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
<earlier discussions pruned>