Howdy,

I was an active member of the ASTM DSRC sandards formulating committee for roughly 2 yrs (2000-2001). This is all familiar stuff, and I appreciate seeing the URL to see how the effort has proceeded.

John wrote:
Actually I was told that this is above the existing UNII band frequencies. I was told this has nothing to do with existing frequencies we use for our networks.

Yes, and no. Most of the DSRC rules deal with the band above the existing UNII band, true enough. But DSRC is intended to be populated by DUAL-BAND units (spoken to briefly in this FCC order). In fact, one of the issues petitioned was to recommend action to SAVE the DSRC band from being destroyed by malicious wifi usage by dual-band units ... which the commission has apparently rejected for the moment according to this order.

Rick Smith raises the concern for usage in the neighboring DSRC band:
yep, just like paging's "Just above" the 900 mhz unlicensed bands but makes
926 and above useless.   See ... ?

Yeah, that is a valid concern. They're contemplating a lot of outdoor units (like one in every American car). FYI, when I left the activity ASTM was recommending DSRC use a 10MHz wide 802.11a variant with limited power, and road-side units of limited height. They're not trying to do multiple miles. When DSRC applications are broken into short-medium-&-long range, they're talking about 10-30 feet (short, like electronic toll collection and pay-at-the-pump), 300-600 feet (medium, like road signage), and 1000 feet (long, for emergency traffic light control).

So, just as sufficient wifi energy can impact an adjacent band, proximity to a busy roadway can potentially impact the high wifi channels. However, the intent of DSRC to promote unlicensed wifi outdoors in the 5.8 UNII band via dual-band usage may be more troubling to wisps than bleed-over from DSRC band usage.

Rich

----- Original Message ----- From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org>
Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 3:30 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WTB Orders (FCC-06-110)


Actually I was told that this is above the existing UNII band frequencies. I was told this has nothing to do with existing frequencies we use for our networks.
Scriv


Rick Smith wrote:

potential horrendous MOBILE interference to 5805 channels...

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 3:14 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] WTB Orders (FCC-06-110)

Dawn,
Could you tell us what interest you believe there should be for WISPs
involving this proceeding? I am doubting it as much as I would like to know
your personal thoughts on the subject. Kris Twomey looked into this for me
some time back and told me it is of no concern for WISPs. If you see
something he did not though please forward it along.
Thank you,
Scriv


Dawn DiPietro wrote:


All,

Below is something WISPA should be paying attention to.

WTB Orders (FCC-06-110)
AMENDMENT OF THE COMMISSION'S RULES REGARDING DEDICATED SHORT-RANGE COMMUNICATION SERVICES IN THE 5.850-5.925 GHZ BAND (5.9 GHZ BAND), AMENDMENT OF PARTS 2 AND 90 OF THE COMMISSION'S RULES TO ALLOCATE THE
5.850-5.925 GHZ BAND TO THE MOBILE SERVICE

And here is the link for those of you who would like to look into this in further detail.
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-110A1.pdf

Regards,
Dawn DiPietro


--
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/

--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Reply via email to