Then you know and understand the value of selectivity and what clean transmitters are. There's "good enough" to get certified, and then there's "good" and "better" and "excellent" and I'd like to see us have the information and be able to lean on the manufacturers to clean up their acts. There is a wide gulf between "certifieable" and "very good". An aweful lot of manufacturers are playing the "power" race, which I don't like, I wish they were trying to complete on all the RF qualities of their equipment.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Jack Unger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" <firstname.lastname@example.org> Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 11:14 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] was School WiFi , about technical values. > I am a ham and I have been for 48 years. I've also held an FCC > Commercial License for 28 years. Without my ham experience, I doubt that > I would have been able to transition into the license-free wireless > industry in 1993 - which was before any WISPs even existed. My years of > ham experience made the transition relatively easy. I recommend that all > WISP operators consider getting their ham licenses which, BTW no longer > require any Morse Code tests. > > jack > > > Mark Koskenmaki wrote: > > You a HAM operator, Jack? > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Jack Unger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "WISPA General List" <email@example.com> > > Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 10:52 PM > > Subject: Re: [WISPA] was School WiFi , about technical values. > > > > > >> Mark, > >> > >> Certification verifies that the signals conducted into the power line > >> and the signals radiated into the air from a wireless system are clean > >> and that they do not exceed the power limits. Minimizing self > >> interference is primarily a function of good network design techniques. > >> This is outside the scope of FCC certification because, even with > >> certified equipment, it is easy for an uninformed person to deploy a > >> network that interferes with itself and with other networks. > >> > >> To motivate manufacturers, let them know you want to buy only certified > >> systems from them. > >> > >> jack > >> > >> > >> Mark Koskenmaki wrote: > >>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>> From: "Jack Unger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> To: "WISPA General List" <firstname.lastname@example.org> > >>> Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 10:05 PM > >>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] was School WiFi , about technical values. > >>> > >>> > >>>> See comment inline, near end of post. > >>>> Wrong. Certification DOES test for out of band emissions; it also tests > >>>> for out of channel emissions. It does not test for receiver selectivity > >>>> because that is not a characteristic that will mess up the band. Part > > 15 > >>>> certification deals primarily with dirty transmitted signals, not poor > >>>> receivers. > >>>> jack > >>>> > >>> Well, I should have been more clear. Yes, there are tests and certain > >>> limits. Just being "good enough" isn't what I was wanting. I'd like > > the > >>> best stuff, because doing so means you minimize self interference, etc. > >>> > > > -- > 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: email@example.com > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: firstname.lastname@example.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/