On 2/9/2014 9:42 AM, Gino Villarini wrote:
The use of compliance test is one of the reasons the FCC is clamping
down on 5 ghz...
UBNT says that they got DFS2 working in 5.5.2, in 2012, so at least some
radios, including the NSM5, are compliant. Aren't these officially
approved yet for the DFS bands?
Gino A. Villarini
g...@aeronetpr.com <mailto:g...@aeronetpr.com>
Aeronet Wireless Broadband Corp.
787.273.4143
*From:*wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org]
*On Behalf Of *Mike Hammett
*Sent:* Saturday, February 08, 2014 6:56 PM
*To:* WISPA General List
*Subject:* Re: [WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700
frequencies?
DFS always comes second due to a longer certification process. It'll
eventually come. Some manufacturers seem to get approved more quickly,
but that could be timing of announcements and not the actual
certification process.
-50 dBm? Where? Where? I do see where your address is and I am
suspect. I am in suburban Chicago and I have at worst -70 noise floor.
It's actually better in downtown Chicago at someone I know's apartment
22 floors up (maybe low-E glass?). Something is very wrong if you have
a -50 dB noise floor.
-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From: *"Art Stephens" <asteph...@ptera.com <mailto:asteph...@ptera.com>>
*To: *wireless@wispa.org <mailto:wireless@wispa.org>
*Sent: *Friday, January 31, 2014 10:29:09 AM
*Subject: *[WISPA] Are we being muscled out of the 5265 - 5700
frequencies?
Recent events make me wonder if the FCC is trying to muscle wisps out
of these frequencies.
Since we are primarily Ubiquiti equipment I can only speak from that
platform.
First the latest firmware update removes compliance test which for
about 40% of our equipment deployed would render them unusable since
5735 - 5840 runs at - 50dBm or higher noise levels in our area,
Second is new product released only supports 5735 - 5840.
Seems like DFS is such a pain that manufacturers do not want to mess
with it.
Case in point the new NanoBeam M series only support 5725-5850 for USA.
Worldwide version which we are not allowed to buy or deploy supports
5170-5875.
Seems the only alternative is to go with licensed P2MP which makes
more money for the FCC and drives the cost of wireless internet up for
both wisps and consumers.
--
Arthur Stephens
Senior Networking Technician
Ptera Inc.
PO Box 135
24001 E Mission Suite 50
Liberty Lake, WA 99019
509-927-7837
ptera.com <http://ptera.com>
facebook.com/PteraInc <http://facebook.com/PteraInc> |
twitter.com/Ptera <http://twitter.com/Ptera>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information,
and is intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally
addressed.
Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views
or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and
are not intended to represent those of the company."
_______________________________________________
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org <mailto:Wireless@wispa.org>
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
_______________________________________________
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
--
Fred R. Goldstein k1io fred "at" interisle.net
Interisle Consulting Group
+1 617 795 2701
_______________________________________________
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
