Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
Yup. Definitely looks like DFS non compliant radios. Sent from my iPad On Feb 14, 2014, at 22:08, Jim Patient jpati...@linktechs.net wrote: Anyone happen to notice the noise on the San Juan TDWR station lately? Must be a bunch of Airgrids down there J https://tinyurl.com/pohpj6o Jim From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Forrest Christian (List Account) Sent: Friday, February 14, 2014 8:27 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? I guess the point I was trying to make was that every one of those airgrids have been illegal to operate in 5.4 since day one. If you're unfortunate enough to get the FCC's attention you could be fined dearly for operating out of spec. A bit of history. The 5.4 frequency block used to be military and civilian radar only. As part of the conditions of us gaining access to the band the concept of DFS was created. The specific purpose of DFS was to protect the existing, licensed, and primary users of the band. All operations in 5.4 must use DFS to ensure that radios shut down instead of interfering with the existing, primary users. Without DFS we would have never been permitted in the band. As hardware came out which was capable of transmitting in the band some implemented DFS and was certified and legal to operate in 5.4. And some of it, like the airgrids, could transmit in the 5.4 band but were not legal to operate in those bands in the US. One of the primary users in the 5.4 band is TDWR. This detects micro bursts at airports where they're common. This is a public safety system run by the FAA. A couple of years ago the FAA started having interference caused by various unlicensed operations in this band. Several operators were fined and as fallout the frequencies used by TDWR were carved out of the band and cannot be used anywhere even in areas where TDWR isn't used. In addition the FCC started tightening down on equipment sold in the US and capable of operating in these bands. Which gets us to where we are now. UBNT and others are releasing firmware updates specifically designed to deny illegal operation. This includes removing compliance test mode. In theory legal operations should not be impacted, but operations which should never have been permitted in the first place will no longer be possible. In the bigger picture, illegal operations is a definite strike against our credibility when we either ask for more bands or defend the ones we already have, especially if there needs to be some sort of protection to existing users of the band. On Feb 14, 2014 2:17 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: We have over 600 Airgrids deployed (Which did not get DFS approval but we are using the frequencies listed and DFS on the Rocket Sectors they connect to. I have been chasing jumping bunny rabbits (False Positives from competitors putting up new APs)) - cost to replace $6000 not including labor costs. And money grows on trees. All of our other equipment I have reprogrammed and updated to bring them up to legal. Same with Power Bridges - No DFS - So when the Nano beams came out 5.7-5.8 No DFS that triggered my question about the lower frequencies whether it seemed like they were going to be withdrawn and sold off to the highest bidder. It is all about the money after all. Are we the only ones that deployed so many Airgrids?. On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com wrote: Yes but the lower ones require DFS and lower power and a certified radio. Your original message was complaining about the removal of compliance test mode. The specific purpose of compliance test mode is to permit a radio to operate outside of legal limits. For instance over the legal power limit or on DFS bands without DFS enabled or outside legal channels for that radio. UBNT has stated over and over that their intent was not to prevent any legal operation of their radio. I haven't heard of any instances where not having compliance mode has resulted in a meaningful impact to a legal operator. I hate to defend them but in this case it seems like they may have gotten it nearly correct. Is there a specific frequency and power you're using you think is legal but isn't permitted unless you turn on compliance test mode? On Feb 12, 2014 2:08 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: 5265-5320 5500-5580 5660-5700 5735-5840 Are these not USA channels? If am wrong let me know and I will change them. On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller par...@cyberbroadband.net wrote: Forrest...what is your offlist email ? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone - Reply message - From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
We have over 600 Airgrids deployed (Which did not get DFS approval but we are using the frequencies listed and DFS on the Rocket Sectors they connect to. I have been chasing jumping bunny rabbits (False Positives from competitors putting up new APs)) - cost to replace $6000 not including labor costs. And money grows on trees. All of our other equipment I have reprogrammed and updated to bring them up to legal. Same with Power Bridges - No DFS - So when the Nano beams came out 5.7-5.8 No DFS that triggered my question about the lower frequencies whether it seemed like they were going to be withdrawn and sold off to the highest bidder. It is all about the money after all. Are we the only ones that deployed so many Airgrids?. On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com wrote: Yes but the lower ones require DFS and lower power and a certified radio. Your original message was complaining about the removal of compliance test mode. The specific purpose of compliance test mode is to permit a radio to operate outside of legal limits. For instance over the legal power limit or on DFS bands without DFS enabled or outside legal channels for that radio. UBNT has stated over and over that their intent was not to prevent any legal operation of their radio. I haven't heard of any instances where not having compliance mode has resulted in a meaningful impact to a legal operator. I hate to defend them but in this case it seems like they may have gotten it nearly correct. Is there a specific frequency and power you're using you think is legal but isn't permitted unless you turn on compliance test mode? On Feb 12, 2014 2:08 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: 5265-5320 5500-5580 5660-5700 5735-5840 Are these not USA channels? If am wrong let me know and I will change them. On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller par...@cyberbroadband.net wrote: Forrest...what is your offlist email ? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone - Reply message - From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Date: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 11:53 AM I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed over. Even if the radios don't do this you are introducing far more rf than is likely needed causing an overall rising of the noise floor. Please don't interpret everyone's ire incorrectly. We've just all either dealt with an operator like you are now or have been an operator like you are now. And right now we're trying to gain credibility with the FCC which is hard to do when some operators are flagrantly breaking the rules. Which makes us a bit grumpy. I'm sure some of your neighbors out there would love to help you better understand what you are doing to yourself and help you improve your operations which will in turn improve your quality of service. Heck, I'd drive over there for a weekend if my schedule wasn't so packed. In any case please ask for help in appropriate spots and let us help you reap the rewards of a correctly and legally operating network. On Feb 8, 2014 4:49 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927-7837 ptera.com facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera - This message may contain
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
Yes? :-p - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2014 9:17:34 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? We have over 600 Airgrids deployed (Which did not get DFS approval but we are using the frequencies listed and DFS on the Rocket Sectors they connect to. I have been chasing jumping bunny rabbits (False Positives from competitors putting up new APs)) - cost to replace $6000 not including labor costs. And money grows on trees. All of our other equipment I have reprogrammed and updated to bring them up to legal. Same with Power Bridges - No DFS - So when the Nano beams came out 5.7-5.8 No DFS that triggered my question about the lower frequencies whether it seemed like they were going to be withdrawn and sold off to the highest bidder. It is all about the money after all. Are we the only ones that deployed so many Airgrids?. On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com wrote: Yes but the lower ones require DFS and lower power and a certified radio. Your original message was complaining about the removal of compliance test mode. The specific purpose of compliance test mode is to permit a radio to operate outside of legal limits. For instance over the legal power limit or on DFS bands without DFS enabled or outside legal channels for that radio. UBNT has stated over and over that their intent was not to prevent any legal operation of their radio. I haven't heard of any instances where not having compliance mode has resulted in a meaningful impact to a legal operator. I hate to defend them but in this case it seems like they may have gotten it nearly correct. Is there a specific frequency and power you're using you think is legal but isn't permitted unless you turn on compliance test mode? On Feb 12, 2014 2:08 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: blockquote 5265-5320 5500-5580 5660-5700 5735-5840 Are these not USA channels? If am wrong let me know and I will change them. On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller par...@cyberbroadband.net wrote: blockquote Forrest...what is your offlist email ? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone - Reply message - From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Date: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 11:53 AM I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed over. Even if the radios don't do this you are introducing far more rf than is likely needed causing an overall rising of the noise floor. Please don't interpret everyone's ire incorrectly. We've just all either dealt with an operator like you are now or have been an operator like you are now. And right now we're trying to gain credibility with the FCC which is hard to do when some operators are flagrantly breaking the rules. Which makes us a bit grumpy. I'm sure some of your neighbors out there would love to help you better understand what you are doing to yourself and help you improve your operations which will in turn improve your quality of service. Heck, I'd drive over there for a weekend if my schedule wasn't so packed. In any case please ask for help in appropriate spots and let us help you reap the rewards of a correctly and legally operating network. On Feb 8, 2014 4:49 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: blockquote Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
Run your rockets at legal power levels and you won't be chasing DFS hops. On Feb 13, 2014, at 10:17, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: We have over 600 Airgrids deployed (Which did not get DFS approval but we are using the frequencies listed and DFS on the Rocket Sectors they connect to. I have been chasing jumping bunny rabbits (False Positives from competitors putting up new APs)) - cost to replace $6000 not including labor costs. And money grows on trees. All of our other equipment I have reprogrammed and updated to bring them up to legal. Same with Power Bridges - No DFS - So when the Nano beams came out 5.7-5.8 No DFS that triggered my question about the lower frequencies whether it seemed like they were going to be withdrawn and sold off to the highest bidder. It is all about the money after all. Are we the only ones that deployed so many Airgrids?. On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com wrote: Yes but the lower ones require DFS and lower power and a certified radio. Your original message was complaining about the removal of compliance test mode. The specific purpose of compliance test mode is to permit a radio to operate outside of legal limits. For instance over the legal power limit or on DFS bands without DFS enabled or outside legal channels for that radio. UBNT has stated over and over that their intent was not to prevent any legal operation of their radio. I haven't heard of any instances where not having compliance mode has resulted in a meaningful impact to a legal operator. I hate to defend them but in this case it seems like they may have gotten it nearly correct. Is there a specific frequency and power you're using you think is legal but isn't permitted unless you turn on compliance test mode? On Feb 12, 2014 2:08 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: 5265-5320 5500-5580 5660-5700 5735-5840 Are these not USA channels? If am wrong let me know and I will change them. On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller par...@cyberbroadband.net wrote: Forrest...what is your offlist email ? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone - Reply message - From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Date: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 11:53 AM I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed over. Even if the radios don't do this you are introducing far more rf than is likely needed causing an overall rising of the noise floor. Please don't interpret everyone's ire incorrectly. We've just all either dealt with an operator like you are now or have been an operator like you are now. And right now we're trying to gain credibility with the FCC which is hard to do when some operators are flagrantly breaking the rules. Which makes us a bit grumpy. I'm sure some of your neighbors out there would love to help you better understand what you are doing to yourself and help you improve your operations which will in turn improve your quality of service. Heck, I'd drive over there for a weekend if my schedule wasn't so packed. In any case please ask for help in appropriate spots and let us help you reap the rewards of a correctly and legally operating network. On Feb 8, 2014 4:49 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
Ummm. And how are you connected uncertified devices to a DFS equipped sector? On Feb 13, 2014, at 10:17, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: We have over 600 Airgrids deployed (Which did not get DFS approval but we are using the frequencies listed and DFS on the Rocket Sectors they connect to. I have been chasing jumping bunny rabbits (False Positives from competitors putting up new APs)) - cost to replace $6000 not including labor costs. And money grows on trees. All of our other equipment I have reprogrammed and updated to bring them up to legal. Same with Power Bridges - No DFS - So when the Nano beams came out 5.7-5.8 No DFS that triggered my question about the lower frequencies whether it seemed like they were going to be withdrawn and sold off to the highest bidder. It is all about the money after all. Are we the only ones that deployed so many Airgrids?. On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com wrote: Yes but the lower ones require DFS and lower power and a certified radio. Your original message was complaining about the removal of compliance test mode. The specific purpose of compliance test mode is to permit a radio to operate outside of legal limits. For instance over the legal power limit or on DFS bands without DFS enabled or outside legal channels for that radio. UBNT has stated over and over that their intent was not to prevent any legal operation of their radio. I haven't heard of any instances where not having compliance mode has resulted in a meaningful impact to a legal operator. I hate to defend them but in this case it seems like they may have gotten it nearly correct. Is there a specific frequency and power you're using you think is legal but isn't permitted unless you turn on compliance test mode? On Feb 12, 2014 2:08 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: 5265-5320 5500-5580 5660-5700 5735-5840 Are these not USA channels? If am wrong let me know and I will change them. On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller par...@cyberbroadband.net wrote: Forrest...what is your offlist email ? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone - Reply message - From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Date: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 11:53 AM I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed over. Even if the radios don't do this you are introducing far more rf than is likely needed causing an overall rising of the noise floor. Please don't interpret everyone's ire incorrectly. We've just all either dealt with an operator like you are now or have been an operator like you are now. And right now we're trying to gain credibility with the FCC which is hard to do when some operators are flagrantly breaking the rules. Which makes us a bit grumpy. I'm sure some of your neighbors out there would love to help you better understand what you are doing to yourself and help you improve your operations which will in turn improve your quality of service. Heck, I'd drive over there for a weekend if my schedule wasn't so packed. In any case please ask for help in appropriate spots and let us help you reap the rewards of a correctly and legally operating network. On Feb 8, 2014 4:49 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
It seems technically quite easy. Set compliance mode on an older device and associate to one that is compliant. Does DFS certification only apply to AP operations or CPE operations as well? I'm guessing the former. If that's the case, UBNT hasn't done the paperwork to get them certified as CPE either, but should be a lot easier as they don't need to pass all of the other business. Also, that makes more sense... that your AP control what happens in a given area. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Cc: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, February 14, 2014 3:31:32 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Ummm. And how are you connected uncertified devices to a DFS equipped sector? On Feb 13, 2014, at 10:17, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: We have over 600 Airgrids deployed (Which did not get DFS approval but we are using the frequencies listed and DFS on the Rocket Sectors they connect to. I have been chasing jumping bunny rabbits (False Positives from competitors putting up new APs)) - cost to replace $6000 not including labor costs. And money grows on trees. All of our other equipment I have reprogrammed and updated to bring them up to legal. Same with Power Bridges - No DFS - So when the Nano beams came out 5.7-5.8 No DFS that triggered my question about the lower frequencies whether it seemed like they were going to be withdrawn and sold off to the highest bidder. It is all about the money after all. Are we the only ones that deployed so many Airgrids?. On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com wrote: blockquote Yes but the lower ones require DFS and lower power and a certified radio. Your original message was complaining about the removal of compliance test mode. The specific purpose of compliance test mode is to permit a radio to operate outside of legal limits. For instance over the legal power limit or on DFS bands without DFS enabled or outside legal channels for that radio. UBNT has stated over and over that their intent was not to prevent any legal operation of their radio. I haven't heard of any instances where not having compliance mode has resulted in a meaningful impact to a legal operator. I hate to defend them but in this case it seems like they may have gotten it nearly correct. Is there a specific frequency and power you're using you think is legal but isn't permitted unless you turn on compliance test mode? On Feb 12, 2014 2:08 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: blockquote 5265-5320 5500-5580 5660-5700 5735-5840 Are these not USA channels? If am wrong let me know and I will change them. On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller par...@cyberbroadband.net wrote: blockquote Forrest...what is your offlist email ? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone - Reply message - From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Date: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 11:53 AM I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed over. Even if the radios don't do this you are introducing far more rf than is likely needed causing an overall rising of the noise floor. Please don't interpret everyone's ire incorrectly. We've just all either dealt with an operator like you are now or have been an operator like you are now. And right now we're trying to gain credibility with the FCC which is hard to do when some operators are flagrantly breaking the rules. Which makes us a bit grumpy. I'm sure some of your neighbors out there would love to help you better understand what you are doing to yourself and help you improve your operations which will in turn improve your quality of service. Heck, I'd drive over there for a weekend if my schedule wasn't so packed. In any case please ask for help in appropriate spots and let us help you reap the rewards of a correctly and legally operating network. On Feb 8, 2014 4:49 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: blockquote Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
CPE must be DFS compliant as well. CPE has to be able to respond to channel change requests from the AP, etc. *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 02/14/2014 12:35 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: It seems technically quite easy. Set compliance mode on an older device and associate to one that is compliant. Does DFS certification only apply to AP operations or CPE operations as well? I'm guessing the former. If that's the case, UBNT hasn't done the paperwork to get them certified as CPE either, but should be a lot easier as they don't need to pass all of the other business. Also, that makes more sense... that your AP control what happens in a given area. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com *To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org *Cc: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Friday, February 14, 2014 3:31:32 PM *Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Ummm. And how are you connected uncertified devices to a DFS equipped sector? On Feb 13, 2014, at 10:17, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com mailto:asteph...@ptera.com wrote: We have over 600 Airgrids deployed (Which did not get DFS approval but we are using the frequencies listed and DFS on the Rocket Sectors they connect to. I have been chasing jumping bunny rabbits (False Positives from competitors putting up new APs)) - cost to replace $6000 not including labor costs. And money grows on trees. All of our other equipment I have reprogrammed and updated to bring them up to legal. Same with Power Bridges - No DFS - So when the Nano beams came out 5.7-5.8 No DFS that triggered my question about the lower frequencies whether it seemed like they were going to be withdrawn and sold off to the highest bidder. It is all about the money after all. Are we the only ones that deployed so many Airgrids?. On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com mailto:li...@packetflux.com wrote: Yes but the lower ones require DFS and lower power and a certified radio. Your original message was complaining about the removal of compliance test mode. The specific purpose of compliance test mode is to permit a radio to operate outside of legal limits. For instance over the legal power limit or on DFS bands without DFS enabled or outside legal channels for that radio. UBNT has stated over and over that their intent was not to prevent any legal operation of their radio. I haven't heard of any instances where not having compliance mode has resulted in a meaningful impact to a legal operator. I hate to defend them but in this case it seems like they may have gotten it nearly correct. Is there a specific frequency and power you're using you think is legal but isn't permitted unless you turn on compliance test mode? On Feb 12, 2014 2:08 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com mailto:asteph...@ptera.com wrote: 5265-5320 5500-5580 5660-5700 5735-5840 Are these not USA channels? If am wrong let me know and I will change them. On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller par...@cyberbroadband.net mailto:par...@cyberbroadband.net wrote: Forrest...what is your offlist email ? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone - Reply message - From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com mailto:li...@packetflux.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org mailto:wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Date: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 11:53 AM I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed over. Even
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
Don't think that anything to do with DFS has to make any sense. It doesn't. -- On 2/14/2014 4:35 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: It seems technically quite easy. Set compliance mode on an older device and associate to one that is compliant. Does DFS certification only apply to AP operations or CPE operations as well? I'm guessing the former. If that's the case, UBNT hasn't done the paperwork to get them certified as CPE either, but should be a lot easier as they don't need to pass all of the other business. Also, that makes more sense... that your AP control what happens in a given area. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com *To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org *Cc: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Friday, February 14, 2014 3:31:32 PM *Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Ummm. And how are you connected uncertified devices to a DFS equipped sector? On Feb 13, 2014, at 10:17, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com mailto:asteph...@ptera.com wrote: We have over 600 Airgrids deployed (Which did not get DFS approval but we are using the frequencies listed and DFS on the Rocket Sectors they connect to. I have been chasing jumping bunny rabbits (False Positives from competitors putting up new APs)) - cost to replace $6000 not including labor costs. And money grows on trees. All of our other equipment I have reprogrammed and updated to bring them up to legal. Same with Power Bridges - No DFS - So when the Nano beams came out 5.7-5.8 No DFS that triggered my question about the lower frequencies whether it seemed like they were going to be withdrawn and sold off to the highest bidder. It is all about the money after all. Are we the only ones that deployed so many Airgrids?. On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com mailto:li...@packetflux.com wrote: Yes but the lower ones require DFS and lower power and a certified radio. Your original message was complaining about the removal of compliance test mode. The specific purpose of compliance test mode is to permit a radio to operate outside of legal limits. For instance over the legal power limit or on DFS bands without DFS enabled or outside legal channels for that radio. UBNT has stated over and over that their intent was not to prevent any legal operation of their radio. I haven't heard of any instances where not having compliance mode has resulted in a meaningful impact to a legal operator. I hate to defend them but in this case it seems like they may have gotten it nearly correct. Is there a specific frequency and power you're using you think is legal but isn't permitted unless you turn on compliance test mode? On Feb 12, 2014 2:08 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com mailto:asteph...@ptera.com wrote: 5265-5320 5500-5580 5660-5700 5735-5840 Are these not USA channels? If am wrong let me know and I will change them. On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller par...@cyberbroadband.net mailto:par...@cyberbroadband.net wrote: Forrest...what is your offlist email ? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone - Reply message - From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com mailto:li...@packetflux.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org mailto:wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Date: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 11:53 AM I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed over. Even if the radios don't do this you are introducing far more rf than is likely needed causing an overall
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
The DOD only cares that you stop using the channel. It's up to you if you want it to work somewhere else. ;-) - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com To: wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, February 14, 2014 3:58:13 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? CPE must be DFS compliant as well. CPE has to be able to respond to channel change requests from the AP, etc. Josh Reynolds Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 02/14/2014 12:35 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: It seems technically quite easy. Set compliance mode on an older device and associate to one that is compliant. Does DFS certification only apply to AP operations or CPE operations as well? I'm guessing the former. If that's the case, UBNT hasn't done the paperwork to get them certified as CPE either, but should be a lot easier as they don't need to pass all of the other business. Also, that makes more sense... that your AP control what happens in a given area. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Cc: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, February 14, 2014 3:31:32 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Ummm. And how are you connected uncertified devices to a DFS equipped sector? On Feb 13, 2014, at 10:17, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: blockquote We have over 600 Airgrids deployed (Which did not get DFS approval but we are using the frequencies listed and DFS on the Rocket Sectors they connect to. I have been chasing jumping bunny rabbits (False Positives from competitors putting up new APs)) - cost to replace $6000 not including labor costs. And money grows on trees. All of our other equipment I have reprogrammed and updated to bring them up to legal. Same with Power Bridges - No DFS - So when the Nano beams came out 5.7-5.8 No DFS that triggered my question about the lower frequencies whether it seemed like they were going to be withdrawn and sold off to the highest bidder. It is all about the money after all. Are we the only ones that deployed so many Airgrids?. On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com wrote: blockquote Yes but the lower ones require DFS and lower power and a certified radio. Your original message was complaining about the removal of compliance test mode. The specific purpose of compliance test mode is to permit a radio to operate outside of legal limits. For instance over the legal power limit or on DFS bands without DFS enabled or outside legal channels for that radio. UBNT has stated over and over that their intent was not to prevent any legal operation of their radio. I haven't heard of any instances where not having compliance mode has resulted in a meaningful impact to a legal operator. I hate to defend them but in this case it seems like they may have gotten it nearly correct. Is there a specific frequency and power you're using you think is legal but isn't permitted unless you turn on compliance test mode? On Feb 12, 2014 2:08 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: blockquote 5265-5320 5500-5580 5660-5700 5735-5840 Are these not USA channels? If am wrong let me know and I will change them. On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller par...@cyberbroadband.net wrote: blockquote Forrest...what is your offlist email ? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone - Reply message - From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Date: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 11:53 AM I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed over. Even if the radios don't do this you are introducing far more rf than is likely needed causing an overall rising of the noise floor. Please don't interpret everyone's ire incorrectly. We've just all either dealt with an operator like you are now or have been an operator like you are now. And right now we're trying to gain credibility with the FCC which is hard to do
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
We're talking about DFS certification requirements for CPEs. They exist :P *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 02/14/2014 01:46 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: The DOD only cares that you stop using the channel. It's up to you if you want it to work somewhere else. ;-) - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com *To: *wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Friday, February 14, 2014 3:58:13 PM *Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? CPE must be DFS compliant as well. CPE has to be able to respond to channel change requests from the AP, etc. *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 02/14/2014 12:35 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: It seems technically quite easy. Set compliance mode on an older device and associate to one that is compliant. Does DFS certification only apply to AP operations or CPE operations as well? I'm guessing the former. If that's the case, UBNT hasn't done the paperwork to get them certified as CPE either, but should be a lot easier as they don't need to pass all of the other business. Also, that makes more sense... that your AP control what happens in a given area. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com *To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org *Cc: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Friday, February 14, 2014 3:31:32 PM *Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Ummm. And how are you connected uncertified devices to a DFS equipped sector? On Feb 13, 2014, at 10:17, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com mailto:asteph...@ptera.com wrote: We have over 600 Airgrids deployed (Which did not get DFS approval but we are using the frequencies listed and DFS on the Rocket Sectors they connect to. I have been chasing jumping bunny rabbits (False Positives from competitors putting up new APs)) - cost to replace $6000 not including labor costs. And money grows on trees. All of our other equipment I have reprogrammed and updated to bring them up to legal. Same with Power Bridges - No DFS - So when the Nano beams came out 5.7-5.8 No DFS that triggered my question about the lower frequencies whether it seemed like they were going to be withdrawn and sold off to the highest bidder. It is all about the money after all. Are we the only ones that deployed so many Airgrids?. On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com mailto:li...@packetflux.com wrote: Yes but the lower ones require DFS and lower power and a certified radio. Your original message was complaining about the removal of compliance test mode. The specific purpose of compliance test mode is to permit a radio to operate outside of legal limits. For instance over the legal power limit or on DFS bands without DFS enabled or outside legal channels for that radio. UBNT has stated over and over that their intent was not to prevent any legal operation of their radio. I haven't heard of any instances where not having compliance mode has resulted in a meaningful impact to a legal operator. I hate to defend them but in this case it seems like they may have gotten it nearly correct. Is there a specific frequency and power you're using you think is legal but isn't permitted unless you turn on compliance test mode? On Feb 12, 2014 2:08 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com mailto:asteph...@ptera.com wrote: 5265-5320 5500-5580 5660-5700 5735-5840 Are these not USA channels? If am wrong let me know and I will change them. On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller par...@cyberbroadband.net mailto:par...@cyberbroadband.net wrote: Forrest...what is your offlist email ? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone - Reply message - From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com mailto:li...@packetflux.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
Exactly... and this conversation just took a hair pin into exactly WHY we're being muscled out of the frequencies. Guys -- if you're going to run, play by the rules. No unlocked radios, compliance with DFS, set to US country code, etc. Matt Hoppes Director of Information Technology Indigo Wireless +1 (570) 723-7312 On 2/14/14, 6:01 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: We're talking about DFS certification requirements for CPEs. They exist :P *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 02/14/2014 01:46 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: The DOD only cares that you stop using the channel. It's up to you if you want it to work somewhere else. ;-) - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com *To: *wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Friday, February 14, 2014 3:58:13 PM *Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? CPE must be DFS compliant as well. CPE has to be able to respond to channel change requests from the AP, etc. *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 02/14/2014 12:35 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: It seems technically quite easy. Set compliance mode on an older device and associate to one that is compliant. Does DFS certification only apply to AP operations or CPE operations as well? I'm guessing the former. If that's the case, UBNT hasn't done the paperwork to get them certified as CPE either, but should be a lot easier as they don't need to pass all of the other business. Also, that makes more sense... that your AP control what happens in a given area. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com *To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org *Cc: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Friday, February 14, 2014 3:31:32 PM *Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Ummm. And how are you connected uncertified devices to a DFS equipped sector? On Feb 13, 2014, at 10:17, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com mailto:asteph...@ptera.com wrote: We have over 600 Airgrids deployed (Which did not get DFS approval but we are using the frequencies listed and DFS on the Rocket Sectors they connect to. I have been chasing jumping bunny rabbits (False Positives from competitors putting up new APs)) - cost to replace $6000 not including labor costs. And money grows on trees. All of our other equipment I have reprogrammed and updated to bring them up to legal. Same with Power Bridges - No DFS - So when the Nano beams came out 5.7-5.8 No DFS that triggered my question about the lower frequencies whether it seemed like they were going to be withdrawn and sold off to the highest bidder. It is all about the money after all. Are we the only ones that deployed so many Airgrids?. On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com mailto:li...@packetflux.com wrote: Yes but the lower ones require DFS and lower power and a certified radio. Your original message was complaining about the removal of compliance test mode. The specific purpose of compliance test mode is to permit a radio to operate outside of legal limits. For instance over the legal power limit or on DFS bands without DFS enabled or outside legal channels for that radio. UBNT has stated over and over that their intent was not to prevent any legal operation of their radio. I haven't heard of any instances where not having compliance mode has resulted in a meaningful impact to a legal operator. I hate to defend them but in this case it seems like they may have gotten it nearly correct. Is there a specific frequency and power you're using you think is legal but isn't permitted unless you turn on compliance test mode? On Feb 12, 2014 2:08 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com mailto:asteph...@ptera.com wrote: 5265-5320 5500-5580 5660-5700 5735-5840 Are these not USA channels? If am wrong let me know and I will change them. On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller par
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
I was just speaking theoretical. Don't do any of the things I mentioned. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, February 14, 2014 5:03:53 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Exactly... and this conversation just took a hair pin into exactly WHY we're being muscled out of the frequencies. Guys -- if you're going to run, play by the rules. No unlocked radios, compliance with DFS, set to US country code, etc. Matt Hoppes Director of Information Technology Indigo Wireless +1 (570) 723-7312 On 2/14/14, 6:01 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: We're talking about DFS certification requirements for CPEs. They exist :P *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 02/14/2014 01:46 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: The DOD only cares that you stop using the channel. It's up to you if you want it to work somewhere else. ;-) - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com *To: *wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Friday, February 14, 2014 3:58:13 PM *Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? CPE must be DFS compliant as well. CPE has to be able to respond to channel change requests from the AP, etc. *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 02/14/2014 12:35 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: It seems technically quite easy. Set compliance mode on an older device and associate to one that is compliant. Does DFS certification only apply to AP operations or CPE operations as well? I'm guessing the former. If that's the case, UBNT hasn't done the paperwork to get them certified as CPE either, but should be a lot easier as they don't need to pass all of the other business. Also, that makes more sense... that your AP control what happens in a given area. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com *To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org *Cc: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Friday, February 14, 2014 3:31:32 PM *Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Ummm. And how are you connected uncertified devices to a DFS equipped sector? On Feb 13, 2014, at 10:17, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com mailto:asteph...@ptera.com wrote: We have over 600 Airgrids deployed (Which did not get DFS approval but we are using the frequencies listed and DFS on the Rocket Sectors they connect to. I have been chasing jumping bunny rabbits (False Positives from competitors putting up new APs)) - cost to replace $6000 not including labor costs. And money grows on trees. All of our other equipment I have reprogrammed and updated to bring them up to legal. Same with Power Bridges - No DFS - So when the Nano beams came out 5.7-5.8 No DFS that triggered my question about the lower frequencies whether it seemed like they were going to be withdrawn and sold off to the highest bidder. It is all about the money after all. Are we the only ones that deployed so many Airgrids?. On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com mailto:li...@packetflux.com wrote: Yes but the lower ones require DFS and lower power and a certified radio. Your original message was complaining about the removal of compliance test mode. The specific purpose of compliance test mode is to permit a radio to operate outside of legal limits. For instance over the legal power limit or on DFS bands without DFS enabled or outside legal channels for that radio. UBNT has stated over and over that their intent was not to prevent any legal operation of their radio. I haven't heard of any instances where not having compliance mode has resulted in a meaningful impact to a legal operator. I hate to defend them but in this case it seems like they may have gotten it nearly correct. Is there a specific frequency and power you're using you think is legal but isn't permitted unless you turn on compliance test mode? On Feb 12, 2014 2:08 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com mailto:asteph...@ptera.com wrote: 5265-5320 5500-5580 5660-5700 5735-5840 Are these not USA channels? If am wrong let me know and I will change them. On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller par...@cyberbroadband.net mailto:par...@cyberbroadband.net wrote: Forrest
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
You didn't make the comments that took this in the direction it did :) On 2/14/14, 6:04 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: I was just speaking theoretical. Don't do any of the things I mentioned. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com *To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Friday, February 14, 2014 5:03:53 PM *Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Exactly... and this conversation just took a hair pin into exactly WHY we're being muscled out of the frequencies. Guys -- if you're going to run, play by the rules. No unlocked radios, compliance with DFS, set to US country code, etc. Matt Hoppes Director of Information Technology Indigo Wireless +1 (570) 723-7312 On 2/14/14, 6:01 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: We're talking about DFS certification requirements for CPEs. They exist :P *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 02/14/2014 01:46 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: The DOD only cares that you stop using the channel. It's up to you if you want it to work somewhere else. ;-) - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com *To: *wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Friday, February 14, 2014 3:58:13 PM *Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? CPE must be DFS compliant as well. CPE has to be able to respond to channel change requests from the AP, etc. *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 02/14/2014 12:35 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: It seems technically quite easy. Set compliance mode on an older device and associate to one that is compliant. Does DFS certification only apply to AP operations or CPE operations as well? I'm guessing the former. If that's the case, UBNT hasn't done the paperwork to get them certified as CPE either, but should be a lot easier as they don't need to pass all of the other business. Also, that makes more sense... that your AP control what happens in a given area. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com *To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org *Cc: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Friday, February 14, 2014 3:31:32 PM *Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Ummm. And how are you connected uncertified devices to a DFS equipped sector? On Feb 13, 2014, at 10:17, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com mailto:asteph...@ptera.com wrote: We have over 600 Airgrids deployed (Which did not get DFS approval but we are using the frequencies listed and DFS on the Rocket Sectors they connect to. I have been chasing jumping bunny rabbits (False Positives from competitors putting up new APs)) - cost to replace $6000 not including labor costs. And money grows on trees. All of our other equipment I have reprogrammed and updated to bring them up to legal. Same with Power Bridges - No DFS - So when the Nano beams came out 5.7-5.8 No DFS that triggered my question about the lower frequencies whether it seemed like they were going to be withdrawn and sold off to the highest bidder. It is all about the money after all. Are we the only ones that deployed so many Airgrids?. On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com mailto:li...@packetflux.com wrote: Yes but the lower ones require DFS and lower power and a certified radio. Your original message was complaining about the removal of compliance test mode. The specific purpose of compliance test mode is to permit a radio to operate outside of legal limits. For instance over the legal power limit or on DFS bands without DFS enabled or outside legal channels for that radio. UBNT has stated over and over that their intent was not to prevent any legal operation of their radio. I haven't heard of any instances where not having compliance mode has resulted
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
Well I know that. Punch in the FCC ID on your radio. What does it say you can use? Yup, that's it. Move on. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com To: wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, February 14, 2014 5:01:39 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? We're talking about DFS certification requirements for CPEs. They exist :P Josh Reynolds Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 02/14/2014 01:46 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: The DOD only cares that you stop using the channel. It's up to you if you want it to work somewhere else. ;-) - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com To: wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, February 14, 2014 3:58:13 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? CPE must be DFS compliant as well. CPE has to be able to respond to channel change requests from the AP, etc. Josh Reynolds Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 02/14/2014 12:35 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: blockquote It seems technically quite easy. Set compliance mode on an older device and associate to one that is compliant. Does DFS certification only apply to AP operations or CPE operations as well? I'm guessing the former. If that's the case, UBNT hasn't done the paperwork to get them certified as CPE either, but should be a lot easier as they don't need to pass all of the other business. Also, that makes more sense... that your AP control what happens in a given area. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Cc: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, February 14, 2014 3:31:32 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Ummm. And how are you connected uncertified devices to a DFS equipped sector? On Feb 13, 2014, at 10:17, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: blockquote We have over 600 Airgrids deployed (Which did not get DFS approval but we are using the frequencies listed and DFS on the Rocket Sectors they connect to. I have been chasing jumping bunny rabbits (False Positives from competitors putting up new APs)) - cost to replace $6000 not including labor costs. And money grows on trees. All of our other equipment I have reprogrammed and updated to bring them up to legal. Same with Power Bridges - No DFS - So when the Nano beams came out 5.7-5.8 No DFS that triggered my question about the lower frequencies whether it seemed like they were going to be withdrawn and sold off to the highest bidder. It is all about the money after all. Are we the only ones that deployed so many Airgrids?. On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com wrote: blockquote Yes but the lower ones require DFS and lower power and a certified radio. Your original message was complaining about the removal of compliance test mode. The specific purpose of compliance test mode is to permit a radio to operate outside of legal limits. For instance over the legal power limit or on DFS bands without DFS enabled or outside legal channels for that radio. UBNT has stated over and over that their intent was not to prevent any legal operation of their radio. I haven't heard of any instances where not having compliance mode has resulted in a meaningful impact to a legal operator. I hate to defend them but in this case it seems like they may have gotten it nearly correct. Is there a specific frequency and power you're using you think is legal but isn't permitted unless you turn on compliance test mode? On Feb 12, 2014 2:08 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: blockquote 5265-5320 5500-5580 5660-5700 5735-5840 Are these not USA channels? If am wrong let me know and I will change them. On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller par...@cyberbroadband.net wrote: blockquote Forrest...what is your offlist email ? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone - Reply message - From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Date: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 11:53 AM I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
LOUD NOISES - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, February 14, 2014 5:06:30 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? You didn't make the comments that took this in the direction it did :) On 2/14/14, 6:04 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: I was just speaking theoretical. Don't do any of the things I mentioned. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com *To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Friday, February 14, 2014 5:03:53 PM *Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Exactly... and this conversation just took a hair pin into exactly WHY we're being muscled out of the frequencies. Guys -- if you're going to run, play by the rules. No unlocked radios, compliance with DFS, set to US country code, etc. Matt Hoppes Director of Information Technology Indigo Wireless +1 (570) 723-7312 On 2/14/14, 6:01 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: We're talking about DFS certification requirements for CPEs. They exist :P *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 02/14/2014 01:46 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: The DOD only cares that you stop using the channel. It's up to you if you want it to work somewhere else. ;-) - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com *To: *wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Friday, February 14, 2014 3:58:13 PM *Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? CPE must be DFS compliant as well. CPE has to be able to respond to channel change requests from the AP, etc. *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 02/14/2014 12:35 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: It seems technically quite easy. Set compliance mode on an older device and associate to one that is compliant. Does DFS certification only apply to AP operations or CPE operations as well? I'm guessing the former. If that's the case, UBNT hasn't done the paperwork to get them certified as CPE either, but should be a lot easier as they don't need to pass all of the other business. Also, that makes more sense... that your AP control what happens in a given area. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com *To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org *Cc: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Friday, February 14, 2014 3:31:32 PM *Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Ummm. And how are you connected uncertified devices to a DFS equipped sector? On Feb 13, 2014, at 10:17, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com mailto:asteph...@ptera.com wrote: We have over 600 Airgrids deployed (Which did not get DFS approval but we are using the frequencies listed and DFS on the Rocket Sectors they connect to. I have been chasing jumping bunny rabbits (False Positives from competitors putting up new APs)) - cost to replace $6000 not including labor costs. And money grows on trees. All of our other equipment I have reprogrammed and updated to bring them up to legal. Same with Power Bridges - No DFS - So when the Nano beams came out 5.7-5.8 No DFS that triggered my question about the lower frequencies whether it seemed like they were going to be withdrawn and sold off to the highest bidder. It is all about the money after all. Are we the only ones that deployed so many Airgrids?. On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com mailto:li...@packetflux.com wrote: Yes but the lower ones require DFS and lower power and a certified radio. Your original message was complaining about the removal of compliance test mode. The specific purpose of compliance test mode is to permit a radio to operate outside of legal limits. For instance over the legal power limit or on DFS bands without DFS enabled or outside legal channels for that radio. UBNT has stated over and over that their intent was not to prevent any legal operation of their radio. I haven't heard of any instances where not having compliance mode has resulted
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
On 02/14/2014 03:08 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: LOUD NOISES I don't know what we're yelling about! ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
Exactly-What Matt said! or you are no better than the Mikrotik boys who use uncertified stuff. (yes a FEW MT devices radios are certified, but most are illegal to use in the US. But they don't seem to care) I feel that 5GHz is going to be toast anyway before long. In our Metro WiFi deployments we see hundreds of 5 GHz Linksys, Dlink, etc. neighbors on scans now. And many of them are overlapping many channels. And of course all Comcast's hotspots and everyone else's broadcasting on both bands. I often wonder how long WiFi has before it is totally unusable. It is getting that way now here in the large Metro areas! You guys out in the sticks with your grain elevators and 20 mile unobstructed views have it so easy. Lol -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Matt Hoppes Sent: Friday, February 14, 2014 6:04 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Exactly... and this conversation just took a hair pin into exactly WHY we're being muscled out of the frequencies. Guys -- if you're going to run, play by the rules. No unlocked radios, compliance with DFS, set to US country code, etc. Matt Hoppes Director of Information Technology Indigo Wireless +1 (570) 723-7312 On 2/14/14, 6:01 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: We're talking about DFS certification requirements for CPEs. They exist :P *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 02/14/2014 01:46 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: The DOD only cares that you stop using the channel. It's up to you if you want it to work somewhere else. ;-) - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com *To: *wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Friday, February 14, 2014 3:58:13 PM *Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? CPE must be DFS compliant as well. CPE has to be able to respond to channel change requests from the AP, etc. *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 02/14/2014 12:35 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: It seems technically quite easy. Set compliance mode on an older device and associate to one that is compliant. Does DFS certification only apply to AP operations or CPE operations as well? I'm guessing the former. If that's the case, UBNT hasn't done the paperwork to get them certified as CPE either, but should be a lot easier as they don't need to pass all of the other business. Also, that makes more sense... that your AP control what happens in a given area. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com *To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org *Cc: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Friday, February 14, 2014 3:31:32 PM *Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Ummm. And how are you connected uncertified devices to a DFS equipped sector? On Feb 13, 2014, at 10:17, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com mailto:asteph...@ptera.com wrote: We have over 600 Airgrids deployed (Which did not get DFS approval but we are using the frequencies listed and DFS on the Rocket Sectors they connect to. I have been chasing jumping bunny rabbits (False Positives from competitors putting up new APs)) - cost to replace $6000 not including labor costs. And money grows on trees. All of our other equipment I have reprogrammed and updated to bring them up to legal. Same with Power Bridges - No DFS - So when the Nano beams came out 5.7-5.8 No DFS that triggered my question about the lower frequencies whether it seemed like they were going to be withdrawn and sold off to the highest bidder. It is all about the money after all. Are we the only ones that deployed so many Airgrids?. On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com mailto:li...@packetflux.com wrote: Yes but the lower ones require DFS and lower power and a certified radio. Your original message was complaining about the removal of compliance test mode. The specific purpose of compliance test mode is to permit a radio to operate outside of legal limits. For instance over the legal power limit or on DFS bands without DFS enabled or outside legal channels for that radio. UBNT has stated
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
Haven't we had this discussion before? In reference to m-PCI radio cards? Didn't it break down to a 'spirit of the law' group and a 'letter of the law' group last time? Professional installer, anyone? Won't it do that again? Isn't insanity doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result? The fact is, if a DFS compliant AP changes channels and it's CPE follow it, the radar occupied channel is vacated. Yes, it is not letter of the law compliant. OTOH, it is unlikely to cause interference. Isn't that the goal? I don't have a dog in this fight. The only thing I have in this band is a legacy 600 yard 5.3GHz PtP from before the new rules. So it doesn't affect me either way. -- On 2/14/2014 7:35 PM, ralph wrote: Exactly-What Matt said! or you are no better than the Mikrotik boys who use uncertified stuff. (yes a FEW MT devices radios are certified, but most are illegal to use in the US. But they don't seem to care) I feel that 5GHz is going to be toast anyway before long. In our Metro WiFi deployments we see hundreds of 5 GHz Linksys, Dlink, etc. neighbors on scans now. And many of them are overlapping many channels. And of course all Comcast's hotspots and everyone else's broadcasting on both bands. I often wonder how long WiFi has before it is totally unusable. It is getting that way now here in the large Metro areas! You guys out in the sticks with your grain elevators and 20 mile unobstructed views have it so easy. Lol -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Matt Hoppes Sent: Friday, February 14, 2014 6:04 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Exactly... and this conversation just took a hair pin into exactly WHY we're being muscled out of the frequencies. Guys -- if you're going to run, play by the rules. No unlocked radios, compliance with DFS, set to US country code, etc. Matt Hoppes Director of Information Technology Indigo Wireless +1 (570) 723-7312 On 2/14/14, 6:01 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: We're talking about DFS certification requirements for CPEs. They exist :P *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 02/14/2014 01:46 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: The DOD only cares that you stop using the channel. It's up to you if you want it to work somewhere else. ;-) - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com *To: *wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Friday, February 14, 2014 3:58:13 PM *Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? CPE must be DFS compliant as well. CPE has to be able to respond to channel change requests from the AP, etc. *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 02/14/2014 12:35 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: It seems technically quite easy. Set compliance mode on an older device and associate to one that is compliant. Does DFS certification only apply to AP operations or CPE operations as well? I'm guessing the former. If that's the case, UBNT hasn't done the paperwork to get them certified as CPE either, but should be a lot easier as they don't need to pass all of the other business. Also, that makes more sense... that your AP control what happens in a given area. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com *To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org *Cc: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Friday, February 14, 2014 3:31:32 PM *Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Ummm. And how are you connected uncertified devices to a DFS equipped sector? On Feb 13, 2014, at 10:17, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com mailto:asteph...@ptera.com wrote: We have over 600 Airgrids deployed (Which did not get DFS approval but we are using the frequencies listed and DFS on the Rocket Sectors they connect to. I have been chasing jumping bunny rabbits (False Positives from competitors putting up new APs)) - cost to replace $6000 not including labor costs. And money grows on trees. All of our other equipment I have reprogrammed and updated to bring them up to legal. Same with Power Bridges - No DFS - So when the Nano beams came out 5.7-5.8 No DFS that triggered my question about the lower frequencies whether it seemed like they were going
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
I guess the point I was trying to make was that every one of those airgrids have been illegal to operate in 5.4 since day one. If you're unfortunate enough to get the FCC's attention you could be fined dearly for operating out of spec. A bit of history. The 5.4 frequency block used to be military and civilian radar only. As part of the conditions of us gaining access to the band the concept of DFS was created. The specific purpose of DFS was to protect the existing, licensed, and primary users of the band. All operations in 5.4 must use DFS to ensure that radios shut down instead of interfering with the existing, primary users. Without DFS we would have never been permitted in the band. As hardware came out which was capable of transmitting in the band some implemented DFS and was certified and legal to operate in 5.4. And some of it, like the airgrids, could transmit in the 5.4 band but were not legal to operate in those bands in the US. One of the primary users in the 5.4 band is TDWR. This detects micro bursts at airports where they're common. This is a public safety system run by the FAA. A couple of years ago the FAA started having interference caused by various unlicensed operations in this band. Several operators were fined and as fallout the frequencies used by TDWR were carved out of the band and cannot be used anywhere even in areas where TDWR isn't used. In addition the FCC started tightening down on equipment sold in the US and capable of operating in these bands. Which gets us to where we are now. UBNT and others are releasing firmware updates specifically designed to deny illegal operation. This includes removing compliance test mode. In theory legal operations should not be impacted, but operations which should never have been permitted in the first place will no longer be possible. In the bigger picture, illegal operations is a definite strike against our credibility when we either ask for more bands or defend the ones we already have, especially if there needs to be some sort of protection to existing users of the band. On Feb 14, 2014 2:17 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: We have over 600 Airgrids deployed (Which did not get DFS approval but we are using the frequencies listed and DFS on the Rocket Sectors they connect to. I have been chasing jumping bunny rabbits (False Positives from competitors putting up new APs)) - cost to replace $6000 not including labor costs. And money grows on trees. All of our other equipment I have reprogrammed and updated to bring them up to legal. Same with Power Bridges - No DFS - So when the Nano beams came out 5.7-5.8 No DFS that triggered my question about the lower frequencies whether it seemed like they were going to be withdrawn and sold off to the highest bidder. It is all about the money after all. Are we the only ones that deployed so many Airgrids?. On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com wrote: Yes but the lower ones require DFS and lower power and a certified radio. Your original message was complaining about the removal of compliance test mode. The specific purpose of compliance test mode is to permit a radio to operate outside of legal limits. For instance over the legal power limit or on DFS bands without DFS enabled or outside legal channels for that radio. UBNT has stated over and over that their intent was not to prevent any legal operation of their radio. I haven't heard of any instances where not having compliance mode has resulted in a meaningful impact to a legal operator. I hate to defend them but in this case it seems like they may have gotten it nearly correct. Is there a specific frequency and power you're using you think is legal but isn't permitted unless you turn on compliance test mode? On Feb 12, 2014 2:08 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: 5265-5320 5500-5580 5660-5700 5735-5840 Are these not USA channels? If am wrong let me know and I will change them. On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller par...@cyberbroadband.net wrote: Forrest...what is your offlist email ? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone - Reply message - From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Date: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 11:53 AM I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific tx power
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
Anyone happen to notice the noise on the San Juan TDWR station lately? Must be a bunch of Airgrids down there J https://tinyurl.com/pohpj6o Jim From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Forrest Christian (List Account) Sent: Friday, February 14, 2014 8:27 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? I guess the point I was trying to make was that every one of those airgrids have been illegal to operate in 5.4 since day one. If you're unfortunate enough to get the FCC's attention you could be fined dearly for operating out of spec. A bit of history. The 5.4 frequency block used to be military and civilian radar only. As part of the conditions of us gaining access to the band the concept of DFS was created. The specific purpose of DFS was to protect the existing, licensed, and primary users of the band. All operations in 5.4 must use DFS to ensure that radios shut down instead of interfering with the existing, primary users. Without DFS we would have never been permitted in the band. As hardware came out which was capable of transmitting in the band some implemented DFS and was certified and legal to operate in 5.4. And some of it, like the airgrids, could transmit in the 5.4 band but were not legal to operate in those bands in the US. One of the primary users in the 5.4 band is TDWR. This detects micro bursts at airports where they're common. This is a public safety system run by the FAA. A couple of years ago the FAA started having interference caused by various unlicensed operations in this band. Several operators were fined and as fallout the frequencies used by TDWR were carved out of the band and cannot be used anywhere even in areas where TDWR isn't used. In addition the FCC started tightening down on equipment sold in the US and capable of operating in these bands. Which gets us to where we are now. UBNT and others are releasing firmware updates specifically designed to deny illegal operation. This includes removing compliance test mode. In theory legal operations should not be impacted, but operations which should never have been permitted in the first place will no longer be possible. In the bigger picture, illegal operations is a definite strike against our credibility when we either ask for more bands or defend the ones we already have, especially if there needs to be some sort of protection to existing users of the band. On Feb 14, 2014 2:17 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: We have over 600 Airgrids deployed (Which did not get DFS approval but we are using the frequencies listed and DFS on the Rocket Sectors they connect to. I have been chasing jumping bunny rabbits (False Positives from competitors putting up new APs)) - cost to replace $6000 not including labor costs. And money grows on trees. All of our other equipment I have reprogrammed and updated to bring them up to legal. Same with Power Bridges - No DFS - So when the Nano beams came out 5.7-5.8 No DFS that triggered my question about the lower frequencies whether it seemed like they were going to be withdrawn and sold off to the highest bidder. It is all about the money after all. Are we the only ones that deployed so many Airgrids?. On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com wrote: Yes but the lower ones require DFS and lower power and a certified radio. Your original message was complaining about the removal of compliance test mode. The specific purpose of compliance test mode is to permit a radio to operate outside of legal limits. For instance over the legal power limit or on DFS bands without DFS enabled or outside legal channels for that radio. UBNT has stated over and over that their intent was not to prevent any legal operation of their radio. I haven't heard of any instances where not having compliance mode has resulted in a meaningful impact to a legal operator. I hate to defend them but in this case it seems like they may have gotten it nearly correct. Is there a specific frequency and power you're using you think is legal but isn't permitted unless you turn on compliance test mode? On Feb 12, 2014 2:08 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: 5265-5320 5500-5580 5660-5700 5735-5840 Are these not USA channels? If am wrong let me know and I will change them. On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller par...@cyberbroadband.net wrote: Forrest...what is your offlist email ? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone - Reply message - From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Date: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 11:53 AM I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
They certainly aren't DFS certified, if you're willing to cede 5.8 GHz. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Blair Davis the...@wmwisp.net To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, February 14, 2014 6:54:38 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Haven't we had this discussion before? In reference to m-PCI radio cards? Didn't it break down to a 'spirit of the law' group and a 'letter of the law' group last time? Professional installer, anyone? Won't it do that again? Isn't insanity doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result? The fact is, if a DFS compliant AP changes channels and it's CPE follow it, the radar occupied channel is vacated. Yes, it is not letter of the law compliant. OTOH, it is unlikely to cause interference. Isn't that the goal? I don't have a dog in this fight. The only thing I have in this band is a legacy 600 yard 5.3GHz PtP from before the new rules. So it doesn't affect me either way. -- On 2/14/2014 7:35 PM, ralph wrote: Exactly-What Matt said! or you are no better than the Mikrotik boys who use uncertified stuff. (yes a FEW MT devices radios are certified, but most are illegal to use in the US. But they don't seem to care) I feel that 5GHz is going to be toast anyway before long. In our Metro WiFi deployments we see hundreds of 5 GHz Linksys, Dlink, etc. neighbors on scans now. And many of them are overlapping many channels. And of course all Comcast's hotspots and everyone else's broadcasting on both bands. I often wonder how long WiFi has before it is totally unusable. It is getting that way now here in the large Metro areas! You guys out in the sticks with your grain elevators and 20 mile unobstructed views have it so easy. Lol -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Matt Hoppes Sent: Friday, February 14, 2014 6:04 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Exactly... and this conversation just took a hair pin into exactly WHY we're being muscled out of the frequencies. Guys -- if you're going to run, play by the rules. No unlocked radios, compliance with DFS, set to US country code, etc. Matt Hoppes Director of Information Technology Indigo Wireless +1 (570) 723-7312 On 2/14/14, 6:01 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: We're talking about DFS certification requirements for CPEs. They exist :P *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 02/14/2014 01:46 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: The DOD only cares that you stop using the channel. It's up to you if you want it to work somewhere else. ;-) - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *Josh Reynolds j...@spitwspots.com *To: *wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Friday, February 14, 2014 3:58:13 PM *Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? CPE must be DFS compliant as well. CPE has to be able to respond to channel change requests from the AP, etc. *Josh Reynolds* Chief Information Officer SPITwSPOTS j...@spitwspots.com | www.spitwspots.com On 02/14/2014 12:35 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: It seems technically quite easy. Set compliance mode on an older device and associate to one that is compliant. Does DFS certification only apply to AP operations or CPE operations as well? I'm guessing the former. If that's the case, UBNT hasn't done the paperwork to get them certified as CPE either, but should be a lot easier as they don't need to pass all of the other business. Also, that makes more sense... that your AP control what happens in a given area. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com *To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org *Cc: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Friday, February 14, 2014 3:31:32 PM *Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Ummm. And how are you connected uncertified devices to a DFS equipped sector? On Feb 13, 2014, at 10:17, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com mailto:asteph...@ptera.com wrote: We have over 600 Airgrids deployed (Which did not get DFS approval but we are using the frequencies listed and DFS on the Rocket Sectors they connect to. I have been chasing jumping bunny rabbits (False Positives from competitors putting up new APs)) - cost to replace $6000 not including labor costs. And money grows on trees
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
5265-5320 5500-5580 5660-5700 5735-5840 Are these not USA channels? If am wrong let me know and I will change them. On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller par...@cyberbroadband.net wrote: Forrest...what is your offlist email ? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone - Reply message - From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Date: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 11:53 AM I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed over. Even if the radios don't do this you are introducing far more rf than is likely needed causing an overall rising of the noise floor. Please don't interpret everyone's ire incorrectly. We've just all either dealt with an operator like you are now or have been an operator like you are now. And right now we're trying to gain credibility with the FCC which is hard to do when some operators are flagrantly breaking the rules. Which makes us a bit grumpy. I'm sure some of your neighbors out there would love to help you better understand what you are doing to yourself and help you improve your operations which will in turn improve your quality of service. Heck, I'd drive over there for a weekend if my schedule wasn't so packed. In any case please ask for help in appropriate spots and let us help you reap the rewards of a correctly and legally operating network. On Feb 8, 2014 4:49 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927-7837 ptera.com facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera - This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are not intended to represent those of the company. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927-7837 ptera.com facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera - This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are not intended to represent those of the company. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
Yea, but the power levels of some are not likely usable in an outdoor WISP environment. A good explanation is at Wikipedia strange enough... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-NII People running equipment in frequencies at a power level higher than intended is the issue. Also, the 5470-5725 band requires DFS. Regards, Chuck On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: 5265-5320 5500-5580 5660-5700 5735-5840 Are these not USA channels? If am wrong let me know and I will change them. On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller par...@cyberbroadband.net wrote: Forrest...what is your offlist email ? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone - Reply message - From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Date: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 11:53 AM I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed over. Even if the radios don't do this you are introducing far more rf than is likely needed causing an overall rising of the noise floor. Please don't interpret everyone's ire incorrectly. We've just all either dealt with an operator like you are now or have been an operator like you are now. And right now we're trying to gain credibility with the FCC which is hard to do when some operators are flagrantly breaking the rules. Which makes us a bit grumpy. I'm sure some of your neighbors out there would love to help you better understand what you are doing to yourself and help you improve your operations which will in turn improve your quality of service. Heck, I'd drive over there for a weekend if my schedule wasn't so packed. In any case please ask for help in appropriate spots and let us help you reap the rewards of a correctly and legally operating network. On Feb 8, 2014 4:49 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927-7837 ptera.com facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera - This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are not intended to represent those of the company. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927-7837 ptera.com facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera - This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are not intended to represent those of the company. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
On 2/11/2014 6:18 PM, Art Stephens wrote: 5265-5320 5500-5580 5660-5700 5735-5840 Are these not USA channels? If am wrong let me know and I will change them. Yes, if your radio is type-approved for 15.407 with DFS. Otherwise only the latter block, which can be type-approved under 15.247 and doesn't use DFS. The first three blocks are UNII-2, which requires DFS. And of course the power limit there is lower. AFAIK no MikroTik radios can legally use the DFS frequencies. UBNT has it approved on at least some models as of AirOS 5.5.2. I have however seen professional installers put up MikroTik radios on, uh, unapproved frequencies. I don't know if any UBNT radios block operation even if they are up to rev. Ticking off obey regulatory rules on a v5.3 radio certainly does narrow the frequency choices... anybody have an up-to-rev one handy? On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller par...@cyberbroadband.net mailto:par...@cyberbroadband.net wrote: Forrest...what is your offlist email ? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone - Reply message - From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com mailto:li...@packetflux.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org mailto:wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Date: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 11:53 AM I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed over. Even if the radios don't do this you are introducing far more rf than is likely needed causing an overall rising of the noise floor. Please don't interpret everyone's ire incorrectly. We've just all either dealt with an operator like you are now or have been an operator like you are now. And right now we're trying to gain credibility with the FCC which is hard to do when some operators are flagrantly breaking the rules. Which makes us a bit grumpy. I'm sure some of your neighbors out there would love to help you better understand what you are doing to yourself and help you improve your operations which will in turn improve your quality of service. Heck, I'd drive over there for a weekend if my schedule wasn't so packed. In any case please ask for help in appropriate spots and let us help you reap the rewards of a correctly and legally operating network. On Feb 8, 2014 4:49 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com mailto:asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Fred R. Goldstein k1io fred at interisle.net Interisle Consulting Group +1 617 795 2701 ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
On 2/12/2014 5:23 PM, Chuck Hogg wrote: Yea, but the power levels of some are not likely usable in an outdoor WISP environment. A good explanation is at Wikipedia strange enough... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-NII People running equipment in frequencies at a power level higher than intended is the issue. Also, the 5470-5725 band requires DFS. Actually, so does 5.25-5.35, as of 2004 or so. It didn't originally, but when they added the 5.47-5.725 band, which needs DFS, they added the requirement to the original U-NII-2A band. So 15.407(h)(2) Radar Detection Function of Dynamic Frequency Selection (DFS). U-NII devices operating in the 5.25-5.35 GHz and5 http://www.hallikainen.org/FCC/FccRules/2013/5/47-5/section.pdf.47-5 http://sujan.hallikainen.org/FCC/FccRules/2013/5/47-5/index.php.725 GHz bands shall employ a DFS radar detection mechanism to detect the presence of radar systems and to avoid co-channel operation with radar systems. The power level down there is adequate for some applications, like half-mile links. Lots of old Motorola PTP-400s are legally pumping +5 to +9 dBm into panels... one urban path is working over 2 miles, though we're replacing it. On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com mailto:asteph...@ptera.com wrote: 5265-5320 5500-5580 5660-5700 5735-5840 Are these not USA channels? If am wrong let me know and I will change them. On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller par...@cyberbroadband.net mailto:par...@cyberbroadband.net wrote: Forrest...what is your offlist email ? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone - Reply message - From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com mailto:li...@packetflux.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org mailto:wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Date: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 11:53 AM I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed over. Even if the radios don't do this you are introducing far more rf than is likely needed causing an overall rising of the noise floor. Please don't interpret everyone's ire incorrectly. We've just all either dealt with an operator like you are now or have been an operator like you are now. And right now we're trying to gain credibility with the FCC which is hard to do when some operators are flagrantly breaking the rules. Which makes us a bit grumpy. I'm sure some of your neighbors out there would love to help you better understand what you are doing to yourself and help you improve your operations which will in turn improve your quality of service. Heck, I'd drive over there for a weekend if my schedule wasn't so packed. In any case please ask for help in appropriate spots and let us help you reap the rewards of a correctly and legally operating network. On Feb 8, 2014 4:49 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com mailto:asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
Obey regs shouldn't narrow any frequencies. It only limits power. Your frequency availability is limited by the country code lock. Sent from my iPad On Feb 12, 2014, at 17:35, Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com wrote: On 2/11/2014 6:18 PM, Art Stephens wrote: 5265-5320 5500-5580 5660-5700 5735-5840 Are these not USA channels? If am wrong let me know and I will change them. Yes, if your radio is type-approved for 15.407 with DFS. Otherwise only the latter block, which can be type-approved under 15.247 and doesn't use DFS. The first three blocks are UNII-2, which requires DFS. And of course the power limit there is lower. AFAIK no MikroTik radios can legally use the DFS frequencies. UBNT has it approved on at least some models as of AirOS 5.5.2. I have however seen professional installers put up MikroTik radios on, uh, unapproved frequencies. I don't know if any UBNT radios block operation even if they are up to rev. Ticking off obey regulatory rules on a v5.3 radio certainly does narrow the frequency choices... anybody have an up-to-rev one handy? On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller par...@cyberbroadband.net wrote: Forrest...what is your offlist email ? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone - Reply message - From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Date: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 11:53 AM I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed over. Even if the radios don't do this you are introducing far more rf than is likely needed causing an overall rising of the noise floor. Please don't interpret everyone's ire incorrectly. We've just all either dealt with an operator like you are now or have been an operator like you are now. And right now we're trying to gain credibility with the FCC which is hard to do when some operators are flagrantly breaking the rules. Which makes us a bit grumpy. I'm sure some of your neighbors out there would love to help you better understand what you are doing to yourself and help you improve your operations which will in turn improve your quality of service. Heck, I'd drive over there for a weekend if my schedule wasn't so packed. In any case please ask for help in appropriate spots and let us help you reap the rewards of a correctly and legally operating network. On Feb 8, 2014 4:49 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Fred R. Goldstein k1io fred at interisle.net Interisle Consulting Group +1 617 795 2701 ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
What are you guys talking about? A 30dB dish with a 0dB radio on it will easily go 4-5 miles. Or put a 34dB dish on with a -4dB radio if you want more gain. Sent from my iPad On Feb 12, 2014, at 17:56, Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com wrote: On 2/12/2014 5:23 PM, Chuck Hogg wrote: Yea, but the power levels of some are not likely usable in an outdoor WISP environment. A good explanation is at Wikipedia strange enough... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-NII People running equipment in frequencies at a power level higher than intended is the issue. Also, the 5470-5725 band requires DFS. Actually, so does 5.25-5.35, as of 2004 or so. It didn't originally, but when they added the 5.47-5.725 band, which needs DFS, they added the requirement to the original U-NII-2A band. So 15.407(h)(2) Radar Detection Function of Dynamic Frequency Selection (DFS). U-NII devices operating in the 5.25-5.35 GHz and 5.47-5.725 GHz bands shall employ a DFS radar detection mechanism to detect the presence of radar systems and to avoid co-channel operation with radar systems. The power level down there is adequate for some applications, like half-mile links. Lots of old Motorola PTP-400s are legally pumping +5 to +9 dBm into panels... one urban path is working over 2 miles, though we're replacing it. On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: 5265-5320 5500-5580 5660-5700 5735-5840 Are these not USA channels? If am wrong let me know and I will change them. On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller par...@cyberbroadband.net wrote: Forrest...what is your offlist email ? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone - Reply message - From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Date: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 11:53 AM I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed over. Even if the radios don't do this you are introducing far more rf than is likely needed causing an overall rising of the noise floor. Please don't interpret everyone's ire incorrectly. We've just all either dealt with an operator like you are now or have been an operator like you are now. And right now we're trying to gain credibility with the FCC which is hard to do when some operators are flagrantly breaking the rules. Which makes us a bit grumpy. I'm sure some of your neighbors out there would love to help you better understand what you are doing to yourself and help you improve your operations which will in turn improve your quality of service. Heck, I'd drive over there for a weekend if my schedule wasn't so packed. In any case please ask for help in appropriate spots and let us help you reap the rewards of a correctly and legally operating network. On Feb 8, 2014 4:49 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927-7837 ptera.com facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera - This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
I said not likely :) Regards, Chuck On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.comwrote: What are you guys talking about? A 30dB dish with a 0dB radio on it will easily go 4-5 miles. Or put a 34dB dish on with a -4dB radio if you want more gain. Sent from my iPad On Feb 12, 2014, at 17:56, Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com wrote: On 2/12/2014 5:23 PM, Chuck Hogg wrote: Yea, but the power levels of some are not likely usable in an outdoor WISP environment. A good explanation is at Wikipedia strange enough... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-NII People running equipment in frequencies at a power level higher than intended is the issue. Also, the 5470-5725 band requires DFS. Actually, so does 5.25-5.35, as of 2004 or so. It didn't originally, but when they added the 5.47-5.725 band, which needs DFS, they added the requirement to the original U-NII-2A band. So 15.407(h)(2) Radar Detection Function of Dynamic Frequency Selection (DFS). U-NII devices operating in the 5.25-5.35 GHz and 5 http://www.hallikainen.org/FCC/FccRules/2013/5/47-5/section.pdf.47-5 http://sujan.hallikainen.org/FCC/FccRules/2013/5/47-5/index.php.725 GHz bands shall employ a DFS radar detection mechanism to detect the presence of radar systems and to avoid co-channel operation with radar systems. The power level down there is adequate for some applications, like half-mile links. Lots of old Motorola PTP-400s are legally pumping +5 to +9 dBm into panels... one urban path is working over 2 miles, though we're replacing it. On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: 5265-5320 5500-5580 5660-5700 5735-5840 Are these not USA channels? If am wrong let me know and I will change them. On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller par...@cyberbroadband.net wrote: Forrest...what is your offlist email ? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone - Reply message - From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Date: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 11:53 AM I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed over. Even if the radios don't do this you are introducing far more rf than is likely needed causing an overall rising of the noise floor. Please don't interpret everyone's ire incorrectly. We've just all either dealt with an operator like you are now or have been an operator like you are now. And right now we're trying to gain credibility with the FCC which is hard to do when some operators are flagrantly breaking the rules. Which makes us a bit grumpy. I'm sure some of your neighbors out there would love to help you better understand what you are doing to yourself and help you improve your operations which will in turn improve your quality of service. Heck, I'd drive over there for a weekend if my schedule wasn't so packed. In any case please ask for help in appropriate spots and let us help you reap the rewards of a correctly and legally operating network. On Feb 8, 2014 4:49 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927-7837 ptera.com facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera - This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is intended for the person/entity
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
Heck I have a very old 5.2 BH20 extended range (software scheduling) at 7.3 miles with a rx of -76. Its been up since 2003 or 2004 running 7.2.9. On Feb 12, 2014, at 4:04 PM, Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com wrote: What are you guys talking about? A 30dB dish with a 0dB radio on it will easily go 4-5 miles. Or put a 34dB dish on with a -4dB radio if you want more gain. Sent from my iPad On Feb 12, 2014, at 17:56, Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com wrote: On 2/12/2014 5:23 PM, Chuck Hogg wrote: Yea, but the power levels of some are not likely usable in an outdoor WISP environment. A good explanation is at Wikipedia strange enough... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-NII People running equipment in frequencies at a power level higher than intended is the issue. Also, the 5470-5725 band requires DFS. Actually, so does 5.25-5.35, as of 2004 or so. It didn't originally, but when they added the 5.47-5.725 band, which needs DFS, they added the requirement to the original U-NII-2A band. So 15.407(h)(2) Radar Detection Function of Dynamic Frequency Selection (DFS). U-NII devices operating in the 5.25-5.35 GHz and 5.47-5.725 GHz bands shall employ a DFS radar detection mechanism to detect the presence of radar systems and to avoid co-channel operation with radar systems. The power level down there is adequate for some applications, like half-mile links. Lots of old Motorola PTP-400s are legally pumping +5 to +9 dBm into panels... one urban path is working over 2 miles, though we're replacing it. On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: 5265-5320 5500-5580 5660-5700 5735-5840 Are these not USA channels? If am wrong let me know and I will change them. On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller par...@cyberbroadband.net wrote: Forrest...what is your offlist email ? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone - Reply message - From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Date: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 11:53 AM I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed over. Even if the radios don't do this you are introducing far more rf than is likely needed causing an overall rising of the noise floor. Please don't interpret everyone's ire incorrectly. We've just all either dealt with an operator like you are now or have been an operator like you are now. And right now we're trying to gain credibility with the FCC which is hard to do when some operators are flagrantly breaking the rules. Which makes us a bit grumpy. I'm sure some of your neighbors out there would love to help you better understand what you are doing to yourself and help you improve your operations which will in turn improve your quality of service. Heck, I'd drive over there for a weekend if my schedule wasn't so packed. In any case please ask for help in appropriate spots and let us help you reap the rewards of a correctly and legally operating network. On Feb 8, 2014 4:49 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927-7837 ptera.com facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera - This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
On 2/12/2014 6:04 PM, Matt Hoppes wrote: What are you guys talking about? A 30dB dish with a 0dB radio on it will easily go 4-5 miles. Or put a 34dB dish on with a -4dB radio if you want more gain. Yes, though urban clutter gets in our way. With 5 GHz WLANs becoming more common, the noise level is higher than it used to be, though not as bad as on 5.8 where the cable company has decided to hang APs on their wires. :-( FWIW I'm looking at the SNMP for one urban PTP400 link, presumably well situated, that is getting a 64QAM 7/8 signal at a distance of 1.4 miles (per the radios), with the TX power set to +4 dBm. The PTPs were all upgraded to DFS. Longer paths tend to converge at lower speeds (QPSK). But path by path conditions vary. Sent from my iPad On Feb 12, 2014, at 17:56, Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com mailto:fgoldst...@ionary.com wrote: On 2/12/2014 5:23 PM, Chuck Hogg wrote: Yea, but the power levels of some are not likely usable in an outdoor WISP environment. A good explanation is at Wikipedia strange enough... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-NII People running equipment in frequencies at a power level higher than intended is the issue. Also, the 5470-5725 band requires DFS. Actually, so does 5.25-5.35, as of 2004 or so. It didn't originally, but when they added the 5.47-5.725 band, which needs DFS, they added the requirement to the original U-NII-2A band. So 15.407(h)(2) Radar Detection Function of Dynamic Frequency Selection (DFS). U-NII devices operating in the 5.25-5.35 GHz and5 http://www.hallikainen.org/FCC/FccRules/2013/5/47-5/section.pdf.47-5 http://sujan.hallikainen.org/FCC/FccRules/2013/5/47-5/index.php.725 GHz bands shall employ a DFS radar detection mechanism to detect the presence of radar systems and to avoid co-channel operation with radar systems. The power level down there is adequate for some applications, like half-mile links. Lots of old Motorola PTP-400s are legally pumping +5 to +9 dBm into panels... one urban path is working over 2 miles, though we're replacing it. On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com mailto:asteph...@ptera.com wrote: 5265-5320 5500-5580 5660-5700 5735-5840 Are these not USA channels? If am wrong let me know and I will change them. On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller par...@cyberbroadband.net mailto:par...@cyberbroadband.net wrote: Forrest...what is your offlist email ? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone - Reply message - From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com mailto:li...@packetflux.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org mailto:wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Date: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 11:53 AM I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed over. Even if the radios don't do this you are introducing far more rf than is likely needed causing an overall rising of the noise floor. Please don't interpret everyone's ire incorrectly. We've just all either dealt with an operator like you are now or have been an operator like you are now. And right now we're trying to gain credibility with the FCC which is hard to do when some operators are flagrantly breaking the rules. Which makes us a bit grumpy. I'm sure some of your neighbors out there would love to help you better understand what you are doing to yourself and help you improve your operations which will in turn improve your quality of service. Heck, I'd drive over there for a weekend if my schedule wasn't so packed. In any case please ask for help in appropriate spots and let us help you reap the rewards of a correctly and legally operating network. On Feb 8, 2014 4:49 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com mailto:asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
Back in the Alvarion days we had a customer in south FL with well over 1000 CPE using UNII-2 bands with DFS via the BreezeMAX Extreme product. They ran only QAM16 or higher connections and we able to achieve that with high reliability in the dense suburban areas up to about 3 miles. The low noise floor and 2x2 MIMO was a key factor in getting their excellent link budgets. So the idea that mid-5GHz is not good for BWA is a myth. Sent from my iPhone On Feb 12, 2014, at 17:05, Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.commailto:mhop...@indigowireless.com wrote: What are you guys talking about? A 30dB dish with a 0dB radio on it will easily go 4-5 miles. Or put a 34dB dish on with a -4dB radio if you want more gain. Sent from my iPad On Feb 12, 2014, at 17:56, Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.commailto:fgoldst...@ionary.com wrote: On 2/12/2014 5:23 PM, Chuck Hogg wrote: Yea, but the power levels of some are not likely usable in an outdoor WISP environment. A good explanation is at Wikipedia strange enough... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-NII People running equipment in frequencies at a power level higher than intended is the issue. Also, the 5470-5725 band requires DFS. Actually, so does 5.25-5.35, as of 2004 or so. It didn't originally, but when they added the 5.47-5.725 band, which needs DFS, they added the requirement to the original U-NII-2A band. So 15.407(h)(2) Radar Detection Function of Dynamic Frequency Selection (DFS). U-NII devices operating in the 5.25-5.35 GHz and 5http://www.hallikainen.org/FCC/FccRules/2013/5/47-5/section.pdf.47-5http://sujan.hallikainen.org/FCC/FccRules/2013/5/47-5/index.php.725 GHz bands shall employ a DFS radar detection mechanism to detect the presence of radar systems and to avoid co-channel operation with radar systems. The power level down there is adequate for some applications, like half-mile links. Lots of old Motorola PTP-400s are legally pumping +5 to +9 dBm into panels... one urban path is working over 2 miles, though we're replacing it. On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.commailto:asteph...@ptera.com wrote: 5265-5320 5500-5580 5660-5700 5735-5840 Are these not USA channels? If am wrong let me know and I will change them. On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller par...@cyberbroadband.netmailto:par...@cyberbroadband.net wrote: Forrest...what is your offlist email ? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone - Reply message - From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.commailto:li...@packetflux.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.orgmailto:wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Date: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 11:53 AM I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed over. Even if the radios don't do this you are introducing far more rf than is likely needed causing an overall rising of the noise floor. Please don't interpret everyone's ire incorrectly. We've just all either dealt with an operator like you are now or have been an operator like you are now. And right now we're trying to gain credibility with the FCC which is hard to do when some operators are flagrantly breaking the rules. Which makes us a bit grumpy. I'm sure some of your neighbors out there would love to help you better understand what you are doing to yourself and help you improve your operations which will in turn improve your quality of service. Heck, I'd drive over there for a weekend if my schedule wasn't so packed. In any case please ask for help in appropriate spots and let us help you reap the rewards of a correctly and legally operating network. On Feb 8, 2014 4:49 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.commailto:asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
I've got a 10 year old PtP at 5.3GHz. -- On 2/12/2014 5:56 PM, Fred Goldstein wrote: On 2/12/2014 5:23 PM, Chuck Hogg wrote: Yea, but the power levels of some are not likely usable in an outdoor WISP environment. A good explanation is at Wikipedia strange enough... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-NII People running equipment in frequencies at a power level higher than intended is the issue. Also, the 5470-5725 band requires DFS. Actually, so does 5.25-5.35, as of 2004 or so. It didn't originally, but when they added the 5.47-5.725 band, which needs DFS, they added the requirement to the original U-NII-2A band. So 15.407(h)(2) Radar Detection Function of Dynamic Frequency Selection (DFS). U-NII devices operating in the 5.25-5.35 GHz and5 http://www.hallikainen.org/FCC/FccRules/2013/5/47-5/section.pdf.47-5 http://sujan.hallikainen.org/FCC/FccRules/2013/5/47-5/index.php.725 GHz bands shall employ a DFS radar detection mechanism to detect the presence of radar systems and to avoid co-channel operation with radar systems. The power level down there is adequate for some applications, like half-mile links. Lots of old Motorola PTP-400s are legally pumping +5 to +9 dBm into panels... one urban path is working over 2 miles, though we're replacing it. On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com mailto:asteph...@ptera.com wrote: 5265-5320 5500-5580 5660-5700 5735-5840 Are these not USA channels? If am wrong let me know and I will change them. On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller par...@cyberbroadband.net mailto:par...@cyberbroadband.net wrote: Forrest...what is your offlist email ? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone - Reply message - From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com mailto:li...@packetflux.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org mailto:wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Date: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 11:53 AM I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed over. Even if the radios don't do this you are introducing far more rf than is likely needed causing an overall rising of the noise floor. Please don't interpret everyone's ire incorrectly. We've just all either dealt with an operator like you are now or have been an operator like you are now. And right now we're trying to gain credibility with the FCC which is hard to do when some operators are flagrantly breaking the rules. Which makes us a bit grumpy. I'm sure some of your neighbors out there would love to help you better understand what you are doing to yourself and help you improve your operations which will in turn improve your quality of service. Heck, I'd drive over there for a weekend if my schedule wasn't so packed. In any case please ask for help in appropriate spots and let us help you reap the rewards of a correctly and legally operating network. On Feb 8, 2014 4:49 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com mailto:asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. --
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
Yes but the lower ones require DFS and lower power and a certified radio. Your original message was complaining about the removal of compliance test mode. The specific purpose of compliance test mode is to permit a radio to operate outside of legal limits. For instance over the legal power limit or on DFS bands without DFS enabled or outside legal channels for that radio. UBNT has stated over and over that their intent was not to prevent any legal operation of their radio. I haven't heard of any instances where not having compliance mode has resulted in a meaningful impact to a legal operator. I hate to defend them but in this case it seems like they may have gotten it nearly correct. Is there a specific frequency and power you're using you think is legal but isn't permitted unless you turn on compliance test mode? On Feb 12, 2014 2:08 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: 5265-5320 5500-5580 5660-5700 5735-5840 Are these not USA channels? If am wrong let me know and I will change them. On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller par...@cyberbroadband.net wrote: Forrest...what is your offlist email ? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone - Reply message - From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Date: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 11:53 AM I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed over. Even if the radios don't do this you are introducing far more rf than is likely needed causing an overall rising of the noise floor. Please don't interpret everyone's ire incorrectly. We've just all either dealt with an operator like you are now or have been an operator like you are now. And right now we're trying to gain credibility with the FCC which is hard to do when some operators are flagrantly breaking the rules. Which makes us a bit grumpy. I'm sure some of your neighbors out there would love to help you better understand what you are doing to yourself and help you improve your operations which will in turn improve your quality of service. Heck, I'd drive over there for a weekend if my schedule wasn't so packed. In any case please ask for help in appropriate spots and let us help you reap the rewards of a correctly and legally operating network. On Feb 8, 2014 4:49 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927-7837 ptera.com facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera - This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are not intended to represent those of the company. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927-7837 ptera.com facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
Patrick, how the heck are ya? marlon From: Patrick Leary Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 10:01 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Amen. Preach it Brother Marlon. Sent from my iPhone On Feb 10, 2014, at 12:19, Marlon Schafer (509.982.2181) o...@odessaoffice.com wrote: I’m with Forrest here. Back in the “back ol’ days” of everyone running amps (we had to back then in many cases) some vendors loved to sell more power. More power means faster service at longer ranges right? WRONG. Carrier to interference level is where your speed and distance comes from. The high power systems, as Forrest says, cause the radios to produce much more *detectable* power outside their main band. That power outside the main band causes the interference. It was always a struggle, but when I used to do interference I convinced many WISPs that LOWER powers would actually improve the performance of their networks. It was nearly 100% true. In the rare cases when lower power levels didn’t work it was because people were trying to use higher powers to over-ride physics and go through trees, buildings etc. One very important note here. If you do try lower power levels you’ll have to lower ALL of the devices back down to reasonable levels (RSSI should be between –65 and –75 for most modern radios to perform their best, –55 will work but see the above notes about self inflicted interference). A quick check is to shut down all of your AP’s in an area and see what the noise goes to. Oh yeah, very few radios really report accurate interference information. If you are checking those levels via anything other than a real spectrum analyzer you’ll likely find out that there are also other things happening in your area. Call if you’d like and we can talk this out a bit more. 509.988.0260 laters, marlon From: Forrest Christian (List Account) Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2014 9:53 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed over. Even if the radios don't do this you are introducing far more rf than is likely needed causing an overall rising of the noise floor. Please don't interpret everyone's ire incorrectly. We've just all either dealt with an operator like you are now or have been an operator like you are now. And right now we're trying to gain credibility with the FCC which is hard to do when some operators are flagrantly breaking the rules. Which makes us a bit grumpy. I'm sure some of your neighbors out there would love to help you better understand what you are doing to yourself and help you improve your operations which will in turn improve your quality of service. Heck, I'd drive over there for a weekend if my schedule wasn't so packed. In any case please ask for help in appropriate spots and let us help you reap the rewards of a correctly and legally operating network. On Feb 8, 2014 4:49 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927-7837 ptera.com facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera - This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
Different band. Different designs. Different equipment. Same screwups.. marlon From: Blair Davis Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 12:24 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? I don't even know of amps for 5GHz? I thought this was mainly about antenna gain... -- On 2/10/2014 3:14 PM, D. Ryan Spott wrote: I would be happy to drive out there to give you a hand Arthur. ryan On 2/10/14 9:19 AM, Marlon Schafer (509.982.2181) wrote: I’m with Forrest here. Back in the “back ol’ days” of everyone running amps (we had to back then in many cases) some vendors loved to sell more power. More power means faster service at longer ranges right? WRONG. Carrier to interference level is where your speed and distance comes from. The high power systems, as Forrest says, cause the radios to produce much more *detectable* power outside their main band. That power outside the main band causes the interference. It was always a struggle, but when I used to do interference I convinced many WISPs that LOWER powers would actually improve the performance of their networks. It was nearly 100% true. In the rare cases when lower power levels didn’t work it was because people were trying to use higher powers to over-ride physics and go through trees, buildings etc. One very important note here. If you do try lower power levels you’ll have to lower ALL of the devices back down to reasonable levels (RSSI should be between –65 and –75 for most modern radios to perform their best, –55 will work but see the above notes about self inflicted interference). A quick check is to shut down all of your AP’s in an area and see what the noise goes to. Oh yeah, very few radios really report accurate interference information. If you are checking those levels via anything other than a real spectrum analyzer you’ll likely find out that there are also other things happening in your area. Call if you’d like and we can talk this out a bit more. 509.988.0260 laters, marlon From: Forrest Christian (List Account) Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2014 9:53 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed over. Even if the radios don't do this you are introducing far more rf than is likely needed causing an overall rising of the noise floor. Please don't interpret everyone's ire incorrectly. We've just all either dealt with an operator like you are now or have been an operator like you are now. And right now we're trying to gain credibility with the FCC which is hard to do when some operators are flagrantly breaking the rules. Which makes us a bit grumpy. I'm sure some of your neighbors out there would love to help you better understand what you are doing to yourself and help you improve your operations which will in turn improve your quality of service. Heck, I'd drive over there for a weekend if my schedule wasn't so packed. In any case please ask for help in appropriate spots and let us help you reap the rewards of a correctly and legally operating network. On Feb 8, 2014 4:49 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927-7837 ptera.com
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
Freezing my a** off in St. Paul tonight, but loving it since I'm with about 20 operators at a customer user event. Sent from my iPhone On Feb 11, 2014, at 18:37, Marlon Schafer (509.982.2181) o...@odessaoffice.commailto:o...@odessaoffice.com wrote: Patrick, how the heck are ya? marlon From: Patrick Learymailto:patrick.le...@telrad.com Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 10:01 AM To: WISPA General Listmailto:wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Amen. Preach it Brother Marlon. Sent from my iPhone On Feb 10, 2014, at 12:19, Marlon Schafer (509.982.2181) o...@odessaoffice.commailto:o...@odessaoffice.com wrote: I’m with Forrest here. Back in the “back ol’ days” of everyone running amps (we had to back then in many cases) some vendors loved to sell more power. More power means faster service at longer ranges right? WRONG. Carrier to interference level is where your speed and distance comes from. The high power systems, as Forrest says, cause the radios to produce much more *detectable* power outside their main band. That power outside the main band causes the interference. It was always a struggle, but when I used to do interference I convinced many WISPs that LOWER powers would actually improve the performance of their networks. It was nearly 100% true. In the rare cases when lower power levels didn’t work it was because people were trying to use higher powers to over-ride physics and go through trees, buildings etc. One very important note here. If you do try lower power levels you’ll have to lower ALL of the devices back down to reasonable levels (RSSI should be between –65 and –75 for most modern radios to perform their best, –55 will work but see the above notes about self inflicted interference). A quick check is to shut down all of your AP’s in an area and see what the noise goes to. Oh yeah, very few radios really report accurate interference information. If you are checking those levels via anything other than a real spectrum analyzer you’ll likely find out that there are also other things happening in your area. Call if you’d like and we can talk this out a bit more. 509.988.0260 laters, marlon From: Forrest Christian (List Account)mailto:li...@packetflux.com Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2014 9:53 AM To: WISPA General Listmailto:wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed over. Even if the radios don't do this you are introducing far more rf than is likely needed causing an overall rising of the noise floor. Please don't interpret everyone's ire incorrectly. We've just all either dealt with an operator like you are now or have been an operator like you are now. And right now we're trying to gain credibility with the FCC which is hard to do when some operators are flagrantly breaking the rules. Which makes us a bit grumpy. I'm sure some of your neighbors out there would love to help you better understand what you are doing to yourself and help you improve your operations which will in turn improve your quality of service. Heck, I'd drive over there for a weekend if my schedule wasn't so packed. In any case please ask for help in appropriate spots and let us help you reap the rewards of a correctly and legally operating network. On Feb 8, 2014 4:49 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.commailto:asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
They have been DFS2 friendly for a long time, yes. They've been tweaking the false-positive reactions, but otherwise good. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com To: wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, February 9, 2014 10:15:50 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? On 2/9/2014 9:42 AM, Gino Villarini wrote: The use of compliance test is one of the reasons the FCC is clamping down on 5 ghz… UBNT says that they got DFS2 working in 5.5.2, in 2012, so at least some radios, including the NSM5, are compliant. Aren't these officially approved yet for the DFS bands? blockquote Gino A. Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. 787.273.4143 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [ mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org ] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Saturday, February 08, 2014 6:56 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? DFS always comes second due to a longer certification process. It'll eventually come. Some manufacturers seem to get approved more quickly, but that could be timing of announcements and not the actual certification process. -50 dBm? Where? Where? I do see where your address is and I am suspect. I am in suburban Chicago and I have at worst -70 noise floor. It's actually better in downtown Chicago at someone I know's apartment 22 floors up (maybe low-E glass?). Something is very wrong if you have a -50 dB noise floor. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com To: wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, January 31, 2014 10:29:09 AM Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927-7837 ptera.com facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera - This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are not intended to represent those of the company. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless /blockquote -- Fred R. Goldstein k1io fred at interisle.net Interisle Consulting Group +1 617 795 2701 ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
Blair Davis wrote, I just went and read a bunch of the comments on the proceeding... I didn't read them all, but I didn't find one in favor of the lower antenna gain... Has anyone else? Motorola Solutions, makers of $6000 police walkie-talkies, explicitly supports the lower gain limit. Cisco also supports the lower power rule. They only make local access points, after all, and are buddy-buddy with the Bells. We should keep that in mind when making our purchase decisions. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
Interesting statement regarding Cisco. They sell $3000 per unit mesh equipment whose range would be hurt if power limits were dropped. John Sent with AquaMail for Android http://www.aqua-mail.com On February 10, 2014 6:15:22 AM Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com wrote: Blair Davis wrote, I just went and read a bunch of the comments on the proceeding... I didn't read them all, but I didn't find one in favor of the lower antenna gain... Has anyone else? Motorola Solutions, makers of $6000 police walkie-talkies, explicitly supports the lower gain limit. Cisco also supports the lower power rule. They only make local access points, after all, and are buddy-buddy with the Bells. We should keep that in mind when making our purchase decisions. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
Which means more units... Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Feb 10, 2014 9:42 AM, John Thomas jtho...@quarnet.com wrote: Interesting statement regarding Cisco. They sell $3000 per unit mesh equipment whose range would be hurt if power limits were dropped. John Sent with AquaMail for Android http://www.aqua-mail.com On February 10, 2014 6:15:22 AM Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com wrote: Blair Davis wrote, I just went and read a bunch of the comments on the proceeding... I didn't read them all, but I didn't find one in favor of the lower antenna gain... Has anyone else? Motorola Solutions, makers of $6000 police walkie-talkies, explicitly supports the lower gain limit. Cisco also supports the lower power rule. They only make local access points, after all, and are buddy-buddy with the Bells. We should keep that in mind when making our purchase decisions. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
On 2/10/2014 9:42 AM, John Thomas wrote: Interesting statement regarding Cisco. They sell $3000 per unit mesh equipment whose range would be hurt if power limits were dropped. John But I don't think they do stuff with high-gain external antennas. Peeking through Comments, Ericsson, btw, also supports the lower limits. Again, a big supplier to the CMRS industry, so they probably see WISPs as competitors. The WiFi Alliance also calls for the stricter gain limit, presumably because they only care about their indoor applications and want to limit competing users of the band. I don't know what companies are in the Alliance. Sent with AquaMail for Android http://www.aqua-mail.com On February 10, 2014 6:15:22 AM Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com wrote: Blair Davis wrote, I just went and read a bunch of the comments on the proceeding... I didn't read them all, but I didn't find one in favor of the lower antenna gain... Has anyone else? Motorola Solutions, makers of $6000 police walkie-talkies, explicitly supports the lower gain limit. Cisco also supports the lower power rule. They only make local access points, after all, and are buddy-buddy with the Bells. We should keep that in mind when making our purchase decisions. -- Fred R. Goldstein k1io fred at interisle.net Interisle Consulting Group +1 617 795 2701 ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
So what about the cell companies that use 5GHz for a quick back haul while waiting for their license to come in? On Feb 10, 2014, at 10:20, Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com wrote: On 2/10/2014 9:42 AM, John Thomas wrote: Interesting statement regarding Cisco. They sell $3000 per unit mesh equipment whose range would be hurt if power limits were dropped. John But I don't think they do stuff with high-gain external antennas. Peeking through Comments, Ericsson, btw, also supports the lower limits. Again, a big supplier to the CMRS industry, so they probably see WISPs as competitors. The WiFi Alliance also calls for the stricter gain limit, presumably because they only care about their indoor applications and want to limit competing users of the band. I don't know what companies are in the Alliance. Sent with AquaMail for Android http://www.aqua-mail.com On February 10, 2014 6:15:22 AM Fred Goldstein fgoldst...@ionary.com wrote: Blair Davis wrote, I just went and read a bunch of the comments on the proceeding... I didn't read them all, but I didn't find one in favor of the lower antenna gain... Has anyone else? Motorola Solutions, makers of $6000 police walkie-talkies, explicitly supports the lower gain limit. Cisco also supports the lower power rule. They only make local access points, after all, and are buddy-buddy with the Bells. We should keep that in mind when making our purchase decisions. -- Fred R. Goldstein k1io fred at interisle.net Interisle Consulting Group +1 617 795 2701 ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
On 2/10/2014 10:21 AM, Matt Hoppes wrote: So what about the cell companies that use 5GHz for a quick back haul while waiting for their license to come in? Not the ones commenting in favor of the proposal. I suppose the old Motorola might have understood that, but Cambium now owns the unlicensed stuff, while MotSol sells extravagantly expensive P25 radios. And you don't want to know what their dispatch console (really a PC application) sells for. To most of the WiFi crowd, unlicensed wireless is just indoors. That's all most consumers, at least in urban areas, see. Of course they don't know that we're using those bands for urban public safety applications too (which is what I am up to). The WiFi Alliance is obsessing about 802.11ac, and wants four 160 MHz wide channels for indoor use. So uniform rules make that easier, so that all of the channel is under one rule. And to hell with everyone else. After all, if you're out in the boonies at the end of a WISP link, you probably don't need 802.11ac in your home anyway. Personally, I think that 11n is fast enough for normal WLAN use, and for those super-fast short haul indoor applications like HD video monitors, WiGig at 60G is more promising. It's just a matter of getting the cost down and into mass production. The new 60G rules are interesting too, for those shorter outdoor hops (1 mile). The +82 dBm EIRP cap is quite generous. But boy does 52dBi antenna alignment matter. -- Fred R. Goldstein k1io fred at interisle.net Interisle Consulting Group +1 617 795 2701 ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
I’m with Forrest here. Back in the “back ol’ days” of everyone running amps (we had to back then in many cases) some vendors loved to sell more power. More power means faster service at longer ranges right? WRONG. Carrier to interference level is where your speed and distance comes from. The high power systems, as Forrest says, cause the radios to produce much more *detectable* power outside their main band. That power outside the main band causes the interference. It was always a struggle, but when I used to do interference I convinced many WISPs that LOWER powers would actually improve the performance of their networks. It was nearly 100% true. In the rare cases when lower power levels didn’t work it was because people were trying to use higher powers to over-ride physics and go through trees, buildings etc. One very important note here. If you do try lower power levels you’ll have to lower ALL of the devices back down to reasonable levels (RSSI should be between –65 and –75 for most modern radios to perform their best, –55 will work but see the above notes about self inflicted interference). A quick check is to shut down all of your AP’s in an area and see what the noise goes to. Oh yeah, very few radios really report accurate interference information. If you are checking those levels via anything other than a real spectrum analyzer you’ll likely find out that there are also other things happening in your area. Call if you’d like and we can talk this out a bit more. 509.988.0260 laters, marlon From: Forrest Christian (List Account) Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2014 9:53 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed over. Even if the radios don't do this you are introducing far more rf than is likely needed causing an overall rising of the noise floor. Please don't interpret everyone's ire incorrectly. We've just all either dealt with an operator like you are now or have been an operator like you are now. And right now we're trying to gain credibility with the FCC which is hard to do when some operators are flagrantly breaking the rules. Which makes us a bit grumpy. I'm sure some of your neighbors out there would love to help you better understand what you are doing to yourself and help you improve your operations which will in turn improve your quality of service. Heck, I'd drive over there for a weekend if my schedule wasn't so packed. In any case please ask for help in appropriate spots and let us help you reap the rewards of a correctly and legally operating network. On Feb 8, 2014 4:49 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927-7837 ptera.com facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera - This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are not intended to represent those of the company. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
Amen. Preach it Brother Marlon. Sent from my iPhone On Feb 10, 2014, at 12:19, Marlon Schafer (509.982.2181) o...@odessaoffice.commailto:o...@odessaoffice.com wrote: I’m with Forrest here. Back in the “back ol’ days” of everyone running amps (we had to back then in many cases) some vendors loved to sell more power. More power means faster service at longer ranges right? WRONG. Carrier to interference level is where your speed and distance comes from. The high power systems, as Forrest says, cause the radios to produce much more *detectable* power outside their main band. That power outside the main band causes the interference. It was always a struggle, but when I used to do interference I convinced many WISPs that LOWER powers would actually improve the performance of their networks. It was nearly 100% true. In the rare cases when lower power levels didn’t work it was because people were trying to use higher powers to over-ride physics and go through trees, buildings etc. One very important note here. If you do try lower power levels you’ll have to lower ALL of the devices back down to reasonable levels (RSSI should be between –65 and –75 for most modern radios to perform their best, –55 will work but see the above notes about self inflicted interference). A quick check is to shut down all of your AP’s in an area and see what the noise goes to. Oh yeah, very few radios really report accurate interference information. If you are checking those levels via anything other than a real spectrum analyzer you’ll likely find out that there are also other things happening in your area. Call if you’d like and we can talk this out a bit more. 509.988.0260 laters, marlon From: Forrest Christian (List Account)mailto:li...@packetflux.com Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2014 9:53 AM To: WISPA General Listmailto:wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed over. Even if the radios don't do this you are introducing far more rf than is likely needed causing an overall rising of the noise floor. Please don't interpret everyone's ire incorrectly. We've just all either dealt with an operator like you are now or have been an operator like you are now. And right now we're trying to gain credibility with the FCC which is hard to do when some operators are flagrantly breaking the rules. Which makes us a bit grumpy. I'm sure some of your neighbors out there would love to help you better understand what you are doing to yourself and help you improve your operations which will in turn improve your quality of service. Heck, I'd drive over there for a weekend if my schedule wasn't so packed. In any case please ask for help in appropriate spots and let us help you reap the rewards of a correctly and legally operating network. On Feb 8, 2014 4:49 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.commailto:asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927-7837tel:509-927-7837 ptera.comhttp://ptera.com facebook.com/PteraInchttp://facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Pterahttp://twitter.com/Ptera - This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
You're mostly correct. You need to top -65 dB to get full modulation when you have -95 dB of noise, so you still need the -55 signals if you're near any civilization. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Marlon Schafer (509.982.2181) o...@odessaoffice.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 11:19:32 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? I’m with Forrest here. Back in the “back ol’ days” of everyone running amps (we had to back then in many cases) some vendors loved to sell more power. More power means faster service at longer ranges right? WRONG. Carrier to interference level is where your speed and distance comes from. The high power systems, as Forrest says, cause the radios to produce much more *detectable* power outside their main band. That power outside the main band causes the interference. It was always a struggle, but when I used to do interference I convinced many WISPs that LOWER powers would actually improve the performance of their networks. It was nearly 100% true. In the rare cases when lower power levels didn’t work it was because people were trying to use higher powers to over-ride physics and go through trees, buildings etc. One very important note here. If you do try lower power levels you’ll have to lower ALL of the devices back down to reasonable levels (RSSI should be between –65 and –75 for most modern radios to perform their best, –55 will work but see the above notes about self inflicted interference). A quick check is to shut down all of your AP’s in an area and see what the noise goes to. Oh yeah, very few radios really report accurate interference information. If you are checking those levels via anything other than a real spectrum analyzer you’ll likely find out that there are also other things happening in your area. Call if you’d like and we can talk this out a bit more. 509.988.0260 laters, marlon From: Forrest Christian (List Account) Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2014 9:53 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed over. Even if the radios don't do this you are introducing far more rf than is likely needed causing an overall rising of the noise floor. Please don't interpret everyone's ire incorrectly. We've just all either dealt with an operator like you are now or have been an operator like you are now. And right now we're trying to gain credibility with the FCC which is hard to do when some operators are flagrantly breaking the rules. Which makes us a bit grumpy. I'm sure some of your neighbors out there would love to help you better understand what you are doing to yourself and help you improve your operations which will in turn improve your quality of service. Heck, I'd drive over there for a weekend if my schedule wasn't so packed. In any case please ask for help in appropriate spots and let us help you reap the rewards of a correctly and legally operating network. On Feb 8, 2014 4:49 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927-7837 ptera.com facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera - This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
I would be happy to drive out there to give you a hand Arthur. ryan On 2/10/14 9:19 AM, Marlon Schafer (509.982.2181) wrote: I'm with Forrest here. Back in the back ol' days of everyone running amps (we had to back then in many cases) some vendors loved to sell more power. More power means faster service at longer ranges right? WRONG. Carrier to interference level is where your speed and distance comes from. The high power systems, as Forrest says, cause the radios to produce much more *detectable* power outside their main band. That power outside the main band causes the interference. It was always a struggle, but when I used to do interference I convinced many WISPs that LOWER powers would actually improve the performance of their networks. It was nearly 100% true. In the rare cases when lower power levels didn't work it was because people were trying to use higher powers to over-ride physics and go through trees, buildings etc. One very important note here. If you do try lower power levels you'll have to lower ALL of the devices back down to reasonable levels (RSSI should be between --65 and --75 for most modern radios to perform their best, --55 will work but see the above notes about self inflicted interference). A quick check is to shut down all of your AP's in an area and see what the noise goes to. Oh yeah, very few radios really report accurate interference information. If you are checking those levels via anything other than a real spectrum analyzer you'll likely find out that there are also other things happening in your area. Call if you'd like and we can talk this out a bit more. 509.988.0260 laters, marlon *From:* Forrest Christian (List Account) mailto:li...@packetflux.com *Sent:* Sunday, February 09, 2014 9:53 AM *To:* WISPA General List mailto:wireless@wispa.org *Subject:* Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed over. Even if the radios don't do this you are introducing far more rf than is likely needed causing an overall rising of the noise floor. Please don't interpret everyone's ire incorrectly. We've just all either dealt with an operator like you are now or have been an operator like you are now. And right now we're trying to gain credibility with the FCC which is hard to do when some operators are flagrantly breaking the rules. Which makes us a bit grumpy. I'm sure some of your neighbors out there would love to help you better understand what you are doing to yourself and help you improve your operations which will in turn improve your quality of service. Heck, I'd drive over there for a weekend if my schedule wasn't so packed. In any case please ask for help in appropriate spots and let us help you reap the rewards of a correctly and legally operating network. On Feb 8, 2014 4:49 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com mailto:asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927-7837 tel:509-927-7837 ptera.com http://ptera.com facebook.com/PteraInc http://facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera http://twitter.com/Ptera - This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. Any use by others is strictly prohibited
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
I don't even know of amps for 5GHz? I thought this was mainly about antenna gain... -- On 2/10/2014 3:14 PM, D. Ryan Spott wrote: I would be happy to drive out there to give you a hand Arthur. ryan On 2/10/14 9:19 AM, Marlon Schafer (509.982.2181) wrote: I'm with Forrest here. Back in the back ol' days of everyone running amps (we had to back then in many cases) some vendors loved to sell more power. More power means faster service at longer ranges right? WRONG. Carrier to interference level is where your speed and distance comes from. The high power systems, as Forrest says, cause the radios to produce much more *detectable* power outside their main band. That power outside the main band causes the interference. It was always a struggle, but when I used to do interference I convinced many WISPs that LOWER powers would actually improve the performance of their networks. It was nearly 100% true. In the rare cases when lower power levels didn't work it was because people were trying to use higher powers to over-ride physics and go through trees, buildings etc. One very important note here. If you do try lower power levels you'll have to lower ALL of the devices back down to reasonable levels (RSSI should be between --65 and --75 for most modern radios to perform their best, --55 will work but see the above notes about self inflicted interference). A quick check is to shut down all of your AP's in an area and see what the noise goes to. Oh yeah, very few radios really report accurate interference information. If you are checking those levels via anything other than a real spectrum analyzer you'll likely find out that there are also other things happening in your area. Call if you'd like and we can talk this out a bit more. 509.988.0260 laters, marlon *From:* Forrest Christian (List Account) mailto:li...@packetflux.com *Sent:* Sunday, February 09, 2014 9:53 AM *To:* WISPA General List mailto:wireless@wispa.org *Subject:* Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed over. Even if the radios don't do this you are introducing far more rf than is likely needed causing an overall rising of the noise floor. Please don't interpret everyone's ire incorrectly. We've just all either dealt with an operator like you are now or have been an operator like you are now. And right now we're trying to gain credibility with the FCC which is hard to do when some operators are flagrantly breaking the rules. Which makes us a bit grumpy. I'm sure some of your neighbors out there would love to help you better understand what you are doing to yourself and help you improve your operations which will in turn improve your quality of service. Heck, I'd drive over there for a weekend if my schedule wasn't so packed. In any case please ask for help in appropriate spots and let us help you reap the rewards of a correctly and legally operating network. On Feb 8, 2014 4:49 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com mailto:asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927-7837 tel:509-927-7837 ptera.com http://ptera.com facebook.com/PteraInc http://facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera http://twitter.com/Ptera - This message may contain confidential and/or propriety
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
maybe time to stock up on dishes. -- On 2/8/2014 8:11 PM, Jason Bailey wrote: Chuck has it right. See below. 33. /Antenna Gain/. Under Section 15.247, the assumed antenna gain is 6 dBi, with a 1 dB reduction in power required for every 1 dB that the antenna gain exceeds 6 dBi. For fixed point-to-point systems, no power reduction is required. Section 15.407 assumes the same antenna gain of 6 dBi, with 1 dB reduction in power required for every 1 dB that gain exceeds 6 dBi. For fixed point-to-point systems, a 1 dB reduction in power is required for every 1 dB that gain exceeds 23 dBi. The only difference between the two rule parts is the maximum antenna gain that can be deployed without a penalty in transmitter power. We propose to apply the more stringent 23 dBi maximum antenna gain that is currently required under Section 15.407. We believe that using the more stringent antenna gain requirement will ensure that there is no increase in the potential for interference from unlicensed devices operating under the new combined rule parts. On Saturday, February 8, 2014 7:32 PM, Chuck Hogg ch...@shelbybb.com wrote: /Revision of Part 15 of the Commission's Rules to Permit Unlicensed National Information Infrastructure (U-NII) Devices in the 5 GHz band, ET Docket No. 13-49./ Regards, Chuck On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 7:11 PM, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net mailto:wispawirel...@ics-il.net wrote: Yeah, I'd let someone official provide something. I wouldn't want to try to discern public information from internal information. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com http://www.ics-il.com/ *From: *Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com mailto:mhop...@indigowireless.com *To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org mailto:wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Saturday, February 8, 2014 6:03:50 PM *Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Chuck, Do you have a link or any information to what the FCC is specifically discussing? Sent from my iPad On Feb 8, 2014, at 18:48, Chuck Hogg ch...@shelbybb.com mailto:ch...@shelbybb.com wrote: People running on those TDWR frequencies like that without proper configuration are ruining the Unlimited Gain Antenna rule in the 5.8GHz band. It is before the FCC right now and WISPA just held a manufacturer's webinar about it. Every dish 2'+ would be affected, and would not be allowed any longer. No more 20-30 Mile 5GHz links. I truly hope you are not running your equipment inappropriately. Ubiquiti already has DFS certified gear, they are VERY familiar with the process, and they typically produce DFS options on their 5GHz platform. Regards, Chuck On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 6:08 PM, Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com mailto:mhop...@indigowireless.com wrote: The new NanoBeams will support DFS, they are just pending approval. Compliance Test - do you really want to go down that road? So what you just said, in a public forum, is that 40% of your radios are running illegally on frequencies they are not authorized to be on. Please pack up and go home. Sent from my iPad On Jan 31, 2014, at 11:29, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com mailto:asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
The use of compliance test is one of the reasons the FCC is clamping down on 5 ghz… Gino A. Villarini g...@aeronetpr.commailto:g...@aeronetpr.com Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. 787.273.4143 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Saturday, February 08, 2014 6:56 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? DFS always comes second due to a longer certification process. It'll eventually come. Some manufacturers seem to get approved more quickly, but that could be timing of announcements and not the actual certification process. -50 dBm? Where? Where? I do see where your address is and I am suspect. I am in suburban Chicago and I have at worst -70 noise floor. It's actually better in downtown Chicago at someone I know's apartment 22 floors up (maybe low-E glass?). Something is very wrong if you have a -50 dB noise floor. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com From: Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.commailto:asteph...@ptera.com To: wireless@wispa.orgmailto:wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, January 31, 2014 10:29:09 AM Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927-7837 ptera.comhttp://ptera.com facebook.com/PteraInchttp://facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Pterahttp://twitter.com/Ptera - This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are not intended to represent those of the company. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.orgmailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
On 2/9/2014 9:42 AM, Gino Villarini wrote: The use of compliance test is one of the reasons the FCC is clamping down on 5 ghz... UBNT says that they got DFS2 working in 5.5.2, in 2012, so at least some radios, including the NSM5, are compliant. Aren't these officially approved yet for the DFS bands? Gino A. Villarini g...@aeronetpr.com mailto:g...@aeronetpr.com Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp. 787.273.4143 *From:*wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] *On Behalf Of *Mike Hammett *Sent:* Saturday, February 08, 2014 6:56 PM *To:* WISPA General List *Subject:* Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? DFS always comes second due to a longer certification process. It'll eventually come. Some manufacturers seem to get approved more quickly, but that could be timing of announcements and not the actual certification process. -50 dBm? Where? Where? I do see where your address is and I am suspect. I am in suburban Chicago and I have at worst -70 noise floor. It's actually better in downtown Chicago at someone I know's apartment 22 floors up (maybe low-E glass?). Something is very wrong if you have a -50 dB noise floor. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com *From: *Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com mailto:asteph...@ptera.com *To: *wireless@wispa.org mailto:wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Friday, January 31, 2014 10:29:09 AM *Subject: *[WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927-7837 ptera.com http://ptera.com facebook.com/PteraInc http://facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera http://twitter.com/Ptera - This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are not intended to represent those of the company. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org mailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless -- Fred R. Goldstein k1io fred at interisle.net Interisle Consulting Group +1 617 795 2701 ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed over. Even if the radios don't do this you are introducing far more rf than is likely needed causing an overall rising of the noise floor. Please don't interpret everyone's ire incorrectly. We've just all either dealt with an operator like you are now or have been an operator like you are now. And right now we're trying to gain credibility with the FCC which is hard to do when some operators are flagrantly breaking the rules. Which makes us a bit grumpy. I'm sure some of your neighbors out there would love to help you better understand what you are doing to yourself and help you improve your operations which will in turn improve your quality of service. Heck, I'd drive over there for a weekend if my schedule wasn't so packed. In any case please ask for help in appropriate spots and let us help you reap the rewards of a correctly and legally operating network. On Feb 8, 2014 4:49 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927-7837 ptera.com facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera - This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are not intended to represent those of the company. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
Forrest...what is your offlist email ? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone - Reply message - From: Forrest Christian (List Account) li...@packetflux.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Date: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 11:53 AM I'm going to agree with others... Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use than to exceed the limits. I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed over. Even if the radios don't do this you are introducing far more rf than is likely needed causing an overall rising of the noise floor. Please don't interpret everyone's ire incorrectly. We've just all either dealt with an operator like you are now or have been an operator like you are now. And right now we're trying to gain credibility with the FCC which is hard to do when some operators are flagrantly breaking the rules. Which makes us a bit grumpy. I'm sure some of your neighbors out there would love to help you better understand what you are doing to yourself and help you improve your operations which will in turn improve your quality of service. Heck, I'd drive over there for a weekend if my schedule wasn't so packed. In any case please ask for help in appropriate spots and let us help you reap the rewards of a correctly and legally operating network. On Feb 8, 2014 4:49 PM, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies.Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform.First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840.Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it.Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875.Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking TechnicianPtera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927-7837 ptera.com facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera - This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are not intended to represent those of the company. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
I just went and read a bunch of the comments on the proceeding... I didn't read them all, but I didn't find one in favor of the lower antenna gain... Has anyone else? -- On 2/8/2014 8:11 PM, Jason Bailey wrote: Chuck has it right. See below. 33. /Antenna Gain/. Under Section 15.247, the assumed antenna gain is 6 dBi, with a 1 dB reduction in power required for every 1 dB that the antenna gain exceeds 6 dBi. For fixed point-to-point systems, no power reduction is required. Section 15.407 assumes the same antenna gain of 6 dBi, with 1 dB reduction in power required for every 1 dB that gain exceeds 6 dBi. For fixed point-to-point systems, a 1 dB reduction in power is required for every 1 dB that gain exceeds 23 dBi. The only difference between the two rule parts is the maximum antenna gain that can be deployed without a penalty in transmitter power. We propose to apply the more stringent 23 dBi maximum antenna gain that is currently required under Section 15.407. We believe that using the more stringent antenna gain requirement will ensure that there is no increase in the potential for interference from unlicensed devices operating under the new combined rule parts. On Saturday, February 8, 2014 7:32 PM, Chuck Hogg ch...@shelbybb.com wrote: /Revision of Part 15 of the Commission's Rules to Permit Unlicensed National Information Infrastructure (U-NII) Devices in the 5 GHz band, ET Docket No. 13-49./ Regards, Chuck On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 7:11 PM, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net mailto:wispawirel...@ics-il.net wrote: Yeah, I'd let someone official provide something. I wouldn't want to try to discern public information from internal information. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com http://www.ics-il.com/ *From: *Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com mailto:mhop...@indigowireless.com *To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org mailto:wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Saturday, February 8, 2014 6:03:50 PM *Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Chuck, Do you have a link or any information to what the FCC is specifically discussing? Sent from my iPad On Feb 8, 2014, at 18:48, Chuck Hogg ch...@shelbybb.com mailto:ch...@shelbybb.com wrote: People running on those TDWR frequencies like that without proper configuration are ruining the Unlimited Gain Antenna rule in the 5.8GHz band. It is before the FCC right now and WISPA just held a manufacturer's webinar about it. Every dish 2'+ would be affected, and would not be allowed any longer. No more 20-30 Mile 5GHz links. I truly hope you are not running your equipment inappropriately. Ubiquiti already has DFS certified gear, they are VERY familiar with the process, and they typically produce DFS options on their 5GHz platform. Regards, Chuck On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 6:08 PM, Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com mailto:mhop...@indigowireless.com wrote: The new NanoBeams will support DFS, they are just pending approval. Compliance Test - do you really want to go down that road? So what you just said, in a public forum, is that 40% of your radios are running illegally on frequencies they are not authorized to be on. Please pack up and go home. Sent from my iPad On Jan 31, 2014, at 11:29, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com mailto:asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
DFS always comes second due to a longer certification process. It'll eventually come. Some manufacturers seem to get approved more quickly, but that could be timing of announcements and not the actual certification process. -50 dBm? Where? Where? I do see where your address is and I am suspect. I am in suburban Chicago and I have at worst -70 noise floor. It's actually better in downtown Chicago at someone I know's apartment 22 floors up (maybe low-E glass?). Something is very wrong if you have a -50 dB noise floor. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com To: wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, January 31, 2014 10:29:09 AM Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927-7837 ptera.com facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera - This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are not intended to represent those of the company. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
The new NanoBeams will support DFS, they are just pending approval. Compliance Test - do you really want to go down that road? So what you just said, in a public forum, is that 40% of your radios are running illegally on frequencies they are not authorized to be on. Please pack up and go home. Sent from my iPad On Jan 31, 2014, at 11:29, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927-7837 ptera.com facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera - This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are not intended to represent those of the company. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
People running on those TDWR frequencies like that without proper configuration are ruining the Unlimited Gain Antenna rule in the 5.8GHz band. It is before the FCC right now and WISPA just held a manufacturer's webinar about it. Every dish 2'+ would be affected, and would not be allowed any longer. No more 20-30 Mile 5GHz links. I truly hope you are not running your equipment inappropriately. Ubiquiti already has DFS certified gear, they are VERY familiar with the process, and they typically produce DFS options on their 5GHz platform. Regards, Chuck On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 6:08 PM, Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.comwrote: The new NanoBeams will support DFS, they are just pending approval. Compliance Test - do you really want to go down that road? So what you just said, in a public forum, is that 40% of your radios are running illegally on frequencies they are not authorized to be on. Please pack up and go home. Sent from my iPad On Jan 31, 2014, at 11:29, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927-7837 ptera.com facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera - This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are not intended to represent those of the company. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
Chuck, Do you have a link or any information to what the FCC is specifically discussing? Sent from my iPad On Feb 8, 2014, at 18:48, Chuck Hogg ch...@shelbybb.com wrote: People running on those TDWR frequencies like that without proper configuration are ruining the Unlimited Gain Antenna rule in the 5.8GHz band. It is before the FCC right now and WISPA just held a manufacturer's webinar about it. Every dish 2'+ would be affected, and would not be allowed any longer. No more 20-30 Mile 5GHz links. I truly hope you are not running your equipment inappropriately. Ubiquiti already has DFS certified gear, they are VERY familiar with the process, and they typically produce DFS options on their 5GHz platform. Regards, Chuck On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 6:08 PM, Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com wrote: The new NanoBeams will support DFS, they are just pending approval. Compliance Test - do you really want to go down that road? So what you just said, in a public forum, is that 40% of your radios are running illegally on frequencies they are not authorized to be on. Please pack up and go home. Sent from my iPad On Jan 31, 2014, at 11:29, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927-7837 ptera.com facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera - This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are not intended to represent those of the company. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
Yeah, I'd let someone official provide something. I wouldn't want to try to discern public information from internal information. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, February 8, 2014 6:03:50 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Chuck, Do you have a link or any information to what the FCC is specifically discussing? Sent from my iPad On Feb 8, 2014, at 18:48, Chuck Hogg ch...@shelbybb.com wrote: People running on those TDWR frequencies like that without proper configuration are ruining the Unlimited Gain Antenna rule in the 5.8GHz band. It is before the FCC right now and WISPA just held a manufacturer's webinar about it. Every dish 2'+ would be affected, and would not be allowed any longer. No more 20-30 Mile 5GHz links. I truly hope you are not running your equipment inappropriately. Ubiquiti already has DFS certified gear, they are VERY familiar with the process, and they typically produce DFS options on their 5GHz platform. Regards, Chuck On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 6:08 PM, Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com wrote: blockquote The new NanoBeams will support DFS, they are just pending approval. Compliance Test - do you really want to go down that road? So what you just said, in a public forum, is that 40% of your radios are running illegally on frequencies they are not authorized to be on. Please pack up and go home. Sent from my iPad On Jan 31, 2014, at 11:29, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: blockquote Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927-7837 ptera.com facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera - This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are not intended to represent those of the company. blockquote ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless /blockquote ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless /blockquote /blockquote blockquote ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless /blockquote ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
*Revision of Part 15 of the Commission's Rules to Permit Unlicensed National Information Infrastructure (U-NII) Devices in the 5 GHz band, ET Docket No. 13-49.* Regards, Chuck On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 7:11 PM, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.netwrote: Yeah, I'd let someone official provide something. I wouldn't want to try to discern public information from internal information. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com -- *From: *Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com *To: *WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org *Sent: *Saturday, February 8, 2014 6:03:50 PM *Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Chuck, Do you have a link or any information to what the FCC is specifically discussing? Sent from my iPad On Feb 8, 2014, at 18:48, Chuck Hogg ch...@shelbybb.com wrote: People running on those TDWR frequencies like that without proper configuration are ruining the Unlimited Gain Antenna rule in the 5.8GHz band. It is before the FCC right now and WISPA just held a manufacturer's webinar about it. Every dish 2'+ would be affected, and would not be allowed any longer. No more 20-30 Mile 5GHz links. I truly hope you are not running your equipment inappropriately. Ubiquiti already has DFS certified gear, they are VERY familiar with the process, and they typically produce DFS options on their 5GHz platform. Regards, Chuck On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 6:08 PM, Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.comwrote: The new NanoBeams will support DFS, they are just pending approval. Compliance Test - do you really want to go down that road? So what you just said, in a public forum, is that 40% of your radios are running illegally on frequencies they are not authorized to be on. Please pack up and go home. Sent from my iPad On Jan 31, 2014, at 11:29, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927-7837 ptera.com facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera - This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are not intended to represent those of the company. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
Chuck has it right. See below. 33. Antenna Gain. Under Section 15.247, the assumed antenna gain is 6 dBi, with a 1 dB reduction in power required for every 1 dB that the antenna gain exceeds 6 dBi. For fixed point-to-point systems, no power reduction is required. Section 15.407 assumes the same antenna gain of 6 dBi, with 1 dB reduction in power required for every 1 dB that gain exceeds 6 dBi. For fixed point-to-point systems, a 1 dB reduction in power is required for every 1 dB that gain exceeds 23 dBi. The only difference between the two rule parts is the maximum antenna gain that can be deployed without a penalty in transmitter power. We propose to apply the more stringent 23 dBi maximum antenna gain that is currently required under Section 15.407. We believe that using the more stringent antenna gain requirement will ensure that there is no increase in the potential for interference from unlicensed devices operating under the new combined rule parts. On Saturday, February 8, 2014 7:32 PM, Chuck Hogg ch...@shelbybb.com wrote: Revision of Part 15 of the Commission’s Rules to Permit Unlicensed National Information Infrastructure (U-NII) Devices in the 5 GHz band, ET Docket No. 13-49. Regards, Chuck On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 7:11 PM, Mike Hammett wispawirel...@ics-il.net wrote: Yeah, I'd let someone official provide something. I wouldn't want to try to discern public information from internal information. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com From: Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Saturday, February 8, 2014 6:03:50 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Chuck, Do you have a link or any information to what the FCC is specifically discussing? Sent from my iPad On Feb 8, 2014, at 18:48, Chuck Hogg ch...@shelbybb.com wrote: People running on those TDWR frequencies like that without proper configuration are ruining the Unlimited Gain Antenna rule in the 5.8GHz band. It is before the FCC right now and WISPA just held a manufacturer's webinar about it. Every dish 2'+ would be affected, and would not be allowed any longer. No more 20-30 Mile 5GHz links. I truly hope you are not running your equipment inappropriately. Ubiquiti already has DFS certified gear, they are VERY familiar with the process, and they typically produce DFS options on their 5GHz platform. Regards, Chuck On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 6:08 PM, Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com wrote: The new NanoBeams will support DFS, they are just pending approval. Compliance Test - do you really want to go down that road? So what you just said, in a public forum, is that 40% of your radios are running illegally on frequencies they are not authorized to be on. Please pack up and go home. Sent from my iPad On Jan 31, 2014, at 11:29, Art Stephens asteph...@ptera.com wrote: Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927-7837 ptera.com facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera - This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are not intended to represent those of the company. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
I realize that many here hate the Cisco word, but all their radios are DFS compliant. John -Original Message- From: Art Stephens [mailto:asteph...@ptera.com] Sent: Friday, January 31, 2014 08:29 AM To: wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927-7837 ptera.com facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera - This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are not intended to represent those of the company. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies?
I realize that many here hate the Cisco word, but all their radios are DFS compliant. John -Original Message- From: Art Stephens [mailto:asteph...@ptera.com] Sent: Friday, January 31, 2014 08:29 AM To: wireless@wispa.org Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of these frequencies. Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that platform. First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess with it. Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports 5170-5875. Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both wisps and consumers. -- Arthur Stephens Senior Networking Technician Ptera Inc. PO Box 135 24001 E Mission Suite 50 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 509-927-7837 ptera.com facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera - This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are not intended to represent those of the company. ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
