Tim , Great post. I concur 100% with your statements, that's why I would
prefer, instead of more unlicensed space, a Wisp Only band with
coordination from a centralized organization and payable dues per
pop/channel or something similar....only for bona-fide wireless
operators

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tim Wolfe
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 10:01 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV
whitespaces

Hey Gang, After reading this thread for a few hours, I told myself I 
would shut up and just go away, but I must say, after pacing around the 
house for awhile and reviewing all of the things that I know in my 
mind?, I must say something?(Not that anyone gives a rats behind?). 
Look, what Patrick has posted to this list(As much as I hate to say it, 
and not because it's Patrick, its because of the actual subject?) is 
TRUE!. If You are looking to find some truth to his statements?, just 
wander over to DSL Reports WISP forum( 
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/wisp )  and review some of the posts 
that have been made there over the years?. At least every other day or 
so, someone posts a question about how far they can hook up a client 
using a 1 watt amp with a 15.5dBi omni. When I first started in this 
business, if the salesperson at Ecomm, Winncomm etc. didn't know You?, 
and You asked for a 1 watt amp?, they wouldn't sell it?, or at least You

had to answer a LOT of questions as to what You were going to use it 
for?. Today, all someone has to do is go to ebay, or call any of the 
popular vendors and in most cases?, it is on a UPS truck in 24hrs headed

for Your address. I am NOT blaming any vendor for this mess any more 
than I am blaming the FCC or our industry as a police force, it just 
needs to be said that it IS heading in the wrong direction quickly(I 
think Patrick's mention of the slippery slope is accurate?). To add to 
the mess is a list of "consultants" that have popped up as of late?. In 
2000, if You typed in "WISP" as a search word?, You got almost NO hits. 
Today, when You repeat this, the result is CRAZY! ( Results 1 - 10 of 
about 3,430,000 for WISP-From Google!) . The current trend in the WISP 
business is headed right towards the same debacle as the CB radio craze 
of the 70's? (I guess I am showing my age, LOL!). That problem ended 
because the spectrum was so wasted that You couldn't even talk to 
someone down the street, and cell phone and other communications 
technologies replaced the medium. While I do not know anyone in a high 
position in the FCC at the time, I am almost positive that more than one

FCC meeting had people with their arms in the air going, "OMG!, What are

we going to do??". IMHO.....ahh, You know what?, scratch my opinion, 
lets just say that in my experience, I know where this entire deal is 
headed unless something major happens?, it will be a wasteland that is 
sooo.... bad, You won't even have to put Your coffee in the microwave to

heat it up, just open the protective steel front doors on Your house and

set it outside for a few seconds and it is ready!( OK, a little 
overboard, but I think You all get my point?). I have been in this 
business since 2000. When I started lighting up PoP's in 2001, a site 
survey yielded nothing, nada, zip zilch zero as far as other AP's or 
competitors 802.11b AP's. Now, at those same PoP's, I can find on 
average at least 8 to 10 active AP's. I know all of You have seen this?.

While some are just home user AP's, they are there non the less!. Heck, 
the other day an AP showed up with a -58!!!. I traced it down to a home 
user that had a 13.5dBi omni on his/her roof. While I have no idea why 
they did that?(My guess is to provide better coverage in their house and

back yard or maybe share their cable connection?), it is insane that a 
consumer was allowed to purchase that stuff!. If any of You think that 
we do not have an issue with people violating FCC rules?, You had better

think again!. It is not just WISP's but all types of people that include

consumers, municipal, school and business IT depts. and a few 
"consultants" who yesterday where saying "Wendys drive thru, can I take 
Your order please?" and now today they are spouting out, "I are a  wi-fi

consultant". I just find it odd that the alarm bells are not ringing in 
more heads than just a few of us?.




Dennis Burgess - 2K Wireless wrote:
> Interesting thread, very good points on all fronts.
>
> I wanted to point out something, something that the guy who was
talking
> about "consultants" etc.  You are correct in that many people who are
> consultants don't know the real world implications.  Us WISPs have
first
> hand knowledge of what these things will do, what the bands, hardware,
etc
> is capable of.  
>
> A recent "study" was commissioned in St. Louis. This was a feasibility
study
> that netted some "consultant" over $90,000 bucks from the way I read
it.
> What was this for?  To see if the city of St. Louis can put in a
wireless
> network covering downtown.   Hmmmm.  My first thought on this was....
>
> "So the consultant needs to conduct a study on IF you can do this?"
Does
> he not know what he is doing? I can tell you I can do it, might take
me a
> bit to do the necessary research, but hell for that price, I will do
the
> research, finding bandwidth, contracts, and power/data agreements.  
>
> This is the kind of thing that us, using license exempt bands nee to
fight.
> We need to make it public, that this is a misuse of taxpayer's
dollars.  We
> need to ensure that this is shown to cut out the small business, in
favor of
> large, non-local companies doing the work.  
>
> A few other things that would help us WISPs out, someone in the FCC
ready to
> listen to our findings of non-complaint gear/overpowered radios,
someone
> that can actually say, you get me these things, the proof to say, and
then
> we will do something with it.  Don't happen very often.  If someone
calls
> the FCC, how many times have you heard anything back on them?  I have
heard
> interference stories, even from cell companies, (recent on the lists).
>
> The story about the IT Person telling the WISP to use 4.9, is a prime
> example of something that the FCC should be ON THE BALL about.  And
also
> some clarification on band usages, power limits, etc, where several
> questions and things are open to "interpretation", not closed down
enough to
> be "solid" in court or anywhere.
>
>
> Just a few thoughts.
>
> Dennis
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
> Behalf Of Tom DeReggi
> Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 1:05 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV
> whitespaces
>
> George,
>
> Thats a good point. WISPs are maturing and as they grow they start to
demand
>
> name brand type gear that will let them scale, which inadvertently is 
> usually certified.
> Thus larger providers using certified gear.  With no disrespect meant,
I 
> could argue that some of WISP's straying to non-certified gear, could
be 
> more of a science project, or trials to test the viabilty of that type

> product line, and as those trials become successful, they likely will 
> certify gear or buy versions that are certified.
>
> Tom DeReggi
> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "George Rogato" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 10:54 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Widespread abuse of FCC rules, a list...was TV 
> whitespaces
>
>
>   
>> Well this was an exiting day on the lists.
>>
>> I would find it hard to believe that the wisp industry is in worse
shape 
>> now than before concerning abuse.
>>
>> 5 years ago when most were new and choices were far and few between,
there
>>     
>
>   
>> was a lot of "pringles" type wisps. Hey, they were the inovators.
>>
>> But it's hard to believe that with the advent of cheap gear from many
new 
>> players, I'd have ahard time believing that the vast majority of wisp
gear
>>     
>
>   
>> is an fcc certified system or kit type product, such as a star or mt.
>>
>> I think we're building a mountain out of a mole hill in even
suggesting 
>> that this an issue that has to be delt with. The industry has matured
in a
>>     
>
>   
>> very positive way over the past few years.
>>
>> George
>>
>> This is NOT an official wispa stance or position, just my own.
>>
>> Patrick Leary wrote:
>>     
>>> Here are few raw comments that might fray some nerves:
>>>
>>> 1. The FCC is not a baby sitter. 2. Mature operators (and industries
as a
>>>       
>
>   
>>> whole) follow the rules as a
>>> matter of course and expected cost of business.
>>> 3. You are not the public, you are commercial operators financially
>>> benefiting off the public's free spectrum and you off all users
should
>>> thus be a responsible steward of that spectrum.
>>> 4. Those not following the rules have no ethical standing to
complain
>>> about other illegal use, predatory competitors, lack of spectrum,
etc.
>>>
>>> As someone who has argued for WISP compliance for years, I've
certainly
>>> been alarmed by what I see as a new level of non-compliance. WISPs
are
>>> now commonly assuming the FCC's lack of enforcement is tantamount to
its
>>> approval of abuse. The general attitude is now that there is but one
>>> rule: "Don't exceed the power limitations." Everything else has
become
>>> fair game.
>>>
>>> Here is a list of things I see that lend anecdotal evidence, if not
>>> actual, that abuse is reaching new levels:
>>>  - many WISPs now believe it is no big deal to use 4.9 GHz to carry
some
>>> commercial traffic (Hey, there's excess capacity so what's the big
deal,
>>> right?...)
>>> - use of STA's to commercially use spectrum is openly being
advocated
>>> (this is partially responsible for an over 6 month wait in STA
filings)
>>> - illegal vendors now operate in the clear with prominent U.S.
>>> distribution (They must be legal if they have a store front and it
only
>>> hurts other vendors anyway...)
>>> - "build your own base station" type Google ads are rampant
>>>
>>> Call me an alarmist, but this accelerating trend is disturbing and
such
>>> attitudes easily even have the potential to infect safety issues
(hey,
>>> OSHA rules must not be that big a deal either).
>>>
>>> We must all appreciate that many violating the rules do so out of
>>> ignorance, but that as an excuse. Groups like WISPA should take firm
>>> stands on subjects like this. You should strongly encourage
compliance,
>>> lead the way and educate. You should fight the ignorance that allows
for
>>> relativism and "creative interpretation" of the rules. You should
also
>>> not cave to the hard luck excuses that "I'm a small guy and can't
afford
>>> to follow the rules." (Your response to such should be to point to
>>> funding sources/advice or otherwise tell them that there is a
minimum
>>> cost to legally participate in this business and that following FCC
>>> rules is a minimum expectation as responsible stewards of the
public's
>>> free spectrum.) And finally, WISPs should not treat knowingly
illegal
>>> operators as equals because in fact they are liabilities to you and
the
>>> industry at large.
>>>
>>> And yes, of course I have skin in the game but that in no way alters
>>> anything here or devalues my comments. If anything, as a legal
vendor
>>> with a long professional reputation of compliance and scores of
legal
>>> operator partners, and as an individual who has been beating this
drum
>>> for 7 years, it should only increase the weight of my comments.
>>>
>>> Sincerely,
>>>
>>> Patrick Leary
>>> AVP WISP Markets
>>> Alvarion, Inc.
>>> o: 650.314.2628
>>> c: 760.580.0080
>>> Vonage: 650.641.1243
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
>>> Behalf Of Dawn DiPietro
>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 9:26 AM
>>> To: WISPA General List
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces
>>>
>>> All,
>>>
>>> Remember, it only takes a few bad apples to make the whole industry
look
>>>
>>> bad.
>>> Think about that the next time anyone wants to complain about the
rules.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dawn DiPietro
>>>
>>>
>>> Patrick Leary wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>       
>>>> I hope it does go UL, but I have also heard some recent rumblings
that
>>>> the FCC is concerned with what seems like a widespread
deterioration of
>>>> WISPs following the rules. The phrase I recall is something along
the
>>>> lines of "Damn it, these things are not guidelines."
>>>>
>>>> >From my view it is true. I see it in conversations that go beyond
the
>>>> usual, "if you just stay within the power no one cares" to now
where
>>>> people seem to via the STA process as a round-about tool to get
access
>>>> to and use spectrum that does not commercially exist.
>>>>
>>>> Letting loose the same level of abuse in the TV bands is something
that
>>>> will cause real problems for the FCC should broadcasters be
affected.
>>>> The WISP industry must do a better job of policing itself and
>>>> discouraging the slippery slope.
>>>>
>>>> Patrick Leary
>>>> AVP WISP Markets
>>>> Alvarion, Inc.
>>>> o: 650.314.2628
>>>> c: 760.580.0080
>>>> Vonage: 650.641.1243
>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>>>> Behalf Of Jack Unger
>>>> Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 11:22 PM
>>>> To: WISPA General List
>>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces
>>>>
>>>> Steve,
>>>>
>>>> I appreciate your insight into the possibility that license-exempt
>>>>         
>>> white
>>>
>>>       
>>>> space use might actually materialize. I very much hope that it
does.
>>>>
>>>> jack
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Steve Stroh wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>>> Jack:
>>>>>
>>>>> Consider...
>>>>>
>>>>> To the television broadcasters, WISPs using this spectrum in a
"we'll
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>>> stay out of the way of any television broadcasting activity"
manner
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>> is
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>>> the lesser of several other evils; television broadcasting has
been 
>>>>> steadily losing ground now; first 800 MHz was carved out of
Channels 
>>>>> 70-83, and now the 700 MHz bands are being carved out of  Channels

>>>>> 52-69. The trend is clear, and while it's one thing for  powerful 
>>>>> terrestrial broadcasting to "share" spectrum with low-power 
>>>>> license-exempt usage, it's quite another for communications use to
do
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>>> the same. If the broadcasters play things right (and it appears
they 
>>>>> are "bending" towards white space license-exempt usage, but very
much
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>>> on THEIR terms...) the license-exempt usage of television white
space
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>>> may serve to "pollute" the remaining television broadcast spectrum

>>>>> sufficiently to prevent future reallocation (for at least another 
>>>>> decade or so).
>>>>>
>>>>> Intel, Microsoft, Cisco are some of the names being bandied about
as 
>>>>> advocates for license-exempt use of white space television
broadcast 
>>>>> spectrum.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Steve
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jan 24, 2007, at Jan 24  09:21 AM, Jack Unger wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>>>> Likelihood of unlicensed???
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My guess is that the established communications carriers and the 
>>>>>> broadcasters will fight the concept of license-free use of this
space.
>>>>>>             
>
>   
>>>>>> I expect it will come down to who lobbies Congress most
effectively.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>> Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
>>>>>> Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993
>>>>>> Author of the WISP Handbook - "Deploying License-Free Wireless
WANs"
>>>>>> True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting
>>>>>> Newsletters Downloadable from http://ask-wi.com/newsletters.html
>>>>>> Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220  www.ask-wi.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>             
>>>>> ---
>>>>>
>>>>> Steve Stroh
>>>>> 425-939-0076 | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>> Writing about BWIA again! - www.bwianews.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>>         
>>>       
>> -- 
>> George Rogato
>>
>> Welcome to WISPA
>>
>> www.wispa.org
>>
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> -- 
>> 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