Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 01:16:43 -0600 To: "TAPR Networking Special Interest Group" From: Steve Lampereur Subject: [netsig] Confused Has anyone noticed this? "FCC Queries Wireless 'Net Provider About Interference To Hams" http://www.arrl.org/arrlletter/01/0216/ Basically, Riley Hollingsworth says Darwin Networks' wireless 2.4 GHz nodes from Cisco Inc are causing interference to Amateur TV on 2.4 GHz in the Dallas Texas area. And he says Darwin Networks are required to cease operation of this part 15 device. They say their devices are operating under Part 18 Industrial, Scientific and Medical rules, which would not obligate the company to resolve amateur complaints. But Hollingsworth said it appears that Darwin is not operating Part 18 ISM devices but Part 15 devices that are not covered by the same sort of exception. Now this struck me as odd. I guess I just assumed all the wireless ethernet stuff was classifed as Part 18 & Part 15. I guess not? What they are running is a Part 15 device on a Part 18 ISM band? Now if what I see is true then there are definate advantages to take a Part 15 wireless NIC and embed a callsign ID in a ping or whatever and call it ham radio (Part 97). You now have protection from all the other wireless stuff that is classified as Part 15. Previously I interpereted the current band plan which says 2417-2450 ISM holds primary allocations over us, to not be in out favor for this type of application. I assumed hams would have to be careful not to cause interference to (and we wouldn't be able to claim protection from) all the other wireless activity in the area. Am I reading the artical right? Could we reclasssify our wireless stuff as Part 97, and get some sort of protection from all the other stuff out there?