Thanks for your summary Tom. I not even going to pretend to be surprised
by anything they mentioned -- as your meeting only validates my recent
posts on the subject, no matter how much so many reject what I say as
"opinion" and no matter how many think these are matters of choice. They
are not. When the pain comes, such WISPs cannot say they were not
adequately informed.

As for, "The same request goes out to all the name brand 
vendors like Trango, Alvarion, and Whoever else..." regarding 5.4
certification. No worries there --ever-- about Alvarion not following
the FCC requirements to the letter.

I can and will tell folks that it will be the WISP relativism of so many
and the rampant use of uncertified 5.4 GHz that will bring this all to a
head. The FCC has been patient and EXCEPTIONALLY laissez-faire, but in
5.4 GHz that ends. Why, because many WISPs may not be aware how
difficult 5.4 GHz has been for the FCC. They don't know the lengths that
they, the NTIA, and others went through to come up with something
expectable for the military. And this time, when the violations come, it
will be the DoD that applies the pressure on the FCC to enforce the
rules. 

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 Tom DeReggi
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2007 8:47 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: [WISPA] Brief report from FCC visit

We just got back from FCC and FTC visits yesterday.  A couple notes...

1) Both meetings had full staff attending, which I consider an honor.
Each 
meeting lasted about 2 hours.

2) Some of the WISPs had to cancel due to weather, but 3 made it, George

Rigoto, Brent Anderson, and myself Tom DeReggi.

3) One thing was clear without a doubt. They are somewhat pissed that
all 
WISPs are NOT filling From 477.  I think the general concensus was that 
maybe only 10% were? The FCC primarilly stayed on the arguement that it 
wasn't a choice, it was law.  But I could see it in their eyes that it
was 
more than that, possibly even hurtful. After all that they have been
doing 
for us, that the single only thing that they asked of us, we couldn't
even 
bother to do. I tell you, we will alienate our friends at the FCC, if we
do 
not cooperate.  EVERYONE must file Form 477.  They did Thank WISPA for 
helping in  promoting the need to file. We talked a bit about why we
thought 
some WISPs weren't filing. But anyway we looked at it, any reason not to
was 
a false fear. The Form 477 is not intertwined with the taxation
department, 
it is not intertwined with the Enforcement beaurow for illegal gear.
They 
aren't giving the data to our competition. And the data they collect is
to 
broad to even do us harm if it was disclosed.  So if you are a WISP,
please 
file.  I personally am working on my Form today, and plan on sending it
in 
Monday.  I personally won't make the mistake of not filing, again.

4) We discussed the option for self/group effort to certifying gear 
combinations. It won't be an option that will be viable. It must be a 
"Manufacturer" that applied for equipment certification, as there must
be an 
accountable/responsible/liable party.  A group applying for
certification, 
would have to take liabilty and prove their ability to be able to be 
accountable.  I'm not the police and not going to tell you what to use,
but 
any way you slice it, make your own StarOS / Mikrotik gear is illegal 
(non-certified) in the US.  The only way to not be illegal, is to buy it

from a manufacturer that has certified their combination,  or you become
a 
manufacturer yourself and apply for certification of your combination.
The 
fact that XYZ certified the combination, does not make your combination 
certified. UNLESS you convince XYZ  to be responsible and liable for the

compliance of the gear that you bought elsewhere. A MPCI card and
antenna is 
not enough to be a certified system. There are other components involved

like Main boards and cases, and testing gear during the QC stage to
verify 
compliance.

But there is nothing wrong with a group of people taking up a collection
to 
help a manufactuer pay for certifying their combination.

The grey area is it is also in the new rules that all the components
(such 
as antenna and cables) don't necessarilly have to be bought from the 
manufacturer, if they are the same products bought elsewhere.  So if a 
manufacturer certified a complete combination, and discloses what
components 
were in it, technically it could be argued that it is that same product
as 
the manufacturers, if the same oem parts were used.  But legally that
won't 
completely fly either, because there is no FCC sticker that was issued
to 
the manufactuer, and there is no one accountable for it.  So
technically, at 
least one major component of the solution would have to be certified
where 
you'd get the sticker from the manufacturer.  So legally we may be able
to 
substitute antenna, but that is not the same thing as saying you are
allowed 
to just build your own radio system from scratch.

5) Enforcement-   The FCC was clear on the issue that the rules are the 
rules, period.  But they also said, when reporting a complaint, it
should be 
defined the details. Complaints are prioritized by severity, and more
severe 
violation will be given higher priority to enforce. The mentons a very
low 
number of complaints we filed. They stated enforcement is a reality, but
it 
requires someone to complain, and disclose facts for the FCC to know 
something is needing investigation.

6) 5.4G violations. They were very concerned that some gear on the
market 
may be able to illegally be configured to use 5.4Ghz without going
through 
the certification process for compliance. They are much more concerned
on 
the compliace of 5.4 gear because the importance NOT TO INTERFERE with
DOD 
applications.  So using uncertified 5.4 gear is on the Radar for 
enforcement, without sympathy.   They did however say its a full green
light 
for manufacturers to apply for certification, already two manufacturers
have 
passed 5.4G certification testing.

So I'm begging StarOS and/or MIkrotik, to go through the 5.4Ghz 
certification testing, so your software can be proven to work and
comply, so 
third party manufactuers will certify your solutions for resale, and we
can 
start using 5.4Ghz.  The FCC did their job, now its time for the 
manufacturers to do theirs.  The same request goes out to all the name
brand 
vendors like Trango, Alvarion, and Whoever else. 5,4Ghz certified gear
is 
the next big market for manufacturers.

7) Otard- Otard will never be extended to include standalone broadcast 
antennas. However, the existing rules do have some provisions for mesh
with 
multiple radios. The primary point is that if a radio's primary roles is

that of a subscriber antenna and meet the physical specifications of a 
subscriber antenna, it does not matter if it also has an AP built-in or
a 
second antenna built in, it is still considered a subscriber antenna and

protected by OTARD. That is good news.

That about covers it for FCC visit. As for the FTC visit, its a little 
harder to put my finger on what we accomplished. The converstation went
all 
over the place. The primary goal was to show them what a wisp was. It
also 
was a very good meeting, its just hard to summarize. Maybe I'll try 
tommorrow. One of the guys gave us a report, that is also on the FTC
website 
for download, that was very informative on Muni broadband.  When I have
the 
business cards in front of me tommorrow, I'll try and find and post
names 
and links. But I think we made some new friends there. The task force
(who 
we met with) seemed very eager to help us.

George or Brett, feel free to jump in with comments, if I got anything
wrong 
or you have something to add.

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

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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



************************************************************************
************
This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals &
computer viruses(190).
************************************************************************
************





 
 
************************************************************************
************
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.
************************************************************************************



--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

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

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

Reply via email to