Where did this relevant paragraph come from? I like the mention of me but I can't take credit for it. I use the information from the FCC data, just happen to be pretty good at mapping the information. Most people could do a simple search channel by channel in the FCC database and get maps. This requirement should be easy to meet. I have said before that we should also be able to use the methods yet to be approved for 5.4 GHz stuff. If it's good enough not to broadcast over radar it should work for TV stations too. The idea of some FM or TV station sending some control signal scares me. That's like leaving the mouse in charge of the cheese factory. Who gets a say in what they put on that control channel. Spectrum sensing should be a no brainer and would work fine. It still irks the crap out of me that they worry about this anyway. So few people receive signals off the air that they won't notice any low power spread spectrum signals. Politics................ at least all these failed muni projects will force some spectrum policy though. It'll take a couple of years but it'll happen.
From: Ron Wallace [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2006 4:25 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] tv white spaces update and a question for you guysHere is the relevant paragraph."The Notice proposed to require that fixed unlicensed devices incorporate a geo-location method such as GPS or be professionally installed, and that they access a database to identify vacant channels at their location. It proposed to require that portable unlicensed devices operate only when they receive a control signal from a source such as an FM or TV station that identifies the vacant TV channels in that particular area. The Commission also sought comment on the use of spectrum sensing to identify vacant TV channels, but did not propose any specific technical requirements for devices that use spectrum sensing."The GPS requirement does not seem to present a problem, for Fixed Wireless, many GPs devices cna be incorporated into any PC. As for a data base that exists and is available from Brian Webster [EMAIL PROTECTED] , or could be accomodated to ID vacant channels at a given location. If this is all that is required the information is already available.For "Portable Unlicensed devices" the requirement is more difficult, I admit. But to run a test for fixed unlicensed devices this should be much more straight forward.What do you guys think?Ron Wallace
220 S. Jackson Dt.
Addison, MI 49220
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From: John Scrivner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2006 01:17 PM
>To: 'WISPA General List'
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] tv white spaces update and a question for you guys
>I would think a better approach would be to work with Intel or another
>company who is already building prototypes to get a test system built
>and have WISPs become the operations portion of a test for this type of
>technology. A converted WiFi unit will not have any of the existing GPS
>or sniffing capabilities required in the NPRM. If we are going to become
>part of the solution then we need to have something capable of doing
>what is being asked in the NPRM.
>Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 wrote:
>> Hi All,
>> Looks like we're still TWO years away from being able to use the white
>> spaces. In a month we'll see the first draft rules from the FCC.
>> It looks like what they want to do is to get some testing data. I'd
>> like to propose to them that we be allowed to build a few test systems
>> using 2.4 ghz to tv band converters. Similar to the 2.4 to 900mhz
>> I think it's important to have the support of WISPA on this, officially.
>> (509) 982-2181 Equipment sales
>> (408) 907-6910 (Vonage) Consulting services
>> 42846865 (icq) And I run my own wisp!
>> 220.127.116.11 (net meeting)
>WISPA Wireless List: email@example.com
-- WISPA Wireless List: firstname.lastname@example.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless