John, You're being sarcastic here, right?
I'd be really surprised to hear that any certification ever was voided because a connector became more available.
I'm starting to feel sorry for the poor, old FCC. First off, certain business elements want to eliminate them. Second, certain political interests (controlled by certain business interests) want to control them and determine what rules they make. Third, they regularly get threatened by Congress with reduced budgets. Fourth, their job is to implement the (often vague) laws made by Congress. Fifth, they have to be somewhat vague to try to apply the laws to everyone without pissing off anyone. Sixth, they have to be somewhat specific so their rules don't get challenged in court by the previously mentioned business interests. Seven, their engineers have to be pretty smart to know how wireless really works and what engineering principles to write into regulations. Eight, their lawyers have to be pretty good writers to translate the engineering principles into clearly-written rules and regulations. Nine, they have to craft a website that makes it fairly easy for the "public" to do business with them. Ten, they have to have pretty thick skin to not get distracted and become vindictive when everyone attacks them.
Sheeesh, I never found myself defending the FCC before. Unfortunately, unlicensed does not mean unregulated. Responsible business people (which is what we are) strive to understand the conditions under which the regulatory agency works and strive to interact constructively with the people who work for that agency. I think we've found (and will continue to find) that most of the FCC employees will do what they can to be responsive to our needs if only we will communicate those needs in a clear, responsible, and timely fashion.
But I'm probably "preaching to the choir" here because most WISP-folk already know this stuff and are already playing a constructive role, right?
jack
John Scrivner wrote:
So I guess once a unique connector gets a shelf spot in the local radio shack your radio certification is void and requires a new "unique" connector to be developed followed by a trip back to the certification lab. I just love the FCC sometimes. I guess the FCC could outlaw the sale of certain connectors to the general public. That would be a good approach...NOT!(see the film Borat for proper use of the "pause-NOT" punchline) Scriv Jack Unger wrote:Here's one definition that the FCC has used for "unique connector". ____________ Begin Quote _______________________ A "unique connector" is one that is not of a standard type found in electronic supply stores. _____________ End Quote ______________________________ jack Lonnie Nunweiler wrote:I am still wondering what is meant by "unique" for the connector. I've seen you write that the N connector is NOT allowed. Why is that? LonnieOn 4/26/07, Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Under the normal Part-15 rules, the only devices allowed to have a "nonunique" connector are devices labeled for and sold only to "professionalinstallers". The problem is, there isn't really a good explanation of what a part-15 professional installer is.What I've been told by the FCC is that the intent is that any device whereit's easy to mix and match parts (remember that you could only usespecifically certified antennas before 2005) was to only be sold to a pro installer. Literally, it was illegal for a vendor to sell us an ap withoutalso including the cable and antenna for it.To be a pro installer we're supposed to have been manufacturer trained on a specific piece of gear (I was trained on p-com and wmux gear in the bad ol'wpcs days). The reasoning was that it's possible to use a certifiedcombination of radio, cable, and antenna, and STILL exceed the EIRP limits.So we're supposed to have been trained on the device so we'd not accidentally assemble and configure an illegal version of a legal kit.The new rules specifically say that these rules do NOT apply to a device designed for a professional installer. If you're not sure that your device is for a pro installer, look in the manual. If it's got an n connector on it, it should also say that it's only available to professional installers.That rule has been TOTALLY ignored by everyone. We are, as users of this gear day in and day out, assumed to be professional installers so we don't have to buy devices with only unique connectors or buy only in kits (like aLinksys dsl router etc.).Again, I'd LOVE to see a real mix and match capability where we could use anyone's radio with anyone's amp and antenna. But they clearly aren't yetready to go there.Just to make sure I'm reading this correctly, I've asked for some time with the head of OET (the FCC folks that write these rules). I'll pass alongwhat he says once I'm able to talk to him about it. Hope that helps, Marlon (509) 982-2181 (408) 907-6910 (Vonage) Consulting services42846865 (icq) WISP Operator since 1999![EMAIL PROTECTED] www.odessaoffice.com/wireless www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lonnie Nunweiler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 9:02 AMSubject: Re: [WISPA] Modifications of Parts 2 and 15 of the,Commission'sRules for unlicensed devices and, equipment approval >I saw nothing about an N connector being disallowed. It simply says > that the connector(s) must be unique, and my contention is that an N > connector is just as unique as a U.FL or RP-SMA. Once something > becomes an Industry Standard it sort of loses its uniqueness. > > Since every system must have an antenna and for maintenance purposes> that antenna must be removable. Just try and unsolder an antenna lead> while hanging off a tower. I doubt that is their intention and thus > they would certainly allow a removable antenna. > > I do agree that they are worried about the consumer gear and having > Joe Schmoe hook up a larger antenna to his Dlink, LinkSys or Zcom > consumer router. > > For the ISP market the rules must have a bit more common sense, and I > did see that in the document. I felt it was a very positive step and > one that will help the Industry in general. >(earlier discussion pruned)
-- Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. FCC License # PG-12-25133 Serving the Broadband Wireless Industry Since 1993 Author of the WISP Handbook - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs" True Vendor-Neutral Wireless Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting FCC Part 15 Certification Assistance for Wireless Service Providers Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220 www.ask-wi.com -- WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
