No, they were building DFS the entire time, people just took it into their hands to use the band illegally before DFS was ready. Even though DFS has been available for some time, people are still getting busted because they aren't paying attention.
I'm a believer in bigger antennas and smaller radios. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Erik Anderson" <erik.ander...@hocking.net> To: wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 9:05:31 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Latest trend for heavy wooded areas Yes, but wind load is dramatically different. Bottom line is there is simply not enough demand for high windload antennas to justify the compliance risk. UBNT was "safe" until they started making some decent money. Then, after massive legal bills, they were forced to implement DFS because their customers were not being compliant. Production line had to be modified, coding had to be done to appease the FCC and their communications lawyers. It was not UBNT's fault, but in the eyes of our beautiful regulators it was. In the 5.x range, higher gain is manufactured due to licensed frequencies being available, and thus the ability to shift liability while increasing demand. As I said, the problem is the regulations, not the manufacturers. But if you disagree, you just might have another business opportunity. I am not trying to argue. I am not happy about the regs/equipment limitations. I use 900 mhz a lot. I would love to take some 4W transceiver amps in the 900 range and throw in 17 dbi antennas (I know of a few installations that have done this). But just because one can get away with it does not mean it is good business practice. The public sector does not seem to worry about compliance. Why not? Perhaps the WISPS should simply start filling out FCC forms reporting violations from the smart meters. Or better yet, start writing press releases about smart meter non compliance with the regulations and getting the releases into the hands of the smart meter activists (start with infowars.com and drudgereport.com) who can flood the FCC with reported violations. That seems like an activity WISPA could handle. If this was done, I suspect the regulations would change which would result in equipment being available. On 8/23/2013 9:26 AM, Mike Hammett wrote: All of the other bands have EIRP limits. You have to worry on The AP side in 2.4 and 5.8. You have to worry on both the AP and CPE in 5.3 and 5.4. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Erik Anderson" <erik.ander...@hocking.net> To: wireless@wispa.org Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 8:15:27 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Latest trend for heavy wooded areas On 8/22/2013 5:23 PM, Mike Hammett wrote: > I do not yet know of any source for dual polarity 900 MHz 90* sectors > that are 18 dB nor any 900 MHz dual polarity CPE antenna that are 25 > dB of gain. Agreed, but again, what would be the point? EIRP of 36 - 25 dBi antenna - 1dB line loss = 11 dBm TPO. Are you really going to turn down the radio to 11 dBm? The manufacturers are not doing it because they know that they are creating giant antennas with massive wind low to permit you to break the regulations and incur an FCC visit. I suspect most WISPs have installations that are not in compliance. In fact, most public sector installations and energy companies are probably non compliant. _______________________________________________ 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 _______________________________________________ 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
