Has there been any indication of what costs are going to be associated with the SAS?
On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 1:20 PM Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com> wrote: > In CBRS you'll get higher EIRP, you'll no longer have the +2dbm Tx limit > on mobile devices, and you'll have access to 3x the spectrum. Overall > you'd much rather operate under the CBRS rules > > The main reason a person might prefer NN is they don't have to pay for > the SAS. > > In theory you could argue that a grandfathered NN license protects you > from interference from a CBRS operator, but a person better make sure > they don't have any of those "bodies in the trunk" if they try to call > the FCC for help with that. We'd also likely be stuck with old equipment > in that case. If we use the advantages of the new rules then it's hard > to argue that we should be protected by the old license, and if we're > using old Wimax gear with our old license then we'll be less competitive > than someone with modern electronics, another 100mhz, and 8 or 10 more > db in the link budget. > > In my opinion NN is dead already, regardless of what year a specific > license expires. > > RIP NN > > > On 1/27/2020 11:52 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote: > > Apparently there was a window of time where new or renewed licenses got > expiration dates out to like 2025. See for example WQVI696. I'm a little > unclear on whether all Part 96 equipment becomes illegal this April > regardless of whether your NN license expires. Ours was renewed in October > 2018 and expires April 2020, so it's moot unless we get an extension. But > I know at least one WISP that thinks they have lots of time because their > license doesn't expire until 2024. > > > > That's another bizarre feature of how the FCC has handled this. A > license acquired or renewed in 2018 expires in 2020, but one acquired in > 2015 runs the full 10 years to 2025? That's just random. How can they not > grant extensions if some licenses still have 5 years to run? > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> On Behalf Of David Coudron > > Sent: Monday, January 27, 2020 10:35 AM > > To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <af@af.afmug.com> > > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] FCC 3.5 GHz Spectrum Auction 105 > > > > Yes, that is our understanding. > > > > David Coudron > > david.coud...@advantenon.com | Mobile: 612-991-7474 > > > > Advantenon, Inc. > > i...@advantenon.com | 3500 Vicksburg Lane N, Suite 315, Plymouth, MN > 55447 | www.advantenon.com | Phone: 800-704-4720 | Local: > 612-454-1545 > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> On Behalf Of Seth Mattinen > > Sent: Monday, January 27, 2020 10:33 AM > > To: af@af.afmug.com > > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] FCC 3.5 GHz Spectrum Auction 105 > > > > On 1/27/20 7:20 AM, Mark Radabaugh wrote: > >> yep, and a self fulfilling failure on the part of the FCC. The FCC > >> looked at the registered CPE and decided that WISP’s were not using > >> the band without ever considering how badly they fubared the entire > >> registration process. > >> > >> You WISP’s don’t need an extension, you didn’t use the band. Uh, yeah. > >> > > > > Is the NN shutdown date still April 17, 2020? > > > > -- > > AF mailing list > > AF@af.afmug.com > > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > -- > > AF mailing list > > AF@af.afmug.com > > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > > > > > > > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >
-- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
