Lonnie,
I have published a Certification FAQ
http://ask-wi.com/certification.html
that I believe addresses all of these questions.
WISPA also has a Certification email list to further address these
issues. That list is currently open only to WISPA members.
Regarding using a copy of someone else's certified system; an EXACT copy
can be legal however this is easier said than done because the company
that pays for the certification may choose to keep some information
confidential to preclude someone else from making an exact copy. Most
well-run businesses would probably want to prevent other businesses from
"sponging" off of them and competing unfairly and would not cooperate
with competitor businesses. Of course, a group of WISPs could
collaborate to share the certification costs, then agree to build EXACT
(hardware and software) copies. Responsible manufacturers or
organizations could even choose to publish EXACT descriptions of their
already-certified products. Anyone building these exact copies must take
responsibility for building an EXACT copy. The FCC can come inspect at
any time. They can also request that anyone building a certified system
(the original "Grantee" or someone "copying" a certified system) provide
a sample system for the FCC to test to verify compliance with the
originally certified system specs.
I can't speak for WISPA but their Certification email list appears to be
one possible vehicle that can be used to coordinate equipment needs and
share certification costs.
Regarding software, AFAIK every software update does not need to be
recertified. The original system certification must be done using
software that only allows the system to operate in FCC-legal frequency
bands and at FCC-legal power levels. For example, a 5.8 GHz system could
not ship with software that also allowed operation on 4.9 GHz or even on
5.4 GHz because the certification requirements for those two bands are
different than 5.8 GHz. A two-band system would be legal (for example
5.4 and 5.8 GHz) if it was tested and verified to operate within
FCC-legal specs on BOTH bands however today this would require a rather
long test cycle because only the FCC lab is currently doing 5.4 GHz
testing.
AFAIK, if a certified system had a software fix come out to add security
or to address software reliability issues, that would be legal as long
as the RF characteristics weren't changed to allow operation on
non-certified bands or on additional frequencies or at
higher-than-originally certified power levels.
If anyone has additional questions or corrections, please feel free to
post them.
Thanks,
jack
P.S. - Earlier tonight I emailed ADI Engineering asking for
clarification regarding any fully-certified systems that they offer.
Their website says that their MOTHERBOARDS have FCC Part 15 Class B
certification but there is no mention of FCC Part 15 Subpart C
certification which includes testing the motherboard with the wireless
card(s) and the antenna(s). We need to use systems that have been tested
and verified to meet both Class B and Subpart C requirements.
Lonnie Nunweiler wrote:
Are you sure about this? Is this what ADI told you, personally?
The Original Manufacturer assembles a system and has it certified with
that set of components and construction techniques. As long as the
SAME parts and SAME techniques are used then this system should be
certified. Of course the manufacturer must take responsibility and
certify that proper components and techniques were used.
As to software, there is a lot of leeway there. Most systems use
Linux and all Atheros code is derived from the source code that people
license from Atheros. The free madwifi drivers are still traceable
and derived from Atheros source code. If you had to certify the exact
software with the system, then it would be a nightmare and I believe
that not a single manufacturer would currently be legal after they
release a new image unless they would get each and every software
release certified, as they must do for each hardware change. That
would be excessive and would eventually make everybody illegal since
software fixes are brought out rapidly to address security and
reliability issues.
Lonnie
On 4/22/07, Tim Kerns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Matt,
Is this latest news? The last I heard was adi had certified their
board in
their enclosure with a couple different antennas, but never heard what OS
they were running. Also, to be certified you would have to purchase the
units pre-assembled from ADI.
Remember the certification goes to the manufacturer.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Larsen - Lists" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org>
Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2007 4:23 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5GHz Amps
> Wrong.
>
> ADI Engineering has a certified StarOS/War Board combo, with a
choice of
> cards. I am currently evaluating them for my future backhauls.
>
> Matt Larsen
> vistabeam.com
>
>
> Smith, Rick wrote:
>> Nope, not FCC certified. What Mikrotik / Star-OS systems are ? None.
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>> Behalf Of Dawn DiPietro
>> Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2007 11:15 AM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 5GHz Amps
>>
>> Rick,
>>
>> Can you tell me if this system you suggested is FCC Certified?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dawn DiPietro
>>
>>
>> Smith, Rick wrote:
>>
>>> use an XR5 (ubiquity) card as radios, with mikrotik, a 24 dbi
panel on
>>> the aesthetic end from pac wireless.
>>> 3' dish on the other end. You'll have more than enough margin.
>>>
>>> Don't ever ever ever use an amp on anything. you only amplify your
>>> problems.
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>> On
>>
>>> Behalf Of Mark Nash
>>> Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2007 7:28 PM
>>> To: WISPA General List
>>> Subject: [WISPA] 5GHz Amps
>>>
>>> I'm needing to do a 14-mile link at 5.8GHz. I will have to use a
>>> 15"-or-so flat panel antenna due to building owner's asthetics
>>> requirements. On this 8-story building, I'll mount to the side of
the
>>> masonry, then I'll have about 25 feet of LMR-400 from the antenna
to a
>>> weatherproof enclosure with 110v power.
>>>
>>> On the other side I'll be 100' up on a tower on a hilltop, and I can
>>>
>> use
>>
>>> a higher-gain antenna.
>>>
>>> I believe I'll have to use an amplifier to achieve this.
>>>
>>> Soo...
>>>
>>> A) Am I incorrect about this?
>>>
>>> B) If I'm correct, what 5GHz amps have you found to be effective?
>>>
>>> C) Opinions on using regular or bi-directional amps?
>>>
>>> Mark Nash
>>> Network Engineer
>>> UnwiredOnline.Net
>>> 350 Holly Street
>>> Junction City, OR 97448
>>> http://www.uwol.net
>>> 541-998-5555
>>> 541-998-5599 fax
--
Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
FCC License # PG-12-25133
Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993
Author of the WISP Handbook - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs"
True Vendor-Neutral Wireless Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting
FCC Part 15 Certification Assistance for Wireless Service Providers
Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220 www.ask-wi.com
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
