[MLB-WIRELESS] New submissions to the wireless broadband inquiry

[Greg]

Hi EvilB,
I was not aguing in the defense of IDS,
just figuring their motivation for the drivel in the submission;-)
I think we are in agreement here on most points...
Greg NODEEAI
www.turboclub.com/wireless


----- Original Message -----
From: "evilbunny" <evilbunny at sydneywireless.com>
To: "Greg" <turbo at alphalink.com.au>
Cc: <melbwireless at wireless.org.au>
Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 1:01 PM
Subject: Re[2]: [MLB-WIRELESS] New submissions to the wireless broadband
inquiry


> Hello Greg,
>
> that's not a valid argument, the fact of the matter is Unisys were
> flogging off these cards at market value till the warranties run out
> then dumped them for that, some of which ended up in the hands of a
> company in WA, who in turn were flogging them off for about the same
> (I think they got them cheaper then $50/ea as that's what eathos was
> going to get them for)...
>
> In any case this is still a democracy (well they let us think that
> most of the time at least) and the opinion they voiced isn't shared by
> the majority of the submission's I've read, bear in mind the ACA made
> reference to being asked something like this in the future, disturbed
> me a little though as it goes against what the rest of the UN body
> that over sees this, and even the FCC's comments on public spectrum
> space...
>
> The majority, not the minority of submission all state along similar
> lines, ISM spectrum isn't suitable for commercial purposes, more then
> 25m, there are other users in this spectrum that could have the WISPs
> "removed" or anyone else that interferes with them, simply because
> they were here first... and they are licensed, and in the US ham
> operators have had WISPs shutdown...
>
> The only thing I slightly agree with in the entire submission from
> IDS, was their comments on allowing more output, especially in rural
> areas at 5.7Ghz, and basing the allowed output on the density of
> people
>
> --
> Best regards,
>  evilbunny                            mailto:evilbunny at sydneywireless.com
>
> http://www.SydneyWireless.com - Exercise your communications
> freedom to make it do what you never thought possible...
>
> Friday, June 7, 2002, 12:02:23 PM, you wrote:
>
> G> Why do you think IDS have made this submission?
>
> G> Besides my business, how many others are looking at these bulk buys and
not
> G> getting any wireless gear from IDS any longer?
>
> G> Because we cant run a business making no margins (FAT PRICES?!?) just
like
> G> they can't if many sales are not happening because people get wireless
gear
> G> for LESS than even distributor cost. ($55 for a 802.11b PCard? Who
could do
> G> that except mfr?)
>
> G> ( I dont sell much of wireless so its not really effecting my business,
but
> G> I would bet its effecting IDS!)
>
> G> Irespective of motive, I think most thinking policy makers will see
through
> G> their outlandish claims as to antennas and EIRP, licencing (they dont
even
> G> Licence CBers any more and there are lots of them putting out 30w when
the
> G> limit is 5w on UHF 476Mhz  and a 100w when the limit is 12w on 27Mhz)
etc.
> G> Their conradictory references to the public and to the "non conforming
or
> G> law breaking" public eg.:
> G> "Also 2.4 GHz products are typically used by free community
> G> networks or gaming groups who again may not care or know if they exceed
the
> G> 4-watt limit." and then "We recommend that steps be taken to protect
the
> G> resource so it is available
> G> for use by everyone." is unlikely to convince anyone.
>
> G> Its always what side of the fence you are on that makes the way you
think
> G> and act.
>
> G> They are on the "other side" to most here, so lets drop this thred.
>
>
> G> From: "Andy Freeman" <wireless at kawasaki.kz>
> >> So what do we do now?  The way I see it we have a couple of options...
> >>
> >> b.\ We charge a $100 membership fee to all, put it in a big pot and
> >> become the second Orinoco distributor in the Australasia region.  We
> >> undercut the fat prices that IDS are asking and supply the world with
> >> cheap wireless gear.
> >>
> >>
> >> Don't get angry... get even!
> >>
> G> Integrity Data Systems says: "The 2.4 GHz IEEE 802.11 b products have
been
> G> in use for some time now for entry level point-to-point and
> G> point-to-multipoint broadband deployment. The proliferation of brands
now
> G> entering Australia and the use of wireless LAN cards in
> G> personal computers (PCs) and Linux boxes for community gaming is
polluting
> G> the 2.4GHz band as a resource."
>
> G> "Of even more concern is the number of importers and installers of 2.4
GHz
> G> product that have nil radio experience or knowledge. These companies
are
> G> combining the 2.4 GHz products with directional, omni antennas and
> G> amplifiers that in many cases breach the ACA's class license. Many of
these
> G> companies are not even aware of the conditions around the use of
products in
> G> the 2.4 GHz band. Also 2.4 GHz products are typically used by free
community
> G> networks or gaming groups who again may not care or know if they exceed
the
> G> 4-watt limit."
>
> G> "We recommend that steps be taken to protect the resource so it is
available
> G> for use by everyone. Any vendors or importers selling the product in
> G> Australia should undertake an accreditation process, which involves
> G> educating their channel on the class license. All installed links
should be
> G> registered with the ACA by the installer, end user or both and must
supply,
> G> as a minimum, a link budget which clearly shows the product, RF cable,
and
> G> antennas used, as well as the EIRP level for the link. The ACA could
then
> G> issue a certificate of compliance. We also believe that retrospective
steps
> G> be taken to clean up the band by ensuring current links comply with the
> G> class license conditions. After an amnesty or grace period, sites
without a
> G> certificate of compliance could be fined. This should not only remove
the
> G> "cowboy" element of some suppliers and resellers, but allow more second
tier
> G> carriers to look at using the technology, which is still the most
economical
> G> way to distribute Internet services.
> G> This would still allow the technology to be used for gaming purposes,
but
> G> minimise the risk of interference with a second tier carrier who is
> G> deploying a suburb-wide wireless broadband service.
> G> Using the analogy of the spectrum resource as a river, there would be
an
> G> uproar over the lax way we allow some to pollute it. We must protect it
from
> G> the reckless or ignorant behaviour of a few so broadband is
cost-effectively
> G> available for all.
> G> In regard to free community wireless networks, they again should not
only
> G> register their links, but be excluded from using amplifiers. This
should not
> G> be an issue, as community links ares typically point to point and cover
> G> short distances."
>
>
>
>
> G> To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo at wireless.org.au
> G> with "unsubscribe melbwireless" in the body of the message
>


To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo at wireless.org.au
with "unsubscribe melbwireless" in the body of the message