LOUD NOISES!!!! 



----- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

----- Original Message -----

From: "Matt Hoppes" <[email protected]> 
To: "WISPA General List" <[email protected]> 
Sent: Friday, February 14, 2014 5:06:30 PM 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 frequencies? 

You didn't make the comments that took this in the direction it did :) 



On 2/14/14, 6:04 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: 
> I was just speaking theoretical. Don't do any of the things I mentioned. 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- 
> Mike Hammett 
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> http://www.ics-il.com 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
> *From: *"Matt Hoppes" <[email protected]> 
> *To: *"WISPA General List" <[email protected]> 
> *Sent: *Friday, February 14, 2014 5:03:53 PM 
> *Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 
> frequencies? 
> 
> Exactly... and this conversation just took a hair pin into exactly WHY 
> we're being "muscled out" of the frequencies. 
> 
> Guys -- if you're going to run, play by the rules. No unlocked radios, 
> compliance with DFS, set to US country code, etc. 
> 
> 
> Matt Hoppes 
> Director of Information Technology 
> Indigo Wireless 
> +1 (570) 723-7312 
> 
> On 2/14/14, 6:01 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: 
> > We're talking about DFS certification requirements for CPEs. They 
> exist :P 
> > 
> > *Josh Reynolds* 
> > Chief Information Officer 
> > SPITwSPOTS 
> > [email protected] | www.spitwspots.com 
> > 
> > On 02/14/2014 01:46 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: 
> >> The DOD only cares that you stop using the channel. It's up to you if 
> >> you want it to work somewhere else. ;-) 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> ----- 
> >> Mike Hammett 
> >> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> >> http://www.ics-il.com 
> >> 
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
> >> *From: *"Josh Reynolds" <[email protected]> 
> >> *To: *[email protected] 
> >> *Sent: *Friday, February 14, 2014 3:58:13 PM 
> >> *Subject: *Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700 
> >> frequencies? 
> >> 
> >> CPE must be DFS compliant as well. CPE has to be able to respond to 
> >> channel change requests from the AP, etc. 
> >> 
> >> *Josh Reynolds* 
> >> Chief Information Officer 
> >> SPITwSPOTS 
> >> [email protected] | www.spitwspots.com 
> >> 
> >> On 02/14/2014 12:35 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: 
> >> 
> >> 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 
> >> 
> >> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
> >> *From: *"Matt Hoppes" <[email protected]> 
> >> *To: *"WISPA General List" <[email protected]> 
> >> *Cc: *"WISPA General List" <[email protected]> 
> >> *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 <[email protected] 
> >> <mailto:[email protected]>> 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) <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> 
> >> wrote: 
> >> 
> >> 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" 
> >> <[email protected] <mailto:[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] 
> >> <mailto:[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] <mailto:[email protected]>> 
> >> To: "WISPA General List" <[email protected] 
> >> <mailto:[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] <mailto:[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 <tel:509-927-7837> 
> >> ptera.com <http://ptera.com> 
> >> facebook.com/PteraInc 
> >> <http://facebook.com/PteraInc> | 
> >> twitter.com/Ptera <http://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] <mailto:[email protected]> 
> >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> _______________________________________________ 
> >> Wireless mailing list 
> >> [email protected] <mailto:[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 <tel:509-927-7837> 
> >> ptera.com <http://ptera.com> 
> >> facebook.com/PteraInc <http://facebook.com/PteraInc> | 
> >> twitter.com/Ptera <http://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] <mailto:[email protected]> 
> >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> _______________________________________________ 
> >> Wireless mailing list 
> >> [email protected] <mailto:[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 <http://ptera.com> 
> >> facebook.com/PteraInc <http://facebook.com/PteraInc> | 
> >> twitter.com/Ptera <http://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] <mailto:[email protected]> 
> >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> _______________________________________________ 
> >> Wireless mailing list 
> >> [email protected] 
> >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> _______________________________________________ 
> >> Wireless mailing list 
> >> [email protected] 
> >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> _______________________________________________ 
> >> Wireless mailing list 
> >> [email protected] 
> >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> _______________________________________________ 
> >> Wireless mailing list 
> >> [email protected] 
> >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________ 
> > Wireless mailing list 
> > [email protected] 
> > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless 
> > 
> _______________________________________________ 
> Wireless mailing list 
> [email protected] 
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________ 
> Wireless mailing list 
> [email protected] 
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless 
> 
_______________________________________________ 
Wireless mailing list 
[email protected] 
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless 

_______________________________________________
Wireless mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Reply via email to