Re: [WISPA] Modifications of Parts 2 and 15 of the, Commission's Rules for unlicensed devices and, equipment approval

2007-04-27 Thread Marlon K. Schafer

Grin

It's certainly a fuzzy one.  A unique connector was defined a few years 
back.  As I recall, It's one that's not commonly available to the average 
consumer.  It's one of the reasons that the old Orinoco cards had those 
goofy connectors on them.  They had to come up with something that wasn't 
common.


Yet, the FCC still certifies millions of Linksys devices with RPSMA 
connectors.  Go figure.


Like I said, I think that the FCC is MOSTLY worried about getting broadband 
out to people.  No harmful interference, and no blasting over the EIRP 
limits.  Other than that, they sure don't seem to care.


But if they ever do start to care, I hope to have my network in dang good 
shape when the man come a callin'.

marlon

- Original Message - 
From: Lonnie Nunweiler [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 8:18 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Modifications of Parts 2 and 15 of the,Commission's 
Rules for unlicensed devices and, equipment approval




I am still wondering what is meant by unique for the connector.
I've seen you write that the N connector is NOT allowed.  Why is that?

Lonnie

On 4/26/07, Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Under the normal Part-15 rules, the only devices allowed to have a non
unique connector are devices labeled for and sold only to professional
installers.

The problem is, there isn't really a good explanation of what a part-15
professional installer is.

What I've been told by the FCC is that the intent is that any device 
where

it's easy to mix and match parts (remember that you could only use
specifically certified antennas before 2005) was to only be sold to a pro
installer.  Literally, it was illegal for a vendor to sell us an ap 
without

also including the cable and antenna for it.

To be a pro installer we're supposed to have been manufacturer trained on 
a
specific piece of gear (I was trained on p-com and wmux gear in the bad 
ol'

wpcs days).  The reasoning was that it's possible to use a certified
combination of radio, cable, and antenna, and STILL exceed the EIRP 
limits.

So we're supposed to have been trained on the device so we'd not
accidentally assemble and configure an illegal version of a legal kit.

The new rules specifically say that these rules do NOT apply to a device
designed for a professional installer.  If you're not sure that your 
device
is for a pro installer, look in the manual.  If it's got an n connector 
on
it, it should also say that it's only available to professional 
installers.


That rule has been TOTALLY ignored by everyone.  We are, as users of this
gear day in and day out, assumed to be professional installers so we 
don't
have to buy devices with only unique connectors or buy only in kits (like 
a

Linksys dsl router etc.).

Again, I'd LOVE to see a real mix and match capability where we could use
anyone's radio with anyone's amp and antenna.  But they clearly aren't 
yet

ready to go there.

Just to make sure I'm reading this correctly, I've asked for some time 
with

the head of OET (the FCC folks that write these rules).  I'll pass along
what he says once I'm able to talk to him about it.

Hope that helps,
Marlon
(509) 982-2181
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 
1999!

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



- Original Message -
From: Lonnie Nunweiler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 9:02 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Modifications of Parts 2 and 15 of the,Commission's
Rules for unlicensed devices and, equipment approval


I saw nothing about an N connector being disallowed.  It simply says
 that the connector(s) must be unique, and my contention is that an N
 connector is just as unique as a U.FL or RP-SMA.  Once something
 becomes an Industry Standard it sort of loses its uniqueness.

 Since every system must have an antenna and for maintenance purposes
 that antenna must be removable.  Just try and unsolder an antenna lead
 while hanging off a tower.  I doubt that is their intention and thus
 they would certainly allow a removable antenna.

 I do agree that they are worried about the consumer gear and having
 Joe Schmoe hook up a larger antenna to his Dlink, LinkSys or Zcom
 consumer router.

 For the ISP market the rules must have a bit more common sense, and I
 did see that in the document.  I felt it was a very positive step and
 one that will help the Industry in general.



 On 4/26/07, Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 wrote:

 I certainly DO want to mix and match.  Hell, it's going on all over
 anywhere, they're gonna have to legalize it sooner or later anyway. 
 The

 mix
 and match thing is way beyond anyone's ability to enforce it 
 anymore.

 However, it's still the law and shouldn't be done.

 This is the specific 

Re: [WISPA] Modifications of Parts 2 and 15 of the, Commission's Rules for unlicensed devices and,equipment approval

2007-04-26 Thread Scott Reed
Right.  And my point is, they should be easy to get certified.  How do 
we get the various SBC vendors we use to get their boards certified as 
non-intentional radiators that can hold intentionally radiating modules?


ralph wrote:

Laptop=Legal FCC Certified Computing Device
SBC=not
WRAP=not
RB=not

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Scott Reed
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 8:04 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Modifications of Parts 2 and 15 of the,Commission's
Rules for unlicensed devices and,equipment approval

Right, for the transmitter.  That is the mPCI card that goes in the 
laptop.  I am talking about the laptop itself.  Laptop = SBC = WRAP = RB 
= ???


Dawn DiPietro wrote:
  

Scott,

In order for the system to be certified it must include the modular 
transmitter and the antenna. If you did not include these parts what 
would you be certifying exactly?


As quoted from said document;

The modular transmitter must comply with the antenna requirements of 
Section 15.203
and 15.204(c). The antenna must either be permanently attached or 
employ a unique
antenna coupler (at all connections between the module and the 
antenna, including the
cable). Any antenna used with the module must be approved with the 
module, either at
the time of initial authorization or through a Class II permissive 
change. The
professional installation provision of Section 15.203 may not be 
applied to modules.


Regards,
Dawn DiPietro


Scott Reed wrote:

And look as I might, I have trouble find what antennae the card 
vendor is certified with.


From other discussions, I would ask a couple of additional 
questions.  If we assume we can find a mPCI card that has WISP usable 
antennae in its certification then:
1) Couldn't someone just get an RBxxx or WRAP or whatever SBC 
certified as a base unit and we could put the card in it?
2) If an SBC is certified without an enclosure, is it still certified 
if it is in a box?


Here is what I am thinking.  If we would get  an SBC certified bare 
as a base unit then we could use it with various cards in whatever 
enclosure we want to use.  The FCC seems to be interested in RF noise 
being emitted.  I don't think there are very many enclosures that 
increase the RF output, so if a bare SBC is certified, putting it in 
a box shouldn't negate the certification.  That would be like saying 
I can't put my laptop in a suitcase if the laptop is powered on.


If this is the case, getting some of the equipment many of  us use in 
our operations certified may not be as hard as once thought.  And if 
we can show the mPCI makers the advantage of including some of the 
antennae we use in their certifications, we may be able to legally 
use a lot more equipment.

Jack Unger wrote:
  

Scott,

I believe that your comments are substantially correct.

The main problem that I see with building our own equipment is that 
very few (if any) manufacturers of modular wireless cards have 
certified them with a range of usable external WISP-grade antennas. 
I don't think this 2nd Report and Order changes that. Also, remember 
that the software used must limit operation of the complete system 
only to those frequencies and power levels that are legal in the U.S.


jack


Scott Reed wrote:

I haven't read it really well and I have not yet looked up the 
referenced sections of Part 15, but I read the part that is not 
about split modular to be the part the refers to a PC.  And I 
read it that if the PC is certified to have radio cards AND the 
radio card is certified with an antenna, then that PC, radio card 
and antenna can be used.


So, if that is true, then Tim may be on the right track.  Jack is 
right, not any base, but I would read it that any certified 
base is doable.
I have often wondered how it works for laptops, but hadn't bothered 
to find it.  This makes sense.  Ubiquiti certifies the CM9 card 
with a set of antennae.  Dell certifies the laptop for a radio 
card.  Putting a CM9 in Dell's laptop is fine as long as it 
connects to an antenna, using the proper cable, that was certified 
with the CM9.


Therefore, if MT can get an RBxxx board certified as a base unit, 
we should be able to use a CM9 in that RBxxx with the proper 
antenna and be good.  The gotcha here is those sections of Part 
15 I have not yet followed up on.  I am not sure what the 
professional installer stuff is about.


What am I missing or is this good news?

Jack Unger wrote:
  

Tim,

I read the 2nd Report and Order and I don't see where it is saying 
that a certified mini PCI radio can be put into any base unit.


I think what the FCC is doing is:

1. Providing eight criteria that clarify the definition of what a 
legal modular assembly is.


2. Allowing some flexibility regarding on-module shielding, data 
inputs, and power supply regulation.


3. Clarifying the definition of what a split modular assembly is.

4. Defining the 

Re: [WISPA] Modifications of Parts 2 and 15 of the, Commission's Rules for unlicensed devices and, equipment approval

2007-04-26 Thread Tim Kerns

Marlon,

What does The professional installation provision of Section 15.203 say? 
and how does this change things?


I thought the professional installation only meant that the installer had 
the knowledge and was allowed by the FCC to determine what antenna and 
xmitter could work together without the complete assembly being certified as 
one.


To me the exclusion of this only means that again the radio module, 
firmware, and antenna have to be certified. Thus if the mfg did this with 
several different antenna then these modules with any of the certified 
combinations of antenna would be legal.


I'm not sure what an N connector has to do with this?  The rule says a 
unique connector. Don't know about you but a u.fl is about as unique as 
you can get and not for the consumer.


Tim


- Original Message - 
From: Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 8:11 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Modifications of Parts 2 and 15 of the,Commission's 
Rules for unlicensed devices and, equipment approval



I certainly DO want to mix and match.  Hell, it's going on all over 
anywhere, they're gonna have to legalize it sooner or later anyway.  The 
mix and match thing is way beyond anyone's ability to enforce it anymore. 
However, it's still the law and shouldn't be done.


This is the specific clause that applies to us:
may not be applied to modules.

If it's got an N connector on it, as does most of our gear, it's for 
professional installation only.


This new ruling is clearly aimed at the Dells, HPs, Toshibas etc. of the 
world.  Not at us.  If you can find a source at the FCC that'll say 
otherwise I'd LOVE to hear from them.  90% of the networks out there have 
changed something that will take them out of compliance, this rule would 
bring almost all of them back into compliance.


Marlon
(509) 982-2181
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 
1999!

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



- Original Message - 
From: Lonnie Nunweiler [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 4:27 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Modifications of Parts 2 and 15 of the,Commission's 
Rules for unlicensed devices and, equipment approval




Why were you waiting for that one?  It sounds like you do NOT want to
mix and match to suit the job.

You can mix and match, you just have to make sure that the
transmitters you mix are certified with the antennas you use.
Certified is certified.  It does not matter that you have other types
in use.  Imagine if you could not mix and match, since that would mean
you could not use Alvarion and Tranzeo on the same tower, which is
certainly not the intent.  Since you can clearly mix different systems
on a tower then it also holds that you can mix different transmitters
with a system.  Just keep each one meeting the proper requirements and
you should be OK.

The new regs are not regulating your entire network as a whole, but
rather are wanting individual parts to be proper.

Lonnie

On 4/25/07, Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:

THAT's the one I've been waiting for.

This pretty much rules out any intent what so ever that WE can use this 
to

mix and match transmitters.

Marlon
(509) 982-2181
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 
1999!

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



- Original Message -
From: Dawn DiPietro [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 2:58 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Modifications of Parts 2 and 15 of the,Commission's
Rules for unlicensed devices and,equipment approval


 Scott,

 In order for the system to be certified it must include the modular
 transmitter and the antenna. If you did not include these parts what 
 would

 you be certifying exactly?

 As quoted from said document;

 The modular transmitter must comply with the antenna requirements of
 Section 15.203
 and 15.204(c). The antenna must either be permanently attached or 
 employ a

 unique
 antenna coupler (at all connections between the module and the 
 antenna,

 including the
 cable). Any antenna used with the module must be approved with the 
 module,

 either at
 the time of initial authorization or through a Class II permissive 
 change.

 The
 professional installation provision of Section 15.203 may not be 
 applied

 to modules.

 Regards,
 Dawn DiPietro


 Scott Reed wrote:
 And look as I might, I have trouble find what antennae the card 
 vendor is

 certified with.

 From other discussions, I would ask a couple of additional questions. 
 If
 we assume we can find a mPCI card that has WISP usable antennae in 
 

Re: [WISPA] Modifications of Parts 2 and 15 of the, Commission's Rules for unlicensed devices and, equipment approval

2007-04-26 Thread Tim Kerns


- Original Message - 
From: Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181
This new ruling is clearly aimed at the Dells, HPs, Toshibas etc. of the 
world.  Not at us.  If you can find a source at the FCC that'll say 
otherwise I'd LOVE to hear from them.  90% of the networks out there have 
changed something that will take them out of compliance, this rule would 
bring almost all of them back into compliance.


This is where I don't see that we are any different. What is the difference 
between an IPAQ, Dell, and SBC's  like WRAP, Gateworks, Metro, etc. They are 
computers, they are base units that a radio module is installed into, they 
run an OS. Their primary purpose is to be a computer and we the WISP 
community have used them to become AP's or Clients. My Dell laptop with it's 
installed minipci radio is a Client. And if I chose to install other 
software it can be an AP. The only thing I see my laptop from being legal is 
if I chose to attach a different antenna than what is already there. But if 
the manufacture of that radio had certified it with say a 24bd grid then I 
could attach that grid to the laptop and still be legal.


Again this is MY wishful understanding of this new rule.

Tim

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Modifications of Parts 2 and 15 of the, Commission's Rules for unlicensed devices and, equipment approval

2007-04-26 Thread Lonnie Nunweiler

I saw nothing about an N connector being disallowed.  It simply says
that the connector(s) must be unique, and my contention is that an N
connector is just as unique as a U.FL or RP-SMA.  Once something
becomes an Industry Standard it sort of loses its uniqueness.

Since every system must have an antenna and for maintenance purposes
that antenna must be removable.  Just try and unsolder an antenna lead
while hanging off a tower.  I doubt that is their intention and thus
they would certainly allow a removable antenna.

I do agree that they are worried about the consumer gear and having
Joe Schmoe hook up a larger antenna to his Dlink, LinkSys or Zcom
consumer router.

For the ISP market the rules must have a bit more common sense, and I
did see that in the document.  I felt it was a very positive step and
one that will help the Industry in general.



On 4/26/07, Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

I certainly DO want to mix and match.  Hell, it's going on all over
anywhere, they're gonna have to legalize it sooner or later anyway.  The mix
and match thing is way beyond anyone's ability to enforce it anymore.
However, it's still the law and shouldn't be done.

This is the specific clause that applies to us:
 The professional installation provision of Section 15.203 may not be
applied to modules.

If it's got an N connector on it, as does most of our gear, it's for
professional installation only.

This new ruling is clearly aimed at the Dells, HPs, Toshibas etc. of the
world.  Not at us.  If you can find a source at the FCC that'll say
otherwise I'd LOVE to hear from them.  90% of the networks out there have
changed something that will take them out of compliance, this rule would
bring almost all of them back into compliance.

Marlon
(509) 982-2181
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



--
Lonnie Nunweiler
Valemount Networks Corporation
http://www.star-os.com/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Modifications of Parts 2 and 15 of the, Commission's Rules for unlicensed devices and, equipment approval

2007-04-26 Thread Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181
Under the normal Part-15 rules, the only devices allowed to have a non 
unique connector are devices labeled for and sold only to professional 
installers.


The problem is, there isn't really a good explanation of what a part-15 
professional installer is.


What I've been told by the FCC is that the intent is that any device where 
it's easy to mix and match parts (remember that you could only use 
specifically certified antennas before 2005) was to only be sold to a pro 
installer.  Literally, it was illegal for a vendor to sell us an ap without 
also including the cable and antenna for it.


To be a pro installer we're supposed to have been manufacturer trained on a 
specific piece of gear (I was trained on p-com and wmux gear in the bad ol' 
wpcs days).  The reasoning was that it's possible to use a certified 
combination of radio, cable, and antenna, and STILL exceed the EIRP limits. 
So we're supposed to have been trained on the device so we'd not 
accidentally assemble and configure an illegal version of a legal kit.


The new rules specifically say that these rules do NOT apply to a device 
designed for a professional installer.  If you're not sure that your device 
is for a pro installer, look in the manual.  If it's got an n connector on 
it, it should also say that it's only available to professional installers.


That rule has been TOTALLY ignored by everyone.  We are, as users of this 
gear day in and day out, assumed to be professional installers so we don't 
have to buy devices with only unique connectors or buy only in kits (like a 
Linksys dsl router etc.).


Again, I'd LOVE to see a real mix and match capability where we could use 
anyone's radio with anyone's amp and antenna.  But they clearly aren't yet 
ready to go there.


Just to make sure I'm reading this correctly, I've asked for some time with 
the head of OET (the FCC folks that write these rules).  I'll pass along 
what he says once I'm able to talk to him about it.


Hope that helps,
Marlon
(509) 982-2181
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



- Original Message - 
From: Lonnie Nunweiler [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 9:02 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Modifications of Parts 2 and 15 of the,Commission's 
Rules for unlicensed devices and, equipment approval




I saw nothing about an N connector being disallowed.  It simply says
that the connector(s) must be unique, and my contention is that an N
connector is just as unique as a U.FL or RP-SMA.  Once something
becomes an Industry Standard it sort of loses its uniqueness.

Since every system must have an antenna and for maintenance purposes
that antenna must be removable.  Just try and unsolder an antenna lead
while hanging off a tower.  I doubt that is their intention and thus
they would certainly allow a removable antenna.

I do agree that they are worried about the consumer gear and having
Joe Schmoe hook up a larger antenna to his Dlink, LinkSys or Zcom
consumer router.

For the ISP market the rules must have a bit more common sense, and I
did see that in the document.  I felt it was a very positive step and
one that will help the Industry in general.



On 4/26/07, Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

I certainly DO want to mix and match.  Hell, it's going on all over
anywhere, they're gonna have to legalize it sooner or later anyway.  The 
mix

and match thing is way beyond anyone's ability to enforce it anymore.
However, it's still the law and shouldn't be done.

This is the specific clause that applies to us:
 The professional installation provision of Section 15.203 may not be
applied to modules.

If it's got an N connector on it, as does most of our gear, it's for
professional installation only.

This new ruling is clearly aimed at the Dells, HPs, Toshibas etc. of the
world.  Not at us.  If you can find a source at the FCC that'll say
otherwise I'd LOVE to hear from them.  90% of the networks out there have
changed something that will take them out of compliance, this rule would
bring almost all of them back into compliance.

Marlon
(509) 982-2181
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 
1999!

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



--
Lonnie Nunweiler
Valemount Networks Corporation
http://www.star-os.com/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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


Re: [WISPA] Modifications of Parts 2 and 15 of the, Commission's Rules for unlicensed devices and, equipment approval

2007-04-26 Thread Tim Kerns

Please see inline...


- Original Message - 
From: Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 6:00 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Modifications of Parts 2 and 15 of the,Commission's 
Rules for unlicensed devices and, equipment approval



Under the normal Part-15 rules, the only devices allowed to have a non 
unique connector are devices labeled for and sold only to professional 
installers.


The problem is, there isn't really a good explanation of what a part-15 
professional installer is.


What I've been told by the FCC is that the intent is that any device where 
it's easy to mix and match parts (remember that you could only use 
specifically certified antennas before 2005) was to only be sold to a pro 
installer.  Literally, it was illegal for a vendor to sell us an ap 
without also including the cable and antenna for it.


To be a pro installer we're supposed to have been manufacturer trained on 
a specific piece of gear (I was trained on p-com and wmux gear in the bad 
ol' wpcs days).  The reasoning was that it's possible to use a certified 
combination of radio, cable, and antenna, and STILL exceed the EIRP 
limits. So we're supposed to have been trained on the device so we'd not 
accidentally assemble and configure an illegal version of a legal kit.


up to here I agreewith you.



The new rules specifically say that these rules do NOT apply to a device 
designed for a professional installer.  If you're not sure that your 
device is for a pro installer, look in the manual.  If it's got an n 
connector on it, it should also say that it's only available to 
professional installers.

***

From the new rule:
4. The modular transmitter must comply with the antenna requirements of 
Section 15.203 and 15.204(c). The antenna must either be permanently 
attached or employ a unique antenna coupler (at all connections between 
the module and the antenna, including the cable). Any antenna used with the 
module must be approved with the module, either at the time of initial 
authorization or through a Class II permissive change. The professional 
installation provision of Section 15.203 may not be applied to modules.


In other words it MUST ALWAYS have a unique connector

***
This from part 15 says that the unique conector is NOT required if 
intended for a professional installer The N connector is considered a 
unique connector
Section 15.203 Antenna requirement.An intentional radiator shall be designed 
to ensure that no antenna other than that furnished by the responsible party 
shall be used with the device. The use of a permanently attached antenna or 
of an antenna that uses a unique coupling to the intentional radiator shall 
be considered sufficient to comply with the provisions of this Section. The 
manufacturer may design the unit so that a broken antenna can be replaced by 
the user, but the use of a standard antenna jack or electrical connector is 
prohibited. This requirement does not apply to carrier current devices or to 
devices operated under the provisions of Sections 15.211, 15.213, 15.217, 
15.219, or 15.221. Further, this requirement does not apply to intentional 
radiators that must be professionally installed, such as perimeter 
protection systems and some field disturbance sensors, or to other 
intentional radiators which, in accordance with Section 15.31(d), must be 
measured at the installation site. However, the installer shall be 
responsible for ensuring that theproper antenna is employed so that the 
limits in this Part are not exceeded.


**


That rule has been TOTALLY ignored by everyone.  We are, as users of this 
gear day in and day out, assumed to be professional installers so we don't 
have to buy devices with only unique connectors or buy only in kits (like 
a Linksys dsl router etc.).


TRUE. all radios are to be sold with cable and antennas



Again, I'd LOVE to see a real mix and match capability where we could use 
anyone's radio with anyone's amp and antenna.  But they clearly aren't yet 
ready to go there.


The mix/match can still ONLY be with antennas that were certified with the 
radio module / firmware.




Just to make sure I'm reading this correctly, I've asked for some time 
with the head of OET (the FCC folks that write these rules).  I'll pass 
along what he says once I'm able to talk to him about it.


Thanks, looking forward to response.



Hope that helps,
Marlon
(509) 982-2181
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 
1999!

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



- 

Re: [WISPA] Modifications of Parts 2 and 15 of the, Commission's Rules for unlicensed devices and, equipment approval

2007-04-26 Thread Lonnie Nunweiler

I am still wondering what is meant by unique for the connector.
I've seen you write that the N connector is NOT allowed.  Why is that?

Lonnie

On 4/26/07, Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Under the normal Part-15 rules, the only devices allowed to have a non
unique connector are devices labeled for and sold only to professional
installers.

The problem is, there isn't really a good explanation of what a part-15
professional installer is.

What I've been told by the FCC is that the intent is that any device where
it's easy to mix and match parts (remember that you could only use
specifically certified antennas before 2005) was to only be sold to a pro
installer.  Literally, it was illegal for a vendor to sell us an ap without
also including the cable and antenna for it.

To be a pro installer we're supposed to have been manufacturer trained on a
specific piece of gear (I was trained on p-com and wmux gear in the bad ol'
wpcs days).  The reasoning was that it's possible to use a certified
combination of radio, cable, and antenna, and STILL exceed the EIRP limits.
So we're supposed to have been trained on the device so we'd not
accidentally assemble and configure an illegal version of a legal kit.

The new rules specifically say that these rules do NOT apply to a device
designed for a professional installer.  If you're not sure that your device
is for a pro installer, look in the manual.  If it's got an n connector on
it, it should also say that it's only available to professional installers.

That rule has been TOTALLY ignored by everyone.  We are, as users of this
gear day in and day out, assumed to be professional installers so we don't
have to buy devices with only unique connectors or buy only in kits (like a
Linksys dsl router etc.).

Again, I'd LOVE to see a real mix and match capability where we could use
anyone's radio with anyone's amp and antenna.  But they clearly aren't yet
ready to go there.

Just to make sure I'm reading this correctly, I've asked for some time with
the head of OET (the FCC folks that write these rules).  I'll pass along
what he says once I'm able to talk to him about it.

Hope that helps,
Marlon
(509) 982-2181
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since 1999!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



- Original Message -
From: Lonnie Nunweiler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 9:02 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Modifications of Parts 2 and 15 of the,Commission's
Rules for unlicensed devices and, equipment approval


I saw nothing about an N connector being disallowed.  It simply says
 that the connector(s) must be unique, and my contention is that an N
 connector is just as unique as a U.FL or RP-SMA.  Once something
 becomes an Industry Standard it sort of loses its uniqueness.

 Since every system must have an antenna and for maintenance purposes
 that antenna must be removable.  Just try and unsolder an antenna lead
 while hanging off a tower.  I doubt that is their intention and thus
 they would certainly allow a removable antenna.

 I do agree that they are worried about the consumer gear and having
 Joe Schmoe hook up a larger antenna to his Dlink, LinkSys or Zcom
 consumer router.

 For the ISP market the rules must have a bit more common sense, and I
 did see that in the document.  I felt it was a very positive step and
 one that will help the Industry in general.



 On 4/26/07, Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 I certainly DO want to mix and match.  Hell, it's going on all over
 anywhere, they're gonna have to legalize it sooner or later anyway.  The
 mix
 and match thing is way beyond anyone's ability to enforce it anymore.
 However, it's still the law and shouldn't be done.

 This is the specific clause that applies to us:
  The professional installation provision of Section 15.203 may not be
 applied to modules.

 If it's got an N connector on it, as does most of our gear, it's for
 professional installation only.

 This new ruling is clearly aimed at the Dells, HPs, Toshibas etc. of the
 world.  Not at us.  If you can find a source at the FCC that'll say
 otherwise I'd LOVE to hear from them.  90% of the networks out there have
 changed something that will take them out of compliance, this rule would
 bring almost all of them back into compliance.

 Marlon
 (509) 982-2181
 (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)Consulting services
 42846865 (icq)WISP Operator since
 1999!
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
 www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam


 --
 Lonnie Nunweiler
 Valemount Networks Corporation
 http://www.star-os.com/
 --
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

 Archives: 

Re: [WISPA] Modifications of Parts 2 and 15 of the, Commission's Rules for unlicensed devices and, equipment approval

2007-04-25 Thread George Rogato

Ralph, you hit the mark.
The sbc guys need to get their stuff tested and certified.
End of story. If some can't do it and others do, they will soon be 
without sales. That ought to drive them to conform.


I can see the domino effect starting.

ADI has done a very good thing for us. The pressure is on the other guys 
now.


George


ralph wrote:

I'm just trying to say that most of these boards have never been certified
to even use as a computing device in the US.  They could be putting out
spurs and harmonics all over the aircraft band or anywhere else.

I had an SBC once whose crystal oscillator was putting out a strong signal
right on 146.055 MHZ, the input of a local Ham repeater. It shut them
completely down until I could get there and shut the computer off.
Manufacturer had me pad the crystal with a capacitor.  Moved the spur off to
who knows where else. Hopefully not to the aircraft distress frequency or
something like that.  This board was not FCC certified either.

I have a Routerboard 153 sitting here on my desk.
Nowhere on it is an FCC compliance note about its compliance as an
unintentional radiator.  




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mark Koskenmaki
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 10:26 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Modifications of Parts 2 and 15 of the,Commission's
Rules for unlicensed devices and, equipment approval


- Original Message - 
From: ralph [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: 'WISPA General List' wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 6:42 PM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] Modifications of Parts 2 and 15 of the,Commission's
Rules for unlicensed devices and,equipment approval



Laptop=Legal FCC Certified Computing Device
SBC=not
WRAP=not
RB=not



I'm not sure what you're trying to say here...

I know that lots of SBC's have been certified within systems, and gettting
them certified outside of systems, as unintentional radiators should be...
well.. almost trivial.
 I don't think a WRAP board has been, but then, the WRAP is now obsolete.
The various RB / Compex / Gateworks, etc SBC's are nothing but PARTS of
already certified systems.   The CPU's and other parts are common parts.
They'd probably qualify under plain old declaration of compliance rules.




--
George Rogato

Welcome to WISPA

www.wispa.org

http://signup.wispa.org/
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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