I don't think so, since I'm pretty sure ePMP was released before the new rules were announced. ePMP can actually use quite a bit higher power in 5.1ghz PtP than ubnt - for example, a NanoBridge M5 is limited to 11db and an ePMP force 110 can do, I think 20db (both are 25db antennas).
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 10:27 AM, John Woodfield <[email protected]> wrote: > Is this why the power is so limited in the US ePMP gear and not UBNT? > > > > > > > > John Woodfield Delmarva WiFi http://www.delmarvawifi.com cell (410) > 708-1937 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: "Mark Radabaugh" <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2015 11:23am > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the future of being an ISP > > The new rules don’t prohibit high power operation in 5.8, they limit the > out of band emission into 5.4 to such extreme levels that it’s very > difficult to get the equipment to pass certification. > I wish I could recall exactly what the numbers are but the gist of it was > that if you take a currently legal 5.8 radio with a high gain antenna and > point it at a TDWR site, the out of band emissions inside the TDWR band can > still be high enough to cause an issue. The result being that the FCC > imposed much stricter limits on the OOB emissions thus making the equipment > either much more expensive or requiring power reductions in the 5730-5850 > section of the band. > Mark > > On Jan 22, 2015, at 11:15 AM, Mathew Howard <[email protected]> wrote: > Are you sure about that? I thought they were still operating under the > old rules for 5.8ghz... everything in 5150-5250 already has to use the new > rules (which MImosa does), but my understanding is that the new rules would > basically limit 5.8ghz to what 5.1ghz is doing now, and on a Mimosa B5 > (integrated) I can set the Tx power to 17db in 5.8ghz, but only 7db in > 5.1ghz. > > On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 9:35 AM, Rory Conaway <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> The Mimosa B5’s already meet the current spec that the FCC proposed. >> The problem is that the rules were like using a hammer to break an egg. >> >> >> >> Rory >> >> >> >> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Ken Hohhof >> *Sent:* Thursday, January 22, 2015 8:28 AM >> >> *To:* [email protected] >> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] the future of being an ISP >> >> >> >> My worry would be that manufacturers decide the redesign effort, higher >> prices, and lower performance makes the WISP market not worthwhile and they >> just walk away and don’t make long range equipment for the 5 GHz band. And >> decide the money is in small cell WiFi equipment, for the guys who wanted >> the rules change. >> >> >> >> The other possible outcome is manufacturers sell equipment authorized for >> low gain antennas but that can be operated illegally with high gain >> antennas, leaving WISPs with the choice of going out of business or >> operating illegally. Kind of a Walter White choice. >> >> >> >> It’s good to hear the manufacturers are developing a proposal that will >> hopefully appease the FCC and FAA, I assume they are proposing something >> they believe they can actually design, manufacture and sell to the WISP >> market. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *From:* John Woodfield <[email protected]> >> >> *Sent:* Thursday, January 22, 2015 8:53 AM >> >> *To:* [email protected] >> >> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] the future of being an ISP >> >> >> But will they enforce it with all the amateurs running around throwing >> up UBNT stuff everywhere? Its gotten really bad around here. Nobody even >> bothers to do spectrum analysis. Heck the county government starting >> throwing up rocket dishes at full power blasting 40mhz channels all over >> the place... >> >> >> >> John Woodfield Delmarva WiFi http://www.delmarvawifi.com cell (410) >> 708-1937 >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: "Adam Moffett" <[email protected]> >> Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2015 9:49am >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the future of being an ISP >> >> >> >> Oh you missed that? Out of band emissions limits will be based on EIRP >> instead of Tx power. So a linksys router with a 3db antenna probably >> doesn't have to change anything, but anything with big >> panels/dishes/sectors has to reduce their OOB emissions accordingly. The >> end result is staying legal in 5ghz will require expensive filters added to >> the equipment, or a reduction in tx power, or a reduction in antenna gain, >> or a combination of the three. >> >> I think that's about the size of it. >> >> Ok What did I miss. New 5ghz rules??? >> >> >> >> John Woodfield Delmarva WiFi http://www.delmarvawifi.com cell (410) >> 708-1937 >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: "Ken Hohhof" mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]> >> Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2015 9:28am >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the future of being an ISP >> >> So did all you folks stop worrying about the 5 GHz rules? They are >> already >> a done deal, the end of new equipment authorization is coming soon, to be >> followed by end of sale. >> >> Seems like this is as big an issue if not bigger than having to pay into >> USF >> which, let's face it, we just turn around and add as a below-the-line >> charge >> on customer bills. Customers have already proved they don't pay attention >> to below-the-line charges, plus all the competition would be doing it as >> well. The main downside I see is if they increase the size of the CAF >> fund >> and our big competition gets even more subsidies to overbuild us. >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Rory Conaway >> Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2015 8:14 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the future of being an ISP >> >> You should change it to, "when required by corrupt, geriatric, ignorant, >> and >> moronic government politicians". There is no question why Obama is >> pushing >> this, he is an ideological idiot with absolutely no management or >> economic >> skills. Add to that his feelings are hurt that the rest of the country is >> now seeing him for the egomaniac immature child that he is. Wheeler is >> now >> just trying to keep his job temporarily but I guarantee is trying to find >> a >> way out of this that preserves his lobbying business. The second he can >> get out, preserve his reputation, and probably not let his boss destroy >> the >> country and his future/former clients any further economically than he >> already has, including the 1200 new regulations taking effect now that >> will >> cost at least $200B this year alone, he's gone. >> >> All I know is I didn't go far enough with my Tom Wheeler article. Obama >> blindsided me on his need to destroy another industry and make government >> bigger. >> >> Rory >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Af [mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] On Behalf >> Of Bill Prince >> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 10:21 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the future of being an ISP >> >> We have always had the disclaimer in our service agreement that it would >> include taxes/surcharges if/when required by the government. Doesn't make >> it taste any better, but it covers the reality. >> >> bp >> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> >> >> On 1/21/2015 6:23 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote: >> > On 1/21/15 18:07, Rory Conaway wrote: >> >> I think we need to tell every single customer why the rates went up. >> >> There is another election in 2 years. >> >> >> > >> > >> > Your rates aren't going up. The explanation to the customer is simple: >> > "the total bill is higher because the government added a new tax. The >> > pre-tax price of service hasn't changed. We're not making any money >> > off this, if anything it adds more overhead to collect it. If you're >> > unhappy with this tax then call/write your representatives in congress." >> > >> > ~Seth >> >>
