The proposals protect Part 101 links using a database system. It’s curious that you would give up access to potentially >1000Mhz of clean mid-band spectrum because you don’t want your competitors using it. Given the current limited amount of spectrum available for PTMP use how do you propose to serve the demands of your customers without obtaining additional spectrum?
You said “all licensed PTP links would be at risk”. I don’t believe that is the case here - we are only discussing 6Ghz which is largely used (in our industry) for long range legacy PTP links. It’s certainly important where it’s used at Mike Meluskey pointed out, but looking at the numbers the band shows pretty light usage. How much of the 6Ghz spectrum are you currently using for PTP links? Mark > On Jun 4, 2017, at 8:45 PM, garrettshan...@vabb.com wrote: > > I think the 6Ghz band need to stay for PtP links only. As for band sharing > I think that the need for reliable wireless back-haul far outweighs any > benefit of moving the band completely to part 15. > > Use of this band for PtMP applications should not be permitted and all > installations should require registration and professional installation. As > for higher power and larger channels: I do think the band could use some > updates. But not at the expense of the current links. > > We've seen the 5.1Ghz band fill in with noise almost as soon as > certifications rolled out. I don't want hundreds of "Xfinity wifi" SSID's in > 6ghz as well. > > While I don't think our company alone counts as significant opposition, you > can count us as "significantly opposed". > > > Garrett Shankle > Senior Field Technician > Virginia Broadband LLC. > (540)-829-1700 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: mike.l...@gmail.com > Sent: Sunday, June 4, 2017 7:35pm > To: "WISPA General List" <email@example.com> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Looking for opinions on a proposal for PTMP in 6Ghz Part > 101 spectrum > > +1000 > > > On Jun 4, 2017, at 16:23, Seth Mattinen <se...@rollernet.us> wrote: > > > >> On 6/2/17 2:12 PM, Mark Radabaugh wrote: > >> I’m interested in opinions on how important 6Ghz PTP links are to the > >> membership and for those who use them if there would be significant > >> opposition to using the spectrum for Point to Multipoint. > > > > > > I think that if the history of behavior with unlicensed is any > > indication, then all licensed PTP links will be at risk of seeing > > substantial interference by idiots and would be at high risk of being > > forced offline. > > > > ~Seth > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > _______________________________________________ > 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