Yea, but the power levels of some are not likely usable in an outdoor WISP environment. A good explanation is at Wikipedia strange enough...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-NII People running equipment in frequencies at a power level higher than intended is the issue. Also, the 5470-5725 band requires DFS. Regards, Chuck On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Art Stephens <[email protected]> wrote: > 5265-5320 > 5500-5580 > 5660-5700 > 5735-5840 > > Are these not USA channels? > If am wrong let me know and I will change them. > > > On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> >> Forrest...what is your offlist email ? >> >> Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone >> >> ----- Reply message ----- >> From: "Forrest Christian (List Account)" <[email protected]> >> To: "WISPA General List" <[email protected]> >> Subject: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? >> Date: Sun, Feb 9, 2014 11:53 AM >> >> >> I'm going to agree with others... >> >> Running outside legal limits doesn't look good to the FCC, and it sounds >> like you are definitely running outside the limits since you are whining >> about the ability to run your radios in a mode which seems to have no use >> than to exceed the limits. >> >> I will also add that if you're running all your radios hotter than they >> should be that your nose floor problem is most likely self inflicted. My >> experience over the years is that radios are designed to run at a specific >> tx power and if you're exceeding it you get a lot of out of channel bleed >> over. Even if the radios don't do this you are introducing far more rf >> than is likely needed causing an overall rising of the noise floor. >> >> Please don't interpret everyone's ire incorrectly. We've just all >> either dealt with an operator like you are now or have been an operator >> like you are now. And right now we're trying to gain credibility with the >> FCC which is hard to do when some operators are flagrantly breaking the >> rules. Which makes us a bit grumpy. >> >> I'm sure some of your neighbors out there would love to help you better >> understand what you are doing to yourself and help you improve your >> operations which will in turn improve your quality of service. Heck, I'd >> drive over there for a weekend if my schedule wasn't so packed. >> >> In any case please ask for help in appropriate spots and let us help you >> reap the rewards of a correctly and legally operating network. >> On Feb 8, 2014 4:49 PM, "Art Stephens" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out of >>> these frequencies. >>> Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that >>> platform. >>> First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for about >>> 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since 5735 - 5840 >>> runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area, >>> Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840. >>> Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess >>> with it. >>> Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA. >>> Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports >>> 5170-5875. >>> >>> Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes more >>> money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for both >>> wisps and consumers. >>> >>> -- >>> Arthur Stephens >>> Senior Networking Technician >>> Ptera Inc. >>> PO Box 135 >>> 24001 E Mission Suite 50 >>> Liberty Lake, WA 99019 >>> 509-927-7837 >>> ptera.com >>> facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera >>> >>> >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> "This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and >>> is intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. >>> Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or >>> opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are not >>> intended to represent those of the company." >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wireless mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wireless mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> > > > -- > Arthur Stephens > Senior Networking Technician > Ptera Inc. > PO Box 135 > 24001 E Mission Suite 50 > Liberty Lake, WA 99019 > 509-927-7837 > ptera.com > facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > "This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and > is intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. > Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or > opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are not > intended to represent those of the company." > > _______________________________________________ > Wireless mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > >
_______________________________________________ Wireless mailing list [email protected] http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
