What are you guys talking about? A 30dB dish with a 0dB radio on it will easily go 4-5 miles. Or put a 34dB dish on with a -4dB radio if you want more gain.
Sent from my iPad On Feb 12, 2014, at 17:56, Fred Goldstein <fgoldst...@ionary.com> wrote: > On 2/12/2014 5:23 PM, Chuck Hogg wrote: >> 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. > > Actually, so does 5.25-5.35, as of 2004 or so. It didn't originally, but > when they added the 5.47-5.725 band, which needs DFS, they added the > requirement to the original U-NII-2A band. So > 15.407(h)(2) Radar Detection Function of Dynamic Frequency Selection (DFS). > U-NII devices operating in the 5.25-5.35 GHz and 5.47-5.725 GHz bands > shall employ a DFS radar detection mechanism to detect the presence of > radar systems and to avoid co-channel operation with radar systems. > > The power level down there is adequate for some applications, like half-mile > links. Lots of old Motorola PTP-400s are legally pumping +5 to +9 dBm into > panels... one urban path is working over 2 miles, though we're replacing it. > >> >> On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Art Stephens <asteph...@ptera.com> 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 >>> <par...@cyberbroadband.net> wrote: >>>> >>>> Forrest...what is your offlist email ? >>>> >>>> Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone >>>> >>>> ----- Reply message ----- >>>> From: "Forrest Christian (List Account)" <li...@packetflux.com> >>>> To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> >>>> 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" <asteph...@ptera.com> 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 >>>>> Wireless@wispa.org >>>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Wireless mailing list >>>> Wireless@wispa.org >>>> 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 >>> Wireless@wispa.org >>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wireless mailing list >> Wireless@wispa.org >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > -- > Fred R. Goldstein k1io fred "at" interisle.net > Interisle Consulting Group > +1 617 795 2701 > _______________________________________________ > Wireless mailing list > Wireless@wispa.org > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
_______________________________________________ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
