On 12/27/16 18:36, Mike Hammett wrote:
> I also have a feeling that there's a non-zero number of people that
> won't give a shit and will run whatever they want whenever they want.
You're right, of course, but I was trying to be optimistic. I do wish
the FCC would go out and nuke those people.
rom: "Seth Mattinen"
To: wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2016 8:34:37 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] 3.65 Precedence
On 12/27/16 16:50, Stuart Pierce wrote:
> I set forth the point at a get together with the FCC in Gettysburg a few
> years back that I thought it was a was
On 12/27/16 16:50, Stuart Pierce wrote:
> I set forth the point at a get together with the FCC in Gettysburg a few
> years back that I thought it was a waste of time to register the CPE's.
> The base station already spews forth the frequency in a certain direction
> anyway.
>
> That's when I realiz
I set forth the point at a get together with the FCC in Gettysburg a few
years back that I thought it was a waste of time to register the CPE's.
The base station already spews forth the frequency in a certain direction
anyway.
That's when I realized I thought something else was afoot other than
fr
On 12/27/2016 4:41 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote:
On 12/27/16 13:35, Fred Goldstein wrote:
Since you have the license, you are entitled to put up more devices,
just not as Incumbent. So what you might want to do is pull the FCC's
ULS records in that area to see what registered devices the existing
WIS
On 12/27/16 13:35, Fred Goldstein wrote:
>
> Since you have the license, you are entitled to put up more devices,
> just not as Incumbent. So what you might want to do is pull the FCC's
> ULS records in that area to see what registered devices the existing
> WISPs have in the area you're looking to
m Morris
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2016 1:26 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] 3.65 Precedence
I have a question to which I suspect I know the answer but wanted to defer to
you smart guys.
Let's say I'm opening up a new WISP and want to go into an area where there is
an exis
.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Sam Morris
> Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2016 1:26 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: [WISPA] 3.65 Precedence
>
> I have a question to which I suspect I know the answer but wanted to defer to
> you smart guys.
&g
On 12/27/2016 3:25 PM, Sam Morris wrote:
I have a question to which I suspect I know the answer but wanted to
defer to you smart guys.
Let's say I'm opening up a new WISP and want to go into an area where
there is an existing WISP already there. And let's say I want to use
3.65 GHz (non-LTE if t
boun...@wispa.org] On
> Behalf Of Sam Morris
> Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2016 1:26 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: [WISPA] 3.65 Precedence
>
> I have a question to which I suspect I know the answer but wanted to defer
> to you smart guys.
>
> Let's say I'
...@wispa.org] On Behalf
Of Sam Morris
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2016 1:26 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] 3.65 Precedence
I have a question to which I suspect I know the answer but wanted to defer to
you smart guys.
Let's say I'm opening up a new WISP and want to go into an
I have a question to which I suspect I know the answer but wanted to
defer to you smart guys.
Let's say I'm opening up a new WISP and want to go into an area where
there is an existing WISP already there. And let's say I want to use
3.65 GHz (non-LTE if that matters) gear in that area, but that
12 matches
Mail list logo
