It seems technically quite easy. Set compliance mode on an older device and associate to one that is compliant.
Does DFS certification only apply to AP operations or CPE operations as well? I'm guessing the former. If that's the case, UBNT hasn't done the paperwork to get them certified as CPE either, but should be a lot easier as they don't need to pass all of the other business. Also, that makes more sense... that your AP control what happens in a given area. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt Hoppes" <mhop...@indigowireless.com> To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> Cc: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> Sent: Friday, February 14, 2014 3:31:32 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? Ummm. And how are you connected uncertified devices to a DFS equipped sector? On Feb 13, 2014, at 10:17, Art Stephens < asteph...@ptera.com > wrote: We have over 600 Airgrids deployed (Which did not get DFS approval but we are using the frequencies listed and DFS on the Rocket Sectors they connect to. I have been chasing jumping bunny rabbits (False Positives from competitors putting up new APs)) - cost to replace $6000 not including labor costs. And money grows on trees. All of our other equipment I have reprogrammed and updated to bring them up to "legal". Same with Power Bridges - No DFS - So when the Nano beams came out 5.7-5.8 No DFS that triggered my question about the lower frequencies whether it seemed like they were going to be withdrawn and sold off to the highest bidder. It is all about the money after all. Are we the only ones that deployed so many Airgrids?. On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 4:59 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) < li...@packetflux.com > wrote: <blockquote> Yes but the lower ones require DFS and lower power and a certified radio. Your original message was complaining about the removal of compliance test mode. The specific purpose of compliance test mode is to permit a radio to operate outside of legal limits. For instance over the legal power limit or on DFS bands without DFS enabled or outside legal channels for that radio. UBNT has stated over and over that their intent was not to prevent any legal operation of their radio. I haven't heard of any instances where not having compliance mode has resulted in a meaningful impact to a legal operator. I hate to defend them but in this case it seems like they may have gotten it nearly correct. Is there a specific frequency and power you're using you think is legal but isn't permitted unless you turn on compliance test mode? On Feb 12, 2014 2:08 PM, "Art Stephens" < asteph...@ptera.com > wrote: <blockquote> 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: <blockquote> 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: <blockquote> 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 </blockquote> -- 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 </blockquote> _______________________________________________ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless </blockquote> -- 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." </blockquote> <blockquote> _______________________________________________ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless </blockquote> _______________________________________________ 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
