THAT's the one I've been waiting for.
This pretty much rules out any intent what so ever that WE can use this to
mix and match transmitters.
Marlon
(509) 982-2181
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage) Consulting services
42846865 (icq) WISP Operator since 1999!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dawn DiPietro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 2:58 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Modifications of Parts 2 and 15 of the,Commission’s
Rules for unlicensed devices and,equipment approval
Scott,
In order for the system to be certified it must include the modular
transmitter and the antenna. If you did not include these parts what would
you be certifying exactly?
As quoted from said document;
The modular transmitter must comply with the antenna requirements of
Section 15.203
and 15.204(c). The antenna must either be permanently attached or employ a
“unique”
antenna coupler (at all connections between the module and the antenna,
including the
cable). Any antenna used with the module must be approved with the module,
either at
the time of initial authorization or through a Class II permissive change.
The
“professional installation” provision of Section 15.203 may not be applied
to modules.
Regards,
Dawn DiPietro
Scott Reed wrote:
And look as I might, I have trouble find what antennae the card vendor is
certified with.
From other discussions, I would ask a couple of additional questions. If
we assume we can find a mPCI card that has WISP usable antennae in its
certification then:
1) Couldn't someone just get an RBxxx or WRAP or whatever SBC certified
as a base unit and we could put the card in it?
2) If an SBC is certified without an enclosure, is it still certified if
it is in a box?
Here is what I am thinking. If we would get an SBC certified bare as a
base unit then we could use it with various cards in whatever enclosure
we want to use. The FCC seems to be interested in RF noise being
emitted. I don't think there are very many enclosures that increase the
RF output, so if a bare SBC is certified, putting it in a box shouldn't
negate the certification. That would be like saying I can't put my
laptop in a suitcase if the laptop is powered on.
If this is the case, getting some of the equipment many of us use in our
operations certified may not be as hard as once thought. And if we can
show the mPCI makers the advantage of including some of the antennae we
use in their certifications, we may be able to legally use a lot more
equipment.
Jack Unger wrote:
Scott,
I believe that your comments are substantially correct.
The main problem that I see with building our own equipment is that very
few (if any) manufacturers of modular wireless cards have certified them
with a range of usable external WISP-grade antennas. I don't think this
2nd Report and Order changes that. Also, remember that the software used
must limit operation of the complete system only to those frequencies
and power levels that are legal in the U.S.
jack
Scott Reed wrote:
I haven't read it really well and I have not yet looked up the
referenced sections of Part 15, but I read the part that is not about
"split modular" to be the part the refers to a PC. And I read it that
if the PC is certified to have radio cards AND the radio card is
certified with an antenna, then that PC, radio card and antenna can be
used.
So, if that is true, then Tim may be on the right track. Jack is
right, not any "base," but I would read it that any "certified base" is
doable.
I have often wondered how it works for laptops, but hadn't bothered to
find it. This makes sense. Ubiquiti certifies the CM9 card with a set
of antennae. Dell certifies the laptop for a radio card. Putting a
CM9 in Dell's laptop is fine as long as it connects to an antenna,
using the proper cable, that was certified with the CM9.
Therefore, if MT can get an RBxxx board certified as a "base" unit, we
should be able to use a CM9 in that RBxxx with the proper antenna and
be good. The "gotcha" here is those sections of Part 15 I have not yet
followed up on. I am not sure what the "professional installer" stuff
is about.
What am I missing or is this good news?
Jack Unger wrote:
Tim,
I read the 2nd Report and Order and I don't see where it is saying
that a certified mini PCI radio can be put into any "base" unit.
I think what the FCC is doing is:
1. Providing eight criteria that clarify the definition of what a
legal modular assembly is.
2. Allowing some flexibility regarding on-module shielding, data
inputs, and power supply regulation.
3. Clarifying the definition of what a "split" modular assembly is.
4. Defining the (somewhat flexible) requirements that a "split"
modular assembly must meet.
Although a motherboard will certainly contain an operating system, I
don't think that a mini PCI radio plugged into any motherboard meets
the FCC's definition of a "split" modular assembly. I think the FCC
considers a "split" modular assembly to be where circuitry that today
would be contained on a single modular assembly is (now or in the
future) "split" between two different physical assemblies. This
splitting allows more equipment design flexibility because one
"transmitter control element" (the new term that the FCC formerly
called the module "firmware") could theoretically be interfaced with
and control more than one "radio front end" (the amplifier and
antenna-connecting) section.
Of course, that's just my interpretation. I'll bet others could add
more detail. The bottom line is - I don't think this 2nd Report and
Order contains anything that will substantially change the way we do
business.
jack
Tim Kerns wrote:
Am I reading this correctly???? Does this mean that if a mfg of a
mini pci radio gets it certified with different antenna, that it then
can be put into ANY base unit and be certified?
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this what we have been
asking for?
Tim
----- Original Message ----- From: "Dawn DiPietro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 8:36 AM
Subject: [WISPA] Modifications of Parts 2 and 15 of the,Commission’s
Rules for unlicensed devices and,equipment approval
All,
I just received this document and thought it might be of some
interest to the list.
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-56A1.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/