On 6/5/17 4:04 AM, Mark Radabaugh wrote:
> 
> 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?
> 

Smaller sites closer to your customers.


> 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.


If you take away one licensed band it could set a precedent to take 
more. I think this proposal is too short sighted to say that nobody uses 
it or that it's legacy. It's used. I just talked with a WISP about a 
potential 26 mile link and that's territory for considering 6GHz.

I ask the parties that support killing 6GHz with unlicensed use: what 
replaces it?

~Seth
_______________________________________________
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Reply via email to