From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Jun 6 13:42:24 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id NAA27913 for ; Wed, 6 Jun 2001 13:42:23 -0500 (CDT) X-Originating-IP: [169.204.238.46] From: "Steven Scott" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Hello Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 11:37:09 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Jun 2001 18:37:09.0887 (UTC) FILETIME=[B1FBD0F0:01C0EEB7] List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Hi I am a newbie to this list. My name is Steve callsign KD7KDC I am located in Deer Park, WA which is about 20 miles north of Spokane, WA I am a Highschool Sudent Junior this year. Currently I am envolved in Spokane County ARES/RACES group. The reason that I joined this list is to try to get something going in the way of spread spectrum tecnology for the spokane city county emergency communications group on the primary basis and others in secondary means. I am also interested in the Motorola Workstation 520 (MDT). Thats all for now. 73 Steve FCC Amateur Radio Licensee KD7KDC Spokane County Sheriff E816 _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Jun 12 01:40:00 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id BAA10006 for ; Tue, 12 Jun 2001 01:39:55 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 00:38:08 -0600 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Brett Glass Subject: [ss] Seeking Persoft Intersect wireless bridge(s) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010612002930.046b56c0@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk LARIAT is seeking one or more Persoft Intersect wireless bridges -- the original DSSS units that ran on the 900 MHz band using pre-IEEE 802.11 WaveLAN. They're built from Intel OEM 386SX PCs with no hard disk -- the embedded software loads from a floppy -- and have a Persoft Intersect logo on the front. The wireless LAN cards in these units are often marked with the name NCR, since they were developed at Dutch facilities originally owned by NCR before Lucent acquired them. Most of these old units are probably sitting in closets gathering dust, since they're not as fast as 802.11b and operate on a band that's monopolized in many cities by the Metricom Ricochet system. But we're still running some and are looking for spares. If you have one or more -- working or broken with usable parts -- please e-mail. --Brett Glass --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Jun 12 09:13:44 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id JAA21669 for ; Tue, 12 Jun 2001 09:13:39 -0500 (CDT) X-Lotus-FromDomain: GHI From: "Chris Anderson" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Message-ID: Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 09:06:54 -0500 Subject: [ss] Re: Seeking Persoft Intersect wireless bridge(s) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <86256A69.004F2DEA.00@lgrsmtp1.grayhill.com> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk I swear I've seen one of these around but I just looked in the cabnets and all I have are a few Proxim's and an RDC. Same form factor different system. _________________ Chris Anderson - KA9UQO RF Design Engineer Grayhill Inc. Phone: (708) 482-2312 Fax: (708) 354-2820 Brett Glass on 06/12/2001 01:38:08 AM Please respond to "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" cc: (bcc: Chris Anderson/NPD/GHI) Subject: [ss] Seeking Persoft Intersect wireless bridge(s) LARIAT is seeking one or more Persoft Intersect wireless bridges -- the original DSSS units that ran on the 900 MHz band using pre-IEEE 802.11 WaveLAN. They're built from Intel OEM 386SX PCs with no hard disk -- the embedded software loads from a floppy -- and have a Persoft Intersect logo on the front. The wireless LAN cards in these units are often marked with the name NCR, since they were developed at Dutch facilities originally owned by NCR before Lucent acquired them. Most of these old units are probably sitting in closets gathering dust, since they're not as fast as 802.11b and operate on a band that's monopolized in many cities by the Metricom Ricochet system. But we're still running some and are looking for spares. If you have one or more -- working or broken with usable parts -- please e-mail. --Brett Glass --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: chris_anderson@grayhill.com To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Jun 14 12:50:21 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id MAA19030 for ; Thu, 14 Jun 2001 12:50:16 -0500 (CDT) Date: 14 Jun 2001 17:50:16 -0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] how SS works! From: "Brijesh Yadav" Content-ID: Content-type: text/plain Content-Description: Body Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <20010614175016.4356.qmail@mailweb32.rediffmail.com> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Hi, My Self Brijesh, i m from Bombay(India) & intrested in like 2 know how the SS works. how the 2 points can be connected to for internet access using radio ? is it possible to connect more then two sites by using the single centerlised antenna? this r the few question wht i hv in my mind if ne1 knows it so plz give me reply bye Brijesh Yadav _____________________________________________________ Chat with your friends as soon as they come online. Get Rediff Bol at http://bol.rediff.com --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-message-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Jun 16 02:35:02 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id CAA02717 for ; Sat, 16 Jun 2001 02:35:01 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Lyris-Type: unsub-conf-req From: Lyris Reply-To: Lyris To: lyris.ss@tapr.org Subject: Your confirmation is needed (ok 6751) Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 02:54:29 -0500 Your email address 'lyris.ss@tapr.org' has been submitted to be unsubscribed from the 'ss' mailing list. This unsubscribe command requires your confirmation that you want to be unsubscribed. To confirm that you do want to unsubscribe, reply to this message so that the words "ok 6751" appear somewhere on the subject line. Make sure that your reply message is addressed to unsubscribe-confirm@lists.tapr.org You will receive notification that your confirmation has been received, and that you have been unsubscribed. If you do not want to unsubscribe, do nothing. You will be kept on the mailing list. --- Return-Path: Received: from worldses.org ([194.219.139.130]) by lists.tapr.org with SMTP (Lyris Server version 3.0); Sat, 16 Jun 2001 02:53:37 -0500 From: "Mrs. Angeliki Protopappa" To: ss-request Subject: Sender: "Mrs. Angeliki Protopappa" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 10:35:20 +0300 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit # Mail sent to leave-ss-6751t was converted to these commands: unsubscribe ss lyris.ss@tapr.org confirm end # This is the text of the message that triggered the action: Return-Path: Received: from worldses.org ([194.219.139.130]) by lists.tapr.org with SMTP (Lyris Server version 3.0); Sat, 16 Jun 2001 02:53:37 -0500 From: "Mrs. Angeliki Protopappa" To: Subject: WSES/IEEE techn.Co-Sponsored RODLICS, MIV, SSIP, SIM 2001, Sept.1-6, Malta Sender: "Mrs. Angeliki Protopappa" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 10:35:20 +0300 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit We would like to remind that the deadline for paper submission for WSES MIV'01, SSIP'01, SIM'01, RODLICS'01 in Malta (September 1-6, 2001). Technical Co-Sponsored by IEEE RA Society expires very soom (June 30, 2001!) (see below) ****** WSES Intern.Conf. on: MULTIMEDIA, INTERNET, VIDEO TECHNOLOGIES 2001 (MIV 2001), Malta, Sept.1-6, 2001 Technical Co-Sponsored by IEEE RA Society http://www.worldses.org/wses/conferences/malta/miv ****** WSES Intern.Conf. on: SPEECH, SIGNAL AND IMAGE PROCESSING 2001 (SSIP 2001), Malta, Sept.1-6, 2001 Technical Co-Sponsored by IEEE RA Society http://www.worldses.org/wses/conferences/malta/ssip ****** WSES Intern.Conf. on: SIMULATION 2001 (SIM 2001), Malta, Sept.1-6, 2001 Technical Co-Sponsored by IEEE RA Society http://www.worldses.org/wses/conferences/malta/sim ****** WSES Intern.Conf. on: ROBOTICS, DISTANCE LEARNING AND INTELLIGENT COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS 2001 (RODLICS 2001), Malta, Sept.1-6, 2001 Technical Co-Sponsored by IEEE RA Society http://www.worldses.org/wses/conferences/malta/rodlics All the Conferences will be being held in the NEW DOLMEN HOTEL: Conference Center - Casino. (which is Superior 4-Star Resort Hotel) and will offer to the participants Excellent proceedings (with their papers), Excellent luxurious Post-Conference books by WSES Press International Editions with their papers (different edition than the proceedings with different ISBN, hard cover, velvet paper, etc), possibility for journal publication, lectures by distinguished and famous scientists (see the web, IEEE Fellow Members and other important personalities), and of course social and cultural activities of high academical standards! http://www.worldses.org/wses/conferences/malta All the accepted papers will be published in 1) the Proceedings and 2) WSES-Press International Post-Conference Luxurious Editions and maybe 3) In some of collaborating journals after further review TOPICS: See the Web INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE: See the Web FORMAT OF YOUR PAPER: See the Web INSTRUCTIONS FOR PAPER SUBMISSION: See the Web LOCATION: Malta, a Jewel in the Mediterranean. With it's warm summers and mild winters, surrounded by blue sea, Malta is indead a beautiful country. It has a rich history, holding a strategic position in the middle of the Mediterranean Sea. Malta, the beautiful island of the Knights, is famous for its sun, sea, and sand. An ideal vacation spot fascinating, not only for its natural beauty, but also for its archeological treasures. Highlights of Malta (None place in the world have so many highlights in a small geographical area): * Cathedral Church of St.John in Valetta (Capital of Malta) * Magistrates' Palace in Valetta * Knights' Monastery in Valetta * "Beheading of St.John" * Hanging Gardens of Baracca * Knights Museam * Mdina (Old Capital of Malta) Wall * Cathedral Church of St.Paul in Mdina * Gardens of St.Antonio * Catacombs of St.Paul * Craft Village: construction of blowing glass * Craft Village: silver handwork * Cazino of Sliema * Blue (Azure) Cave * Marshaslox Port * Gozo: The Island of Calypso * Gozo: Royal Church "Ta Pinou" * Gozo: Cathedral Chitadel * Gozo: Prehistorical Temples of Gandigia Best Regards Angeliki Protopappa From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sun Jun 24 09:25:46 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id JAA17063 for ; Sun, 24 Jun 2001 09:25:45 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Sender: cfrancis#pop.info.com.ph@141.4.1.10 (Unverified) Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2001 22:15:03 +0800 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Francis See Subject: [ss] Antenna Polarization... In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20010624220216.02bc7050@127.0.0.1> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Hi, I've noticed that most WLAN PC Cards antennas are layout flat in a horizontal manner (I assume this is horizontally polarized antenna). While 2.4 GHz access points having two antennas are normally installed in a vertical polarization layout (even on brochures). Shouldn't the AP antennas be installed in a horizontal format too? Will performance improve if you put one antenna in horizontal and the other vertical to reduce multi-path problems on DSSS? Francis, DU3HF --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sun Jun 24 17:44:22 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id RAA23376 for ; Sun, 24 Jun 2001 17:44:22 -0500 (CDT) Subject: [ss] RE: Antenna Polarization... Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2001 17:45:09 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Thread-Topic: [ss] Antenna Polarization... Thread-Index: AcD8/1SvC1aZ9MdfTBGDJ+F/xA2Dcg== content-class: urn:content-classes:message X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.4417.0 From: "Jason A. Beens" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3ED688DB5D46C04695CFB16A7CBA5F0C02420E@office.sa-office.sensetechnologies.com> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id RAA23376 The antenna polarization can be dependant on the antenna design. There are breeds of antenna that exhibit large amounts of cross polarization, and can operate essentially as a vertical and horizontal element simultaneously. Typically these aren't the most efficient antennas, but they are capable of receiving energy in most directions and orientations. One such antenna is the Planar Inverted-F Antenna (or PIFA). The IEEE antennas and propagation society has a number of articles on this type of element. You might want to check them out. Hope that helps, Jason Beens Director of Research and Development Sense Technologies, L.L.C. jbeens@sensetechnologies.com Phone (210) 690 3500 Fax (210) 690 3877 -----Original Message----- From: bounce-ss-22185@lists.tapr.org [mailto:bounce-ss-22185@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of Francis See Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2001 9:15 AM To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Subject: [ss] Antenna Polarization... Hi, I've noticed that most WLAN PC Cards antennas are layout flat in a horizontal manner (I assume this is horizontally polarized antenna). While 2.4 GHz access points having two antennas are normally installed in a vertical polarization layout (even on brochures). Shouldn't the AP antennas be installed in a horizontal format too? Will performance improve if you put one antenna in horizontal and the other vertical to reduce multi-path problems on DSSS? Francis, DU3HF --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: jbeens@sensetechnologies.com To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Mon Jun 25 17:18:53 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id RAA21190 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2001 17:18:50 -0500 (CDT) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 17:16:48 -0500 Message-Id: X-Sender: kb9mwr@yahoo.com (Unverified) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Steve Lampereur Subject: [ss] Re: Antenna Polarization... Cc: netsig@lists.tapr.org List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <200106252216.f5PMGl131939@faulkner.netnet.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id RAA21190 >Shouldn't the AP antennas be installed in a horizontal format too? As a general rule of thumb: Yes but if your only trying to cover a short distance then it probably won't make a big difference. >Will performance improve if you put one antenna in horizontal and >the other vertical to reduce multi-path problems on DSSS? No. See the excerpt below from our online documentation: (http://wireless.gbppr.org) Signal Polarity The antennas will also have to have the same RF signal polarity.  The polarity of the signal will depend on the direction the actual antenna is positioned.  If it's up/down then the polarity is vertical, if it's left/right then it's horizontal, if it's diagonal (45° usually), then you'll have diagonal polarization.  By not having the same polarity on your network's antennas, you can receive a 20 dB loss of signal strength.  This is an enormous loss, but can also be very useful.  By changing antenna polarization you can help eliminate certain types of radio interference, or allow many antennas in one location.  Horizontal antenna polarization at microwave frequencies will generally provide less multipath and may also provide lower path loss in non line-of-sight situations, but you should always experiment with different polarizations. In addition I recommend reading: VHF/UHF/Microwave Radio Propagation: A Primer for Digital Experimenters http://hydra.carleton.ca/articles/ve3jf-dcc97.html Steve, KB9MWR High Speed Packet Radio Using Part 15 Wireless Ethernet Cards: http://www.qsl.net/kb9mwr/projects/wireless/plan.html --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Mon Jun 25 21:41:33 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id VAA10460 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2001 21:41:32 -0500 (CDT) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 22:41:42 -0400 (EDT) From: Jim Ussailis Subject: [ss] Re: ss digest: June 24, 2001 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" cc: ss digest recipients In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk The only polarization that does anything for multipath is circular. In this case, the antennas must be of opposite polarization on each end of the link. For all odd number of bounces, the signal is cross-polarized to the antenna. Now, that is the theory. The fact is most bounces are oblique, and contain large amounts of cross-polarization. So circular pol does something for odd bounce multipath, but it is not a panacea. If you want to play with CP, use a helix. They are broadband and very forgiving. Look up the design info in "Antennas" by Kraus. (W8JK). He invented the thing. Incidently, almost all antennas are only a pure polarization on biresught axis. Off-axis there is a lot of cross-pol. It is very difficult to make a highly uniform polarized antenna. Jim Ussailis, W1EQO / VE1EQO On Mon, 25 Jun 2001, TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group digest wrote: > TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Digest for Sunday, June 24, 2001. > > 1. Antenna Polarization... > 2. RE: Antenna Polarization... > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Subject: Antenna Polarization... > From: Francis See > Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2001 22:15:03 +0800 > X-Message-Number: 1 > > Hi, > > I've noticed that most WLAN PC Cards antennas are layout flat in a > horizontal manner (I assume this is horizontally polarized antenna). While > 2.4 GHz access points having two antennas are normally installed in a > vertical polarization layout (even on brochures). > > Shouldn't the AP antennas be installed in a horizontal format too? > > Will performance improve if you put one antenna in horizontal and the other > vertical to reduce multi-path problems on DSSS? > > > Francis, DU3HF > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Subject: RE: Antenna Polarization... > From: "Jason A. Beens" > Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2001 17:45:09 -0500 > X-Message-Number: 2 > > The antenna polarization can be dependant on the antenna design. There > are breeds of antenna that exhibit large amounts of cross polarization, > and can operate essentially as a vertical and horizontal element > simultaneously. Typically these aren't the most efficient antennas, but > they are capable of receiving energy in most directions and > orientations. One such antenna is the Planar Inverted-F Antenna (or > PIFA). The IEEE antennas and propagation society has a number of > articles on this type of element. You might want to check them out. =20 > > Hope that helps, > > > Jason Beens > Director of Research and Development > Sense Technologies, L.L.C. > jbeens@sensetechnologies.com > Phone (210) 690 3500 > Fax (210) 690 3877 > > -----Original Message----- > From: bounce-ss-22185@lists.tapr.org > [mailto:bounce-ss-22185@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of Francis See > Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2001 9:15 AM > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] Antenna Polarization... > > Hi, > > I've noticed that most WLAN PC Cards antennas are layout flat in a > horizontal manner (I assume this is horizontally polarized antenna). > While > 2.4 GHz access points having two antennas are normally installed in a > vertical polarization layout (even on brochures). > > Shouldn't the AP antennas be installed in a horizontal format too? > > Will performance improve if you put one antenna in horizontal and the > other > vertical to reduce multi-path problems on DSSS? > > > Francis, DU3HF > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: jbeens@sensetechnologies.com > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > > > > --- > > END OF DIGEST > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: ussailis@shaysnet.com > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Jun 26 14:16:14 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id OAA12472 for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 14:16:12 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Sender: genem/mail.wwc.com@pop3.norton.antivirus (Unverified) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 15:16:53 -0400 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Gene Mitchell Subject: [ss] SS, Ricochet, etc Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010626150335.00a938c0@pop3.norton.antivirus> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk I am new to this sig, or any sig for that matter. I am a ham interested in spread spectrum. I would love to see more hams using it. I am not an engineer so I would have to buy or build a kit. I read that TAPR had a project with SS but there seems to be no up to date info on what's happening with the project. Someone told me the project is dead. Is that true? I hope not! I use Ricochet in my business (902-928mhz, spread spectrum) and find it extremely good as well as fascinating. There are rumors that Ricochet may not stay in business due to lack of funding. If that is the case, there might be some commercial units to play with. I have taken the Ricochet modem home and my home is out of the planned area by 1.5 miles but find I can use it from upstairs and at a window. ( I live on a hill). Anyone else using Ricochet? Gene K3DSM k3dsm@arrl.net --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Jun 26 16:37:51 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id QAA28174 for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 16:37:50 -0500 (CDT) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 16:35:43 -0500 Message-Id: X-Sender: kb9mwr@yahoo.com (Unverified) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Steve Lampereur Subject: [ss] Re: SS, Ricochet, etc Cc: netsig@lists.tapr.org List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <200106262135.f5QLZhK27701@faulkner.netnet.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk >I am new to this sig, or any sig for that matter. I am a ham >interested in spread spectrum. I would love to see more hams >using it. I am not an engineer so I would have to buy or build I would love to see more hams use it as well, as I see it as a potential re-birth for packet radio. I can think of several hams who have adapted other commerical Part 15 radio ethernet devices to amateur use, besides our group here in Green Bay. >a kit. I read that TAPR had a project with SS but there seems >to be no up to date info on what's happening with the project. >Someone told me the project is dead. Is that true? I hope not! Could be dead or in major limbo (again). I noticed TAPR has several projects going, DSP, APRS :(, PIC stuff, ect, and it seems after then make a little progress on one, they switch and focus on a different one. So if it's in limbo again, they are probably working on some other project right now. TAPR's 900 MHz FHSS radio will probably resemble the Ricochet radio in many ways. I found the TAPR FHSS radio plans at: http://tprs.org/publications/qr_arch/Aug97.PDF and part 2: http://tprs.org/publications/qr_arch/Sept97.PDF (The plans call for a 1 watt, 128 Kbps throughput, 900 MHz FHSS unit with an expected 20 mile coverage area) The last know update was late Jan 2001 see: http://www.tapr.org/tapr/html/fhss.013001.html >I use Ricochet in my business (902-928mhz, spread spectrum) >and find it extremely good as well as fascinating. There are >rumors that Ricochet may not stay in business due to lack of >funding. If that is the case, there might be some commercial >units to play with. Let me know if you hear anymore about this. Sounds like it would be neat to play with. I'd be worried about what they would go for and configuring them for ham use. >I have taken the Ricochet modem home and my home is out of >the planned area by 1.5 miles but find I can use it from >upstairs and at a window. (I live on a hill). >Anyone else using Ricochet? >Gene K3DSM k3dsm@arrl.net We don't have any Ricochet coverage over here so the 900 MHz band is fairly quite over here. And where there is Ricochet coverage many hams complain that the 900 MHz band is trashed. For those hams, I suggest that you start using the band, and they will have to leave as Part 15 has no real rights. Steve Lampereur, KB9MWR High Speed Packet Radio Using Part 15 Wireless Ethernet Cards: http://www.qsl.net/kb9mwr/projects/wireless/plan.html --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Jun 26 17:16:23 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id RAA03173 for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 17:16:22 -0500 (CDT) Errors-To: Message-ID: Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 18:12:03 -0400 From: Jeff King Organization: Aero Data Systems, Inc. X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" CC: netsig@lists.tapr.org Subject: [ss] Re: SS, Ricochet, etc References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3B3908B3.2A41DA9B@aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Steve Lampereur wrote: > > TAPR's 900 MHz FHSS radio.. > > The last know update was late Jan 2001 see: > http://www.tapr.org/tapr/html/fhss.013001.html The Texas Packet Radio Society gets updates ahead of TAPR, here is one for May 2001: http://www.tprs.org/publications/qr_arch/MAY01a.PDF And the root page for the reports: http://www.tprs.org/publications/pubs.htm -Jeff --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Jun 26 17:23:35 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id RAA04136 for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 17:23:33 -0500 (CDT) Errors-To: Message-ID: Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 18:22:47 -0400 From: Jeff King Organization: Aero Data Systems, Inc. X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" CC: netsig@lists.tapr.org Subject: [ss] Re: SS, Ricochet, etc References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3B390B37.325316C9@aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Steve Lampereur wrote: > We don't have any Ricochet coverage over here so the 900 MHz > band is fairly quite over here. And where there is Ricochet > coverage many hams complain that the 900 MHz band is trashed. > For those hams, I suggest that you start using the band, and > they will have to leave as Part 15 has no real rights. I don't want to start a juhad here, but in practice, I don't think it is practical. How would you encourage Metricom (other then bankruptcy) to vacate 900mhz in a deployed urban area? Or your neighbors 900mhz phone? Heck, the ARRL and Metricom worked hand in hand trying to give little reason for hams to use off the shelf spread spectrum gear (i.e. automatic power control). It is no suprize it hasn't taken off. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for encouraging spread spectrum use, but I see little advantage to operating under part 97, at least if I'm going to be using off the shelf SS gear, of which I don't have access to the firmware. > Steve Lampereur, KB9MWR > High Speed Packet Radio Using Part 15 Wireless Ethernet Cards: > http://www.qsl.net/kb9mwr/projects/wireless/plan.html BTW, you site is regularly mentioned on the wireless ISP (WISP) list. This is a mailing list for Part 15 experimenters and ISP resellers. Good job. -Jeff --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Jun 26 18:46:01 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id SAA12539 for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 18:45:58 -0500 (CDT) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 18:44:56 -0500 Message-Id: X-Sender: kb9mwr@yahoo.com (Unverified) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Steve Lampereur Subject: [ss] Re: SS, Ricochet, etc List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <200106262344.f5QNiuK22794@faulkner.netnet.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Your right there is little chance of bumping off something like Metricom from 900 MHz. If we would have been using the 900 & 2.4 bands to begin with they probably wouldn't have been allocated for ISM as well, and the ARRL probbably would of put up a stink about the automatic power bologna. Personally I see no "real" difference between opperating part 97 & part 15 on these bands. The only advantage is the ability to run more power if you need it in the first place. Which can come in handy if you have alot of interference issues to overcome (especially for multipoint links) My thoughts are of hams can make further part 15 opperation on these bands difficult as a result of their (somewhat) higher power co-existing network, this is a step in the right direction to ever so slowly reclaiming the band(s). Also I don't think we will ever see a "part 97" wireless ethernet type of card operating in "our portion of the band" (unshared with ISM) unless we start showing interest and start using what's out there on the shared bands. When trying to promote the use of wireless ethernet to hams the words "Part 97 & Amateur Radio" seems to draw more attention and is probably more comforting to some. [Don't confuse me for someone else Jeff.. Like I said I see no "real" difference between part 15 & 97 opperation. I'm still that 22 yr old who has lost most all interest in traditional amateur radio. I really could care less what other hams do.] Your last couple lines confuse me. You make "off the shelf SS gear" sound like a bad thing. What is the difference between "off the shelf SS gear" and ?? TAPR's 900 MHz radio? >I don't want to start a juhad here, but in practice, I don't think it >is practical. How would you encourage Metricom (other then bankruptcy) >to vacate >900mhz in a deployed urban area? Or your neighbors 900mhz phone? Heck, >the ARRL and Metricom worked hand in hand trying to give little reason >for hams to use off the shelf spread spectrum gear (i.e. automatic power >control). >It is no suprize it hasn't taken off. >Don't get me wrong, I'm all for encouraging spread spectrum use, but I >see little advantage to operating under part 97, at least if I'm going >to >be using off the shelf SS gear, of which I don't have access to the >firmware. [Maybe someone should develop a high power ( non-SS)sweeping wideband umm.. "propagation beacon" for these shared bands. :) ] --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Jun 26 19:26:31 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id TAA15336 for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 19:26:25 -0500 (CDT) Errors-To: Message-ID: Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 20:26:18 -0400 From: Jeff King Organization: Aero Data Systems, Inc. X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: SS, Ricochet, etc References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3B39282A.1D0F286C@aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Steve Lampereur wrote: > Personally I see no "real" difference > between opperating part 97 & part 15 on these bands. Freedom of speech, less legal liability, ability to recoup costs and even make a profit are the advantages of Part 15. But your right, other then that there are no real differences. > The only > advantage is the ability to run more power if you need it in the > first place. How can you do that? The limit on both part 97 and part 15 is 1 watt unless you implement automatic power control on the part 97 equipment. This even applies with point to point links. And how do you apply automatic power control to a piece of Part 15 equipment that you don't have access to the firmware source? > Which can come in handy if you have alot of > interference issues to overcome (especially for multipoint links) OK, well in this case, lets look at what we can do with Part 15 vs. Part 97 (without automatic power control). With part 15, if we are doing a 2.4ghz point to point link, our ERP is limited to 36dBm unless we reduce are transmitter power. For every 1db drop of TX power, we are allowed a 3 db increase in antenna gain. So, with our standard 100mw 2.4ghz WLAN card, we have 20dbm of TX power, which puts us 10db under the 1 watt limit. So, and correct me if I am wrong, but that would allow us a antenna with a gain of 30db, which would be one big dish. That would give us a ERP of 50dBm, which is 100 watts. With this same antenna, under part 97, we could run 30dBm into it, giving use a ERP of 60dBm. Only 10 db more then that 100 watt ERP (1000 watt ERP). But you said multipoint, ok, then part 15 has less of a advantage as there is a hard 36dBm erp limit. So, best we can get is 36dBm. With our ham gear, we can run 30dbm out, and couple this with the highest gain omni antenna I can find (the Comets are around 12-14dbi) we end up with, at best, a ERP of 44dBm, which is only 8 db more then the Part 15 solution. That 8 db is a bit too expensive for me. > My thoughts are of hams can make further part 15 opperation on > these bands difficult as a result of their (somewhat) higher power > co-existing network, this is a step in the right direction to > ever so slowly reclaiming the band(s). Think paradigm shift, not reclaiming the ISM bands. The only way they will be "reclaimed", is if non licensed part 15 hackers decide their is a advantage to having a ham license. Someone that is hacking unix, playing with networks, or playing with microwaves, is not that same kind of person your going to find hanging on a 2 meter repeater. Not cut towards them, but we have to face reality. I'm not holding my breath here, but if you want to make a marketing plan, you have to consider your audience.... the people you are selling to. You sell ice cubes to people in the desert, not Eskimos. > When trying to promote the use of wireless ethernet to hams the > words "Part 97 & Amateur Radio" seems to draw more attention and is > probably more comforting to some. Right, they think it is another mode. I went down this path 10 years ago promoting NOS. It is a waste of time to 90% of them. You would have alot better luck going to computer clubs, if your goal is to attract new blood that can make use of the bands. Not being argumentative here, just being blunt with you. > [Don't confuse me for someone else Jeff.. Like I said I see no "real" > difference between part 15 & 97 opperation. I'm still that 22 yr old > who has lost most all interest in traditional amateur radio. I > really could care less what other hams do.] I would *never* confuse you with anyone else. I have the highest respect for you, you can speak your mind, and you go out and do things. I wasn't kidding about the references to your web page on the WISP lists. Here is the list address: isp-wireless@isp-wireless.com > Your last couple lines confuse me. You make "off the shelf SS gear" > sound like a bad thing. What is the difference between "off the shelf > SS gear" and ?? TAPR's 900 MHz radio? One exists, and one doesn't, for one. And the "off the shelf" gear I am referring to was the Part 15 stuff. Certainly not a bad thing, but most (all?) part 15 gear cannot be adapted to the subtleties of Part 97, which requires automatic power control for > 1 watt. I actually think there is a significant commercial market for the concept of the TAPR SS radio. On the WISP lists, we keep having the BreezeCom's, Teletronics, Lucent and Raylink push their 2.4ghz stuff for the CPE (customer premise equipment). Yet, as you know, 900mhz penetrates much better then 2.4ghz, and most rural consumers would be happy to get a 24/7 128-256kbaud line. There really is a problem with high speed internet in rural areas, that in my opinion would be much better addressed by a decent 900mhz FH radio. Now, the only decent 900mhz radio that exists is the FreeWave, and it is to expensive, and in any case, is not tcp/ip friendly. > [Maybe someone should develop a high power ( non-SS)sweeping wideband > umm.. "propagation beacon" for these shared bands. :) ] In all honesty, with the low process gains most WLAN cards exhibit, you would not be much worse off doing it narrow band. 73 Jeff P.S. A few things to say about the Ricochet, but I'll put them in another thread. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Jun 26 19:43:17 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id TAA16296 for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 19:43:13 -0500 (CDT) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 19:41:56 -0500 (CDT) From: John Koster To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: SS, Ricochet, etc In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk On Tue, 26 Jun 2001, Steve Lampereur wrote: > Your right there is little chance of bumping off something like > Metricom from 900 MHz. If we would have been using the 900 & 2.4 > bands to begin with they probably wouldn't have been allocated for > ISM as well, Actually 2.4 has been shared ever since we got the allocation (50 or so years ago?). Hams were secondary to military radar originally. Getting part of it as exclusive (or is the proper term primary?) might be considered a step up. 900 is a recent allocation (relatively speaking) and as far as I can recall always has been a shared. I think we got a chance at it because others weren't using it heavily at the time, but I wasn't paying that much attention at the time (raising teenagers). In the distant past 10GHz was the only allocation where hams had it to themselves. John Koster, W9DDD --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Jun 26 20:04:06 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id UAA19226 for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 20:04:02 -0500 (CDT) Errors-To: Message-ID: Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 21:02:12 -0400 From: Jeff King Organization: Aero Data Systems, Inc. X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" CC: netsig@lists.tapr.org Subject: [ss] Re: SS, Ricochet, etc References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3B393094.43445ABF@aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Steve Lampereur wrote: > >I use Ricochet in my business (902-928mhz, spread spectrum) > >and find it extremely good as well as fascinating. There are > >rumors that Ricochet may not stay in business due to lack of > >funding. If that is the case, there might be some commercial > >units to play with. > > Let me know if you hear anymore about this. > Sounds like it would be neat to play with. I'd be worried > about what they would go for and configuring them for ham use. I suspect not much support from Metricomm, they even don't support the hackers anymore, having pulled support for the STRIP driver. http://www.mobial.com/software/strip.html http://phobos.illtel.denver.co.us/~abelits/metricom/ http://mosquitonet.stanford.edu/software/strip.html I'm not familar with the newer (128K) radios, but the older ones where frequency hoppers. I suspect if we could get to the guts to them, they would be fairly decent. -Jeff --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Jun 26 20:57:19 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id UAA23601 for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 20:57:13 -0500 (CDT) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 20:55:44 -0500 Message-Id: X-Sender: kb9mwr@yahoo.com (Unverified) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Steve Lampereur Subject: [ss] Re: SS, Ricochet, etc List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <200106270155.f5R1tiK16785@faulkner.netnet.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Jeff, First before I forget thanks for the Ricochet info.. & I know about the WISP stuff. Part 97.311(d) : >(d) The transmitter power must not exceed 100 W under any circumstances. > If more than 1 W is used, automatic transmitter control shall limit > output power to that which is required for the communication. This > shall be determined by the use of the ratio, measured at the receiver, > of the received energy per user data bit (Eb) to the sum of the > received power spectral densities of noise (N0) and co-channel > interference (I0). Average transmitter power over 1 W shall be > automatically adjusted to maintain an Eb/(N0+I0) ratio of no more > than 23 dB at the intended receiver. There have never been and ERP limits for amateur radio, that I know of. (Like 1500 watts PEP not ERP) Part 97.311 makes no reference to ERP, PEP is implied by tht words "transmitter power". (instead of radiated power) I could be wrong here, but thats how I see it. So.. Part 97: just under 1 watt PEP (or more with auto pwr ctrl) + your max antenna gain verses: Part 15's (which ever is greater:) 1 watt PEP / 4 watt EIRP limit (I don't have calculator handy so I'm not goig to dive into calculating the possible ERP for Part 97) >How can you do that? The limit on both part 97 and part 15 is 1 watt >unless you implement automatic power control on the part 97 equipment. >This even applies with point to point links. And how do you apply >automatic power control to a piece of Part 15 equipment that you don't >have access to the firmware source? True it would be hard but can be done with hardware in the amplifer as I beleive HyperAmp and other do it.. >One exists, and one doesn't, for one. And the "off the shelf" gear I am >referring to was the Part 15 stuff. Certainly not a bad thing, but most >(all?) part 15 gear cannot be adapted to the subtleties of Part 97, >which >requires automatic power control for > 1 watt. The only stuff that can't be easily adapted for ham use is 2.4 GHz, FHSS stuff because the band plan dosen't match up. And automatic power control is only an issue for 1 watt or more PEP. In which case you need commerical amps likes I said before. >Yet, as you know, 900mhz penetrates much better then 2.4ghz, and >most rural consumers would be happy to get a 24/7 128-256kbaud >line. There really is a problem with high speed internet in rural areas, >that in my opinion would be much better addressed by a decent 900mhz >FH radio. Now, the only decent 900mhz radio that exists is the >FreeWave, and it is to expensive, and in any case, is not tcp/ip >friendly. True, thats why I asked about an estimated cost for TAPR's 900 MHz radio.. 900 MHz FHSS would be nice and I'm all for it. As for trying to promote the use of wireless ethernet to hams. I realize for the most part it's a waste of time. Most hams are stubborn, and resist change. My goal is not really to attract new blood, but to try to advance our present technology. If that ever happens I think new blood will come forth by itself. New modes take years to catch on. (ex: SSB vs. AM) I know there are few out there probably lurking this list (waiting for the TAPR radio to come out), who will (in the mean time) try adapting part 15 gear. Those few hams are the audience I seek not the old moldy guys on HF or the guys on 2 meters who can't put on a PL259. If it's all the same to you I will keep on trying till I'm sick of it and leave the hobby as there is nothing left for me. I urge anyone interested in adapting part 15 gear for part 97 to check out the link below for legal implementation: High Speed Amateur Packet Radfio Using Part 15 Wireless Ethernet Cards: http://www.qsl.net/kb9mwr/projects/wireless/plan.html --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Jun 26 21:50:04 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id VAA28033 for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 21:49:58 -0500 (CDT) Errors-To: Message-ID: Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 22:50:02 -0400 From: Jeff King Organization: Aero Data Systems, Inc. X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: SS, Ricochet, etc References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3B3949DA.B9C0C137@aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Steve Lampereur wrote: > Part 97: > just under 1 watt PEP (or more with auto pwr ctrl) + your max antenna > gain > verses: > Part 15's > (which ever is greater:) 1 watt PEP / 4 watt EIRP limit Yes, that is true for multi-point on 2.4ghz part 15. But for point to point you can go much higher then a 4 watt EIRP (36dB). The rule is for every 1dB you reduce TX power below 30dBm (at the antenna jack) you can increase antenna gain by 3dB. A real common setup is a 250mw pole top amp (about +24dBm) coupled with a 24dBi gain Conifer. This gives you over 60 watts EIRP with not to expensive of a setup. So, if you are doing a point to point link, without automatic power control, I just was stating there is no big technical advantage to part 97, and it was my personal feelings the other negatives outweighed what little technical ones remained. With 60 watts EIRP, you can do alot. Also, lets not forget this is not a CB vs. Ham radio argument. Whatever way you go, your still going to be playing radio, and I doubt if you will be doing random CQ's anytime soon. Each link will be well engineered ahead of time, and the service it is operated under is secondary to the results. And this is the key, and the whole crux of my "mode" argument. Someone who wants to operate a "mode" likely is not willing to make the investment in time and money to be successful, or have the staying power. On the other hand, a person with a goal (like a local highspeed wireless lan) will have the focus and staying power to succeed. > As for trying to promote the use of wireless ethernet to hams. I > realize for the most part it's a waste of time. I hope I wasn't saying not to do it.... I just was suggesting to broaden your horizons. One of the most interesting amateur radio/Spread Spectrum demos I ever gave was at a Linux meeting. I was presenting the TAPR STA/Freewave deal at the club, and quite few were going to buy in. One of the guys even wrote up a whole networking plan. > Most hams are stubborn, and resist change. That describes 99% of the human race ;-) > My goal is not really to attract new > blood, but to try to advance our present technology. I know. But starting from ground zero, all things being equal, if your going to be a evangelist, you need to chose a receptive audience that can recognize a need. Selling bibles in Soviet Russia likely wouldn't have been a good business plan. > If that ever > happens I think new blood will come forth by itself. It may already be... the 802.11b open networks we are hearing about in San Francisco and New York may be the start here. In particular with mobile IP encapsulation. And of course the recognition I mentioned you where getting on the WISP lists. > Those few hams > are the audience I seek not the old moldy guys on HF or the guys on 2 > meters who can't put on a PL259. If it's all the same to you I will > keep on trying till I'm sick of it and leave the hobby as there is > nothing left for me. Ha ha ha.... that reminds me of the time I was banned from a local clubs field day for some of my opinions I had expressed, but I digress ;-) Seriously though, you have ham radio and then you have amateur radio. You don't have to participate in ham radio to be a amateur radio operator. The FCC allows you to experiment with these frequencies by granting you a license. It is even written in the rules as one purpose of amateur radio. So don't give up. Like I said before, what you are doing is making a impact, maybe not in ham radio, but most certainly with radio experimenters. 73 Jeff > I urge anyone interested in adapting part 15 gear for part 97 to > check out the link below for legal implementation: > > High Speed Amateur Packet Radfio Using Part 15 Wireless Ethernet Cards: > http://www.qsl.net/kb9mwr/projects/wireless/plan.html --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Jun 27 09:48:31 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id JAA13421 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 09:48:31 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Paul McInnish" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: SS, Ricochet, etc Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 10:42:31 -0400 Organization: Cirronet, Inc. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: <008201c0ff17$6581a5e0$6b00a8c0@PMcInnish> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk And will probably loose some of our "exclusive" rights unless we use it! Best regards, Paul McInnish - K4BET Manager, Business Development Cirronet, Inc. (formerly Digital Wireless) 5375 Oakbrook Parkway Norcross, GA 30093, USA Direct Phone: 678.684.2011 Fax: 678.684.2001 Cell Phone: 678.429.2124 Web site: http://www.cirronet.com The information transmitted herein is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please notify the sender and delete the material from all computers. Thank You! ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Koster" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 8:41 PM Subject: [ss] Re: SS, Ricochet, etc : : On Tue, 26 Jun 2001, Steve Lampereur wrote: : : > Your right there is little chance of bumping off something like : > Metricom from 900 MHz. If we would have been using the 900 & 2.4 : > bands to begin with they probably wouldn't have been allocated for : > ISM as well, : : Actually 2.4 has been shared ever since we got the allocation (50 or so : years ago?). Hams were secondary to military radar originally. Getting : part of it as exclusive (or is the proper term primary?) might be : considered a step up. 900 is a recent allocation (relatively speaking) : and as far as I can recall always has been a shared. I think we got a : chance at it because others weren't using it heavily at the time, but I : wasn't paying that much attention at the time (raising teenagers). : : In the distant past 10GHz was the only allocation where hams had it to : themselves. : : : John Koster, W9DDD : : : : : --- : You are currently subscribed to ss as: k4bet@digital-wireless.com : To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org : --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Jun 27 10:01:50 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id KAA15034 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 10:01:50 -0500 (CDT) X-Lotus-FromDomain: GHI From: "Chris Anderson" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Message-ID: Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 09:44:11 -0500 Subject: [ss] SS,Amature Radio Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <86256A78.0051DA82.00@lgrsmtp1.grayhill.com> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk I'd like to add my voice to the Jeffs's there, don't give up. I haven't made a contact for years but as I develop SS radios for a living I still hold out hope AR can offer innovation in new areas. BTW, a lot of the 2.4GHz radios will in fact tune down to the non part 15 2.390-2.4 segment of the Amature allocation. The WLAN cards should be easy to mess with using the linux driver. Standalone radios like ours would be harder but since I built it I know it'll tune down there. 8) OH and "Part 97: just under 1 watt PEP (or more with auto pwr ctrl) + your max antenna gain verses: Part 15's (which ever is greater:) 1 watt PEP / 4 watt EIRP limit" Well actually for part 15 it's RMS power. The "peak power" FCC speaks of in 15.247 is refering to when the radio is transmitting, as opposed to averaging the power over time and presumably over multi-bursts. I had this particular tidbit bite me so I had to learn it well. The 4W EIRP limit of course is explicit. Also keep in mind that for part 15's the 1 watt can be specified any wya you like. I could for instance see a radio with 100 feet of coax perm attached or with a 15.203 compliant connector and have the 1W measured at the end of the coax. This is allowed though no-body does it that I know of. Chris Anderson KA9UQO --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Jun 27 10:21:43 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id KAA16580 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 10:21:38 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Sender: kbanke@mage.qualcomm.com Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 08:11:20 -0700 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Kerry Banke Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <4.1.20010627080212.00b60980@mage.qualcomm.com> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk I've been following the recent email on the reflector & woud like to consider taking a pair of cheap 2.4 GHz 802.11 SS radios and translate them to the 10 GHz Amateur band. What units are low cost and will provide an external antenna jack that I can use to connect to a transverter? Frequency doesn't matter as I can make the transverter match anything I want. I've seen the Syncbyair PCMCIA 2.4 GHz units on Ebay but don't know if thay have external antenna connections available or If they present any other special problems. Any input on this would be appreciated. At 09:44 AM 6/27/01 -0500, Chris Anderson wrote: >I'd like to add my voice to the Jeffs's there, don't give up. I haven't made a >contact for years but as I develop SS radios for a living I still hold out hope --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Jun 27 10:34:56 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id KAA17160 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 10:34:56 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Paul McInnish" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 11:21:29 -0400 Organization: Cirronet, Inc. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: <010101c0ff1c$d6bdbd20$6b00a8c0@PMcInnish> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk I agree with Chris... Dog gone it, our radios will not tune down (actually they will, but firmware controlled and we are not going to let anyone have the code to modify the radio firmware). However, seeing as how ours are in the ISM band, you can use them legally! We have ALL the FCC, ETSI, Industry Canada & CE certifications! Best regards, Paul McInnish - K4BET Manager, Business Development Cirronet, Inc. (formerly Digital Wireless) 5375 Oakbrook Parkway Norcross, GA 30093, USA Direct Phone: 678.684.2011 Fax: 678.684.2001 Cell Phone: 678.429.2124 Web site: http://www.cirronet.com The information transmitted herein is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please notify the sender and delete the material from all computers. Thank You! The attached file(s) are in Adobe Acrobat .pdf format; if you do not have the Adobe Acrobat reader or desire the latest version - V 5.0, go to this web site for a free download: http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readstep2.html ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Anderson" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 10:44 AM Subject: [ss] SS,Amature Radio : I'd like to add my voice to the Jeffs's there, don't give up. I haven't made a : contact for years but as I develop SS radios for a living I still hold out hope : AR can offer innovation in new areas. : : BTW, a lot of the 2.4GHz radios will in fact tune down to the non part 15 : 2.390-2.4 segment of the Amature allocation. The WLAN cards should be easy to : mess with using the linux driver. Standalone radios like ours would be harder : but since I built it I know it'll tune down there. 8) : : OH and : : "Part 97: : just under 1 watt PEP (or more with auto pwr ctrl) + your max antenna : gain : : verses: : : Part 15's : (which ever is greater:) 1 watt PEP / 4 watt EIRP limit" : : Well actually for part 15 it's RMS power. The "peak power" FCC speaks of in : 15.247 is refering to when the radio is transmitting, as opposed to averaging : the power over time and presumably over multi-bursts. I had this particular : tidbit bite me so I had to learn it well. The 4W EIRP limit of course is : explicit. Also keep in mind that for part 15's the 1 watt can be specified any : wya you like. I could for instance see a radio with 100 feet of coax perm : attached or with a 15.203 compliant connector and have the 1W measured at the : end of the coax. This is allowed though no-body does it that I know of. : : Chris Anderson : KA9UQO : : : : --- : You are currently subscribed to ss as: k4bet@digital-wireless.com : To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org : --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Jun 27 11:07:21 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id LAA19379 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 11:07:21 -0500 (CDT) X-Lotus-FromDomain: GHI From: "Chris Anderson" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Message-ID: Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 10:54:02 -0500 Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <86256A78.00584089.00@lgrsmtp1.grayhill.com> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk I haven't been paying much attention to the PCMCIA cards raelly as they're all pretty much one of the Prism chipsets. I have some generics that have reverse MMCX connectors on them but I haven't done much with them. If I were you I'd pick up one of the 802.11 Breezecom radios and rip it apart. They usually have a conn inside for the antennas. If I were me of course I'd just use our radio as it's got a reverse TNC. I don't expect your looking for a router though. 10GHz eh? I've been bulding this N6GN microwave data link project now for about 4 years 8) I just picked up some 24GHz MA/COM Gunns to try. I have a pair of 10GHz as well but I never quote seem to get time to mess with it. Kerry Banke on 06/27/2001 10:11:20 AM Please respond to "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" cc: (bcc: Chris Anderson/NPD/GHI) Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio I've been following the recent email on the reflector & woud like to consider taking a pair of cheap 2.4 GHz 802.11 SS radios and translate them to the 10 GHz Amateur band. What units are low cost and will provide an external antenna jack that I can use to connect to a transverter? Frequency doesn't matter as I can make the transverter match anything I want. I've seen the Syncbyair PCMCIA 2.4 GHz units on Ebay but don't know if thay have external antenna connections available or If they present any other special problems. Any input on this would be appreciated. At 09:44 AM 6/27/01 -0500, Chris Anderson wrote: >I'd like to add my voice to the Jeffs's there, don't give up. I haven't made a >contact for years but as I develop SS radios for a living I still hold out hope --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: chris_anderson@grayhill.com To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Jun 27 11:38:55 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id LAA21286 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 11:38:54 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Sender: kbanke@mage.qualcomm.com Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 09:34:20 -0700 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Kerry Banke Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <4.1.20010627092018.02e26290@mage.qualcomm.com> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Chris - Thanks for thereply - The 10 Ghz portion of such a project is my strong suite as I have been hosting the San Diego Microwave Group for over 14 years now & maintain a pretty decent home lab for working up through 12 Ghz. I have access to lot's of Qualcomm scrap for which I have developed conversion procedures to produce synthesized 10 GHz transverters with 1 dB noise figure and 1W output. These units of course solve all of the frequency drift problems as well as are much higher performance all around than the GUNN units. The bandwidth of the transverters can be just about anything we'd possibly need (100 MHz+). If you'd be interested in getting together on making a 10 Ghz wideband link, I'd be interested in working with you. If you already have a pair of 802.11 radios that you'd like to put on 10 GHz, I'll be happy to make up a pair of 10 Ghz transverters to match. Is the 802.11 simplex or full duplex? I haven't tried configuring one of the 10 GHz transverters for full duplex but don't see why that shouldn't be possible. I've got some committments through the Summer for some Ham microwave activities but could work on such a project this fall. - Kerry N6IZW At 10:54 AM 6/27/01 -0500, you wrote: >I haven't been paying much attention to the PCMCIA cards raelly as they're all >pretty much one of the Prism chipsets. I have some generics that have reverse >MMCX connectors on them but I haven't done much with them. If I were you I'd >pick up one of the 802.11 Breezecom radios and rip it apart. They usually >have a >conn inside for the antennas. If I were me of course I'd just use our radio as >it's got a reverse TNC. I don't expect your looking for a router though. > > >10GHz eh? I've been bulding this N6GN microwave data link project now for about >4 years 8) I just picked up some 24GHz MA/COM Gunns to try. I have a pair of >10GHz as well but I never quote seem to get time to mess with it. > > > > > > > > > >Kerry Banke on 06/27/2001 10:11:20 AM > >Please respond to "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" > > > cc: (bcc: Chris Anderson/NPD/GHI) > > > > Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio > > > > > > > > > >I've been following the recent email on the reflector & woud like to >consider taking a pair of cheap 2.4 GHz 802.11 SS radios and translate >them to the 10 GHz Amateur band. What units are low cost and will provide >an external antenna jack that I can use to connect to a transverter? >Frequency doesn't matter as I can make the transverter match anything I >want. I've seen the Syncbyair PCMCIA 2.4 GHz units on Ebay but don't know >if thay have external antenna connections available or If they present any >other special problems. Any input on this would be appreciated. > >At 09:44 AM 6/27/01 -0500, Chris Anderson wrote: >>I'd like to add my voice to the Jeffs's there, don't give up. I haven't made a >>contact for years but as I develop SS radios for a living I still hold out >hope > > >--- >You are currently subscribed to ss as: chris_anderson@grayhill.com >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > > > > >--- >You are currently subscribed to ss as: KBANKE@QUALCOMM.COM >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Jun 27 15:01:50 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id PAA13343 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 15:01:36 -0500 (CDT) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 14:59:55 -0500 (CDT) From: John Koster To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: SS, Ricochet, etc In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk You can probably count on it. Use it or lose it. John Koster, W9DDD On Wed, 27 Jun 2001, Paul McInnish wrote: > And will probably loose some of our "exclusive" rights unless we use it! > > Best regards, > > Paul McInnish - K4BET > Manager, Business Development > Cirronet, Inc. (formerly Digital Wireless) > 5375 Oakbrook Parkway > Norcross, GA 30093, USA > > Direct Phone: 678.684.2011 > Fax: 678.684.2001 > Cell Phone: 678.429.2124 > > Web site: http://www.cirronet.com > > The information transmitted herein is intended only for the person or entity > to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged > material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or > taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or > entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received > this in error, please notify the sender and delete the material from all > computers. Thank You! > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John Koster" > To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" > Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 8:41 PM > Subject: [ss] Re: SS, Ricochet, etc > > > : > : On Tue, 26 Jun 2001, Steve Lampereur wrote: > : > : > Your right there is little chance of bumping off something like > : > Metricom from 900 MHz. If we would have been using the 900 & 2.4 > : > bands to begin with they probably wouldn't have been allocated for > : > ISM as well, > : > : Actually 2.4 has been shared ever since we got the allocation (50 or so > : years ago?). Hams were secondary to military radar originally. Getting > : part of it as exclusive (or is the proper term primary?) might be > : considered a step up. 900 is a recent allocation (relatively speaking) > : and as far as I can recall always has been a shared. I think we got a > : chance at it because others weren't using it heavily at the time, but I > : wasn't paying that much attention at the time (raising teenagers). > : > : In the distant past 10GHz was the only allocation where hams had it to > : themselves. > : > : > : John Koster, W9DDD > : > : > : > : > : --- > : You are currently subscribed to ss as: k4bet@digital-wireless.com > : To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > : > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: W9DDD@TAPR.ORG > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Jun 27 15:32:19 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id PAA17021 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 15:32:17 -0500 (CDT) Errors-To: Message-ID: Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 16:29:43 -0400 From: Jeff King Organization: Aero Data Systems, Inc. X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3B3A4237.43794915@aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Paul McInnish wrote: > Dog gone it, our radios will not tune down (actually they will, but firmware > controlled and we are not going to let anyone have the code to modify the > radio firmware). As you well shouldn't, being that is how you make your money. However, how about walking over to your software group and asking them how hard it would be to do this? Might be a nice contribution Cirronet can make to amateur radio. One way to sell this (trivial?) modification to management would be to explain to them it would give them a pool of RF literate beta testers that would actually purchase the equipment. > However, seeing as how ours are in the ISM band, you can > use them legally! We have ALL the FCC, ETSI, Industry Canada & CE > certifications! Yes, under Part 15 but not Part 97? I think your units are frequency hoppers, and they may visit the non amateur part of the ISM in their stock configuration. Changing gears... Say, have you given any thought to my idea of making a 900mhz WISP version? I really like Cirronet's vision with regards to a CPE unit for the WISP market. As far as I am concerned, you are the only company that is truly making a WISP product and not a warmed over WLAN product. A 900mhz hopper, would making deployment in truly rural areas much easier. Give it some thought, I think your old company already had a 900mhz hopper although I'm not sure if it was in the ISDN speed class (128K-256K). Regards, Jeff wb8wka --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Jun 27 16:24:40 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id QAA21164 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 16:24:30 -0500 (CDT) X-Lotus-FromDomain: GHI From: "Chris Anderson" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Message-ID: Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 16:17:03 -0500 Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <86256A78.0075D470.00@lgrsmtp1.grayhill.com> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk I'm afraid I'm locked up with work. I've got 3 projects already so I never have time to do anything outside work. As for our 2.4Ghz radio, it's a 2mbps QPSK radio. It's not actually 802.11 as 802.11 places some restrictions on packet turnaround that limit range while our product is designed for 5+ mile links. I was pondering putting a PLL on the Gunns at one time just fer grins but I never got aroud to it. Kerry Banke on 06/27/2001 11:34:20 AM Please respond to "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" cc: (bcc: Chris Anderson/NPD/GHI) Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio Chris - Thanks for thereply - The 10 Ghz portion of such a project is my strong suite as I have been hosting the San Diego Microwave Group for over 14 years now & maintain a pretty decent home lab for working up through 12 Ghz. I have access to lot's of Qualcomm scrap for which I have developed conversion procedures to produce synthesized 10 GHz transverters with 1 dB noise figure and 1W output. These units of course solve all of the frequency drift problems as well as are much higher performance all around than the GUNN units. The bandwidth of the transverters can be just about anything we'd possibly need (100 MHz+). If you'd be interested in getting together on making a 10 Ghz wideband link, I'd be interested in working with you. If you already have a pair of 802.11 radios that you'd like to put on 10 GHz, I'll be happy to make up a pair of 10 Ghz transverters to match. Is the 802.11 simplex or full duplex? I haven't tried configuring one of the 10 GHz transverters for full duplex but don't see why that shouldn't be possible. I've got some committments through the Summer for some Ham microwave activities but could work on such a project this fall. - Kerry N6IZW At 10:54 AM 6/27/01 -0500, you wrote: >I haven't been paying much attention to the PCMCIA cards raelly as they're all >pretty much one of the Prism chipsets. I have some generics that have reverse >MMCX connectors on them but I haven't done much with them. If I were you I'd >pick up one of the 802.11 Breezecom radios and rip it apart. They usually >have a >conn inside for the antennas. If I were me of course I'd just use our radio as >it's got a reverse TNC. I don't expect your looking for a router though. > > >10GHz eh? I've been bulding this N6GN microwave data link project now for about >4 years 8) I just picked up some 24GHz MA/COM Gunns to try. I have a pair of >10GHz as well but I never quote seem to get time to mess with it. > > > > > > > > > >Kerry Banke on 06/27/2001 10:11:20 AM > >Please respond to "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" > > > cc: (bcc: Chris Anderson/NPD/GHI) > > > > Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio > > > > > > > > > >I've been following the recent email on the reflector & woud like to >consider taking a pair of cheap 2.4 GHz 802.11 SS radios and translate >them to the 10 GHz Amateur band. What units are low cost and will provide >an external antenna jack that I can use to connect to a transverter? >Frequency doesn't matter as I can make the transverter match anything I >want. I've seen the Syncbyair PCMCIA 2.4 GHz units on Ebay but don't know >if thay have external antenna connections available or If they present any >other special problems. Any input on this would be appreciated. > >At 09:44 AM 6/27/01 -0500, Chris Anderson wrote: >>I'd like to add my voice to the Jeffs's there, don't give up. I haven't made a >>contact for years but as I develop SS radios for a living I still hold out >hope > > >--- >You are currently subscribed to ss as: chris_anderson@grayhill.com >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > > > > >--- >You are currently subscribed to ss as: KBANKE@QUALCOMM.COM >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: chris_anderson@grayhill.com To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Jun 27 16:43:16 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id QAA22570 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 16:43:07 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Paul McInnish" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 17:42:57 -0400 Organization: Cirronet, Inc. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: <00a401c0ff52$211688e0$6b00a8c0@PMcInnish> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Jeff... tnx for the input... 1st.... our 'code' is very complex and with the demands of normal day to day activities and the level of business activity we have and priorities what they are... internal development and customer needs are addressed first. Thus, this code mod would be forever being changed. We are busier than one armed paper hangers in a paper hanging contest. 2nd.... Our chief engineer tells me that would potentially put us into violation of the ETSI & CE requirements and that will never happen as that is our bread & butter! As our firmware now exists... any parameter that needs changing can be done with a configuration program we provide to the customer (our radio's have hundreds of 'changeable' parameters) and if a parameter exists that can be changed to cause the radio to operate beyond the ETSI & CE requirements, then the certifications are null and void. So........ 3rd.... We had a 900 MHz ISM product line and discontinued it... lack of sales 'cause we were limited only to USA, Canada, Mexico & Australia in the 900 MHz ISM band. The 2.4 GHz band allows us to sell world wide and in fact, we do! Almost half of our sales are international! (Yep, I love it when we can contribute to the reduction of the trade deficit - yep built in good ol USA - Atlanta). Also, the 900 MHz ISM band restricts the number of hopping channels we can use... and before someone asks... we have NO desire to do Direct Sequence radios... can't do the neat digital things with DS we do with our "hoppers". Yep, the old 900 MHz product had a OTA data rate of 230kbps (115kbps full - duplex... both directions, simultaneously). Our current 2.4 GHz product has an OTA data rate of 460kbps (230kbps, full duplex, both directions) and will be announcing a new 1.2mbps radio in next few months... past alpha stage and in full (pilot production) beta testing now. 4th.... Our fastest growing segment of our business is the WISP business! We only sell to (financially sound) ISP's & Telco's. But our OEM, Commercial & Industrial segment of our business is still 65% of our total business and growing like a house fire (admittedly, the WISP side of our business also growing like gang busters... maybe a little faster than the OEM side!). Best regards, Paul McInnish - K4BET Manager, Business Development Cirronet, Inc. (formerly Digital Wireless) 5375 Oakbrook Parkway Norcross, GA 30093, USA Direct Phone: 678.684.2011 Fax: 678.684.2001 Cell Phone: 678.429.2124 Web site: http://www.cirronet.com The information transmitted herein is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please notify the sender and delete the material from all computers. Thank You! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff King" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 4:29 PM Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio : : : Paul McInnish wrote: : : : > Dog gone it, our radios will not tune down (actually they will, but firmware : > controlled and we are not going to let anyone have the code to modify the : > radio firmware). : : As you well shouldn't, being that is how you make your money. However, how about : walking over to your software group and asking them how hard it would be to do : this? Might be a nice contribution Cirronet can make to amateur radio. One way : to sell this (trivial?) modification to management would be to explain to them it : would give them a pool of RF literate beta testers that would actually purchase : the equipment. : : > However, seeing as how ours are in the ISM band, you can : > use them legally! We have ALL the FCC, ETSI, Industry Canada & CE : > certifications! : : Yes, under Part 15 but not Part 97? I think your units are frequency hoppers, : and they may visit the non amateur part of the ISM in their stock configuration. : : Changing gears... : : Say, have you given any thought to my idea of making a 900mhz WISP version? I really : like Cirronet's vision with regards to a CPE unit for the WISP market. As far : as I am concerned, you are the only company that is truly making a WISP product : and not a warmed over WLAN product. A 900mhz hopper, would making deployment in : truly rural areas much easier. Give it some thought, I think your old company : already had a 900mhz hopper although I'm not sure if it was in the ISDN speed : class (128K-256K). : : Regards, : : Jeff wb8wka : : --- : You are currently subscribed to ss as: k4bet@digital-wireless.com : To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org : --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Jun 27 17:32:52 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id RAA26028 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 17:32:47 -0500 (CDT) Errors-To: Message-ID: Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 18:32:28 -0400 From: Jeff King Organization: Aero Data Systems, Inc. X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3B3A5EFC.9A6B1BB9@aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Paul McInnish wrote: (on suggesting cirronet support amateur radio use of their product) > 4th.... Our fastest growing segment of our business is the WISP business! > We only sell to (financially sound) ISP's & Telco's. OK, sorry, didn't think I was out of line asking as this is a amateur radio list and you have been posting promoting your companies products here. -Jeff >Paul McInnish - K4BET >Manager, Business Development >Cirronet, Inc. (formerly Digital Wireless) >5375 Oakbrook Parkway >Norcross, GA 30093, USA > >Direct Phone: 678.684.2011 >Fax: 678.684.2001 >Cell Phone: 678.429.2124 > >Web site: http://www.cirronet.com --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Jun 27 18:23:38 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id SAA29832 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2001 18:23:32 -0500 (CDT) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 18:21:55 -0500 Message-Id: X-Sender: kb9mwr@yahoo.com (Unverified) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Steve Lampereur Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <200106272321.f5RNLtd18310@faulkner.netnet.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Yes it would be nice to find more companies (like Proxim) that will supply hams with 2.4 GHz, FHSS units that hop within the amateur overlap (2400-2450 MHz). (Personally I'd like to be able to do it myself.) If your company will do this let me know. As we all should know: FHSS on 2.4 is that it is spread over the entire 2400-2483.5 MHz ISM band. The amateur overlap stops at 2450 MHz. DSSS systems can be user set for 1 of 11 channels, the first 6 land in the overlapping section. (on all other bands 900 & 5.7 this isn't an issue as there is full overlap) Some manufactures like Proxim will sell amateur's FHSS gear programed with the Australian ISM band plan 2400-2445 MHz. Most cards are factory *programmed* for the intented country to where they will be sold. Theoretically it's possible to change your card country code, through software and probably many other things, like hopping times, (also disable hopping) (http://www.qsl.net/kb9mwr/projects/wireless/dssfreq.txt) As for transverting it. We have toyed with the idea of converting it to the 1296 ham band, it should work if everything can switch fast enough. Unfortunatly the transverters that exist are very pricy and low power. We are still working on a homebrew transverter for this purpose. As for the Part 97 vs Part 15 radiated power issue here is how I interpret it: (assumes no coax loses) (Just under a 1 Watt to avoid having to use automatic power control as per 97.311(d)) With 950 mW (0.95 Watts or 29.7 dBm) into a 24 dBi parabolic = 238 Watts EIRP - And under Part 15 using directional antennas to get the same: (i) Systems operating in the 2400-2483.5 MHz band that are used exclusively for fixed, point-to-point operations may employ transmitting antennas with directional gain greater than 6 dBi provided the maximum peak output power of the intentional radiator is reduced by 1 dB for every 3 dB that the directional gain of the antenna exceeds 6 dBi. Example: Max Transmitter RF power (dBm) Antenna Gain (dBi) EIRP (W) 30 6 3.98 29 9 6.35 28 12 10.14 27 15 15.81 26 18 25.23 25 21 40.28 24 24 40.28<-- http://www.qsl.net/kb9mwr/projects/wireless/pwr.html (for further) I also have a number of ideas related to use of wireless ethernet cards for amateur radio networking that require writing and or disassembling software and I am looking for help (both Linux & Windows solutions) See: http://www.tapr.org/tapr/list-archive/netsig/0106/msg00006.html --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Jun 28 08:17:04 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id IAA04366 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 08:16:56 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Paul McInnish" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 09:16:31 -0400 Organization: Cirronet, Inc. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: <000f01c0ffd4$8cb9a460$6b00a8c0@PMcInnish> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Jeff... Bull $#&%, I HAVE NOT BEEN PROMOTING OUR PRODUCTS! You asked questions and I responded to them, in detail! If you did NOT want detailed answers or want the world to see the answers, you should have asked OFF LINE and I would have responded OFF LINE! Another point... by giving detailed answers for the world to see... there is always a slim chance that someone may learn there is more than one way to do something... some other application... some other need... Yes, I - and here comes another push for my company as you would see it - support amateur radio! I... we (here is another "promotion as you would see it"), have donated tons of product to various amateur radio groups for use in such applications as repeater control (point - to - point & point - to - multipoint of various remote receiver sites, etc.), balloon chase groups, data logging for public service events (parades, charity drives that amateur radio operators provide communications for, etc.). We (the company) bought and paid for and pay the monthly bills for a repeater and some remote sites, etc., etc., etc. And I did not want to mention it but I asked the Engineering group to investigate some way the products could be shifted to use the Part 97 bands and somehow keep us out of trouble in the Part 15 bands... they agreed! I can assure you, that push just stopped at my direction! You happy?? This is last and final response to you in public! I resent your chastisement in public! I do not want to see any more reference by you about me or my company in public! You are the kind of loud mouth that cause companies like ours to turn away from providing any support of any kind to amateur radio! The almighty self appointed police of the airways and internet! For the benefit of those that may read all of my above diatribe, I apologize to you and now that my anger has calmed down... this is my last post - of any kind - to this list! Paul McInnish ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff King" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 6:32 PM Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio : : : Paul McInnish wrote: : : (on suggesting cirronet support amateur radio use of their product) : : > 4th.... Our fastest growing segment of our business is the WISP business! : > We only sell to (financially sound) ISP's & Telco's. : : OK, sorry, didn't think I was out of line asking as this is a amateur radio list and : you have been posting promoting your companies products here. : : : -Jeff : : : : : >Paul McInnish - K4BET : >Manager, Business Development : >Cirronet, Inc. (formerly Digital Wireless) : >5375 Oakbrook Parkway : >Norcross, GA 30093, USA : > : >Direct Phone: 678.684.2011 : >Fax: 678.684.2001 : >Cell Phone: 678.429.2124 : > : >Web site: http://www.cirronet.com : : --- : You are currently subscribed to ss as: k4bet@digital-wireless.com : To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org : --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Jun 28 09:13:53 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id JAA09713 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 09:13:37 -0500 (CDT) Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 10:12:06 -0400 (EDT) From: Ryan Wilkins To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Just for my own curiosity, what kind of restrictions does 802.11 impose on packet turn around to limit range? I, and a group of friends, am trying to setup a wireless point to point link using 2mbps 802.11 FHSS PC-Cards. We were able to get the devices linked at 2 miles. We're trying for 10 miles but that may be too much of a stretch, not to mention a lot of free space attenuation along with god knows what else in the way. We may make the move to DSSS cards instead but I dont know that it will really help us any. In a different experiment a year or two ago, we tried running a 2Mbps link 6 miles but never could close the link 100%. We were constantly showing packet losses anywhere from 30% to 70%. I had several thoughts of what could have contributed to the problem but never really investigated it much further. Ryan Wilkins N8YHV On Wed, 27 Jun 2001, Chris Anderson wrote: > I'm afraid I'm locked up with work. I've got 3 projects already so I never have > time to do anything outside work. > > As for our 2.4Ghz radio, it's a 2mbps QPSK radio. It's not actually 802.11 as > 802.11 places some restrictions on packet turnaround that limit range while our > product is designed for 5+ mile links. I was pondering putting a PLL on the > Gunns at one time just fer grins but I never got aroud to it. > > > > > > > > > Kerry Banke on 06/27/2001 11:34:20 AM > > Please respond to "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" > > > > > > > > > > To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" > > > cc: (bcc: Chris Anderson/NPD/GHI) > > > > Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio > > > > > > > > > Chris - Thanks for thereply - The 10 Ghz portion of such a project is my > strong suite as I have been hosting the San Diego Microwave Group for over > 14 years now & maintain a pretty decent home lab for working up through 12 > Ghz. I have access to lot's of Qualcomm scrap for which I have developed > conversion procedures to produce synthesized 10 GHz transverters with 1 dB > noise figure and 1W output. These units of course solve all of the > frequency drift problems as well as are much higher performance all around > than the GUNN units. The bandwidth of the transverters can be just about > anything we'd possibly need (100 MHz+). If you'd be interested in getting > together on making a 10 Ghz wideband link, I'd be interested in working > with you. If you already have a pair of 802.11 radios that you'd like to > put on 10 GHz, I'll be happy to make up a pair of 10 Ghz transverters to > match. Is the 802.11 simplex or full duplex? I haven't tried configuring > one of the 10 GHz transverters for full duplex but don't see why that > shouldn't be possible. I've got some committments through the Summer for > some Ham microwave activities but could work on such a project this fall. > - Kerry N6IZW > > At 10:54 AM 6/27/01 -0500, you wrote: > >I haven't been paying much attention to the PCMCIA cards raelly as they're all > >pretty much one of the Prism chipsets. I have some generics that have reverse > >MMCX connectors on them but I haven't done much with them. If I were you I'd > >pick up one of the 802.11 Breezecom radios and rip it apart. They usually > >have a > >conn inside for the antennas. If I were me of course I'd just use our radio as > >it's got a reverse TNC. I don't expect your looking for a router though. > > > > > >10GHz eh? I've been bulding this N6GN microwave data link project now for > about > >4 years 8) I just picked up some 24GHz MA/COM Gunns to try. I have a pair of > >10GHz as well but I never quote seem to get time to mess with it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Kerry Banke on 06/27/2001 10:11:20 AM > > > >Please respond to "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" > > > > > > cc: (bcc: Chris Anderson/NPD/GHI) > > > > > > > > Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >I've been following the recent email on the reflector & woud like to > >consider taking a pair of cheap 2.4 GHz 802.11 SS radios and translate > >them to the 10 GHz Amateur band. What units are low cost and will provide > >an external antenna jack that I can use to connect to a transverter? > >Frequency doesn't matter as I can make the transverter match anything I > >want. I've seen the Syncbyair PCMCIA 2.4 GHz units on Ebay but don't know > >if thay have external antenna connections available or If they present any > >other special problems. Any input on this would be appreciated. > > > >At 09:44 AM 6/27/01 -0500, Chris Anderson wrote: > >>I'd like to add my voice to the Jeffs's there, don't give up. I haven't > made a > >>contact for years but as I develop SS radios for a living I still hold out > >hope > > > > > >--- > >You are currently subscribed to ss as: chris_anderson@grayhill.com > >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > > > > > > > > > > >--- > >You are currently subscribed to ss as: KBANKE@QUALCOMM.COM > >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: chris_anderson@grayhill.com > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: RYAN@DEADFROG.NET > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Jun 28 09:58:35 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id JAA15736 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 09:58:28 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Paul McInnish" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 10:59:02 -0400 Organization: Cirronet, Inc. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: <008701c0ffe2$dea4adc0$6b00a8c0@PMcInnish> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Ryan... a couple of comments.... Two issues you will run into with the 802.11 link and those are.... 1. Even at two miles, the "string" is stretched way beyond the intent of 802.11 product and your data thru-put will be slower - as we say here in Jawja - than molasses! 10 miles, even if you used 25 - 35 dBi parabolic dishes will suffer even more thru-put slow down... if you can make a link. 2. The other issue and even with the 2 mile hop... remembering that 802.11 products are theoretically built around a 'standard' that will allow other manufacturers products to talk to each other and the chances of other 802.11 devices, of every conceivable type, being anywhere near a extended path such as your 2 mile path are really highly likely and you will have so much jamming going on that the apparent data thru-put, at times, will be non-existent or slower than "molasses" (we have run tests here in metro Hotlanta and found this to be true... with much, much shorter paths than your 2 miles). OK, Jeff, you bucket mouth, sanctimonious lid and self appointed amateur radio/internet cop, here is some more "commercializing"... This is some of the many reason's our firm and several other competitive firms that are in the digital RF data transceiver business choose NOT to buy into the 802.11 standard. Best regards, Paul McInnish - K4BET ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ryan Wilkins" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 10:12 AM Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio : Just for my own curiosity, what kind of restrictions does 802.11 impose on : packet turn around to limit range? I, and a group of friends, am trying to : setup a wireless point to point link using 2mbps 802.11 FHSS PC-Cards. We were : able to get the devices linked at 2 miles. We're trying for 10 miles but that : may be too much of a stretch, not to mention a lot of free space attenuation : along with god knows what else in the way. We may make the move to DSSS cards : instead but I dont know that it will really help us any. : : In a different experiment a year or two ago, we tried running a 2Mbps link 6 : miles but never could close the link 100%. We were constantly showing packet : losses anywhere from 30% to 70%. I had several thoughts of what could have : contributed to the problem but never really investigated it much further. : : Ryan Wilkins : N8YHV : : On Wed, 27 Jun 2001, Chris Anderson wrote: : : > I'm afraid I'm locked up with work. I've got 3 projects already so I never have : > time to do anything outside work. : > : > As for our 2.4Ghz radio, it's a 2mbps QPSK radio. It's not actually 802.11 as : > 802.11 places some restrictions on packet turnaround that limit range while our : > product is designed for 5+ mile links. I was pondering putting a PLL on the : > Gunns at one time just fer grins but I never got aroud to it. : > : > : > : > : > : > : > : > : > Kerry Banke on 06/27/2001 11:34:20 AM : > : > Please respond to "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" : > : > : > : > : > : > : > : > : > : > To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" : > : > : > cc: (bcc: Chris Anderson/NPD/GHI) : > : > : > : > Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio : > : > : > : > : > : > : > : > : > Chris - Thanks for thereply - The 10 Ghz portion of such a project is my : > strong suite as I have been hosting the San Diego Microwave Group for over : > 14 years now & maintain a pretty decent home lab for working up through 12 : > Ghz. I have access to lot's of Qualcomm scrap for which I have developed : > conversion procedures to produce synthesized 10 GHz transverters with 1 dB : > noise figure and 1W output. These units of course solve all of the : > frequency drift problems as well as are much higher performance all around : > than the GUNN units. The bandwidth of the transverters can be just about : > anything we'd possibly need (100 MHz+). If you'd be interested in getting : > together on making a 10 Ghz wideband link, I'd be interested in working : > with you. If you already have a pair of 802.11 radios that you'd like to : > put on 10 GHz, I'll be happy to make up a pair of 10 Ghz transverters to : > match. Is the 802.11 simplex or full duplex? I haven't tried configuring : > one of the 10 GHz transverters for full duplex but don't see why that : > shouldn't be possible. I've got some committments through the Summer for : > some Ham microwave activities but could work on such a project this fall. : > - Kerry N6IZW : > : > At 10:54 AM 6/27/01 -0500, you wrote: : > >I haven't been paying much attention to the PCMCIA cards raelly as they're all : > >pretty much one of the Prism chipsets. I have some generics that have reverse : > >MMCX connectors on them but I haven't done much with them. If I were you I'd : > >pick up one of the 802.11 Breezecom radios and rip it apart. They usually : > >have a : > >conn inside for the antennas. If I were me of course I'd just use our radio as : > >it's got a reverse TNC. I don't expect your looking for a router though. : > > : > > : > >10GHz eh? I've been bulding this N6GN microwave data link project now for : > about : > >4 years 8) I just picked up some 24GHz MA/COM Gunns to try. I have a pair of : > >10GHz as well but I never quote seem to get time to mess with it. : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > >Kerry Banke on 06/27/2001 10:11:20 AM : > > : > >Please respond to "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" : > > : > > : > > cc: (bcc: Chris Anderson/NPD/GHI) : > > : > > : > > : > > Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > >I've been following the recent email on the reflector & woud like to : > >consider taking a pair of cheap 2.4 GHz 802.11 SS radios and translate : > >them to the 10 GHz Amateur band. What units are low cost and will provide : > >an external antenna jack that I can use to connect to a transverter? : > >Frequency doesn't matter as I can make the transverter match anything I : > >want. I've seen the Syncbyair PCMCIA 2.4 GHz units on Ebay but don't know : > >if thay have external antenna connections available or If they present any : > >other special problems. Any input on this would be appreciated. : > > : > >At 09:44 AM 6/27/01 -0500, Chris Anderson wrote: : > >>I'd like to add my voice to the Jeffs's there, don't give up. I haven't : > made a : > >>contact for years but as I develop SS radios for a living I still hold out : > >hope : > > : > > : > >--- : > >You are currently subscribed to ss as: chris_anderson@grayhill.com : > >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > >--- : > >You are currently subscribed to ss as: KBANKE@QUALCOMM.COM : > >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org : > > : > : > : > --- : > You are currently subscribed to ss as: chris_anderson@grayhill.com : > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org : > : > : > : > : > : > --- : > You are currently subscribed to ss as: RYAN@DEADFROG.NET : > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org : > : > : : : --- : You are currently subscribed to ss as: k4bet@digital-wireless.com : To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org : --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Jun 28 10:23:00 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id KAA19780 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 10:22:53 -0500 (CDT) X-Lotus-FromDomain: GHI From: "Chris Anderson" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Message-ID: Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 10:15:47 -0500 Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <86256A79.0054C696.00@lgrsmtp1.grayhill.com> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk the 802.11b spec says you have like 20uS to send an ACK/NAK to resepose when you get a packet. at something like 0.169 miles/uS 20uS would be about 3 miles. SO if your link distance is say 10 or 15 miles (we did a link of 12 miles while beta testing ) your transmitting radio wouldn't get his response within the 20uS and he'd try to resend the last packet. Most likely causing a collision and of course shooting network efficency down the toilet. That's why we're not 802.11. In our opinion, in general 802.11 isn't a good idea for reliable long range communicaitons. HEY! DO NOT FLAME ME ABOUT 802.11 I have no intrest in holy war. I'm just explaining why WE chose not to be 802.11, our customers ususally want long range, thus the trade off. I don't know off hand if the 802.11 FHSS PHY definition says something similar I suspect it does but ye'd want to look it up. Ryan Wilkins on 06/28/2001 09:12:06 AM Please respond to "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" cc: (bcc: Chris Anderson/NPD/GHI) Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio Just for my own curiosity, what kind of restrictions does 802.11 impose on packet turn around to limit range? I, and a group of friends, am trying to setup a wireless point to point link using 2mbps 802.11 FHSS PC-Cards. We were able to get the devices linked at 2 miles. We're trying for 10 miles but that may be too much of a stretch, not to mention a lot of free space attenuation along with god knows what else in the way. We may make the move to DSSS cards instead but I dont know that it will really help us any. In a different experiment a year or two ago, we tried running a 2Mbps link 6 miles but never could close the link 100%. We were constantly showing packet losses anywhere from 30% to 70%. I had several thoughts of what could have contributed to the problem but never really investigated it much further. Ryan Wilkins N8YHV On Wed, 27 Jun 2001, Chris Anderson wrote: > I'm afraid I'm locked up with work. I've got 3 projects already so I never have > time to do anything outside work. > > As for our 2.4Ghz radio, it's a 2mbps QPSK radio. It's not actually 802.11 as > 802.11 places some restrictions on packet turnaround that limit range while our > product is designed for 5+ mile links. I was pondering putting a PLL on the > Gunns at one time just fer grins but I never got aroud to it. > > > > > > > > > Kerry Banke on 06/27/2001 11:34:20 AM > > Please respond to "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" > > > > > > > > > > To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" > > > cc: (bcc: Chris Anderson/NPD/GHI) > > > > Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio > > > > > > > > > Chris - Thanks for thereply - The 10 Ghz portion of such a project is my > strong suite as I have been hosting the San Diego Microwave Group for over > 14 years now & maintain a pretty decent home lab for working up through 12 > Ghz. I have access to lot's of Qualcomm scrap for which I have developed > conversion procedures to produce synthesized 10 GHz transverters with 1 dB > noise figure and 1W output. These units of course solve all of the > frequency drift problems as well as are much higher performance all around > than the GUNN units. The bandwidth of the transverters can be just about > anything we'd possibly need (100 MHz+). If you'd be interested in getting > together on making a 10 Ghz wideband link, I'd be interested in working > with you. If you already have a pair of 802.11 radios that you'd like to > put on 10 GHz, I'll be happy to make up a pair of 10 Ghz transverters to > match. Is the 802.11 simplex or full duplex? I haven't tried configuring > one of the 10 GHz transverters for full duplex but don't see why that > shouldn't be possible. I've got some committments through the Summer for > some Ham microwave activities but could work on such a project this fall. > - Kerry N6IZW > > At 10:54 AM 6/27/01 -0500, you wrote: > >I haven't been paying much attention to the PCMCIA cards raelly as they're all > >pretty much one of the Prism chipsets. I have some generics that have reverse > >MMCX connectors on them but I haven't done much with them. If I were you I'd > >pick up one of the 802.11 Breezecom radios and rip it apart. They usually > >have a > >conn inside for the antennas. If I were me of course I'd just use our radio as > >it's got a reverse TNC. I don't expect your looking for a router though. > > > > > >10GHz eh? I've been bulding this N6GN microwave data link project now for > about > >4 years 8) I just picked up some 24GHz MA/COM Gunns to try. I have a pair of > >10GHz as well but I never quote seem to get time to mess with it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Kerry Banke on 06/27/2001 10:11:20 AM > > > >Please respond to "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" > > > > > > cc: (bcc: Chris Anderson/NPD/GHI) > > > > > > > > Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >I've been following the recent email on the reflector & woud like to > >consider taking a pair of cheap 2.4 GHz 802.11 SS radios and translate > >them to the 10 GHz Amateur band. What units are low cost and will provide > >an external antenna jack that I can use to connect to a transverter? > >Frequency doesn't matter as I can make the transverter match anything I > >want. I've seen the Syncbyair PCMCIA 2.4 GHz units on Ebay but don't know > >if thay have external antenna connections available or If they present any > >other special problems. Any input on this would be appreciated. > > > >At 09:44 AM 6/27/01 -0500, Chris Anderson wrote: > >>I'd like to add my voice to the Jeffs's there, don't give up. I haven't > made a > >>contact for years but as I develop SS radios for a living I still hold out > >hope > > > > > >--- > >You are currently subscribed to ss as: chris_anderson@grayhill.com > >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > > > > > > > > > > >--- > >You are currently subscribed to ss as: KBANKE@QUALCOMM.COM > >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: chris_anderson@grayhill.com > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: RYAN@DEADFROG.NET > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: chris_anderson@grayhill.com To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Jun 28 10:42:08 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id KAA21400 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 10:41:33 -0500 (CDT) Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:35:53 -0400 (EDT) From: Ryan Wilkins To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk That's good info to know. I'm sure I could find something on google but while I'm here do you have any good links for the 802.11 and 802.11b specs for both FHSS and DSSS? Thanks, Ryan Wilkins On Thu, 28 Jun 2001, Chris Anderson wrote: > the 802.11b spec says you have like 20uS to send an ACK/NAK to resepose when you > get a packet. at something like 0.169 miles/uS 20uS would be about 3 miles. SO > if your link distance is say 10 or 15 miles (we did a link of 12 miles while > beta testing ) your transmitting radio wouldn't get his response within the 20uS > and he'd try to resend the last packet. Most likely causing a collision and of > course shooting network efficency down the toilet. That's why we're not 802.11. > In our opinion, in general 802.11 isn't a good idea for reliable long range > communicaitons. HEY! DO NOT FLAME ME ABOUT 802.11 I have no intrest in holy war. > I'm just explaining why WE chose not to be 802.11, our customers ususally want > long range, thus the trade off. > > I don't know off hand if the 802.11 FHSS PHY definition says something similar I > suspect it does but ye'd want to look it up. > > > > > > > > > Ryan Wilkins on 06/28/2001 09:12:06 AM > > Please respond to "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" > > > > > > > > > > To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" > > > cc: (bcc: Chris Anderson/NPD/GHI) > > > > Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio > > > > > > > > > Just for my own curiosity, what kind of restrictions does 802.11 impose on > packet turn around to limit range? I, and a group of friends, am trying to > setup a wireless point to point link using 2mbps 802.11 FHSS PC-Cards. We were > able to get the devices linked at 2 miles. We're trying for 10 miles but that > may be too much of a stretch, not to mention a lot of free space attenuation > along with god knows what else in the way. We may make the move to DSSS cards > instead but I dont know that it will really help us any. > > In a different experiment a year or two ago, we tried running a 2Mbps link 6 > miles but never could close the link 100%. We were constantly showing packet > losses anywhere from 30% to 70%. I had several thoughts of what could have > contributed to the problem but never really investigated it much further. > > Ryan Wilkins > N8YHV > > On Wed, 27 Jun 2001, Chris Anderson wrote: > > > I'm afraid I'm locked up with work. I've got 3 projects already so I never > have > > time to do anything outside work. > > > > As for our 2.4Ghz radio, it's a 2mbps QPSK radio. It's not actually 802.11 as > > 802.11 places some restrictions on packet turnaround that limit range while > our > > product is designed for 5+ mile links. I was pondering putting a PLL on the > > Gunns at one time just fer grins but I never got aroud to it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kerry Banke on 06/27/2001 11:34:20 AM > > > > Please respond to "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" > > > > > > cc: (bcc: Chris Anderson/NPD/GHI) > > > > > > > > Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chris - Thanks for thereply - The 10 Ghz portion of such a project is my > > strong suite as I have been hosting the San Diego Microwave Group for over > > 14 years now & maintain a pretty decent home lab for working up through 12 > > Ghz. I have access to lot's of Qualcomm scrap for which I have developed > > conversion procedures to produce synthesized 10 GHz transverters with 1 dB > > noise figure and 1W output. These units of course solve all of the > > frequency drift problems as well as are much higher performance all around > > than the GUNN units. The bandwidth of the transverters can be just about > > anything we'd possibly need (100 MHz+). If you'd be interested in getting > > together on making a 10 Ghz wideband link, I'd be interested in working > > with you. If you already have a pair of 802.11 radios that you'd like to > > put on 10 GHz, I'll be happy to make up a pair of 10 Ghz transverters to > > match. Is the 802.11 simplex or full duplex? I haven't tried configuring > > one of the 10 GHz transverters for full duplex but don't see why that > > shouldn't be possible. I've got some committments through the Summer for > > some Ham microwave activities but could work on such a project this fall. > > - Kerry N6IZW > > > > At 10:54 AM 6/27/01 -0500, you wrote: > > >I haven't been paying much attention to the PCMCIA cards raelly as they're > all > > >pretty much one of the Prism chipsets. I have some generics that have > reverse > > >MMCX connectors on them but I haven't done much with them. If I were you I'd > > >pick up one of the 802.11 Breezecom radios and rip it apart. They usually > > >have a > > >conn inside for the antennas. If I were me of course I'd just use our radio > as > > >it's got a reverse TNC. I don't expect your looking for a router though. > > > > > > > > >10GHz eh? I've been bulding this N6GN microwave data link project now for > > about > > >4 years 8) I just picked up some 24GHz MA/COM Gunns to try. I have a pair of > > >10GHz as well but I never quote seem to get time to mess with it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Kerry Banke on 06/27/2001 10:11:20 AM > > > > > >Please respond to "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" > > > > > > > > > cc: (bcc: Chris Anderson/NPD/GHI) > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >I've been following the recent email on the reflector & woud like to > > >consider taking a pair of cheap 2.4 GHz 802.11 SS radios and translate > > >them to the 10 GHz Amateur band. What units are low cost and will provide > > >an external antenna jack that I can use to connect to a transverter? > > >Frequency doesn't matter as I can make the transverter match anything I > > >want. I've seen the Syncbyair PCMCIA 2.4 GHz units on Ebay but don't know > > >if thay have external antenna connections available or If they present any > > >other special problems. Any input on this would be appreciated. > > > > > >At 09:44 AM 6/27/01 -0500, Chris Anderson wrote: > > >>I'd like to add my voice to the Jeffs's there, don't give up. I haven't > > made a > > >>contact for years but as I develop SS radios for a living I still hold out > > >hope > > > > > > > > >--- > > >You are currently subscribed to ss as: chris_anderson@grayhill.com > > >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >--- > > >You are currently subscribed to ss as: KBANKE@QUALCOMM.COM > > >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > > > > > > > > --- > > You are currently subscribed to ss as: chris_anderson@grayhill.com > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > You are currently subscribed to ss as: RYAN@DEADFROG.NET > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > > > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: chris_anderson@grayhill.com > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: RYAN@DEADFROG.NET > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Jun 28 11:05:39 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id LAA24933 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 11:05:28 -0500 (CDT) X-Lotus-FromDomain: GHI From: "Chris Anderson" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Message-ID: Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 10:57:23 -0500 Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <86256A79.005895A2.00@lgrsmtp1.grayhill.com> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk not really, I walked over to the software guy and borrowed his printed copy of the 802.11 spec. I'm doin a serial radio just now so I haven't needed the 802.11 stuff for a while. Ryan Wilkins on 06/28/2001 10:35:53 AM Please respond to "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" cc: (bcc: Chris Anderson/NPD/GHI) Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio That's good info to know. I'm sure I could find something on google but while I'm here do you have any good links for the 802.11 and 802.11b specs for both FHSS and DSSS? Thanks, Ryan Wilkins On Thu, 28 Jun 2001, Chris Anderson wrote: > the 802.11b spec says you have like 20uS to send an ACK/NAK to resepose when you > get a packet. at something like 0.169 miles/uS 20uS would be about 3 miles. SO > if your link distance is say 10 or 15 miles (we did a link of 12 miles while > beta testing ) your transmitting radio wouldn't get his response within the 20uS > and he'd try to resend the last packet. Most likely causing a collision and of > course shooting network efficency down the toilet. That's why we're not 802.11. > In our opinion, in general 802.11 isn't a good idea for reliable long range > communicaitons. HEY! DO NOT FLAME ME ABOUT 802.11 I have no intrest in holy war. > I'm just explaining why WE chose not to be 802.11, our customers ususally want > long range, thus the trade off. > > I don't know off hand if the 802.11 FHSS PHY definition says something similar I > suspect it does but ye'd want to look it up. > > > > > > > > > Ryan Wilkins on 06/28/2001 09:12:06 AM > > Please respond to "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" > > > > > > > > > > To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" > > > cc: (bcc: Chris Anderson/NPD/GHI) > > > > Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio > > > > > > > > > Just for my own curiosity, what kind of restrictions does 802.11 impose on > packet turn around to limit range? I, and a group of friends, am trying to > setup a wireless point to point link using 2mbps 802.11 FHSS PC-Cards. We were > able to get the devices linked at 2 miles. We're trying for 10 miles but that > may be too much of a stretch, not to mention a lot of free space attenuation > along with god knows what else in the way. We may make the move to DSSS cards > instead but I dont know that it will really help us any. > > In a different experiment a year or two ago, we tried running a 2Mbps link 6 > miles but never could close the link 100%. We were constantly showing packet > losses anywhere from 30% to 70%. I had several thoughts of what could have > contributed to the problem but never really investigated it much further. > > Ryan Wilkins > N8YHV > > On Wed, 27 Jun 2001, Chris Anderson wrote: > > > I'm afraid I'm locked up with work. I've got 3 projects already so I never > have > > time to do anything outside work. > > > > As for our 2.4Ghz radio, it's a 2mbps QPSK radio. It's not actually 802.11 as > > 802.11 places some restrictions on packet turnaround that limit range while > our > > product is designed for 5+ mile links. I was pondering putting a PLL on the > > Gunns at one time just fer grins but I never got aroud to it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kerry Banke on 06/27/2001 11:34:20 AM > > > > Please respond to "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" > > > > > > cc: (bcc: Chris Anderson/NPD/GHI) > > > > > > > > Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chris - Thanks for thereply - The 10 Ghz portion of such a project is my > > strong suite as I have been hosting the San Diego Microwave Group for over > > 14 years now & maintain a pretty decent home lab for working up through 12 > > Ghz. I have access to lot's of Qualcomm scrap for which I have developed > > conversion procedures to produce synthesized 10 GHz transverters with 1 dB > > noise figure and 1W output. These units of course solve all of the > > frequency drift problems as well as are much higher performance all around > > than the GUNN units. The bandwidth of the transverters can be just about > > anything we'd possibly need (100 MHz+). If you'd be interested in getting > > together on making a 10 Ghz wideband link, I'd be interested in working > > with you. If you already have a pair of 802.11 radios that you'd like to > > put on 10 GHz, I'll be happy to make up a pair of 10 Ghz transverters to > > match. Is the 802.11 simplex or full duplex? I haven't tried configuring > > one of the 10 GHz transverters for full duplex but don't see why that > > shouldn't be possible. I've got some committments through the Summer for > > some Ham microwave activities but could work on such a project this fall. > > - Kerry N6IZW > > > > At 10:54 AM 6/27/01 -0500, you wrote: > > >I haven't been paying much attention to the PCMCIA cards raelly as they're > all > > >pretty much one of the Prism chipsets. I have some generics that have > reverse > > >MMCX connectors on them but I haven't done much with them. If I were you I'd > > >pick up one of the 802.11 Breezecom radios and rip it apart. They usually > > >have a > > >conn inside for the antennas. If I were me of course I'd just use our radio > as > > >it's got a reverse TNC. I don't expect your looking for a router though. > > > > > > > > >10GHz eh? I've been bulding this N6GN microwave data link project now for > > about > > >4 years 8) I just picked up some 24GHz MA/COM Gunns to try. I have a pair of > > >10GHz as well but I never quote seem to get time to mess with it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Kerry Banke on 06/27/2001 10:11:20 AM > > > > > >Please respond to "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" > > > > > > > > > cc: (bcc: Chris Anderson/NPD/GHI) > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >I've been following the recent email on the reflector & woud like to > > >consider taking a pair of cheap 2.4 GHz 802.11 SS radios and translate > > >them to the 10 GHz Amateur band. What units are low cost and will provide > > >an external antenna jack that I can use to connect to a transverter? > > >Frequency doesn't matter as I can make the transverter match anything I > > >want. I've seen the Syncbyair PCMCIA 2.4 GHz units on Ebay but don't know > > >if thay have external antenna connections available or If they present any > > >other special problems. Any input on this would be appreciated. > > > > > >At 09:44 AM 6/27/01 -0500, Chris Anderson wrote: > > >>I'd like to add my voice to the Jeffs's there, don't give up. I haven't > > made a > > >>contact for years but as I develop SS radios for a living I still hold out > > >hope > > > > > > > > >--- > > >You are currently subscribed to ss as: chris_anderson@grayhill.com > > >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >--- > > >You are currently subscribed to ss as: KBANKE@QUALCOMM.COM > > >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > > > > > > > > --- > > You are currently subscribed to ss as: chris_anderson@grayhill.com > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > You are currently subscribed to ss as: RYAN@DEADFROG.NET > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > > > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: chris_anderson@grayhill.com > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: RYAN@DEADFROG.NET > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: chris_anderson@grayhill.com To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Jun 28 14:47:01 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id OAA15544 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 14:46:55 -0500 (CDT) Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 12:45:19 -0700 From: "Shawn T. Rutledge" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.15i In-Reply-To: ; from k4bet@cirronet.com on Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 10:59:02AM -0400 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <20010628124519.I5353@cx47646-a.phnx1.az.home.com> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 10:59:02AM -0400, Paul McInnish wrote: > OK, Jeff, you bucket mouth, sanctimonious lid and self appointed amateur > radio/internet cop, here is some more "commercializing"... I think we've had enough of your personal attacks. I can't see that Jeff did a whole lot to provoke this; only noticed that you present a "dangling carrot" - products which might be useful if only they were modified a little, but your company won't sell them to us anyway. Let's try to keep it civil. -- _______ Shawn T. Rutledge / KB7PWD ecloud@bigfoot.com (_ | |_) http://www.bigfoot.com/~ecloud kb7pwd@kb7pwd.ampr.org __) | | \________________________________________________________________ --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Jun 28 14:50:56 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id OAA15775 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 14:50:55 -0500 (CDT) Errors-To: Message-ID: Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 15:50:48 -0400 From: Jeff King Organization: Aero Data Systems, Inc. X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3B3B8A98.93FB41BC@aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Paul McInnish wrote: > Jeff... Bull $#&%, I HAVE NOT BEEN PROMOTING OUR PRODUCTS! OK, sorry, not that promoting it is a bad thing. I just was explaining why I thought your company (or you) might have a interest in supporting a amateur radio version of the firmware, first to keep the FH in the band, and second to give a hook for automatic power control. Many people use the resources of their companies to help amateur radio, I can list many on this very list. But many don't or can't, this is no crime, nor was I implying in any way it was. I simply mis-read your intentions. > This is last and final response to you in public! Then in another message to Ryan Wilkins a hour later you wrote: >OK, Jeff, you bucket mouth, sanctimonious lid and self appointed amateur >radio/internet cop, here is some more "commercializing"... Somebody forget their morning coffee today? > You are the kind of loud mouth that cause > companies like ours to turn away from providing any support of any kind to > amateur radio! How specifically is that? If a company puts out a piece of junk, sure I'll speak up about it. But such was not the case here. If you'll do me the favor and look at my prior postings about your company, you'll see nothing but praise, in particular in comparing your company to the other WISP players. I thought your companies radio architecture would fit in well with amateur radio. Your architecture is in fact is similar to the TAPR SS radio project, at least one description I heard of it. It just wasn't clear to me if your interest was personal or from your company (based on your extensive SIG line, which I noticed you have now removed). I thought possibly your company might have a interest in the amateur radio market, or at a minimum that was something you were hoping to do. I was mistaken. Hey, I might have deserved a kick in the butt here, but not your salvo of nuclear weapons. Lighten up a bit, OK? -Jeff > : Paul McInnish wrote: > : > : (on suggesting cirronet support amateur radio use of their product) > : > : > 4th.... Our fastest growing segment of our business is the WISP > business! > : > We only sell to (financially sound) ISP's & Telco's. > : > : OK, sorry, didn't think I was out of line asking as this is a amateur > radio list and > : you have been posting promoting your companies products here. > : > : > : -Jeff > : > : > : > : > : >Paul McInnish - K4BET > : >Manager, Business Development > : >Cirronet, Inc. (formerly Digital Wireless) > : >5375 Oakbrook Parkway > : >Norcross, GA 30093, USA > : > > : >Direct Phone: 678.684.2011 > : >Fax: 678.684.2001 > : >Cell Phone: 678.429.2124 > : > > : >Web site: http://www.cirronet.com > : > : --- > : You are currently subscribed to ss as: k4bet@digital-wireless.com > : To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > : > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: jeff@aerodata.net > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Jun 28 15:37:01 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id PAA19219 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 15:36:59 -0500 (CDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: Devin Butterfield To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 13:34:05 -0700 References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <01062813340501.53633@dbm.wireless.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > > For the benefit of those that may read all of my above diatribe, I > apologize to you and now that my anger has calmed down... this is my last > post - of any kind - to this list! > > Paul McInnish Please honor this statement, and unsubscribe from this list. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Jun 28 20:54:35 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id UAA10025 for ; Thu, 28 Jun 2001 20:54:34 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 03:52:22 +0200 From: Luis Yanes Organization: Escuela Superior de Ingenieros de Sevilla MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3B3BD146.A2A@teleline.es> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Talking about how should the SS things be done, or how will like that will be, or what we sell could do, or what is doing these commercial stuff that we can't use, or... Well for wireless network access we only have to sit down and wait. But is someone building something here?. For amateur use?. Without commercial boards?. May be just the nature of SS over UHF with its local range, and complex appearence. From time to time, here one can learn something interesting also. What we get is what we deserve. And also I'm guilty first without almost any excuse. Please, understand that this isn't a flame to anyone just my own frustration, and probably would have been better to do not post it since may be won't be understood positively. -- 73's de Luis mail: melus0(@)teleline(.)es Ampr: eb7gwl.ampr.org http://www.terra.es/personal2/melus0/ <- PCBs for Homebrewed Hardware --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Jun 29 09:47:00 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id JAA11945 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 09:46:59 -0500 (CDT) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 23:19:23 +1000 From: Hamish Moffatt To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio Message-ID: Mail-Followup-To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from Chris_Anderson@grayhill.com on Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 10:15:47AM -0500 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <20010629231923.A20390@silly.cloud.net.au> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 10:15:47AM -0500, Chris Anderson wrote: > In our opinion, in general 802.11 isn't a good idea for reliable long range > communicaitons. HEY! DO NOT FLAME ME ABOUT 802.11 I have no intrest in holy war. > I'm just explaining why WE chose not to be 802.11, our customers ususally want > long range, thus the trade off. > > I don't know off hand if the 802.11 FHSS PHY definition says something similar I > suspect it does but ye'd want to look it up. Don't you think that standards-compliance is in the best interests of the customers, though? It's to the customers' advantage if they can mix products from different vendors, and that requires a standard like 802.11. Otherwise they are locked in to your products. Something your marketing department is probably quite happy with? Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Jun 29 09:48:14 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id JAA11984 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 09:48:12 -0500 (CDT) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 23:20:22 +1000 From: Hamish Moffatt To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio Message-ID: Mail-Followup-To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from ecloud@bigfoot.com on Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 12:45:19PM -0700 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <20010629232022.B20390@silly.cloud.net.au> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 12:45:19PM -0700, Shawn T. Rutledge wrote: > On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 10:59:02AM -0400, Paul McInnish wrote: > > OK, Jeff, you bucket mouth, sanctimonious lid and self appointed amateur > > radio/internet cop, here is some more "commercializing"... > > I think we've had enough of your personal attacks. I can't see that > Jeff did a whole lot to provoke this; only noticed that you present a > "dangling carrot" - products which might be useful if only they were > modified a little, but your company won't sell them to us anyway. Yes; to be fair, Paul said just a couple of days ago that their products cannot be modified for use in the amateur band (or at least, they won't do it). So I wonder why Paul thinks they are of continual interest to amateurs on this list. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Jun 29 10:35:34 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id KAA16423 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 10:35:31 -0500 (CDT) X-Lotus-FromDomain: GHI From: "Chris Anderson" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Message-ID: Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 10:26:37 -0500 Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <86256A7A.0055CB50.00@lgrsmtp1.grayhill.com> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk A "Standard" is a propriatary solution that a very big company forced on a given market. It seems to me that if your making WLAN cards for under 100 meters under 100mW and under $200 802.11 aint bad. Thats typical consumer office product fare. We don't make office products. We sell to a different market who's needs are different. They want different things because they have a different application. Thus, for our market 802.11 isn't suitable. It's simply a matter of don't try and use an HT for EME, you might hear something but you sure can't count on it. I've been pondering creating a standard for FHSS actually but it's not real high on the priority list. Another thing to keep in mind is that what a ham wants in a SS radio is different from what many of our users want. For instance if I was buying a SS radio for ham radio use, I'd expect to be able to alter the length, speed and content of the hopset. Our customers want very very simple interfaces with "as few things to mess with" as possable. A ham of course wants to mess with EVERYTHING! 8) as it should be. Hamish Moffatt on 06/29/2001 08:19:23 AM Please respond to "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" cc: (bcc: Chris Anderson/NPD/GHI) Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 10:15:47AM -0500, Chris Anderson wrote: > In our opinion, in general 802.11 isn't a good idea for reliable long range > communicaitons. HEY! DO NOT FLAME ME ABOUT 802.11 I have no intrest in holy war. > I'm just explaining why WE chose not to be 802.11, our customers ususally want > long range, thus the trade off. > > I don't know off hand if the 802.11 FHSS PHY definition says something similar I > suspect it does but ye'd want to look it up. Don't you think that standards-compliance is in the best interests of the customers, though? It's to the customers' advantage if they can mix products from different vendors, and that requires a standard like 802.11. Otherwise they are locked in to your products. Something your marketing department is probably quite happy with? Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: chris_anderson@grayhill.com To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Jun 29 10:52:42 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id KAA18245 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 10:52:37 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Paul McInnish" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 11:54:04 -0400 Organization: Cirronet, Inc. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: <00b201c100b3$b9690ca0$6b00a8c0@PMcInnish> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Hamish... (to quote your response: "So I wonder why Paul thinks they are of continual interest to amateurs on this list.") of considerable interest because we do support amateur radio - contrary to what Jeff thinks - and if you would read some of my previous flames when I was madder than all get out @ Jeff... you'll read where we have donated, provided and supplied tons of radios to the amateur community! Provided a lot of money to support various 'things', etc., etc., etc., etc. As we carry on this diatribe, our radios are being used right now, in many many NON commercial amateur applications!!!!! Another reason... when I threatened to unsubscribe... I got tons of e-mail asking me to 'stick around' and continue contributing in what little infinite small way I or my firm could! And of course there is interest by tons of amateurs in a leading & cutting edge (yes, proprietary) technology! Quite a few of our competitors do the same as we... do things of a proprietary nature BUT of interest to amateurs. How many hams do you think we have working for us?? A major percentage! As a matter of fact, when we have a technical job slot come open... a ham will get an unofficial edge over a non-licensed person. So, you want me and my company to go away, if that is what you and the majority want, then I'll go in & talk with our CEO and we can change ALL these things as related to amateur radio. No consideration for "freebies", no consideration for employment if you have a ham ticket, no participation in many, many extra circular activities that hams are involved in, take the repeater down and all the remote sites, stop paying the power and phone bills for the repeater system, stop the remote repeater sites from communicating & controlling the system back to the main site via our PROPRIETARY technology radios, and on and on and on! When and where in the heck do you think our proprietary technology was developed? In a dark dungeon, hidden from amateurs? Heck no, it was our employees with ham licenses! We or our competitors will not devote that many resources to amateur radio because of many millions and millions of dollars invested there is NO WAY we could recover even 1% of our stock holders investment by participating in an extremely small market, a market that is traditionally non profitable... you know what that market is? Yep, amateur radio! Why have dozens and dozens of firms gotten out of the ham market? Why have dozens & dozens of firms gone out of business? Trying to support a market that just is not big enough to provide the sales and profit to survive! The only reason the biggies Kenwood, Yaesu, Icom, etc. are in the Amateur radio market is because they have a management team that are hams, have a love for the amateur and have enough commercial business to finance and bankroll the amateur effort! Let their commercial business get in trouble or profits shrink... which segment do you think they will dispose of? Yep, amateur! Just as many others have done so in the past (Collins, Johnson, Drake, etc., etc.). An announcement was just made a few weeks ago by another for these reasons.... was I disappointed because they pulled a leading edge technology out of the amateur market, YES! Do I understand? Damn sure do... been there, done that! Was it a technology that parallels our firm? Yes! Digital RF! Not FHSS but nevertheless.... These kind of inconsiderations and attitudes as expressed by Hamish, Jeff & a few others (thanks for these types being of a minority) makes it very difficult for those of us who do care and will do what we can for the amateur community but have an uphill climb to convince those in our firms that are higher in seniority and can override us when we do go in and ask for something for the amateur community. The first thing they usually do is say: "You want me to do whatever with all the BS and negatives being thrown at you or our company from the amateurs? But boss, they are a minority.... yes Paul, but the public remembers all the bad and forget the good! We don't need it... go away and bring me something that will turn an immediate profit, right now and make our stock holders happy and so I can grow the company, ad infinitum, etc.!" This is what bugs me about some folks... they look at ONLY a small segment of something and do not even consider the bigger, overall picture!! Man, did I get up on a soap box, or what? Best regards, Paul McInnish - K4BET Cirronet, Inc. (formerly Digital Wireless) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hamish Moffatt" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 9:20 AM Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio : On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 12:45:19PM -0700, Shawn T. Rutledge wrote: : > On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 10:59:02AM -0400, Paul McInnish wrote: : > > OK, Jeff, you bucket mouth, sanctimonious lid and self appointed amateur : > > radio/internet cop, here is some more "commercializing"... : > : > I think we've had enough of your personal attacks. I can't see that : > Jeff did a whole lot to provoke this; only noticed that you present a : > "dangling carrot" - products which might be useful if only they were : > modified a little, but your company won't sell them to us anyway. : : Yes; to be fair, Paul said just a couple of days ago that their : products cannot be modified for use in the amateur band (or at : least, they won't do it). So I wonder why Paul thinks they are : of continual interest to amateurs on this list. : : : Hamish : -- : Hamish Moffatt VK3SB : : --- : You are currently subscribed to ss as: k4bet@digital-wireless.com : To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org : --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Jun 29 10:58:29 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id KAA18660 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 10:58:20 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Paul McInnish" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 11:59:44 -0400 Organization: Cirronet, Inc. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: <00b801c100b4$83892100$6b00a8c0@PMcInnish> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Chris... right on! Yep! (Jeff, please note... here is another commercialization... by me) The length, speed and content of the hopset can be modified in our radio via the configuration software we provide with the radio (not to mention a few hundred other parameters that can be modified). Best regards, Paul McInnish - K4BET Cirronet, Inc. (formerly Digital Wireless) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Anderson" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 11:26 AM Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio : A "Standard" is a propriatary solution that a very big company forced on a given : market. It seems to me that if your making WLAN cards for under 100 meters under : 100mW and under $200 802.11 aint bad. Thats typical consumer office product : fare. We don't make office products. We sell to a different market who's needs : are different. They want different things because they have a different : application. Thus, for our market 802.11 isn't suitable. It's simply a matter of : don't try and use an HT for EME, you might hear something but you sure can't : count on it. : : I've been pondering creating a standard for FHSS actually but it's not real high : on the priority list. Another thing to keep in mind is that what a ham wants in : a SS radio is different from what many of our users want. For instance if I was : buying a SS radio for ham radio use, I'd expect to be able to alter the length, : speed and content of the hopset. Our customers want very very simple interfaces : with "as few things to mess with" as possable. A ham of course wants to mess : with EVERYTHING! 8) as it should be. : : : : : : : : : : Hamish Moffatt on 06/29/2001 08:19:23 AM : : Please respond to "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" : : : : : : : : : : To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" : : : cc: (bcc: Chris Anderson/NPD/GHI) : : : : Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio : : : : : : : : : On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 10:15:47AM -0500, Chris Anderson wrote: : > In our opinion, in general 802.11 isn't a good idea for reliable long range : > communicaitons. HEY! DO NOT FLAME ME ABOUT 802.11 I have no intrest in holy : war. : > I'm just explaining why WE chose not to be 802.11, our customers ususally want : > long range, thus the trade off. : > : > I don't know off hand if the 802.11 FHSS PHY definition says something similar : I : > suspect it does but ye'd want to look it up. : : Don't you think that standards-compliance is in the best interests of : the customers, though? It's to the customers' advantage if they can mix : products from different vendors, and that requires a standard like : 802.11. Otherwise they are locked in to your products. Something your : marketing department is probably quite happy with? : : : Hamish : -- : Hamish Moffatt VK3SB : : --- : You are currently subscribed to ss as: chris_anderson@grayhill.com : To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org : : : : : : --- : You are currently subscribed to ss as: k4bet@digital-wireless.com : To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org : --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Jun 29 13:53:57 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id NAA01953 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 13:53:51 -0500 (CDT) Errors-To: Message-ID: Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 14:53:19 -0400 From: Jeff King Organization: Aero Data Systems, Inc. X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3B3CCE9F.B19A5AA0@aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Paul McInnish wrote: > > Chris... right on! Yep! > > (Jeff, please note... here is another commercialization... by me) How is that? -Jeff --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Jun 29 18:17:26 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id SAA21556 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:17:21 -0500 (CDT) Errors-To: Message-ID: Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 19:16:55 -0400 From: Jeff King Organization: Aero Data Systems, Inc. X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3B3D0C67.4B312460@aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Paul McInnish wrote about Cirronet's mortal enemy, Jeff King, in a message to Hamish on 6/29/01: > contrary to what Jeff thinks Yes indeed Paul, why don't you tell everyone here what *I* think. I don't seem to even know myself. > you would read some of my previous flames when I was madder than all get out > @ Jeff... Was it the the lack of coffee that day or did you figure out yet why you were mad at me? I still haven't figured it out myself. Did I run your dog over or something? (on the claimed demise of amateur radio manufacturing (which btw, we have more now then ever, but don't want to break that illusion you hold)) > These kind of inconsiderations and attitudes as expressed by Hamish, Jeff & > a few others (thanks for these types being of a minority) makes it very > difficult for those of us who do care and will do what we can for the > amateur community but have an uphill climb to convince those in our firms > that are higher in seniority and can override us when we do go in and ask > for something for the amateur community. Are you serious? I assure you I had nothing to do with Collins, Drake, Johnson or any other firm pulling out of the market. I don't even know you, and I doubt if Hamish does either. However, I do appreciate the thought of the world domination I hold over amateur radio manufacturing from my garage here in Farmington. Come to think of it, I was also blamed in 1985 for the 500 point slip of the Dow. You heard of that also? I did hear a rumor that Hamish caused the Asian markets to collapse a few years ago, he had said something negative about Dick Smith Electronics, any idea if that is true? (on trying to sell amateur radio to your firm) > The first thing they usually do is > say: "You want me to do whatever with all the BS and negatives being thrown > at you or our company from the amateurs? But boss, they are a minority.... Well, besides the fact you are your own worst enemy in regards to selling amateur radio to your firm (for a product) I can say this: Give me your bosses e-mail and I'd be happy to forward the positive things I said about your company. I've not said anything negative, and at worst, just gave you some ideas to improve the product. I've never seen anyone on here say anything negative about your company ... maybe I missed it, but what in the heck is going on with you? I'm certainly game to debate you if that is what you are trolling for, but give us a premise that has some basis in fact, better yet, do it in private e-mail. But for a real challenge, go on isp-wireless@isp-wireless.com list and try acting the way you are now. I don't see you on there flaming Judd Dare who just recently responded negatively to a trial of your equipment (and I don't happen to agree with him either). Yet your on a amateur radio list fighting your apparent holy war to defend your companies honor. You have nothing to defend here as no-one has wronged you. Your anger would be better spent on that other list, at least there would be some justification for it. > So, you want me and my > company to go away, if that is what you and the majority want, then I'll go > in & talk with our CEO and we can change ALL these things as related to > amateur radio. First of all, you need to chill out. You took one thing I said, heard it as you wanted to, and have been running with it ever since. The only one that ever said they wanted you to leave was yourself. If you actually would have taken the time to read my response, you would have seen I have been very complimentary about your company.... go back and read my earlier comments. (one of which I attached at the bottom) If you can't accept that, and if all you want to do is vent, can I suggest you just do it in private e-mail instead of using this list for whatever twisted personal vendetta you have? Frankly I don't even know you, and for the life of me don't know what I did to you or your company to cause such a bizarre reaction from you. > This is what bugs me about some folks... they look at ONLY a small segment > of something and do not even consider the bigger, overall picture!! Advice you might want to take yourself. > Man, did I get up on a soap box, or what? And I'm sure everyone on the TAPR Spread Spectrum mailing list was glued to their seats reading it all. I wonder how many have unsubscribed? -Jeff Jeff King wrote on 6/27/01: > > Paul McInnish wrote: > > > Dog gone it, our radios will not tune down (actually they will, but firmware > > controlled and we are not going to let anyone have the code to modify the > > radio firmware). > > As you well shouldn't, being that is how you make your money. However, how about > walking over to your software group and asking them how hard it would be to do > this? Might be a nice contribution Cirronet can make to amateur radio. One way > to sell this (trivial?) modification to management would be to explain to them it > would give them a pool of RF literate beta testers that would actually purchase > the equipment. > > > However, seeing as how ours are in the ISM band, you can > > use them legally! We have ALL the FCC, ETSI, Industry Canada & CE > > certifications! > > Yes, under Part 15 but not Part 97? I think your units are frequency hoppers, > and they may visit the non amateur part of the ISM in their stock configuration. > > Changing gears... > > Say, have you given any thought to my idea of making a 900mhz WISP version? I really > like Cirronet's vision with regards to a CPE unit for the WISP market. As far > as I am concerned, you are the only company that is truly making a WISP product > and not a warmed over WLAN product. A 900mhz hopper, would making deployment in > truly rural areas much easier. Give it some thought, I think your old company > already had a 900mhz hopper although I'm not sure if it was in the ISDN speed > class (128K-256K). > > Regards, > > Jeff wb8wka > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Jun 29 18:23:59 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id SAA22156 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 18:23:52 -0500 (CDT) From: "Steve Stroh" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: SS, Amateur Radio Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 16:20:51 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Paul's postings SHOULD be of interest to all Amateurs interested in Spread Spectrum because his company's products are a close commercial fit to what could be accomplished in Amateur Radio using Frequency Hopping Spread Spectrum. In my professional capacity, writing full-time about Broadband Wireless Internet Access, I've watched Cirronet evolve its product into one of the very few wireless systems that's truly suitable for small Internet Service providers. Cirronet _thoroughly_ worked through the various problems, both RF and non-RF and their system is good. Paul's actually let slip a few details in his postings that I haven't been able to get from my official interviews with the company, including one with Cirronet's CEO a few days ago. You're getting some real insider, been-there-done-that perspective here, folks. Over the next few years, as Editor of TAPR's Packet Status Register newsletter, I can say that the PSR will be devoting a lot of space to trying to learn lessons from companies with innovative products like Cirronet's in order to gain some ideas and perspective for what could be done in Amateur Radio. Paul, for the record, let me add MY voice to the chorus for you not to unsubscribe from ss; we've lost too many worthy voices already, and your contributions have proven to be particularly relevant and valuable. Thanks, Steve Stroh N8GNJ Editor, TAPR Packet Status Register newsletter -- Steve Stroh steve@strohpub.com 425-481-0600 ICQ 68879994 Independent Technology Writer Specializing in Broadband Wireless Internet Access Focus on Broadband Wireless Internet Access newsletter - http://www.strohpub.com/focus.htm > -----Original Message----- > From: bounce-ss-4757@lists.tapr.org > [mailto:bounce-ss-4757@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of Hamish Moffatt > Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 06:20 > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio > > Yes; to be fair, Paul said just a couple of days ago that their > products cannot be modified for use in the amateur band (or at > least, they won't do it). So I wonder why Paul thinks they are > of continual interest to amateurs on this list. > > > Hamish > -- > Hamish Moffatt VK3SB > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Jun 29 20:33:52 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id UAA29101 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 20:33:45 -0500 (CDT) Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "J.R. Marlow" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 20:34:24 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2462.0000 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: <001201c10104$cb6ed5a0$1fdc02cf@jrsloptop> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Maybe I am missing something. We have successful 27 mile hops using. DSSS 802.11 gear. 30db narrow beamwidth antennas and 500mw amps. Throughput is not an issue if your RSSI is good. Interference or jamming is not a problem because the antenna beamwidth is only 7 deg. What did they add to the 802.11 spec that limits this over distance? Please explain further. J.R. -----Original Message----- From: bounce-ss-18540@lists.tapr.org [mailto:bounce-ss-18540@lists.tapr.org] On Behalf Of Paul McInnish Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 9:59 AM To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio Ryan... a couple of comments.... Two issues you will run into with the 802.11 link and those are.... 1. Even at two miles, the "string" is stretched way beyond the intent of 802.11 product and your data thru-put will be slower - as we say here in Jawja - than molasses! 10 miles, even if you used 25 - 35 dBi parabolic dishes will suffer even more thru-put slow down... if you can make a link. 2. The other issue and even with the 2 mile hop... remembering that 802.11 products are theoretically built around a 'standard' that will allow other manufacturers products to talk to each other and the chances of other 802.11 devices, of every conceivable type, being anywhere near a extended path such as your 2 mile path are really highly likely and you will have so much jamming going on that the apparent data thru-put, at times, will be non-existent or slower than "molasses" (we have run tests here in metro Hotlanta and found this to be true... with much, much shorter paths than your 2 miles). OK, Jeff, you bucket mouth, sanctimonious lid and self appointed amateur radio/internet cop, here is some more "commercializing"... This is some of the many reason's our firm and several other competitive firms that are in the digital RF data transceiver business choose NOT to buy into the 802.11 standard. Best regards, Paul McInnish - K4BET ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ryan Wilkins" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 10:12 AM Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio : Just for my own curiosity, what kind of restrictions does 802.11 impose on : packet turn around to limit range? I, and a group of friends, am trying to : setup a wireless point to point link using 2mbps 802.11 FHSS PC-Cards. We were : able to get the devices linked at 2 miles. We're trying for 10 miles but that : may be too much of a stretch, not to mention a lot of free space attenuation : along with god knows what else in the way. We may make the move to DSSS cards : instead but I dont know that it will really help us any. : : In a different experiment a year or two ago, we tried running a 2Mbps link 6 : miles but never could close the link 100%. We were constantly showing packet : losses anywhere from 30% to 70%. I had several thoughts of what could have : contributed to the problem but never really investigated it much further. : : Ryan Wilkins : N8YHV : : On Wed, 27 Jun 2001, Chris Anderson wrote: : : > I'm afraid I'm locked up with work. I've got 3 projects already so I never have : > time to do anything outside work. : > : > As for our 2.4Ghz radio, it's a 2mbps QPSK radio. It's not actually 802.11 as : > 802.11 places some restrictions on packet turnaround that limit range while our : > product is designed for 5+ mile links. I was pondering putting a PLL on the : > Gunns at one time just fer grins but I never got aroud to it. : > : > : > : > : > : > : > : > : > Kerry Banke on 06/27/2001 11:34:20 AM : > : > Please respond to "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" : > : > : > : > : > : > : > : > : > : > To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" : > : > : > cc: (bcc: Chris Anderson/NPD/GHI) : > : > : > : > Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio : > : > : > : > : > : > : > : > : > Chris - Thanks for thereply - The 10 Ghz portion of such a project is my : > strong suite as I have been hosting the San Diego Microwave Group for over : > 14 years now & maintain a pretty decent home lab for working up through 12 : > Ghz. I have access to lot's of Qualcomm scrap for which I have developed : > conversion procedures to produce synthesized 10 GHz transverters with 1 dB : > noise figure and 1W output. These units of course solve all of the : > frequency drift problems as well as are much higher performance all around : > than the GUNN units. The bandwidth of the transverters can be just about : > anything we'd possibly need (100 MHz+). If you'd be interested in getting : > together on making a 10 Ghz wideband link, I'd be interested in working : > with you. If you already have a pair of 802.11 radios that you'd like to : > put on 10 GHz, I'll be happy to make up a pair of 10 Ghz transverters to : > match. Is the 802.11 simplex or full duplex? I haven't tried configuring : > one of the 10 GHz transverters for full duplex but don't see why that : > shouldn't be possible. I've got some committments through the Summer for : > some Ham microwave activities but could work on such a project this fall. : > - Kerry N6IZW : > : > At 10:54 AM 6/27/01 -0500, you wrote: : > >I haven't been paying much attention to the PCMCIA cards raelly as they're all : > >pretty much one of the Prism chipsets. I have some generics that have reverse : > >MMCX connectors on them but I haven't done much with them. If I were you I'd : > >pick up one of the 802.11 Breezecom radios and rip it apart. They usually : > >have a : > >conn inside for the antennas. If I were me of course I'd just use our radio as : > >it's got a reverse TNC. I don't expect your looking for a router though. : > > : > > : > >10GHz eh? I've been bulding this N6GN microwave data link project now for : > about : > >4 years 8) I just picked up some 24GHz MA/COM Gunns to try. I have a pair of : > >10GHz as well but I never quote seem to get time to mess with it. : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > >Kerry Banke on 06/27/2001 10:11:20 AM : > > : > >Please respond to "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" : > > : > > : > > cc: (bcc: Chris Anderson/NPD/GHI) : > > : > > : > > : > > Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > >I've been following the recent email on the reflector & woud like to : > >consider taking a pair of cheap 2.4 GHz 802.11 SS radios and translate : > >them to the 10 GHz Amateur band. What units are low cost and will provide : > >an external antenna jack that I can use to connect to a transverter? : > >Frequency doesn't matter as I can make the transverter match anything I : > >want. I've seen the Syncbyair PCMCIA 2.4 GHz units on Ebay but don't know : > >if thay have external antenna connections available or If they present any : > >other special problems. Any input on this would be appreciated. : > > : > >At 09:44 AM 6/27/01 -0500, Chris Anderson wrote: : > >>I'd like to add my voice to the Jeffs's there, don't give up. I haven't : > made a : > >>contact for years but as I develop SS radios for a living I still hold out : > >hope : > > : > > : > >--- : > >You are currently subscribed to ss as: chris_anderson@grayhill.com : > >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org : > > : > > : > > : > > : > > : > >--- : > >You are currently subscribed to ss as: KBANKE@QUALCOMM.COM : > >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org : > > : > : > : > --- : > You are currently subscribed to ss as: chris_anderson@grayhill.com : > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org : > : > : > : > : > : > --- : > You are currently subscribed to ss as: RYAN@DEADFROG.NET : > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org : > : > : : : --- : You are currently subscribed to ss as: k4bet@digital-wireless.com : To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org : --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: jr@skyhop.net To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Jun 29 21:21:52 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id VAA01889 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 21:21:46 -0500 (CDT) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 12:20:23 +1000 From: Hamish Moffatt To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio Message-ID: Mail-Followup-To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from k4bet@cirronet.com on Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 11:54:04AM -0400 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <20010630122023.A24358@silly.cloud.net.au> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 11:54:04AM -0400, Paul McInnish wrote: > Hamish... (to quote your response: "So I wonder why Paul thinks they are of > continual interest to amateurs on this list.") of considerable interest > because we do support amateur radio - contrary to what Jeff thinks - and if > you would read some of my previous flames when I was madder than all get out > @ Jeff... you'll read where we have donated, provided and supplied tons of > radios to the amateur community! Provided a lot of money to support various > 'things', etc., etc., etc., etc. As we carry on this diatribe, our radios > are being used right now, in many many NON commercial amateur > applications!!!!! Another reason... when I threatened to unsubscribe... I > got tons of e-mail asking me to 'stick around' and continue contributing in > what little infinite small way I or my firm could! Sorry Paul.. my mistake. However you did say recently: "Dog gone it, our radios will not tune down (actually they will, but firmware controlled and we are not going to let anyone have the code to modify the radio firmware)". ... which made me wonder what the amateur connection was. Is an amateur better off operating SS under part 15 or part 97? I haven't followed all the arguments (especially as it doesn't apply to me, as I live in Australia), but it sounds like part 15 gives you a larger band but lower maximum power. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Jun 29 21:53:04 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id VAA03166 for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2001 21:53:04 -0500 (CDT) Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Message-ID: Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 21:50:26 -0500 From: Gerry Creager N5JXS Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Organization: Da House X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: <3B3D3E72.9556A3B4@cs.tamu.edu> Precedence: bulk What you missed is acommon misconception amongst users of 802.11(x) gear. There are different variants of it. There's the local access point variant. Variable (and various) power levels and authentication schemes. There's the ethernet wireless bridge. Yagis are allowed, as are other more esoteric and functional antennae for the frequency... if not the bandwidth. There are significant variations in encryption and security, none very effective at this point, unless you preencrypt before submitting to the ethernet port. We are currently accomplishing an 11 mile link with one hop due to path obscuration. We plan to establish another over a 16 mile path, single hop. The primary limits are obscuration and interference. Note: If you superimpose a 2.4 GHz cordless phone directly in your path, your margin may go down the tubes precipitously... and putting one near an access point is just plain silly. Throughput can be affected by load, signal strength, multipath interference and congestion. I'll assume jamming is not a real issue _yet_ but I'm on a university campus where you never know what the kids might just do for sport! 73, gerry -- "J.R. Marlow" wrote: > > Maybe I am missing something. > We have successful 27 mile hops using. DSSS 802.11 gear. 30db narrow > beamwidth antennas and 500mw amps. Throughput is not an issue if your > RSSI is good. Interference or jamming is not a problem because the > antenna beamwidth is only 7 deg. What did they add to the 802.11 spec > that limits this over distance? Please explain further. -- Gerry Creager -- gerry@cs.tamu.edu Network Engineering |Research focusing on Academy for Advanced Telecommunications |Satellite Geodesy and and Learning Technologies |Geodetic Control Texas A&M University 979.458.4020 (Phone) -- 979.847.8578 (Fax) --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Jun 30 03:18:26 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id DAA28705 for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 03:18:22 -0500 (CDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: Devin Butterfield To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: SS, Amateur Radio Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 01:19:48 -0700 References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <01063001194800.56342@dbm.wireless.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk On Friday 29 June 2001 4:20, you wrote: > Paul's postings SHOULD be of interest to all Amateurs interested in Spread > Spectrum because his company's products are a close commercial fit to what > could be accomplished in Amateur Radio using Frequency Hopping Spread > Spectrum. Yeah, I guess you're right. It's too bad that paul is proving himself to be a complete asshole. > Paul's actually let slip a few details in his postings that I haven't been > able to get from my official interviews with the company, including one > with Cirronet's CEO a few days ago. You're getting some real insider, > been-there-done-that perspective here, folks. Oh, please. So we should all tolerate this man (boy) and his temper tantrums because he supposedly has information we need? > Paul, for the record, let me add MY voice to the chorus for you not to > unsubscribe from ss; we've lost too many worthy voices already, and your > contributions have proven to be particularly relevant and valuable. This is essentially telling paul that it's ok to flood this list with flames and other nonsense whenever he feels like it, because he is too valuable to lose. Look, I'm not attacking you Steve, but I think that tolerating this kind of behavior is very bad policy for a public mailing list. Everyone, no matter how "relevant and valuable" their posts may be perceived, should be respectful of others. This means having a little self control (anger management). -- Regards, Devin. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Jun 30 08:26:00 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id IAA22681 for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 08:25:54 -0500 (CDT) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 08:25:12 -0500 (CDT) From: John Koster To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: SS, Amateur Radio In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Thank goodness someone finally fixed the spelling of Amateur. John Koster, W9DDD --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Jun 30 09:04:25 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id JAA24341 for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 09:04:22 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 10:04:09 -0400 From: Mike Rafferty X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: SS, Amateur Radio References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3B3DDC59.ED3916FA@zoomnet.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Might have been more appropriate to the thread if it had been AMANURE! Mike, N8CUG John Koster wrote: > Thank goodness someone finally fixed the spelling of Amateur. > > John Koster, W9DDD > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: MRAFF@ZOOMNET.NET > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Jun 30 09:25:51 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id JAA24946 for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 09:25:51 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Paul McInnish" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Owner: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk X-MDMail-Server: MDaemon v2.0 rU b1 32 X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: tlang@freeway.apana.org.au Jeff... Bull $#&%, I HAVE NOT BEEN PROMOTING OUR PRODUCTS! You asked questions and I responded to them, in detail! If you did NOT want detailed answers or want the world to see the answers, you should have asked OFF LINE and I would have responded OFF LINE! Another point... by giving detailed answers for the world to see... there is always a slim chance that someone may learn there is more than one way to do something... some other application... some other need... Yes, I - and here comes another push for my company as you would see it - support amateur radio! I... we (here is another "promotion as you would see it"), have donated tons of product to various amateur radio groups for use in such applications as repeater control (point - to - point & point - to - multipoint of various remote receiver sites, etc.), balloon chase groups, data logging for public service events (parades, charity drives that amateur radio operators provide communications for, etc.). We (the company) bought and paid for and pay the monthly bills for a repeater and some remote sites, etc., etc., etc. And I did not want to mention it but I asked the Engineering group to investigate some way the products could be shifted to use the Part 97 bands and somehow keep us out of trouble in the Part 15 bands... they agreed! I can assure you, that push just stopped at my direction! You happy?? This is last and final response to you in public! I resent your chastisement in public! I do not want to see any more reference by you about me or my company in public! You are the kind of loud mouth that cause companies like ours to turn away from providing any support of any kind to amateur radio! The almighty self appointed police of the airways and internet! For the benefit of those that may read all of my above diatribe, I apologize to you and now that my anger has calmed down... this is my last post - of any kind - to this list! Paul McInnish ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff King" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 6:32 PM Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio : : : Paul McInnish wrote: : : (on suggesting cirronet support amateur radio use of their product) : : > 4th.... Our fastest growing segment of our business is the WISP business! : > We only sell to (financially sound) ISP's & Telco's. : : OK, sorry, didn't think I was out of line asking as this is a amateur radio list and : you have been posting promoting your companies products here. : : : -Jeff : : : : : >Paul McInnish - K4BET : >Manager, Business Development : >Cirronet, Inc. (formerly Digital Wireless) : >5375 Oakbrook Parkway : >Norcross, GA 30093, USA : > : >Direct Phone: 678.684.2011 : >Fax: 678.684.2001 : >Cell Phone: 678.429.2124 : > : >Web site: http://www.cirronet.com : : --- : You are currently subscribed to ss as: k4bet@digital-wireless.com : To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org : --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: tlang@freeway.apana.org.au To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Jun 30 11:57:20 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id LAA04353 for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 11:57:19 -0500 (CDT) From: "Steve Stroh" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: SS, Amateur Radio Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 09:54:21 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Devin: If MY record was absolutely spotless regarding inappropriate responses on a public list, I might have been tempted to be more critical. But it's not, and sometimes we're all just a bit too human when someone says or does something that rubs us the wrong way. Later, we wish we hadn't done that, but too late, it's in public, in its full glory, for as long as the archives last. So, we go on, having endured another abject lesson in being only too human. If the point of this list is to learn about Spread Spectrum technologies as could be applied to Amateur Radio (the reason I'M here), then I think that, on balance, Paul's postings have been more valuable than not. I'm on a number of lists where it's important that I be there because I can't get that information in any other place. So, no matter how obnoxious some of the inmates, er, posters can get, I put up with it because, on balance, there's far more "signal" than "noise". In such a case where there are only a few that are obnoxious, the worst of them can easily be filtered out and I don't see any of their postings. On some lists, the noise/signal ratio rises above my threshold, and I unsubscribe. That Cirronet doesn't sell to Amateurs doesn't concern me at all. Neither does Motorola, Ericsson, EF Johnson, Ritron, etc. The main point is that we can learn some lessons why Cirronet made the technical decisions they did with their Spread Spectrum product, and how they made it low cost, high speed, robust (to interference), etc. I'd HAPPILY tolerate mention of other commercial, non-Amateur spread spectrum products on this list if the poster made a similar effort to explain why they did things the way they did. Thanks, Steve -- Steve Stroh steve@strohpub.com 425-481-0600 ICQ 68879994 Independent Technology Writer Specializing in Broadband Wireless Internet Access Focus on Broadband Wireless Internet Access newsletter - http://www.strohpub.com/focus.htm > -----Original Message----- > From: bounce-ss-24593@lists.tapr.org > [mailto:bounce-ss-24593@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of Devin Butterfield > Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2001 01:20 > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] Re: SS, Amateur Radio > > Yeah, I guess you're right. It's too bad that paul is proving > himself to be a > complete @#$%^&*. [edited- N8GNJ] > > Oh, please. So we should all tolerate this man (boy) and his > temper tantrums > because he supposedly has information we need? > > This is essentially telling paul that it's ok to flood this list > with flames > and other nonsense whenever he feels like it, because he is too > valuable to > lose. > > Look, I'm not attacking you Steve, but I think that tolerating > this kind of > behavior is very bad policy for a public mailing list. Everyone, > no matter > how "relevant and valuable" their posts may be perceived, should be > respectful of others. This means having a little self control (anger > management). > -- > Regards, Devin. > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Jun 30 18:26:06 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id SAA28140 for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 18:26:01 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: From: "Chuck Hast" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 19:25:07 -0500 Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Priority: Normal MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [ss] Re: Re: SS, Amateur Radio List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: <200106302325.f5UNPDp00117@smtp-server2.tampabay.rr.com> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk I believe that as Steve said, we have allowed our humanity to show all to much. Each side had valid points on the other, but in the end what we ended up with was a bitter pissing contest in which each side took offense at the other and now we have dripping bitterness on the list. Paul has stated with pride some very interesting points about is product, and indeed a produce for which he is proud to represent, and as several have pointed out is a very good product, indeed though it uses proprietary protocols, it gets the job done in a excellent fashion. Agreed there was some "carrot dangling" done, and at times I felt that it may have been a but too commercial but pardoned it because as was pointed out there was some very good data and not even buried deep (Paul you put a lot more out about your product than many would expect for a proprietary product) Folks, here is my cure for the fast punch on the keyboard, I carry a 45 calibre bullet in my coin wallet, and when I run into something that I want to either exact my ire on via the keyboard or by my big mouth or other more radical means, I pull that bullet out and BITE on it, big time (one of these days I am going to break a tooth doing that) and usually after clinching on it a bit I have cooled down to the point of not retaliating. The trick is to redirect that energy that you were going to direct to flying fingers, flapping lips, a fist or other obnoxious ways of getting your point across, then after you have taken that energy out on something that will not cause so much damage (cat, dog, kid, wall, rock, etc. you make your choice) you can usually set down and make your points without being toxic and obnoxious. I would hope that we can see some exchange of niceties and get on about spread spectrum. Those that took abrasion at Paul, I can understand why, but at the same time he has made some very valid points, making the information very valuable. Paul I can send you a 45 calibre bullet, you are very proud of the company you work for, and the hits I know were felt, but you too should take it out on something beside the keyboard THEN after things have settled down you can usually make a clearer less violent assessment of the issue. I know of others who have been the brunt of similar situations, they have done a lot of things for the amateur community, but they still get hung out to dry (I personally have the tee shirt with the bullet holes) by some who do not know all the facts( Had one turkey here in Tampa tell me that I had skeletons in my closet when I challenged him on some improper operations such as purchasing packet equipment from a out of area manufacturer when there where TWO right here in they bay area who would have given the gear to the county, that gear still does not work and he is no longer active in amateur radio, I just took my skeletons out looked them over and put them back where they belonged, and dropped it, it was better than a fire fight.) I have seen post from all involved on both sides of this argument, I am talking about post prior to this flare up, and they were all very valid and had good information in them, I would not want to see ANY of you leave the list over this... Sooo... Folks can't we just get a long and please lets get back to SS and exchanging data on this very valid part of our hobby... I have a LASER list waiting so shall go over there for now.... Chuck Hast e-mail kp4djt@tampabay.rr.com ---- FPAC ---- www.qsl.net/fpac/ --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Jun 30 22:11:08 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id WAA09969 for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2001 22:11:02 -0500 (CDT) From: N8BLK@aol.com Message-ID: Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 23:09:23 EDT Subject: [ss] Re: SS, Ricochet, etc To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_c4.16819cd5.286fee63_boundary" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk --part1_c4.16819cd5.286fee63_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 6/26/2001 19:46:08 Eastern Daylight Time, kb9mwr@yahoo.com writes: >[Don't confuse me for someone else Jeff.. Like I said I see no "real" >difference between part 15 & 97 opperation. I'm still that 22 yr old >who has lost most all interest in traditional amateur radio. I >really could care less what other hams do.] The difference between part 97 & 15 is that a part 15 user can't produce interference, and must accept any interference which crops up. If hams really want to reclaim the band, nothing stops said hams from using them, since not only can they use more power, but hams supposedly are not supposed to be interfered with by part 15 devices. It wouldn't take many hams operating on 900 communicating with other amateurs to make life just about impossible for part 15 devices. Of course, hams can't intentionally interfere with other services either, but they have no duty to protect folks they can't hear, and they can complain if part 15 devices interfere with them. Another point to consider is that quite frankly, hams are about to lose most of the incredibly high RF bands they once had exclusive claim to, or had secondary assignments with no primary or a primary military user. At some point, hams are going to regret not making use of the bands for which equipment is now available, or could be cobbled together rather easily from commercial parts. The other point to consider is that part 97 usage is subject to limitations on what can be done with any equipment. One would probably lose one's license downloading some websites via amateur radio, even if a part 15 user on the same frequencies would not. Thus there are some advantages to being a part 15 user not available to a part 97 user. -art clemons- --part1_c4.16819cd5.286fee63_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 6/26/2001 19:46:08 Eastern Daylight Time, kb9mwr@yahoo.com
writes:


>[Don't confuse me for someone else Jeff.. Like I said I see no "real"
>difference between part 15 & 97 opperation.  I'm still that 22 yr old
>who has lost most all interest in traditional amateur radio.  I
>really could care less what other hams do.]



The difference between part 97 & 15 is that a part 15 user can't produce
interference, and must accept any interference which crops up.  If hams
really want to reclaim the band, nothing stops said hams from using them,
since not only can they use more power, but hams supposedly are not supposed
to be interfered with by part 15 devices.  It wouldn't take many hams
operating on 900 communicating with other amateurs to make life just about
impossible for part 15 devices.  Of course, hams can't intentionally
interfere with other services either, but they have no duty to protect folks
they can't hear, and they can complain if part 15 devices interfere with them.

Another point to consider is that quite frankly, hams are about to lose most
of the incredibly high RF bands they once had exclusive claim to, or had
secondary assignments with no primary or a primary military user.  At some
point, hams are going to regret not making use of the bands for which
equipment is now available, or could be cobbled together rather easily from
commercial parts.  The other point to consider is that part 97 usage is
subject to limitations on what can be done with any equipment.   One would
probably lose one's license downloading some websites via amateur radio, even
if a part 15 user on the same frequencies would not.  Thus there are some
advantages to being a part 15 user not available to a part 97 user.
-art clemons- --part1_c4.16819cd5.286fee63_boundary-- --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org