Actually, didn't you just agree with me that 15.23 allows experimenter's to do just that now?
Now, what you suggest is a good thing for the WISP's and manufacturer's who can't market products under 15.23. -- Jeff King, [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 12/1/2002 On Sun, 1 Dec 2002 13:10:04 -0800, Patrick Leary wrote: >I left out one key point that should be noted (and it should make >everyone >here happy). As a result of our side of the industry's requests of >the SPTF, >their recent report specifically makes note that future rules >revisions >regarding unlicensed should permit professional installers to >configure >their own combinations of antennas, cables and connectors so long as >the >power rules are not violated. The FCC recognizes that the certified >systems >rule may be too restrictive with regard to passive components. Do >not expect >this, however, to extend to include active devices like amps and >frequency >convertors. > >Thank your peers in the commercial side of the business for this >expected >rules revision. > >Patrick J. Leary >Chief Evangelist, Alvarion, Inc. >Executive Committee Member, WCA/LEA >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Ph: 760.494.4717 >Cell: 770.331.5849 >Fax: 509.479.2374 > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Patrick Leary [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Sunday, December 01, 2002 12:28 PM >To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' >Subject: RE: [BAWUG] CNN Aricle.. > > >Jeff, >Since Part 15 was written long before these systems emerged. I am >told that >the "professional installer" verbage was originally intended to >address some >scientific radio systems. However, I have been party to >conversations with >FCC folks regarding how this clause translates with respect to this >industry >in their opinion. (It is worth noting, that since the rules are thus >written >and codified, even FCC opinion matters less than legal >interpretation of the >verbiage until such time as the rule is formally amended with >explicit >verbiage addressing these applications.) > >The verbiage was intended to be common sense sort of straight forward >understanding of "professional," namely, someone formally trained in >the >discipline in which they are engaged. Qualifying the notion of >training is >is very diffiult, but in general, think of it like you would think >of an >electrician. An professional electrician available by hire is >expected to >know the NEC codes AND to abide by them. They have access to >techniques and >systems the general public may not have obvious access. If you are >paying >for the install, the FCC presumes the installer to be professional. >The FCC >assumes such a person will know that radio x, that uses standard >connectors, >may only be mated with antennas certified with the radio. > >The FCC also demands that manufacturers make sure that vendors train >installers to make sure the rules are followed and their systems are >installed per FCC dictates. Again, that burden is nebulous too. From >a >vendor standpoint, we historically offered extensive free training, >hoping >that would meet the requirements at least from a standpoint of good >faith. > >However, one point can be definitively made - even a professional >installer >may not violate the "certified systems" rules. They must install only >certified systems. They may not assemble their own solution >customizations. >They may not exceed power limits. These are not debatable points. >That is >the intent and the written rule. > >Patrick J. Leary >Chief Evangelist, Alvarion, Inc. >Executive Committee Member, WCA/LEA >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Ph: 760.494.4717 >Cell: 770.331.5849 >Fax: 509.479.2374 > > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Jeff King [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Sunday, December 01, 2002 11:46 AM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' >Subject: RE: [BAWUG] CNN Aricle.. > > >Patrick: > >While I see the term at least once in the Part 15 rules >"professionally >installed" I have yet to know from a legal standpoint what this >means to the > >FCC. > >Since you used the term "professional unlicensed" are you aware of >exactly >what this means? (to the FCC) > >Thanks > >-- >Jeff King, [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 12/1/2002 > > >On Sun, 1 Dec 2002 10:49:57 -0800, Patrick Leary wrote: >>...and that is one of the major differentiators of Wi-Fi radios with >>professional unlicensed wireless broadband systems. They are >>intended and >>required to do much more, and to do it in a much more RF-hostile >>environment. This is no slight against Wi-Fi. >> >>Think of it as an attempt to explain the difference between a >>consumer >>automobile designed surface streets and a commercial grade offroad >>cargo >>hauler. >> >>Patrick J. Leary >>Chief Evangelist, Alvarion, Inc. >>Executive Committee Member, WCA/LEA >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Ph: 760.494.4717 >>Cell: 770.331.5849 >>Fax: 509.479.2374 >> >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Todd Boyle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >>Sent: Saturday, November 30, 2002 1:03 PM >>To: Chris Petrell; [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Subject: Re: [BAWUG] CNN Aricle.. >> >> >> >>>WiFi activists on free Web crusade >>>http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/11/21/yourtech.wifis/index.html >>>...Richard Dineen, senior analyst at UK-based consultancy Ovum said >>>"I think WiFi will act as a compliment to 3G. Its success is >>>heavily >>>dependent on people setting up good business models as it is more >>>expensive than most people think." >>> >>>... he says WiFi enthusiasts forget that running a public network >>>is >>>difficult. >>> >>>..You need a good network management layer, billing service and >>>user >>>software so they don't hog all the available bandwidth." >> >>Hear hear. >> >>Owner-operated community networks cannot give serious competition >>to central-controlled capitalist models, unless every node has a way >>to >>communicate some economic signals to other nodes. In my opinion, >>a small payable /receivable event table would suffice. >> >>When another node is significant enough to exist in your router >>table or >>to be "permitted" in your filters then it might perhaps, be >>transparently >>created as an account in your payable/receivable system. Nodes >>could submit bills and the other party could drop them or walk down >>the street and pay them. >> >>The most critical problem is efficiently communicating and >>administering >>the amounts, not measuring traffic, or good heavens not settlement >>such >>as digital coins. Just a common framework to send a bill for x >>cents would >>be sufficient. >> >>(any number of small but useful applications are possible on >>community >>networks, for example, schemes for registering latitude/longitude of >>your >>node, schemes for emergency or distress pings, schemes for robust >>identity, reputation or encryption, etc. All of these ideas are >>lost in the >>background noise. How can society compete with the marketing of >>companies like Microsoft who spends $5.2 billion/year on R&D and >>more on marketing? $5.2 billion is enough for 50,000 fulltime >>people >>at $100,000 per year. The egyptian pharaohs built the pyramids >>with such numbers ...an equally useless piece of crap) >> >>Todd >> >>-- >>general wireless list, a bawug thing <http://www.bawug.org/> >>[un]subscribe: http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>-------------------------------------------------------------------- >>- >>------- >>---------------------------------------- >>This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and >>intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom >>they are addressed. >>If you have received this email in error please notify the >>originator of the message. This footer also confirms that this >>email message has been scanned for the presence of computer viruses. >> >>Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual >>sender, except where the sender specifies and with authority, >>states them to be the views of Alvarion Inc. >> >>Scanning of this message and addition of this footer is performed >>by SurfControl SuperScout Email Filter software in conjunction with >>virus detection software. >>-- >>general wireless list, a bawug thing <http://www.bawug.org/> >>[un]subscribe: http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >------- >---------------------------------------- >This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and >intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom >they are addressed. >If you have received this email in error please notify the >originator of the message. This footer also confirms that this >email message has been scanned for the presence of computer viruses. > >Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual >sender, except where the sender specifies and with authority, >states them to be the views of Alvarion Inc. > >Scanning of this message and addition of this footer is performed >by SurfControl SuperScout Email Filter software in conjunction with >virus detection software. >-- >general wireless list, a bawug thing <http://www.bawug.org/> >[un]subscribe: http://lists.bawug.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >------- >---------------------------------------- >This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and >intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom >they are addressed. >If you have received this email in error please notify the >originator of the message. This footer also confirms that this >email message has been scanned for the presence of computer viruses. > >Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual >sender, except where the sender specifies and with authority, >states them to be the views of Alvarion Inc. > >Scanning of this message and addition of this footer is performed >by SurfControl SuperScout Email Filter software in conjunction with >virus detection software. >-- >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
