There are plenty of paths around here where you can't get any 6 GHz licenses in 
any meaningful capacity. 




----- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 

----- Original Message -----

From: "Mark Radabaugh" <m...@amplex.net> 
To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> 
Sent: Monday, June 5, 2017 6:04:18 AM 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Looking for opinions on a proposal for PTMP in 6Ghz Part 
101 spectrum 


The proposals protect Part 101 links using a database system. 


It’s curious that you would give up access to potentially >1000Mhz of clean 
mid-band spectrum because you don’t want your competitors using it. Given the 
current limited amount of spectrum available for PTMP use how do you propose to 
serve the demands of your customers without obtaining additional spectrum? 


You said “all licensed PTP links would be at risk”. I don’t believe that is the 
case here - we are only discussing 6Ghz which is largely used (in our industry) 
for long range legacy PTP links. It’s certainly important where it’s used at 
Mike Meluskey pointed out, but looking at the numbers the band shows pretty 
light usage. 


How much of the 6Ghz spectrum are you currently using for PTP links? 


Mark 






On Jun 4, 2017, at 8:45 PM, garrettshan...@vabb.com wrote: 


I think the 6Ghz band need to stay for PtP links only. As for band sharing I 
think that the need for reliable wireless back-haul far outweighs any benefit 
of moving the band completely to part 15. 

Use of this band for PtMP applications should not be permitted and all 
installations should require registration and professional installation. As for 
higher power and larger channels: I do think the band could use some updates. 
But not at the expense of the current links. 

We've seen the 5.1Ghz band fill in with noise almost as soon as certifications 
rolled out. I don't want hundreds of "Xfinity wifi" SSID's in 6ghz as well. 

While I don't think our company alone counts as significant opposition, you can 
count us as "significantly opposed". 


Garrett Shankle 
Senior Field Technician 
Virginia Broadband LLC. 
(540)-829-1700 



-----Original Message----- 
From: mike.l...@gmail.com 
Sent: Sunday, June 4, 2017 7:35pm 
To: "WISPA General List" < wireless@wispa.org > 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Looking for opinions on a proposal for PTMP in 6Ghz Part 
101 spectrum 



+1000 

> On Jun 4, 2017, at 16:23, Seth Mattinen < se...@rollernet.us > wrote: 
> 
>> On 6/2/17 2:12 PM, Mark Radabaugh wrote: 
>> I’m interested in opinions on how important 6Ghz PTP links are to the 
>> membership and for those who use them if there would be significant 
>> opposition to using the spectrum for Point to Multipoint. 
> 
> 
> I think that if the history of behavior with unlicensed is any 
> indication, then all licensed PTP links will be at risk of seeing 
> substantial interference by idiots and would be at high risk of being 
> forced offline. 
> 
> ~Seth 
> _______________________________________________ 
> 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 

_______________________________________________
Wireless mailing list
Wireless@wispa.org
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Reply via email to