I understand that... but the SASs have told me they will continue to
divide the pie up.
On 7/26/21 12:10 PM, Brian Webster wrote:
This is based on conversations with Richard Barnhart who understand this
probably as good as anyone. He did help develop the standards and SAS
requirements.
Just saying that while it's possible for the SAS to do that now, if more
users show up than there are channels there is no first in protections. Make
your business plans accordingly.
Thank you,
Brian Webster
www.wirelessmapping.com
-----Original Message-----
From: AF [mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com] On Behalf Of Matt Hoppes
Sent: Monday, July 26, 2021 11:18 AM
To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group; Tyson Burris
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] T-Mobile PALs and CBRS GAA
What equipment are you using? If 450 make sure you use Frame Type 2 for
LTE Coexxistence.
Then contact your SAS who will promptly kick T-Mobile off of part of the
GAA and allow both of you to coexist nicely.
On 7/25/21 6:24 AM, Tyson Burris wrote:
Good morning AF Geeks-
Someone help me understand this better. Several questions below.
We operate in six counties in Indiana. Some rural some not so much.
In our main county (johnson) we are starting to get interference even
when we are connected to the SAS.
While we cannot prove anything yet, each tower we are seeing this on
recently had new T-Mobile equipment deployed.
I reached out to our attorney, Steve Coran, this week and asked him to
pulled the county PAL winners. Listed here:
PAL winners for Johnson County, IN:
XF Wireless Investment, LLC (Comcast) -- 20 MHz
Actel, LLC (CenturyLink) -- 20 MHz
Wetterhorn Wireless L.L.C. (DISH) – 30 MHz
-Century Link has zero cell services of any kind in our county and
currently not deploying in fixed wireless.
-Comcast floats off Verizon
-Dish also has zero cell services of any kind in our count
So what we ended up with is PAL winners who have nothing to offer
locally yet unless subleasing.
Questions are:
is T-Mobile subleasing PAL’s from any of these three?
Is T-Mobile illegally just rotating PAL’s anywhere they want in the
country instead of just local counties?
Anyway to clearly isolate the offending carrier sucking up so much
spectrum and causing all the interference?
Another member brought up T-Mobile as a possible offender. Did any data
come from that?
What time of the day do the SAS databases sync with each other and does
this force other carriers to cut back on total GAA – share nicely?
Has anyone found the other SAS providers to be better then GOOGLE.
Starting to think their system is worthless or inaccurate. Truth is I
think this whole concept of spectrum sharing is poorly handled and not
fully tested on 3g.
If a carrier is on the same tower, how will that affect sync? I ask
because we found some very interesting work arounds and results with
upload when we started playing with sync settings…ie distance, frame,
channel.
If the customer SM is moved from one spot to another or from a roof to a
post how badly does this affect the calculations on the SAS side?
Things we have discovered:
* Even when we find noise floors on spectrum analysis in a reasonable
range and move to the cleaner channel on the SAS the interference
still trashes the uplinks.
* In some cases the SAS is blocking the cleanest of channels which
could be PAL related.
* In some cases customer SM’s going off other ‘unaffected’ sites
nearby may get knocked offline by the new noise.
* In some cases we have had to drop off the SAS and found switching to
other regulatory has allowed us to switch to cleaner channels and
stabilized subs. (which is exactly what we shouldn’t be doing)
* We have a ton of 450m units going on towers as both new and
upgrades. I am concerned that the more urban areas will struggle
with capacity since we have to break this up across multiple sectors.
History and Equipment:
Again this seems very isolated to our more urban deployments which have
historically been awesome in the 50Mhz channels prior to CBRS turn ups.
Our more rural areas are not seeing this issue at all.
All three locations have very specific and brand new T-Mobile equipment
so this has been our assumption of the cause without such proof.
Equipment on these commercial towers has been no more then two 450i AP’s
with KP 120’ sectors (pending 450m upgrades).
*Tyson Burris, President**
**Internet Communications Inc.**
**739 Commerce Dr.**
**Franklin, IN 46131**
***
*Office #**317-738-0320 *
*Cell/Direct #**317-412-1540 *
*Online: **www.surfici.net*
ICI
*What can ICI do for you?*
*Broadband Wireless - PtP/PtMP Solutions - Mesh Wifi/Hotzones - IP
Cameras - Fiber - Towers - Infrastructure.*
**
*CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail is intended for the*
*addressee shown. It contains information that is*
*confidential and protected from disclosure. Any review,*
*dissemination or use of this transmission or its contents by*
*unauthorized organizations or individuals is strictly*
*prohibited.*
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
