John,
I have railed against illegal vendors for years -- before you put up
your first link. I (in official "corporate" capacity) have met with
officials on the topic. I (in official corporate capacity) have met with
lawyers on the topic. I have publicly spoken out at events on the topic.
Who is stereotyping? I have said "many" and that's the truth and it's
not even a debate. What's "trying to do right"? One either follows the
rules or does not.
No FUD being slung here. On the 4.9 issue I filed that question and deal
with that assumption quite a bit. I suspect your definition of WISP is
more narrow than mine. Mine includes ANY entity providing services with
wireless broadband gear. There are utility-based WISPs, telco WISPs,
large funded WISPs, Mom and Pop WISPs, rural WISPs, etc. The fact is
that the public is not able and does not differentiate between all the
competing groups of WISPs and groups like WISPA should understand that.
You "want it to stop," John? Well, you have the power to censure your
list from those you disagree with. You will have to mute dissent then,
as I will not subdue my opinion on the topic because you wield power.
Has does one best use their power John? To silence rational opinion one
disagrees with? Must we all be sensitive or averse to differing from
your opinion? Should I watch my back and wait to be called into the
corner office for expressing my qualified opinion because you "want it
to stop"?
Patrick
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Scrivner
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 12:47 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces
Patrick, what is Alvarion doing as a corporation to police the majority
of BWIA vendors who now pollute our industry with uncertified gear?
These are your peers. Do you like being stereotyped with them?
Your stereotyping of WISP operators as being predominantly illegal and
the source of the problem is not accurate or fair and I want it to stop.
The majority of the WISPs out there are trying to do right. It is the
vendors who are the real problem. The majority of vendors ignore the
law. The last gear purchase I made was for an Alvarion B100 backhaul
link which is due in here today. It is certified but now I wonder if
buying from a vendor who stereotypes the industry is a good idea. Maybe
I made a mistake buying from your company?
By the way, the slam about 4.9 GHz is completely erroneous and you need
to apologize. The vast majority of WISPs stay the hell away from 4.9 and
other bands which we are not allowed in. You need to watch your tack on
this public list. Being a paid vendor member does not give you the right
to sling mud or FUD.
Scriv
Patrick Leary wrote:
I understand and agree, but that's all the more reason why WISPs need
to
police themselves because the public impression and liabilities are
there just as well.
a
Sometimes I wonder if the FCC is not content to let WISPs sort of stay
partially self-destructing. It gives them and the major operators an
ace
in the hole against WISPs if and when they need it.
Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 10:14 AM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces
Yeah, for sure.
However, the FCC must take some credit for that problem Patrick. How
many
times have you been told that operator a has turned in operator b for
an
illegal network and never heard a peep out of the FCC?
laters,
Marlon
(509) 982-2181 Equipment sales
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage) Consulting services
42846865 (icq) And I run my own
wisp!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam
----- Original Message -----
From: "Patrick Leary" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org>
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 8:49 AM
Subject: RE: [WISPA] TV white spaces
I hope it does go UL, but I have also heard some recent rumblings that
the FCC is concerned with what seems like a widespread deterioration of
WISPs following the rules. The phrase I recall is something along the
lines of "Damn it, these things are not guidelines."
From my view it is true. I see it in conversations that go beyond the
usual, "if you just stay within the power no one cares" to now where
people seem to via the STA process as a round-about tool to get access
to and use spectrum that does not commercially exist.
Letting loose the same level of abuse in the TV bands is something that
will cause real problems for the FCC should broadcasters be affected.
The WISP industry must do a better job of policing itself and
discouraging the slippery slope.
Patrick Leary
AVP WISP Markets
Alvarion, Inc.
o: 650.314.2628
c: 760.580.0080
Vonage: 650.641.1243
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jack Unger
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 11:22 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] TV white spaces
Steve,
I appreciate your insight into the possibility that license-exempt
white
space use might actually materialize. I very much hope that it does.
jack
Steve Stroh wrote:
Jack:
Consider...
To the television broadcasters, WISPs using this spectrum in a "we'll
stay out of the way of any television broadcasting activity" manner
is
the lesser of several other evils; television broadcasting has been
steadily losing ground now; first 800 MHz was carved out of Channels
70-83, and now the 700 MHz bands are being carved out of Channels
52-69. The trend is clear, and while it's one thing for powerful
terrestrial broadcasting to "share" spectrum with low-power
license-exempt usage, it's quite another for communications use to do
the same. If the broadcasters play things right (and it appears they
are "bending" towards white space license-exempt usage, but very much
on THEIR terms...) the license-exempt usage of television white space
may serve to "pollute" the remaining television broadcast spectrum
sufficiently to prevent future reallocation (for at least another
decade or so).
Intel, Microsoft, Cisco are some of the names being bandied about as
advocates for license-exempt use of white space television broadcast
spectrum.
Thanks,
Steve
On Jan 24, 2007, at Jan 24 09:21 AM, Jack Unger wrote:
Likelihood of unlicensed???
My guess is that the established communications carriers and the
broadcasters will fight the concept of license-free use of this
space. I expect it will come down to who lobbies Congress most
effectively.
--
Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc.
Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993
Author of the WISP Handbook - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs"
True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting
Newsletters Downloadable from http://ask-wi.com/newsletters.html
Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220 www.ask-wi.com
---
Steve Stroh
425-939-0076 | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Writing about BWIA again! - www.bwianews.com
