The TV stations already think that they are loosing their space.
They have fought this whole TVWS thing tooth and nail. They won't be
giving any waivers.
Jeromie Reeves wrote:
There are already RF/DOCSIS hybrid systems. DOCSIS is a
very expensive idea to go with. The head end is the primary cost, but
so its the client RF system. The system I looked at was 75K not
counting the cable head or modems (this was also about 10 years ago, I
have not heard that it was any cheaper today). If you already had a
DOCSIS system then it helps. I think Ubnt would be a good contender
here. It depends on the rules for channel bonding. If we have say 8
channels (40mhz) then we could use 40mhz airmax. Yummie. And, to my
surprise, I have found palces with 15 channels open, and 10 miles up
the valley, no upper channels at all open. I have been there, I have
put a antenna up 30 feet (and more, a client has a 75ft crank tower for
tv) and its pretty impossible to get more then a handful of channels,
and most of the ones listed are not receivable. I do not know what
options we have for those area, where they are in the coverage zone but
have no signal due to mountains and such. Is there any mechanism in
place, or being thought of, that would let us have a exemption or
exception to the rules for channel sitting? Namely, Say I have 2 open
channels, 30, 31. Can I ask 29 or 32 for a waver? "You can use this
channel ,at this power, with your antenna(s) pointed as such that it
does not cause us interference". this would be very useful in a case
where that channel (29/32) is used to TX (namely away from said market)
and the clear channel is used to RX. We could then design the networks
with lots of dirt between us and them. I knwo I have very tall
mountains and many low site butting right up against them. I could
blast out on some channels and the over lapping station would never
hear me (mtns, distance, and direction) as well the market does not use
their channels as they do not come in as it is. (We put in OTA & HD
Antennas).
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 9:24 AM, Randy Cosby
<[email protected]>
wrote:
I have not had time to read
up on TVWS much yet, but just had a thought over the weekend. Wouldn't
it be easy to adapt DOCSIS to TVWS?
Randy
On 9/25/2010 1:53 PM, Jeremie Chism wrote:
Looks like the cable companies are very worried about this
situation.
On Sep 25, 2010, at 1:39 PM, "Scott Carullo" <[email protected]> wrote:
I
read the whole FCC document regarding what channels can be used. In
one section it talks about fixed wireless under channel 21 but then in
the decision section under that it just made the general statement that
channels under 21 could not be utilized. I only breezed through the
document once. Can someone answer the question of exactly what
channels/frequencies are available for use assuming that all channels
are free from other operators and none adjacent. Once the list of
possible candidate channels are listed the available ones for use in a
particular area can be further refined by removing all the utilized and
adjacent channels to the ones utilized -- leaving only ones that can
actually be used.
Next question to add - it would appear that there are currently no
devices that can operate in TV WS due to the FCC requirement to A) be
certified for use in this band and B) they require the devices to
broadcast an identifying set of info for location / identity purposes
which will need to be incorporated into the wireless protocol I would
imagine. Is this correct, there are no devices on the market in the US
that are legal to use at this time....
Thanks
Scott Carullo
Technical Operations
877-804-3001 x102
