Agreed but now there could be less room for additional development of
other wireless devices.
Also, if they would stay on on side of the band would be nice like 5.1
Still plenty of room for us.
On 03/03/2015 06:31 AM, Patrick Leary wrote:
That's called "malicious interference" and can and should get you
fined and shut down. Further, it is not WISP spectrum and never was. I
have never understood the WISP sense of entitlement with unlicensed
(free) spectrum, especially given that it is a population that is
largely politically conservative.
On Mar 2, 2015 12:16 PM, "Tim Reichhart" <t...@nwohiobb.com
<mailto:t...@nwohiobb.com>> wrote:
That means can we point our 5ghz backhaul stuff at there towers
and make there signal about worthless? If so that would teach cell
phone companies not to mess with WISP’s spectrum.
*From:*Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com
<mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>] *On Behalf Of *Peter Kranz
*Sent:* Monday, March 02, 2015 12:03 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>
*Subject:* [AFMUG] More LTE tradgedy of the commons on 5 GHz..
If systems like this end up rolling out on cell sites across the
nation we are going to see some tough times getting clear
channels. I’ve seen several proposals now for tower based systems
that use very large swaths of 5Ghz as alternative LTE data paths
to cell phones with multi-channel BW designed to suck up every
free piece of 5Ghz spectrum found.
http://www.engadget.com/2015/03/02/t-mobile-alcatel-wifi-and-4g-fight/
*Peter Kranz
*Founder/CEO - Unwired Ltd
www.UnwiredLtd.com <http://www.unwiredltd.com/>
Desk: 510-868-1614 x100 <tel:510-868-1614%20x100>
Mobile: 510-207-0000 <tel:510-207-0000>
pkr...@unwiredltd.com <mailto:pkr...@unwiredltd.com>
