Here's the compromise http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=60001333104
Not sure where it stands today, maybe Steve Coran could give us an update. On Tuesday, February 23, 2016, Josh Luthman <j...@imaginenetworksllc.com> wrote: > Pushed it back as in not taking effect summer 2016??? > > > Josh Luthman > Office: 937-552-2340 > Direct: 937-552-2343 > 1100 Wayne St > Suite 1337 > Troy, OH 45373 > > On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 11:00 PM, Chuck Hogg <ch...@shelbybb.com > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','ch...@shelbybb.com');>> wrote: > >> That's correct, as I understood it. >> >> On Tuesday, February 23, 2016, Sean Heskett <af...@zirkel.us >> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','af...@zirkel.us');>> wrote: >> >>> OOBE rules have/are being modified so as to meet the intended DoD >>> requirements but not hamstring the manufacturers with expensive filters >>> etc. I believe they pushed back some or all of the implementation for a >>> year. there was an explanation at last years wispapalooza on the technical >>> details and i know steve coran posted some filings etc. to the list a while >>> back. I think the FCC chose the UBNT method over the WISPA/JAB method. >>> >>> don't quote me on this tho...i might have just been drunk in vegas and >>> dreamed all this up lol. >>> >>> -Sean >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 6:17 PM, Matt <matt.mailingli...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Will the "next generation PMP 450 SM" have the same throughput and >>>> range as the current standard PMP450 SM with a reflector dish in 5.8 >>>> ghz band? Just concerned the new OOBE rules might reduce usefulness >>>> of 5 ghz band for longer range PtmP and PTP? I am guessing they will >>>> have some added filtering to meet the OOBE rules and just hoping this >>>> does not reduce range terribly? 24 volt or 48 volt POE? It would be >>>> nice if they worked on either voltage to make swap outs easier. Will >>>> also slightly reduce cost of swapping power supplies. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Matt Mangriotis >>>> <matt.mangrio...@cambiumnetworks.com> wrote: >>>> > YES! >>>> > >>>> > We are undertaking this project and working toward a next generation >>>> PMP 450 >>>> > SM that will cover the entire 5 GHz band (from 4.9-5.9 GHz), and be >>>> less >>>> > expensive than the 450i SM. >>>> > >>>> > At this point, I can’t comment on much surrounding the launch, as >>>> we’ve only >>>> > recently embarked down this path. >>>> > >>>> > Matt >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Sam Lambie >>>> > Sent: Sunday, February 21, 2016 8:59 PM >>>> > To: af@afmug.com >>>> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 450i 5.1 and 5.2 non overlapping channels? >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > Thank you Matt. I appreciate the info. >>>> > >>>> > Are there any plans on creating 1 450 SM that can handle all 4 >>>> frequencies? >>>> > >>>> > That would be super.... >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 3:30 PM, George Skorup <geo...@cbcast.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > No, the regular 450 is hardware limited to 5470-5900. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > On 2/20/2016 3:55 PM, Jeff Broadwick - Lists wrote: >>>> > >>>> > Will the 450 CPE work in 5.2? >>>> > >>>> > Jeff Broadwick >>>> > >>>> > ConVergence Technologies, Inc. >>>> > >>>> > 312-205-2519 Office >>>> > >>>> > 574-220-7826 Cell >>>> > >>>> > jbroadw...@converge-tech.com >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > On Feb 20, 2016, at 2:45 PM, Tushar Patel <tpa...@ecpi.com> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > Matt, >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > To take advantage don't we need cheaper CPE? >>>> > >>>> > Tushar >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > On Feb 20, 2016, at 12:43 PM, Matt Mangriotis >>>> > <matt.mangrio...@cambiumnetworks.com> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > Didn’t see anyone answer you on this Sam. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > 5.1 GHz (UNII-1) is 100 MHz (5150-5250 MHz), and is not DFS >>>> controlled, and >>>> > follows similar rules to 5.8 GHz. This band is available in R14.1.1. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > 5.2 GHz (UNII-2) is also 100 MHz (5250-5350 MHz), but is a bit less >>>> useful >>>> > in that the max EIRP allowed is 30 dBm and it’s subject to DFS radar >>>> > detection mechanisms. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > Additional info: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-NII >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > Taking advantage of these bands, however, can prove hugely useful and >>>> > several of our customers are getting equipment deployed and working >>>> soon. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > (Note: 5.2 and 5.4 will be supported in the R14.1.2 beta release that >>>> will >>>> > be out very soon). >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > Matt >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Sam Lambie >>>> > Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 4:54 PM >>>> > To: af@afmug.com >>>> > Subject: [AFMUG] 450i 5.1 and 5.2 non overlapping channels? >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > Is there any documentation or list knowledge on how big each >>>> frequency is? >>>> > >>>> > Just wondering if it is worth it to go to the 450i and the >>>> ridiculously >>>> > expensive SM's. >>>> > >>>> > We are running out of spectrum in 5.4 and 5.8 though. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > -- >>>> > >>>> > -- >>>> > Sam Lambie >>>> > Taosnet Wireless Tech. >>>> > 575-758-7598 Office >>>> > www.Taosnet.com >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > -- >>>> > >>>> > -- >>>> > Sam Lambie >>>> > Taosnet Wireless Tech. >>>> > 575-758-7598 Office >>>> > www.Taosnet.com >>>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> Regards, >> Chuck >> > >
