I don’t suppose you can license ALL of 952-960 as a single 8 MHz channel? Probably more like 100 kHz channels.
From: Chuck McCown via Af Sent: Monday, October 06, 2014 1:54 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 900 MHz Survey - Request for Info 932.5 – 935 941.5 – 944 952 - 960 From: Ken Hohhof via Af Sent: Monday, October 06, 2014 12:48 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 900 MHz Survey - Request for Info I remember seeing a Part 101 PCN for a railway (BNSF) that included some licensed 900 MHz links. Unfortunately I didn’t save it. But I know at the sites I typically see a paraflector antenna. What I don’t remember is the frequency and channel width. I think there is licensed 900 MHz above 902-928. Can you get a big enough channel to be useful for broadband, or is this pretty much for SCADA? From: Paul Conlin via Af Sent: Monday, October 06, 2014 1:35 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 900 MHz Survey - Request for Info Channel flexibility is going to be key for the 900 band. Some want smaller channels to avoid noise. Some want larger for more throughput. We want both. Ability to move those channels around will be necessary. Separate channels for Tx and Rx would be really helpful in some cases. PC Blaze Broadband From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chuck McCown via Af Sent: Monday, October 6, 2014 2:25 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 900 MHz Survey - Request for Info How about one wide channel that takes up the whole band. Then you could get 430 type of throughput. Be great for areas with 50 customers that can all be served from one AP. From: That One Guy via Af Sent: Monday, October 06, 2014 12:13 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 900 MHz Survey - Request for Info smaller channels, higher throughput ala UBNT, and unicorn farts On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 1:10 PM, Adam Moffett via Af <af@afmug.com> wrote: Survey done....I'm going to address a question you didn't ask in the survey: There are two things I hate about 900mhz: First is the lower capacity, and a lot of the survey questions were pertinent to that. The second is there is a ton of interference and that makes it unreliable. I think it would be nice if a product could deliver higher capacity in 900mhz, but I also think it would be nice if we could get some rock solid IP connectivity without line of sight, even if it was at a low speed. I won't presume to tell Cambium how to do that, but maybe your next product could have an option for very small channels, or FHSS, or maybe tx and rx on different channels so I can avoid listening on a noisy channel at the tower but still transmit on it. I'd love to have more options in the toolbox to make a NLOS link keep on chugging along for telemetry, or remote desktop, or a single camera, or whatever. As some of you may already be aware, we are conducting some inquiries surrounding the 900 MHz band in order to properly address concerns in using this band, and help provide us the information needed to develop the product that you need to deliver service to your customers. The survey is just over 20 questions, and is located here: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/XNS38W6 Please help us help you! Any information we gather will help us to make sure we’re developing the right product for your needs, and this info will not be used for any commercial or solicitation purposes. It’s optional to fill in the contact info at the end, but I encourage you to do so, in case further exploration of a few of the responses could help even more. The survey will stay open for about 2 weeks, so try to get to it soon. Let me know if you have any questions or problems accessing the survey. Thanks, Matt Mangriotis Senior Product Manager Cambium Networks 3800 Golf Road, Suite 360 Rolling Meadows, IL 60008 www.cambiumnetworks.com O: 847-439-6379 M: 630-308-9394 E: m...@cambiumnetworks.com -- All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember that the parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you. Therefore, if you can't get them together again, there must be a reason. By all means, do not use a hammer. -- IBM maintenance manual, 1925
