There may be a problem with this, but until some ruling comes down, that is how I read 15.23. And I may be wrong, but IMHO "you guys' on this BAWUG list are both within the spirit and intent of the FCC rules here, as long as you keep within the ERP and TPO (transmitter power output) limitations.
Now if you building systems for resale or providing a service, that is entirely different, but if you want to homebrew and experiment with antennas, coax, amps and other RF devices for your own personal use, that is exactly what 15.23 is all about. Now, I'm not a attorney, but that is how I read the rules. Remember, "certification" is just required for resale. It is not the 1000 mile brickwall as someone pointed out. -- Jeff King, [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 11/28/2002 On Thu, 28 Nov 2002 18:48:01 -0500 (EST), Dan Lanciani wrote: >Jeff King [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >|On Thu, 28 Nov 2002 11:05:59 -0800, Todd Boyle wrote: >|>Let me see if I understand this right. The FCC has issued >|>regulations, >|>presumably conforming to US legislation, that vendors can provide >|>external connectors but only if they are proprietary? >| >|Yes, although not clear to me what "proprietary' means considering >some of >|them you can mail order from DigiKey. Also, just about everyone I >have seen >|has a standard PCB footprint, so if the "proprietary' connector >bothers you, >|just unsolder it and put a standard one on (<5 15.23). > >There is a problem with this, and it does at least slightly support >Todd's >concern. Some (many?) vendors claim that the FCC takes the position >that >15.23 does not apply to modifications of (or composite systems >created from) >components that were certified. Few people have the facilities >required to >truly "home build" 802.11 gear from scratch. Some vendors go >further and >claim that the requirement that a Part 15 intentional radiator be >used only >with an antenna with which it has been certified voids 15.23 >entirely since >a home-built device will have been certified with no antenna. > >Now, I may have a skewed perspective, but my recollection is that >Part 15 >operation was originally available to everyone. Then we got type >acceptance >because of massive rules abuses on the part of the vendors, >importers, and >manufacturers--not because of users tinkering too much. The wording >of what >was then analogous to 15.23 (I don't remember if it was the same >section) made >it clear that type acceptance was not intended to reserve Part 15 >operation >for commercial products only. Eventually type acceptance was >replaced with >certification, and somewhere along the way "use" was added to some >lists of >activities requiring certification along with >manufacture/import/sale. So >restrictions that once were supposed to protect us from commercial >abuses have >to some extent been reversed to give commercial concerns more >control over the >public's use of the public's unlicensed spectrum. Clearly this is >advantageous >to vendors who can charge a significant markup on a commodity >antenna by adding >it (under their own name) to their list of certified configurations. >In effect, >vendors are getting many of the customer-control advantages of >licensed services >without themselves having to do as much paperwork (or pay recurring >fees). > > Dan Lanciani > ddl@danlan.*com >-- >general wireless list, a bawug thing <http://www.bawug.org/> >[un]subscribe: http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless -- general wireless list, a bawug thing <http://www.bawug.org/> [un]subscribe: http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
