Tom You are calling the Wimax base station an AP, this is not the case they are true base stations with a large amount of R&D behind them plus most are licensing code which adds a great deal of cost. I do not think you are going to see Wimax base stations anywhere near what WISP are used to doing, ever.
This is correct for PtP 25 Watts max EIRP for 3.65Ghz, but you can do this now and much more with 2.4Ghz and 5Ghz so the power is not the plus. The plus is that each side of the PtP link must be listed in the central FCC database so a WISP will know where all the APs are and can make sure not to cause issues with each other which is what they must do by law. Any 3.65Ghz that is not listed in the central FCC database is limited to 1 Watt EIRP. But because the noise floor is low your single to noise should be descent in more locations. Which goes to the last point, this is NOT 2.4Ghz under part-15. 3.65Ghz is under part-90 which means all WISP MUST obey the law of the FCC or they will be forced to take down there equipment and fined for any issues. Also there is never going to be as must 3.65Ghz equipment out there and no of it will be AMP to all hell and way over FCC limits. Which means there will be very little "extra" power creating a every higher noise floor. Comments? Sincerely, Tony Morella Demarc Technology Group, A Wireless Solution Provider Office: 207-667-7583 Fax: 207-433-1008 http://www.demarctech.com This communication constitutes an electronic communication within the meaning of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 USC 2510, and its disclosure is strictly limited to the recipient intended by the sender of this message. This communication may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient and receipt by anyone other than the intended recipient does not constitute a loss of the confidential or privileged nature of the communication. Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient please contact the sender by return electronic mail and delete all copies of this communication -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 1:11 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New Wimax Service >what it looks like many are going to do in order to get a greater number of >subs per tower, at $10k+ per radio they will have to Nope. The manufacturers will have to lower their price per AP. >2.4Ghz can go way up to 50 Watts EIRP, where the clients under >3.65Ghz are limited to 1 Watt max. That is a surprise to me. 3.6G was pitched as a PtP for rural in its early discussions, meaning a 25watt link between to points, meaning 25watts per side. Did the rules change? Are you saying manufacturers are putting out CPEs limited to 1 watt EIRP. Or are you saying the rules limit CPE to 1 watt EIRP. I was not under the impression CPEs were limited to 1 watt by FCC rules, if thats the case the band would be as worthless as 5.3Gz-5.4Ghz. >What makes 3.65Ghz better overall is the > low noise floors, Yes, but only a temporary advantage. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" <wireless@wispa.org> Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 10:34 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New Wimax Service Guys I keep hearing people say 3.65Ghz has more power than 2.4Ghz, I guess I can see this over all with 25Watt total but because of how the rules are written this is not the case. The base station in Wimax is 7 Watts EIRP max if you use the larger channel size, and less if you use the smaller ones which is what it looks like many are going to do in order to get a greater number of subs per tower, at $10k+ per radio they will have to! Anyway this puts the EIRP at about 3.5 Watts EIRP which is about what 2.4Ghz can do. On the client side What makes 3.65Ghz better overall is the low noise floors, non-exclusive license and a central database so you know when and where new base stations are installed! Because of this I don't see how there will be an issues for WISP as long as all the rules are followed, which they must by law, another good thing :) Sincerely, Tony Morella Demarc Technology Group, A Wireless Solution Provider Office: 207-667-7583 Fax: 207-433-1008 http://www.demarctech.com This communication constitutes an electronic communication within the meaning of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 USC 2510, and its disclosure is strictly limited to the recipient intended by the sender of this message. This communication may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient and receipt by anyone other than the intended recipient does not constitute a loss of the confidential or privileged nature of the communication. Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient please contact the sender by return electronic mail and delete all copies of this communication -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom DeReggi Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 9:08 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > It's only practical implementation is a dense urban environment with low > throughput I have a very hard time accepting that comment. 3.650 is more power than other unlicenced. 3.650 has better RF characteristics than 5.8G for NLOS and Distance. Possibly even better than 2.4G (up for debate, based on average size of pine needles and leafs). Any time there is a capabilty to serve MANY such as in an Urban area, of course its also possible to serve a LOWER number of people typical or subburb or rural. If you are trying to say, 3.6 Wimax is not a replacement for 900Mhz to tackle foliage, I 100% agree. If you say, NLOS is not possible long range, I fully agree, but neither is any other technology. If you say, smaller channels will mean lower throughpout for multi-sector designs, I'd agree with you. But 3.6G was designed for Rural. Thats why it has higher power levels. And WiMax was designed for typical cell distances of existing legacy unlicened gear. If anything it could be argued that WIMax is Better in rural areas because it does not have the contention protocols needed to deal with many interference sources typical of Urban america, and Wimax dies in interference. Wimax 3.6G, is as rural as any other product, and smart urban WISPs will also do their best to use it. Personally, even if its one 20Mhz sector, its one more sector that can be added to the tower. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Hammett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 2:37 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >I would like to note that Redline echoed my thoughts on 3.65 GHz. It is >not > for rural providers and is not for high bandwidth providers. It's only > practical implementation is a dense urban environment with low throughput > clients. > > > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> > Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 12:18 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service > > >> There are a number of WiMAX 3.5 GHz solutions that will tune to 3.65 >> just fine. I doubt that we would need to force the forum to issue a new >> profile for a frequency band that existing profiles already cover. As >> far as I am concerned WiMAX in 3.65 GHz is here in all respects and is >> not just marketing verbiage. Bravo to Matt Liotta on making a move that >> I am sure many others will follow. Way to go Matt. >> Scriv >> >> >> Clint Ricker wrote: >>> Tom, >>> I'd agree. I'm in no way advocating marketing that is deceptive in >>> terms >>> of >>> deliverables. >>> >>> My main point is more that communications in marketing often involves >>> using >>> buzzwords that coopt something someone knows for describing your >>> product. >>> Even if that is, on a technical level, incorrect, on a business and >>> communication and marketing standpoint good practice--the reality is >>> that >>> the end user understands what you are saying and more "truth" is >>> communicated--they better understand what to expect from your product. >>> >>> Now, using terms that mislead the customer into expecting something that >>> it >>> isn't is an entirely different matter, and one that I don't advocate >>> and, >>> in >>> the end, is very detrimental. I think it comes down to the >>> deliverables, >>> in >>> that sense. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Clint Ricker >>> -Kentnis Technologies >>> >>> >>> On Jan 11, 2008 11:56 AM, Tom DeReggi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> First, two thumbs up for Matt. 1) He's leading the way to expand with >>>> new >>>> technologies. 2) He's clever enough to use maximize how he uses of >>>> Press >>>> Releases. >>>> >>>> With that said, in response to Clint, I had mixed feelings regarding >>>> the >>>> release. >>>> >>>> I didn't see a problem listing "Wimax" in the press release. >>>> Wimax/Non-Wimax, whats the difference, its wireless, its latest state >>>> of >>>> the >>>> art. All the same to the consumer. >>>> >>>> Where I saw it riding the line was stating "Granted a License". >>>> I believe that misleads the public to come to a false conclusion. >>>> There is a big difference between licensed and unlicensed in the public >>>> eye. >>>> Licensed has 100% protection, Unlicensed 100% doesn't. >>>> Licenses are usualy exclusive, unlicensed is not. >>>> 3650 light licensing is "experiental" and much closer to the >>>> characteristics >>>> of unlicensed, with registration added. >>>> Sure technically 3650 is licensed, but again the reader is misled to >>>> think >>>> the service is something more than it really is. >>>> >>>> Is that ethical? Is it deceptive? Could you here the spin? Its not >>>> illegal. >>>> Nothing was said that could be miscontrued as a lie. Is it any >>>> different >>>> than typical forward thinking statements of other press releases? Maybe >>>> just >>>> clever marketing? >>>> >>>> Tom DeReggi >>>> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc >>>> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband >>>> >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "Clint Ricker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> >>>> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 10:15 PM >>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] One Ring Networks To Rollout New WiMAX Service >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> I'd like to make a point in return. >>>>> >>>>> This is a press release, and it is generally used for marketing and >>>>> publicity. Who the flip cares about the exact nuances in technology? >>>>> >>>> If >>>> >>>>> Matt's company expresses their product in terms that their target >>>>> market >>>>> understands, then it is good marketing. It's not like their customers >>>>> >>>> are >>>> >>>>> going to do deep layer1 and 2 analysis to see that their bandwidth is >>>>> coming >>>>> over the "one true WiMax". If it looks like a duck and quacks like a >>>>> >>>> duck >>>> >>>>> and you're talking to kindergarteners, just go ahead and call it a >>>>> duck >>>>> and >>>>> reeducate the 1/1000 of 1 percent who become ornithologists when they >>>>> >>>> grow >>>> >>>>> up and care to learn the subtle nuances. >>>>> >>>>> I know companies that sell/sold "wireless DSL". Technically, this is >>>>> a >>>>> complete absurdity. >>>>> But, I'd bet that it did a good job of communicating the >>>>> concept--which >>>>> is, >>>>> after all, the point of marketing. I'd imagine that they do better >>>>> >>>> then >>>> >>>>> companies that sell "High bandwidth 802.11A/B/G Data Traffic Transport >>>>> Solutions". >>>>> >>>>> There are service providers who still keep on trying to sell "VoIP" >>>>> with >>>>> multi page explanations about how the analog voice get digitized, >>>>> packetized, encapsulated, and 20 other gazillion processes that no one >>>>> really cares about unless they like reading RFCs every time they make >>>>> >>>> even >>>> >>>>> mundane purchase decisions. Then there's Comcast who, while >>>>> definitely >>>>> not >>>>> hurt by the existing customer base and financial resources and >>>>> technical >>>>> infrastructure, became the fourth largest telco in quite a short >>>>> amount >>>>> >>>> of >>>> >>>>> time. They did this by having the marketing common sense to sell >>>>> "telephone >>>>> service", not "Voice over IP". >>>>> >>>>> If the customers understand what Matt's product is better because he >>>>> >>>> calls >>>> >>>>> it "WiMax", then great. It sure sounds better than "Modified >>>>> >>>> pre-release >>>> >>>>> quasi 802.16". You're in business to sell products...and, that >>>>> involves >>>>> communication. Using language that people can understand sells >>>>> products >>>>> and, in the end, gets more "truth" across--if that is your objective >>>>> here--by actually communicating with people as opposed to using >>>>> language >>>>> that people just don't understand--nor care to. >>>>> >>>>> -Clint Ricker >>>>> Kentnis Technologies >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Jan 10, 2008 7:49 PM, Mike Bushard, Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Do your radios have sub channelization? >>>>>> >>>>>> I Congratulate you on the build, but I have to question if stuff like >>>>>> this >>>>>> is not part of the total misunderstanding of WiMAX (what it is and >>>>>> isn't). >>>>>> I >>>>>> really don't think WiMAX is the right term, Maybe WiMAX based, but it >>>>>> definitely is not WiMAX. >>>>>> >>>>>> We just turned up our first WiMAX base station today. Running >>>>>> 2.5Ghzand >>>>>> using 16e ready hardware. I'm Not trying to steal glory here, just >>>>>> >>>> making >>>> >>>>>> a >>>>>> point. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Mike Bushard, Jr >>>>>> Wireless Network Engineer >>>>>> 320-256-WISP (9477) >>>>>> 320-256-9478 Fax >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>>> On >>>>>> Behalf Of Matt Liotta >>>>>> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 2:22 PM >>>>>> To: WISPA General List >>>>>> Subject: [SPAM] Re: [WISPA] [SPAM] One Ring Networks To Rollout New >>>>>> >>>> WiMAX >>>> >>>>>> Service >>>>>> Importance: Low >>>>>> >>>>>> Steve Stroh wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Fixed WiMAX profiles for 3.5 (non-US), but NOT 3.65 GHz in the US >>>>>>> >>>>>> because >>>>>> of >>>>>> >>>>>>> the unique "contention protocol" requirements (systems for 3.65 GHz >>>>>>> >>>>>> should >>>>>> >>>>>>> be considered proprietary and quite possibly non-interoperable). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> The lower 25Mhz of 3.65Ghz does not have a "contention protocol" >>>>>> requirement. However, if the radio implements contention then it >>>>>> won't >>>>>> be restricted to the lower 25Mhz. As of today, only WiMAX radios have >>>>>> been certified for 3.65Ghz. >>>>>> >>>>>> -Matt >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>>>> ---- >>>>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>>>>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>>>> ---- >>>>>> >>>>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>>>>> >>>>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>>>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>>>>> >>>>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- >>>> >>>>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>>>>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- >>>> >>>>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>>>>> >>>>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>>>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>>>>> >>>>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- >>>> >>>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>>>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- >>>> >>>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>>>> >>>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>>>> >>>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- >>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>>> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- >>>> >>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>>> >>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>>> >>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- >>> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >>> http://signup.wispa.org/ >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- >>> >>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >>> >>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>> >>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >>> >>> >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- >> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
