On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 12:33 PM, Oliver Garraux <oli...@g.garraux.net> wrote: > I was at Ubiquiti's conference. I don't disagree with what you're > saying. Ubiquiti's take on it seemed to be that 24 Ghz would likely > never be used to the extent that 2.4 / 5.8 is. They are seeing 24 Ghz > as only for backhaul - no connections to end users.
I suspect this is just due to cost and practicality. ISPs, nor users will want to pay 3k USD, nor widely utilize a service that requires near-direct LOS. I could see this working well in rural or sparse areas that might not mind the transceiver. > I guess > point-to-multipoint connections aren't permitted by the FCC for 24 > Ghz. The whole point of these unlicensed bands is that their usage is not tightly controlled. I imagine hardware for use still should comply with FCC's part 15 rules though. > AirFiber appears to be fairly highly directional. It needs to > be though, as each link uses 100 Mhz, and there's only 250 Mhz > available @ 24 Ghz. Being so directional, I'm not sure that cross-talk will as much of an issue, except for dense hub-like sites. It sounds like there's some novel application of using GPS timing to make the radios spectrally orthogonal -- that's pretty cool. If they can somehow coordinate timing across point-to-point links, that would be great for sites that co-locate multiple link terminations. Overall, this looks like a pretty cool product! --j
