Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-12 Thread Mike Hammett
] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 4:27 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] MT Babble But the base product, the computer does not start life as an intentional radiator. So at what point does a FCC certified computer become an intentional radiator as a whole? When

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-12 Thread Dawn DiPietro
- Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 12:39 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble It works like this Doug. A radio card is an intentional radiator. Under part 15 rules it can only be sold

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-12 Thread Mike Hammett
DiPietro [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:09 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble Mike, What Marlon said IS NOT OPINION. The only way you can be legal is to certify a system as a whole. You might want to take a look at the ADI link I posted

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-12 Thread Dawn DiPietro
http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 12:39 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble It works like this Doug. A radio card is an intentional radiator. Under part 15 rules

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-12 Thread Matt Liotta
Marlon K. Schafer wrote: I have the contacts, forms to fill out etc. just waiting for me to get the time to take this issue on as part of the FCC committee's job. We have basically no FCC committee though. The principal membership doesn't seem to be all that interested in anything other than

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-12 Thread Mike Hammett
: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble Mike, That post was looking for clarification on whether or not it was possible it would make this legal without going through system certification as an intentional radiator. Since the FCC wording can be mind boggling sometimes there is confusion. In other words you

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-12 Thread Forrest W. Christian
Mike Hammett wrote: Then why can I purchase a Netgear PCI card for my Dell desktop? Because the Netgear PCI card has been certified both as a computing device and a Part 15 intentional radiator - but only if it is used with the antenna which the Netgear was certified with. -forrestc --

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-12 Thread Tim Kerns
as a complete system. Did I miss something? Tim Kerns CV-Access, Inc. - Original Message - From: Dawn DiPietro [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 5:09 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble Mike, What Marlon said IS NOT OPINION

RE: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-12 Thread Ralph
. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 8:17 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble Then why can I purchase a Netgear PCI card for my Dell desktop? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing

RE: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-12 Thread dougr
So is the Ubiquiti SRC and 4.9 PCMCIA card a computing device since it was designed for install in laptops? -Original Message- From: Forrest W. Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 9:32 AM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble Mike

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-12 Thread Forrest W. Christian
Let me further clarify the statement below. Computer certifications permit each component to be certified separately and assembled as a system. As long as all of the components which go into the computer are certified individually, you can assemble them together into a computer which is also

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-12 Thread Mike Hammett
@wispa.org Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 8:32 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble Mike Hammett wrote: Then why can I purchase a Netgear PCI card for my Dell desktop? Because the Netgear PCI card has been certified both as a computing device and a Part 15 intentional radiator - but only

RE: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-12 Thread Eric Rogers
Solutions, LLC (317) 831-3000 x200 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 9:17 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble Then why can I purchase a Netgear PCI card for my Dell desktop

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-12 Thread Clint Ricker
Matt, I'm not a WISP (I do network design, deployment, and consulting for service providers), but, seeing as how none of the WISPs are answering, I'll give it a shot as to percieved advantages of MT or StarOS. 1. I don't think the FCC certification is a huge issue. This is largely because any

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-12 Thread Michael Erskine
Dawn DiPietro wrote: Is it that I keep misunderstanding what you are trying to say? But I feel like this has been discussed before in no uncertain terms. Maybe I wasn't there? I gladly yield to your apparent superior knowledge, until that is proper reflected in an FCC ruling and the only

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Michael Erskine
Ryan, A few of you are making a lot of noise. You seem to want to talk a lot about how MT is not certified and you say but if it were... Ryan, Why haven't you and those so vocal gone to the FCC with this question already? The FCC is but a telephone call away. http://www.fcc.gov/ It never

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Ryan Langseth
Michael, This is the first time I have gotten into this subject, and the last. As I said, I have seen this same thing come up at least a dozen time on this list. While I did say how long I have been on this list, my time in the industry is only about a month longer. Its always the same thing,

Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Jack Unger
Michael, Just for info - The question of being required to use a software version that denied operation on non-US frequencies has been hanging over Mikrotik and WISPs now for several months. Seems this is the last issue that needs to be addressed before we will see a potential flood of

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Dawn DiPietro
All, I have come to the conclusion that there are some on this list that think FCC certification is up for debate. There may be a need for clarification in some cases but like it or not the FCC has the final say in what can and cannot be certified. Regards, Dawn DiPietro -- WISPA Wireless

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Mike Hammett
on it. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2007 5:14 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble Mike, I see no evidence of anyone twisting your words

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Mike Hammett
[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2007 6:36 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble I said this several months ago and I'll say it again MT and Star-OS are used because of price. Period. If the certified systems come out and are double the price

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Mike Hammett
] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2007 11:06 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble I don't really understand this MT thread at all. Why use MT over all the other certified systems available? Further, why spend time and money trying to get MT certified? Why not just

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Mike Hammett
://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2007 6:44 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] MT Babble Ok. I've said this before. On a home PC, I don't need to certify a Dell computer running Win2k and a Netgear wireless

RE: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread dougr
to call their cards peripherals like Linksys and D-link already do. -Original Message- From: Dawn DiPietro [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 8:57 AM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble All, I have come to the conclusion that there are some

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Mike Hammett
: Sunday, June 10, 2007 9:43 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble The problem is the current RB532 will NEVER pass FCC certifications. It emits too much noise in the 150mHz and 400mHz areas to ever pass any certification. Maybe their new boards are different? Travis Microserv D. Ryan

Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Mike Hammett
? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 2:00 AM Subject: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble Michael, Just for info

RE: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread dougr
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 9:40 AM To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble I never thought of it that way. Doug makes a lot of valid points. I can put an XR5 with a 32 dbi antenna into a PC and install Windows and be legal. Why can't I install

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Matt Liotta
Mike Hammett wrote: Speed, features, reduced points of failure, price. If I can setup two complete and separate MT systems for less than the other guys can... Heck, could probably even setup a wireless ring using different bands for each link for less than the other guys. Even the greatest

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Mike Hammett
PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 8:59 AM Subject: RE: [WISPA] MT Babble If indeed, an XR5 is certified with that particular 32dbi antenna, cable and pigtail. No reason they wouldnt certify popular antenna combos, not to mention the changes

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread John Scrivner
Bravo. The best way to get gear certified from vendors is to NOT buy it until it is. The problem then fixes itself. There are plenty of certified gear options out there already. Scriv Matt Liotta wrote: I don't really understand this MT thread at all. Why use MT over all the other certified

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Tim Kerns
. - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 6:08 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble I would. I already committed to my guy that he will be my source for whatever he makes that I could use. $200 more isn't

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Mike Hammett
PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 9:04 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble Mike Hammett wrote: Speed, features, reduced points of failure, price. If I can setup two complete and separate MT systems for less than the other guys can... Heck, could probably

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Mike Hammett
] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 9:26 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble Why $200 more? At $200 if the vendor sell 10 systems, that is $2000, almost 66% of the certification cost returned. Sell 100 and that is $20,000, a lot more than the cost

Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Jack Unger
permission? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 2:00 AM Subject: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble Michael, Just

RE: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Doug Ratcliffe
in the lab. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Hammett Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 10:38 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble On a volume of 1, I can get a 5 GHz CPE for $185. IIRC, 100 unit quantities were $140. I can

Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Marlon K. Schafer
] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 12:00 AM Subject: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble Michael, Just for info - The question of being required to use a software version that denied operation on non-US frequencies has been hanging over Mikrotik

Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Mike Hammett
it off to a lab. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 10:11 AM Subject: Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Mike Hammett
: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble One or two people have asked this question also. I asked them to test and see if their equipment actually did transmit outside the U.S. band. So far, I've received no confirmation that outside-the-band transmissions were actually taking place. If you have equipment

Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Jack Unger
fcc areas. All the need is a MODE that puts the device into an FCC compatible format. laters, marlon - Original Message - From: Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 12:00 AM Subject: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Marlon K. Schafer
- Original Message - From: Travis Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2007 10:07 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble Can you use nice and Teletronics in the same sentence? ;) Travis Marlon K. Schafer wrote: I disagree with that. I

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread George Rogato
-Access, Inc. - Original Message - From: Mike Hammett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 6:08 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble I would. I already committed to my guy that he will be my source for whatever he makes that I could use

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread George Rogato
Dawn, Just how many wisp customers did you have in your short career as a wisp? Why is it that some people who don't actually participate in running a wireless service want to come in and try to tell us how to run our wisps? Dawn DiPietro wrote: All, I have come to the conclusion that

Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Sam Tetherow
? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 2:00 AM Subject: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble Michael, Just for info

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Matt Liotta
George Rogato wrote: Dawn, Just how many wisp customers did you have in your short career as a wisp? Why is it that some people who don't actually participate in running a wireless service want to come in and try to tell us how to run our wisps? I don't think that is fair. It isn't Dawn

RE: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Doug Ratcliffe
: Monday, June 11, 2007 11:47 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble Dawn, Just how many wisp customers did you have in your short career as a wisp? Why is it that some people who don't actually participate in running a wireless service want to come in and try to tell us how

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread George Rogato
Matt Liotta wrote: George Rogato wrote: Dawn, Just how many wisp customers did you have in your short career as a wisp? Why is it that some people who don't actually participate in running a wireless service want to come in and try to tell us how to run our wisps? I don't think that is

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread George Rogato
Doug Ratcliffe wrote: Is that really a necessary question, It sure is to find out where she's coming from. As a wisp, a long term wisp, as the person that bootstrapped this tiny bbs-isp from the dial up days in 99 to where we are today, who has put his money where his mouth is, and taken

RE: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Stephen Patrick
-Original Message- From: Mike Hammett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 11 June 2007 16:25 To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble I have no means of testing that. However, if the hardware can't do it, why does the software by the same manufacturer of this FCC

RE: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Brad Belton
: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble This FCC country-code-lock-down question is interesting. Doing a quick google I found this: http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/wireless/airo1200/accsspts/a p120scg/bkscgaxa.htm Don't know how up-to-date those lists are, as it was posted in 2003. Clearly some

RE: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Brad Belton
: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble This FCC country-code-lock-down question is interesting. Doing a quick google I found this: http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/wireless/airo1200/accsspts/a p120scg/bkscgaxa.htm Don't know how up-to-date those lists are, as it was posted in 2003. Clearly some

RE: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Doug Ratcliffe
, June 11, 2007 1:56 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble Wasn't there an ISP in Puerto Rico that was fined because they had set their gear (Aperto I think) to a higher power than they should have? The manufacturer's manual clearly stated it was up

Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread John Scrivner
] On Behalf Of Brad Belton Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 1:56 PM To: 'WISPA General List' Subject: RE: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble Wasn't there an ISP in Puerto Rico that was fined because they had set their gear (Aperto I think) to a higher power than they should have? The manufacturer's manual

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Dawn DiPietro
George, As I said in my post wireless providers do not get to decide what has to be certified this is up to the FCC and if there are any questions they need to be clarified not argued against which seems to be the norm among some on this list. How would the number of customers I had on my

Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Jack Unger
://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Marlon K. Schafer [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 10:11 AM Subject: Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble I disagree with you on this one Jack. I've got plenty of certified products

Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Jack Unger
Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 10:02 AM Subject: Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble One or two people have asked this question also. I

Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Jack Unger
something outside of FCC permission? - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 2:00 AM Subject: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread John Scrivner
I think we can all agree that gear certification is the law. Could we maybe kill this thread off before we start losing list members from the inflation of the number of posts about this seemingly elementary topic? Scriv Dawn DiPietro wrote: George, As I said in my post wireless providers

Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Mike Hammett
Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com - Original Message - From: Jack Unger [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 2:40 PM Subject: Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble Mike, I'll do my best to answer your

Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Jack Unger
PROTECTED] Sent: 11 June 2007 16:25 To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble I have no means of testing that. However, if the hardware can't do it, why does the software by the same manufacturer of this FCC certified device have the option of setting non-FCC? I've

Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Jack Unger
] On Behalf Of Stephen Patrick Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 12:49 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: RE: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble This FCC country-code-lock-down question is interesting. Doing a quick google I found this: http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/wireless

RE: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Brad Belton
To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble George, As I said in my post wireless providers do not get to decide what has to be certified this is up to the FCC and if there are any questions they need to be clarified not argued against which seems to be the norm among some on this list

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Matt Liotta
2:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble George, As I said in my post wireless providers do not get to decide what has to be certified this is up to the FCC and if there are any questions they need to be clarified not argued against which seems to be the norm among some

Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Sam Tetherow
: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stephen Patrick Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 12:49 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: RE: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble This FCC country-code-lock-down question is interesting. Doing a quick google I found this: http://www.cisco.com

Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Jeromie Reeves
was able to make these changes? Best, Brad -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stephen Patrick Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 12:49 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: RE: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble This FCC country-code

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Sam Tetherow
I think the question that really hasn't been answered is if a RB can be certified class B and then use a certified radio/antenna combo as is allowed with a PC/laptop. And you are right that then FCC makes the rules. What is not clear is that Dawn's (and others) position that the component

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Butch Evans
On Mon, 11 Jun 2007, Dawn DiPietro wrote: How would the number of customers I had on my network have any bearing on this discussion? The question was, however, why it matters to you what gear WISPs are using. Sounds like George agrees with me in his opinion of your harping on this issue.

Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Jack Unger
11, 2007 12:49 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: RE: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble This FCC country-code-lock-down question is interesting. Doing a quick google I found this: http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/wireless/airo1200/accsspts/a p120scg/bkscgaxa.htm

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Dawn DiPietro
Sam, Since some here feel I have no credibility because I no longer run a WISP I will let you decide from this information provided. Starting on page 78 of the following link should explain why the wireless devices in question cannot be certified as computers.

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread George Rogato
Butch Evans wrote: On Mon, 11 Jun 2007, Dawn DiPietro wrote: How would the number of customers I had on my network have any bearing on this discussion? The question was, however, why it matters to you what gear WISPs are using. Sounds like George agrees with me in his opinion of your

RE: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Doug Ratcliffe
sense. Cisco Aironet=Intentional Radiator, PC=Unintentional Radiator. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dawn DiPietro Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 7:10 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble Sam, Since some here feel I have

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Sam Tetherow
For the record, I don't feel that you have no credibility because you no longer run a WISP, I just don't agree with you and if 15.201-221 is your basis for the belief that a RB can't be considered under component rules I have to believe that you don't understand what a RB is. It is NOT an

Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Jeromie Reeves
to make these changes? Best, Brad -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stephen Patrick Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 12:49 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: RE: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble This FCC country

Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Jack Unger
To: WISPA General List Subject: RE: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble This FCC country-code-lock-down question is interesting. Doing a quick google I found this: http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/wireless/airo1200/accsspts/a p120scg/bkscgaxa.htm Don't

Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Jeromie Reeves
] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stephen Patrick Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 12:49 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: RE: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble This FCC country-code-lock-down question is interesting. Doing a quick google I found this: http

Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Jack Unger
Of Stephen Patrick Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 12:49 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: RE: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble This FCC country-code-lock-down question is interesting. Doing a quick google I found this: http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Carl A jeptha
Sam, Thank you, that is what I wanted to hear. If a system board is certified then the operating system is certified for FCC and of course your mini-pci was certified by the manufacturer. Now anybody can attach an antenna and have it certified. Total certification. You have a Good Day now,

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread George Rogato
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dawn DiPietro Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 2:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble George, As I said in my post wireless providers do not get to decide what has to be certified this is up to the FCC and if there are any questions they need

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Travis Johnson
2:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble George, As I said in my post wireless providers do not get to decide what has to be certified this is up to the FCC and if there are any questions they need to be clarified not argued against which seems to be the norm among some

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Michael Erskine
Ryan Langseth wrote: I made one comment in this entire thread, which I am already regretting. I hardly consider that vocal. My bad, Ryan, My bad. I did not mean to lump you in with a few vocal people.. My comment was not meant to be sarcastic, I would like to see a ruling on it one way or

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Michael Erskine
Dawn DiPietro wrote: All, I have come to the conclusion that there are some on this list that think FCC certification is up for debate. There may be a need for clarification in some cases but like it or not the FCC has the final say in what can and cannot be certified. Regards, Dawn

RE: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Joe
: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble Or maybe it was Adaptive Broadband gear that allowed the end user to break the rules? Anyone remember? Best, Brad -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http

Re: Not Babble: WAS Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread George Rogato
Joe wrote: Not sure about now but when smartbridges came out with Nexus line it had a a few extra channells. And it was certified. Did you know it was Pac Wireless who paid for the certifications on the original Smart Bridges, not Smart Bridges? -- George Rogato Welcome to WISPA

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Sam Tetherow
Just to be absolutely clear since this topic has generated a lot of 'assumptions'. I have NOT confirmed with the FCC that a routerboard/wrap/gateworks SBC is considered a unintentional radiator I have just made the statement that *I* don't see how it could be considered an intentional

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-11 Thread Marlon K. Schafer
] To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 4:27 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] MT Babble But the base product, the computer does not start life as an intentional radiator. So at what point does a FCC certified computer become an intentional radiator as a whole? When you add

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-10 Thread Mike Hammett
@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2007 9:27 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble Mike, This does not make everyone using a Mikrotik system legal though. It is not just as easy as saying I use the same components in my system as the one certified so I am legal. In case you are unaware, this would

RE: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-10 Thread Smith, Rick
@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2007 9:27 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble Mike, This does not make everyone using a Mikrotik system legal though. It is not just as easy as saying I use the same components in my system as the one certified so I am legal. In case you are unaware, this would

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-10 Thread Matt Liotta
I don't really understand this MT thread at all. Why use MT over all the other certified systems available? Further, why spend time and money trying to get MT certified? Why not just use certified gear that is available from vendors that are actually interested in participating in this market?

RE: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-10 Thread Smith, Rick
: [WISPA] MT Babble I don't really understand this MT thread at all. Why use MT over all the other certified systems available? Further, why spend time and money trying to get MT certified? Why not just use certified gear that is available from vendors that are actually interested in participating

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-10 Thread Dawn DiPietro
- Original Message - From: Dawn DiPietro [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2007 9:27 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble Mike, This does not make everyone using a Mikrotik system legal though. It is not just as easy as saying I use the same

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-10 Thread Matt Liotta
Smith, Rick wrote: Cheaper / Better. Faster would remain to be seen. I figured that would be the answer, but how does that help people who have no idea why MT might be cheaper or better? I'm not trying to start an argument; I would just like to know what about MT makes it worth risking

RE: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-10 Thread Smith, Rick
believe is already done. The whole system is up to whoever wants to certify it and then sell it as a system. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Liotta Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2007 12:23 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-10 Thread Matt Liotta
Smith, Rick wrote: From what I've seen to date; Alvarion / Canopy / Trango backhaul equipment - they are merely (sometimes fancy) bridges. I don't know about all vendors, but Canopy APs certainly can be configured to route. Additionally, the Deliberant radios I have seen do routing as

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-10 Thread Jack Unger
List wireless@wispa.org Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2007 9:27 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] MT Babble Mike, This does not make everyone using a Mikrotik system legal though. It is not just as easy as saying I use the same components in my system as the one certified so I am legal. In case you are unaware

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-10 Thread George Rogato
Matt The reason we like stuff MT and Star, it works and we like it. The future is arriving, there will be lots of new certified Star and MT products to choose from. http://forums.star-os.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=67stc=1d=1180571824 That one is called the Can-O-War. See it looks like

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-10 Thread Matt Liotta
George Rogato wrote: Matt The reason we like stuff MT and Star, it works and we like it. I'm glad it works and that you like it because you like it. That doesn't really help me understand why one would choose MT over something else. I mean there has to be something beyond that you like it if

RE: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-10 Thread D. Ryan Spott
I don't really care for the whole discussion of whether certified gear should be used or not. Every piece of gear has advantages and disadvantages as well as pricing considerations. Regardless of whether someone is willing to use uncertified gear, I am sure that given the choice between

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-10 Thread Travis Johnson
I said this several months ago and I'll say it again MT and Star-OS are used because of price. Period. If the certified systems come out and are double the price (so $400 for a RB532 type solution compared with $200 now) how many people are going to start using the certified ones? Very

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-10 Thread Travis Johnson
Ryan, Currently a typical MT AP with wireless card, outdoor case, pigtails, etc. with an RB532 board is going to be about $350ish without antenna. Can you give an example of what this PREMIUM price is that you are willing to pay for the same system certified? Travis Microserv D. Ryan Spott

Re: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-10 Thread George Rogato
Matt Liotta wrote: George Rogato wrote: Matt The reason we like stuff MT and Star, it works and we like it. I'm glad it works and that you like it because you like it. That doesn't really help me understand why one would choose MT over something else. Matt there is a tool for every job.

RE: [WISPA] MT Babble

2007-06-10 Thread dougr
, did they break the law and should be fined for violating Part 15? Is running Linux illegal by the FCC? -Original Message- From: D. Ryan Spott [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2007 7:17 PM To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org Subject: RE: [WISPA] MT Babble I don't really

  1   2   >