Patrick, Respectfully I have been told the exact opposite by a WISP that was going to do a large 3.65 deployment, except the local teleco registered all of the high ground in the area preventing them from registering their own sites. The teleco has no intention of deploying the gear, so now they are in a heck of a problem.
Daniel White 3-dB Networks > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Patrick Leary > Sent: Monday, December 15, 2008 9:22 AM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vecima 3.65 > > Hi Travis, I wish I had specifics, but I don't have anything other than > an anecdotal story told to me by Redline when I was at a conference. I > had always been under the impression an operator could register for the > same locations. > > Patrick > > ________________________________ > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Travis Johnson > Sent: Monday, December 15, 2008 8:08 AM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vecima 3.65 > > > Patrick, > > Could you please share the exact information about the FCC rejecting > applications for the same tower? At ISPCon a month ago, there were > several people there that had deployed 3.65 and had even registered on > the same tower as other 3.65 people and the applications went through > just fine. > > I think you are giving people the impression that if they are first to > the tower, they get entire use. This is NOT going to be the case. > > Travis > Microserv > > Patrick Leary wrote: > > I'll chime in with a few comments: > > I admit to having been frustrated by the requirements in the > 3.65 GHz > ruling by the ambiguity of the cooperation requirements and for > sure > there are no first in rights. However, what I am seeing thus far > in > practice is that first movers do enjoy a meaningful advantage in > their > markets. Since WiMAX does represent a more significant CAPEX > investment > on infrastructure, operators are reluctant to deploy > aggressively in a > market where several operators are already live. Second, since > the rule > does not define neither the nature nor extent of the > cooperation, the > first in operators seem to have a leg up with the next in folks > needing > to work around them to some extent. At a minimum, cooperation as > it > relates to 3.65 GHz is a boon for the lawyer class and since > most WISPs > are loathe to deploy an attorney to battle the first in's > attorney, many > opt to find greener pastures. Also, according to me Redline > friends, we > are learning that the FCC has rejected some registrations of > multiple > operators on the same tower site. So on balance, the > interference risks > in 3.65 GHz are minimal as compared to 5.x GHz and certainly the > other > ISM bands. > > I do wish that the FCC would use some of the 3.65 HGz license > fees to > create an enforcement pool, as well as defining a more specific > set of > rules and procedures for the human side of 3.65 GHz cooperation. > > Cheers, > > Patrick Leary > Aperto Networks > 813.426.4230 mobile > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of John Scrivner > Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2008 9:36 PM > To: WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Vecima 3.65 > > I consider my reply to be of enough value that I am sending out > on the > WISPA members list. You will see my reply there. > Scriv > > > > On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 11:28 PM, Travis Johnson <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]> wrote: > > > > John, > > What are your thoughts about using the 3.65ghz band that > has no > capabilities to handle any type of noise rejection? One > of my big > concerns with 3.65ghz is spending a lot of money on base > stations, > NMS, etc. and then having someone purchase a $3,000 > LigoWave 3.65 > point to point link and shut my system down completely. > I believe this > > > > > > to be a _very_ real concern in this space. > > I know the Vecima equipment is just a frequency change > from their > 3.5ghz equipment. I know equipment in that band has > nothing to deal > with noise, because they are licensed frequencies and > therefore don't > need to worry about interference. Do you have concerns > about this? The > > > > > > FCC has already said that problems will need to be > "worked out", and > that they are not going to step in and do anything. It > will NOT be a > first come first serve basis as many believe. > > Thoughts? Comments? > > Travis > Microserv > > John Scrivner wrote: > > My thoughts inline below: > > On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 5:21 PM, Travis Johnson > <[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]> > > > <[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Ummmm.... pricing is WAY, WAY different. > > Redline AP's are around $10k > Vecima AP's are around $4k > > > > Redline has an FCC approved system with 3 - 120 degree > sectors with a > > > > > > 3-way splitter which allows for full 360 degree coverage > now with one > sector controller with upgrade path for more sector > controllers as > your needs increase over time. Redline supports uplink > sub-channelization which adds about 15 db of increased > receive > sensitivity to your CPE to base station link. I find the > cost is > justified for the Redline system and I have one online > that I am very > happy with. I am moving my leased line connections to > WiMax with > better speeds and erquivalent reliability. The ROI for > this base > station ist less than 2.5 years now and will improve as > I add more > customers. I feel very satisfied with the Redline system > and am > > > confident we will add more Redline bases in the future. > > > > > > Redline CPE's are $300 each (even in 250 quantity) > Vecima CPE's are > less than $249 > > > > Redline CPEs are built like a tank. They have the Intel > WiMax Ruby > chipset (the best available at any price). Future > migration to 802.16e > > > > > > for this CPE is a firmware flash. It is true that you > have to buy 72 > radios (not 250) to get the $300 price point. They are > well worth the > money. I take a Redline CPE in with me on sales calls. > The quality > helps me sell WiMax.. It is that nice of a piece. It is > the best > quality CPE device I have used. It is very similar to > the quality look > > > and feel of the Alvarion VL CPE radios. > > > > > And, I was told Tranzeo is making Redline's CPE as > well? Could you > send a picture of the Redline CPE? > > > > This is not true at all. Tranzeo and Redline CPEs are > night and day > different from one another. The quality of the Redline > CPE was a big > part of my decision to choose Redline as our WiMax > platform. Nothing > touches the Intel Ruby chipset. It is the best going. > Scriv > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------- WISPA Wants You! Join > today!http://signup.wispa.org/ > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------- > > WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] > > > 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: [email protected] > > 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: [email protected] > > 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: [email protected] > > 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: [email protected] > > 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: [email protected] Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
