote:
 George...you can not plug-n-play components as I said earlier. It has to 
 be certified as a system that makes use of a contention based protocol.

 Leon

 * George Rogato wrote, On 6/4/2008 11:22 AM:
   
 Thanks for explaining that Travis.
 I asked Jack Unger to look into this recently.
 There was a post somewhere else recently about 3650 use and I forwarded 
 it to Jack to find out from the FCC if in fact it is the way the post read.

 I'd like to hear Jack's opinion based on what he has found out from the FCC.

 As far as using those cards, if they work in mt and star, then for most 
 of us it's just add another card to the multi port board and go. It 
 sounds a lot cheaper than I had expected.

 George

 Travis Johnson wrote:
   
 
 John,

 Here is what I have heard or read so far:

 (1) I heard that 3650 users that are conflicting will have to work it 
 out and that more than likely the FCC would not get involved in a 
 frequency conflict.

 (2) Getting a license for 3650 takes about 2 hours, start to finish 
 (from what I have heard from people that have done it). Meaning any 
 person with Internet access can have a valid, FCC license in 2 hours.

 (3) The FCC has already approved someone using just the Ubiquiti XR3 
 card as the registered base station. Putting that card in a MT system 
 does not broadcast any call signs or info in the packet frame, yet you 
 are licensed and FCC legal as per the registration.

 (4) If it truly is a first registered, everyone else work around me 
 then I will be registering every single tower within a 1,000 mile radius 
 from my NOC. :)

 I'm not trying bash you or anything you said... I'm just thinking the 
 3650 band is going to get just as messy as the 5ghz band within a few 
 years... and I think the FCC has given false hope that it is somewhat 
 protected... yet I don't see how.

 Travis
 Microserv

 John Scrivner wrote:
 
   
 Here is how it is different than 5 GHz. In 5 GHz the rules are that you 
 have
 to accept interference. Also any equipment on earth can use the band from
 mobile phones to cameras and of course broadband devices of many types.
 There is little involved in dropping your link. Also there is little chance
 of you knowing what the interfering source is without some leg work. In 
 3650
 only people who get a license can launch. Base stations must be certified
 systems with the FCC and must be registered with the FCC. The rules state
 that it is a requirement that anyone using the band must work to eliminate
 interference with other users. That means if you are there first and 
 someone
 interferes with you then they broke the law and it is their duty to fix it.
 Also, since everyone must register base 

Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations (was: Rapid Link Launches WiMax)

2008-06-04 Thread reader
I've been in contact with UBNT for some time.The modular approval 
specifies the antenna to be used, and it is, according to both the FCC ( 
email from the FCC in response to an inquiry ) and UBNT entirely legal to 
use with any OS that properly operates the card.

So, yes you can grow your own, and if nothing else, you simply use the FCC 
ID on the card itself as your FCC ID...If you wish to have your own 
number on the box, you must apply to the FCC for your own number, and simply 
cite the this is unchanged from XX  in your applicaiton.

All stated clearly and unambiguously by the FCC personell.

I hope this puts this argument to bed.Modular approval is just that. 
The module, ON ITS OWN, is approved and can be put in anything appropriate. 
Again, stated clearly by the FCC.

BTW, on your license, you're required to put the ID of the equipment you're 
putting in place.   In this case, it's the FCC ID for UBNT.

BTW, current XR3's out now are not ACTUALLY the right card.   I've been 
promised a pair from the first stickered and channelized batch.   I would 
not deploy anything being sold by retailers right now, as they are pretty 
much engineering mules...   Not optimized and not properly channel filtered 
and limited.





insert witty tagline here

- Original Message - 
From: Randy Cosby [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 9:12 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations (was: Rapid Link Launches WiMax)


I had a feeling this would unleash a can of worms.

 I'm the one who registered the locations.  My first location (my office
 rooftop) was done purely as an academic exercise to see what exactly was
 required.  I had hoped the FCC would come back and say, you need to do
 X Y and Z before this is acceptable. I would have been fine with that
 and taken that into consideration in my feasibility study.  They did not.

 Since then, there has been some further digging to clarify some
 questions that were brought up by this approval.  From what I
 understand, using the XR3, MT and an 18dbi antenna (or smaller) is
 approved as far as Part 90 goes.  See
 http://forum.ubnt.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1451start=14 for 
 clarification.

 Now, if you were to go out and SELL that bundle as a product, I would
 think there would need to be further licensing
 (http://www.fcc.gov/oet/ea/ ) to be approved. Hana Wireless (
 http://www.streakwave.com/mmSWAVE1/Video/HW3.pdf ) is selling pretty
 much the same kit I made myself, but I do NOT see any OET approvals for
 them.   I hear other WISPS are using the Hana units, but I see nothing
 of the sort registered in ULS, so I would think they are not legal.

 If I use any of these, they will be for PTP links.  Because the XR3 was
 only approved for 18dBi antennas, and has a max output of 25dbm (see
 *http://tinyurl.com/4jpndg *,
 http://ubnt.com/downloads/ubi_mtik_power.pdf ) and assuming .5 dB loss
 for the jumper cable, at slow speeds we're only going to get a 42.5 dBm
 or 17.8 watts, not the full 20 watts allowed under the rules in a 20 mhz
 channel.   If you want  to run  at full 54 mbps, you will only get 18
 dBm on the radio,  plus 18 on the antenna, or 35.5 dbm, or 3.5 watts.
 Not the ideal PTP solution.

 So is it moral or legal to run it?  I'm glad this has stirred some
 debate and further clarifications.  I'd like to see 802.11Y moved along
 and put into MT and the cards, that would help open up lots of other
 non-wimax possibilities.  For now, it is what it is.  I've seen nothing
 to indicate it is illegal.  Is it unwise?

 I honestly am interested in hearing verifiable refutations to anything
 I've found so far.  I want to do what is legal, as well as wise.

 Randy




 Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE wrote:
 George...you can not plug-n-play components as I said earlier. It has to
 be certified as a system that makes use of a contention based protocol.

 Leon

 * George Rogato wrote, On 6/4/2008 11:22 AM:

 Thanks for explaining that Travis.
 I asked Jack Unger to look into this recently.
 There was a post somewhere else recently about 3650 use and I forwarded
 it to Jack to find out from the FCC if in fact it is the way the post 
 read.

 I'd like to hear Jack's opinion based on what he has found out from the 
 FCC.

 As far as using those cards, if they work in mt and star, then for most
 of us it's just add another card to the multi port board and go. It
 sounds a lot cheaper than I had expected.

 George

 Travis Johnson wrote:


 John,

 Here is what I have heard or read so far:

 (1) I heard that 3650 users that are conflicting will have to work 
 it
 out and that more than likely the FCC would not get involved in a
 frequency conflict.

 (2) Getting a license for 3650 takes about 2 hours, start to finish
 (from what I have heard from people that have done it). Meaning any
 person with Internet access can have a valid, FCC license in 2 hours.

 (3) The FCC has

Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations

2008-06-04 Thread Randy Cosby
Thanks for the clarification on the cards.  Any hints on getting someone 
at UBNT to talk to you?  My emails, private forum messages, etc. have 
been ignored.  I understand they are completely buried with NS2 / NS5 
demand, but come on... :)

Randy


[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 I've been in contact with UBNT for some time.The modular approval 
 specifies the antenna to be used, and it is, according to both the FCC ( 
 email from the FCC in response to an inquiry ) and UBNT entirely legal to 
 use with any OS that properly operates the card.

 So, yes you can grow your own, and if nothing else, you simply use the FCC 
 ID on the card itself as your FCC ID...If you wish to have your own 
 number on the box, you must apply to the FCC for your own number, and simply 
 cite the this is unchanged from XX  in your applicaiton.

 All stated clearly and unambiguously by the FCC personell.

 I hope this puts this argument to bed.Modular approval is just that. 
 The module, ON ITS OWN, is approved and can be put in anything appropriate. 
 Again, stated clearly by the FCC.

 BTW, on your license, you're required to put the ID of the equipment you're 
 putting in place.   In this case, it's the FCC ID for UBNT.

 BTW, current XR3's out now are not ACTUALLY the right card.   I've been 
 promised a pair from the first stickered and channelized batch.   I would 
 not deploy anything being sold by retailers right now, as they are pretty 
 much engineering mules...   Not optimized and not properly channel filtered 
 and limited.




 
 insert witty tagline here

 - Original Message - 
 From: Randy Cosby [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 9:12 AM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations (was: Rapid Link Launches WiMax)


   
 I had a feeling this would unleash a can of worms.

 I'm the one who registered the locations.  My first location (my office
 rooftop) was done purely as an academic exercise to see what exactly was
 required.  I had hoped the FCC would come back and say, you need to do
 X Y and Z before this is acceptable. I would have been fine with that
 and taken that into consideration in my feasibility study.  They did not.

 Since then, there has been some further digging to clarify some
 questions that were brought up by this approval.  From what I
 understand, using the XR3, MT and an 18dbi antenna (or smaller) is
 approved as far as Part 90 goes.  See
 http://forum.ubnt.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1451start=14 for 
 clarification.

 Now, if you were to go out and SELL that bundle as a product, I would
 think there would need to be further licensing
 (http://www.fcc.gov/oet/ea/ ) to be approved. Hana Wireless (
 http://www.streakwave.com/mmSWAVE1/Video/HW3.pdf ) is selling pretty
 much the same kit I made myself, but I do NOT see any OET approvals for
 them.   I hear other WISPS are using the Hana units, but I see nothing
 of the sort registered in ULS, so I would think they are not legal.

 If I use any of these, they will be for PTP links.  Because the XR3 was
 only approved for 18dBi antennas, and has a max output of 25dbm (see
 *http://tinyurl.com/4jpndg *,
 http://ubnt.com/downloads/ubi_mtik_power.pdf ) and assuming .5 dB loss
 for the jumper cable, at slow speeds we're only going to get a 42.5 dBm
 or 17.8 watts, not the full 20 watts allowed under the rules in a 20 mhz
 channel.   If you want  to run  at full 54 mbps, you will only get 18
 dBm on the radio,  plus 18 on the antenna, or 35.5 dbm, or 3.5 watts.
 Not the ideal PTP solution.

 So is it moral or legal to run it?  I'm glad this has stirred some
 debate and further clarifications.  I'd like to see 802.11Y moved along
 and put into MT and the cards, that would help open up lots of other
 non-wimax possibilities.  For now, it is what it is.  I've seen nothing
 to indicate it is illegal.  Is it unwise?

 I honestly am interested in hearing verifiable refutations to anything
 I've found so far.  I want to do what is legal, as well as wise.

 Randy




 Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE wrote:
 
 George...you can not plug-n-play components as I said earlier. It has to
 be certified as a system that makes use of a contention based protocol.

 Leon

 * George Rogato wrote, On 6/4/2008 11:22 AM:

   
 Thanks for explaining that Travis.
 I asked Jack Unger to look into this recently.
 There was a post somewhere else recently about 3650 use and I forwarded
 it to Jack to find out from the FCC if in fact it is the way the post 
 read.

 I'd like to hear Jack's opinion based on what he has found out from the 
 FCC.

 As far as using those cards, if they work in mt and star, then for most
 of us it's just add another card to the multi port board and go. It
 sounds a lot cheaper than I had expected.

 George

 Travis Johnson wrote:


 
 John,

 Here is what I have heard or read so far:

 (1) I heard that 3650 users that are conflicting will have

Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations (was: Rapid Link Launches WiMax)

2008-06-04 Thread Doug Ratcliffe
Does that apply to part 15 modular approval as well for SR2/SR5/XR2/XR5?

- Original Message - 
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 12:33 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations (was: Rapid Link Launches WiMax)


 I've been in contact with UBNT for some time.The modular approval
 specifies the antenna to be used, and it is, according to both the FCC (
 email from the FCC in response to an inquiry ) and UBNT entirely legal to
 use with any OS that properly operates the card.

 So, yes you can grow your own, and if nothing else, you simply use the FCC
 ID on the card itself as your FCC ID...If you wish to have your own
 number on the box, you must apply to the FCC for your own number, and 
 simply
 cite the this is unchanged from XX  in your applicaiton.

 All stated clearly and unambiguously by the FCC personell.

 I hope this puts this argument to bed.Modular approval is just that.
 The module, ON ITS OWN, is approved and can be put in anything 
 appropriate.
 Again, stated clearly by the FCC.

 BTW, on your license, you're required to put the ID of the equipment 
 you're
 putting in place.   In this case, it's the FCC ID for UBNT.

 BTW, current XR3's out now are not ACTUALLY the right card.   I've been
 promised a pair from the first stickered and channelized batch.   I would
 not deploy anything being sold by retailers right now, as they are pretty
 much engineering mules...   Not optimized and not properly channel 
 filtered
 and limited.




 
 insert witty tagline here

 - Original Message - 
 From: Randy Cosby [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 9:12 AM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations (was: Rapid Link Launches WiMax)


I had a feeling this would unleash a can of worms.

 I'm the one who registered the locations.  My first location (my office
 rooftop) was done purely as an academic exercise to see what exactly was
 required.  I had hoped the FCC would come back and say, you need to do
 X Y and Z before this is acceptable. I would have been fine with that
 and taken that into consideration in my feasibility study.  They did not.

 Since then, there has been some further digging to clarify some
 questions that were brought up by this approval.  From what I
 understand, using the XR3, MT and an 18dbi antenna (or smaller) is
 approved as far as Part 90 goes.  See
 http://forum.ubnt.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1451start=14 for
 clarification.

 Now, if you were to go out and SELL that bundle as a product, I would
 think there would need to be further licensing
 (http://www.fcc.gov/oet/ea/ ) to be approved. Hana Wireless (
 http://www.streakwave.com/mmSWAVE1/Video/HW3.pdf ) is selling pretty
 much the same kit I made myself, but I do NOT see any OET approvals for
 them.   I hear other WISPS are using the Hana units, but I see nothing
 of the sort registered in ULS, so I would think they are not legal.

 If I use any of these, they will be for PTP links.  Because the XR3 was
 only approved for 18dBi antennas, and has a max output of 25dbm (see
 *http://tinyurl.com/4jpndg *,
 http://ubnt.com/downloads/ubi_mtik_power.pdf ) and assuming .5 dB loss
 for the jumper cable, at slow speeds we're only going to get a 42.5 dBm
 or 17.8 watts, not the full 20 watts allowed under the rules in a 20 mhz
 channel.   If you want  to run  at full 54 mbps, you will only get 18
 dBm on the radio,  plus 18 on the antenna, or 35.5 dbm, or 3.5 watts.
 Not the ideal PTP solution.

 So is it moral or legal to run it?  I'm glad this has stirred some
 debate and further clarifications.  I'd like to see 802.11Y moved along
 and put into MT and the cards, that would help open up lots of other
 non-wimax possibilities.  For now, it is what it is.  I've seen nothing
 to indicate it is illegal.  Is it unwise?

 I honestly am interested in hearing verifiable refutations to anything
 I've found so far.  I want to do what is legal, as well as wise.

 Randy




 Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE wrote:
 George...you can not plug-n-play components as I said earlier. It has to
 be certified as a system that makes use of a contention based protocol.

 Leon

 * George Rogato wrote, On 6/4/2008 11:22 AM:

 Thanks for explaining that Travis.
 I asked Jack Unger to look into this recently.
 There was a post somewhere else recently about 3650 use and I forwarded
 it to Jack to find out from the FCC if in fact it is the way the post
 read.

 I'd like to hear Jack's opinion based on what he has found out from the
 FCC.

 As far as using those cards, if they work in mt and star, then for most
 of us it's just add another card to the multi port board and go. It
 sounds a lot cheaper than I had expected.

 George

 Travis Johnson wrote:


 John,

 Here is what I have heard or read so far:

 (1) I heard that 3650 users that are conflicting will have to work
 it
 out

Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations

2008-06-04 Thread Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE
* Randy Cosby wrote, On 6/4/2008 12:36 PM:
 Thanks for the clarification on the cards.  Any hints on getting someone 
 at UBNT to talk to you?  My emails, private forum messages, etc. have 
 been ignored.  I understand they are completely buried with NS2 / NS5 
 demand, but come on... :)
   
As far as I know, 3650 requires a contention based protocol not just a 
modular part's FCCID to use it.

Leon
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
   
 I've been in contact with UBNT for some time.The modular approval 
 specifies the antenna to be used, and it is, according to both the FCC ( 
 email from the FCC in response to an inquiry ) and UBNT entirely legal to 
 use with any OS that properly operates the card.

 So, yes you can grow your own, and if nothing else, you simply use the FCC 
 ID on the card itself as your FCC ID...If you wish to have your own 
 number on the box, you must apply to the FCC for your own number, and simply 
 cite the this is unchanged from XX  in your applicaiton.

 All stated clearly and unambiguously by the FCC personell.

 I hope this puts this argument to bed.Modular approval is just that. 
 The module, ON ITS OWN, is approved and can be put in anything appropriate. 
 Again, stated clearly by the FCC.

 BTW, on your license, you're required to put the ID of the equipment you're 
 putting in place.   In this case, it's the FCC ID for UBNT.

 BTW, current XR3's out now are not ACTUALLY the right card.   I've been 
 promised a pair from the first stickered and channelized batch.   I would 
 not deploy anything being sold by retailers right now, as they are pretty 
 much engineering mules...   Not optimized and not properly channel filtered 
 and limited.




 
 insert witty tagline here

 - Original Message - 
 From: Randy Cosby [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 9:12 AM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations (was: Rapid Link Launches WiMax)


   
 
 I had a feeling this would unleash a can of worms.

 I'm the one who registered the locations.  My first location (my office
 rooftop) was done purely as an academic exercise to see what exactly was
 required.  I had hoped the FCC would come back and say, you need to do
 X Y and Z before this is acceptable. I would have been fine with that
 and taken that into consideration in my feasibility study.  They did not.

 Since then, there has been some further digging to clarify some
 questions that were brought up by this approval.  From what I
 understand, using the XR3, MT and an 18dbi antenna (or smaller) is
 approved as far as Part 90 goes.  See
 http://forum.ubnt.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1451start=14 for 
 clarification.

 Now, if you were to go out and SELL that bundle as a product, I would
 think there would need to be further licensing
 (http://www.fcc.gov/oet/ea/ ) to be approved. Hana Wireless (
 http://www.streakwave.com/mmSWAVE1/Video/HW3.pdf ) is selling pretty
 much the same kit I made myself, but I do NOT see any OET approvals for
 them.   I hear other WISPS are using the Hana units, but I see nothing
 of the sort registered in ULS, so I would think they are not legal.

 If I use any of these, they will be for PTP links.  Because the XR3 was
 only approved for 18dBi antennas, and has a max output of 25dbm (see
 *http://tinyurl.com/4jpndg *,
 http://ubnt.com/downloads/ubi_mtik_power.pdf ) and assuming .5 dB loss
 for the jumper cable, at slow speeds we're only going to get a 42.5 dBm
 or 17.8 watts, not the full 20 watts allowed under the rules in a 20 mhz
 channel.   If you want  to run  at full 54 mbps, you will only get 18
 dBm on the radio,  plus 18 on the antenna, or 35.5 dbm, or 3.5 watts.
 Not the ideal PTP solution.

 So is it moral or legal to run it?  I'm glad this has stirred some
 debate and further clarifications.  I'd like to see 802.11Y moved along
 and put into MT and the cards, that would help open up lots of other
 non-wimax possibilities.  For now, it is what it is.  I've seen nothing
 to indicate it is illegal.  Is it unwise?

 I honestly am interested in hearing verifiable refutations to anything
 I've found so far.  I want to do what is legal, as well as wise.

 Randy




 Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE wrote:
 
   
 George...you can not plug-n-play components as I said earlier. It has to
 be certified as a system that makes use of a contention based protocol.

 Leon

 * George Rogato wrote, On 6/4/2008 11:22 AM:

   
 
 Thanks for explaining that Travis.
 I asked Jack Unger to look into this recently.
 There was a post somewhere else recently about 3650 use and I forwarded
 it to Jack to find out from the FCC if in fact it is the way the post 
 read.

 I'd like to hear Jack's opinion based on what he has found out from the 
 FCC.

 As far as using those cards, if they work in mt and star, then for most
 of us it's just add another card to the multi port board and go. It
 sounds a lot

Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations (was: Rapid Link Launches WiMax)

2008-06-04 Thread reader
Yes.





insert witty tagline here

- Original Message - 
From: Doug Ratcliffe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 9:44 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations (was: Rapid Link Launches WiMax)


 Does that apply to part 15 modular approval as well for SR2/SR5/XR2/XR5?
 




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations

2008-06-04 Thread reader
Approval by getting your FCC cert ID means it qualifies, period.

And yes, 802.11 is contention based but the FCC refuses to allow 802.11 to 
be approved for the full spectrum until some 802.something standard is 
finalized.





insert witty tagline here

- Original Message - 
From: Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 11:16 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations


* Randy Cosby wrote, On 6/4/2008 12:36 PM:
 Thanks for the clarification on the cards.  Any hints on getting someone
 at UBNT to talk to you?  My emails, private forum messages, etc. have
 been ignored.  I understand they are completely buried with NS2 / NS5
 demand, but come on... :)

 As far as I know, 3650 requires a contention based protocol not just a
 modular part's FCCID to use it.

 Leon
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I've been in contact with UBNT for some time.The modular approval
 specifies the antenna to be used, and it is, according to both the FCC (
 email from the FCC in response to an inquiry ) and UBNT entirely legal 
 to
 use with any OS that properly operates the card.

 So, yes you can grow your own, and if nothing else, you simply use the 
 FCC
 ID on the card itself as your FCC ID...If you wish to have your own
 number on the box, you must apply to the FCC for your own number, and 
 simply
 cite the this is unchanged from XX  in your applicaiton.

 All stated clearly and unambiguously by the FCC personell.

 I hope this puts this argument to bed.Modular approval is just that.
 The module, ON ITS OWN, is approved and can be put in anything 
 appropriate.
 Again, stated clearly by the FCC.

 BTW, on your license, you're required to put the ID of the equipment 
 you're
 putting in place.   In this case, it's the FCC ID for UBNT.

 BTW, current XR3's out now are not ACTUALLY the right card.   I've been
 promised a pair from the first stickered and channelized batch.   I 
 would
 not deploy anything being sold by retailers right now, as they are 
 pretty
 much engineering mules...   Not optimized and not properly channel 
 filtered
 and limited.




 
 insert witty tagline here

 - Original Message - 
 From: Randy Cosby [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
 Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 9:12 AM
 Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations (was: Rapid Link Launches WiMax)




 I had a feeling this would unleash a can of worms.

 I'm the one who registered the locations.  My first location (my office
 rooftop) was done purely as an academic exercise to see what exactly 
 was
 required.  I had hoped the FCC would come back and say, you need to do
 X Y and Z before this is acceptable. I would have been fine with that
 and taken that into consideration in my feasibility study.  They did 
 not.

 Since then, there has been some further digging to clarify some
 questions that were brought up by this approval.  From what I
 understand, using the XR3, MT and an 18dbi antenna (or smaller) is
 approved as far as Part 90 goes.  See
 http://forum.ubnt.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1451start=14 for
 clarification.

 Now, if you were to go out and SELL that bundle as a product, I would
 think there would need to be further licensing
 (http://www.fcc.gov/oet/ea/ ) to be approved. Hana Wireless (
 http://www.streakwave.com/mmSWAVE1/Video/HW3.pdf ) is selling pretty
 much the same kit I made myself, but I do NOT see any OET approvals for
 them.   I hear other WISPS are using the Hana units, but I see nothing
 of the sort registered in ULS, so I would think they are not legal.

 If I use any of these, they will be for PTP links.  Because the XR3 was
 only approved for 18dBi antennas, and has a max output of 25dbm (see
 *http://tinyurl.com/4jpndg *,
 http://ubnt.com/downloads/ubi_mtik_power.pdf ) and assuming .5 dB loss
 for the jumper cable, at slow speeds we're only going to get a 42.5 dBm
 or 17.8 watts, not the full 20 watts allowed under the rules in a 20 
 mhz
 channel.   If you want  to run  at full 54 mbps, you will only get 18
 dBm on the radio,  plus 18 on the antenna, or 35.5 dbm, or 3.5 watts.
 Not the ideal PTP solution.

 So is it moral or legal to run it?  I'm glad this has stirred some
 debate and further clarifications.  I'd like to see 802.11Y moved along
 and put into MT and the cards, that would help open up lots of other
 non-wimax possibilities.  For now, it is what it is.  I've seen nothing
 to indicate it is illegal.  Is it unwise?

 I honestly am interested in hearing verifiable refutations to anything
 I've found so far.  I want to do what is legal, as well as wise.

 Randy




 Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE wrote:


 George...you can not plug-n-play components as I said earlier. It has 
 to
 be certified as a system that makes use of a contention based 
 protocol.

 Leon

 * George Rogato wrote, On 6/4/2008 11:22 AM:



 Thanks

Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations

2008-06-04 Thread Kyle Duren
I have been working on this a little bit with Jack and some other 
people, and we had a few questions submitted directly to the FCC, to 
verify some of these exact questions, here are there responses:

*Inquiry:*
I am trying to fully understand the procedures for getting a radio 
device certified for used as a registered base station under the new 
3650-3700 rules. I know this device is only allowed to operate in the 
lower 25mhz. The device in question is fcc id: SWX-XR3B. What procedures 
do I need to take, to allow me to use this in a single board computer, 
as a Access Point (Base station)? SBC: Routerboard 333 
http://routerboard.com/pdf/rb333b.pdf Radio Device: 
http://ubnt.com/products/xr3.php Thanks, Kyle Duren

*Response: *
Since the device is already certified, it can be installed into a final 
basestation without further approval, as long as the FCCID label is 
attached on the outside of the final product.  However, if your company 
wishes to obtain it's own FCC number for the final product, then you 
must apply for an original FCCID.

#2

*Inquiry:*

---*Reply from Customer on 04/29/2008*---

The grant issued for this device lists this: This device incorporates a 
restricted contention based protocol. It is not capable of avoiding co 
frequency interference with devices using all other types of 
contention-based protocols. Operation is restricted to the 3650-3675 MHz 
band. Yet using this device, which is a 802.11g device, includes support 
for CSMA/CD, which is a method of detecting and avoiding interference 
with other devices. Doesn't this meet the requirements set forward in 
part90.7? Thanks, Kyle Duren

*Response: *
We will not issue unrestricted use approval until the 802.16h and 802.19 
protocol standards are finalized.

802.16h =  Improved Coexistence Mechanisms for License-Exempt Operation 
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.16)
802.19 = More Coexistence Stuff (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.19)
-
Now #2 is only being asked, in regards to the grant aproval actually 
given to the XR3, since there was much discussion before hand, on how 
the wi-fi band would meet these rules, whereas WiMax would not.

Grant can be found here: 
https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/Eas731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COPYRequestTimeout=500application_id=930658fcc_id=SWX-XR3B

or here, if that didnt come across correctly: *http://tinyurl.com/5alnkl

-
*ARC Wireless does make a nice antenna/enclosure, for the 3.65ghz range, 
although Im not sure who has it in stock.

---
Label examples and such can be found here:

http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/oetcf/kdb/forms/FTSSearchResultPage.cfm?id=27980switch=P

To me it seems like using the Assembled with tested components makes 
the most sense, since thats totally true, the system has not been 
certified, just the radio device within the system.

-
Details on channels and conversion frequencies:

Channel Freq Driver Freq Real Channel Width Support

ChannelA 5765MHz 3658MHz 5/10MHz
ChannelB 5770MHz 3663MHz 20/10/5MHz
ChannelC 5775MHz 3668MHz 5/10MHz

3 channels is not a lot; but the best that can be done with only 25MHz 
of bandwidth and the band edge rules of the 3.65GHz band. from 
[EMAIL PROTECTED], who is in charge of the XR3 compliance stuff.
---
The statement about which card to buy:

There are 3 versions of this card, as far as I know, they follow

XR-3-2.8 = 2.70ghz - 2.90ghz
XR-3-3.5 = 3.400ghz - 3.7ghz **XR3-3.5 is a General Purpose Engineer 
Card that can be used toqualify performane up to 3.7GHz**
XR-3-3.7 = 3.65ghz - 3.7gh (FCC Part90 Compliant card)
I do NOT know what the differences in appears on these cards might be, 
but if its marked with the SWX-SR3B FCCID sticker, I would assume it is 
the correct 3.65ghz radio card. None of the other models should actually 
have that fcc, since they are not approved for those other ranges. They 
are mostly for export outside the US, much like the XR7 card (760mhz-780mhz)
---
Also from what I have heard (cannot back up with fact) Ubiquiti is 
working on a LS3, or PS3 or NS3 style radio, and also a LS9 or PS9 radio 
(This one is for sure, it is in beta tests currently, checking its 
compatibility with the XR9/SR9 existing networks)

Hope that clears a few things up,
Kyle Duren



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations

2008-06-04 Thread Butch Evans
On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, Kyle Duren wrote:

*Response: *

Since the device is already certified, it can be installed into a 
final basestation without further approval, as long as the FCCID 
label is attached on the outside of the final product.  However, if 
your company wishes to obtain it's own FCC number for the final 
product, then you must apply for an original FCCID.

WOW!  I wonder if this type of flexibility carries over to 2.4 and 
5gig.  I know this has been a REALLY contentious question, but if 
that's the response in 3.65, I have to question the reality of FCC 
views in other bands that are NOT licensed.

-- 

*Butch Evans*Professional Network Consultation *
*Network Engineering*MikroTik RouterOS *
*573-276-2879   *ImageStream   *
*http://www.butchevans.com/ *StarOS and MORE   *
*Mikrotik Certified Consultant  *Wired or Wireless Networks*




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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