I meant Part 74 vs. part 101.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> To: "AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group" <af@af.afmug.com> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 8:48:12 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New unlicensed spectrum Part 101 has spectral efficiency rules that most part 15 type radios cannot achieve. Sent from my iPhone On Apr 26, 2020, at 7:17 AM, Mike Hammett <af...@ics-il.net> wrote: <blockquote> Is there a reason that can't be changed to accommodate radio? Why can't it all just be part 101? ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Hardy" <thardy...@gmail.com> To: "AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group" <af@af.afmug.com> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 7:14:55 AM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New unlicensed spectrum Actually, they are eligible but only in the same areas that other Part 101 licensees would be eligible. They are not eligible under Part 74. <blockquote> On Apr 26, 2020, at 8:10 AM, Tim Hardy < thardy...@gmail.com > wrote: Radio is not eligible for 7 GHz <blockquote> On Apr 25, 2020, at 8:56 AM, Mike Hammett < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: Shouldn't they be in 7 GHz? ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions Midwest Internet Exchange The Brothers WISP ----- Original Message ----- From: "Caleb Knauer" < cknauer.li...@gmail.com > To: "AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group" < af@af.afmug.com > Sent: Friday, April 24, 2020 4:46:41 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New unlicensed spectrum The majority of broadcast TV and radio STL replacements I've been involved with have been 6Ghz due to distances to transmitter towers and fade margins. Those aren't going away, and they have a pretty big voice with the feds. AFC feels like it could be quite the boondoggle. But we shall see. On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 12:39 AM Ken Hohhof < af...@kwisp.com > wrote: > > But unlike 11/18/23 GHz it can be used for PTP links >10 miles based on rain > fade characteristics. And there are many existing links. Just saying your > spectrum would be nice for indoor WiFi doesn’t make them go away, and the > service carried on those existing links is often critical traffic. > > > > From: AF < af-boun...@af.afmug.com > On Behalf Of Kurt Fankhauser > Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2020 10:29 PM > To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group < af@af.afmug.com > > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New unlicensed spectrum > > > > Honestly I think that 6ghz licensed is becoming less practical. As more and > more fiber is run to the tower the 6ghz band would be much more better > utilized for last mile PTMP and indoor wifi. > > > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 10:30 PM Tim Reichhart < > timreichh...@hometowncable.net > wrote: > > I dont think it was WISPA I think other companies had there fingers in it > WISPA isnt that big in DC like some of these other companies. > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > -----Original Message----- > From: "Matt Hoppes" < mattli...@rivervalleyinternet.net > > To: "AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group" < af@af.afmug.com > > Date: 04/23/20 10:14 > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New unlicensed spectrum > > So did WISPA make this happen? Or was it the millions these companies dropped > that made it happen? > > > On Apr 23, 2020, at 9:51 PM, Eric Nielsen < ericlniel...@gmail.com > wrote: > > The primary influencers behind the rule change are some small, no-name > companies like Google, Facebook, Apple, Broadcom. I doubt you've heard of > them. They're interested in unlicensed 6GHz for the indoor low power (WiFi6) > usage. > > > > I'm certain they've dropped millions lobbying for this. > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 9:45 PM TJ Trout < t...@voltbb.com > wrote: > > There must be some ulterior motive here there is no way that the FCC out of > the goodness of their heart provided more unlicensed spectrum to the common > man/small business. > > > > So the question is who can utilize this spectrum? > > > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2020, 6:35 PM Tim Hardy < thardy...@gmail.com > wrote: > > FCC has total authority over these bands. > > > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 9:29 PM Kurt Fankhauser < lists.wavel...@gmail.com > > wrote: > > How can the FCC make spectrum available for un-licensed without an act of > Congress? > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 7:30 PM Erich Kaiser < er...@northcentraltower.com > > wrote: > > yes you are right. > > > > > Erich Kaiser > > North Central Tower > > er...@northcentraltower.com > > Office: 815-570-3101 > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 6:12 PM Ken Hohhof < af...@kwisp.com > wrote: > > More like 4.9 to 7. > > > > From: AF < af-boun...@af.afmug.com > On Behalf Of Erich Kaiser > Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2020 5:35 PM > To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group < af@af.afmug.com > > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] New unlicensed spectrum > > > > Two of the UNII bands are heavily used for licensed PTP and I mean heavily, > so really if the AFC system works correctly most of the spectrum proposed > will likely be unuseable outdoor. I feel like from a reliability standpoint > it will be tough to count on a system that uses AFC in general. What about > the Antenna being used on these APs are they going to be able to cover the > entire band from 5Ghz to 6Ghz efficiently? Just thinking... > > > > > > > > > > > > > Erich Kaiser > > North Central Tower > > er...@northcentraltower.com > > Office: 815-570-3101 > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 5:24 PM Sean Heskett < af...@zirkel.us > wrote: > > from Fred Goldstein via the wispa list: > > > > "There are really two different types of devices approved today. A Standard > Power device, allowed +36 dBm EIRP, must communicate daily with an AFC that > determines what frequencies are available at its location. It must have > geolocation. (We are waiting to see the final Order to see how the "client > AP" is handled.) The rules for the AFC are reasonably conservative, so the > licensed PtP users are generally pretty happy with it. And a whole bunch of > companies have already been working on AFCs. > > > The Low Power Indoor device, on the other hand, does not require AFC. It is > limited to indoor use only (must have mains power, may not be weatherproof, > must be labeled) and is allowed +30 dBm EIRP (clients +24 dBm). Since those > can use any frequency, the incumbents are a wee bit concerned. But between > building entry losses (pretty high at 6 GHz) and the directionality of the FS > dishes, harmful interference is unlikely. That is likely to be a volume > market for Wi-Fi 6e. The higher-end business stuff, and ours, will be > standard power. > > The FNPRM asks about Very Low Power outdoor operation without AFC. Like cell > phones and small hotspots. It also asks about higher power for AFC-controlled > devices." > > > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 4:07 PM Jaime Solorza < losguyswirel...@gmail.com > > wrote: > > Yep...lots of buzz from this > > > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2020, 3:47 PM Sean Heskett < af...@zirkel.us > wrote: > > WISPA said they are waiting for them to release the order. they are hoping > it's 36db...there's a chance it's only 30db. > > > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 3:42 PM Tim Withrow via AF < af@af.afmug.com > wrote: > > I learned that the FCC approved 1200Mhz of unlicensed spectrum in 6 Gigahertz > today. > > any idea what Eirp they approved for fixed wireless? > > -- > 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 > > -- > 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 > > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > -- > > Eric Nielsen > 571-508-7409 > ericlniel...@gmail.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 > > -- > 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 </blockquote> </blockquote> -- 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 </blockquote> -- 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
