Tom, I had to go and read where I said we don't need more spectrum. Sadly I cannot find that statement.
I did, however, say that we must learn to use what we have before we should be given any more. When someone is not responsible with their spectrum allocation it is stupid to give them more and expect things to be fixed by getting more. We already have an incredible amount of bandwidth, but it is being squandered by a few clueless people. Lonnie On 8/5/05, Tom DeReggi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Marlon and Lonnie, > > First Off, Lonnie I fully agree with your point that we should not suggest > rules that discourage good design or make it to easy to do poor designs. > > However, saying we don't need more spectrum is rediculous, expecially in > these urban areas with lots of competition. We need to gain access to every > ounce of spectrum that we can. > > I FULLY agree with Marlon, that it would be a GREAT idea to find a way to > have 6 Ghz more usable for us. It is factual that the 6 foot antenna > requirement makes it near impossible for most WISPs to use the band cost > effectively. I personally am effected by this and could have need for the > band. However doing away with the large antenna rule all togeather I think > would be a mistake. A PtP band with safety rules is advantageous. I'd > suggest asking to modify the rules to the extent necessary to make it usable > for us. For example, what if the min antenna size requirement was reduced > down to a 3 ft dish? Thats still down to around 5 degrees, and pretty easy > getting approval for a 3 ft dish. > > Marlon, whats the most cost effective 6 Ghz radios on the market today, > excluding the antennas? Just so I understand the ball park we are talking > about. When you say Licenced is still twice the cost, that doesn't mean much > unless you identify wether you were talking about unlicenced redline or > Trango :-) > > Tom DeReggi > RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Lonnie Nunweiler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "WISPA General List" > <firstname.lastname@example.org> > Sent: Friday, August 05, 2005 11:50 AM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 6 foot 6ghz antenna rule > > > >I think you guys are wrong on this. This is still a ptp band and it's > >licensed. So interference issues can be dealt with. > > > > As for links that are not correctly aimed. Why in the world would we want > > to give up on what could be a very useful rule change just because some > > minority (probably a very small minority) will likely screw up? > > > > Think, instead about how nice it would be if the manufacturers could > > modify today's relatively cheap 5 gig radios to do 6 gig. It's not all > > that much of a leap. But today MANY of you couldn't use that gear because > > you'd never be able to mount the antennas. Or because it's licensed gear > > it's still nearly twice the cost of unlicensed. > > > > It's easy to come up with reasons not to make changes. A man once told me > > that if no one ever changed we'd still all be eating with our fingers. > > Your points are valid but I don't think they are likely enough to happen > > that it'll matter. Or we can take steps now to deal with those issues. > > Again, it's a licensed band, interference isn't really an issue. You have > > protection against that. > > > > I've got a customer in Fresno that's got no place to go with 2.4 or 900. > > He's using VERY high end radios in the 5 gig bands. Even the big boy toys > > won't work well anymore. Even ptp links. He's getting by but it's > > getting much harder all of the time. He needs the 6 gig band to pull some > > ptp links around but can't use them because of the antenna size issue. > > > > And lets not forget about the cost part of the mix. 6' antennas are > > listing for $1800 in the EC cat without a raydome. That's for a good > > Radio Waves unit, but still. > > > > I really can't see a down side to trying that comes anywhere near the > > potential upside. I see a few that don't think it's a good thing. Do the > > rest of you agree with that? I happen to think that anything that gives > > us more flexibility without letting the bad people out there do bad things > > is a good thing to try to do. > > > > Marlon > > (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales > > (408) 907-6910 (Vonage) Consulting services > > 42846865 (icq) And I run my own wisp! > > 18.104.22.168 (net meeting) > > www.odessaoffice.com/wireless > > www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Lonnie Nunweiler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "WISPA General List" <email@example.com> > > Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 9:28 PM > > Subject: Re: [WISPA] 6 foot 6ghz antenna rule > > > > > > APC is useless if the antennas are not aimed properly or the distance > > is excessive for the antenna gain. These conditions will cause the > > transmitters to pump out full volume, and if the antennas are your > > lower gain variety that means spraying noise everywhere. > > > > I would recommend leaving the nice tight 6 foot dishes. That simple > > rule keeps the band clean for those long distance shots, instead of > > polluting it for close in shots. > > > > You guys have to start asking yourself what you are doing wrong if you > > continually need more bands. The growing trend to higher power and > > wide beam antennas has to stop. We are now doing a shot with 3 foot > > antennas and the CM9 Atheros radios in the 5 GHz band that is just > > over 52 miles and pulling -71 to -77 dB (variance through the day), > > yet I see people lining and almost drooling for the 400 mW high power > > cards. > > > > In short, most guys have little RF knowledge and they naturally take > > the easy way. I would expect to see 400 mW cards and patch antennas > > if the rules get changed as you are proposing. > > > > I say that is a mistake. > > > > Regards, > > Lonnie > > > > > > On 8/4/05, Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Hi All, > >> > >> For those that don't know, the 6 gig band is licensed ptp only. It's a > >> pretty cheap license and you can get a LOT of throughput for very long > >> distances. > >> > >> For short (less than 50 miles :-) the 6' antenna requirement often kills > >> the > >> deal because of size limits on what towers can handle. Or the building > >> owner doesn't want such large antennas etc. > >> > >> Certainly for something that just shoots a mile or three up the road it's > >> a > >> tough rule to deal with. > >> > >> I'm not exactly sure how to go about it but I've got the name of the > >> person > >> at the FCC that'll help us if we'd like to request a rule change. > >> > >> I'd like to suggest that we push for elimination of the 6' antenna rule > >> for > >> the 6 gig band. If people are worried about undue interference in the > >> band > >> due to the wider beam antennas we could toss out an APC (automatic power > >> control) requirement to use smaller antennas. > >> > >> Thoughts? > >> Marlon > >> (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales > >> (408) 907-6910 (Vonage) Consulting services > >> 42846865 (icq) And I run my own wisp! > >> 22.214.171.124 (net meeting) > >> www.odessaoffice.com/wireless > >> www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> WISPA Wireless List: firstname.lastname@example.org > >> > >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > >> > >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > >> > > > > > > -- > > Lonnie Nunweiler > > Valemount Networks Corporation > > http://www.star-os.com/ > > -- > > WISPA Wireless List: email@example.com > > > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > -- > > WISPA Wireless List: firstname.lastname@example.org > > > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > > > > -- > > No virus found in this incoming message. > > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > > Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.10.1/64 - Release Date: 8/4/2005 > > > > > > -- > WISPA Wireless List: email@example.com > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > -- Lonnie Nunweiler Valemount Networks Corporation http://www.star-os.com/ -- WISPA Wireless List: firstname.lastname@example.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/