Why were you waiting for that one? It sounds like you do NOT want to mix and match to suit the job.
You can mix and match, you just have to make sure that the transmitters you mix are certified with the antennas you use. Certified is certified. It does not matter that you have other types in use. Imagine if you could not mix and match, since that would mean you could not use Alvarion and Tranzeo on the same tower, which is certainly not the intent. Since you can clearly mix different systems on a tower then it also holds that you can mix different transmitters with a system. Just keep each one meeting the proper requirements and you should be OK. The new regs are not regulating your entire network as a whole, but rather are wanting individual parts to be proper. Lonnie On 4/25/07, Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
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/
-- Lonnie Nunweiler Valemount Networks Corporation http://www.star-os.com/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
