Re: [WISPA] 3650 Omni

[wispa]

I know, but I have not been able to do 2 radios running on the same site that 
were both 3650 without killing each other. But, I appreciate the abuse again, 
Jack 

heith

From: Jack Unger 
Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2014 12:48 PM
To: WISPA General List 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Omni

OMNI = Open (to) Monstrous Noise (and) Interference 


On 4/8/2014 7:55 AM, wi...@mncomm.com wrote:

  Just curious if others have deployed a 3650 Omni and to know if it was 
effective? We have a few sites that we use 3650 PTP and one with a 120 degree 
panel that cranks out some decent power. Of course we are always looking for 
areas that we can break up APs and get some RF separation. I ran into a 
competitor on the extreme north side of one of our competitors that has a 
customer using a M365 power bridge. From their registration on FCC the closest 
sites they have registered are over 20 miles away. Can this be done PtMP on 
3650? I have a BH link doing 24 miles on Rockets but havent tried anything this 
distance PtMP. I assume they have a closer site that’s not fully registered on 
the FCC site as of yet.

  Anyways, just curious if omni was real effective. Just more or less looking 
for areas to throw on 15 to 20 subs to break down some overloaded M2 & M5 AP. 
And if so, are you using UBNT antennas or KP or other

  thanks
  heith



   

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless


-- 
Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
Author (2003) - "Deploying License-Free Wireless Wide-Area Networks"
Serving the WISP Community since 1993
760-678-5033  jun...@ask-wi.com






___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
<>___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] 3650 Omni

[Josh Luthman]

Best acronym ever.


Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373


On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 1:48 PM, Jack Unger  wrote:

>  OMNI = Open (to) Monstrous Noise (and) Interference
>
>  On 4/8/2014 7:55 AM, wi...@mncomm.com wrote:
>
>  Just curious if others have deployed a 3650 Omni and to know if it was
> effective? We have a few sites that we use 3650 PTP and one with a 120
> degree panel that cranks out some decent power. Of course we are always
> looking for areas that we can break up APs and get some RF separation. I
> ran into a competitor on the extreme north side of one of our competitors
> that has a customer using a M365 power bridge. From their registration on
> FCC the closest sites they have registered are over 20 miles away. Can this
> be done PtMP on 3650? I have a BH link doing 24 miles on Rockets but havent
> tried anything this distance PtMP. I assume they have a closer site that's
> not fully registered on the FCC site as of yet.
>
> Anyways, just curious if omni was real effective. Just more or less
> looking for areas to throw on 15 to 20 subs to break down some overloaded
> M2 & M5 AP. And if so, are you using UBNT antennas or KP or other
>
> thanks
> heith
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Wireless mailing 
> listWireless@wispa.orghttp://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
>
> --
> Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
> Author (2003) - "Deploying License-Free Wireless Wide-Area Networks"
> Serving the WISP Community since 1993760-678-5033  jun...@ask-wi.com
>
>
>
> ___
> Wireless mailing list
> Wireless@wispa.org
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
>
___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] 3650 Omni

[Jack Unger]

  
  
OMNI = Open (to) Monstrous Noise (and)
  Interference 
  

On 4/8/2014 7:55 AM, wi...@mncomm.com
  wrote:


  

  Just curious if others have deployed a 3650 Omni and to
know if it was effective? We have a few sites that we use
3650 PTP and one with a 120 degree panel that cranks out
some decent power. Of course we are always looking for areas
that we can break up APs and get some RF separation. I ran
into a competitor on the extreme north side of one of our
competitors that has a customer using a M365 power bridge.
From their registration on FCC the closest sites they have
registered are over 20 miles away. Can this be done PtMP on
3650? I have a BH link doing 24 miles on Rockets but havent
tried anything this distance PtMP. I assume they have a
closer site that’s not fully registered on the FCC site as
of yet.
   
  Anyways, just curious if omni was real effective. Just
more or less looking for areas to throw on 15 to 20 subs to
break down some overloaded M2 & M5 AP. And if so, are
you using UBNT antennas or KP or other
   
  thanks
  heith
   
   

  
  
  
  
  ___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless



-- 
Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
Author (2003) - "Deploying License-Free Wireless Wide-Area Networks"
Serving the WISP Community since 1993
760-678-5033  jun...@ask-wi.com




  

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] 3650 Omni

[Patrick Leary]

Good point re the downtilt. I should have noted the omnis I mentioned being 
used on the COMPACTs have an electrical downtilt.

Patrick Leary
M 727.501.3735
[cid:image001.png@01CF531F.350B0540]<http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet>





From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf 
Of Eric Muehleisen
Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2014 11:40 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Omni

Doesn't answer your question but, we've use splitters and sector antennas to 
get around the use of omni's. There are a couple of advantages to sector 
design. Downtilt being the most important. However, it does cost more tower 
rent and cable management can be a pain. We've used it with great success.

On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 9:55 AM, mailto:wi...@mncomm.com>> 
wrote:
Just curious if others have deployed a 3650 Omni and to know if it was 
effective? We have a few sites that we use 3650 PTP and one with a 120 degree 
panel that cranks out some decent power. Of course we are always looking for 
areas that we can break up APs and get some RF separation. I ran into a 
competitor on the extreme north side of one of our competitors that has a 
customer using a M365 power bridge. From their registration on FCC the closest 
sites they have registered are over 20 miles away. Can this be done PtMP on 
3650? I have a BH link doing 24 miles on Rockets but havent tried anything this 
distance PtMP. I assume they have a closer site that's not fully registered on 
the FCC site as of yet.

Anyways, just curious if omni was real effective. Just more or less looking for 
areas to throw on 15 to 20 subs to break down some overloaded M2 & M5 AP. And 
if so, are you using UBNT antennas or KP or other

thanks
heith



___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org<mailto:Wireless@wispa.org>
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless





This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer 
viruses.





This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer 
viruses.




<>___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] 3650 Omni

[Eric Muehleisen]

Doesn't answer your question but, we've use splitters and sector antennas
to get around the use of omni's. There are a couple of advantages to sector
design. Downtilt being the most important. However, it does cost more tower
rent and cable management can be a pain. We've used it with great success.


On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 9:55 AM,  wrote:

>   Just curious if others have deployed a 3650 Omni and to know if it was
> effective? We have a few sites that we use 3650 PTP and one with a 120
> degree panel that cranks out some decent power. Of course we are always
> looking for areas that we can break up APs and get some RF separation. I
> ran into a competitor on the extreme north side of one of our competitors
> that has a customer using a M365 power bridge. From their registration on
> FCC the closest sites they have registered are over 20 miles away. Can this
> be done PtMP on 3650? I have a BH link doing 24 miles on Rockets but havent
> tried anything this distance PtMP. I assume they have a closer site that's
> not fully registered on the FCC site as of yet.
>
> Anyways, just curious if omni was real effective. Just more or less
> looking for areas to throw on 15 to 20 subs to break down some overloaded
> M2 & M5 AP. And if so, are you using UBNT antennas or KP or other
>
> thanks
> heith
>
>
>
> ___
> Wireless mailing list
> Wireless@wispa.org
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
>
___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] 3650 Omni

[Patrick Leary]

We have a few operators doing this with our COMPACT using a dual polarity omni. 
Granted, the locations are extremely rural with ample tree density, so conflict 
of what nearby cells there may be is not a problem. For us, it is not a 
recommended design, but the operator finds it is working well for their needs. 
Their range is better than I would have expected as well. I am not sure what 
brand or model antenna is being used.

Patrick Leary
M 727.501.3735
[cid:image003.png@01CF531D.F9A21620]<http://mkt2.us/TelrdNet>





From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf 
Of wi...@mncomm.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2014 10:55 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] 3650 Omni

Just curious if others have deployed a 3650 Omni and to know if it was 
effective? We have a few sites that we use 3650 PTP and one with a 120 degree 
panel that cranks out some decent power. Of course we are always looking for 
areas that we can break up APs and get some RF separation. I ran into a 
competitor on the extreme north side of one of our competitors that has a 
customer using a M365 power bridge. From their registration on FCC the closest 
sites they have registered are over 20 miles away. Can this be done PtMP on 
3650? I have a BH link doing 24 miles on Rockets but havent tried anything this 
distance PtMP. I assume they have a closer site that’s not fully registered on 
the FCC site as of yet.

Anyways, just curious if omni was real effective. Just more or less looking for 
areas to throw on 15 to 20 subs to break down some overloaded M2 & M5 AP. And 
if so, are you using UBNT antennas or KP or other

thanks
heith







This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer 
viruses.


 
 

This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer 
viruses.


<>___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

[WISPA] 3650 Omni

[wispa]

Just curious if others have deployed a 3650 Omni and to know if it was 
effective? We have a few sites that we use 3650 PTP and one with a 120 degree 
panel that cranks out some decent power. Of course we are always looking for 
areas that we can break up APs and get some RF separation. I ran into a 
competitor on the extreme north side of one of our competitors that has a 
customer using a M365 power bridge. From their registration on FCC the closest 
sites they have registered are over 20 miles away. Can this be done PtMP on 
3650? I have a BH link doing 24 miles on Rockets but havent tried anything this 
distance PtMP. I assume they have a closer site that’s not fully registered on 
the FCC site as of yet.

Anyways, just curious if omni was real effective. Just more or less looking for 
areas to throw on 15 to 20 subs to break down some overloaded M2 & M5 AP. And 
if so, are you using UBNT antennas or KP or other

thanks
heith

___
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Re: [WISPA] 3650 MHz permission letters?

[Matt Jenkins]

  
  
a...@afmug.com. Cambium (Canopy) posts on this list.

On 12/22/2011 03:30 PM, John Buwa wrote:

  Is there a good canopy list?

John Buwa
Michiana Wireless,Inc 
  574-233-7170
  Sent from my iPhone

  
  
On Dec 12, 2011, at 4:12 PM, Michael Hughes 
wrote:

  
  

  SES Americom can be done. It's just not a easy process.
   
  Our first agreement with them took more than a year of
legal wrangling.
  
Since then we have successfully negotiated agreements with
SES for another 5 towers and 3500 CPE.
  
 
  Michael C. Hughes
CEO Antelecom, Inc.
661.726.3516
  
  
  
  On Monday 12/12/2011 at 12:17, Pat O'Connor wrote:
  You have to contact who manages the
Satellite Earth Station and they 
usually have an application and various forms to fill out.
If you're 
dealing with SES Americom, have fun. I don't know of one
that they have 
approved.


Pat





On 12/12/2011 11:20 AM, Fred R. Goldstein wrote:
Does anyone have a standard letter
  to use to ask permission from
  satellite earth stations to use the 3650 MHz band within
  the 150 mile
  exclusion zone? Thanks.
  
   --
   Fred Goldstein k1io fgoldstein "at" ionary.com
   ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/
   +1 617 795 2701
  
  
  

  WISPA Wants You! Join today!
  http://signup.wispa.org/

  
  WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
  
  Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
  http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
  
  Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
  
  
  






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
  
  

  
  

  
  
  WISPA Wants You! Join today!
  http://signup.wispa.org/
  
  
  WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
  
  Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
  http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
  
  Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
  
  




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

  




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 MHz permission letters?

[John Buwa]

Is there a good canopy list?

John Buwa
Michiana Wireless,Inc 
574-233-7170
Sent from my iPhone

On Dec 12, 2011, at 4:12 PM, Michael Hughes  wrote:

> SES Americom can be done. It's just not a easy process.
> 
>  
> 
> Our first agreement with them took more than a year of legal wrangling.
> 
> 
> Since then we have successfully negotiated agreements with SES for another 5 
> towers and 3500 CPE.
> 
> 
>  
> 
> Michael C. Hughes
> CEO Antelecom, Inc.
> 661.726.3516
> 
> 
> On Monday 12/12/2011 at 12:17, Pat O'Connor wrote:
>> 
>> You have to contact who manages the Satellite Earth Station and they 
>> usually have an application and various forms to fill out. If you're 
>> dealing with SES Americom, have fun. I don't know of one that they have 
>> approved.
>> 
>> 
>> Pat
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 12/12/2011 11:20 AM, Fred R. Goldstein wrote:
>>> Does anyone have a standard letter to use to ask permission from
>>> satellite earth stations to use the 3650 MHz band within the 150 mile
>>> exclusion zone? Thanks.
>>> 
>>>  --
>>>  Fred Goldstein k1io fgoldstein "at" ionary.com
>>>  ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/
>>>  +1 617 795 2701
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>> 
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>> 
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>> 
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>> 
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>> 
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
> 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 MHz permission letters?

[Marlon K. Schafer (509-982-2181)]

Half of my network is in SES land.  I finally gave up and am putting my effort 
into the FCC's new rules.  The new rules will hopefully shorten the exclusion 
zone and will require that they negotiate in good faith.

laters,
marlon

  - Original Message - 
  From: Rich _ 
  To: WISPA General List 
  Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2011 9:59 AM
  Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 MHz permission letters?


  I've been hearing more and more about spam filters that are too "agressive". 
Calling may be the best thing to do.


  On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 12:37 AM, Scottie Arnett  wrote:

In my area, I have to deal with northstarstudios.tv.

I have sent emails after emails to them.I guess next is call them
direct!?!?!?!?

Scottie Arnett
President
Info-Ed, Inc.
Electronics and More
931-243-2101
sarn...@info-ed.com

- Original Message -
From: "Fred Goldstein" 
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 3:19 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 MHz permission letters?


> Thanks for the information.  Much obliged.
>
> At 12/12/2011 04:12 PM, you wrote:
>
>>SES Americom can be done. It's just not a easy process.
>>
>>
>>
>>Our first agreement with them took more than a year of legal wrangling.
>>
>>
>>Since then we have successfully negotiated agreements with SES for
>>another 5 towers and 3500 CPE.
>>
>>
>>
>>Michael C. Hughes
>>CEO Antelecom, Inc.
>>661.726.3516
>>
>>
>>On Monday 12/12/2011 at 12:17, Pat O'Connor wrote:
>>>You have to contact who manages the Satellite Earth Station and they
>>>usually have an application and various forms to fill out. If you're
>>>dealing with SES Americom, have fun. I don't know of one that they have
>>>approved.
>>>
>>>
>>>Pat
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>On 12/12/2011 11:20 AM, Fred R. Goldstein wrote:
>>>>Does anyone have a standard letter to use to ask permission from
>>>>satellite earth stations to use the 3650 MHz band within the 150 mile
>>>>exclusion zone? Thanks.
>
>  --
>  Fred Goldsteink1io   fgoldstein "at" ionary.com
>  ionary Consulting  http://www.ionary.com/
>  +1 617 795 2701
>
>
>
> 

> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 

>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/



WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/





--




  

  WISPA Wants You! Join today!
  http://signup.wispa.org/
  

   
  WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

  Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
  http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

  Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 MHz permission letters?

[Rich _]

I've been hearing more and more about spam filters that are too
"agressive". Calling may be the best thing to do.

On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 12:37 AM, Scottie Arnett wrote:

> In my area, I have to deal with northstarstudios.tv.
>
> I have sent emails after emails to them.I guess next is call them
> direct!?!?!?!?
>
> Scottie Arnett
> President
> Info-Ed, Inc.
> Electronics and More
> 931-243-2101
> sarn...@info-ed.com
>  - Original Message -
> From: "Fred Goldstein" 
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 3:19 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 MHz permission letters?
>
>
> > Thanks for the information.  Much obliged.
> >
> > At 12/12/2011 04:12 PM, you wrote:
> >
> >>SES Americom can be done. It's just not a easy process.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>Our first agreement with them took more than a year of legal wrangling.
> >>
> >>
> >>Since then we have successfully negotiated agreements with SES for
> >>another 5 towers and 3500 CPE.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>Michael C. Hughes
> >>CEO Antelecom, Inc.
> >>661.726.3516
> >>
> >>
> >>On Monday 12/12/2011 at 12:17, Pat O'Connor wrote:
> >>>You have to contact who manages the Satellite Earth Station and they
> >>>usually have an application and various forms to fill out. If you're
> >>>dealing with SES Americom, have fun. I don't know of one that they have
> >>>approved.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Pat
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>On 12/12/2011 11:20 AM, Fred R. Goldstein wrote:
> >>>>Does anyone have a standard letter to use to ask permission from
> >>>>satellite earth stations to use the 3650 MHz band within the 150 mile
> >>>>exclusion zone? Thanks.
> >
> >  --
> >  Fred Goldsteink1io   fgoldstein "at" ionary.com
> >  ionary Consulting  http://www.ionary.com/
> >  +1 617 795 2701
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> > WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> > http://signup.wispa.org/
> >
> 
> >
> > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> >
> > Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> >
> > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 MHz permission letters?

[Scottie Arnett]

In my area, I have to deal with northstarstudios.tv.

I have sent emails after emails to them.I guess next is call them 
direct!?!?!?!?

Scottie Arnett
President
Info-Ed, Inc.
Electronics and More
931-243-2101
sarn...@info-ed.com
- Original Message - 
From: "Fred Goldstein" 
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 3:19 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 MHz permission letters?


> Thanks for the information.  Much obliged.
>
> At 12/12/2011 04:12 PM, you wrote:
>
>>SES Americom can be done. It's just not a easy process.
>>
>>
>>
>>Our first agreement with them took more than a year of legal wrangling.
>>
>>
>>Since then we have successfully negotiated agreements with SES for
>>another 5 towers and 3500 CPE.
>>
>>
>>
>>Michael C. Hughes
>>CEO Antelecom, Inc.
>>661.726.3516
>>
>>
>>On Monday 12/12/2011 at 12:17, Pat O'Connor wrote:
>>>You have to contact who manages the Satellite Earth Station and they
>>>usually have an application and various forms to fill out. If you're
>>>dealing with SES Americom, have fun. I don't know of one that they have
>>>approved.
>>>
>>>
>>>Pat
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>On 12/12/2011 11:20 AM, Fred R. Goldstein wrote:
>>>>Does anyone have a standard letter to use to ask permission from
>>>>satellite earth stations to use the 3650 MHz band within the 150 mile
>>>>exclusion zone? Thanks.
>
>  --
>  Fred Goldsteink1io   fgoldstein "at" ionary.com
>  ionary Consulting  http://www.ionary.com/
>  +1 617 795 2701
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 MHz permission letters?

[Fred Goldstein]

Thanks for the information.  Much obliged.

At 12/12/2011 04:12 PM, you wrote:

>SES Americom can be done. It's just not a easy process.
>
>
>
>Our first agreement with them took more than a year of legal wrangling.
>
>
>Since then we have successfully negotiated agreements with SES for 
>another 5 towers and 3500 CPE.
>
>
>
>Michael C. Hughes
>CEO Antelecom, Inc.
>661.726.3516
>
>
>On Monday 12/12/2011 at 12:17, Pat O'Connor wrote:
>>You have to contact who manages the Satellite Earth Station and they
>>usually have an application and various forms to fill out. If you're
>>dealing with SES Americom, have fun. I don't know of one that they have
>>approved.
>>
>>
>>Pat
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On 12/12/2011 11:20 AM, Fred R. Goldstein wrote:
>>>Does anyone have a standard letter to use to ask permission from
>>>satellite earth stations to use the 3650 MHz band within the 150 mile
>>>exclusion zone? Thanks.

  --
  Fred Goldsteink1io   fgoldstein "at" ionary.com
  ionary Consulting  http://www.ionary.com/
  +1 617 795 2701 




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 MHz permission letters?

[Michael Hughes]

WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 MHz permission letters?

[Pat O'Connor]

You have to contact who manages the Satellite Earth Station and they 
usually have an application and various forms to fill out.  If you're 
dealing with SES Americom, have fun.  I don't know of one that they have 
approved.


Pat





On 12/12/2011 11:20 AM, Fred R. Goldstein wrote:
> Does anyone have a standard letter to use to ask permission from
> satellite earth stations to use the 3650 MHz band within the 150 mile
> exclusion zone?  Thanks.
>
>--
>Fred Goldsteink1io   fgoldstein "at" ionary.com
>ionary Consulting  http://www.ionary.com/
>+1 617 795 2701
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

[WISPA] 3650 MHz permission letters?

[Fred R. Goldstein]

Does anyone have a standard letter to use to ask permission from 
satellite earth stations to use the 3650 MHz band within the 150 mile 
exclusion zone?  Thanks.

  --
  Fred Goldsteink1io   fgoldstein "at" ionary.com
  ionary Consulting  http://www.ionary.com/
  +1 617 795 2701 




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 License Contact

[Mike Hammett]

Indeed. I've got the initial application sitting on their desk for over 
a month since last activity.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



On 9/6/2011 4:36 PM, John Scrivner wrote:
Can someone please forward me the name and contact information of the 
gal at the FCC who handles all 3650 applications? We have a couple 
which have not been completed and we do not know why.

Thank you,
John Scrivner





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 License Contact

[Josh Luthman]

Cheryl Black ,

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Sep 6, 2011 5:36 PM, "John Scrivner"  wrote:
> Can someone please forward me the name and contact information of the gal
at
> the FCC who handles all 3650 applications? We have a couple which have not
> been completed and we do not know why.
> Thank you,
> John Scrivner



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

[WISPA] 3650 License Contact

[John Scrivner]

Can someone please forward me the name and contact information of the gal at
the FCC who handles all 3650 applications? We have a couple which have not
been completed and we do not know why.
Thank you,
John Scrivner



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment

[Jeremie Chism]

There are several flavors of 3650 wimax out there. Motorola definitely has its 
advantages but there are some draw backs also. I would dig a little deeper into 
motorola and then look at axxcelera or one of the other ones. 

Sent from my iPhone4

On Oct 19, 2010, at 8:02 PM, David Hannum  wrote:

> Thanks for the info. 
> We have been, to this point, a Motorola shop.  Any thoughts on the Motorola 
> 3650 equipment?
>  
> Dave
> 
> 
>  
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 4:26 PM, Brian Webster  
> wrote:
> Second order diversity antenna systems can make a very big difference in the 
> overall performance too.
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> Brian
> 
>  
> 
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On 
> Behalf Of Jeremie Chism
> Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 3:22 PM
> 
> 
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment
>  
> 
> I have a customer at 2 miles that is completely non line of sight that is at 
> -78 if that helps. 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone4
> 
> 
> On Oct 19, 2010, at 1:57 PM, David Hannum  wrote:
> 
> It's been suggested that it's as good or better than 900MHz NLOS up to about 
> 4mi.  Thoughts?
> 
>  
> 
> Dave
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Justin Wilson  wrote:
> 
>It’s not magic by any means.  Still have the physics of the signal to deal 
> with.  It’s major advantage is the noise floor.  Don’t expect 3.65 by itself 
> to go through stuff more.
> -- 
> Justin Wilson 
> http://www.mtin.net/blog – xISP News
> http://www.twitter.com/j2sw – Follow me on Twitter
> Wisp Consulting – Tower Climbing – Network Support
> 
> 
> 
> From: David Hannum 
> Reply-To: WISPA General List 
> Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:08:53 -0400
> To: WISPA General List 
> Subject: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment
> 
> 
> 
> Hello all,
>  
> Is anyone who is having success with 3.65GHz in very rural, forrested, hilly 
> areas willing to talk on the phone about it?  We're looking at deploying it 
> over 2.4GHz here in the near future.   Looking for reasons to or not to from 
> experienced operators.
>  
> Kind Regards,
> David Hannum
> New Era Broadband, LLC
>  
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
> 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
> 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
> 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
> 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment

[David Hannum]

Thanks for the info.
We have been, to this point, a Motorola shop.  Any thoughts on the Motorola
3650 equipment?

Dave



On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 4:26 PM, Brian Webster  wrote:

>  Second order diversity antenna systems can make a very big difference in
> the overall performance too.
>
>
>
>
>
> Brian
>
>
>
> *From:* wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Jeremie Chism
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 19, 2010 3:22 PM
>
> *To:* WISPA General List
> *Subject:* Re: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment
>
>
>
> I have a customer at 2 miles that is completely non line of sight that is
> at -78 if that helps.
>
> Sent from my iPhone4
>
>
> On Oct 19, 2010, at 1:57 PM, David Hannum  wrote:
>
>  It's been suggested that it's as good or better than 900MHz NLOS up to
> about 4mi.  Thoughts?
>
>
>
> Dave
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Justin Wilson  wrote:
>
>It’s not magic by any means.  Still have the physics of the signal to
> deal with.  It’s major advantage is the noise floor.  Don’t expect 3.65 by
> itself to go through stuff more.
> --
> Justin Wilson 
> http://www.mtin.net/blog – xISP News
> http://www.twitter.com/j2sw – Follow me on Twitter
> Wisp Consulting – Tower Climbing – Network Support
>
>
>  ------
>
> *From: *David Hannum 
> *Reply-To: *WISPA General List 
> *Date: *Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:08:53 -0400
> *To: *WISPA General List 
> *Subject: *[WISPA] 3650 Deployment
>
>
>
> Hello all,
>
> Is anyone who is having success with 3.65GHz in very rural,
> forrested, hilly areas willing to talk on the phone about it?  We're looking
> at deploying it over 2.4GHz here in the near future.   Looking for reasons
> to or not to from experienced operators.
>
> Kind Regards,
> David Hannum
> New Era Broadband, LLC
>
>
>  --
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment

[Brian Webster]

Second order diversity antenna systems can make a very big difference in the 
overall performance too.

 



Brian

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf 
Of Jeremie Chism
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 3:22 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment

 

I have a customer at 2 miles that is completely non line of sight that is at 
-78 if that helps. 

Sent from my iPhone4


On Oct 19, 2010, at 1:57 PM, David Hannum  wrote:

It's been suggested that it's as good or better than 900MHz NLOS up to about 
4mi.  Thoughts?

 

Dave



 

On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Justin Wilson  wrote:

   It’s not magic by any means.  Still have the physics of the signal to deal 
with.  It’s major advantage is the noise floor.  Don’t expect 3.65 by itself to 
go through stuff more.
-- 
Justin Wilson 
http://www.mtin.net/blog – xISP News
http://www.twitter.com/j2sw – Follow me on Twitter
Wisp Consulting – Tower Climbing – Network Support





  _  


From: David Hannum 
Reply-To: WISPA General List 
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:08:53 -0400
To: WISPA General List 
Subject: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment 



Hello all,
 
Is anyone who is having success with 3.65GHz in very rural, forrested, hilly 
areas willing to talk on the phone about it?  We're looking at deploying it 
over 2.4GHz here in the near future.   Looking for reasons to or not to from 
experienced operators.
 
Kind Regards,
David Hannum
New Era Broadband, LLC
 
 


  _  





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

 




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment

[Jeremie Chism]

I have a customer at 2 miles that is completely non line of sight that is at 
-78 if that helps. 

Sent from my iPhone4

On Oct 19, 2010, at 1:57 PM, David Hannum  wrote:

> It's been suggested that it's as good or better than 900MHz NLOS up to about 
> 4mi.  Thoughts?
>  
> Dave
> 
> 
>  
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Justin Wilson  wrote:
>It’s not magic by any means.  Still have the physics of the signal to deal 
> with.  It’s major advantage is the noise floor.  Don’t expect 3.65 by itself 
> to go through stuff more.
> -- 
> Justin Wilson 
> http://www.mtin.net/blog – xISP News
> http://www.twitter.com/j2sw – Follow me on Twitter
> Wisp Consulting – Tower Climbing – Network Support
> 
> 
> 
> From: David Hannum 
> Reply-To: WISPA General List 
> Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:08:53 -0400
> To: WISPA General List 
> Subject: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment
> 
> 
> Hello all,
>  
> Is anyone who is having success with 3.65GHz in very rural, forrested, hilly 
> areas willing to talk on the phone about it?  We're looking at deploying it 
> over 2.4GHz here in the near future.   Looking for reasons to or not to from 
> experienced operators.
>  
> Kind Regards,
> David Hannum
> New Era Broadband, LLC
>  
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
> 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
> 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment

[Matt Jenkins]

Through heavy foliage (4 miles and 20 oak trees), when using 3.65 vs
900 Motorola equipment I got better downlink but worse uplink. This was
because the CPE is only 2x1 MIMO (has only one TX radio). I believe the
use of a true 2x2 MIMO 3.65 CPE will perform better than most 900
systems in some environments. What I would really like to see is a FHSS
MIMO 900 system that uses the whole band. With sync and coordinated
hopping patterns this could outperform any system out there for foliage
penetration and interference avoidance.

Things to note:
Clean noise floor on 3.65 and most connections were -82db to -88db
receive.
Noise floor in 900 was -75db so most connections would not link due to
noise.
900 was single horizontal polarity.
3.65 was MIMO.
900 is limited to 4 watts EIRP.
3.65 is can use up to 10 watts EIRP in a 10mhz channel.



On 10/19/2010 12:10 PM, St. Louis Broadband wrote:

  
  

  
  
  From
what I am hearing, equipment selection can play a vital
role.
   
  Victoria
Proffer - President/CEO
  www.ShowMeBroadband.com
  www.StLouisBroadband.com
  314-974-5600
   
   
   
  
  From:
wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of David
Hannum
  Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 1:58 PM
  To: WISPA General List
  Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment
  
   
  
  It's been suggested that it's as good or better
than 900MHz NLOS up to about 4mi.  Thoughts?
  
  
   
  
  
  Dave
  
  
  
  
 
  
  
  On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Justin Wilson
<li...@mtin.net>
wrote:
  
     It’s
not magic by any
means.  Still have the physics of the signal to deal with.  It’s
major advantage is the noise floor.  Don’t expect 3.65 by itself to go
through stuff more.
-- 
Justin Wilson <j...@mtin.net>
  http://www.mtin.net/blog
–
xISP News
  http://www.twitter.com/j2sw
– Follow me on Twitter
Wisp Consulting – Tower Climbing – Network Support
  
  
  
  
  
  From:
  David
Hannum <d.han...@newerabroadband.com>
  Reply-To: WISPA General List <wireless@wispa.org>
  Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:08:53 -0400
  To: WISPA General List <wireless@wispa.org>
  Subject: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment 
  
  
  
  
Hello all,
 
Is anyone who is having success with 3.65GHz in very rural,
forrested, hilly areas willing to talk on the phone about it?  We're
looking at deploying it over 2.4GHz here in the near future.  
Looking for reasons to or not to from experienced operators.
 
Kind Regards,
David Hannum
New Era Broadband, LLC
 
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

WISPA Wants You! Join today!
  http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
  
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
  http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
  
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
  
  
  
  
  

WISPA Wants You! Join today!
  http://signup.wispa.org/

  
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
  
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
  http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
  
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
  
   
  
  




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment

[St. Louis Broadband]

>From what I am hearing, equipment selection can play a vital role.

 

Victoria Proffer - President/CEO

www.ShowMeBroadband.com

www.StLouisBroadband.com

314-974-5600

 

 

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of David Hannum
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 1:58 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment

 

It's been suggested that it's as good or better than 900MHz NLOS up to about
4mi.  Thoughts?

 

Dave



 

On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Justin Wilson  wrote:

   It's not magic by any means.  Still have the physics of the signal to
deal with.  It's major advantage is the noise floor.  Don't expect 3.65 by
itself to go through stuff more.
-- 
Justin Wilson 
http://www.mtin.net/blog - xISP News
http://www.twitter.com/j2sw - Follow me on Twitter
Wisp Consulting - Tower Climbing - Network Support




  _  

From: David Hannum 
Reply-To: WISPA General List 
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:08:53 -0400
To: WISPA General List 
Subject: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment 



Hello all,
 
Is anyone who is having success with 3.65GHz in very rural, forrested, hilly
areas willing to talk on the phone about it?  We're looking at deploying it
over 2.4GHz here in the near future.   Looking for reasons to or not to from
experienced operators.
 
Kind Regards,
David Hannum
New Era Broadband, LLC
 
 

  _  





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/



WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

 




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment

[David Hannum]

It's been suggested that it's as good or better than 900MHz NLOS up to about
4mi.  Thoughts?

Dave



On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Justin Wilson  wrote:

>It’s not magic by any means.  Still have the physics of the signal to
> deal with.  It’s major advantage is the noise floor.  Don’t expect 3.65 by
> itself to go through stuff more.
> --
> Justin Wilson 
> http://www.mtin.net/blog – xISP News
> http://www.twitter.com/j2sw – Follow me on Twitter
> Wisp Consulting – Tower Climbing – Network Support
>
>
>
> --
> *From: *David Hannum 
> *Reply-To: *WISPA General List 
> *Date: *Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:08:53 -0400
> *To: *WISPA General List 
> *Subject: *[WISPA] 3650 Deployment
>
>
> Hello all,
>
> Is anyone who is having success with 3.65GHz in very rural,
> forrested, hilly areas willing to talk on the phone about it?  We're looking
> at deploying it over 2.4GHz here in the near future.   Looking for reasons
> to or not to from experienced operators.
>
> Kind Regards,
> David Hannum
> New Era Broadband, LLC
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment

[Justin Wilson]

It¹s not magic by any means.  Still have the physics of the signal to
deal with.  It¹s major advantage is the noise floor.  Don¹t expect 3.65 by
itself to go through stuff more.
-- 
Justin Wilson 
http://www.mtin.net/blog ­ xISP News
http://www.twitter.com/j2sw ­ Follow me on Twitter
Wisp Consulting ­ Tower Climbing ­ Network Support




From: David Hannum 
Reply-To: WISPA General List 
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 14:08:53 -0400
To: WISPA General List 
Subject: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment

Hello all,
 
Is anyone who is having success with 3.65GHz in very rural, forrested, hilly
areas willing to talk on the phone about it?  We're looking at deploying it
over 2.4GHz here in the near future.   Looking for reasons to or not to from
experienced operators.
 
Kind Regards,
David Hannum
New Era Broadband, LLC
 
 






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 Deployment

[Jeremie Chism]

I have it deployed in all those except the hill part. Be glad to talk. 

Sent from my iPhone4

On Oct 19, 2010, at 1:08 PM, David Hannum  wrote:

> Hello all,
>  
> Is anyone who is having success with 3.65GHz in very rural, forrested, hilly 
> areas willing to talk on the phone about it?  We're looking at deploying it 
> over 2.4GHz here in the near future.   Looking for reasons to or not to from 
> experienced operators.
>  
> Kind Regards,
> David Hannum
> New Era Broadband, LLC
>  
>  
> 
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
> 
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

[WISPA] 3650 Deployment

[David Hannum]

Hello all,

Is anyone who is having success with 3.65GHz in very rural, forrested, hilly
areas willing to talk on the phone about it?  We're looking at deploying it
over 2.4GHz here in the near future.   Looking for reasons to or not to from
experienced operators.

Kind Regards,
David Hannum
New Era Broadband, LLC



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

[3-dB Networks]

I'd have to do research... I've never gone looking for them before.

Many guys within Motorola can help though... hit me offlist and I can
provide some contacts

Daniel White
3-dB Networks
http://www.3dbnetworks.com


>-Original Message-
>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
>Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 8:27 AM
>To: WISPA General List
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>
>Got it.
>
>Do you know where to go after those grants that the county can get?
>
>thanks,
>marlon
>
>- Original Message -
>From: "3-dB Networks" 
>To: "'WISPA General List'" 
>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 2:26 PM
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>
>
>>I can only quote the MotoMesh Duo today... MotoMesh Solo though is
>probably
>> more along the lines of what you want... either way your not going to
>like
>> the price if your trying to do it on the cheap.  The sell to a city or
>> county though should work though with more expensive gear because they
>can
>> get grants, etc. for public safety.
>>
>> 4.9GHz to the car though is going to be hard to do without a Mesh
>> system...
>> and Mesh is costly.  I'd hate to be the one to sell a homebrew 4.9GHz
>> system
>> to a government agency and have it not perform as advertised.  You
>also
>> need
>> to be careful... 4.9GHz is part 90 not part-15 so FCC compliance
>should be
>> high on your list.
>>
>> Daniel White
>> 3-dB Networks
>> http://www.3dbnetworks.com
>>
>>
>>>-Original Message-
>>>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
>On
>>>Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
>>>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 12:28 PM
>>>To: WISPA General List
>>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>>
>>>Hmmm, can you price a system like this out?  I'll need per tower and
>per
>>>node prices.
>>>
>>>Out here we'll probably be better off with a less expensive homebrew
>>>system
>>>due to long term costs though
>>>
>>>marlon
>>>
>>>- Original Message -
>>>From: "3-dB Networks" 
>>>To: "'WISPA General List'" 
>>>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:47 AM
>>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>>
>>>
>>>> That's what the MotoMesh gear is for... the MEA architecture
>>>(developed
>>>> for
>>>> the military to connector tanks with helicopters) allows the cop car
>>>to be
>>>> traveling at 150MPH and for it to still work.  Plus to modems you
>>>install
>>>> in
>>>> the cars can mesh with the ones in other cars... so if one car can
>>>connect
>>>> to the network but another car 1/4 mile down the road can't... it
>can
>>>mesh
>>>> through another car to work.
>>>>
>>>> I don't think a municipality/county is going to like deploying a
>>>homebrew
>>>> solution for something like this... Moto already has the complete
>>>turnkey
>>>> package available (not that any of it is cheap!)
>>>>
>>>> Daniel White
>>>> 3-dB Networks
>>>> http://www.3dbnetworks.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>-Original Message-
>>>>>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
>>>On
>>>>>Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
>>>>>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 10:32 AM
>>>>>To: WISPA General List
>>>>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>>>>
>>>>>Got it.  Thanks!
>>>>>
>>>>>Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile
>ip?
>>>>>
>>>>>The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a
>>>pursuit
>>>>>or
>>>>>code 3 call.  The dispatcher could then take control of the car's
>>>laptop
>>>>>and
>>>>>push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car.  They could also
>use
>>>>>an ip
>>>>>enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's happening at the call.
>This
>>>>>would
>>>>>allow much faster response times if something were to happen to the
>>>>>officer
>>>>>on scene.
>>>>>
>>>>>laters,
>>>>>marlon
>&

Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

[3-dB Networks]

Very true...

Daniel White
3-dB Networks
http://www.3dbnetworks.com


>-Original Message-
>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>Behalf Of Jack Unger
>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 11:05 PM
>To: WISPA General List
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>
>Yes, but the system doesn't have to fail before the WISP who supplies
>the homebrew 4.9 system gets blown out of the water. All one person
>would have to do is point out to the City that the equipment that they
>have been sold is uncertified and illegal to use per FCC rules. What
>Police Department IT guy (or Police Chief) is going to accept that and
>put his own career on the line just because some WISP didn't tell him
>the truth about the equipment that they sold the Police Department?
>
>3-dB Networks wrote:
>> I'd just hate to be the guy deploying a 4.9GHz homebrew system that
>the
>> police/fire come to depend on and have it fail on me and someone die
>because
>> of it.  Systems like these should cost a lot of money to be built very
>well.
>> The FCC would really be the last person I would be concerned about.
>it's the
>> wrath of the city when a mission critical system like this fails.
>>
>>
>>
>> I've heard a lot of stories from Motorola two-way guys how they could
>go
>> into meetings and cities would buy their two-way gear and pay the
>extra
>> price because no one wants to take chances with people's lives.  Help
>the
>> city find the grant money to purchase a system like Moto's. and your
>going
>> to be the hero big time.  Take it one step farther and do a Motomesh
>Quatro
>> deployment. have grant money pay for the gear. and use the 2.4GHz Wi-
>Fi
>> coverage you now have to sell service.  Since the gear is paid for
>your ROI
>> is in a much better situation than the average muni-wifi project.  Or
>take
>> it one step further and get the water department to use it for meter
>> reading, etc.
>>
>>
>>
>> At the end of the day money isn't an issue really for something like
>this.
>> its just about getting the right people together and FINDING the money
>for
>> it.
>>
>>
>>
>> Daniel White
>>
>> 3-dB Networks
>>
>> http://www.3dbnetworks.com
>>
>>
>>
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
>On
>> Behalf Of Jack Unger
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 3:37 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>
>>
>>
>> Good point Daniel. Anyone doing 4.9 GHz "homebrew" would likely lose
>their
>> business when the FCC came knocking along with the Police Department
>that
>> was sold the illegal system by the WISP.  OUCH!!
>>
>> 3-dB Networks wrote:
>>
>> I can only quote the MotoMesh Duo today... MotoMesh Solo though is
>probably
>> more along the lines of what you want... either way your not going to
>like
>> the price if your trying to do it on the cheap.  The sell to a city or
>> county though should work though with more expensive gear because they
>can
>> get grants, etc. for public safety.
>>
>> 4.9GHz to the car though is going to be hard to do without a Mesh
>system...
>> and Mesh is costly.  I'd hate to be the one to sell a homebrew 4.9GHz
>system
>> to a government agency and have it not perform as advertised.  You
>also need
>> to be careful... 4.9GHz is part 90 not part-15 so FCC compliance
>should be
>> high on your list.
>>
>> Daniel White
>> 3-dB Networks
>> http://www.3dbnetworks.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
>On
>> Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 12:28 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>
>> Hmmm, can you price a system like this out?  I'll need per tower and
>per
>> node prices.
>>
>> Out here we'll probably be better off with a less expensive homebrew
>> system
>> due to long term costs though
>>
>> marlon
>>
>> - Original Message -
>> From: "3-dB Networks"  <mailto:wi...@3-db.net> 
>> To: "'WISPA General List'"  <mailto:wireless@wispa.org>
>
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:47 AM
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> That's what the MotoMesh gear is for... the MEA arch

Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

[Blake Bowers]

Depends on what agency in the county want the
grants, and what state.

There is SCADS of money for Fire Departments and
4.9 gear.


Don't take your organs to heaven,
heaven knows we need them down here!
Be an organ donor, sign your donor card today.

- Original Message - 
From: "Marlon K. Schafer" 
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 9:26 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9


> Got it.
>
> Do you know where to go after those grants that the county can get?
>
> thanks,
> marlon
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "3-dB Networks" 
> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 2:26 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>
>
>>I can only quote the MotoMesh Duo today... MotoMesh Solo though is 
>>probably
>> more along the lines of what you want... either way your not going to 
>> like
>> the price if your trying to do it on the cheap.  The sell to a city or
>> county though should work though with more expensive gear because they 
>> can
>> get grants, etc. for public safety.
>>
>> 4.9GHz to the car though is going to be hard to do without a Mesh
>> system...
>> and Mesh is costly.  I'd hate to be the one to sell a homebrew 4.9GHz
>> system
>> to a government agency and have it not perform as advertised.  You also
>> need
>> to be careful... 4.9GHz is part 90 not part-15 so FCC compliance should 
>> be
>> high on your list.
>>
>> Daniel White
>> 3-dB Networks
>> http://www.3dbnetworks.com
>>
>>
>>>-Original Message-
>>>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>>>Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
>>>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 12:28 PM
>>>To: WISPA General List
>>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>>
>>>Hmmm, can you price a system like this out?  I'll need per tower and per
>>>node prices.
>>>
>>>Out here we'll probably be better off with a less expensive homebrew
>>>system
>>>due to long term costs though
>>>
>>>marlon
>>>
>>>- Original Message -
>>>From: "3-dB Networks" 
>>>To: "'WISPA General List'" 
>>>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:47 AM
>>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>>
>>>
>>>> That's what the MotoMesh gear is for... the MEA architecture
>>>(developed
>>>> for
>>>> the military to connector tanks with helicopters) allows the cop car
>>>to be
>>>> traveling at 150MPH and for it to still work.  Plus to modems you
>>>install
>>>> in
>>>> the cars can mesh with the ones in other cars... so if one car can
>>>connect
>>>> to the network but another car 1/4 mile down the road can't... it can
>>>mesh
>>>> through another car to work.
>>>>
>>>> I don't think a municipality/county is going to like deploying a
>>>homebrew
>>>> solution for something like this... Moto already has the complete
>>>turnkey
>>>> package available (not that any of it is cheap!)
>>>>
>>>> Daniel White
>>>> 3-dB Networks
>>>> http://www.3dbnetworks.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>-Original Message-
>>>>>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
>>>On
>>>>>Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
>>>>>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 10:32 AM
>>>>>To: WISPA General List
>>>>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>>>>
>>>>>Got it.  Thanks!
>>>>>
>>>>>Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip?
>>>>>
>>>>>The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a
>>>pursuit
>>>>>or
>>>>>code 3 call.  The dispatcher could then take control of the car's
>>>laptop
>>>>>and
>>>>>push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car.  They could also use
>>>>>an ip
>>>>>enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's happening at the call.  This
>>>>>would
>>>>>allow much faster response times if something were to happen to the
>>>>>officer
>>>>>on scene.
>>>>>
>>>>>laters,
>>>>>marlon
>>>>>
>>>>>-

Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

[Marlon K. Schafer]

Got it.

Do you know where to go after those grants that the county can get?

thanks,
marlon

- Original Message - 
From: "3-dB Networks" 
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 2:26 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9


>I can only quote the MotoMesh Duo today... MotoMesh Solo though is probably
> more along the lines of what you want... either way your not going to like
> the price if your trying to do it on the cheap.  The sell to a city or
> county though should work though with more expensive gear because they can
> get grants, etc. for public safety.
>
> 4.9GHz to the car though is going to be hard to do without a Mesh 
> system...
> and Mesh is costly.  I'd hate to be the one to sell a homebrew 4.9GHz 
> system
> to a government agency and have it not perform as advertised.  You also 
> need
> to be careful... 4.9GHz is part 90 not part-15 so FCC compliance should be
> high on your list.
>
> Daniel White
> 3-dB Networks
> http://www.3dbnetworks.com
>
>
>>-Original Message-
>>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>>Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
>>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 12:28 PM
>>To: WISPA General List
>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>
>>Hmmm, can you price a system like this out?  I'll need per tower and per
>>node prices.
>>
>>Out here we'll probably be better off with a less expensive homebrew
>>system
>>due to long term costs though
>>
>>marlon
>>
>>- Original Message -
>>From: "3-dB Networks" 
>>To: "'WISPA General List'" 
>>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:47 AM
>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>
>>
>>> That's what the MotoMesh gear is for... the MEA architecture
>>(developed
>>> for
>>> the military to connector tanks with helicopters) allows the cop car
>>to be
>>> traveling at 150MPH and for it to still work.  Plus to modems you
>>install
>>> in
>>> the cars can mesh with the ones in other cars... so if one car can
>>connect
>>> to the network but another car 1/4 mile down the road can't... it can
>>mesh
>>> through another car to work.
>>>
>>> I don't think a municipality/county is going to like deploying a
>>homebrew
>>> solution for something like this... Moto already has the complete
>>turnkey
>>> package available (not that any of it is cheap!)
>>>
>>> Daniel White
>>> 3-dB Networks
>>> http://www.3dbnetworks.com
>>>
>>>
>>>>-Original Message-
>>>>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
>>On
>>>>Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
>>>>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 10:32 AM
>>>>To: WISPA General List
>>>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>>>
>>>>Got it.  Thanks!
>>>>
>>>>Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip?
>>>>
>>>>The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a
>>pursuit
>>>>or
>>>>code 3 call.  The dispatcher could then take control of the car's
>>laptop
>>>>and
>>>>push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car.  They could also use
>>>>an ip
>>>>enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's happening at the call.  This
>>>>would
>>>>allow much faster response times if something were to happen to the
>>>>officer
>>>>on scene.
>>>>
>>>>laters,
>>>>marlon
>>>>
>>>>- Original Message -
>>>>From: "Jerry Richardson" 
>>>>To: "WISPA General List" 
>>>>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:02 AM
>>>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Might look at Solectek, they have both 3.65 and 4.9 multipoint
>>>>> solutions. However, why not wait to see what happens with TVWS.
>>Seems
>>>>> that band would be outstanding for mobile use.
>>>>>
>>>>> Since it's your network, you could assign each agency it's own
>>>>SSID/VLAN
>>>>> which route across your network to the appropriate agency's servers.
>>>>> This way the IP's are not changing as they move from tower to tower
>>-
>>>>> the only delay would be when the subscriber

Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

[Mike Hammett]

If it's anything like Part-15 vs. Part-90 for the XR3 and 3650, then there's 
actually LESS hoops to go through to use it vs. Part-15.

I don't know the details of each of those bands, but it sounds like any 
statement saying you can't use homebrew is FUD.  The FCC permits use of the 
XR3 in 3650, why wouldn't the XR4 work in 4.9.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



--
From: "3-dB Networks" 
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 4:26 PM
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

> I can only quote the MotoMesh Duo today... MotoMesh Solo though is 
> probably
> more along the lines of what you want... either way your not going to like
> the price if your trying to do it on the cheap.  The sell to a city or
> county though should work though with more expensive gear because they can
> get grants, etc. for public safety.
>
> 4.9GHz to the car though is going to be hard to do without a Mesh 
> system...
> and Mesh is costly.  I'd hate to be the one to sell a homebrew 4.9GHz 
> system
> to a government agency and have it not perform as advertised.  You also 
> need
> to be careful... 4.9GHz is part 90 not part-15 so FCC compliance should be
> high on your list.
>
> Daniel White
> 3-dB Networks
> http://www.3dbnetworks.com
>
>
>>-Original Message-
>>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>>Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
>>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 12:28 PM
>>To: WISPA General List
>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>
>>Hmmm, can you price a system like this out?  I'll need per tower and per
>>node prices.
>>
>>Out here we'll probably be better off with a less expensive homebrew
>>system
>>due to long term costs though
>>
>>marlon
>>
>>- Original Message -
>>From: "3-dB Networks" 
>>To: "'WISPA General List'" 
>>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:47 AM
>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>
>>
>>> That's what the MotoMesh gear is for... the MEA architecture
>>(developed
>>> for
>>> the military to connector tanks with helicopters) allows the cop car
>>to be
>>> traveling at 150MPH and for it to still work.  Plus to modems you
>>install
>>> in
>>> the cars can mesh with the ones in other cars... so if one car can
>>connect
>>> to the network but another car 1/4 mile down the road can't... it can
>>mesh
>>> through another car to work.
>>>
>>> I don't think a municipality/county is going to like deploying a
>>homebrew
>>> solution for something like this... Moto already has the complete
>>turnkey
>>> package available (not that any of it is cheap!)
>>>
>>> Daniel White
>>> 3-dB Networks
>>> http://www.3dbnetworks.com
>>>
>>>
>>>>-Original Message-
>>>>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
>>On
>>>>Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
>>>>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 10:32 AM
>>>>To: WISPA General List
>>>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>>>
>>>>Got it.  Thanks!
>>>>
>>>>Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip?
>>>>
>>>>The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a
>>pursuit
>>>>or
>>>>code 3 call.  The dispatcher could then take control of the car's
>>laptop
>>>>and
>>>>push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car.  They could also use
>>>>an ip
>>>>enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's happening at the call.  This
>>>>would
>>>>allow much faster response times if something were to happen to the
>>>>officer
>>>>on scene.
>>>>
>>>>laters,
>>>>marlon
>>>>
>>>>- Original Message -
>>>>From: "Jerry Richardson" 
>>>>To: "WISPA General List" 
>>>>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:02 AM
>>>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Might look at Solectek, they have both 3.65 and 4.9 multipoint
>>>>> solutions. However, why not wait to see what happens with TVWS.
>>Seems
>>>>> that band would be outstanding for mobile use.
>>>>>
>>>>&

Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

[Jack Unger]

Yes, but the system doesn't have to fail before the WISP who supplies 
the homebrew 4.9 system gets blown out of the water. All one person 
would have to do is point out to the City that the equipment that they 
have been sold is uncertified and illegal to use per FCC rules. What 
Police Department IT guy (or Police Chief) is going to accept that and 
put his own career on the line just because some WISP didn't tell him 
the truth about the equipment that they sold the Police Department?

3-dB Networks wrote:
> I'd just hate to be the guy deploying a 4.9GHz homebrew system that the
> police/fire come to depend on and have it fail on me and someone die because
> of it.  Systems like these should cost a lot of money to be built very well.
> The FCC would really be the last person I would be concerned about. it's the
> wrath of the city when a mission critical system like this fails.
>
>  
>
> I've heard a lot of stories from Motorola two-way guys how they could go
> into meetings and cities would buy their two-way gear and pay the extra
> price because no one wants to take chances with people's lives.  Help the
> city find the grant money to purchase a system like Moto's. and your going
> to be the hero big time.  Take it one step farther and do a Motomesh Quatro
> deployment. have grant money pay for the gear. and use the 2.4GHz Wi-Fi
> coverage you now have to sell service.  Since the gear is paid for your ROI
> is in a much better situation than the average muni-wifi project.  Or take
> it one step further and get the water department to use it for meter
> reading, etc.  
>
>  
>
> At the end of the day money isn't an issue really for something like this.
> its just about getting the right people together and FINDING the money for
> it.
>
>  
>
> Daniel White
>
> 3-dB Networks
>
> http://www.3dbnetworks.com
>
>  
>
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Jack Unger
> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 3:37 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>
>  
>
> Good point Daniel. Anyone doing 4.9 GHz "homebrew" would likely lose their
> business when the FCC came knocking along with the Police Department that
> was sold the illegal system by the WISP.  OUCH!!
>
> 3-dB Networks wrote: 
>
> I can only quote the MotoMesh Duo today... MotoMesh Solo though is probably
> more along the lines of what you want... either way your not going to like
> the price if your trying to do it on the cheap.  The sell to a city or
> county though should work though with more expensive gear because they can
> get grants, etc. for public safety.  
>  
> 4.9GHz to the car though is going to be hard to do without a Mesh system...
> and Mesh is costly.  I'd hate to be the one to sell a homebrew 4.9GHz system
> to a government agency and have it not perform as advertised.  You also need
> to be careful... 4.9GHz is part 90 not part-15 so FCC compliance should be
> high on your list.
>  
> Daniel White
> 3-dB Networks
> http://www.3dbnetworks.com
>  
>  
>   
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 12:28 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>  
> Hmmm, can you price a system like this out?  I'll need per tower and per
> node prices.
>  
> Out here we'll probably be better off with a less expensive homebrew
> system
> due to long term costs though
>  
> marlon
>  
> - Original Message -
> From: "3-dB Networks"  <mailto:wi...@3-db.net> 
> To: "'WISPA General List'"  <mailto:wireless@wispa.org> 
> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:47 AM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>  
>  
> 
>
> That's what the MotoMesh gear is for... the MEA architecture
>   
>
> (developed
> 
>
> for
> the military to connector tanks with helicopters) allows the cop car
>   
>
> to be
> 
>
> traveling at 150MPH and for it to still work.  Plus to modems you
>   
>
> install
> 
>
> in
> the cars can mesh with the ones in other cars... so if one car can
>   
>
> connect
> 
>
> to the network but another car 1/4 mile down the road can't... it can
>   
>
> mesh
> 
>
> through another car to work.
>  
> I don't think a municipality/county is going to like deploying a
>   
>
> homebrew
> 
>
> solution for something like this... Moto already has the complete
>   
&g

Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

[John Thomas]

These will do what you want

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/routers/ps272/ps6990/product_data_sheet0900aecd804c207b.html

John

Marlon K. Schafer wrote:
> OK, last one.
>
> What would you guys use for 3650  gear.  I need to deliver very high speeds 
> to lots of users with near 100% reliability.  Money matters, but it's not 
> the driving force here.
>
> Also, I'm looking for a mobile 4.9 system.  We'll have to roam across 
> multiple towers that have multiple ip ranges on them.  The idea is not only 
> to keep voip calls running while this happens, but also to always be able to 
> remotely access the mobile pc's.  Is there a system that will facilitate 
> this idea (talking mobile broadband access across my 6000 square mile 
> network).  Do I have to create something from scratch?
>
> thanks!
> marlon
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

[3-dB Networks]

I'd just hate to be the guy deploying a 4.9GHz homebrew system that the
police/fire come to depend on and have it fail on me and someone die because
of it.  Systems like these should cost a lot of money to be built very well.
The FCC would really be the last person I would be concerned about. it's the
wrath of the city when a mission critical system like this fails.

 

I've heard a lot of stories from Motorola two-way guys how they could go
into meetings and cities would buy their two-way gear and pay the extra
price because no one wants to take chances with people's lives.  Help the
city find the grant money to purchase a system like Moto's. and your going
to be the hero big time.  Take it one step farther and do a Motomesh Quatro
deployment. have grant money pay for the gear. and use the 2.4GHz Wi-Fi
coverage you now have to sell service.  Since the gear is paid for your ROI
is in a much better situation than the average muni-wifi project.  Or take
it one step further and get the water department to use it for meter
reading, etc.  

 

At the end of the day money isn't an issue really for something like this.
its just about getting the right people together and FINDING the money for
it.

 

Daniel White

3-dB Networks

http://www.3dbnetworks.com

 

From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 3:37 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

 

Good point Daniel. Anyone doing 4.9 GHz "homebrew" would likely lose their
business when the FCC came knocking along with the Police Department that
was sold the illegal system by the WISP.  OUCH!!

3-dB Networks wrote: 

I can only quote the MotoMesh Duo today... MotoMesh Solo though is probably
more along the lines of what you want... either way your not going to like
the price if your trying to do it on the cheap.  The sell to a city or
county though should work though with more expensive gear because they can
get grants, etc. for public safety.  
 
4.9GHz to the car though is going to be hard to do without a Mesh system...
and Mesh is costly.  I'd hate to be the one to sell a homebrew 4.9GHz system
to a government agency and have it not perform as advertised.  You also need
to be careful... 4.9GHz is part 90 not part-15 so FCC compliance should be
high on your list.
 
Daniel White
3-dB Networks
http://www.3dbnetworks.com
 
 
  

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 12:28 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
 
Hmmm, can you price a system like this out?  I'll need per tower and per
node prices.
 
Out here we'll probably be better off with a less expensive homebrew
system
due to long term costs though
 
marlon
 
- Original Message -
From: "3-dB Networks"  <mailto:wi...@3-db.net> 
To: "'WISPA General List'"  <mailto:wireless@wispa.org> 
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:47 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
 
 


That's what the MotoMesh gear is for... the MEA architecture
  

(developed


for
the military to connector tanks with helicopters) allows the cop car
  

to be


traveling at 150MPH and for it to still work.  Plus to modems you
  

install


in
the cars can mesh with the ones in other cars... so if one car can
  

connect


to the network but another car 1/4 mile down the road can't... it can
  

mesh


through another car to work.
 
I don't think a municipality/county is going to like deploying a
  

homebrew


solution for something like this... Moto already has the complete
  

turnkey


package available (not that any of it is cheap!)
 
Daniel White
3-dB Networks
http://www.3dbnetworks.com
 
 
  

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]


On


Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 10:32 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
 
Got it.  Thanks!
 
Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip?
 
The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a


pursuit


or
code 3 call.  The dispatcher could then take control of the car's


laptop


and
push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car.  They could also use
an ip
enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's happening at the call.  This
would
allow much faster response times if something were to happen to the
officer
on scene.
 
laters,
marlon
 
- Original Message -
From: "Jerry Richardson"  <mailto:jrichard...@aircloud.com>

To: "WISPA General List"  <mailto:wireless@wispa.org> 
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:02 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
 
 

Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

[Jack Unger]

Good point Daniel. Anyone doing 4.9 GHz "homebrew" would likely lose
their business when the FCC came knocking along with the Police
Department that was sold the illegal system by the WISP.  OUCH!!

3-dB Networks wrote:

  I can only quote the MotoMesh Duo today... MotoMesh Solo though is probably
more along the lines of what you want... either way your not going to like
the price if your trying to do it on the cheap.  The sell to a city or
county though should work though with more expensive gear because they can
get grants, etc. for public safety.  

4.9GHz to the car though is going to be hard to do without a Mesh system...
and Mesh is costly.  I'd hate to be the one to sell a homebrew 4.9GHz system
to a government agency and have it not perform as advertised.  You also need
to be careful... 4.9GHz is part 90 not part-15 so FCC compliance should be
high on your list.

Daniel White
3-dB Networks
http://www.3dbnetworks.com


  
  
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 12:28 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

Hmmm, can you price a system like this out?  I'll need per tower and per
node prices.

Out here we'll probably be better off with a less expensive homebrew
system
due to long term costs though

marlon

- Original Message -
From: "3-dB Networks" 
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:47 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9




  That's what the MotoMesh gear is for... the MEA architecture
  

(developed


  for
the military to connector tanks with helicopters) allows the cop car
  

to be


  traveling at 150MPH and for it to still work.  Plus to modems you
  

install


  in
the cars can mesh with the ones in other cars... so if one car can
  

connect


  to the network but another car 1/4 mile down the road can't... it can
  

mesh


  through another car to work.

I don't think a municipality/county is going to like deploying a
  

homebrew


  solution for something like this... Moto already has the complete
  

turnkey


  package available (not that any of it is cheap!)

Daniel White
3-dB Networks
http://www.3dbnetworks.com


  
  
-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]

  

On


  
Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 10:32 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

Got it.  Thanks!

Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip?

The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a

  

pursuit


  
or
code 3 call.  The dispatcher could then take control of the car's

  

laptop


  
and
push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car.  They could also use
an ip
enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's happening at the call.  This
would
allow much faster response times if something were to happen to the
officer
on scene.

laters,
marlon

- Original Message -
From: "Jerry Richardson" 
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:02 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9




  Might look at Solectek, they have both 3.65 and 4.9 multipoint
solutions. However, why not wait to see what happens with TVWS.
  

  

Seems


  

  that band would be outstanding for mobile use.

Since it's your network, you could assign each agency it's own
  

SSID/VLAN


  which route across your network to the appropriate agency's servers.
This way the IP's are not changing as they move from tower to tower
  

  

-


  

  the only delay would be when the subscriber switches towers.

Alternately MobileIP allows seamless roaming across multiple
  

  

networks.


  

  
__
Jerry Richardson
airCloud Communications

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
  

On
    
        
  Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:35 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

OK, last one.

What would you guys use for 3650  gear.  I need to deliver very high
speeds to lots of users with near 100% reliability.  Money matters,
  

but

Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

[3-dB Networks]

I can only quote the MotoMesh Duo today... MotoMesh Solo though is probably
more along the lines of what you want... either way your not going to like
the price if your trying to do it on the cheap.  The sell to a city or
county though should work though with more expensive gear because they can
get grants, etc. for public safety.  

4.9GHz to the car though is going to be hard to do without a Mesh system...
and Mesh is costly.  I'd hate to be the one to sell a homebrew 4.9GHz system
to a government agency and have it not perform as advertised.  You also need
to be careful... 4.9GHz is part 90 not part-15 so FCC compliance should be
high on your list.

Daniel White
3-dB Networks
http://www.3dbnetworks.com


>-Original Message-
>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 12:28 PM
>To: WISPA General List
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>
>Hmmm, can you price a system like this out?  I'll need per tower and per
>node prices.
>
>Out here we'll probably be better off with a less expensive homebrew
>system
>due to long term costs though
>
>marlon
>
>- Original Message -
>From: "3-dB Networks" 
>To: "'WISPA General List'" 
>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:47 AM
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>
>
>> That's what the MotoMesh gear is for... the MEA architecture
>(developed
>> for
>> the military to connector tanks with helicopters) allows the cop car
>to be
>> traveling at 150MPH and for it to still work.  Plus to modems you
>install
>> in
>> the cars can mesh with the ones in other cars... so if one car can
>connect
>> to the network but another car 1/4 mile down the road can't... it can
>mesh
>> through another car to work.
>>
>> I don't think a municipality/county is going to like deploying a
>homebrew
>> solution for something like this... Moto already has the complete
>turnkey
>> package available (not that any of it is cheap!)
>>
>> Daniel White
>> 3-dB Networks
>> http://www.3dbnetworks.com
>>
>>
>>>-Original Message-
>>>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
>On
>>>Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
>>>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 10:32 AM
>>>To: WISPA General List
>>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>>
>>>Got it.  Thanks!
>>>
>>>Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip?
>>>
>>>The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a
>pursuit
>>>or
>>>code 3 call.  The dispatcher could then take control of the car's
>laptop
>>>and
>>>push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car.  They could also use
>>>an ip
>>>enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's happening at the call.  This
>>>would
>>>allow much faster response times if something were to happen to the
>>>officer
>>>on scene.
>>>
>>>laters,
>>>marlon
>>>
>>>- Original Message -
>>>From: "Jerry Richardson" 
>>>To: "WISPA General List" 
>>>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:02 AM
>>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>>
>>>
>>>> Might look at Solectek, they have both 3.65 and 4.9 multipoint
>>>> solutions. However, why not wait to see what happens with TVWS.
>Seems
>>>> that band would be outstanding for mobile use.
>>>>
>>>> Since it's your network, you could assign each agency it's own
>>>SSID/VLAN
>>>> which route across your network to the appropriate agency's servers.
>>>> This way the IP's are not changing as they move from tower to tower
>-
>>>> the only delay would be when the subscriber switches towers.
>>>>
>>>> Alternately MobileIP allows seamless roaming across multiple
>networks.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> __
>>>> Jerry Richardson
>>>> airCloud Communications
>>>>
>>>> -Original Message-
>>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
>>>On
>>>> Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:35 PM
>>>> To: WISPA General List
>>>> Subject: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>>>
>>>> OK, last one.
>>>>
>>>> What would you guys use for 3650  gear. 

Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

[Marlon K. Schafer]

We're not looking for 100% coverage.  We know that won't happen.  We'll get 
as close as we can afford though.

As for mobility that's yet to be determined.  Back in 2001 when we first did 
cop car setups mobility wasn't an issue because the car would just keep it's 
bridged ip addy.  This network design has routed towers so I'm not sure.

It may be as easy as running multiple ip addys in the car though.

laters,
marlon

- Original Message - 
From: "3-dB Networks" 
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:56 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9


> Are you doing this with mobility though?  How are you doing the car
> installations?  What about LOS issues considering the low power of 4.9GHz?
>
> Daniel White
> 3-dB Networks
> http://www.3dbnetworks.com
>
>
>>-Original Message-
>>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>>Behalf Of Jerry Richardson
>>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 10:44 AM
>>To: WISPA General List
>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>
>>The way we have it set up is that each agency - city, county fire,
>>sheriff has it's own SSID on the radio that is assigned to a unique
>>VLAN.
>>
>>The radio handles the VLAN tagging and forwards it either out the
>>Ethernet port or the backhaul radio (if it's a dual radio). We have 11
>>SSID/VLAN combinations running across the network and it works fine.
>>
>>I am not administering the MobileIP so I would not be the best person to
>>help you with that.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>__
>>Jerry Richardson
>>airCloud Communications
>>
>>-Original Message-
>>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>>Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
>>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:32 AM
>>To: WISPA General List
>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>
>>Got it.  Thanks!
>>
>>Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip?
>>
>>The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a pursuit
>>or code 3 call.  The dispatcher could then take control of the car's
>>laptop and push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car.  They could
>>also use an ip enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's happening at
>>the call.  This would allow much faster response times if something were
>>to happen to the officer on scene.
>>
>>laters,
>>marlon
>>
>>- Original Message -
>>From: "Jerry Richardson" 
>>To: "WISPA General List" 
>>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:02 AM
>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>
>>
>>> Might look at Solectek, they have both 3.65 and 4.9 multipoint
>>> solutions. However, why not wait to see what happens with TVWS. Seems
>>> that band would be outstanding for mobile use.
>>>
>>> Since it's your network, you could assign each agency it's own
>>SSID/VLAN
>>> which route across your network to the appropriate agency's servers.
>>> This way the IP's are not changing as they move from tower to tower -
>>> the only delay would be when the subscriber switches towers.
>>>
>>> Alternately MobileIP allows seamless roaming across multiple networks.
>>>
>>>
>>> __
>>> Jerry Richardson
>>> airCloud Communications
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
>>On
>>> Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:35 PM
>>> To: WISPA General List
>>> Subject: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>>
>>> OK, last one.
>>>
>>> What would you guys use for 3650  gear.  I need to deliver very high
>>> speeds to lots of users with near 100% reliability.  Money matters,
>>but
>>> it's not the driving force here.
>>>
>>> Also, I'm looking for a mobile 4.9 system.  We'll have to roam across
>>> multiple towers that have multiple ip ranges on them.  The idea is not
>>> only to keep voip calls running while this happens, but also to always
>>> be able to remotely access the mobile pc's.  Is there a system that
>>will
>>> facilitate this idea (talking mobile broadband access across my 6000
>>> square mile network).  Do I have to create something from scratch?
>>>
>>> thanks!
>>> marlon
&g

Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

[Marlon K. Schafer]

Hmmm, can you price a system like this out?  I'll need per tower and per 
node prices.

Out here we'll probably be better off with a less expensive homebrew system 
due to long term costs though

marlon

- Original Message - 
From: "3-dB Networks" 
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:47 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9


> That's what the MotoMesh gear is for... the MEA architecture (developed 
> for
> the military to connector tanks with helicopters) allows the cop car to be
> traveling at 150MPH and for it to still work.  Plus to modems you install 
> in
> the cars can mesh with the ones in other cars... so if one car can connect
> to the network but another car 1/4 mile down the road can't... it can mesh
> through another car to work.
>
> I don't think a municipality/county is going to like deploying a homebrew
> solution for something like this... Moto already has the complete turnkey
> package available (not that any of it is cheap!)
>
> Daniel White
> 3-dB Networks
> http://www.3dbnetworks.com
>
>
>>-Original Message-
>>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>>Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
>>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 10:32 AM
>>To: WISPA General List
>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>
>>Got it.  Thanks!
>>
>>Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip?
>>
>>The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a pursuit
>>or
>>code 3 call.  The dispatcher could then take control of the car's laptop
>>and
>>push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car.  They could also use
>>an ip
>>enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's happening at the call.  This
>>would
>>allow much faster response times if something were to happen to the
>>officer
>>on scene.
>>
>>laters,
>>marlon
>>
>>- Original Message -
>>From: "Jerry Richardson" 
>>To: "WISPA General List" 
>>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:02 AM
>>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>
>>
>>> Might look at Solectek, they have both 3.65 and 4.9 multipoint
>>> solutions. However, why not wait to see what happens with TVWS. Seems
>>> that band would be outstanding for mobile use.
>>>
>>> Since it's your network, you could assign each agency it's own
>>SSID/VLAN
>>> which route across your network to the appropriate agency's servers.
>>> This way the IP's are not changing as they move from tower to tower -
>>> the only delay would be when the subscriber switches towers.
>>>
>>> Alternately MobileIP allows seamless roaming across multiple networks.
>>>
>>>
>>> __
>>> Jerry Richardson
>>> airCloud Communications
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
>>On
>>> Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:35 PM
>>> To: WISPA General List
>>> Subject: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>>
>>> OK, last one.
>>>
>>> What would you guys use for 3650  gear.  I need to deliver very high
>>> speeds to lots of users with near 100% reliability.  Money matters,
>>but
>>> it's not the driving force here.
>>>
>>> Also, I'm looking for a mobile 4.9 system.  We'll have to roam across
>>> multiple towers that have multiple ip ranges on them.  The idea is not
>>> only to keep voip calls running while this happens, but also to always
>>> be able to remotely access the mobile pc's.  Is there a system that
>>will
>>> facilitate this idea (talking mobile broadband access across my 6000
>>> square mile network).  Do I have to create something from scratch?
>>>
>>> thanks!
>>> marlon
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>--
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> --
>>--
>>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: ht

Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

[Jerry Richardson]

It's not real "mesh" though, it uses WDS to bridge traffic from one
radio to the next.

 
 
__ 
Jerry Richardson 
airCloud Communications

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Jerry Richardson
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 10:22 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

The network is a mix of Vivato and GO Networks, both of which are out of
business.

We are going to test Deliberant DuoMesh in a small downtown network to
see if it will meet our requirements. 


 
 
__
Jerry Richardson
airCloud Communications

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:46 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

Hmmm, that sounds like a great way to do this part of the project.

What hardware are you using?
thanks,
marlon

- Original Message -
From: "Jerry Richardson" 
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:43 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9


> The way we have it set up is that each agency - city, county fire, 
> sheriff has it's own SSID on the radio that is assigned to a unique 
> VLAN.
>
> The radio handles the VLAN tagging and forwards it either out the 
> Ethernet port or the backhaul radio (if it's a dual radio). We have 11

> SSID/VLAN combinations running across the network and it works fine.
>
> I am not administering the MobileIP so I would not be the best person
to
> help you with that.
>
>
>
>
> __
> Jerry Richardson
> airCloud Communications
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
On
> Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:32 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>
> Got it.  Thanks!
>
> Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip?
>
> The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a
pursuit
> or code 3 call.  The dispatcher could then take control of the car's 
> laptop and push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car.  They
could
> also use an ip enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's happening at 
> the call.  This would allow much faster response times if something
were
> to happen to the officer on scene.
>
> laters,
> marlon
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Jerry Richardson" 
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:02 AM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>
>
>> Might look at Solectek, they have both 3.65 and 4.9 multipoint 
>> solutions. However, why not wait to see what happens with TVWS. Seems

>> that band would be outstanding for mobile use.
>>
>> Since it's your network, you could assign each agency it's own
> SSID/VLAN
>> which route across your network to the appropriate agency's servers.
>> This way the IP's are not changing as they move from tower to tower -

>> the only delay would be when the subscriber switches towers.
>>
>> Alternately MobileIP allows seamless roaming across multiple
networks.
>>
>>
>> __
>> Jerry Richardson
>> airCloud Communications
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
> On
>> Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:35 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>
>> OK, last one.
>>
>> What would you guys use for 3650  gear.  I need to deliver very high 
>> speeds to lots of users with near 100% reliability.  Money matters,
> but
>> it's not the driving force here.
>>
>> Also, I'm looking for a mobile 4.9 system.  We'll have to roam across

>> multiple towers that have multiple ip ranges on them.  The idea is
not
>> only to keep voip calls running while this happens, but also to
always
>> be able to remotely access the mobile pc's.  Is there a system that
> will
>> facilitate this idea (talking mobile broadband access across my 6000 
>> square mile network).  Do I have to create something from scratch?
>>
>> thanks!
>> marlon
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>
>
--

Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

[Jerry Richardson]

The network is a mix of Vivato and GO Networks, both of which are out of
business.

We are going to test Deliberant DuoMesh in a small downtown network to
see if it will meet our requirements. 


 
 
__ 
Jerry Richardson 
airCloud Communications

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:46 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

Hmmm, that sounds like a great way to do this part of the project.

What hardware are you using?
thanks,
marlon

- Original Message -
From: "Jerry Richardson" 
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:43 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9


> The way we have it set up is that each agency - city, county fire,
> sheriff has it's own SSID on the radio that is assigned to a unique
> VLAN.
>
> The radio handles the VLAN tagging and forwards it either out the
> Ethernet port or the backhaul radio (if it's a dual radio). We have 11
> SSID/VLAN combinations running across the network and it works fine.
>
> I am not administering the MobileIP so I would not be the best person
to
> help you with that.
>
>
>
>
> __
> Jerry Richardson
> airCloud Communications
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
On
> Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:32 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>
> Got it.  Thanks!
>
> Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip?
>
> The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a
pursuit
> or code 3 call.  The dispatcher could then take control of the car's
> laptop and push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car.  They
could
> also use an ip enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's happening at
> the call.  This would allow much faster response times if something
were
> to happen to the officer on scene.
>
> laters,
> marlon
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Jerry Richardson" 
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:02 AM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>
>
>> Might look at Solectek, they have both 3.65 and 4.9 multipoint
>> solutions. However, why not wait to see what happens with TVWS. Seems
>> that band would be outstanding for mobile use.
>>
>> Since it's your network, you could assign each agency it's own
> SSID/VLAN
>> which route across your network to the appropriate agency's servers.
>> This way the IP's are not changing as they move from tower to tower -
>> the only delay would be when the subscriber switches towers.
>>
>> Alternately MobileIP allows seamless roaming across multiple
networks.
>>
>>
>> ______
>> Jerry Richardson
>> airCloud Communications
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
> On
>> Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:35 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>
>> OK, last one.
>>
>> What would you guys use for 3650  gear.  I need to deliver very high
>> speeds to lots of users with near 100% reliability.  Money matters,
> but
>> it's not the driving force here.
>>
>> Also, I'm looking for a mobile 4.9 system.  We'll have to roam across
>> multiple towers that have multiple ip ranges on them.  The idea is
not
>> only to keep voip calls running while this happens, but also to
always
>> be able to remotely access the mobile pc's.  Is there a system that
> will
>> facilitate this idea (talking mobile broadband access across my 6000
>> square mile network).  Do I have to create something from scratch?
>>
>> thanks!
>> marlon
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>
>

>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>>
>>
>

> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>&g

Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

[Jerry Richardson]

In this case, it's 2.4GHz to the clients. 

The cars have Laptops with 3 radios:
- Aironet PCMCIA diversity connectors and antennas on the dash
- Cellular cards 
- Low speed radios

The system on the laptop automatically tries to connect to WiFi first,
then the cellular, then finally the low speed radio if needed.


 
 
__ 
Jerry Richardson 
airCloud Communications

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of 3-dB Networks
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:57 AM
To: 'WISPA General List'
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

Are you doing this with mobility though?  How are you doing the car
installations?  What about LOS issues considering the low power of
4.9GHz?

Daniel White
3-dB Networks
http://www.3dbnetworks.com


>-Original Message-
>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On

>Behalf Of Jerry Richardson
>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 10:44 AM
>To: WISPA General List
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>
>The way we have it set up is that each agency - city, county fire, 
>sheriff has it's own SSID on the radio that is assigned to a unique 
>VLAN.
>
>The radio handles the VLAN tagging and forwards it either out the 
>Ethernet port or the backhaul radio (if it's a dual radio). We have 11 
>SSID/VLAN combinations running across the network and it works fine.
>
>I am not administering the MobileIP so I would not be the best person 
>to help you with that.
>
>
>
>
>__
>Jerry Richardson
>airCloud Communications
>
>-Original Message-
>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On

>Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:32 AM
>To: WISPA General List
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>
>Got it.  Thanks!
>
>Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip?
>
>The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a 
>pursuit or code 3 call.  The dispatcher could then take control of the 
>car's laptop and push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car.  
>They could also use an ip enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's 
>happening at the call.  This would allow much faster response times if 
>something were to happen to the officer on scene.
>
>laters,
>marlon
>
>- Original Message -
>From: "Jerry Richardson" 
>To: "WISPA General List" 
>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:02 AM
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>
>
>> Might look at Solectek, they have both 3.65 and 4.9 multipoint 
>> solutions. However, why not wait to see what happens with TVWS. Seems

>> that band would be outstanding for mobile use.
>>
>> Since it's your network, you could assign each agency it's own
>SSID/VLAN
>> which route across your network to the appropriate agency's servers.
>> This way the IP's are not changing as they move from tower to tower -

>> the only delay would be when the subscriber switches towers.
>>
>> Alternately MobileIP allows seamless roaming across multiple
networks.
>>
>>
>> __
>> Jerry Richardson
>> airCloud Communications
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
>On
>> Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:35 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>
>> OK, last one.
>>
>> What would you guys use for 3650  gear.  I need to deliver very high 
>> speeds to lots of users with near 100% reliability.  Money matters,
>but
>> it's not the driving force here.
>>
>> Also, I'm looking for a mobile 4.9 system.  We'll have to roam across

>> multiple towers that have multiple ip ranges on them.  The idea is 
>> not only to keep voip calls running while this happens, but also to 
>> always be able to remotely access the mobile pc's.  Is there a system

>> that
>will
>> facilitate this idea (talking mobile broadband access across my 6000 
>> square mile network).  Do I have to create something from scratch?
>>
>> thanks!
>> marlon
>>
>>
>>
>>
>---
>-
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>
>---
>-
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@

Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

[3-dB Networks]

Are you doing this with mobility though?  How are you doing the car
installations?  What about LOS issues considering the low power of 4.9GHz?

Daniel White
3-dB Networks
http://www.3dbnetworks.com


>-Original Message-
>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>Behalf Of Jerry Richardson
>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 10:44 AM
>To: WISPA General List
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>
>The way we have it set up is that each agency - city, county fire,
>sheriff has it's own SSID on the radio that is assigned to a unique
>VLAN.
>
>The radio handles the VLAN tagging and forwards it either out the
>Ethernet port or the backhaul radio (if it's a dual radio). We have 11
>SSID/VLAN combinations running across the network and it works fine.
>
>I am not administering the MobileIP so I would not be the best person to
>help you with that.
>
>
>
>
>__
>Jerry Richardson
>airCloud Communications
>
>-Original Message-
>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:32 AM
>To: WISPA General List
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>
>Got it.  Thanks!
>
>Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip?
>
>The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a pursuit
>or code 3 call.  The dispatcher could then take control of the car's
>laptop and push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car.  They could
>also use an ip enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's happening at
>the call.  This would allow much faster response times if something were
>to happen to the officer on scene.
>
>laters,
>marlon
>
>- Original Message -
>From: "Jerry Richardson" 
>To: "WISPA General List" 
>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:02 AM
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>
>
>> Might look at Solectek, they have both 3.65 and 4.9 multipoint
>> solutions. However, why not wait to see what happens with TVWS. Seems
>> that band would be outstanding for mobile use.
>>
>> Since it's your network, you could assign each agency it's own
>SSID/VLAN
>> which route across your network to the appropriate agency's servers.
>> This way the IP's are not changing as they move from tower to tower -
>> the only delay would be when the subscriber switches towers.
>>
>> Alternately MobileIP allows seamless roaming across multiple networks.
>>
>>
>> ______
>> Jerry Richardson
>> airCloud Communications
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
>On
>> Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:35 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>
>> OK, last one.
>>
>> What would you guys use for 3650  gear.  I need to deliver very high
>> speeds to lots of users with near 100% reliability.  Money matters,
>but
>> it's not the driving force here.
>>
>> Also, I'm looking for a mobile 4.9 system.  We'll have to roam across
>> multiple towers that have multiple ip ranges on them.  The idea is not
>> only to keep voip calls running while this happens, but also to always
>> be able to remotely access the mobile pc's.  Is there a system that
>will
>> facilitate this idea (talking mobile broadband access across my 6000
>> square mile network).  Do I have to create something from scratch?
>>
>> thanks!
>> marlon
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>
>
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>
>
>
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
&g

Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

[3-dB Networks]

That's what the MotoMesh gear is for... the MEA architecture (developed for
the military to connector tanks with helicopters) allows the cop car to be
traveling at 150MPH and for it to still work.  Plus to modems you install in
the cars can mesh with the ones in other cars... so if one car can connect
to the network but another car 1/4 mile down the road can't... it can mesh
through another car to work.

I don't think a municipality/county is going to like deploying a homebrew
solution for something like this... Moto already has the complete turnkey
package available (not that any of it is cheap!)

Daniel White
3-dB Networks
http://www.3dbnetworks.com


>-Original Message-
>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 10:32 AM
>To: WISPA General List
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>
>Got it.  Thanks!
>
>Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip?
>
>The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a pursuit
>or
>code 3 call.  The dispatcher could then take control of the car's laptop
>and
>push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car.  They could also use
>an ip
>enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's happening at the call.  This
>would
>allow much faster response times if something were to happen to the
>officer
>on scene.
>
>laters,
>marlon
>
>- Original Message -
>From: "Jerry Richardson" 
>To: "WISPA General List" 
>Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:02 AM
>Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>
>
>> Might look at Solectek, they have both 3.65 and 4.9 multipoint
>> solutions. However, why not wait to see what happens with TVWS. Seems
>> that band would be outstanding for mobile use.
>>
>> Since it's your network, you could assign each agency it's own
>SSID/VLAN
>> which route across your network to the appropriate agency's servers.
>> This way the IP's are not changing as they move from tower to tower -
>> the only delay would be when the subscriber switches towers.
>>
>> Alternately MobileIP allows seamless roaming across multiple networks.
>>
>>
>> __
>> Jerry Richardson
>> airCloud Communications
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
>On
>> Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:35 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>
>> OK, last one.
>>
>> What would you guys use for 3650  gear.  I need to deliver very high
>> speeds to lots of users with near 100% reliability.  Money matters,
>but
>> it's not the driving force here.
>>
>> Also, I'm looking for a mobile 4.9 system.  We'll have to roam across
>> multiple towers that have multiple ip ranges on them.  The idea is not
>> only to keep voip calls running while this happens, but also to always
>> be able to remotely access the mobile pc's.  Is there a system that
>will
>> facilitate this idea (talking mobile broadband access across my 6000
>> square mile network).  Do I have to create something from scratch?
>>
>> thanks!
>> marlon
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>--
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> --
>--
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>>
>> --
>--
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> --
>--
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>
>
>WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>http://signup.wispa.org/
>
>
>
>WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
>Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
>Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

[Marlon K. Schafer]

Hmmm, that sounds like a great way to do this part of the project.

What hardware are you using?
thanks,
marlon

- Original Message - 
From: "Jerry Richardson" 
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:43 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9


> The way we have it set up is that each agency - city, county fire,
> sheriff has it's own SSID on the radio that is assigned to a unique
> VLAN.
>
> The radio handles the VLAN tagging and forwards it either out the
> Ethernet port or the backhaul radio (if it's a dual radio). We have 11
> SSID/VLAN combinations running across the network and it works fine.
>
> I am not administering the MobileIP so I would not be the best person to
> help you with that.
>
>
>
>
> __
> Jerry Richardson
> airCloud Communications
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:32 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>
> Got it.  Thanks!
>
> Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip?
>
> The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a pursuit
> or code 3 call.  The dispatcher could then take control of the car's
> laptop and push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car.  They could
> also use an ip enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's happening at
> the call.  This would allow much faster response times if something were
> to happen to the officer on scene.
>
> laters,
> marlon
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Jerry Richardson" 
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:02 AM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>
>
>> Might look at Solectek, they have both 3.65 and 4.9 multipoint
>> solutions. However, why not wait to see what happens with TVWS. Seems
>> that band would be outstanding for mobile use.
>>
>> Since it's your network, you could assign each agency it's own
> SSID/VLAN
>> which route across your network to the appropriate agency's servers.
>> This way the IP's are not changing as they move from tower to tower -
>> the only delay would be when the subscriber switches towers.
>>
>> Alternately MobileIP allows seamless roaming across multiple networks.
>>
>>
>> ______
>> Jerry Richardson
>> airCloud Communications
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
> On
>> Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:35 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>>
>> OK, last one.
>>
>> What would you guys use for 3650  gear.  I need to deliver very high
>> speeds to lots of users with near 100% reliability.  Money matters,
> but
>> it's not the driving force here.
>>
>> Also, I'm looking for a mobile 4.9 system.  We'll have to roam across
>> multiple towers that have multiple ip ranges on them.  The idea is not
>> only to keep voip calls running while this happens, but also to always
>> be able to remotely access the mobile pc's.  Is there a system that
> will
>> facilitate this idea (talking mobile broadband access across my 6000
>> square mile network).  Do I have to create something from scratch?
>>
>> thanks!
>> marlon
>>
>>
>>
>>
> 
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>
> 
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>
> 
> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!

Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

[Jerry Richardson]

The way we have it set up is that each agency - city, county fire,
sheriff has it's own SSID on the radio that is assigned to a unique
VLAN. 

The radio handles the VLAN tagging and forwards it either out the
Ethernet port or the backhaul radio (if it's a dual radio). We have 11
SSID/VLAN combinations running across the network and it works fine.

I am not administering the MobileIP so I would not be the best person to
help you with that.


 
 
__ 
Jerry Richardson 
airCloud Communications

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:32 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

Got it.  Thanks!

Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip?

The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a pursuit
or code 3 call.  The dispatcher could then take control of the car's
laptop and push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car.  They could
also use an ip enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's happening at
the call.  This would allow much faster response times if something were
to happen to the officer on scene.

laters,
marlon

- Original Message -
From: "Jerry Richardson" 
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:02 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9


> Might look at Solectek, they have both 3.65 and 4.9 multipoint
> solutions. However, why not wait to see what happens with TVWS. Seems
> that band would be outstanding for mobile use.
>
> Since it's your network, you could assign each agency it's own
SSID/VLAN
> which route across your network to the appropriate agency's servers.
> This way the IP's are not changing as they move from tower to tower -
> the only delay would be when the subscriber switches towers.
>
> Alternately MobileIP allows seamless roaming across multiple networks.
>
>
> __
> Jerry Richardson
> airCloud Communications
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
On
> Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:35 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>
> OK, last one.
>
> What would you guys use for 3650  gear.  I need to deliver very high
> speeds to lots of users with near 100% reliability.  Money matters,
but
> it's not the driving force here.
>
> Also, I'm looking for a mobile 4.9 system.  We'll have to roam across
> multiple towers that have multiple ip ranges on them.  The idea is not
> only to keep voip calls running while this happens, but also to always
> be able to remotely access the mobile pc's.  Is there a system that
will
> facilitate this idea (talking mobile broadband access across my 6000
> square mile network).  Do I have to create something from scratch?
>
> thanks!
> marlon
>
>
>
>

> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>

> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>


> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>


>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

[Marlon K. Schafer]

Got it.  Thanks!

Any hardware suggestions to deal with the ssid/vlan or the mobile ip?

The only reason mobility is important to me is that I envision a pursuit or 
code 3 call.  The dispatcher could then take control of the car's laptop and 
push the call info, map/gps data etc. to the car.  They could also use an ip 
enabled dash cam to keep an eye on what's happening at the call.  This would 
allow much faster response times if something were to happen to the officer 
on scene.

laters,
marlon

- Original Message - 
From: "Jerry Richardson" 
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 9:02 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9


> Might look at Solectek, they have both 3.65 and 4.9 multipoint
> solutions. However, why not wait to see what happens with TVWS. Seems
> that band would be outstanding for mobile use.
>
> Since it's your network, you could assign each agency it's own SSID/VLAN
> which route across your network to the appropriate agency's servers.
> This way the IP's are not changing as they move from tower to tower -
> the only delay would be when the subscriber switches towers.
>
> Alternately MobileIP allows seamless roaming across multiple networks.
>
>
> __
> Jerry Richardson
> airCloud Communications
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:35 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>
> OK, last one.
>
> What would you guys use for 3650  gear.  I need to deliver very high
> speeds to lots of users with near 100% reliability.  Money matters, but
> it's not the driving force here.
>
> Also, I'm looking for a mobile 4.9 system.  We'll have to roam across
> multiple towers that have multiple ip ranges on them.  The idea is not
> only to keep voip calls running while this happens, but also to always
> be able to remotely access the mobile pc's.  Is there a system that will
> facilitate this idea (talking mobile broadband access across my 6000
> square mile network).  Do I have to create something from scratch?
>
> thanks!
> marlon
>
>
>
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

[Jerry Richardson]

Might look at Solectek, they have both 3.65 and 4.9 multipoint
solutions. However, why not wait to see what happens with TVWS. Seems
that band would be outstanding for mobile use.

Since it's your network, you could assign each agency it's own SSID/VLAN
which route across your network to the appropriate agency's servers.
This way the IP's are not changing as they move from tower to tower -
the only delay would be when the subscriber switches towers.

Alternately MobileIP allows seamless roaming across multiple networks.
 
 
__ 
Jerry Richardson 
airCloud Communications

-Original Message-
From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:35 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

OK, last one.

What would you guys use for 3650  gear.  I need to deliver very high
speeds to lots of users with near 100% reliability.  Money matters, but
it's not the driving force here.

Also, I'm looking for a mobile 4.9 system.  We'll have to roam across
multiple towers that have multiple ip ranges on them.  The idea is not
only to keep voip calls running while this happens, but also to always
be able to remotely access the mobile pc's.  Is there a system that will
facilitate this idea (talking mobile broadband access across my 6000
square mile network).  Do I have to create something from scratch?

thanks!
marlon





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

[3-dB Networks]

For 3.65 I'd say you need to look at Aperto and Redline... they seem to be
the market leaders.  My preference is for Aperto though (and not just
because we resell it :-)

The only Mobile 4.9GHz systems that I know of are Mesh based.  Motorola's
MotoMesh with the MEA architecture is probably what your looking for (I'm
assuming Police/Fire).  You could probably also create something with the
new PTMP 4.9GHz gear from Moto... but it's not going to be turnkey by any
stretch of the imagination.

There isn't that many players in 4.9GHz outside of Point to Point... and I
think Moto probably is leaps and bounds ahead of the competition in that
space (since they already own the two way business its an easy sell to by
the 4.9GHz gear from Moto too).

If you want more information... feel free to contact me offlist Marlon
(dan...@3-db.net)

Daniel White
3-dB Networks
http://www.3dbnetworks.com


>-Original Message-
>From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
>Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer
>Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 9:35 PM
>To: WISPA General List
>Subject: [WISPA] 3650 and 4.9
>
>OK, last one.
>
>What would you guys use for 3650  gear.  I need to deliver very high
>speeds
>to lots of users with near 100% reliability.  Money matters, but it's
>not
>the driving force here.
>
>Also, I'm looking for a mobile 4.9 system.  We'll have to roam across
>multiple towers that have multiple ip ranges on them.  The idea is not
>only
>to keep voip calls running while this happens, but also to always be
>able to
>remotely access the mobile pc's.  Is there a system that will facilitate
>this idea (talking mobile broadband access across my 6000 square mile
>network).  Do I have to create something from scratch?
>
>thanks!
>marlon
>
>
>
>
>
>WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>http://signup.wispa.org/
>
>
>
>WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
>Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
>Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

[WISPA] 3650 and 4.9

[Marlon K. Schafer]

OK, last one.

What would you guys use for 3650  gear.  I need to deliver very high speeds 
to lots of users with near 100% reliability.  Money matters, but it's not 
the driving force here.

Also, I'm looking for a mobile 4.9 system.  We'll have to roam across 
multiple towers that have multiple ip ranges on them.  The idea is not only 
to keep voip calls running while this happens, but also to always be able to 
remotely access the mobile pc's.  Is there a system that will facilitate 
this idea (talking mobile broadband access across my 6000 square mile 
network).  Do I have to create something from scratch?

thanks!
marlon




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage

[Tom DeReggi]

John,

Interesting data. However, any data on how those links performed on rainy 
days?

The deal with Foliage is that wet foliage causes a lot more loss than dry 
foliage or wet air.

I can give an example of 5.8Ghz that might have 1db of loss in a rain storm, 
but in a heavy rain 900Mhz might have had 15 db more of loss through foliage 
than when its dry.
(obviously I do not have an apples to apples comparision since we use 900 
where we have foliage and 5.8 where we do not.)

So Sure 3650 does OK  when its dry, but in rain?

Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband


- Original Message - 
From: "John Rock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 12:21 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage


We have many 3.65GHz WiMAX Base Stations deployed and propagation has been
real positive even through some foliage.
Picture1 -
http://www.wirelessconnections.net/index.php?option=com_shared_private_space
&task=showfile&fileid=117
Picture2 -
http://www.wirelessconnections.net/index.php?option=com_shared_private_space
&task=showfile&fileid=118
Picture3 -
http://www.wirelessconnections.net/index.php?option=com_shared_private_space
&task=showfile&fileid=119

The above pictures are from a shot we had in Texas to a 3.65 Base Station, I
have more tree pictures.
The customer had an older original Alvarion VL CPE at 5.8GHz. They installed
the VL on a 40 ft guyed mast pole, to get good SNR. At 3.65 GHz from street
level(12ft AGL) beside the house we had -75 dBm and downlink/uplink at
64QAM/16QAM respectively we pulled 6Mb/3Mb and perfect Voice calls from the
truck. The WISP is thrilled with their coverage in the small town even
through foliage.

As you can see we shot between two pine trees and "through" the other trees.
At this site we were almost 1.1 Miles away. I would classify the foliage as
"light".

The key to everything is defining the word foliage. How dense is the
foliage? How tall? How much power at the Base Station and CPE? Diversity?
How far away are you from the Base Station?

MIMO or second/fourth order diversity at 3.65Ghz is not being done at the
CPE level yet and only on select type of Base Stations. At the Base Stations
with Second or Fourth order diversity we see greatly improved uplink
capabilities and a lot better connectivity in NLOS environments because of
the improved Uplinks. Passing reliable data at -85 to -92dBm is obtainable,
although I highly recommend only installing clients with "good" signal
strength. Most systems require -74 to -78dBm or better to achieve reliable
full burst rates(64QAM3/4)...When CPE become available with MIMO we can
expect even better sensitivity in the Downlink also. It becomes a question
on how long it takes the vendors to implement 802.16e flavored in 3.65GHz.,
Mid/Late 2009 is my bet.

We can build an RF system at any frequency that can get through foliage, it
comes down to how much do you want to spend to get that type of coverage
within your areas terrain.

Thinking 3.65GHz can cover through foliage at long range is a myth. And I
understand that most operators want to cover 50 miles NLOS from a single
tower site at 75' AGL...

700 MHZ can work better if you own that spectrum for use? 3.65GHz is open to
about anyone.

Thanks,
John Rock
Director of Operations - Senior Engineer
Wireless Connections
166 Milan Ave., Norwalk, Oh. 44857
ACCessing the Future Today!!
ofc. 419.660.6100
cell 419-706-7356
fax 419-668-4077
http://www.wirelessconnections.net
This transmission and any files attached to it, may contain confidential
and/or privileged information and intended only for the named recipient. If
you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
disclosure, reproduction, retransmission, dissemination, disclosure, copying
or any use of the information or files contained is strictly prohibited. If
you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by
reply transmission and delete this electronic mail.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 10:09 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage

Have we gotten any reports how 3650 works with foliage?

Would MIMO have any affect on foliage penetration ability?


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/



WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



--

Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage

[Mike Hammett]

okay, that is better than the manufacturers were telling me, or maybe they 
just didn't understand what I was getting at...   or maybe I discounted 
something they said because they were telling me 75 miles at 75 megabit... 
okay, no one said that, but they exagerated.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



--
From: "Matt Liotta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 11:56 AM
To: "WISPA General List" 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage

>
> On Dec 2, 2008, at 12:33 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:
>
>> Who said anything about using 802.16?  ;-)
>>
>> I generally don't install a customer that has signal worse than
>> -80.  I want
>> to maintain full modulation as best as possible.  Can't expect to
>> service
>> too many customers if everyone has -88 signal.
>>
> With WiMAX you can. We see full modulation at -86.
>
> -Matt
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage

[Matt Liotta]

On Dec 2, 2008, at 12:33 PM, Mike Hammett wrote:

> Who said anything about using 802.16?  ;-)
>
> I generally don't install a customer that has signal worse than  
> -80.  I want
> to maintain full modulation as best as possible.  Can't expect to  
> service
> too many customers if everyone has -88 signal.
>
With WiMAX you can. We see full modulation at -86.

-Matt




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage

[Matt Liotta]

There is the rub of course. In Atlanta, we see on average about -65  
for noise in 2400, while there is no noise in 3650. SNR is important,  
but for the purposes of helping other WISPs understand how 3650 does  
through foliage I thought it better to limit the discussion to signal  
as noise varies by market.

We have done longer links NLOS with 3650, but I would say .5 miles is  
the average we can get away with.

-Matt

On Dec 2, 2008, at 12:18 PM, John Scrivner wrote:

> Matt,
> Would you not agree that you probably have at least 9 db better noise
> figures than 2.4 at the same distance where you are seeing 9 db less  
> signal?
> That is what I was trying to illustrate in my post. Even though the  
> signal
> drops a little more in the 3650 coverage area than 2.4 we see roughly
> equivalent coverage areas due to lower noise floor and hence better  
> SNR at
> the edge of the coverage area.
>
> Matt, I seem to remember a post from you recently where you were  
> touting a
> link through 4 miles of tress with 3650. Was I not reading that  
> correctly?
> Scriv
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 11:03 AM, Matt Liotta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> We see on average 9dB less signal with 3650 than 2400 NLOS with all
>> things being equal.
>>
>> -Matt
>>
>> On Dec 2, 2008, at 11:42 AM, John Scrivner wrote:
>>
>>> Our coverage looks like 2.4 GHz coverage in the same environment
>>> with the
>>> exception of much lower noise floor which helps extend link budgets
>>> slightly
>>> and help increase reliability at the edge of the coverage area.
>>> Scriv
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 10:28 AM, Mike Hammett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> So according to the document from Hawaii, 3.6 GHz should have lower
>>>> atmospheric attenuation (I'm assuming this is similar or the same
>>>> to free
>>>> space loss) than 2.4 GHz.  I'm not at sea level, but I am by no
>>>> means at
>>>> 9150 meters!
>>>>
>>>> Because water is the molecule at play here, that would also show a
>>>> difference in foliage penetration.  Not trying to go through a
>>>> forest or
>>>> anything, but wondering how it would handle a tree or two.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -
>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> From: "Patrick Shoemaker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 10:10 AM
>>>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>> http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/~anita/web/paperwork/currently%20organizing/Military%20EW%20%20Handbook%20Excerpt/rf_absor.pdf
>>  
>> <http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/%7Eanita/web/paperwork/currently%20organizing/Military%20EW%20%20Handbook%20Excerpt/rf_absor.pdf
>>  
>> >
>>>> <
>> http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/%7Eanita/web/paperwork/currently%20organizing/Military%20EW%20%20Handbook%20Excerpt/rf_absor.pdf
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.rfcafe.com/references/electrical/atm-absorption.htm
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Patrick Shoemaker
>>>>> Vector Data Systems LLC
>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>> office: (301) 358-1690 x36
>>>>> http://www.vectordatasystems.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Mike Hammett wrote:
>>>>>> Well right.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I could only assume that 3650 is better than 5.x GHz, but
>>>>>> sometimes you
>>>>>> match something's...  I think natural frequency is the term I'm
>>>>>> looking
>>>>>> for.
>>>>>> Like how 70 - 80 GHz gear goes farther than 60 GHz, because 60
>>>>>> GHz is
>>>> the
>>>>>> natural frequency of oxygen.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>

Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage

[Mike Hammett]

Who said anything about using 802.16?  ;-)

I generally don't install a customer that has signal worse than -80.  I want 
to maintain full modulation as best as possible.  Can't expect to service 
too many customers if everyone has -88 signal.

I'm just looking to be able to go through a single tree row of trees on a 
fence line or maybe a small cluster...  no forests.  ;-)


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



--
From: "John Rock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 11:21 AM
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage

> We have many 3.65GHz WiMAX Base Stations deployed and propagation has been
> real positive even through some foliage.
> Picture1 -
> http://www.wirelessconnections.net/index.php?option=com_shared_private_space
> &task=showfile&fileid=117
> Picture2 -
> http://www.wirelessconnections.net/index.php?option=com_shared_private_space
> &task=showfile&fileid=118
> Picture3 -
> http://www.wirelessconnections.net/index.php?option=com_shared_private_space
> &task=showfile&fileid=119
>
> The above pictures are from a shot we had in Texas to a 3.65 Base Station, 
> I
> have more tree pictures.
> The customer had an older original Alvarion VL CPE at 5.8GHz. They 
> installed
> the VL on a 40 ft guyed mast pole, to get good SNR. At 3.65 GHz from 
> street
> level(12ft AGL) beside the house we had -75 dBm and downlink/uplink at
> 64QAM/16QAM respectively we pulled 6Mb/3Mb and perfect Voice calls from 
> the
> truck. The WISP is thrilled with their coverage in the small town even
> through foliage.
>
> As you can see we shot between two pine trees and "through" the other 
> trees.
> At this site we were almost 1.1 Miles away. I would classify the foliage 
> as
> "light".
>
> The key to everything is defining the word foliage. How dense is the
> foliage? How tall? How much power at the Base Station and CPE? Diversity?
> How far away are you from the Base Station?
>
> MIMO or second/fourth order diversity at 3.65Ghz is not being done at the
> CPE level yet and only on select type of Base Stations. At the Base 
> Stations
> with Second or Fourth order diversity we see greatly improved uplink
> capabilities and a lot better connectivity in NLOS environments because of
> the improved Uplinks. Passing reliable data at -85 to -92dBm is 
> obtainable,
> although I highly recommend only installing clients with "good" signal
> strength. Most systems require -74 to -78dBm or better to achieve reliable
> full burst rates(64QAM3/4)...When CPE become available with MIMO we can
> expect even better sensitivity in the Downlink also. It becomes a question
> on how long it takes the vendors to implement 802.16e flavored in 
> 3.65GHz.,
> Mid/Late 2009 is my bet.
>
> We can build an RF system at any frequency that can get through foliage, 
> it
> comes down to how much do you want to spend to get that type of coverage
> within your areas terrain.
>
> Thinking 3.65GHz can cover through foliage at long range is a myth. And I
> understand that most operators want to cover 50 miles NLOS from a single
> tower site at 75' AGL...
>
> 700 MHZ can work better if you own that spectrum for use? 3.65GHz is open 
> to
> about anyone.
>
> Thanks,
> John Rock
> Director of Operations - Senior Engineer
> Wireless Connections
> 166 Milan Ave., Norwalk, Oh. 44857
> ACCessing the Future Today!!
> ofc. 419.660.6100
> cell 419-706-7356
> fax 419-668-4077
> http://www.wirelessconnections.net
> This transmission and any files attached to it, may contain confidential
> and/or privileged information and intended only for the named recipient. 
> If
> you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
> disclosure, reproduction, retransmission, dissemination, disclosure, 
> copying
> or any use of the information or files contained is strictly prohibited. 
> If
> you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by
> reply transmission and delete this electronic mail.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Mike Hammett
> Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 10:09 AM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage
>
> Have we gotten any reports how 3650 works with foliage?
>
> Would MIMO have any affect on foliage penetration ability?
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
> 
> 

Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage

[John Rock]

We have many 3.65GHz WiMAX Base Stations deployed and propagation has been
real positive even through some foliage.
Picture1 -
http://www.wirelessconnections.net/index.php?option=com_shared_private_space
&task=showfile&fileid=117
Picture2 - 
http://www.wirelessconnections.net/index.php?option=com_shared_private_space
&task=showfile&fileid=118
Picture3 -
http://www.wirelessconnections.net/index.php?option=com_shared_private_space
&task=showfile&fileid=119

The above pictures are from a shot we had in Texas to a 3.65 Base Station, I
have more tree pictures.
The customer had an older original Alvarion VL CPE at 5.8GHz. They installed
the VL on a 40 ft guyed mast pole, to get good SNR. At 3.65 GHz from street
level(12ft AGL) beside the house we had -75 dBm and downlink/uplink at
64QAM/16QAM respectively we pulled 6Mb/3Mb and perfect Voice calls from the
truck. The WISP is thrilled with their coverage in the small town even
through foliage.

As you can see we shot between two pine trees and "through" the other trees.
At this site we were almost 1.1 Miles away. I would classify the foliage as
"light".

The key to everything is defining the word foliage. How dense is the
foliage? How tall? How much power at the Base Station and CPE? Diversity?
How far away are you from the Base Station?

MIMO or second/fourth order diversity at 3.65Ghz is not being done at the
CPE level yet and only on select type of Base Stations. At the Base Stations
with Second or Fourth order diversity we see greatly improved uplink
capabilities and a lot better connectivity in NLOS environments because of
the improved Uplinks. Passing reliable data at -85 to -92dBm is obtainable,
although I highly recommend only installing clients with "good" signal
strength. Most systems require -74 to -78dBm or better to achieve reliable
full burst rates(64QAM3/4)...When CPE become available with MIMO we can
expect even better sensitivity in the Downlink also. It becomes a question
on how long it takes the vendors to implement 802.16e flavored in 3.65GHz.,
Mid/Late 2009 is my bet.

We can build an RF system at any frequency that can get through foliage, it
comes down to how much do you want to spend to get that type of coverage
within your areas terrain.

Thinking 3.65GHz can cover through foliage at long range is a myth. And I
understand that most operators want to cover 50 miles NLOS from a single
tower site at 75' AGL...

700 MHZ can work better if you own that spectrum for use? 3.65GHz is open to
about anyone.

Thanks,
John Rock
Director of Operations - Senior Engineer
Wireless Connections
166 Milan Ave., Norwalk, Oh. 44857 
ACCessing the Future Today!!
ofc. 419.660.6100
cell 419-706-7356
fax  419-668-4077
http://www.wirelessconnections.net
This transmission and any files attached to it, may contain confidential
and/or privileged information and intended only for the named recipient. If
you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
disclosure, reproduction, retransmission, dissemination, disclosure, copying
or any use of the information or files contained is strictly prohibited. If
you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by
reply transmission and delete this electronic mail.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mike Hammett
Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 10:09 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage

Have we gotten any reports how 3650 works with foliage?

Would MIMO have any affect on foliage penetration ability?


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage

[John Scrivner]

Matt,
Would you not agree that you probably have at least 9 db better noise
figures than 2.4 at the same distance where you are seeing 9 db less signal?
That is what I was trying to illustrate in my post. Even though the signal
drops a little more in the 3650 coverage area than 2.4 we see roughly
equivalent coverage areas due to lower noise floor and hence better SNR at
the edge of the coverage area.

Matt, I seem to remember a post from you recently where you were touting a
link through 4 miles of tress with 3650. Was I not reading that correctly?
Scriv


On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 11:03 AM, Matt Liotta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> We see on average 9dB less signal with 3650 than 2400 NLOS with all
> things being equal.
>
> -Matt
>
> On Dec 2, 2008, at 11:42 AM, John Scrivner wrote:
>
> > Our coverage looks like 2.4 GHz coverage in the same environment
> > with the
> > exception of much lower noise floor which helps extend link budgets
> > slightly
> > and help increase reliability at the edge of the coverage area.
> > Scriv
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 10:28 AM, Mike Hammett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >wrote:
> >
> >> So according to the document from Hawaii, 3.6 GHz should have lower
> >> atmospheric attenuation (I'm assuming this is similar or the same
> >> to free
> >> space loss) than 2.4 GHz.  I'm not at sea level, but I am by no
> >> means at
> >> 9150 meters!
> >>
> >> Because water is the molecule at play here, that would also show a
> >> difference in foliage penetration.  Not trying to go through a
> >> forest or
> >> anything, but wondering how it would handle a tree or two.
> >>
> >>
> >> -
> >> Mike Hammett
> >> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> >> http://www.ics-il.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> From: "Patrick Shoemaker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 10:10 AM
> >> To: "WISPA General List" 
> >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage
> >>
> >>>
> >>
> http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/~anita/web/paperwork/currently%20organizing/Military%20EW%20%20Handbook%20Excerpt/rf_absor.pdf<http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/%7Eanita/web/paperwork/currently%20organizing/Military%20EW%20%20Handbook%20Excerpt/rf_absor.pdf>
> >> <
> http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/%7Eanita/web/paperwork/currently%20organizing/Military%20EW%20%20Handbook%20Excerpt/rf_absor.pdf
> >> >
> >>>
> >>> http://www.rfcafe.com/references/electrical/atm-absorption.htm
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Patrick Shoemaker
> >>> Vector Data Systems LLC
> >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>> office: (301) 358-1690 x36
> >>> http://www.vectordatasystems.com
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Mike Hammett wrote:
> >>>> Well right.
> >>>>
> >>>> I could only assume that 3650 is better than 5.x GHz, but
> >>>> sometimes you
> >>>> match something's...  I think natural frequency is the term I'm
> >>>> looking
> >>>> for.
> >>>> Like how 70 - 80 GHz gear goes farther than 60 GHz, because 60
> >>>> GHz is
> >> the
> >>>> natural frequency of oxygen.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> -
> >>>> Mike Hammett
> >>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> >>>> http://www.ics-il.com
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> From: "Charles Wu (CTI)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 9:53 AM
> >>>> To: "WISPA General List" 
> >>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage
> >>>>
> >>>>>> Have we gotten any reports how 3650 works with foliage?
> >>>>> It doesn't
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Would MIMO have any affect on foliage penetration ability?
> >>>>> Sure, it might help, but 700 would help more
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -Charles
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This message is intended only for the use of the individual or
> >>>>> entity
> >> to
> >>>>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> >>>>> privi

Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage

[Josh Luthman]

With Trango and MT (compex and ubnt) I get minimal tree penetration.

On 12/2/08, Matt Liotta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We see on average 9dB less signal with 3650 than 2400 NLOS with all
> things being equal.
>
> -Matt
>
> On Dec 2, 2008, at 11:42 AM, John Scrivner wrote:
>
>> Our coverage looks like 2.4 GHz coverage in the same environment
>> with the
>> exception of much lower noise floor which helps extend link budgets
>> slightly
>> and help increase reliability at the edge of the coverage area.
>> Scriv
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 10:28 AM, Mike Hammett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >wrote:
>>
>>> So according to the document from Hawaii, 3.6 GHz should have lower
>>> atmospheric attenuation (I'm assuming this is similar or the same
>>> to free
>>> space loss) than 2.4 GHz.  I'm not at sea level, but I am by no
>>> means at
>>> 9150 meters!
>>>
>>> Because water is the molecule at play here, that would also show a
>>> difference in foliage penetration.  Not trying to go through a
>>> forest or
>>> anything, but wondering how it would handle a tree or two.
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> Mike Hammett
>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> From: "Patrick Shoemaker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 10:10 AM
>>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage
>>>
>>>>
>>> http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/~anita/web/paperwork/currently%20organizing/Military%20EW%20%20Handbook%20Excerpt/rf_absor.pdf
>>>
>>> <http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/%7Eanita/web/paperwork/currently%20organizing/Military%20EW%20%20Handbook%20Excerpt/rf_absor.pdf
>>>
>>> >
>>>>
>>>> http://www.rfcafe.com/references/electrical/atm-absorption.htm
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Patrick Shoemaker
>>>> Vector Data Systems LLC
>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>> office: (301) 358-1690 x36
>>>> http://www.vectordatasystems.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Mike Hammett wrote:
>>>>> Well right.
>>>>>
>>>>> I could only assume that 3650 is better than 5.x GHz, but
>>>>> sometimes you
>>>>> match something's...  I think natural frequency is the term I'm
>>>>> looking
>>>>> for.
>>>>> Like how 70 - 80 GHz gear goes farther than 60 GHz, because 60
>>>>> GHz is
>>> the
>>>>> natural frequency of oxygen.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -
>>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> From: "Charles Wu (CTI)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 9:53 AM
>>>>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>>>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Have we gotten any reports how 3650 works with foliage?
>>>>>> It doesn't
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Would MIMO have any affect on foliage penetration ability?
>>>>>> Sure, it might help, but 700 would help more
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Charles
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This message is intended only for the use of the individual or
>>>>>> entity
>>> to
>>>>>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is
>>>>>> privileged,
>>>>>> confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the
>>>>>> employee
>>> or
>>>>>> agent responsible for delivery of the message to the intended
>>> recipient,
>>>>>> you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
>>>>>> copying
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received
>>>>>> this
>>>>>> communication in error, please notify us immediately by

Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage

[Matt Liotta]

We see on average 9dB less signal with 3650 than 2400 NLOS with all  
things being equal.

-Matt

On Dec 2, 2008, at 11:42 AM, John Scrivner wrote:

> Our coverage looks like 2.4 GHz coverage in the same environment  
> with the
> exception of much lower noise floor which helps extend link budgets  
> slightly
> and help increase reliability at the edge of the coverage area.
> Scriv
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 10:28 AM, Mike Hammett <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> >wrote:
>
>> So according to the document from Hawaii, 3.6 GHz should have lower
>> atmospheric attenuation (I'm assuming this is similar or the same  
>> to free
>> space loss) than 2.4 GHz.  I'm not at sea level, but I am by no  
>> means at
>> 9150 meters!
>>
>> Because water is the molecule at play here, that would also show a
>> difference in foliage penetration.  Not trying to go through a  
>> forest or
>> anything, but wondering how it would handle a tree or two.
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>>
>> ------
>> From: "Patrick Shoemaker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 10:10 AM
>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage
>>
>>>
>> http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/~anita/web/paperwork/currently%20organizing/Military%20EW%20%20Handbook%20Excerpt/rf_absor.pdf
>>  
>> <http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/%7Eanita/web/paperwork/currently%20organizing/Military%20EW%20%20Handbook%20Excerpt/rf_absor.pdf
>>  
>> >
>>>
>>> http://www.rfcafe.com/references/electrical/atm-absorption.htm
>>>
>>>
>>> Patrick Shoemaker
>>> Vector Data Systems LLC
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> office: (301) 358-1690 x36
>>> http://www.vectordatasystems.com
>>>
>>>
>>> Mike Hammett wrote:
>>>> Well right.
>>>>
>>>> I could only assume that 3650 is better than 5.x GHz, but  
>>>> sometimes you
>>>> match something's...  I think natural frequency is the term I'm  
>>>> looking
>>>> for.
>>>> Like how 70 - 80 GHz gear goes farther than 60 GHz, because 60  
>>>> GHz is
>> the
>>>> natural frequency of oxygen.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -
>>>> Mike Hammett
>>>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>>>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> From: "Charles Wu (CTI)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 9:53 AM
>>>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage
>>>>
>>>>>> Have we gotten any reports how 3650 works with foliage?
>>>>> It doesn't
>>>>>
>>>>>> Would MIMO have any affect on foliage penetration ability?
>>>>> Sure, it might help, but 700 would help more
>>>>>
>>>>> -Charles
>>>>>
>>>>> This message is intended only for the use of the individual or  
>>>>> entity
>> to
>>>>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is  
>>>>> privileged,
>>>>> confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If  
>>>>> the
>>>>> reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the  
>>>>> employee
>> or
>>>>> agent responsible for delivery of the message to the intended
>> recipient,
>>>>> you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or  
>>>>> copying
>>>>> of
>>>>> this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received  
>>>>> this
>>>>> communication in error, please notify us immediately by  
>>>>> telephone at
>>>>> 630-344-1586.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>> 
>>>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>>>>
>> 
>>>>>
>&g

Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage

[Matt]

> Our coverage looks like 2.4 GHz coverage in the same environment with the
> exception of much lower noise floor which helps extend link budgets slightly
> and help increase reliability at the edge of the coverage area.
> Scriv

We do get some tree penetration with Canopy 2.4 and reflectors.  We
get virtually no tree penetration with 5.7 though.  I was thinking
3.6x with higher power might punch through some trees as well.  900
definitely goes through trees but the band is just so trashed.

Matt



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage

[John Scrivner]

Our coverage looks like 2.4 GHz coverage in the same environment with the
exception of much lower noise floor which helps extend link budgets slightly
and help increase reliability at the edge of the coverage area.
Scriv


On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 10:28 AM, Mike Hammett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> So according to the document from Hawaii, 3.6 GHz should have lower
> atmospheric attenuation (I'm assuming this is similar or the same to free
> space loss) than 2.4 GHz.  I'm not at sea level, but I am by no means at
> 9150 meters!
>
> Because water is the molecule at play here, that would also show a
> difference in foliage penetration.  Not trying to go through a forest or
> anything, but wondering how it would handle a tree or two.
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
>
>
> --
> From: "Patrick Shoemaker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 10:10 AM
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage
>
> >
> http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/~anita/web/paperwork/currently%20organizing/Military%20EW%20%20Handbook%20Excerpt/rf_absor.pdf<http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/%7Eanita/web/paperwork/currently%20organizing/Military%20EW%20%20Handbook%20Excerpt/rf_absor.pdf>
> >
> > http://www.rfcafe.com/references/electrical/atm-absorption.htm
> >
> >
> > Patrick Shoemaker
> > Vector Data Systems LLC
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > office: (301) 358-1690 x36
> > http://www.vectordatasystems.com
> >
> >
> > Mike Hammett wrote:
> >> Well right.
> >>
> >> I could only assume that 3650 is better than 5.x GHz, but sometimes you
> >> match something's...  I think natural frequency is the term I'm looking
> >> for.
> >> Like how 70 - 80 GHz gear goes farther than 60 GHz, because 60 GHz is
> the
> >> natural frequency of oxygen.
> >>
> >>
> >> -
> >> Mike Hammett
> >> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> >> http://www.ics-il.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> From: "Charles Wu (CTI)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 9:53 AM
> >> To: "WISPA General List" 
> >> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage
> >>
> >>>> Have we gotten any reports how 3650 works with foliage?
> >>> It doesn't
> >>>
> >>>> Would MIMO have any affect on foliage penetration ability?
> >>> Sure, it might help, but 700 would help more
> >>>
> >>> -Charles
> >>>
> >>> This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity
> to
> >>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged,
> >>> confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
> >>> reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee
> or
> >>> agent responsible for delivery of the message to the intended
> recipient,
> >>> you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying
> >>> of
> >>> this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
> >>> communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone at
> >>> 630-344-1586.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> 
> >>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> >>> http://signup.wispa.org/
> >>>
> 
> >>>
> >>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> >>>
> >>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> >>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> >>>
> >>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> 
> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> >> http://signup.wispa.org/
> >>
> 
> >>
> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> >>
> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> >>
> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> >
> >
&

Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage

[Mike Hammett]

So according to the document from Hawaii, 3.6 GHz should have lower 
atmospheric attenuation (I'm assuming this is similar or the same to free 
space loss) than 2.4 GHz.  I'm not at sea level, but I am by no means at 
9150 meters!

Because water is the molecule at play here, that would also show a 
difference in foliage penetration.  Not trying to go through a forest or 
anything, but wondering how it would handle a tree or two.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



--
From: "Patrick Shoemaker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 10:10 AM
To: "WISPA General List" 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage

> http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/~anita/web/paperwork/currently%20organizing/Military%20EW%20%20Handbook%20Excerpt/rf_absor.pdf
>
> http://www.rfcafe.com/references/electrical/atm-absorption.htm
>
>
> Patrick Shoemaker
> Vector Data Systems LLC
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> office: (301) 358-1690 x36
> http://www.vectordatasystems.com
>
>
> Mike Hammett wrote:
>> Well right.
>>
>> I could only assume that 3650 is better than 5.x GHz, but sometimes you
>> match something's...  I think natural frequency is the term I'm looking 
>> for.
>> Like how 70 - 80 GHz gear goes farther than 60 GHz, because 60 GHz is the
>> natural frequency of oxygen.
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>>
>>
>> ------
>> From: "Charles Wu (CTI)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 9:53 AM
>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage
>>
>>>> Have we gotten any reports how 3650 works with foliage?
>>> It doesn't
>>>
>>>> Would MIMO have any affect on foliage penetration ability?
>>> Sure, it might help, but 700 would help more
>>>
>>> -Charles
>>>
>>> This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to
>>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged,
>>> confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
>>> reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or
>>> agent responsible for delivery of the message to the intended recipient,
>>> you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying 
>>> of
>>> this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
>>> communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone at
>>> 630-344-1586.
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage

[Patrick Shoemaker]

http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/~anita/web/paperwork/currently%20organizing/Military%20EW%20%20Handbook%20Excerpt/rf_absor.pdf

http://www.rfcafe.com/references/electrical/atm-absorption.htm


Patrick Shoemaker
Vector Data Systems LLC
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
office: (301) 358-1690 x36
http://www.vectordatasystems.com


Mike Hammett wrote:
> Well right.
> 
> I could only assume that 3650 is better than 5.x GHz, but sometimes you 
> match something's...  I think natural frequency is the term I'm looking for. 
> Like how 70 - 80 GHz gear goes farther than 60 GHz, because 60 GHz is the 
> natural frequency of oxygen.
> 
> 
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
> 
> 
> 
> --
> From: "Charles Wu (CTI)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 9:53 AM
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage
> 
>>> Have we gotten any reports how 3650 works with foliage?
>> It doesn't
>>
>>> Would MIMO have any affect on foliage penetration ability?
>> Sure, it might help, but 700 would help more
>>
>> -Charles
>>
>> This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to 
>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, 
>> confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the 
>> reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or 
>> agent responsible for delivery of the message to the intended recipient, 
>> you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of 
>> this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
>> communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone at 
>> 630-344-1586.
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
> 
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> 
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> 
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage

[Mike Hammett]

Well right.

I could only assume that 3650 is better than 5.x GHz, but sometimes you 
match something's...  I think natural frequency is the term I'm looking for. 
Like how 70 - 80 GHz gear goes farther than 60 GHz, because 60 GHz is the 
natural frequency of oxygen.


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com



--
From: "Charles Wu (CTI)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 9:53 AM
To: "WISPA General List" 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage

>>Have we gotten any reports how 3650 works with foliage?
>
> It doesn't
>
>>Would MIMO have any affect on foliage penetration ability?
>
> Sure, it might help, but 700 would help more
>
> -Charles
>
> This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to 
> which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, 
> confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the 
> reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or 
> agent responsible for delivery of the message to the intended recipient, 
> you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of 
> this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
> communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone at 
> 630-344-1586.
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage

[Charles Wu (CTI)]

>Have we gotten any reports how 3650 works with foliage?

It doesn't

>Would MIMO have any affect on foliage penetration ability?

Sure, it might help, but 700 would help more

-Charles

This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which 
it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential 
and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message 
is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for 
delivery of the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that 
any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly 
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us 
immediately by telephone at 630-344-1586.



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 Foliage

[Matt Liotta]

On Dec 2, 2008, at 10:08 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:

> Have we gotten any reports how 3650 works with foliage?
>
3650 sucks with foliage and more power doesn't help. Yeah it is that  
bad.

-Matt




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

[WISPA] 3650 Foliage

[Mike Hammett]

Have we gotten any reports how 3650 works with foliage?

Would MIMO have any affect on foliage penetration ability?


-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?

[Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE]

* Charles Wyble wrote, On 8/1/2008 11:08 AM:
> Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE wrote:
>> Charles...As I found out, Appendix D is just ONE way to do those 
>> calculations.   
> Can you expand on this a bit?
>
> Is there another way they should be done? Or are there different 
> conclusions one can reach by doing them differently (ie you follow the 
> method in appendix d and the earth station uses some other method to 
> invalidate your data)?
>
> Is this something to be concerned about?
Hi Charles...from my talks with the WTB folks they indicated that 
Appendix D was just one way to get there from here so to speak. I do not 
know if COmsearch et al are using this procedure or something else.

Leon



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?

[Matt Liotta]

I haven't looked at Appendix D in a while, but I don't think it takes  
into account topology. Ground works really well at stopping noise.

-Matt

On Aug 1, 2008, at 11:08 AM, Charles Wyble wrote:

> Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE wrote:
>> Charles...As I found out, Appendix D is just ONE way to do those
>> calculations.
>>
>
> Can you expand on this a bit?
>
> Is there another way they should be done? Or are there different
> conclusions one can reach by doing them differently (ie you follow the
> method in appendix d and the earth station uses some other method to
> invalidate your data)?
>
> Is this something to be concerned about?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Charles
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
> -- 
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by Rapid Link, and is
> believed to be clean.
>




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?

[Charles Wyble]

Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE wrote:
> Charles...As I found out, Appendix D is just ONE way to do those 
> calculations.
>   

Can you expand on this a bit?

Is there another way they should be done? Or are there different 
conclusions one can reach by doing them differently (ie you follow the 
method in appendix d and the earth station uses some other method to 
invalidate your data)?

Is this something to be concerned about?

Thanks!

Charles



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?

[Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE]

Charles...As I found out, Appendix D is just ONE way to do those 
calculations.

Leon

* Charles Wyble wrote, On 7/31/2008 3:22 PM:
> Doug Ratcliffe wrote:
>   
>> I've read your blogs and have been keeping up with them.  What I can't seem 
>> to find is the ULS registrations for the actual earth satellite stations. 
>> It seems like most other ULS entires, they have a contact address and a 
>> person's name.
>>
>> I did a Geosearch of Orange County, FL (the Sprint Communications Orlando, 
>> FL  county) using Frequencies 3500 to 5000mhz (All Service Types), and found 
>> nothing but a cancelled point to point license for AT&T.
>>   
>> 
> Check out http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/General_Menu_Reports/filenum.cfm to 
> search by file number.
>
> I'm reading over the applications now. Lots of good info which you will 
> need for base station
> placement calculations (try saying that 3 times fast)  located appendix 
> D of the frequency rules document.
> I don't know the formal name of that document.
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?

[Charles Wyble]

Doug Ratcliffe wrote:
> I've read your blogs and have been keeping up with them.  What I can't seem 
> to find is the ULS registrations for the actual earth satellite stations. 
> It seems like most other ULS entires, they have a contact address and a 
> person's name.
>
> I did a Geosearch of Orange County, FL (the Sprint Communications Orlando, 
> FL  county) using Frequencies 3500 to 5000mhz (All Service Types), and found 
> nothing but a cancelled point to point license for AT&T.
>   
Check out http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/General_Menu_Reports/filenum.cfm to 
search by file number.

I'm reading over the applications now. Lots of good info which you will 
need for base station
placement calculations (try saying that 3 times fast)  located appendix 
D of the frequency rules document.
I don't know the formal name of that document.




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?

[David Peterson]

I think it was just a matter of getting around to it.  I am ccing him if you
would like to collaborate with him on getting the info to the community.

David 
On 7/28/08 12:01 PM, "Charles Wyble" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> David Peterson wrote:
>> This site has the basic locations and shows their radius coverage.
>> 
>> http://zing.naviciti.com/
>> 
>> You can also contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] for the contact info on any of
>> those sites.
>> 
>>   
> 
> If they have the info, why don't they put it on the map? Isn't that kind
> of the point of the mash up? :)
> 
> I was quite frustrated with the lack of information on that map (I found
> it some time ago).
> 
> I have also put up a mash up of the stations in SoCal.
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/5hjky4
> 
> What info I have (in my blog posts) is linked to from the map.
> 
> If anyone has info on ground stations (both for ones I have and ones I
> don't) I'll happily expand my mash up, and link back to the page with
> info (and I'll host the info page if you like as well).
> 
> 
>> David
>>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?

[Charles Wyble]

David Peterson wrote:
> This site has the basic locations and shows their radius coverage.
>
> http://zing.naviciti.com/
>
> You can also contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] for the contact info on any of
> those sites.
>
>   

If they have the info, why don't they put it on the map? Isn't that kind 
of the point of the mash up? :)

I was quite frustrated with the lack of information on that map (I found 
it some time ago).

I have also put up a mash up of the stations in SoCal.

http://tinyurl.com/5hjky4

What info I have (in my blog posts) is linked to from the map.

If anyone has info on ground stations (both for ones I have and ones I 
don't) I'll happily expand my mash up, and link back to the page with 
info (and I'll host the info page if you like as well).


> David
>   

-- 
Charles Wyble (818) 280 - 7059
http://charlesnw.blogspot.com
CTO Known Element Enterprises / SoCal WiFI project




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?

[David Peterson]

This site has the basic locations and shows their radius coverage.

http://zing.naviciti.com/

You can also contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] for the contact info on any of
those sites.

David

On 7/28/08 10:21 AM, "Doug Radcliffe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> So how do we find the contact information on the international bureau's
> filings?
> 
> - Original Message -
> From: "Matt Liotta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Monday, July 28, 2008 8:58 AM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?
> 
> 
>> You can't use ULS for earth stations. Earth stations are covered by
>> the international bureau as opposed to the wireless bureau.
>> 
>> -Matt
>> 
>> On Jul 27, 2008, at 6:52 PM, Doug Ratcliffe wrote:
>> 
>>> I've read your blogs and have been keeping up with them.  What I
>>> can't seem
>>> to find is the ULS registrations for the actual earth satellite
>>> stations.
>>> It seems like most other ULS entires, they have a contact address
>>> and a
>>> person's name.
>>> 
>>> I did a Geosearch of Orange County, FL (the Sprint Communications
>>> Orlando,
>>> FL  county) using Frequencies 3500 to 5000mhz (All Service Types),
>>> and found
>>> nothing but a cancelled point to point license for AT&T.
>>> 
>>> A quick search of the FCC site for Sprint's filing #
>>> (SESRWL2000101902129)
>>> finds nothing but the mention in the FCC 3650 FSS list.  If I were
>>> to call
>>> the FCC with that number would they be able to provide me contact
>>> information for that company that pertains to the FSS department?
>>> 
>>> I wonder if creating a website that documented all the FSS contact
>>> info,
>>> combined with map distance, automatic EIRP / bearing calculations
>>> (i.e. the
>>> stuff the FCC talks about in their 3650 document), would be
>>> beneficial to
>>> the other WISPs who want to serve the 125 million people who live
>>> INSIDE of
>>> these zones.
>>> 
>>> It seems silly, like a 5-10W transmitter pointing the opposite
>>> direction
>>> would even make a difference - you would think the FCC would have
>>> integrated
>>> distance AND antenna direction when it comes to base station
>>> registration...
>>> 
>>> Florida is flat.  At 105km, I would need to have at least a 450 foot
>>> tower
>>> or higher on both ends to even send a signal that far.  45 miles
>>> ended up
>>> needing over 400ft on both ends.  It's not like I want to broadcast
>>> 3650
>>> from the top of a 10,000 foot mountain peak.
>>> 
>>> - Original Message -
>>> From: "Charles Wyble" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>>> Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 6:20 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> Doug Ratcliffe wrote:
>>>>> Has anyone gotten any headway on company negotiations in protected
>>>>> zones?
>>>>> Almost all of the zones near me (105km is the closest to the SW,
>>>>> 146.7km
>>>>> next closest to the South) and I have no desire to point coverage
>>>>> in that
>>>>> direction - mainly north and northwest.  But according to the FCC,
>>>>> I'd be
>>>>> dealing with Sprint, and Harris Corporation - these people don't
>>>>> even
>>>>> have
>>>>> phone numbers on their web sites for any departments that would
>>>>> look like
>>>>> they would even know what I was talking about.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I have done several blog posts on this subject:
>>>> 
>>>> http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/satellite-related-brain-dump.html
>>>> http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/80211y-3650-mhz-in-southern-californi
>>>> a.html
>>>> 
>>>> http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/3650mhz-southern-california-malibu.ht
>>>> ml
>>>> http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/3650mhz-southern-california-malibu_05
>>>> .html
>>>> 
>>>> Hope that helps.
>>>>> And even if I found a human being, it seems unlikely I'd talk to
>

Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?

[Matt Liotta]

If I knew a central place to get actual contact information for FSS  
owners I would share it. The few that I have contacted thus far are  
all administrative.

-Matt

On Jul 28, 2008, at 10:21 AM, Doug Ratcliffe wrote:

> So how do we find the contact information on the international  
> bureau's
> filings?
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Matt Liotta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Monday, July 28, 2008 8:58 AM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?
>
>
>> You can't use ULS for earth stations. Earth stations are covered by
>> the international bureau as opposed to the wireless bureau.
>>
>> -Matt
>>
>> On Jul 27, 2008, at 6:52 PM, Doug Ratcliffe wrote:
>>
>>> I've read your blogs and have been keeping up with them.  What I
>>> can't seem
>>> to find is the ULS registrations for the actual earth satellite
>>> stations.
>>> It seems like most other ULS entires, they have a contact address
>>> and a
>>> person's name.
>>>
>>> I did a Geosearch of Orange County, FL (the Sprint Communications
>>> Orlando,
>>> FL  county) using Frequencies 3500 to 5000mhz (All Service Types),
>>> and found
>>> nothing but a cancelled point to point license for AT&T.
>>>
>>> A quick search of the FCC site for Sprint's filing #
>>> (SESRWL2000101902129)
>>> finds nothing but the mention in the FCC 3650 FSS list.  If I were
>>> to call
>>> the FCC with that number would they be able to provide me contact
>>> information for that company that pertains to the FSS department?
>>>
>>> I wonder if creating a website that documented all the FSS contact
>>> info,
>>> combined with map distance, automatic EIRP / bearing calculations
>>> (i.e. the
>>> stuff the FCC talks about in their 3650 document), would be
>>> beneficial to
>>> the other WISPs who want to serve the 125 million people who live
>>> INSIDE of
>>> these zones.
>>>
>>> It seems silly, like a 5-10W transmitter pointing the opposite
>>> direction
>>> would even make a difference - you would think the FCC would have
>>> integrated
>>> distance AND antenna direction when it comes to base station
>>> registration...
>>>
>>> Florida is flat.  At 105km, I would need to have at least a 450 foot
>>> tower
>>> or higher on both ends to even send a signal that far.  45 miles
>>> ended up
>>> needing over 400ft on both ends.  It's not like I want to broadcast
>>> 3650
>>> from the top of a 10,000 foot mountain peak.
>>>
>>> - Original Message -
>>> From: "Charles Wyble" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>>> Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 6:20 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?
>>>
>>>
>>>> Doug Ratcliffe wrote:
>>>>> Has anyone gotten any headway on company negotiations in protected
>>>>> zones?
>>>>> Almost all of the zones near me (105km is the closest to the SW,
>>>>> 146.7km
>>>>> next closest to the South) and I have no desire to point coverage
>>>>> in that
>>>>> direction - mainly north and northwest.  But according to the FCC,
>>>>> I'd be
>>>>> dealing with Sprint, and Harris Corporation - these people don't
>>>>> even
>>>>> have
>>>>> phone numbers on their web sites for any departments that would
>>>>> look like
>>>>> they would even know what I was talking about.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have done several blog posts on this subject:
>>>>
>>>> http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/satellite-related-brain-dump.html
>>>> http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/80211y-3650-mhz-in-southern-california.html
>>>>
>>>> http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/3650mhz-southern-california-malibu.html
>>>> http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/3650mhz-southern-california-malibu_05.html
>>>>
>>>> Hope that helps.
>>>>> And even if I found a human being, it seems unlikely I'd talk to
>>>>> anyone
>>>>> with
>>>>> the power to make a real decision.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Indeed.
>>>

Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?

[Doug Ratcliffe]

So how do we find the contact information on the international bureau's 
filings?

- Original Message - 
From: "Matt Liotta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2008 8:58 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?


> You can't use ULS for earth stations. Earth stations are covered by
> the international bureau as opposed to the wireless bureau.
>
> -Matt
>
> On Jul 27, 2008, at 6:52 PM, Doug Ratcliffe wrote:
>
>> I've read your blogs and have been keeping up with them.  What I
>> can't seem
>> to find is the ULS registrations for the actual earth satellite
>> stations.
>> It seems like most other ULS entires, they have a contact address
>> and a
>> person's name.
>>
>> I did a Geosearch of Orange County, FL (the Sprint Communications
>> Orlando,
>> FL  county) using Frequencies 3500 to 5000mhz (All Service Types),
>> and found
>> nothing but a cancelled point to point license for AT&T.
>>
>> A quick search of the FCC site for Sprint's filing #
>> (SESRWL2000101902129)
>> finds nothing but the mention in the FCC 3650 FSS list.  If I were
>> to call
>> the FCC with that number would they be able to provide me contact
>> information for that company that pertains to the FSS department?
>>
>> I wonder if creating a website that documented all the FSS contact
>> info,
>> combined with map distance, automatic EIRP / bearing calculations
>> (i.e. the
>> stuff the FCC talks about in their 3650 document), would be
>> beneficial to
>> the other WISPs who want to serve the 125 million people who live
>> INSIDE of
>> these zones.
>>
>> It seems silly, like a 5-10W transmitter pointing the opposite
>> direction
>> would even make a difference - you would think the FCC would have
>> integrated
>> distance AND antenna direction when it comes to base station
>> registration...
>>
>> Florida is flat.  At 105km, I would need to have at least a 450 foot
>> tower
>> or higher on both ends to even send a signal that far.  45 miles
>> ended up
>> needing over 400ft on both ends.  It's not like I want to broadcast
>> 3650
>> from the top of a 10,000 foot mountain peak.
>>
>> - Original Message -
>> From: "Charles Wyble" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: "WISPA General List" 
>> Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 6:20 PM
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?
>>
>>
>>> Doug Ratcliffe wrote:
>>>> Has anyone gotten any headway on company negotiations in protected
>>>> zones?
>>>> Almost all of the zones near me (105km is the closest to the SW,
>>>> 146.7km
>>>> next closest to the South) and I have no desire to point coverage
>>>> in that
>>>> direction - mainly north and northwest.  But according to the FCC,
>>>> I'd be
>>>> dealing with Sprint, and Harris Corporation - these people don't
>>>> even
>>>> have
>>>> phone numbers on their web sites for any departments that would
>>>> look like
>>>> they would even know what I was talking about.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I have done several blog posts on this subject:
>>>
>>> http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/satellite-related-brain-dump.html
>>> http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/80211y-3650-mhz-in-southern-california.html
>>>
>>> http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/3650mhz-southern-california-malibu.html
>>> http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/3650mhz-southern-california-malibu_05.html
>>>
>>> Hope that helps.
>>>> And even if I found a human being, it seems unlikely I'd talk to
>>>> anyone
>>>> with
>>>> the power to make a real decision.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Indeed.
>>>> Is this something best sent from a telecommunications attorney to
>>>> their
>>>> FCC
>>>> attorney of record?  Is the consent more like a contract?  Would
>>>> they be
>>>> able to charge me for consent (like a spectrum lease)?  Is this like
>>>> asking
>>>> for keys to the space shuttle?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Excellent questions. Hopefully someone here can help.
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Charles Wyble (818) 280 - 7059
>>> http://charlesnw.blogspot.com
>>> CTO Known Element Enterp

Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?

[Matt Liotta]

You can't use ULS for earth stations. Earth stations are covered by  
the international bureau as opposed to the wireless bureau.

-Matt

On Jul 27, 2008, at 6:52 PM, Doug Ratcliffe wrote:

> I've read your blogs and have been keeping up with them.  What I  
> can't seem
> to find is the ULS registrations for the actual earth satellite  
> stations.
> It seems like most other ULS entires, they have a contact address  
> and a
> person's name.
>
> I did a Geosearch of Orange County, FL (the Sprint Communications  
> Orlando,
> FL  county) using Frequencies 3500 to 5000mhz (All Service Types),  
> and found
> nothing but a cancelled point to point license for AT&T.
>
> A quick search of the FCC site for Sprint's filing #  
> (SESRWL2000101902129)
> finds nothing but the mention in the FCC 3650 FSS list.  If I were  
> to call
> the FCC with that number would they be able to provide me contact
> information for that company that pertains to the FSS department?
>
> I wonder if creating a website that documented all the FSS contact  
> info,
> combined with map distance, automatic EIRP / bearing calculations  
> (i.e. the
> stuff the FCC talks about in their 3650 document), would be  
> beneficial to
> the other WISPs who want to serve the 125 million people who live  
> INSIDE of
> these zones.
>
> It seems silly, like a 5-10W transmitter pointing the opposite  
> direction
> would even make a difference - you would think the FCC would have  
> integrated
> distance AND antenna direction when it comes to base station  
> registration...
>
> Florida is flat.  At 105km, I would need to have at least a 450 foot  
> tower
> or higher on both ends to even send a signal that far.  45 miles  
> ended up
> needing over 400ft on both ends.  It's not like I want to broadcast  
> 3650
> from the top of a 10,000 foot mountain peak.
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Charles Wyble" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 6:20 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?
>
>
>> Doug Ratcliffe wrote:
>>> Has anyone gotten any headway on company negotiations in protected  
>>> zones?
>>> Almost all of the zones near me (105km is the closest to the SW,  
>>> 146.7km
>>> next closest to the South) and I have no desire to point coverage  
>>> in that
>>> direction - mainly north and northwest.  But according to the FCC,  
>>> I'd be
>>> dealing with Sprint, and Harris Corporation - these people don't  
>>> even
>>> have
>>> phone numbers on their web sites for any departments that would  
>>> look like
>>> they would even know what I was talking about.
>>>
>>
>> I have done several blog posts on this subject:
>>
>> http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/satellite-related-brain-dump.html
>> http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/80211y-3650-mhz-in-southern-california.html
>>
>> http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/3650mhz-southern-california-malibu.html
>> http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/3650mhz-southern-california-malibu_05.html
>>
>> Hope that helps.
>>> And even if I found a human being, it seems unlikely I'd talk to  
>>> anyone
>>> with
>>> the power to make a real decision.
>>>
>>
>> Indeed.
>>> Is this something best sent from a telecommunications attorney to  
>>> their
>>> FCC
>>> attorney of record?  Is the consent more like a contract?  Would  
>>> they be
>>> able to charge me for consent (like a spectrum lease)?  Is this like
>>> asking
>>> for keys to the space shuttle?
>>>
>>
>> Excellent questions. Hopefully someone here can help.
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Charles Wyble (818) 280 - 7059
>> http://charlesnw.blogspot.com
>> CTO Known Element Enterprises / SoCal WiFI project
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signu

Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?

[Gino Villarini]

We did it using a telecom attorney, we used Kris Towmey www.lokt.net

Gino A. Villarini
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
tel  787.273.4143   fax   787.273.4145

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Doug Ratcliffe
Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 6:16 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?

Has anyone gotten any headway on company negotiations in protected
zones? 
Almost all of the zones near me (105km is the closest to the SW, 146.7km

next closest to the South) and I have no desire to point coverage in
that 
direction - mainly north and northwest.  But according to the FCC, I'd
be 
dealing with Sprint, and Harris Corporation - these people don't even
have 
phone numbers on their web sites for any departments that would look
like 
they would even know what I was talking about.

And even if I found a human being, it seems unlikely I'd talk to anyone
with 
the power to make a real decision.

Is this something best sent from a telecommunications attorney to their
FCC 
attorney of record?  Is the consent more like a contract?  Would they be

able to charge me for consent (like a spectrum lease)?  Is this like
asking 
for keys to the space shuttle?






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?

[Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE]

I used to live in Boca Raton and my ham repeater is still on the air 
down there. We're also doing some 3650 in Florida as well. Currently 
we're 4 miles just west of the 150km zone so we're in the clear.

I've had numerous calls with higherups at the WTB on this over the last 
few months.

Leon

* Doug Ratcliffe wrote, On 7/27/2008 6:52 PM:
> I've read your blogs and have been keeping up with them.  What I can't seem 
> to find is the ULS registrations for the actual earth satellite stations. 
> It seems like most other ULS entires, they have a contact address and a 
> person's name.
>
> I did a Geosearch of Orange County, FL (the Sprint Communications Orlando, 
> FL  county) using Frequencies 3500 to 5000mhz (All Service Types), and found 
> nothing but a cancelled point to point license for AT&T.
>
> A quick search of the FCC site for Sprint's filing # (SESRWL2000101902129) 
> finds nothing but the mention in the FCC 3650 FSS list.  If I were to call 
> the FCC with that number would they be able to provide me contact 
> information for that company that pertains to the FSS department?
>
> I wonder if creating a website that documented all the FSS contact info, 
> combined with map distance, automatic EIRP / bearing calculations (i.e. the 
> stuff the FCC talks about in their 3650 document), would be beneficial to 
> the other WISPs who want to serve the 125 million people who live INSIDE of 
> these zones.
>
> It seems silly, like a 5-10W transmitter pointing the opposite direction 
> would even make a difference - you would think the FCC would have integrated 
> distance AND antenna direction when it comes to base station registration...
>
> Florida is flat.  At 105km, I would need to have at least a 450 foot tower 
> or higher on both ends to even send a signal that far.  45 miles ended up 
> needing over 400ft on both ends.  It's not like I want to broadcast 3650 
> from the top of a 10,000 foot mountain peak.
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Charles Wyble" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 6:20 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?
>
>
>   
>> Doug Ratcliffe wrote:
>> 
>>> Has anyone gotten any headway on company negotiations in protected zones?
>>> Almost all of the zones near me (105km is the closest to the SW, 146.7km
>>> next closest to the South) and I have no desire to point coverage in that
>>> direction - mainly north and northwest.  But according to the FCC, I'd be
>>> dealing with Sprint, and Harris Corporation - these people don't even 
>>> have
>>> phone numbers on their web sites for any departments that would look like
>>> they would even know what I was talking about.
>>>
>>>   
>> I have done several blog posts on this subject:
>>
>> http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/satellite-related-brain-dump.html
>> http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/80211y-3650-mhz-in-southern-california.html
>>
>> http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/3650mhz-southern-california-malibu.html
>> http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/3650mhz-southern-california-malibu_05.html
>>
>> Hope that helps.
>> 
>>> And even if I found a human being, it seems unlikely I'd talk to anyone 
>>> with
>>> the power to make a real decision.
>>>
>>>   
>> Indeed.
>> 
>>> Is this something best sent from a telecommunications attorney to their 
>>> FCC
>>> attorney of record?  Is the consent more like a contract?  Would they be
>>> able to charge me for consent (like a spectrum lease)?  Is this like 
>>> asking
>>> for keys to the space shuttle?
>>>
>>>   
>> Excellent questions. Hopefully someone here can help.
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Charles Wyble (818) 280 - 7059
>> http://charlesnw.blogspot.com
>> CTO Known Element Enterprises / SoCal WiFI project
>>
>>
>>
>> 




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?

[Jerry Richardson]

Yep. We have 4 grandfathered sites in our region. One signed off, one is 
deactive with the license surendered, one is att, and the 4th is sprint. 

I hope to have sprint and att signed off in the next 30 days

---
airCloud Communications
Jerry Richardson
925-260-4119
Sent Mobile 

-Original Message-
From: Doug Ratcliffe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 3:15 PM
To: WISPA General List 
Subject: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?

Has anyone gotten any headway on company negotiations in protected zones? 
Almost all of the zones near me (105km is the closest to the SW, 146.7km 
next closest to the South) and I have no desire to point coverage in that 
direction - mainly north and northwest.  But according to the FCC, I'd be 
dealing with Sprint, and Harris Corporation - these people don't even have 
phone numbers on their web sites for any departments that would look like 
they would even know what I was talking about.

And even if I found a human being, it seems unlikely I'd talk to anyone with 
the power to make a real decision.

Is this something best sent from a telecommunications attorney to their FCC 
attorney of record?  Is the consent more like a contract?  Would they be 
able to charge me for consent (like a spectrum lease)?  Is this like asking 
for keys to the space shuttle?





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?

[Leon D. Zetekoff, NCE]

Hi Doug...I've been doing this since January and it's been very slow. 
Comsearch seems to rep many of the FSSes. As soon as I have more info on 
where we are I'll post it or you can contact me off list.

Thanks leon

* Doug Ratcliffe wrote, On 7/27/2008 6:16 PM:
> Has anyone gotten any headway on company negotiations in protected zones? 
> Almost all of the zones near me (105km is the closest to the SW, 146.7km 
> next closest to the South) and I have no desire to point coverage in that 
> direction - mainly north and northwest.  But according to the FCC, I'd be 
> dealing with Sprint, and Harris Corporation - these people don't even have 
> phone numbers on their web sites for any departments that would look like 
> they would even know what I was talking about.
>
> And even if I found a human being, it seems unlikely I'd talk to anyone with 
> the power to make a real decision.
>
> Is this something best sent from a telecommunications attorney to their FCC 
> attorney of record?  Is the consent more like a contract?  Would they be 
> able to charge me for consent (like a spectrum lease)?  Is this like asking 
> for keys to the space shuttle?
>   




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?

[Charles Wyble]

Doug Ratcliffe wrote:
> Has anyone gotten any headway on company negotiations in protected zones? 
>   

For better or for worse my blog posts seem to be the only material of 
substance I can find on the subject.
I wish that wasn't the case. :)
> Almost all of the zones near me (105km is the closest to the SW, 146.7km 
> next closest to the South) and I have no desire to point coverage in that 
> direction - mainly north and northwest. 

Have you seen appendix D of the ruling ( located at 
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-56A1.pdf%20 )

It mentions the fact that the 150Km zones are for the worse possible 
configuration.

I have a friend of mine who is a math wizard doing some calculations on 
the zones and figuring out where base stations can be located.

Two data sets are of interest

1) Location of a 3650 base station in  an exclusion zone
2) Location of a 3650 base station inside multiple (overlapping) 
exclusion zones.

Obviously the zones are far to broad, as existing satellite ground 
stations are operating in overlapping zones without interference.

Naturally when his calculations are complete I will post the full data set.

>  But according to the FCC, I'd be 
> dealing with Sprint, and Harris Corporation - these people don't even have 
> phone numbers on their web sites for any departments that would look like 
> they would even know what I was talking about.
>   


Naturally. I would suggest networking with individuals from the 
societies I link to in my blog post. They would seem to be the
ones who could provide the technical contacts and validation.
> And even if I found a human being, it seems unlikely I'd talk to anyone with 
> the power to make a real decision.
>   

Hmmm. I have a sneaky evil plan that just might work. It's a sort of 
backwards way of doing things.

There is a company that offers monitoring service for the 3650Mhz 
registrations. They sell this to
earth station operators. Once someone registers inside the exclusion 
zone they contact them.

I discovered this the other day and am now unable to locate it.

Some people to talk to might be http://www.suirg.org/ ? Think of them 
ass the satellite mafia? :)

For now I have tabled pursuit of spectrum access until any significant 
events occur, or the availability
of 802.11y equipment. Whichever comes first.
> Is this something best sent from a telecommunications attorney to their FCC 
> attorney of record?  

That's an interesting question. In my original post on this subject to 
the list someone mentioned they had
negotiated access. When I asked for further detail I didn't receive any 
more information.

> Is the consent more like a contract?  Would they be 
> able to charge me for consent (like a spectrum lease)? 

Unfortunately all the FCC  spells out is a requirement for negotiation 
in good faith. I am not sure what on earth "in good faith"
means. 
>  Is this like asking 
> for keys to the space shuttle?
>   

You could probably get the nuclear launch codes that a marine carries 
for the President easier then spectrum access. I would love to be proven 
wrong.

I sent a letter to the two names mentioned on the ruling, regarding the 
subject of gaining spectrum access.  A copy of the letter can be found here:

http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/fcc-engagement.html

I have yet to hear back from either of them. :)


If I obtain any more information from the various information loops I'm 
plugged into, I will blog it and post here. Also I am going to track 
down that registration monitoring service now. Might be far easier to 
simply register and have them come to you?

-- 
Charles Wyble (818) 280 - 7059
http://charlesnw.blogspot.com
CTO Known Element Enterprises / SoCal WiFI project




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?

[Mike Hammett]

In a couple years NASA's not going to be using the shuttles anymore, so 
they'll be easier to get a hold of.  ;-)


--
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


- Original Message - 
From: "Doug Ratcliffe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 5:16 PM
Subject: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?


> Has anyone gotten any headway on company negotiations in protected zones?
> Almost all of the zones near me (105km is the closest to the SW, 146.7km
> next closest to the South) and I have no desire to point coverage in that
> direction - mainly north and northwest.  But according to the FCC, I'd be
> dealing with Sprint, and Harris Corporation - these people don't even have
> phone numbers on their web sites for any departments that would look like
> they would even know what I was talking about.
>
> And even if I found a human being, it seems unlikely I'd talk to anyone 
> with
> the power to make a real decision.
>
> Is this something best sent from a telecommunications attorney to their 
> FCC
> attorney of record?  Is the consent more like a contract?  Would they be
> able to charge me for consent (like a spectrum lease)?  Is this like 
> asking
> for keys to the space shuttle?
>
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?

[Doug Ratcliffe]

I've read your blogs and have been keeping up with them.  What I can't seem 
to find is the ULS registrations for the actual earth satellite stations. 
It seems like most other ULS entires, they have a contact address and a 
person's name.

I did a Geosearch of Orange County, FL (the Sprint Communications Orlando, 
FL  county) using Frequencies 3500 to 5000mhz (All Service Types), and found 
nothing but a cancelled point to point license for AT&T.

A quick search of the FCC site for Sprint's filing # (SESRWL2000101902129) 
finds nothing but the mention in the FCC 3650 FSS list.  If I were to call 
the FCC with that number would they be able to provide me contact 
information for that company that pertains to the FSS department?

I wonder if creating a website that documented all the FSS contact info, 
combined with map distance, automatic EIRP / bearing calculations (i.e. the 
stuff the FCC talks about in their 3650 document), would be beneficial to 
the other WISPs who want to serve the 125 million people who live INSIDE of 
these zones.

It seems silly, like a 5-10W transmitter pointing the opposite direction 
would even make a difference - you would think the FCC would have integrated 
distance AND antenna direction when it comes to base station registration...

Florida is flat.  At 105km, I would need to have at least a 450 foot tower 
or higher on both ends to even send a signal that far.  45 miles ended up 
needing over 400ft on both ends.  It's not like I want to broadcast 3650 
from the top of a 10,000 foot mountain peak.

- Original Message - 
From: "Charles Wyble" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2008 6:20 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?


> Doug Ratcliffe wrote:
>> Has anyone gotten any headway on company negotiations in protected zones?
>> Almost all of the zones near me (105km is the closest to the SW, 146.7km
>> next closest to the South) and I have no desire to point coverage in that
>> direction - mainly north and northwest.  But according to the FCC, I'd be
>> dealing with Sprint, and Harris Corporation - these people don't even 
>> have
>> phone numbers on their web sites for any departments that would look like
>> they would even know what I was talking about.
>>
>
> I have done several blog posts on this subject:
>
> http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/satellite-related-brain-dump.html
> http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/80211y-3650-mhz-in-southern-california.html
>
> http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/3650mhz-southern-california-malibu.html
> http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/3650mhz-southern-california-malibu_05.html
>
> Hope that helps.
>> And even if I found a human being, it seems unlikely I'd talk to anyone 
>> with
>> the power to make a real decision.
>>
>
> Indeed.
>> Is this something best sent from a telecommunications attorney to their 
>> FCC
>> attorney of record?  Is the consent more like a contract?  Would they be
>> able to charge me for consent (like a spectrum lease)?  Is this like 
>> asking
>> for keys to the space shuttle?
>>
>
> Excellent questions. Hopefully someone here can help.
>
>
> -- 
> Charles Wyble (818) 280 - 7059
> http://charlesnw.blogspot.com
> CTO Known Element Enterprises / SoCal WiFI project
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?

[Charles Wyble]

Doug Ratcliffe wrote:
> Has anyone gotten any headway on company negotiations in protected zones? 
> Almost all of the zones near me (105km is the closest to the SW, 146.7km 
> next closest to the South) and I have no desire to point coverage in that 
> direction - mainly north and northwest.  But according to the FCC, I'd be 
> dealing with Sprint, and Harris Corporation - these people don't even have 
> phone numbers on their web sites for any departments that would look like 
> they would even know what I was talking about.
>   

I have done several blog posts on this subject:

http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/satellite-related-brain-dump.html
http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/80211y-3650-mhz-in-southern-california.html

http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/3650mhz-southern-california-malibu.html
http://charlesnw.blogspot.com/2008/07/3650mhz-southern-california-malibu_05.html

Hope that helps.
> And even if I found a human being, it seems unlikely I'd talk to anyone with 
> the power to make a real decision.
>   

Indeed.
> Is this something best sent from a telecommunications attorney to their FCC 
> attorney of record?  Is the consent more like a contract?  Would they be 
> able to charge me for consent (like a spectrum lease)?  Is this like asking 
> for keys to the space shuttle?
>   

Excellent questions. Hopefully someone here can help.


-- 
Charles Wyble (818) 280 - 7059
http://charlesnw.blogspot.com
CTO Known Element Enterprises / SoCal WiFI project




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

[WISPA] 3650 FSS negotiations for protected areas...?

[Doug Ratcliffe]

Has anyone gotten any headway on company negotiations in protected zones? 
Almost all of the zones near me (105km is the closest to the SW, 146.7km 
next closest to the South) and I have no desire to point coverage in that 
direction - mainly north and northwest.  But according to the FCC, I'd be 
dealing with Sprint, and Harris Corporation - these people don't even have 
phone numbers on their web sites for any departments that would look like 
they would even know what I was talking about.

And even if I found a human being, it seems unlikely I'd talk to anyone with 
the power to make a real decision.

Is this something best sent from a telecommunications attorney to their FCC 
attorney of record?  Is the consent more like a contract?  Would they be 
able to charge me for consent (like a spectrum lease)?  Is this like asking 
for keys to the space shuttle?





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 PtP equipment

[Matt Hardy]

Hi Randy,
Yes, the LigoWave 900MHz products are all FCC certified. 

-Matt

On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 15:26 -0600, Randy Cosby wrote:

> Is their 900 mhz stuff fcc certified?
> 
> Randy
> 
> 
> Bo Ring wrote:
> > LigoWave is planning one, but has not announced any details. This is 
> > from their website:
> >
> > LigoPTP devices provide high throughput, Point-to-Point connectivity 
> > for backhaul applications on a variety of frequencies. With LigoWave's 
> > proprietary software mechanism utilizing Selective Repeat ARQ 
> > technology (TDD), LigoPTP devices enable actual TCP throughput of up 
> > to 70 Mbps. Current products are available in 5 GHz and 900 MHz 
> > connectorized and integrated antenna models, but stay tuned for our 
> > PtP offerings in the 2.4 GHz and 3.65 GHz spectrums!
> >
> > I have been impressed with the price/performance of the 5 G and 900 
> > stuff so far.
> >
> > On Jun 30, 2008, at 12:33 PM, Jason Hensley wrote:
> >
> >> I think we had a thread on this awhile back, maybe not, but is there 
> >> anyone
> >> offering a 3650 PtP product? Is there enough interest in this to maybe
> >> prompt a manf. to get busy on this? For me, I need a move my 
> >> backhauls out
> >> of the messy and noisy 5ghz and this would be ideal. I don't have any 
> >> short
> >> term plans to start doing 3650 PtMP, and honestly probably won't for 
> >> awhile
> >> - but that could change.
> >>
> >> Whatcha think guys?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 
> >>  
> >>
> >> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> >> http://signup.wispa.org/
> >> 
> >>  
> >>
> >>
> >> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> >>
> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> >>
> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> >
> > Bo Ring
> > Account Manager
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > cell: 630-743-1162 • office: 312-205-2515
> > 16W235 83rd Street, Suite A, Burr Ridge, IL 60527 • tel: 773.667.4585 
> > fax: 773.326.4641
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> > WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> > http://signup.wispa.org/
> > 
> >  
> > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
> >
> > Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
> >
> > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
> 



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 PtP equipment

[Randy Cosby]

Is their 900 mhz stuff fcc certified?

Randy


Bo Ring wrote:
> LigoWave is planning one, but has not announced any details. This is 
> from their website:
>
> LigoPTP devices provide high throughput, Point-to-Point connectivity 
> for backhaul applications on a variety of frequencies. With LigoWave's 
> proprietary software mechanism utilizing Selective Repeat ARQ 
> technology (TDD), LigoPTP devices enable actual TCP throughput of up 
> to 70 Mbps. Current products are available in 5 GHz and 900 MHz 
> connectorized and integrated antenna models, but stay tuned for our 
> PtP offerings in the 2.4 GHz and 3.65 GHz spectrums!
>
> I have been impressed with the price/performance of the 5 G and 900 
> stuff so far.
>
> On Jun 30, 2008, at 12:33 PM, Jason Hensley wrote:
>
>> I think we had a thread on this awhile back, maybe not, but is there 
>> anyone
>> offering a 3650 PtP product? Is there enough interest in this to maybe
>> prompt a manf. to get busy on this? For me, I need a move my 
>> backhauls out
>> of the messy and noisy 5ghz and this would be ideal. I don't have any 
>> short
>> term plans to start doing 3650 PtMP, and honestly probably won't for 
>> awhile
>> - but that could change.
>>
>> Whatcha think guys?
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>>  
>>
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>  
>>
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
> 
>
>
> Bo Ring
> Account Manager
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> cell: 630-743-1162 • office: 312-205-2515
> 16W235 83rd Street, Suite A, Burr Ridge, IL 60527 • tel: 773.667.4585 
> fax: 773.326.4641
>
>
> 
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
Randy Cosby
Vice President
InfoWest, Inc

office: 435-773-6071





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 PtP equipment

[Bo Ring]

LigoWave is planning one, but has not announced any details. This is  
from their website:


LigoPTP devices provide high throughput, Point-to-Point connectivity  
for backhaul applications on a variety of frequencies. With LigoWave's  
proprietary software mechanism utilizing Selective Repeat ARQ  
technology (TDD), LigoPTP devices enable actual TCP throughput of up  
to 70 Mbps. Current products are available in 5 GHz and 900 MHz  
connectorized and integrated antenna models, but stay tuned for our  
PtP offerings in the 2.4 GHz and 3.65 GHz spectrums!


I have been impressed with the price/performance of the 5 G and 900  
stuff so far.


On Jun 30, 2008, at 12:33 PM, Jason Hensley wrote:

I think we had a thread on this awhile back, maybe not, but is there  
anyone
offering a 3650 PtP product?  Is there enough interest in this to  
maybe
prompt a manf. to get busy on this?  For me, I need a move my  
backhauls out
of the messy and noisy 5ghz and this would be ideal.  I don't have  
any short
term plans to start doing 3650 PtMP, and honestly probably won't for  
awhile

- but that could change.

Whatcha think guys?




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/


WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


<>

Bo Ring
Account Manager
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
cell: 630-743-1162 • office: 312-205-2515
16W235 83rd Street, Suite A, Burr Ridge, IL 60527 • tel: 773.667.4585  
fax: 773.326.4641






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

[WISPA] 3650 PtP equipment

[Jason Hensley]

I think we had a thread on this awhile back, maybe not, but is there anyone
offering a 3650 PtP product?  Is there enough interest in this to maybe
prompt a manf. to get busy on this?  For me, I need a move my backhauls out
of the messy and noisy 5ghz and this would be ideal.  I don't have any short
term plans to start doing 3650 PtMP, and honestly probably won't for awhile
- but that could change.  

Whatcha think guys? 




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 locations KML

[Mike Hammett]

Wow, Enbridge sure has a lot of those things...

They've either got a pipeline or are building a pipeline near here.


--
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com


- Original Message - 
From: "Matt Liotta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 9:12 AM
Subject: [WISPA] 3650 locations KML


> In case anyone is interested.
>
> -Matt
>
>





>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations

[Jack Unger]

Chuck,

My point was that if the RF module has already received a modular 
certification but with a low-gain antenna then the process process of 
obtaining certification with additional (typically higher-gain outdoor) 
antennas is shortened. Typically in this instance, the original card 
manufacturer has obtained the original modular certification with the 
intent of promoting the sales of the card in a variety of different 
types of certified equipment. In other words, the card manufacturer is 
being "cooperative". If you are paying your certification lab to run the 
same complete series of RF tests on a variety of equipment models that 
use the same modularly-certified card then you may be paying them too 
much. Feel free to hit me up offline so we can compare notes.

jack


Chuck McCown - 2 wrote:
> You cannot get anything certified without the schematic, block diagram, and 
> other pieces of information that you may not be able to get from the 
> manufacturer.  If the manufacturer does not cooperate, there isn't any way a 
> WISP can obtain the certification.  Moreover, the RF tests do have to be 
> tested due to the prospect of the out of band emissions changing with a 
> change of antenna.  I have been through this several times.
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Jack Unger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "WISPA General List" 
> Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 12:55 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations
>
>
>   
>> Right. The WISP then has the option of sending the AP or CPE to a
>> certification lab with several different types of higher-gain outdoor
>> antennas to get a new FCC ID number (a new certification) in /*your*/
>> company name. The cost is less than certifying without using the
>> already-certified card because many of the RF tests do not need to be
>> repeated because they were already done by the original manufacturer.
>> The cost to do this depends on the number of antenna types tested but
>> could run between $1800 (one or two antennas) to $2800 (more antennas).
>>
>> jack
>>
>>
>> Tom Sharples wrote:
>> 
>>> That is true only if the original modular radio was tested with an 
>>> antenna
>>> of equal or greater gain. You'll want to look at the FCC filings that go
>>> with that radio; bring up the detail page and look at the test photos. 
>>> Quite
>>> often you'll find that these modular radios were only tested with a 
>>> low-gain
>>> rubber-duck omni.
>>>
>>> Tom Sharples
>>> Qorvus Systems, Inc.
>>>
>>> - Original Message - 
>>> From: "Kurt Fankhauser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
>>> Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 6:48 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>   
>>>> Exactly, with that attitude from the FCC then all of my network is 100%
>>>> FCC
>>>> certified because all the radio's have an FCC number on them, I would 
>>>> just
>>>> have to put that number on the outside of the rootenna.
>>>>
>>>> Kurt Fankhauser
>>>> WAVELINC
>>>> P.O. Box 126
>>>> Bucyrus, OH 44820
>>>> 419-562-6405
>>>> www.wavelinc.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -Original Message-
>>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>>>> Behalf Of Butch Evans
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 11:57 PM
>>>> To: WISPA General List
>>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, Kyle Duren wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 
>>>>> *Response: *
>>>>>
>>>>> Since the device is already certified, it can be installed into a
>>>>> final basestation without further approval, as long as the FCCID
>>>>> label is attached on the outside of the final product.  However, if
>>>>> your company wishes to obtain it's own FCC number for the final
>>>>> product, then you must apply for an original FCCID.
>>>>>
>>>>>   
>>>> WOW!  I wonder if this type of flexibility carries over to 2.4 and
>>>> 5gig.  I know this has been a REALLY contentious question, but if
>>>> that's the response in 3.65, I have to question the reality of FCC
>>>> views in other bands that are NOT licensed.
>>>>
>&

Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations

[Chuck McCown - 2]

You cannot get anything certified without the schematic, block diagram, and 
other pieces of information that you may not be able to get from the 
manufacturer.  If the manufacturer does not cooperate, there isn't any way a 
WISP can obtain the certification.  Moreover, the RF tests do have to be 
tested due to the prospect of the out of band emissions changing with a 
change of antenna.  I have been through this several times.
- Original Message - 
From: "Jack Unger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" 
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 12:55 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations


> Right. The WISP then has the option of sending the AP or CPE to a
> certification lab with several different types of higher-gain outdoor
> antennas to get a new FCC ID number (a new certification) in /*your*/
> company name. The cost is less than certifying without using the
> already-certified card because many of the RF tests do not need to be
> repeated because they were already done by the original manufacturer.
> The cost to do this depends on the number of antenna types tested but
> could run between $1800 (one or two antennas) to $2800 (more antennas).
>
> jack
>
>
> Tom Sharples wrote:
>> That is true only if the original modular radio was tested with an 
>> antenna
>> of equal or greater gain. You'll want to look at the FCC filings that go
>> with that radio; bring up the detail page and look at the test photos. 
>> Quite
>> often you'll find that these modular radios were only tested with a 
>> low-gain
>> rubber-duck omni.
>>
>> Tom Sharples
>> Qorvus Systems, Inc.
>>
>> - Original Message - 
>> From: "Kurt Fankhauser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
>> Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 6:48 AM
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations
>>
>>
>>
>>> Exactly, with that attitude from the FCC then all of my network is 100%
>>> FCC
>>> certified because all the radio's have an FCC number on them, I would 
>>> just
>>> have to put that number on the outside of the rootenna.
>>>
>>> Kurt Fankhauser
>>> WAVELINC
>>> P.O. Box 126
>>> Bucyrus, OH 44820
>>> 419-562-6405
>>> www.wavelinc.com
>>>
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>>> Behalf Of Butch Evans
>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 11:57 PM
>>> To: WISPA General List
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations
>>>
>>> On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, Kyle Duren wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> *Response: *
>>>>
>>>> Since the device is already certified, it can be installed into a
>>>> final basestation without further approval, as long as the FCCID
>>>> label is attached on the outside of the final product.  However, if
>>>> your company wishes to obtain it's own FCC number for the final
>>>> product, then you must apply for an original FCCID.
>>>>
>>> WOW!  I wonder if this type of flexibility carries over to 2.4 and
>>> 5gig.  I know this has been a REALLY contentious question, but if
>>> that's the response in 3.65, I have to question the reality of FCC
>>> views in other bands that are NOT licensed.
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> 
>>> *Butch Evans *Professional Network Consultation *
>>> *Network Engineering *MikroTik RouterOS*
>>> *573-276-2879 *ImageStream   *
>>> *http://www.butchevans.com/ *StarOS and MORE   *
>>> *Mikrotik Certified Consultant *Wired or Wireless Networks*
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>>> 
>>> 
>>>
>>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>>
>>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>>
>>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>>> http://signup.wispa.org

Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations

[Jack Unger]

Right. The WISP then has the option of sending the AP or CPE to a 
certification lab with several different types of higher-gain outdoor 
antennas to get a new FCC ID number (a new certification) in /*your*/ 
company name. The cost is less than certifying without using the 
already-certified card because many of the RF tests do not need to be 
repeated because they were already done by the original manufacturer. 
The cost to do this depends on the number of antenna types tested but 
could run between $1800 (one or two antennas) to $2800 (more antennas).

jack


Tom Sharples wrote:
> That is true only if the original modular radio was tested with an antenna 
> of equal or greater gain. You'll want to look at the FCC filings that go 
> with that radio; bring up the detail page and look at the test photos. Quite 
> often you'll find that these modular radios were only tested with a low-gain 
> rubber-duck omni.
>
> Tom Sharples
> Qorvus Systems, Inc.
>
> - Original Message - 
> From: "Kurt Fankhauser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "'WISPA General List'" 
> Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 6:48 AM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations
>
>
>   
>> Exactly, with that attitude from the FCC then all of my network is 100% 
>> FCC
>> certified because all the radio's have an FCC number on them, I would just
>> have to put that number on the outside of the rootenna.
>>
>> Kurt Fankhauser
>> WAVELINC
>> P.O. Box 126
>> Bucyrus, OH 44820
>> 419-562-6405
>> www.wavelinc.com
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>> Behalf Of Butch Evans
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 11:57 PM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations
>>
>> On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, Kyle Duren wrote:
>>
>> 
>>> *Response: *
>>>   
>>> Since the device is already certified, it can be installed into a
>>> final basestation without further approval, as long as the FCCID
>>> label is attached on the outside of the final product.  However, if
>>> your company wishes to obtain it's own FCC number for the final
>>> product, then you must apply for an original FCCID.
>>>   
>> WOW!  I wonder if this type of flexibility carries over to 2.4 and
>> 5gig.  I know this has been a REALLY contentious question, but if
>> that's the response in 3.65, I have to question the reality of FCC
>> views in other bands that are NOT licensed.
>>
>> -- 
>> 
>> *Butch Evans *Professional Network Consultation *
>> *Network Engineering *MikroTik RouterOS*
>> *573-276-2879 *ImageStream   *
>> *http://www.butchevans.com/ *StarOS and MORE   *
>> *Mikrotik Certified Consultant *Wired or Wireless Networks*
>> 
>>
>>
>> 
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
>> http://signup.wispa.org/
>> 
>>
>> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>>
>> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 
>> 
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>  
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
>   

-- 
Jack Unger - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993
Cisco Press Author - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs"
Vendor-Neutral Wireless Design-Training-Troubleshooting-Consulting
FCC License # PG-12-25133 Profile <http://www.linkedin.com/in/jackunger>
Phone 818-227-4220  Email <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>






WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations

[Tom Sharples]

That is true only if the original modular radio was tested with an antenna 
of equal or greater gain. You'll want to look at the FCC filings that go 
with that radio; bring up the detail page and look at the test photos. Quite 
often you'll find that these modular radios were only tested with a low-gain 
rubber-duck omni.

Tom Sharples
Qorvus Systems, Inc.

- Original Message - 
From: "Kurt Fankhauser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" 
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 6:48 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations


> Exactly, with that attitude from the FCC then all of my network is 100% 
> FCC
> certified because all the radio's have an FCC number on them, I would just
> have to put that number on the outside of the rootenna.
>
> Kurt Fankhauser
> WAVELINC
> P.O. Box 126
> Bucyrus, OH 44820
> 419-562-6405
> www.wavelinc.com
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Butch Evans
> Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 11:57 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations
>
> On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, Kyle Duren wrote:
>
>>*Response: *
>
>>Since the device is already certified, it can be installed into a
>>final basestation without further approval, as long as the FCCID
>>label is attached on the outside of the final product.  However, if
>>your company wishes to obtain it's own FCC number for the final
>>product, then you must apply for an original FCCID.
>
> WOW!  I wonder if this type of flexibility carries over to 2.4 and
> 5gig.  I know this has been a REALLY contentious question, but if
> that's the response in 3.65, I have to question the reality of FCC
> views in other bands that are NOT licensed.
>
> -- 
> 
> *Butch Evans *Professional Network Consultation *
> *Network Engineering *MikroTik RouterOS*
> *573-276-2879 *ImageStream   *
> *http://www.butchevans.com/ *StarOS and MORE   *
> *Mikrotik Certified Consultant *Wired or Wireless Networks*
> 
>
>
> 
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
>
>
> 
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> 
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ 




WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations

[Anthony Will]

Not to burst a bubble but the special "type certification" that is part 
of part-15 was created for unlicensed solutions.  Most license holders 
are responsible for the equipment that is in use. Thus the equipment is 
only certified to meet special regs of the band, unlike unlicensed where 
the majority of the responsibility is on the manufacture. 

Anthony Will
Broadband Corp.
http://www.broadband-mn.com



Kurt Fankhauser wrote:
> Exactly, with that attitude from the FCC then all of my network is 100% FCC
> certified because all the radio's have an FCC number on them, I would just
> have to put that number on the outside of the rootenna.
>
> Kurt Fankhauser
> WAVELINC
> P.O. Box 126
> Bucyrus, OH 44820
> 419-562-6405
> www.wavelinc.com
>  
>  
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Butch Evans
> Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 11:57 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations
>
> On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, Kyle Duren wrote:
>
>   
>> *Response: *
>> 
>
>   
>> Since the device is already certified, it can be installed into a 
>> final basestation without further approval, as long as the FCCID 
>> label is attached on the outside of the final product.  However, if 
>> your company wishes to obtain it's own FCC number for the final 
>> product, then you must apply for an original FCCID.
>> 
>
> WOW!  I wonder if this type of flexibility carries over to 2.4 and 
> 5gig.  I know this has been a REALLY contentious question, but if 
> that's the response in 3.65, I have to question the reality of FCC 
> views in other bands that are NOT licensed.
>
>   



WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations

[Randy Cosby]

Well, let's ask! :)

I assume part-15 rules are written quite a bit differently on this 
matter than part-90, but hey, why not ask?

Randy


Kurt Fankhauser wrote:
> Exactly, with that attitude from the FCC then all of my network is 100% FCC
> certified because all the radio's have an FCC number on them, I would just
> have to put that number on the outside of the rootenna.
>
> Kurt Fankhauser
> WAVELINC
> P.O. Box 126
> Bucyrus, OH 44820
> 419-562-6405
> www.wavelinc.com
>  
>  
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Butch Evans
> Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2008 11:57 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3650 XR3 locations
>
> On Wed, 4 Jun 2008, Kyle Duren wrote:
>
>   
>> *Response: *
>> 
>
>   
>> Since the device is already certified, it can be installed into a 
>> final basestation without further approval, as long as the FCCID 
>> label is attached on the outside of the final product.  However, if 
>> your company wishes to obtain it's own FCC number for the final 
>> product, then you must apply for an original FCCID.
>> 
>
> WOW!  I wonder if this type of flexibility carries over to 2.4 and 
> 5gig.  I know this has been a REALLY contentious question, but if 
> that's the response in 3.65, I have to question the reality of FCC 
> views in other bands that are NOT licensed.
>
>   

-- 
Randy Cosby
Vice President
InfoWest, Inc

office: 435-773-6071





WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/

 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/