From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Aug 1 16:50:10 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 QAA27788 for ; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 16:50:08 -0500 (CDT) Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2001 16:49:09 -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: <200108012149.f71Ln9M19207@faulkner.netnet.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk On the subject of modifying / buying off the shelf FHSS gear with a modified band plan for amateur use: >All PC modem cards come with software which enables you to change >the country settings. Setting the wrong one will take modem parameters >outside national or regional (EU, ETSI) standards. Nothing more than >a warning against modifying your modem in this way is required in the >handbook. A simple warning makes since to me. No company can really prevent an anyone from modifying something, I doubt they could be held responsible for something wrong the consumer does with their product. But I'm not sure what kind of restrictions manufactures have to abide by. Just for everyone's info most of wireless cards out there are obviously mass produced and have undocumented (pre set) settings for US, France, Spain and Japan band plans. (And some manufactures have settings for other countries) The manufacture sets this county code using special software) to the county where the product will be sold. And setting or changing the county code adjusts the frequency operating range, and power output slightly to comply with that particular countries standards. However the only two counties that I know of that have ISM band plans that end before 2450 MHz (end of the US amateur overlap) are Australia and Saudi Arabia. So if you can sweet talk a manufacture to sell you a FHSS card programmed with either of those countries codes your in business. It would be even better if we (hams) could easily change these parameters ourselves somehow. This is why I think it would be well worth the time to reverse compile some of the drivers out there, you might just figure out how to change these parameters yourself. Using Part 15 Wireless Ethernet Cards For Amateur Radio: 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 Aug 1 17:36:07 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 RAA01336 for ; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 17:36:06 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: From: Tony Langdon To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 08:35:07 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" 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 > However the only two counties that I know of that have ISM band plans > that end before 2450 MHz (end of the US amateur overlap) are Australia > and Saudi Arabia. Hmm, Australia's wireless LAN band ends at 2463 MHz (4W EIRP), though US spec devices are allowed up to 2483 MHz at 200mW EIRP. --- 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 Aug 1 18:29:42 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 SAA04356 for ; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 18:29:39 -0500 (CDT) Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2001 18:28:51 -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: <200108012328.f71NSpM06005@faulkner.netnet.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk >Hmm, Australia's wireless LAN band ends at 2463 MHz (4W EIRP), though US >spec devices are allowed up to 2483 MHz at 200mW EIRP. Really? I was told by Proxim that the Australian band plan would assure propper overlap. And some info I found said the Australian 1W + Antenna gain ISM band allocations are 2400-2445, and the 200 mW US Spec allocations are 2400-2483.5. And the same piece of info says Saudi Arabia's ISM allocations are 2413-2439. Does anyone else know of any other countries who's 2.4 GHz ISM allocations end at or before 2450 MHz? --- 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 Aug 1 20:02:40 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 UAA09604 for ; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 20:02:40 -0500 (CDT) From: "erik" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2001 17:54:14 -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 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 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 Althought not the same, but Canada's current regs allow "outdoor" use of ISM above 2450MHz until July of 2002. Usage below 2450MHz must be indoors only. > -----Original Message----- > From: bounce-ss-22085@lists.tapr.org > [mailto:bounce-ss-22085@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of Steve Lampereur > Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 4:29 PM > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio > > > >Hmm, Australia's wireless LAN band ends at 2463 MHz (4W EIRP), though US > >spec devices are allowed up to 2483 MHz at 200mW EIRP. > > Really? I was told by Proxim that the Australian band plan would assure > propper overlap. And some info I found said the Australian 1W + Antenna > gain ISM band allocations are 2400-2445, and the 200 mW US Spec > allocations are 2400-2483.5. And the same piece of info says Saudi > Arabia's ISM allocations are 2413-2439. > > Does anyone else know of any other countries who's 2.4 GHz ISM > allocations end at or before 2450 MHz? > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: erik@neurosis.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 Aug 1 20:27:53 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 UAA11929 for ; Wed, 1 Aug 2001 20:27:52 -0500 (CDT) Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2001 20:27:00 -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: <200108020127.f721QxM29442@faulkner.netnet.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk At least that helps protect the 2.4 GHz amateur band. In most large US cites the 2.4 amateur band is trashed by the Part 15/ISM band stuff >Althought not the same, but Canada's current regs allow "outdoor" use >of ISM above 2450MHz until July of 2002. Usage below 2450MHz must be >indoors only. Here a couple links for info on international ISM allocations (scroll down a bit for the tables): http://www.conformity.com/0008emc1.html http://www.ask-technologies.com/freqaksframe.html My extracted text version: http://www.qsl.net/kb9mwr/projects/wireless/int-ism.txt --- 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 Aug 2 00:26:19 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 AAA03361 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 00:26:13 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: From: Tony Langdon To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 09:38:50 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" 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 > >Hmm, Australia's wireless LAN band ends at 2463 MHz (4W > EIRP), though US > >spec devices are allowed up to 2483 MHz at 200mW EIRP. > > Really? I was told by Proxim that the Australian band plan > would assure > propper overlap. And some info I found said the Australian > 1W + Antenna Hmm, I'll have to try and drag out the proper document from www.aca.gov.au... But 2463 and 2483 come to mind. A local ham has worked in the industry and lamented the fact that the ISM band extends outside the amateur band... --- 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 Aug 2 07:45:58 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 HAA08164 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 07:45:57 -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, 2 Aug 2001 08:48:12 -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: <002601c11b51$64016b00$6b00a8c0@PMcInnish> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Does the reflector allow small PDF documents to be attached? If so, I can post a PDF file that has some tables with ISM frequency allocations of the world and some other requirements. Best regards, Paul McInnish - K4BET Manager, Business Development Cirronet, Inc. (formerly Digital Wireless) 5375 Oakbrook Parkway Norcross, GA 30093, USA Direct Phone: 678.684.2011 Fax: 678.684.2001 Cell Phone: 678.429.2124 Web site: http://www.cirronet.com --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Aug 2 07:54:56 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id HAA09031 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 07:54:51 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Jim Pearce" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 08:53:31 -0300 Organization: Pegasus Technologies MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: <001701c11b49$c1118d00$0200a8c0@mshome.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Hi Paul: Glad to see you still here after all the arrows you have taken! How about a link to the pdf file instead of an attachment? 73, Jim W4DY --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Aug 2 08:04:32 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id IAA09294 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 08:04:31 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Paul McInnish" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: Australia ISM Band Plan Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 09:06:44 -0400 Organization: Cirronet, Inc. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: <004701c11b53$fa876fa0$6b00a8c0@PMcInnish> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Here is the table as cut from the ACA web site.... (http://www.aca.gov.au/publications/info/spreadsp.htm) Table 1 - Spread Spectrum Devices Frequency Bands and Power Limits Frequency Band (MHz) 915 to 928 Maximum Equivalent Isotropically Radiated Power (EIRP) 1 watt Frequency Band (MHz) 2400 to 2463 Maximum Equivalent Isotropically Radiated Power (EIRP) 4 watts Frequency Band (MHz) 2463 to 2483.5 Maximum Equivalent Isotropically Radiated Power (EIRP) 200 milliwatts Frequency Band (MHz) 5725 to 5875 Maximum Equivalent Isotropically Radiated Power (EIRP) 1 watt 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 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tony Langdon" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 7:38 PM Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio : > >Hmm, Australia's wireless LAN band ends at 2463 MHz (4W : > EIRP), though US : > >spec devices are allowed up to 2483 MHz at 200mW EIRP. : > : > Really? I was told by Proxim that the Australian band plan : > would assure : > propper overlap. And some info I found said the Australian : > 1W + Antenna : : Hmm, I'll have to try and drag out the proper document from : www.aca.gov.au... But 2463 and 2483 come to mind. A local ham has worked : in the industry and lamented the fact that the ISM band extends outside the : amateur band... : : --- : 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 Aug 2 13:24:10 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 NAA09559 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 13:24:09 -0500 (CDT) Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 13:23:26 Subject: [ss] Ricochet up for auction, going dark? To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Robert Jeffrey King" 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" Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Message-Id: Precedence: bulk See the following: http://www.ricochet.net/auctioninfo/index.html http://www.go2mac.com/story.lasso?newsID=8142 Whatever happens, we are going to be seeing alot of their units on the surplus market soon. Would be a nice unit to convert to ham use. -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 Thu Aug 2 14:20:35 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 OAA21748 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 14:20:34 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: From: "M.A.Pinfold" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: Australia ISM Band Plan Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2001 07:31:58 +1200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 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: <000701c11b89$ccba1060$ec6d60cb@pinfold> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Just to add to the mayhem in NZ Restricted radiation devices http://www.med.govt.nz/rsm/publications/equip_specs/rfs29.pdf (up to 2483MHz) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul McInnish" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 1:06 AM Subject: [ss] Re: Australia ISM Band Plan > Here is the table as cut from the ACA web site.... > (http://www.aca.gov.au/publications/info/spreadsp.htm) > > Table 1 - Spread Spectrum Devices Frequency Bands and Power Limits > > Frequency Band (MHz) 915 to 928 > Maximum Equivalent Isotropically Radiated Power (EIRP) 1 watt > > Frequency Band (MHz) 2400 to 2463 > Maximum Equivalent Isotropically Radiated Power (EIRP) 4 watts > > Frequency Band (MHz) 2463 to 2483.5 > Maximum Equivalent Isotropically Radiated Power (EIRP) 200 milliwatts > > Frequency Band (MHz) 5725 to 5875 > Maximum Equivalent Isotropically Radiated Power (EIRP) 1 watt > > > 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 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tony Langdon" > To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" > Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 7:38 PM > Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio > > > : > >Hmm, Australia's wireless LAN band ends at 2463 MHz (4W > : > EIRP), though US > : > >spec devices are allowed up to 2483 MHz at 200mW EIRP. > : > > : > Really? I was told by Proxim that the Australian band plan > : > would assure > : > propper overlap. And some info I found said the Australian > : > 1W + Antenna > : > : Hmm, I'll have to try and drag out the proper document from > : www.aca.gov.au... But 2463 and 2483 come to mind. A local ham has worked > : in the industry and lamented the fact that the ISM band extends outside > the > : amateur band... > : > : --- > : 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: PINFOLD@XTRA.CO.NZ > 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 Aug 2 16:46:24 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 QAA08459 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 16:46:22 -0500 (CDT) From: "erik" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 14:37:49 -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 In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Importance: Normal 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 > At least that helps protect the 2.4 GHz amateur band. In most large > US cites the 2.4 amateur band is trashed by the Part 15/ISM band stuff Not for long, the plan was to protect licensed users but it will elapse next year. 2.4 is going to be trashed horribly in the next few years, especially with new wireless communities popping up. > -----Original Message----- > From: bounce-ss-22085@lists.tapr.org > [mailto:bounce-ss-22085@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of Steve Lampereur > Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 6:27 PM > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] Re: SS,Amature Radio > > > At least that helps protect the 2.4 GHz amateur band. In most large > US cites the 2.4 amateur band is trashed by the Part 15/ISM band stuff > > >Althought not the same, but Canada's current regs allow "outdoor" use > >of ISM above 2450MHz until July of 2002. Usage below 2450MHz must be > >indoors only. > > Here a couple links for info on international ISM allocations (scroll > down a bit for the tables): > > http://www.conformity.com/0008emc1.html > http://www.ask-technologies.com/freqaksframe.html > My extracted text version: > http://www.qsl.net/kb9mwr/projects/wireless/int-ism.txt > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: erik@neurosis.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 Thu Aug 2 17:06:56 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 RAA12513 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 17:06:52 -0500 (CDT) Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 17:04:54 -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: Australia ISM Band Plan 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: <200108022204.f72M4rd12789@faulkner.netnet.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Well I'll be. I don't really know what Proxim did then. I could of sworn they said they would load an Australian band plan. (Maybe it was an old one) or maybe they created one from scratch. That kinda sucks then if it's to 2463 MHz, all the harder to get something within the ham band with out having to total redo the EEPROM. Unless someone else (maybe who works with the things), has some additional insite. I can think of one other somewhat crude way to ensure off the shelf 2.4 FHSS hops only within the ham overlap. It involves generating a wide band low power (part 15) signal from ~2450 to 2483.5, thus forcing it to hop within the overlap. Pretty lame idea though. --- 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 Aug 2 17:28:09 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 RAA16816 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 17:28:08 -0500 (CDT) Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 17:25:01 -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: Ricochet up for auction, going dark? 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: <200108022225.f72MP1817333@faulkner.netnet.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Does anyone have any technical info on the units? I've never seen one, and have no idea how they work.. Is there anything proprietary about them? Like Jeff says it would be nice to convert them for ham use. And while on the subject of 900 MHz, we've recently put up pictures of a homebrew 900 MHz bi-directional amplifier design, it has been tested on the old style NCR 2 Mbit WaveLAN, 915 MHz DSSS cards and work just fine. If your interested see: http://www.gbonline.com/~multiplx/wireless/appendixE.html And a few other new things from GBPPR: The Wireless Network Link Analysis CGI at: http://www.gbonline.com/~multiplx/wireless/wireless.main.cgi Now calculates reliability/outage percents, and other climate based factors. And Radio Path v1.0: A Perl script to graphically show the radio path profile between two points. It will plot the 0.6 Fresnel zone and the true radio path for a given value of K (the effective Earth radius factor). This is all displayed in reference to the path's elevation data taken at intervals along the link path. This will let you see if you have a clear radio line-of-sight path. A sample output displaying a 10 mile radio path at 2.4 GHz: http://www.gbonline.com/~multiplx/wireless/pics/example.output.png --- 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 Aug 2 18:08:08 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 SAA22176 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 18:08:06 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2001 17:06:30 -0600 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Brett Glass Subject: [ss] Re: Ricochet up for auction, going dark? 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: <4.3.2.7.2.20010802165455.051e2db0@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Oooh. The way they're making this offering, they had better find a buyer who's willing to take the whole company -- lock, stock, and barrel -- or they're in trouble. You see, Metricom's 128 Kbps service (the only one that's worth using, really) runs on 900 MHz from poletop to consumer but on licensed 2.3 GHz spectrum from hub to poletop. Now, as I understand it, the FCC doesn't allow sublicensing, so only the owner of that spectrum license can really make use of the Ricochet infrastructure. It can license resellers (which it did!), but it must be the one that operates the network. The equipment (cost: about $1000 per light pole) is useless without the license, and the license -- while it is of SOME use without the equipment -- would require a huge investment to use for any other purpose. Nothing else is made for that band. What's really needed (or what WAS needed; it may now be too late) is a change of pricing structure, product offerings, and business model. It'd be neat to get some capital, buy the company out, and eliminate the dysfunctional aspects that led the company to this pass. I'm convinced that, with a bit of "thinking outside the box," it could be done. But I sure don't have the kind of money necessary to orchestrate the buyout. --Brett At 07:23 AM 8/2/2001, Robert Jeffrey King wrote: >See the following: > >http://www.ricochet.net/auctioninfo/index.html >http://www.go2mac.com/story.lasso?newsID=8142 > >Whatever happens, we are going to be seeing alot of their units >on the surplus market soon. Would be a nice unit to convert to >ham use. > >-Jeff > > >--- >You are currently subscribed to ss as: BRETT@LARIAT.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 Thu Aug 2 18:20:26 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 SAA23382 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 18:20:23 -0500 (CDT) Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 19:21:24 -0400 (EDT) From: Jim Ussailis Subject: [ss] Re: ss digest: August 01, 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 Correct me... I thought that the FH and DS rules, in the States, allowed 1 Watt power output with an antenna gain of +6 dBi. I also believe there is a benefit to running a higher antenna gain, as the hit on power reduction is less than the allowable antenna gain. Modifying a commerical unit... Most of the commerical units use common PLL ICs for frequency. Developer (or evaluation) boards are available for almost all of these chips. What would prevent one from disconnecting the PLL circuit in a commerical FH modem, and replacing it with a PLL/developers board? From the same manufactor, of course. Note I didn't say to remove the commerical board PLL circuit, I would assume it were left there, operating into a resistor. This way we could be on amateur frequencies, and the commerical board would remain happy. Jim, W1EQO --- 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 Aug 2 18:42:00 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 SAA25561 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 18:41:55 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2001 17:40:18 -0600 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Brett Glass Subject: [ss] Re: ss digest: August 01, 2001 Cc: ss digest recipients In-Reply-To: References: 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: <4.3.2.7.2.20010802173712.051de330@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk At 05:21 PM 8/2/2001, Jim Ussailis wrote: >Correct me... > >I thought that the FH and DS rules, in the States, allowed 1 Watt power >output with an antenna gain of +6 dBi. Almost. It's 1 watt EIRP, which means 1 watt with antenna gain of 0 dBi. >I also believe there is a benefit >to running a higher antenna gain, as the hit on power reduction is less >than the allowable antenna gain. Only on certain bands and under certain circumstances. On 2.4 GHz, the rules are structured so as to encourage the use of narrow beam, high gain antennas... but on point-to-point links ONLY. Point-to-multipoint Part 15 applications aren't allowed to push EIRP above a watt. IMHO, the nodes other than the hub should be allowed to. --Brett --- 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 Aug 2 18:43:07 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 SAA25856 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 18:43:07 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2001 19:42:19 -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 digest: August 01, 2001 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: <3B69E55B.40C7303D@aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Jim Ussailis wrote: > I thought that the FH and DS rules, in the States, allowed 1 Watt power > output with an antenna gain of +6 dBi. Depends what rule set you are talking. Part 97, we can run up to 100 watts on 440 and above using spread spectrum HOWEVER, and this is a big however, we have to use automatic power control if we go above 1 watt. The effectively rules out using part 15 stuff under part 97 (or should I say, there is no good reason to do so). FYI, part 97 are the amateur radio rules, part 15 the unlicensed emitters (commonly referred to as ISM band even though those are the part 18 rules) >I also believe there is a benefit > to running a higher antenna gain, as the hit on power reduction is less > than the allowable antenna gain. OK, so you are talking part 15. 36dbm is the maximum ERP on 900mhz and on 2.4ghz in a point to multipoint operation. On 2.4ghz, in a point to point configuration, what you say is true. In the U.S., for every 1 db our power is below 30dbm (1 watt) we can add 3db of antenna gain (over 6db). For example, with a output power of 20dbm (100mw) one could use a (6+(10*3))db gain antenna. This could give a legal ERP of 56dbm(20+36) (400 watts) on a unlicensed band. Granted, that would be a big dish, but it is common to run ERP's of ~100 watts on this band with affordable equipment (250mw out into a 24dbi gain antenna). -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 Thu Aug 2 18:59:39 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 SAA26282 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 18:59:37 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2001 20:00:21 -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 digest: August 01, 2001 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: <3B69E995.656B09E1@aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Brett Glass wrote: > > At 05:21 PM 8/2/2001, Jim Ussailis wrote: > > >Correct me... > > > >I thought that the FH and DS rules, in the States, allowed 1 Watt power > >output with an antenna gain of +6 dBi. > > Almost. It's 1 watt EIRP, which means 1 watt with antenna gain of 0 dBi. Nope, it is 1 watt output with 6dbi gain. See my other message. Here are the relevent FCC rules: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/get-cfr.cgi?TITLE=47&PART=15&SECTION=247&YEAR=2000&TYPE=TEXT Specifically, Sec. 15.247 (b)(2) and Sec. 15.247 (b)(3) -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 Thu Aug 2 20:52:30 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 UAA05268 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 20:52:29 -0500 (CDT) From: s.monsey@att.net To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: ss Question Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2001 01:51:41 +0000 Message-Id: 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: <20010803015141.EDIF15499.mtiwmhc22.worldnet.att.net@webmail.worldnet.att.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Let me ask this of the group. What if a ham radio operator took a freq hopping SS radio and made it not hop, stay on one freq. Have the radio RX on one freq and TX another? Could we then add a conventional amp? Maybe even take a 2.4 hopper, make it not hop, then transvert it to another band such as 440? Just a thought... Steve N0FPF --- 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 Aug 2 21:40:23 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 VAA08315 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 21:40:21 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2001 18:29:52 -0600 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Brett Glass Subject: [ss] Re: ss digest: August 01, 2001 In-Reply-To: References: 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: <4.3.2.7.2.20010802182527.051dd630@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk At 06:00 PM 8/2/2001, Jeff King wrote: >Nope, it is 1 watt output with 6dbi gain. Just checked, and I stand corrected. It's 1W *output* power into a 6 dBi antenna. Most of the systems I've encountered pump at most 250 mW into a 6 dBi antenna, for an EIRP of a watt. I'd assumed that this was the limit. --Brett --- 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 Aug 2 23:10:03 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 XAA14972 for ; Thu, 2 Aug 2001 23:10:03 -0500 (CDT) Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 21:08:55 -0700 From: "Shawn T. Rutledge" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Ricochet up for auction, going dark? 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 brett@lariat.org on Thu, Aug 02, 2001 at 05:06:30PM -0600 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: <20010802210855.Y6666@cx47646-a.phnx1.az.home.com> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk On Thu, Aug 02, 2001 at 05:06:30PM -0600, Brett Glass wrote: > What's really needed (or what WAS needed; it may now be too > late) is a change of pricing structure, product offerings, and > business model. It'd be neat to get some capital, buy the > company out, and eliminate the dysfunctional aspects that > led the company to this pass. I'm convinced that, with a bit > of "thinking outside the box," it could be done. But I sure > don't have the kind of money necessary to orchestrate the > buyout. Yep; I wrote an email to them a long time ago suggesting that if they would take advantage of people willing to offer homes for hubs, in exchange for free use of the network, they could have a nationwide network much more quickly. I'd gladly volunteer my rooftop for that. :-) But maybe the ISM-band networks will beat them to it. Would be nice. A few months ago it looked like the Proxim Symphony was going to be the card of choice for ham networks or rogue NAN's, so I bought several. Now it looks like 802.11 may be more popular. Anybody here involved in such a network in Phoenix? -- _______ Shawn T. Rutledge / KB7PWD ecloud@bigfoot.com (_ | |_) http://ecloud.org 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 Fri Aug 3 09:34:50 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 JAA14193 for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 09:34:49 -0500 (CDT) Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2001 00:32:57 +1000 From: Hamish Moffatt To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: ss Question 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 s.monsey@att.net on Fri, Aug 03, 2001 at 01:51:41AM +0000 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: <20010804003257.B14781@silly.cloud.net.au> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk On Fri, Aug 03, 2001 at 01:51:41AM +0000, s.monsey@att.net wrote: > Let me ask this of the group. > What if a ham radio operator took a freq hopping SS > radio and made it not hop, stay on one freq. Have the > radio RX on one freq and TX another? Could we then add a > conventional amp? Maybe even take a 2.4 hopper, make it > not hop, then transvert it to another band such as 440? Probably.. but why? 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 Aug 3 12:10:48 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 MAA27180 for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 12:10:48 -0500 (CDT) Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2001 12:9:27 Subject: [ss] Fwd: Ricochet To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Jeff King" 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" Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Message-Id: Precedence: bulk Gene asked me to forward the attached onto the list. As a comment to Gene's message, it might be a good idea to watch E-bay for some real good deals. I know the earlier Ricochet's could be used in a peer to peer mode (point to point) without need for a access point, but not sure if the newer ones can also be used like this. I've heard of folks getting up to 10 miles out of these things in P2P mode, and this would be quite useful for our ham applications. They are 900mhz frequency hoppers entirely within the ham band. -Jeff >From: genem@mail.bee.net >To: jeff@aerodata.net >Subject: Ricochet >Date: Fri, Aug 3 2001 10:47:11 GMT-0400 > >For some reason, the reflector won't let me reply any more, >although I still get it. The is Gene K3DSM. > >Could you please put this on for others to read. > >I use Ricochet >at work and at home. Home is over 2 miles from the nearest pole top. As a >user, if there is anything I can contribute, >let me know. I am not as teckie as some on here. A pole top unit is right >outside the store here. I love Ricochet. It is my understanding that a >creditor will be purchasing it and operating it after the auction. There >will probably be some units that won't be turned back on as users may move >on. It would be interesting if they could be modified to ham use. > >Gene Mitchell K3DSM k3dsm@arrl.net genem@5dnet.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 Fri Aug 3 12:29:32 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 MAA28855 for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 12:29:30 -0500 (CDT) From: "Shannon Holland" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Ricochet up for auction, going dark? Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2001 10:26:33 -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 > Yep; I wrote an email to them a long time ago suggesting that if they > would take advantage of people willing to offer homes for hubs, > in exchange > for free use of the network, they could have a nationwide network much > more quickly. I'd gladly volunteer my rooftop for that. :-) They used to do that (4-5 years ago). I know several people who had radios installed on their rooftops around Los Gatos (mostly in the nearby Santa Cruz mountains). Shannon --- 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 Aug 3 15:28:36 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 PAA13533 for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 15:28:34 -0500 (CDT) Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2001 15:25:24 -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 Question 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: <200108032025.f73KPOE05561@faulkner.netnet.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk It is possible to disable hopping on FHSS cards, although it's not an option in the publicly distributed drivers, but is in the manufactures software. Then you wouldn't have to worry about the stupid automatic power control that only pertains to SS. You would still need to make sure your amplifier and or transverter is capable of the fast switching TX/RX switching times. >Let me ask this of the group. What if a ham radio >operator took a freq hopping SS radio and made it not >hop, stay on one freq. Have the radio RX on one freq >and TX another? Could we then add a conventional amp? >Maybe even take a 2.4 hopper, make it not hop, then >transvert it to another band such as 440? --- 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 Aug 3 22:04:11 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 WAA08949 for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 22:04:10 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: From: "Roy Genger" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: Fwd: Ricochet Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2001 20:00:08 -0700 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 V6.00.2462.0000 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: <00be01c11c91$9349af80$0801010a@roy> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Check out www.affinix.com/~justin/stuff/rico.htm and http://phobos.illtel.denver.co.us/~abelits/metricom/ gives a good overview what can be done with the modems. Roy K6CRE ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeff King" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 12:00 PM Subject: [ss] Fwd: Ricochet > Gene asked me to forward the attached onto the list. > > As a comment to Gene's message, it might be a good idea to watch > E-bay for some real good deals. I know the earlier Ricochet's could > be used in a peer to peer mode (point to point) without need for a > access point, but not sure if the newer ones can also be used like > this. I've heard of folks getting up to 10 miles out of these things > in P2P mode, and this would be quite useful for our ham applications. > > They are 900mhz frequency hoppers entirely within the ham band. > > -Jeff > > > >From: genem@mail.bee.net > >To: jeff@aerodata.net > >Subject: Ricochet > >Date: Fri, Aug 3 2001 10:47:11 GMT-0400 > > > >For some reason, the reflector won't let me reply any more, > >although I still get it. The is Gene K3DSM. > > > >Could you please put this on for others to read. > > > >I use Ricochet > >at work and at home. Home is over 2 miles from the nearest pole top. As a > >user, if there is anything I can contribute, > >let me know. I am not as teckie as some on here. A pole top unit is right > >outside the store here. I love Ricochet. It is my understanding that a > >creditor will be purchasing it and operating it after the auction. There > >will probably be some units that won't be turned back on as users may > move > >on. It would be interesting if they could be modified to ham use. > > > >Gene Mitchell K3DSM k3dsm@arrl.net genem@5dnet.com > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: roy@genger.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 Aug 3 22:20:29 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 WAA09372 for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 22:20:14 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: From: "Roy Genger" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: Ricochet Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2001 20:18:03 -0700 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 V6.00.2462.0000 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: <00cf01c11c94$13510960$0801010a@roy> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Sorry that should be www.affinix.com/~justin/stuff/rico.html Roy K6CRE ----- Original Message ----- From: "Roy Genger" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 8:00 PM Subject: [ss] Re: Fwd: Ricochet > Check out www.affinix.com/~justin/stuff/rico.htm and > http://phobos.illtel.denver.co.us/~abelits/metricom/ gives > a good overview what can be done with the modems. > Roy K6CRE > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jeff King" > To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" > Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 12:00 PM > Subject: [ss] Fwd: Ricochet > > > > Gene asked me to forward the attached onto the list. > > > > As a comment to Gene's message, it might be a good idea to watch > > E-bay for some real good deals. I know the earlier Ricochet's could > > be used in a peer to peer mode (point to point) without need for a > > access point, but not sure if the newer ones can also be used like > > this. I've heard of folks getting up to 10 miles out of these things > > in P2P mode, and this would be quite useful for our ham applications. > > > > They are 900mhz frequency hoppers entirely within the ham band. > > > > -Jeff > > > > > > >From: genem@mail.bee.net > > >To: jeff@aerodata.net > > >Subject: Ricochet > > >Date: Fri, Aug 3 2001 10:47:11 GMT-0400 > > > > > >For some reason, the reflector won't let me reply any more, > > >although I still get it. The is Gene K3DSM. > > > > > >Could you please put this on for others to read. > > > > > >I use Ricochet > > >at work and at home. Home is over 2 miles from the nearest pole top. As a > > >user, if there is anything I can contribute, > > >let me know. I am not as teckie as some on here. A pole top unit is right > > >outside the store here. I love Ricochet. It is my understanding that a > > >creditor will be purchasing it and operating it after the auction. There > > >will probably be some units that won't be turned back on as users may > > move > > >on. It would be interesting if they could be modified to ham use. > > > > > >Gene Mitchell K3DSM k3dsm@arrl.net genem@5dnet.com > > > > --- > > You are currently subscribed to ss as: roy@genger.com > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > > > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: roy@genger.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 Aug 3 23:06:30 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 XAA11547 for ; Fri, 3 Aug 2001 23:06:29 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2001 22:04:02 -0600 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Brett Glass Subject: [ss] Ricochet: Something's fishy about the sudden shutdown 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: <4.3.2.7.2.20010803215952.00da0d00@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk A mere month ago, Metricom announced that it was entering Chapter 11 so as to restructure its debts and look for new financing. Seemed reasonable, considering that the company -- while its technology was promising -- owed so much money. Rumors were floating about that the company was cleaning house in order to be bought. Then, a few days ago, Metricom announced that it hoped to sell off part or all of the company (perhaps city by city?) "as a going concern." Well, OK. Maybe they couldn't restructure their debts or get out of all of their commitments. At least the network would be worth pennies on the dollar to a willing buyer -- like Iridium. Then, just today, Metricom announces that it is terminating service as of August 8, 2001 -- a week before the auction! Its resellers, such as WWC, who have been told that the company was searching in good faith for buyers to keep the service running, are blindsided and thrown into a panic. At this point, the explanations made by Metricom regarding the bankruptcy proceeding and auction no longer seem to hold water. How can one sell a company as a going concern if it is no longer "going?" Who will buy the infrastructure and customer base in a city after those customers have already been cut off for more than a week, have lost faith in the company, and are seeking other options? It appears -- and the stockholders and creditors should be outraged at this -- that whoever is running the show is more interested in killing the company, and making its remaining assets worthless, than in actually selling what's left for the greatest possible return. Could it be that Worldcom (a major creditor) wants to see Metricom dead because it represents competition? Or that there are other skeletons hidden in the closets that would make any takeover of the company infeasible? The answers are unclear, but one thing is: Contrary to the court's order, whoever is in charge of the liquidation seems intent upon minimizing, rather than maximizing, the value of the company's assets. And ought to be held responsible for doing so. --Brett Glass (Note: I've posted a similar message to Slashdot. Anyone know more?) --- 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 Aug 4 09:29:21 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 JAA02709 for ; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 09:29:20 -0500 (CDT) Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2001 10:29:12 -0400 (EDT) From: Jim Ussailis Subject: [ss] Re: ss digest: August 01, 2001 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" cc: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group In-Reply-To: <3B69E55B.40C7303D@aerodata.net> 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 So, +36 dBi is legal under Part 15, eh? From my work in polarimetric radar, that is a BIG dish. At 2.7 GHz you can get about +41 dBi from an efficient 24 ft dish. That translates to +35 dBi for a 12 ft dish. Then, you would probably need a 15 ft reflector to get + 36 dBi at 2.45 GHz. With it would come a 2.2 degree beamwidth, which would preclude the use of a cheap pedstial. Jim, W1EQO --- 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 Aug 4 14:19:01 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 OAA26464 for ; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 14:18:58 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 04 Aug 2001 15:19:43 -0400 From: Jeff King Organization: Aero Data Systems, Inc. X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" CC: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Subject: [ss] Re: ss digest: August 01, 2001 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: <3B6C4ACF.A9DA11D6@aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Jim Ussailis wrote: > > So, +36 dBi is legal under Part 15, eh? 36dBm radiated power is the limit for 900mhz, and for 2.4 ghz in multipoint mode. See: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/get-cfr.cgi?TITLE=47&PART=15&SECTION=247&YEAR=2000&TYPE=TEXT Specifically, Sec. 15.247 (b)(2) and Sec. 15.247 (b)(3) > From my work in polarimetric > radar, that is a BIG dish. At 2.7 GHz you can get about +41 dBi from an > efficient 24 ft dish. That translates to +35 dBi for a 12 ft dish. Then, you > would probably need a 15 ft reflector to get + 36 dBi at 2.45 GHz. I looked at my message and I did say dBm (is that right?) and also ERP. I wasn't specically talking gain, but if you wanted to use such a big dish, and had such a big dish, and wanted a point to point link on 2.4ghz, it would be advantagous because on 2.4ghz part 15 pTp, you can run ERP's higher then 36dBm *if* you reduce your power by 1db for every 3db of gain about 6dBi. So, for your 12 foot dish, which is fairly obtainable in the form of retired TVRO dishes, we have: Antenna Gain: 35dBi Amount of gain over 6dBi: 26dBi Power reduction from 30dBm required by part 15: 26/3= 8.66dbi Transmitter power limit: 30dBm-8.66(9) = ~21dBm System ERP= 21+35 = 56dBm = 400 watts ERP Sound right? > With it would come a 2.2 degree beamwidth, which would preclude the use > of a cheap pedstial. Couldn't you use the same TVRO pedistal you got the dish from? Mounting it high would be the issue unless you had a rooftop. Personally, I'd rather just use a panel antenna, maybe a Tessco 19dbi gain patch at ~$54 (18 degree beamwidth) and just run a little higher power. With this antenna you could run: Gain above 6dBi: 19-6 = 13 db Power reduction required: 13/3 = 4.333 (lets say 4 as the connectors will eat some) Max power = 30dBm-4dBm = 26dBm ERP= 26 + 19 = 45dBm erp ~35 watts ERP Hyperlink has recently reduced the price on their 500mw 2.4ghz poletop amps, I think in the mid $200 range, so something like the above in entirely doable with off the shelf gear. -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 Sat Aug 4 15:17:24 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 PAA01660 for ; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 15:17:24 -0500 (CDT) From: s.monsey@att.net To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: ss Question Date: Sat, 04 Aug 2001 20:16:28 +0000 Message-Id: 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: <20010804201628.CKIS15499.mtiwmhc22.worldnet.att.net@webmail.worldnet.att.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk I wonder if a manufacture will do that? You are right about a fast switching amp. You can also go with full duplex which would help. The reason why I asked this is we are not using alot of the spectrum so going non SS would be cool too. > It is possible to disable hopping on FHSS cards, although > it's not an option in the publicly distributed drivers, > but is in the manufactures software. Then you wouldn't have > to worry about the stupid automatic power control that only > pertains to SS. You would still need to make sure your > amplifier and or transverter is capable of the fast > switching TX/RX switching times. > > >Let me ask this of the group. What if a ham radio > >operator took a freq hopping SS radio and made it not > >hop, stay on one freq. Have the radio RX on one freq > >and TX another? Could we then add a conventional amp? > >Maybe even take a 2.4 hopper, make it not hop, then > >transvert it to another band such as 440? > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: s.monsey@att.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 Aug 4 18:14:08 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 SAA12057 for ; Sat, 4 Aug 2001 18:14:08 -0500 (CDT) From: "Steve Stroh" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Ricochet up for auction, going dark? Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2001 16:12:13 -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 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 Brett's not correct in his description of Ricochet backhaul. Ricochet "2" (Metricom's internal designation for the 128+ Kbps network and components) poletops are designed to use 2.3 GHz WCS spectrum if it's operating in a market where Metricom obtained WCS spectrum. If Metricom had WCS spectrum in a market, it was used as one half of a full-duplex channel - the other half was 2.4 GHz. In markets where Metricom did not have WCS spectrum, the poletops would operate full-duplex within 2.4 GHz. Whether to use 2.3 GHz in a market was a software-configurable option, so Ricochet 2 is capable of operating completely under Part 15 rules in any US market. Thanks, Steve -- Steve Stroh steve@strohpub.com 425-481-0600 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 Brett Glass > Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 16:07 > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] Re: Ricochet up for auction, going dark? > > > Oooh. The way they're making this offering, they had better > find a buyer who's willing to take the whole company -- lock, > stock, and barrel -- or they're in trouble. > > You see, Metricom's 128 Kbps service (the only one that's worth > using, really) runs on 900 MHz from poletop to consumer but > on licensed 2.3 GHz spectrum from hub to poletop. Now, as I > understand it, the FCC doesn't allow sublicensing, so only > the owner of that spectrum license can really make use of > the Ricochet infrastructure. It can license resellers (which > it did!), but it must be the one that operates the network. > > The equipment (cost: about $1000 per light pole) is useless > without the license, and the license -- while it is of SOME > use without the equipment -- would require a huge investment > to use for any other purpose. Nothing else is made for that > band. > > What's really needed (or what WAS needed; it may now be too > late) is a change of pricing structure, product offerings, and > business model. It'd be neat to get some capital, buy the > company out, and eliminate the dysfunctional aspects that > led the company to this pass. I'm convinced that, with a bit > of "thinking outside the box," it could be done. But I sure > don't have the kind of money necessary to orchestrate the > buyout. > > --Brett --- 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 Aug 5 01:23:43 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 BAA15518 for ; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 01:23:43 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2001 00:21:31 -0600 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Brett Glass Subject: [ss] Re: Ricochet up for auction, going dark? In-Reply-To: References: 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: <4.3.2.7.2.20010805001909.04790af0@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk At 05:12 PM 8/4/2001, Steve Stroh wrote: >Whether to use 2.3 GHz in a market was a software-configurable option, so >Ricochet 2 is capable of operating completely under Part 15 rules in any US >market. And thereby making those bands unfit for use by others. I did manage to talk to some unhappy, furloughed Ricochet people, and they did confirm that it was possible to run the system entirely on Part 15 spectrum. Apparently it was less efficient and more expensive to do it this way, however. --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 Sun Aug 5 10:33:34 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 KAA27443 for ; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 10:33:32 -0500 (CDT) Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2001 11:34:23 -0400 (EDT) From: Jim Ussailis Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: ss digest: August 01, 2001 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" cc: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group In-Reply-To: <3B6C4ACF.A9DA11D6@aerodata.net> 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 X-Message-Id: Precedence: bulk Three comments: 1. Big antenna. Pointing is always an issue. TVRO antennas point up, so they can be fixed to the ground with a strong, short pole. Put the same antenna on a Rohn 25, at 30 or 40 ft and that's a different kettle of fish. I don't know how much wiggle it would have, but I'll bet it would exceed 5 degrees even with torque guy mounts. You ought to see the pedistal I've used for the 24 ft dish at 2.7 GHz. In 1980 it cost a bit over 100K. Base contained the receiver, it was a 5 ft tube. Enterprise (Enterprise AL) made some Wx radar antennas with a 12 ft dish and small pedistal. They had to be in a radome if they were to operate in a wind speed greater than 25 MPH. Yes, the screen type TVRO antenna would help a lot. 2. Commerical antennas. Having designed several, and evaluated a few more, I can say, don't place a lot of faith in published gain figures. Here is an example. One VERY LARGE manufacturer of ham antennas also has a large commerical line. One of their 2.54 GHz yagis was advertised to have a gain of 17.1 dBi (or was it 17.3?). That was in 1997. My job was to design an antenna for their competition. So task one is to evaluate the existing antenna I got about 13 dBi. We had this checked at a univ lab. They got 12.9 dBi, at best. In 2000 that antenna had an advertised gain around 13.5 dBi. Possibly truth-in-lending got to them :) 19 dBi is possible, but a lot for a patch array. The problem is the feed & power division network. It has loss, and the bigger it gets, the more the loss, especially if fr-4 PCB material is used at 2.45. The loss due to the material is about 1/2 to 3/4 dB per inch. So, to get gain you add (most likely double) the number of elements. Every doubling gets 3 dB. But the feed line and power dividers eat up more PCB line as this process goes on. At some point of increasing the number of elements, the gain from the increase equals the added loss of the "feed structure." I suspect the max on FR-4 is about 12 to 15 dB. But I could be very wrong. Why not use Duriod? $80 - 90 / sq ft in quan. Why not use 4003 (cheap duroid)? $20 / sq ft 3. Power amp What happened to Pacific Monolithics? (PMI) They had a chip in 1995 that was supposed to put a Watt at 2.45. It didn't, but came close if the circuit was tweaked enough, and ATC caps were used. As well as better than FR-4 PCB material. I have their eval board, and possibly a couple more ICs. Believe I got the eval board to around 800 mW out. I think the ICs were about $15 in quan of 50 or so. The remaining cost of the board is about another 15 in quan. (2 SMAs, 4 or 5 caps, couple of resistors, and a Maxim neg supply chip with two electrolytics) Jim, W1EQO On Sat, 4 Aug 2001, Jeff King wrote: > > > Jim Ussailis wrote: > > > > So, +36 dBi is legal under Part 15, eh? > > 36dBm radiated power is the limit for 900mhz, and for 2.4 ghz in multipoint > mode. > > See: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/get-cfr.cgi?TITLE=47&PART=15&SECTION=247&YEAR=2000&TYPE=TEXT > > Specifically, Sec. 15.247 (b)(2) and Sec. 15.247 (b)(3) > > > From my work in polarimetric > > radar, that is a BIG dish. At 2.7 GHz you can get about +41 dBi from an > > efficient 24 ft dish. That translates to +35 dBi for a 12 ft dish. Then, you > > would probably need a 15 ft reflector to get + 36 dBi at 2.45 GHz. > > I looked at my message and I did say dBm (is that right?) and also ERP. I wasn't > specically talking gain, but if you wanted to use such a big dish, and had such > a big dish, and wanted a point to point link on 2.4ghz, it would be advantagous > because on 2.4ghz part 15 pTp, you can run ERP's higher then 36dBm *if* you reduce > your power by 1db for every 3db of gain about 6dBi. So, for your 12 foot dish, which > is fairly obtainable in the form of retired TVRO dishes, we have: > > Antenna Gain: 35dBi > Amount of gain over 6dBi: 26dBi > Power reduction from 30dBm required by part 15: 26/3= 8.66dbi > Transmitter power limit: 30dBm-8.66(9) = ~21dBm > System ERP= 21+35 = 56dBm = 400 watts ERP > > Sound right? > > > > With it would come a 2.2 degree beamwidth, which would preclude the use > > of a cheap pedstial. > > Couldn't you use the same TVRO pedistal you got the dish from? Mounting it high > would be the issue unless you had a rooftop. > > Personally, I'd rather just use a panel antenna, maybe a Tessco 19dbi gain patch > at ~$54 (18 degree beamwidth) and just run a little higher power. With this > antenna you could run: > > Gain above 6dBi: 19-6 = 13 db > Power reduction required: 13/3 = 4.333 (lets say 4 as the connectors will eat some) > Max power = 30dBm-4dBm = 26dBm > ERP= 26 + 19 = 45dBm erp ~35 watts ERP > > Hyperlink has recently reduced the price on their 500mw 2.4ghz poletop amps, I think > in the mid $200 range, so something like the above in entirely doable with off the > shelf gear. > > -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 Sun Aug 5 11:14:51 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 LAA00366 for ; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 11:14:49 -0500 (CDT) From: Tom Genereaux Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2001 11:12:37 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: In-Reply-To: Subject: [ss] Re: ss digest: August 01, 2001 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 X-Message-Id: <01080511123700.09993@buddha.lawrence.ks.us> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Pacific Monolithics is still around as a division of Richardson Electronics. A PM2117 w/ claimed 29 Dbm output is $16.00, qty 1. Url: http://www.pmmono.com On Sunday 05 August 2001 10:34, you wrote: > Three comments: > > > 3. Power amp > > What happened to Pacific Monolithics? (PMI) They had a chip in 1995 > that was supposed to put a Watt at 2.45. It didn't, but came close if > the circuit was tweaked enough, and ATC caps were used. As well as > better than FR-4 PCB material. > > I have their eval board, and possibly a couple more ICs. Believe I > got the eval board to around 800 mW out. I think the ICs were about > $15 in quan of 50 or so. The remaining cost of the board is about > another 15 in quan. (2 SMAs, 4 or 5 caps, couple of resistors, and a > Maxim neg supply chip with two electrolytics) > > --- 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 Aug 5 16:02:54 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 QAA21369 for ; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 16:02:54 -0500 (CDT) Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2001 15:59:08 -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 Question 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: <200108052059.f75Kx8E00982@faulkner.netnet.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk I already asked Proxim that question, and they said no. Most of the manufactures out there are ultra-paranoid about stuff like that. Like I said before this along with many other "secret" parameters could probably be changed if someone with the skills to reverse the drivers gave it a shot. Here is some reverse engineering of the Proxim driver that some anonymous person sent us: http://www.gbonline.com/~multiplx/wireless/lib/index.html You might get an idea of what types of parameters are capable of being changed. >I wonder if a manufacture will do that? You are right >about a fast switching amp. You can also go with full >duplex which would help. The reason why I asked this is >we are not using alot of the spectrum so going non SS >would be cool too. --- 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 Aug 5 16:26:34 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 QAA22723 for ; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 16:26:33 -0500 (CDT) Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2001 16:25:30 -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: Ricochet up for auction, going dark? 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: <200108052125.f75LPUE04609@faulkner.netnet.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Do Metricom's 128kbps units have the ability to operate peer-to-peer? The link someone provided said the 28.8kbps units did.. As for the back haul whether they use 2.3 WCS or 2.4 ISM spectrum, if someone could quote an actual oppertaing range for the 2.3 that would be helpful. --- 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 Aug 5 16:40:08 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 QAA23555 for ; Sun, 5 Aug 2001 16:40:06 -0500 (CDT) Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2001 16:38:55 -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: ss digest: August 01, 2001 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: <200108052138.f75LctE06528@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 QAA23555 As for Pacific Monolithics, PM2117 there are tons of alternatives. We used RF Microdevices RF2126 1 Watt 2.4 GHz RF amplifier IC (About $12 each) Their website is http://www.rfmd.com And if you use the RF2126 here is our power amplifier schematic: http://www.gbonline.com/~multiplx/wireless/appendixB.html (Pre-made PC boards are now available for this project through FAR Circuits) Other alternatives: http://www.gbonline.com/~multiplx/wireless/page10.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 Aug 6 13:37:08 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 NAA02691 for ; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 13:37:06 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2001 12:35:55 -0600 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Brett Glass Subject: [ss] Re: Ricochet up for auction, going dark? 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: <4.3.2.7.2.20010806123116.053b5ee0@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk At 03:25 PM 8/5/2001, Steve Lampereur wrote: >Do Metricom's 128kbps units have the ability to operate peer-to-peer? Yes, they do. However, Metricom added an unfortunate hack to the modem firmware not long ago. If the modem "acquires" a poletop unit, it refuses to operate peer-to-peer after that time. It is unclear whether this was done (a) as a security measure; (b) to reduce overhead or interference; or (c) to forestall competition by a rival provider that set up its own Ricochet modem as an access point in the same area. >As for the back haul whether they use 2.3 WCS or 2.4 ISM spectrum, if >someone could quote an actual oppertaing range for the 2.3 that would >be helpful. They own different chunks of WCS spectrum in different parts of the country. The auction papers enumerate them. --Brett --- 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 Aug 6 14:21:55 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 OAA07347 for ; Mon, 6 Aug 2001 14:21:54 -0500 (CDT) X-Originating-IP: [208.51.39.70] Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Jeff King" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Ricochet up for auction, going dark? Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2001 19:20:50 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Aug 2001 19:20:51.0097 (UTC) FILETIME=[E78B7890:01C11EAC] List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Brett Glass wrote: >At 03:25 PM 8/5/2001, Steve Lampereur wrote: > > >Do Metricom's 128kbps units have the ability to operate peer-to-peer? > >Yes, they do. However, Metricom added an unfortunate hack to the modem >firmware not long ago. If the modem "acquires" a poletop unit, it refuses >to operate peer-to-peer after that time. Of course, if they do go dark, then hopefully they will turn off the poletop units so they can be used in that manner. Otherwise, I imagine a well placed .22 caliber bullet could disable this function in the pole top unit. Just kidding.... ;-) Has anyone ever used the STRIP driver that Mary Baker (mosquito net) and crew developed with the 128K unit? If so, would like to hear about it. Regards, Jeff _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp --- 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 Aug 7 01:41:02 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 BAA03880 for ; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 01:40:57 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2001 02:41:33 -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] Ricochet poletop units to be abandoned? 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: <3B6F8D9D.1D5AFF5E@aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Not to start rumors, but I was on the Yahoo Finance board reading some posts, one of them by one of the people that attended the auction hearing, he said the following: from: http://messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=FN&action=m&board=4686777&tid=mcom&sid=4686777&mid=224715 >Network customers disconnected within 10 days, 69,000 poletop radios abandoned. >1700 Waps abandoned after disposing of batteries and freon used in their A/C units. >some commodity equipment will be salvaged from NIFs and the two NOCs and auctioned off. >The rest of MCOM's $120 million would then be used to pay off bondholders, creditors, >and preferreds. I'm going to call my city manager tommorrow, and see what his take on this is... maybe it is time to get a ladder out and snag one. One interesting note on the above.... 69,000 poletop units and 51,000 customers.... I'm assuming there goal was some sort of modem ratio on these things similar to most ISP's. At least I now know why every Ricochet user I talked with was so happy with the speed.... every user had what amounted to a dedicated line. Whole thing is sad however. It was a good idea. -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 Wed Aug 8 08:13:47 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 IAA26475 for ; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 08:13:45 -0500 (CDT) Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2001 09:14:46 -0400 (EDT) From: Jim Ussailis Subject: [ss] Re: ss digest: August 07, 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 More genius management! The whole thing in place and thrown away. Could it not be worth 50 cents...sounds like that's more money than nothing + the disposal cost of batteries & freon. Jim W1EQO PS Old Scottish saying: "look after the pennies and the dollars will look after themselves." Management schools, take heed. On Wed, 8 Aug 2001, TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group digest wrote: > TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Digest for Tuesday, August 07, 2001. > > 1. Ricochet poletop units to be abandoned? > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Subject: Ricochet poletop units to be abandoned? > From: Jeff King > Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2001 02:41:33 -0400 > X-Message-Number: 1 > > Not to start rumors, but I was on the Yahoo Finance board reading > some posts, one of them by one of the people that attended the auction > hearing, he said the following: > > from: > http://messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=FN&action=m&board=4686777&tid=mcom&sid=4686777&mid=224715 > > >Network customers disconnected within 10 days, 69,000 poletop radios abandoned. > >1700 Waps abandoned after disposing of batteries and freon used in their A/C units. > >some commodity equipment will be salvaged from NIFs and the two NOCs and auctioned off. > >The rest of MCOM's $120 million would then be used to pay off bondholders, creditors, > >and preferreds. > > I'm going to call my city manager tommorrow, and see what his take on this is... maybe it > is time to get a ladder out and snag one. > > One interesting note on the above.... 69,000 poletop units and 51,000 customers.... I'm > assuming there goal was some sort of modem ratio on these things similar to most ISP's. > At least I now know why every Ricochet user I talked with was so happy with the speed.... > every user had what amounted to a dedicated line. > > Whole thing is sad however. It was a good idea. > > -Jeff > > > > --- > > 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 Wed Aug 8 17:34:54 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 RAA13069 for ; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 17:34:52 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2001 18:34:09 -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: TAPR APRS Special Interest Group , ss@lists.tapr.org Subject: [ss] Re: [aprssig] Metricom / Ricochet packet network goes Bye-bye today 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: <3B71BE61.5FF3BCFB@aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Ralph: This is a fascinating read. I'm copying it to the SS list also as I'm sure some there would find it interesting as well. In particular the specifics of the network are discussed later in the document including customer loading ratios. Lets see, here in Detroit we had 89 Waps and 3547 poletop units. And there are 315 ricochet customers. That is a ratio of 1:11.5 (note the ratio is reversed). I believe the target was of active was 8:1. Not much better in other places. Patents also look interesting. -Jeff rwf@bsrg.org wrote: > This link contains a PDF that really describes the technical, marketing, > and financials behind the endeavor. > It even lists their patents on various technologies they > use. (interestingly they have one on how they AVOID existing systems in > the spectrum they are UNLICENSED to use). > If you are interested in finally seeing some of their secrets, have a look. > http://www.metricom.com/information/assestlist.PDF --- 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 Aug 8 19:29:17 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 TAA19867 for ; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 19:29:13 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2001 18:28:11 -0600 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Brett Glass Subject: [ss] Metricom (Was: ss digest recipients) In-Reply-To: References: 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: <4.3.2.7.2.20010808165122.045c4df0@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk At 07:14 AM 8/8/2001, Jim Ussailis wrote: >More genius management! > >The whole thing in place and thrown away. Indeed. I and a few others placed calls to the person who is supposedly managing their liquidation, asking if the equipment they'd overpurchased (they have a huge inventory of extra poletops and wired access points) was for sale. (I live in a small town, and we could actually deploy this as part of the community wireless network. At one time we were worried that they'd come in and interfere with our signals, but we could avoid this if we did the deployment.) We received no callback. They are acting as if they do not WANT to salvage their goodwill, accounts, or assets. --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 Wed Aug 8 19:35:54 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 TAA20690 for ; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 19:35:53 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2001 20:36:54 -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: Metricom (Was: ss digest recipients) 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: <3B71DB26.262AE06B@aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Brett Glass wrote: > We received no callback. They are acting as if they do not WANT to salvage > their goodwill, accounts, or assets. Take a look at the link I posted. All the bidders were prequailified and that process I believe took place around the 1st of August. Implies to me that it may be sold as a going concern, much as the auction notice implies. -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 Wed Aug 8 19:41:48 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 TAA21138 for ; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 19:41:47 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2001 18:40:46 -0600 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Brett Glass Subject: [ss] Re: Metricom (Was: ss digest recipients) In-Reply-To: References: 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: <4.3.2.7.2.20010808183839.045c4ba0@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk At 06:36 PM 8/8/2001, Jeff King wrote: >Take a look at the link I posted. All the bidders were prequailified and that >process I believe took place around the 1st of August. We downloaded and read that document more than a week ago. Read it more carefully. Certain bidders were prequalified, but anyone can sign up to bid at the auction as little as 24 hours beforehand. >Implies to me that it >may be sold as a going concern, much as the auction notice implies. If they shut off access (as they say they will do 20 minutes from now!), they no longer have a going concern. --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 Sun Aug 12 22:34:43 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 WAA13323 for ; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 22:34:41 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2001 23:33:08 -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: wear-hard@haven.org, ss@lists.tapr.org Subject: [ss] Re: Ricochet poletop units to be abandoned? References: <003501c11f94$ccd904c0$1eaccd3f@neuralocity.com> <005801c12103$2452a8e0$f71e5094@cellnet.com> 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: <3B774A74.5E4B59A8@aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk If anything, good pictures: http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1263808320 -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 Mon Aug 13 15:01:12 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 PAA03878 for ; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 15:01:07 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 14:00:00 -0600 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Brett Glass Subject: [ss] Re: Ricochet poletop units to be abandoned? In-Reply-To: References: <003501c11f94$ccd904c0$1eaccd3f@neuralocity.com> <005801c12103$2452a8e0$f71e5094@cellnet.com> 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: <4.3.2.7.2.20010813134646.00cfa100@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk At 09:33 PM 8/12/2001, Jeff King wrote: >http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1263808320 Yes, but the bidding is up too high already. These are worth zero unless you own a "wired access point." Which Metricom won't sell.... Heck, when we've called to ask about bidding on equipment at auction, they haven't even returned the phone calls. Despite the fact that they have a fiduciary duty to their creditors to get as much as possible for what's left of their network. --Brett --- 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 Aug 13 15:42:19 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 PAA07632 for ; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 15:42:19 -0500 (CDT) X-Originating-IP: [208.51.39.70] Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Jeff King" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Ricochet poletop units to be abandoned? Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 20:41:27 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Aug 2001 20:41:28.0082 (UTC) FILETIME=[53810F20:01C12438] List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Brett Glass wrote: >At 09:33 PM 8/12/2001, Jeff King wrote: > > >http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1263808320 > >Yes, but the bidding is up too high already. I just thought some would find it entertaining. Never suggested anyone buy it, although obviously some people see some value in it. >Heck, when we've called to ask about bidding on equipment at >auction, they haven't even returned the phone calls. The Metricom bidder's had to be pre-qualified, even though as someone pointed out, the documents say otherwise. Ebay is the closest you'll get to a auction. Sometimes life isn't fair, and the stockholders of Metricom are alot worse off then you or I (assuming you didn't get caught holding any stock that is). -Jeff _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp --- 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 Aug 13 17:41:13 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 RAA17804 for ; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 17:41:07 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 16:39:51 -0600 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Brett Glass Subject: [ss] Re: Ricochet poletop units to be abandoned? 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: <4.3.2.7.2.20010813163837.05984de0@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk At 02:41 PM 8/13/2001, Jeff King wrote: >The Metricom bidder's had to be pre-qualified, even though as someone pointed >out, the documents say otherwise. If the company requires anything that's not in the document, it is violating the judge's order and can be cited for contempt of court. --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 Mon Aug 13 18:08:42 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 SAA19939 for ; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 18:08:41 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 19:09:45 -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: Ricochet poletop units to be abandoned? 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: <3B785E39.A0FA7EF2@aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Brett Glass wrote: > > At 02:41 PM 8/13/2001, Jeff King wrote: > > >The Metricom bidder's had to be pre-qualified, even though as someone pointed > >out, the documents say otherwise. > > If the company requires anything that's not in the document, it is violating > the judge's order and can be cited for contempt of court. Then I suggest you contact the judge... I have nothing to do with Metricom or their business practices. Not disagreeing with you Brett. -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 Aug 14 14:49:14 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 OAA26696 for ; Tue, 14 Aug 2001 14:49:13 -0500 (CDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: References: <003501c11f94$ccd904c0$1eaccd3f@neuralocity.com> <005801c12103$2452a8e0$f71e5094@cellnet.com> Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 12:36:33 -0700 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Aleksandr Milewski Subject: [ss] Re: Ricochet poletop units to be abandoned? 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: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk At 11:33 PM -0400 on 8/12/01, you commanded the electrons to create a missive titled "[ss] Re: Ricochet poletop units to be abandoned?": |If anything, good pictures: | |http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1263808320 | |-Jeff | |--- |You are currently subscribed to ss as: N6MOD@AMT.ORG |To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org Yawn. Leaving aside all the misinformation about the lack of peer-to-peer connectivity, this is an old 100k (28.8k advertised) poletop. This is _not_ the 2.3/2.4 radio, but one of the old 902-928 radios. -Zandr -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Aleksandr Milewski N6MOD n6mod@milewski.org http://www.milewski.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 Aug 15 12:17:18 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 MAA16240 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 12:17:17 -0500 (CDT) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 10:16:14 -0700 (PDT) From: Bob Lorenzini To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Ricochet poletop units to be abandoned? 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 At the moment on Ebay is a number of Rangelan2 OEM units from a distributor. I bought a 7422 pcmcia for 39.95 to complement my existing link using 7921 access points. This is a great price. There is also some 7521 access points (500mw) starting at $199.00. I don't see the prices getting bid up for some reason. I have no connection with the seller. YMMV. Bob - wd6dod --- 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 Aug 15 17:37:27 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 RAA16520 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 17:37:26 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 16:35:50 -0600 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Brett Glass Subject: [ss] Re: Ricochet poletop units to be abandoned? In-Reply-To: References: 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: <4.3.2.7.2.20010815163355.04970450@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk As I recall, RangeLAN2 was their first-generation 2.4 GHz product, and ran no faster than their original 900 MHz RangeLAN (that is, between 1 and 2 Mbps). Not nearly as fast as 802.11b. I suspect that the market for these will be limited. --Brett At 11:16 AM 8/15/2001, Bob Lorenzini wrote: >At the moment on Ebay is a number of Rangelan2 OEM units from a >distributor. I bought a 7422 pcmcia for 39.95 to complement my existing >link using 7921 access points. This is a great price. There is also >some 7521 access points (500mw) starting at $199.00. I don't see the >prices getting bid up for some reason. I have no connection with the >seller. YMMV. > >Bob - wd6dod > > >--- >You are currently subscribed to ss as: BRETT@LARIAT.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 Aug 15 17:47:26 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 RAA16981 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 17:47:24 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 18:48:05 -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] Rangelan's on EBAY, was re: Ricochet units 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: <3B7AFC25.738E017A@aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Brett Glass wrote: > > As I recall, RangeLAN2 was their first-generation 2.4 GHz product, > and ran no faster than their original 900 MHz RangeLAN (that is, > between 1 and 2 Mbps). Not nearly as fast as 802.11b. I suspect > that the market for these will be limited. They are either 800kbps or 1.6mbps depending on what mode they are in. They are much better suited to long range applications then 802.11b products due to the fact they are FH and not DSSS. Drivers exist for these in both Linux and windows. These units get alot of praise on the Wireless ISP list. I'm presently doing a commercial product (68332 consulting job) using the proxim OEM module which is the same RF deck as the rangelan. Output power is 100mw on the OEM module and I think the same on the standard Rangelan. Also, since these are a proprietary standard (I think they call it open air) drive-by hacking is less of a problem as compared to 802.11b. -Jeff > At 11:16 AM 8/15/2001, Bob Lorenzini wrote: > >At the moment on Ebay is a number of Rangelan2 OEM units from a > >distributor. I bought a 7422 pcmcia for 39.95 to complement my existing > >link using 7921 access points. This is a great price. There is also > >some 7521 access points (500mw) starting at $199.00. I don't see the > >prices getting bid up for some reason. I have no connection with the > >seller. YMMV. > >Bob - wd6dod --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Aug 15 17:49:44 2001 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id RAA17100 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 17:49:42 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 18:49:49 -0400 From: Jeff King Organization: Aero Data Systems, Inc. X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] [Re: Ricochet poletop units to be abandoned?] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3B7AFC8D.6890465@aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Some stuff not making it to the SS list, I'm forwarding some responses that were copied to the SS list from the wearables list. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: Ricochet poletop units to be abandoned? Resent-Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 22:06:55 -0400 Resent-From: wear-hard@haven.org Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 19:06:59 -0700 From: Michael Paine Reply-To: wear-hard@haven.org To: wear-hard@haven.org, Charles Bolton CC: ss@lists.tapr.org References: <003501c11f94$ccd904c0$1eaccd3f@neuralocity.com><005801c12103$2452a8e0$f71e5094@cellnet.com> <3B774A74.5E4B59A8@aerodata.net> Anyone in San Jose going to the Ricochet auction this thursday @ 10am? 333 W. Julian St.. if so, meet ya there. If not, if you are interested, I can bid for you on items.. what would be hilarious is to setup a GS modem onto my LAN via RRAS and use another one there at the auction (about 2 miles from my house), and do a simulcast of the event via point to point (which they don't support -- err, I guess they don't support anything now) :-) I'm going to ping people there and meet a few of their ex-Ricochet engineers and get some "inside" tips. Too fun. --- 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 Aug 15 17:51:18 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 RAA17355 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 17:51:15 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 18:51:11 -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: Ricochet poletop units to be abandoned?] 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: <3B7AFCDF.E91FEC6E@aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: Ricochet poletop units to be abandoned? Resent-Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 14:43:27 -0400 Resent-From: wear-hard@haven.org Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 11:42:58 -0700 From: "Charles Bolton" Reply-To: "Charles Bolton" To: CC: References: <003501c11f94$ccd904c0$1eaccd3f@neuralocity.com> You might be able to do point to point links by dialing another ricochet as you would a modem using the serial number of the unit. Without a field radio that has a "god" level password you can not reprogram the poletops. If that could be done the units could be used for small local networks. If you an ATS300? command with a direct connect to your ricochet modem you will note some of the configuration information installed in the modem. This can be altered for specialized local activities and I believed that Metricom has some experimental networks that could be re-configured and supported by the pole tops. Also you could always configure one ricochet with high gain antenna on the top of your roof connected to a router/server or phone modem as a bridge. If the ricochet in the field could see the bridge ricochet you could access the net this way. Or you could create a Star mode hub using the Star protocol supported by ricochet for small neighborhood networks. Note that if the junk this stuff, there may be some of these units showing up at local RF surplus shops. There are serial ports inside the box to program the unit. The power supply cable is a sandwich connector that goes between the top of the pole connector and a light sensor switch that controls street light operation. This can be adapted to a 110 AC plug. The antenna is a 6 dBi gain Omni whip. If anyone can find one and access the serial port - please publish your findings so that we can make use of the hardware. Once we know how to re-configure the units, they could be mounted on top of roofs or in attics or other high points. If you have your own bucket truck you could mount it on a street light and maybe no one would notice. Anyway, if metricom and ricochet goest the way of the Newton, we should continue this dialog to keep this technology useful. I am really tired of superior technology getting trashed. The joke here is that I am loosing a good solid RF solution and my only option is CDPD while promised at 19.2 is often less than that. We lost the Newton and got the palm pilot. The moral is that superior technology does not always win the market, but superior market presence and marketing hype does too often when. And the general public doesn't care because they don't ever know what they missed. The investor only wants to see a return this quarter. If the private sector had financed the Manhattan project, we would never have developed the atomic bomb. They would have pulled the plug by early 1943. Or think what would have happened if the internet had been turned over to private investors in the mid 1970's. cordially cb ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Paine" To: Cc: Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 4:00 PM Subject: Re: Ricochet poletop units to be abandoned? > very true. In fact, if they turn off their DNS routers, then we might be > able to do that (if I remember, the GS modem's firmware would require a > "DNS" route to the provider -- this stopped point-to-point communications > through the network, no?) > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Thomas Edwards" > To: > Cc: > Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 7:00 AM > Subject: Re: Ricochet poletop units to be abandoned? > > > > > > On Tue, 7 Aug 2001, Jeff King wrote: > > > > > >Network customers disconnected within 10 days, 69,000 poletop radios > abandoned. > > > >1700 Waps abandoned after disposing of batteries and freon used in > their A/C units. > > > >some commodity equipment will be salvaged from NIFs and the two NOCs > and auctioned off. > > > >The rest of MCOM's $120 million would then be used to pay off > bondholders, creditors, > > > >and preferreds. > > > > I wonder what the power deal was - I assume they are going to stay > > "plugged in". If they stay powered, I wonder what kind of local networks > > could be set up using them. > > > > -Thomas > > --- 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 Aug 15 18:00:14 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 SAA17992 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 18:00:12 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 16:58:59 -0600 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Brett Glass Subject: [ss] Re: Rangelan's on EBAY, was re: Ricochet units In-Reply-To: References: 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: <4.3.2.7.2.20010815165616.0495ea60@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk At 04:48 PM 8/15/2001, Jeff King wrote: >They are either 800kbps or 1.6mbps depending on what mode they are >in. They are much better suited to long range applications then 802.11b >products due to the fact they are FH and not DSSS. Actually, in my experience DSSS works much better than FH over long distances with directional antennas. FH is a bit better in short-range applications when there's a need to punch through noise or if one or both antennas are omnidirectional. FH isn't true spread spectrum. It's merely a quickly retuned narrowband radio. --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 Wed Aug 15 18:10:48 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 SAA19024 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 18:10:46 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 17:08:30 -0600 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Brett Glass Subject: [ss] Re: [Re: Ricochet poletop units to be abandoned?] 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: <4.3.2.7.2.20010815165957.04969100@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk At 04:51 PM 8/15/2001, Charles Bolton wrote: >You might be able to do point to point links by dialing another ricochet as >you would a modem using the serial number of the unit. So long as Metricom doesn't have any working infrastructure in the area. Star mode stops working once the modem has received a "name" from a Metricom "name server." >I am really tired of superior technology getting trashed. Metricom is superior to CDPD, but not to what people could have deployed given sufficient licensed spectrum and more up-to-date technology. Ricochet couldn't surpass 128 Kbps because it was on the ISM bands (and ruined that public common for other users, by the way; this should not have been legal!). They were also using rather crudely designed hoppers instead of FQDM or CDMA technology. Alas, the artificially (that is to say, politically) created spectrum shortage prevented them or anyone else from rolling out technology that would have been competitive with DSL. --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 Wed Aug 15 18:19:29 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 SAA19358 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 18:19:26 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 19:20:33 -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: Rangelan's on EBAY, was re: Ricochet units 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: <3B7B03C1.1815D09B@aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Brett Glass wrote: > > At 04:48 PM 8/15/2001, Jeff King wrote: > > >They are either 800kbps or 1.6mbps depending on what mode they are > >in. They are much better suited to long range applications then 802.11b > >products due to the fact they are FH and not DSSS. > > Actually, in my experience DSSS works much better than FH over long > distances with directional antennas. Most DSSS units on the market are more sensitive then FH units. However, I said was better suited for long range links, not work better occasionally. FH degrades much more gracefully in the presence of narrowband interferers then DSSS does. You might want to try a freewave also if your looking for a long range FH'er to check out. I've not seen anything that can get near them as far as long range reliable performance. > FH is a bit better in short-range > applications when there's a need to punch through noise I'd think that statement would be even more important in a long range link. > FH isn't true spread spectrum. It's merely a quickly retuned > narrowband radio. Well.... your standard Part 15 DSSS radio only has 10-11db of process gain, so it is barely a SS radio as well! But, put a narrow band emitter in the passband of that DSSS radio that is >11db above the SS signal, and bam, your link is totally gone. A FH link will only degrade in speed, it won't be totally taken out like a DSSS link. Case in point was a 900mhz DSSS wavelan card I had a ISP... it could barely do 1/4mile and half the time it was not working. We had a inband pager nearby. But a FH, same antenna, similar power, could do 2 miles to a back of the set antenna and 2-4 miles to a mobile. Sure, the FH was slower then the DSSS wavelan, but it got through when the DSSS could not. -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 Wed Aug 15 18:21:17 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 SAA19454 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 18:21:13 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 19:22:27 -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: [Re: Ricochet poletop units to be abandoned?] 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: <3B7B0433.725DF0BF@aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Brett: If you want Charles to respond, you'll need to copy it to him. He is not on this list. I had crossposted the first message to the wearables list as well as this one. His e-mail is in the forwarded post. -Jeff Brett Glass wrote: > > At 04:51 PM 8/15/2001, Charles Bolton wrote: > > >You might be able to do point to point links by dialing another ricochet as > >you would a modem using the serial number of the unit. > > So long as Metricom doesn't have any working infrastructure in the area. > Star mode stops working once the modem has received a "name" from a > Metricom "name server." > > >I am really tired of superior technology getting trashed. > > Metricom is superior to CDPD, but not to what people could have > deployed given sufficient licensed spectrum and more up-to-date > technology. Ricochet couldn't surpass 128 Kbps because it was on the > ISM bands (and ruined that public common for other users, by the way; > this should not have been legal!). They were also using rather crudely > designed hoppers instead of FQDM or CDMA technology. Alas, the > artificially (that is to say, politically) created spectrum shortage > prevented them or anyone else from rolling out technology that would > have been competitive with DSL. > > --Brett Glass > > --- > 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 Wed Aug 15 18:24:24 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 SAA19579 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 18:24:20 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Sender: esj@localhost Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 19:23:24 -0400 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Eric S. Johansson" Subject: [ss] Re: Rangelan's on EBAY, was re: Ricochet units 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: <5.1.0.14.2.20010815192154.02a93fd8@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk At 07:20 PM 8/15/2001 -0400, you wrote: >Well.... your standard Part 15 DSSS radio only has 10-11db of process gain, so >it is barely a SS radio as well! this raises the question of how can one increase process gain in a standard part 15 DSSS radio? my memory says increasing process gain will also decrease throughput at a given bandwidth. Is this correct? ---eric --- 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 Aug 15 19:48:52 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 TAA25011 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 19:48:52 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 18:47:44 -0600 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Brett Glass Subject: [ss] Re: Rangelan's on EBAY, was re: Ricochet units In-Reply-To: References: 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: <4.3.2.7.2.20010815183052.0488f7f0@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk At 05:20 PM 8/15/2001, Jeff King wrote: >Most DSSS units on the market are more sensitive then FH units. However, I said >was better suited for long range links, not work better occasionally. Nope. DSSS is far better suited for long range links, because it does not even BEGIN to degrade unless there is a substantial amount of interference. FH degrades pretty much linearly with interference. On a long range link, you're likely to be using highly directional antennas, so you'll stay well below the threshold at which there is any degradation in a DSSS system,. >FH degrades >much more gracefully in the presence of narrowband interferers then DSSS does. Again, it begins degrading immediately whereas DSSS does not degrade at all until the band is very noisy. >> FH is a bit better in short-range >> applications when there's a need to punch through noise > >I'd think that statement would be even more important in a long range link. No, it's not. The interference you'll encounter on a long range link is very different from what you will see on short range links. I've measured both. >> FH isn't true spread spectrum. It's merely a quickly retuned >> narrowband radio. > >Well.... your standard Part 15 DSSS radio only has 10-11db of process gain, so >it is barely a SS radio as well! Depends on the band. The figures you mention above are true for 900 MHz, which is a relatively narrow band. But on 2.4 GHz, much higher process gains are typical. 12 dB is substantial. It means that an interfering signal is attenuated by a factor of 8 at the get-go. And that's before other factors, such as antenna directionality, polarization, and forward error correction (Trellis coding is common in DSSS modulation schemes). > But, put a narrow band emitter in the passband >of that DSSS radio that is >11db above the SS signal, and bam, your link is >totally gone. Not true. A properly designed long range link can handle quite a bit more than that. >A FH link will only degrade in speed, it won't be totally taken >out like a DSSS link. Case in point was a 900mhz DSSS wavelan card I had a ISP... >it could barely do 1/4mile and half the time it was not working. Sounds like something was not designed correctly. I've gotten 6 miles out of the original WaveLAN, running under Part 15, in the presence of other emitters. Without the interference, it probably would have gone farther. This isn't to say that someone couldn't take you down by deploying a huge swarm of hoppers, all operating at the legal limit, directly in your path. (This is what Metricom did, and it drove everyone else off 900 MHz in the cities where they deployed. They essentially took over a public resource.) --Brett --- 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 Aug 15 21:53:27 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 VAA02738 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 21:53:26 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 22:54:36 -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: Rangelan's on EBAY, was re: Ricochet units 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: <3B7B35EC.71971C5B@aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Brett Glass wrote: > > At 05:20 PM 8/15/2001, Jeff King wrote: > > >Most DSSS units on the market are more sensitive then FH units. However, I said > >was better suited for long range links, not work better occasionally. > > Nope. DSSS is far better suited for long range links, because it does not > even BEGIN to degrade unless there is a substantial amount of interference. All this tells me is you haven't actually done very much long range Part 15 spread spectrum in urban areas (i.e. the real world). I have and I'm not going to argue about it with you. If that is what you want to do, here are some links to keep you busy. Jeff http://www.proxim.com/wireless/whiteppr/select.shtml#compare http://www2.hom.net/ISPCON98/sld006.htm http://www.wireless-nets.com/whitepaper_spread.htm http://www.digital-wireless.com/ip_tech.htm http://www.digital-wireless.com/ipfaq3.htm http://www.ictp.trieste.it/~radionet/1997_workshop/wireless/notes/sld024.htm http://www.ictp.trieste.it/~radionet/1997_workshop/wireless/notes/sld023.htm http://www.ictp.trieste.it/~radionet/1997_workshop/wireless/notes/sld022.htm http://www.bazar-e.net/raylink/docs/doc_frecuencehoping.htm http://www.cs.technion.ac.il/Courses/Computer-Networks-Lab/projects/spring99/wireless/fhvds.html http://www.compsee.com/libraries/educate/applications/erapplicationsrf-faq.htm http://www.apexwireless.com/aptech.htm http://www.idsystems.com/reader/1998_12/hol1298_sb1.htm http://www.csd.uwo.ca/courses/CS457a/reports/handin/yning/A1/sscomp.html http://www.omnexcontrols.com/faq.html#anchor108745 http://cas.et.tudelft.nl/%7Eglas/ssc/techn/techniques.html http://www.raylink.com/whitepaper/fhss_dsss.pdf http://www.dycor.ca/wireless_data/spread_spectrum_faq.html#advantage/disadvantage%20of%20direct%20sequence%20vs.%20frequency%20hopping http://www.occug.com/files/wireless/sld014.htm --- 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 Aug 15 22:34:18 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 WAA05095 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 22:34:12 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 21:32:57 -0600 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Brett Glass Subject: [ss] Re: Rangelan's on EBAY, was re: Ricochet units In-Reply-To: References: 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: <4.3.2.7.2.20010815211443.0463b5f0@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk At 08:54 PM 8/15/2001, Jeff King wrote: >All this tells me is you haven't actually done very much long range Part 15 spread >spectrum in urban areas (i.e. the real world). It seems to me that you're being quite chauvinistic by claiming that only urban areas are the "real world." The areas which benefit most from wireless are, in fact, rural areas -- where lower population densities and greater distances make the use of wireless more rewarding. In urban areas, wires are ubiquitous and the use of wireless can be limited to the last 100 feet. I've worked with spread spectrum in both urban and rural environments, and -- again -- frequency hopping is primarily useful in "battle zones" where too many transmitters are competing for too little available spectrum. Like Metricom, they sacrifice throughput for energy per bit in an attempt to deal with the jungle-like urban environment and/or penetrate walls. A little bit of data squeaks through, but not nearly as much as if one had a reasonable radio environment and a true spread spectrum modulation scheme. This tradeoff was Metricom's downfall. Ricochet simply couldn't compete, on price or speed, with DSL. Why? Because Metricom had to deploy thousands of poletop relays to combat interference and penetrate buildings, thus blowing infrastructure costs right through the roof. And it couldn't achieve more than 128 Kbps. DSSS on the 900 MHz band (the band Metricom used) can easily do 4 Mbps. I know; I set up a link that uses it last month. It's working perfectly... in the real world. --Brett --- 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 Aug 15 23:16:13 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 XAA07968 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 23:16:06 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 00:16:41 -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: Rangelan's on EBAY, was re: Ricochet units 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: <3B7B4929.A9DC4478@aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Brett Glass wrote: > > At 08:54 PM 8/15/2001, Jeff King wrote: > > >All this tells me is you haven't actually done very much long range Part 15 spread > >spectrum in urban areas (i.e. the real world). > > It seems to me that you're being quite chauvinistic by claiming that only > urban areas are the "real world." The areas which benefit most from wireless > are, in fact, rural areas -- where lower population densities and greater > distances make the use of wireless more rewarding. Sorry, by real world I mean how things really are, as opposed to how we wish they were. When someone is paying you to perform a service for them or you are putting up a mission critical link, it is important to grasp this concept. I am moving to a rural area now.... biggest town in the county is 8000 people and I'm in the middle of the cows and the fields. Yet look at what I said in the prior message: >> Most DSSS units on the market are more sensitive then FH units. However, I said >> was better suited for long range links, not work better occasionally. FH degrades >> much more gracefully in the presence of narrowband interferers then DSSS does. If I was putting up a PtP part 15 link today, a link I wanted to be reliable on a day to day basis, I'd use a frequency hopping unit. And that is exactly what I would use in a rural area. Yes, the noise floor is far lower, yet farmer Jones next door to me can still fire up his Siemens 2.4ghz phone, and I know a FH unit will tolarate that better then a DSSS unit. Yes, if your trying to get the most range and the highest speed, it is DSSS hands down. But sometimes reliability also is a factor. > I've worked with spread spectrum in both urban and rural environments, and > -- again -- frequency hopping is primarily useful in "battle zones" where > too many transmitters are competing for too little available spectrum. Like > Metricom, they sacrifice throughput for energy per bit in an attempt to deal > with the jungle-like urban environment and/or penetrate walls. Yet, if I am feeding my T1 to a remote site, and I need reliability, am I better off with a 11megabit 802.11b PtP solution or a 1.6megabit PtP frequency hopper? I'd rather be prepared for battle even if I am not in a battle zone, in particular if I don't need the extra speed. But before you say I am comparing apples to oranges, I'd say that same thing as well about 802.11 (which is 2megabit) DSSS). I don't think it is any coincedence that CirroNet also chose frequency hopping for their rural CPE units. Sure, they could have squezzed a little extra speed if they went with DSSS, but by going to FH they increased reliablity considerablly. And in the bigger picture, customer support, is a big cost. Just like I don't want to have to keep tweaking my T1 wireless link, the WISP doesn't want to have alot of customer support issues due to interference. I use wireless primarly as a utility, hence something I can setup and walk away from is attractive to me. Maybe we just misunderstood each other's points. I think the rangelan's are fine units, in particular if ~1megabit suites your needs. > DSSS on the 900 MHz band (the band Metricom used) can easily > do 4 Mbps. I know; I set up a link that uses it last month. What unit are you using? This is one of my biggest beefs with the WISP market these days.... almost everyone has walked away from 900mhz. It really had some advantages at least compared to 2.4ghz. -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 Thu Aug 16 11:44:08 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 LAA15094 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 11:44:03 -0500 (CDT) From: "Steve Stroh" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE: Metricom use of 900 MHz Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 09:42:04 -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 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 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 Many would argue that Metricom made effective use of the public resource of the 902-928 MHz band, and brought the benefits of wireless Internet access to many instead of only a few. Metricom's equipment, and usage, was legal. The presence of a Ricochet network did not "drove everyone else off 900 MHz". Rather it's much more correct to say that older, less sophisticated 900 MHz equipment did not cope well in the presence of a Ricochet network. But that's the beauty of the Darwinian process of the Part 15 rules - the "must accept interference, even when such interference causes undesirable operation" clause. What that clause means, in practical terms, is that the use of 902-928 MHz (and 2.4 GHz, and other ISM / Part 15 spectrum) can EVOLVE to new and different uses. To me, the Part 15 rules, especially that clause, mean that the best technology wins, and if you want your operations to stay reliable, you periodically invest in new equipment. If the prospect of periodically investing in new generations of equipment doesn't appeal to you, then I suggest using of licensed spectrum, where the rules actively PREVENT such evolution that would cause "interference" to older generations of equipment. Thanks, Steve -- Steve Stroh steve@strohpub.com 425-481-0600 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 Brett Glass > Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 17:48 > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] Re: Rangelan's on EBAY, was re: Ricochet units > Without the interference, it probably would have gone farther. This isn't > to say that someone couldn't take you down by deploying a huge > swarm of hoppers, > all operating at the legal limit, directly in your path. (This is what > Metricom did, and it drove everyone else off 900 MHz in the cities where > they deployed. They essentially took over a public resource.) > > --Brett > --- 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 Aug 16 13:06:55 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 NAA20828 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 13:06:49 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 12:05:47 -0600 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Brett Glass Subject: [ss] RE: Metricom use of 900 MHz In-Reply-To: References: 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: <4.3.2.7.2.20010816113239.056a7760@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk At 10:42 AM 8/16/2001, Steve Stroh wrote: >Many would argue that Metricom made effective use of the public resource of >the 902-928 MHz band, You and Dewayne are the only two, as best I can tell -- and this seems to be primarily due to an Ayn Randian "might makes right, and to Hell with what's best for the people" philosophy. Those of us who have attempted to use that band for other purposes in the presence of Metricom equipment have recognized the company's activities for what they are: a land grab. >and brought the benefits of wireless Internet access >to many instead of only a few. They trashed a whole band in a large number of cities for the benefit of only 51,000 subscribers nationwide. Hardly a win in my book. >Metricom's equipment, and usage, was legal. They exploited a loophole in the FCC's poorly drawn policies. These policies have also created a spectrum "drought" that has prevented the deployment of many useful services. Here in Laramie, we would have lost our community network -- including service to some of the schools -- had Metricom deployed its equipment. Local hams turned out to be our heroes. They threatened to start using the same frequencies in (legal!) ways that would jam the Metricom network before Metricom and Northern Gas agreed to do anything to alleviate the damage they were about to cause in our community. The City Council likewise recognized the need to prevent two large, out-of-state corporations from trampling local institutions. >The presence of a Ricochet >network did not "drove everyone else off 900 MHz". Yes, it did. In virtually every city where they deployed. >Rather it's much more >correct to say that older, less sophisticated 900 MHz equipment did not >cope well in the presence of a Ricochet network. Not correct. Ricochet's equipment messed up other equipment on the band precisely because it was crude and unsophisticated. It made poor use of the bandwidth, getting 128 Kbps instead of the 4 Mbps we get from our better equipment. That's because it devotes most of its energy to blasting others off the band and penetrating walls. > But that's the beauty of >the Darwinian process of the Part 15 rules - the "must accept interference, >even when such interference causes undesirable operation" clause. One of the reasons the FCC's regulation of spectrum usage has been an utter disaster is that it has relied upon what you call "Darwinian" mechanisms rather than good common sense. The biggest bully in town isn't necessarily the entity that deserves to take over a band. (Which is what Metricom was doing.) Nor is the richest. (The FCC's spectrum auctions have resulted in huge amounts of spectrum being tied up for anti-competitive purposes. Our community network, for example, couldn't afford to participate in the LMDS auctions in our area, which ended at absurd levels -- more than $100 for every man, woman, and child in the population. But the winners have deployed NOTHING. They bought the spectrum as a pre-emptive move to keep everyone else out.) >What that >clause means, in practical terms, is that the use of 902-928 MHz (and 2.4 >GHz, and other ISM / Part 15 spectrum) can EVOLVE to new and different uses. Not so. Remember that evolution is a fight for SURVIVAL, not efficiency. Metricom's equipment DEVOLVED to low throughputs, which in turn killed Metricom itself because it could not compete with DSL. >To me, the Part 15 rules, especially that clause, mean that the best >technology wins, Wrong. They're set up so that BRUTE FORCE wins. >and if you want your operations to stay reliable, you >periodically invest in new equipment. Again, not so. If I wanted to take Metricom's strategy to an extreme, and "win" your so-called "Darwinian" battle, I would have to invest in equipment that was still slower but caused maximum interference to other systems. 19.2 Kbps, anyone? >If the prospect of periodically investing in new generations of equipment >doesn't appeal to you, We routinely do that. But again, Metricom was not a "new generation" of equipment but rather clumsy, crude, and inefficient. Just as a tank is not good civilian transportation, a radio system that puts most of its effort into trashing others on the same band is not necessarily a good form of communication. >then I suggest using of licensed spectrum, where the >rules actively PREVENT such evolution Again, it's "devolution." In any event, I have advocated from the start that Metricom use licensed spectrum if it wants to monopolize the band it uses. But our small community network, which does not monopolize the spectrum and cannot be expected to pay the millions of dollars that the FCC's ham-handed, "Darwinian" management of spectrum would require, should be able to use the public spectrum in a socially responsible and considerate way. As we do now. With more sophisticated equipment than Metricom ever had. --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 Thu Aug 16 14:07:19 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 OAA25706 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 14:07:09 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 15:08:01 -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: Metricom use of 900 MHz 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: <3B7C1A11.FB567E93@aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Brett Glass wrote: > At 10:42 AM 8/16/2001, Steve Stroh wrote: > >Many would argue that Metricom made effective use of the public resource of > >the 902-928 MHz band, > You and Dewayne are the only two, as best I can tell -- and this seems > to be primarily due to an Ayn Randian "might makes right, and to Hell > with what's best for the people" philosophy. Add me to that list also. Ayn Rand is one of my favorite author's. > Those of us who have attempted to use that band for other purposes in > the presence of Metricom equipment have recognized the company's > activities for what they are: a land grab. Maybe, but you do realize that the ARRL and Metricom were in league together to prevent liberalization of the amateur spread spectrum rules, don't you? > Here in Laramie, we would have lost our community network -- including > service to some of the schools -- These were 900mhz Wavelan DSSS units, correct? These where the same units in another thread you were telling me I didn't know what I was doing with when I couldn't get a 1/4 mile link with them.... and this was long before Metricom deployed in Detroit. The older wavelan DSSS units are very susceptible to inband interference, and coupled with the fact they don't have a MAC layer, made them unreliable. However, a FH unit, at the same sites, performed flawlessly. > Local hams turned out to be our heroes. They threatened to start using > the same frequencies in (legal!) ways that would jam the Metricom > network If their intent was to jam the Metricom network, then they should loose their licenses and I suspect a case could be made before the FCC. Don't care what the rules say, if that was their sole intent, they don't deserve to hold a license. Now, if there legitimate operations where affected by Metricom, then yes, Metricom should cease operations just like the much smaller Darwin networks had to in Dallas around the first of the year. They were interfering with 2.4ghz Amateur TV and the ARRL was somehow involved here. It was in the ARRL letter which you can find on their web site. > >The presence of a Ricochet > >network did not "drove everyone else off 900 MHz". > > Yes, it did. In virtually every city where they deployed. I didn't notice any ill effects here in detroit, although there is very little to no amateur activity on 900mhz. Freewaves still worked good. > >Rather it's much more > >correct to say that older, less sophisticated 900 MHz equipment did not > >cope well in the presence of a Ricochet network. Like 900mhz ISA Wavelan DSSS cards with no MAC layer? ;-) > Our community network, for example, couldn't afford to participate > in the LMDS auctions in our area, which ended at absurd levels -- more than > $100 for every man, woman, and child in the population. But the winners have > deployed NOTHING. They bought the spectrum as a pre-emptive move to keep > everyone else out.) This is a topic of a whole other thread. I understand one of the big issues is the FCC is allowing installment payments and some of these squatters are going out of business.... don't remember the name of the company, but I read in the WSJ that one of the spectrum auction winners went out of business, defaulted on their payments to the FCC, then the FCC reauctioned their segment. The creditors then promptly sued the FCC saying it was a asset and they won. I'm in complete agreement here, but if your going to give away free spectrum, what other way to manage it is there other then a Darwian process? > >What that > >clause means, in practical terms, is that the use of 902-928 MHz (and 2.4 > >GHz, and other ISM / Part 15 spectrum) can EVOLVE to new and different uses. > > Not so. Remember that evolution is a fight for SURVIVAL, not efficiency. > Metricom's equipment DEVOLVED to low throughputs, which in turn killed > Metricom itself because it could not compete with DSL. It was never Metricom's goal to compete with DSL. It was mobile connectivity. The one point you are missing here is the complete free for all on the ISM bands..... FCC allows hams, narrowband emitters, DSSS and FH all on the same band. This is a recipe for a disaster, or as you put it survival of the fittest. DSSS just can't be very effective in a mixed environment like that at low process gains. This is not Metricom's fault. > >then I suggest using of licensed spectrum, where the > >rules actively PREVENT such evolution And this is exactly what the Quallcom people did to get a environment where CDMA/DSSS could operate effectively by keeping narrowband emitters out of it. Yet the part 15 bands are a mixed environment and as such, any cooperation is out of the question, and if you check the rules, technical illegal. It clearly is a case of the survival of the fittest. -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 Thu Aug 16 16:09:02 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 QAA05890 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:08:58 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 15:06:58 -0600 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Brett Glass Subject: [ss] Re: Rangelan's on EBAY, was re: Ricochet units In-Reply-To: References: 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: <4.3.2.7.2.20010816145613.05607c30@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk At 10:16 PM 8/15/2001, Jeff King wrote: >Sorry, by real world I mean how things really are, as opposed to how we wish >they were. In that case, you appear to wish that the whole world was an urban RF jungle, with Metricom attempting to take over entire public bands for its own private use. Sorry, but fortunately most of the world is not that way. >When someone is paying you to perform a service for them or you are >putting up a mission critical link, it is important to grasp this concept. In that case, I would recommend that you grasp and apply it yourself. >I am moving to a rural area now.... biggest town in the county is 8000 people and >I'm in the middle of the cows and the fields. Yet look at what I said in >the prior message: > >>> Most DSSS units on the market are more sensitive then FH units. However, I said >>> was better suited for long range links, not work better occasionally. FH degrades >>> much more gracefully in the presence of narrowband interferers then DSSS does. Not true. Until and unless the narrowband interference becomes approximately 10 times more intense than your own signal -- and that includes antenna directionality, polarization, and gain -- DSSS does not degrade AT ALL. That's not only more graceful, it's far superior and much more reliable. There's noise margin to spare, even in some of the older schemes such as the original Aironet and NCR WaveLAN. We have even done well in the presence of some hoppers, such as two Breezecom links. But when Metricom deploys a swarm of hundreds of coordinated hoppers, all operating in the same band, the aggregate field strength will take anything else down regardless of modulation scheme. While their system consists of multiple radios, it is coordinated and therefore should be considered to be one emitter. And, hence, in violation of FCC rules unless it operates on private spectrum. --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 Thu Aug 16 17:18:11 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 RAA10295 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 17:18:06 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 18:19:04 -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: Rangelan's on EBAY 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: <3B7C46D8.E8EE44ED@aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Brett Glass wrote: > > At 10:16 PM 8/15/2001, Jeff King wrote: > > >Sorry, by real world I mean how things really are, as opposed to how we wish > >they were. > > In that case, you appear to wish that the whole world was an urban RF > jungle, with Metricom attempting to take over entire public bands for > its own private use. Sorry, but fortunately most of the world is not > that way. This new thread had nothing to do with Metricom.... none-the-less, they are part of the real world, or should I say were. I think your hatred of Metricom and those that don't think they are the spawn of satan, is warping your judgment. I had concerns about Metricom, but I never started to foam at the mouth about it. Anyways, your making alot of assumptions that are not true. The whole world is not a urban area, yet Farmer Jones in a rural area can fire up his FH cordless phone 500 feet from your 10 mile DSSS link. So if your saying the noise floor in a rural area is far less then a urban area, yes I agree with you. But if your saying intense narrow band emitters cannot appear in a rural area, you are mistaken. With only 10-14db of processing gain in most DSSS solutions and a 22mhz wide target, this just makes me too nervous. Tell you what, I'll compromise with you here..... go look at that list of links I posted yesterday, and when you finish arguing with everyone on the list , I'd be happy to start it up with you again. But I think you will be gone for a while. > >>> Most DSSS units on the market are more sensitive then FH units. However, I said > >>> was better suited for long range links, not work better occasionally. FH degrades > >>> much more gracefully in the presence of narrowband interferers then DSSS does. > > Not true. Until and unless the narrowband interference becomes approximately 10 > times more intense than your own signal -- and that includes antenna directionality, > polarization, and gain -- DSSS does not degrade AT ALL. I don't dispute that at all. Yet your target is 22mhz wide, and only one signal in that window has to be 10-15db stronger to take you out. Farmer Jones 500mw FH cordless phone 500 feet away from your POP could take down your entire network. > That's not only more > graceful, it's far superior and much more reliable. There's noise margin By real world, I mean the reality of the Part 15 bands, with mixed uncoordinated signals. > But when Metricom deploys a swarm of hundreds of coordinated > hoppers, all operating in the same band, the aggregate field strength will > take anything else down regardless of modulation scheme. Yet, Metricom was "real world" for like 30%-40% of the U.S. population. It was real world for me as well. Yet my 900 mhz hoppers still worked when the network was up. My DSSS units, side by side with FH, where quite unreliable and unpredictable in the tests I ran in both Detroit and Ann Arbor over the last 6 years. Again, I don't disagree with your statement that DSSS with power control is a better way to go from a perspective of sensitivity and frequency reuse.... no doubt this is one reason Qualcomm went with them. Yet Qualcomm (or their licenses) were able to license the frequencies and demand that only cooperative DSSS signals share them. This is a far cry from the real world mad house that the Part 15 ISM band is. > While their system > consists of multiple radios, it is coordinated and therefore should be considered > to be one emitter. And, hence, in violation of FCC rules unless it operates > on private spectrum. Then why didn't you report them to the FCC? Seems to me it would have taken you less effort then getting all the hams in Laramie to threaten to jam the Metricom network. But I'm silly like 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 Thu Aug 16 18:15:37 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 SAA13124 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 18:15:28 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 17:13:53 -0600 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Brett Glass Subject: [ss] Re: Rangelan's on EBAY In-Reply-To: References: 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: <4.3.2.7.2.20010816165901.0465cb30@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk At 04:19 PM 8/16/2001, Jeff King wrote: >This new thread had nothing to do with Metricom.... none-the-less, they are part >of the real world, or should I say were. They were predators that were allowed to wreak havoc in many cities, and should not have been. >I think your hatred of Metricom I do not "hate" Metricom. (Your claims that I do appear to be an attempt to argue ad hominem.) However, it is my conviction that they acted unethically to destroy a public commons, and that this behavior is not (or, if you buy their claims that they're exploiting a loophole, certainly should not be) legal. I am all for services like Metricom's, so long as they do not destroy the precious few Part 15 bands for other users. Paul Allen's billions can easily buy spectrum that no one else can afford. If he wants to take over a band, he should pay for it. >and those that don't think they are the spawn of satan, is warping your judgment. See above. Again, your remarks about the "spawn of Satan" are disingenuous. >I had concerns about Metricom, but I never started to foam at the mouth about >it. Nor did I. >Anyways, your making alot of assumptions that are not true. The whole world is >not a urban area, yet Farmer Jones in a rural area can fire up his FH cordless >phone 500 feet from your 10 mile DSSS link. And if your link is properly engineered, he won't interfere at all. Certain technical concepts such as antenna polarization, Fresnel zones, process gain, and EIRP come into play here. There are many such devices in the paths of links I've set up, and the ONLY noticeable interference we've ever had is from Metricom equipment. Which takes down hoppers, too; it blankets the band with huge amounts of energy and turns up the volume when it detects an intruder on its "turf." Again, nasty and predatory. >Yet, Metricom was "real world" for like 30%-40% of the U.S. population. They would have liked to cover that much of the population, but didn't make it before they went under. >It was >real world for me as well. Yet my 900 mhz hoppers still worked when the network was >up. My DSSS units, side by side with FH, where quite unreliable and unpredictable >in the tests I ran in both Detroit and Ann Arbor over the last 6 years. Sounds as if your own hoppers were interfering with your DSSS units. Or perhaps you did not engineer well. >Again, >I don't disagree with your statement that DSSS with power control is a better >way to go from a perspective of sensitivity and frequency reuse.... no doubt >this is one reason Qualcomm went with them. Yet Qualcomm (or their licenses) were >able to license the frequencies and demand that only cooperative DSSS signals >share them. This is a far cry from the real world mad house that the Part 15 ISM band is. Part 15 is not necessarily a madhouse. It's a commons. Anyone who attempts to bring in a herd of cattle that drives everyone else from the commons should be forcibly removed; the commons is for everyone's use. >> While their system >> consists of multiple radios, it is coordinated and therefore should be considered >> to be one emitter. And, hence, in violation of FCC rules unless it operates >> on private spectrum. > >Then why didn't you report them to the FCC? Seems to me it would have taken you >less effort then getting all the hams in Laramie to threaten to jam the Metricom >network. We were preparing to file a complaint with the FCC when we reached an agreement. A complaint certainly would have been one of our actions if they'd tried to steamroller us. As for the hams: They would have made perfectly legitimate use of the band, for amateur activities such as TV. It just would have had the, uh, side effect of jamming Metricom. Remember, hams are primary users; they don't need to justify what they do on the band so long as it is legal activity under Part 97. --Brett --- 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 Aug 16 18:17:05 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 SAA13207 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 18:16:58 -0500 (CDT) From: "Steve Stroh" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE: Ricochet units Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:13:34 -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 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 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 Brett: If your statement about Metricom units "swarming" were OBJECTIVELY true (not just what you believe, or believe you have observed), then the units would not have been granted Part 15 Certification. But they WERE, in FACT, granted FCC Part 15 certification, thus Ricochet units do not operate in violation of FCC rules, regardless of how long, or how fervently you wish to believe and proselytize your viewpoint. Again, the OBJECTIVE truth is that Ricochet devices WERE granted Part 15 certification; and the FACT of the Part 15 certification ends the discussion about whether they were, or were not, legal. Thanks, Steve -- Steve Stroh steve@strohpub.com 425-481-0600 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 Brett Glass > Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 14:07 > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] Re: Rangelan's on EBAY, was re: Ricochet units > But when Metricom deploys a swarm of hundreds of coordinated > hoppers, all operating in the same band, the aggregate field strength will > take anything else down regardless of modulation scheme. While > their system consists of multiple radios, it is coordinated and > therefore should be considered to be one emitter. And, hence, > in violation of FCC rules unless > it operates on private spectrum. > > --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 Thu Aug 16 18:51:16 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 SAA16023 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 18:51:14 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 17:49:42 -0600 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Brett Glass Subject: [ss] RE: Ricochet units In-Reply-To: References: 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: <4.3.2.7.2.20010816174046.04658550@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk At 05:13 PM 8/16/2001, Steve Stroh wrote: >Brett: > >If your statement about Metricom units "swarming" were OBJECTIVELY true (not >just what you believe, or believe you have observed), then the units would >not have been granted Part 15 Certification. Not true. The engineers at the FCC were interested in the phenomenon and might have pursued this if we'd filed a formal complaint. >But they WERE, in FACT, granted >FCC Part 15 certification, Give me a break, Steve. You know, and I know, that Part 15 certification is not done by the FCC itself but by third party labs who are paid by the manufacturer of the equipment under test and therefore have a built-in conflict of interest. The FCC does sometimes review equipment, but if it ever reviewed Metricom's it looked at the individual radios and not at their aggregate behavior. We saw swarming. All the Metricom units in the area turned up the volume in the presence of any other device on 900 MHz. What's more, while they claimed no active hopping sequence coordination, their patents suggest that their interference avoidance mechanism created de facto coordination. >thus Ricochet units do not operate in violation >of FCC rules, regardless of how long, or how fervently you wish to believe >and proselytize your viewpoint. Steve, do you (or did you) have an investment in Metricom? Your tirade (which is unsupported by objective evidence such as what we've gathered) suggests bias. >Again, the OBJECTIVE truth is that Ricochet devices WERE granted Part 15 >certification; and the FACT of the Part 15 certification ends the discussion >about whether they were, or were not, legal. Sorry, Steve, but as mentioned above, that's dead wrong. There was a strong case -- and the FCC engineers we consulted confirmed this -- for re-evaluating their network as a single emitter, in which case they would not have been legal. Perhaps we should have pressed the issue, but we didn't need to. We used other means to keep Metricom from wantonly destroying our community's resources, which is what we cared about. --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 Thu Aug 16 19:58:56 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 TAA21470 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 19:58:51 -0500 (CDT) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 19:57:53 -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] Metricom is Dead get over it! 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: <200108170057.f7H0vrW01470@faulkner.netnet.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk This is what really bugs me about this list. Weather or not you liked them or what they did to the band is irrelevant. They are history. Now is the time to get some ham stuff up on 900 MHz, before the next Part 15 enterprise shows up. I've heard it 100 times before;"the band is trashed by Part 15, so that's why I haven't bothered with the band." Well now it's untrashed or should be somewhat. What will every hams excuse be now. I'm getting tired of all the bickering on this list and all the people spewing equations and saying it can't be done. Have you tried it? Don't just talk about it, do it and document it so everyone else can learn from it. One more thing that just bugs the heck out of me besides the idiotic flaming, is the stupid idea that we hams should all adopt some sort of wireless standard, FHSS, DSSS, 802.11, ect. Use what works for you in your area. Don't wait for a group purchase it will probably never happen, and forget about adapting the Metricom units, unless your gonna do it yourself. --- 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 Aug 16 20:33:32 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 UAA23808 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 20:33:30 -0500 (CDT) From: "Steve Stroh" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE: Metricom is Dead get over it! Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 18:31:35 -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 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 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 Metricom is out of business. The Ricochet networks are shut down... for now. It's not a given that they won't be resurrected by another party. It will take another few days for the results of the "auction" begun on Thursday to become known. I think the discussions, particularly the DSSS vs FHSS were valid for this forum. Thanks, Steve -- Steve Stroh steve@strohpub.com 425-481-0600 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 Steve Lampereur > Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 17:58 > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] Metricom is Dead get over it! > > > This is what really bugs me about this list. Weather or not you liked > them or what they did to the band is irrelevant. They are history. > Now is the time to get some ham stuff up on 900 MHz, before the next > Part 15 enterprise shows up. I've heard it 100 times before;"the band > is trashed by Part 15, so that's why I haven't bothered with the band." > Well now it's untrashed or should be somewhat. What will every hams > excuse be now. I'm getting tired of all the bickering on this list and > all the people spewing equations and saying it can't be done. Have you > tried it? Don't just talk about it, do it and document it so everyone > else can learn from it. One more thing that just bugs the heck out of > me besides the idiotic flaming, is the stupid idea that we hams should > all adopt some sort of wireless standard, FHSS, DSSS, 802.11, ect. Use > what works for you in your area. Don't wait for a group purchase it > will probably never happen, and forget about adapting the Metricom > units, unless your gonna do it yourself. > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: lists@strohpub.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 Aug 16 21:03:12 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 VAA25547 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 21:03:07 -0500 (CDT) X-Authentication-Warning: kb9mwr.ampr.org: kb9mwr owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 21:01:54 -0500 (CDT) From: Steve Lampereur X-Sender: kb9mwr@kb9mwr.ampr.org To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE: Metricom is Dead get over it! 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 >I think the discussions, particularly the DSSS vs FHSS were valid for >this forum. I agree they are too, they are just that.. "discussions" though. Highly doubt anyone was inspired by them to go physically experiment or set anything up. So ask your self what is point of the conversation, if there are no physical results. Food for thought... --- 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 Aug 16 21:22:03 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 VAA27787 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 21:22:00 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 22:23:02 -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: Metricom is Dead get over it! 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: <3B7C8006.1A5CB473@aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Steve Lampereur wrote: > > >I think the discussions, particularly the DSSS vs FHSS were valid for > >this forum. > > I agree they are too, they are just that.. "discussions" though. I suggest you read them again then. They were disscussions of physical findings, and even though I may have disagreed with Brett, I have no doubt he has done alot with spread spectrum as have I. > Highly > doubt anyone was inspired by them to go physically experiment or set > anything up. Can't say anyone was inspired nor was that my specific goal. Can I ask what are you trying to inspire here? -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 Thu Aug 16 21:34:00 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 VAA28697 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 21:33:58 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 20:31:50 -0600 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Brett Glass Subject: [ss] Re: Metricom is Dead get over it! 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: <4.3.2.7.2.20010816202658.046ca380@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk At 06:57 PM 8/16/2001, Steve Lampereur wrote: >This is what really bugs me about this list. Weather or not you liked >them or what they did to the band is irrelevant. They are history. Maybe, maybe not. Their auction today (at which they turned away more than a dozen bidders whom they refused to allow to register!) apparently had a winner. >Now is the time to get some ham stuff up on 900 MHz, before the next >Part 15 enterprise shows up. The demise of Metricom doesn't present any special opportunity for amateur radio operators. Hams aren't, er, hamstrung by a measly 1 watt power limit, so they can outshout anyone -- including Metricom. And they're primary users, so the presence of Part 15 activity doesn't prevent them from using the band. They shouldn't dominate the band just for spite, though. That would be as bad as what Metricom was doing. --Brett --- 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 Aug 16 21:36:19 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 VAA28778 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 21:36:17 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 20:32:38 -0600 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Brett Glass Subject: [ss] RE: Metricom is Dead get over it! 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: <4.3.2.7.2.20010816203211.0561d6a0@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk At 08:01 PM 8/16/2001, Steve Lampereur wrote: >>I think the discussions, particularly the DSSS vs FHSS were valid for >>this forum. > >I agree they are too, they are just that.. "discussions" though. Highly >doubt anyone was inspired by them to go physically experiment or set >anything up. Not true. See http://www.lariat.org/metricom.html --Brett --- 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 Aug 16 21:37:51 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 VAA29345 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2001 21:37:46 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 20:33:48 -0600 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Brett Glass Subject: [ss] RE: Metricom is Dead get over it! In-Reply-To: References: 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: <4.3.2.7.2.20010816203256.055cd840@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk At 07:31 PM 8/16/2001, Steve Stroh wrote: >Metricom is out of business. > >The Ricochet networks are shut down... for now. Not true. Their WAPs and poletop units are still chattering away; I've personally verified this. They just won't let end users connect. --Brett --- 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 Aug 17 02:42:51 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 CAA21861 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 02:42:46 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: From: "Graeme Zimmer" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: Rangelan's on EBAY Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 17:46:19 +1000 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 Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <005201c126f0$b5d890c0$7e86a4cb@co3043446a> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > Yet my 900 mhz hoppers still worked when the network was > up. My DSSS units, side by side with FH, where quite unreliable and unpredictable It was a couple of years ago, and my memory is getting hazy, but my experience was quite the reverse. We had been using early Lucent FH gear with fair success, but then changed to the more recent DSSS product and were absolutely amazed at the improved range and immunitity. With DSSS units we were able to achieve solid links over paths which were quite impossible with FHers. One comment I would make is that many of the competing DSSS products are pretty Micky-Mouse. With only a few bits A/D and short PN sequences it is no suprise that they have little processing gain and poor immunity. They have the simplest ASIC design possible and are designed for short range use only. A well engineered DSSS system should compete favorably with any FH system. Consider the astounding results achieved with modern GPS........ .......................... Zim ................... VK3GJZ --- 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 Aug 17 09:46:08 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 JAA25373 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:46:06 -0500 (CDT) X-Originating-IP: [208.51.39.70] Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Jeff King" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Rangelan's on EBAY Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 14:44:13 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Aug 2001 14:44:13.0324 (UTC) FILETIME=[150B8CC0:01C1272B] List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk "Graeme Zimmer" wrote: >Jeff King wrote: > > Yet my 900 mhz hoppers still worked when the network was > > up. My DSSS units, side by side with FH, where quite unreliable and >unpredictable > >It was a couple of years ago, and my memory is getting hazy, but my >experience was quite the reverse. > >We had been using early Lucent FH gear with fair success, but then changed >to the more recent >DSSS product and were absolutely amazed at the improved range and >immunitity. I was comparing circa 1995 DSSS product to circa 1995 frequency hopping product. The 1995 DSSS product was the same one Brent used as well in Larimie that Metricom would have taken out. A Lucent 900mhz wavelan. What recent DSSS product are you using? >One comment I would make is that many of the competing DSSS products are >pretty Micky-Mouse. >With only a few bits A/D and short PN sequences it is no suprise that they >have little processing gain and poor immunity. Yet this defines the majority of DSSS product on the market.... or should I say one that falls within a hobbist's budget. Remember, this thread started with someone posting a link to $39-$199 frequency hopping units and then another individial critizing these units. I simply suggested these units had a valuable place in the reality of the part 15 bands. And I should add; not theory, calulations or arm chair smoking, but from someone who has done alot of spread spectrum work, including work with these very same units. >A well engineered DSSS system should compete favorably with any FH system. Yes. How much does this cost and what are the test conditions? >Consider the astounding results achieved with modern GPS........ Doesn't GPS DSSS have a process gain of ~40db and have an exclusive band dedicated to it? Where as the typical DSSS we are talking about typically has a processing gain of 11db and shares the band with other narrowband emitters. -Jeff _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp --- 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 Aug 17 09:49:32 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 JAA25544 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:49:28 -0500 (CDT) From: "Steve Stroh" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE: Ricochet units Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 07:46:58 -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 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal 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 Brett: The fact remains that Metricom has Part 15 certification, which entitles it to operate its system. That you, personally, think that their Part 15 certification isn't valid due to "behavior" that you've observed isn't all that relevant until it's progressed into at least an informal complaint to the FCC. That a person at the FCC expressed interest in your observations also isn't that relevant; of COURSE they're going to say that! What member of a regulatory body would risk saying "Go Away"? For the record, I have no personal interest in Metricom other than I'm a (now) former customer and I admire the Ricochet system. Perhaps there were "clean sheet of paper" improvements that could have been made, but making use of the ISM bands and having the potential to deal with numerous other uses of the spectrum, including NUMEROUS other networks, I think that they made the right technology tradeoffs. I don't consider your observations valid about the "harm" of a Ricochet system, other than the fact that you're trying to continue to operate older equipment that can't cope with a band that has steadily more congested as more and more wireless devices are use are put into use. A Ricochet system has been operating in the Seattle area for many years (the second major installation after SF Bay area), as well as a partially operational Ricochet II system. There are numerous ISM Internet systems in operation in the Seattle area. This will be my last post regarding your "politics" about Ricochet. Thanks, Steve -- Steve Stroh steve@strohpub.com 425-481-0600 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 Brett Glass > Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 16:50 > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] RE: Ricochet units > > > At 05:13 PM 8/16/2001, Steve Stroh wrote: > > > >Brett: > > > >If your statement about Metricom units "swarming" were > OBJECTIVELY true (not > >just what you believe, or believe you have observed), then the > units would > >not have been granted Part 15 Certification. > > Not true. The engineers at the FCC were interested in the phenomenon and > might have pursued this if we'd filed a formal complaint. > > >But they WERE, in FACT, granted > >FCC Part 15 certification, > > Give me a break, Steve. You know, and I know, that Part 15 certification > is not done by the FCC itself but by third party labs who are paid by > the manufacturer of the equipment under test and therefore have a built-in > conflict of interest. The FCC does sometimes review equipment, > but if it ever > reviewed Metricom's it looked at the individual radios and not at their > aggregate behavior. We saw swarming. All the Metricom units > in the area turned up the volume in the presence of any other device > on 900 MHz. What's more, while they claimed no active hopping sequence > coordination, their patents suggest that their interference avoidance > mechanism created de facto coordination. > > >thus Ricochet units do not operate in violation > >of FCC rules, regardless of how long, or how fervently you wish > to believe > >and proselytize your viewpoint. > > Steve, do you (or did you) have an investment in Metricom? Your tirade > (which is unsupported by objective evidence such as what we've gathered) > suggests bias. > > >Again, the OBJECTIVE truth is that Ricochet devices WERE granted Part 15 > >certification; and the FACT of the Part 15 certification ends > the discussion > >about whether they were, or were not, legal. > > Sorry, Steve, but as mentioned above, that's dead wrong. There > was a strong > case -- and the FCC engineers we consulted confirmed this -- for > re-evaluating > their network as a single emitter, in which case they would not have been > legal. Perhaps we should have pressed the issue, but we didn't need to. We > used other means to keep Metricom from wantonly destroying our community's > resources, which is what we cared about. > > --Brett Glass > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: lists@strohpub.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 Aug 17 09:57:16 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 JAA26187 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:57:12 -0500 (CDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:56:14 -0400 (EDT) From: Howard Goldstein To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Rangelan's on EBAY In-Reply-To: References: 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: <15229.12430.83592.19139@penny.queue.to> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Jeff King writes: > Doesn't GPS DSSS have a process gain of ~40db A 50db+ number sticks out in my mind, as does a 50bps data rate, all in a zaftig 9mhz package --- 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 Aug 17 10:24:29 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 KAA28096 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:24:28 -0500 (CDT) X-Originating-IP: [208.51.39.70] Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Jeff King" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Rangelan's on EBAY Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 15:23:18 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Aug 2001 15:23:18.0737 (UTC) FILETIME=[8B052C10:01C12730] List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Hey Howie: This is the same Howie that wrote the TNC2 firmware? If so, nice to see you here (and even if not, still nice to see you here!) Howard Goldstein wrote: >Jeff King writes: > > Doesn't GPS DSSS have a process gain of ~40db > >A 50db+ number sticks out in my mind, as does a 50bps data rate, >all in a zaftig 9mhz package I knew it was either 40 or 50, but I thought the 50 was on the military channel and the 40 on the civilian? In any case, the processing gain is significant. 73 Jeff _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp --- 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 Aug 17 11:33:03 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 LAA03841 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:33:01 -0500 (CDT) From: s.monsey@att.net To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Metricom Auction Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 16:30:54 +0000 Message-Id: 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: <20010817163057.XFTN18077.mtiwmhc26.worldnet.att.net@webmail.worldnet.att.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk According to Cnet, the Metricom auction took about 3 hours. They won't anounce the results till Monday. 3 hours...hummm...any speculation? Steve N0FPF http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1004-200-6896369.html?tag=mn_ hd --- 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 Aug 17 11:36:14 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 LAA04591 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:36:05 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:32:25 -0600 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Brett Glass Subject: [ss] RE: Ricochet units In-Reply-To: References: 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: <4.3.2.7.2.20010817101821.05670e60@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk At 08:46 AM 8/17/2001, Steve Stroh wrote: >Brett: > >The fact remains that Metricom has Part 15 certification, which entitles it >to operate its system. Again, Steve, you're being bombastic. Metricom's units have been said by a test lab to meet the requirements of Part 15, but it is not at all clear that they'd stand up to closer scrutiny by the FCC. >That you, personally, think that their Part 15 certification isn't valid due >to "behavior" that you've observed isn't all that relevant until it's >progressed into at least an informal complaint to the FCC. The fact that we haven't hired lawyers and pressed the issue with the FCC does not mean that our observations and tests are not correct or relevant. >That a person at >the FCC expressed interest in your observations also isn't that relevant; of >COURSE they're going to say that! What member of a regulatory body would >risk saying "Go Away"? Most regulatory bodies do that on a regular basis. >For the record, I have no personal interest in Metricom other than I'm a >(now) former customer and I admire the Ricochet system. Your admiration is misplaced. It's a hack. >Perhaps there were "clean sheet of paper" improvements that could have been >made, but making use of the ISM bands Which they should not have done... >and having the potential to deal with I think you mean, "take down" >numerous other uses of the spectrum, including NUMEROUS other networks, I >think that they made the right technology tradeoffs. No, they made the wrong ones. There is not a sufficient number of committed mobile users to sustain such a network. They needed to serve home users, and could not compete with DSL because their technology was aimed at blasting others off the band rather than providing competitive bandwidth. >I don't consider your observations valid about the "harm" of a Ricochet >system, other than the fact that you're trying to continue to operate older >equipment Even after 6 years, it's proven to be an inspired design -- and is far superior technologically to Metricom's equipment. That's why we can get 4 Mbps out of it when Ricochet limps along at one sixteenth of that data rate AND a fraction of the range. >that can't cope with a band that has steadily more congested as >more and more wireless devices are use are put into use. It copes with that congestion wonderfully, unless faced by a virtual army of emitters which is designed to take it down and does not play by the rules set for that band. The fact that Ricochet interferes destructively with it does not mean that it "can't cope." One can take down ANY radio technology, no matter how sophisticated, with a sufficient number of transmitters. >A Ricochet system >has been operating in the Seattle area for many years (the second major >installation after SF Bay area), as well as a partially operational Ricochet >II system. There are numerous ISM Internet systems in operation in the >Seattle area. On other bands, such as 2.4 GHz. >This will be my last post regarding your "politics" about Ricochet. If you consider a request for conformance to the FCC regulations, or for responsible and nondestructive use of a public resource, to be "politics," so be it. Metricom has exercised neither good sense, good manners, nor good citizenship -- which appears to be why it failed. We'll see what its successor does. --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 Fri Aug 17 11:38:49 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 LAA04941 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:38:48 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:33:37 -0600 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Brett Glass Subject: [ss] Re: Metricom Auction 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: <4.3.2.7.2.20010817103238.056704c0@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk At 10:30 AM 8/17/2001, s.monsey@att.net wrote: >According to Cnet, the Metricom auction took about 3 >hours. They won't anounce the results till Monday. 3 >hours...hummm...any speculation? My guess: Verizon or Worldcom bought it and will either kill it or take all marketing, etc. in house. --Brett --- 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 Aug 17 11:42:17 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 LAA05044 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 11:42:12 -0500 (CDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 12:37:35 -0400 (EDT) From: Howard Goldstein To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Rangelan's on EBAY In-Reply-To: References: 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: <15229.18511.311199.566749@penny.queue.to> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Jeff King writes: > Hey Howie: > > This is the same Howie that wrote the TNC2 firmware? If so, > nice to see you here (and even if not, still nice to see > you here!) > Hi Jeff, yes you pinned me out. Thanks for your kind words. It's nice to be here amongst old friends, and new ones. > Howard Goldstein wrote: > > > >Jeff King writes: > > > Doesn't GPS DSSS have a process gain of ~40db > > > >A 50db+ number sticks out in my mind, as does a 50bps data rate, > >all in a zaftig 9mhz package > > I knew it was either 40 or 50, but I thought the 50 was on the > military channel and the 40 on the civilian? You're far more correct than I (what I get for relying on memory?) Not having access to the P code I can't ever see the numbers I cited. > In any case, the > processing gain is significant. Agreed. And as you noted, it's at a tremendous price, huge amounts of protected spectrum we can't expect to get in this world and probably won't ever find in the ham bands. Having also put these to use in the real world my experience with ds vs fh probably mirrors yours'. I really like the freewaves for single hops and used them extensively in a previous job. The networking side (what passes for it) could sure stand quite a bit of improvement. --- 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 Aug 17 13:03:13 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 NAA10637 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 13:03:12 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 12:02:02 -0600 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Brett Glass Subject: [ss] Re: Correction, Re: Ricochet units 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: <4.3.2.7.2.20010817115924.0475f100@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk I wrote: >Even after 6 years, [WaveLAN has]proven to be an inspired design -- and is far >superior technologically to Metricom's equipment. That's why we can get >4 Mbps out of it when Ricochet limps along at one sixteenth of that >data rate AND a fraction of the range. I miscalculated here. Actually, Ricochet gets one thirty-second of the data rate. --Brett --- 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 Aug 17 14:25:59 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 OAA16555 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 14:25:56 -0500 (CDT) X-Originating-IP: [208.51.39.70] Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Jeff King" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Metricom Auction Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 19:24:25 +0000 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Aug 2001 19:24:25.0802 (UTC) FILETIME=[3A101AA0:01C12752] List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk s.monsey@att.net wrote: >According to Cnet, the Metricom auction took about 3 >hours. They won't anounce the results till Monday. 3 >hours...hummm...any speculation? The following attachments are from the Motley Fool message board (a stock trading board). Two of the people tried to attend the auction. I would have posted the links except you need to register to see them. If anyone wants to debate these guys, they will need to go to the motley fool board to do it (www.fool.com). Anyways, these are nothing more them rumors. -Jeff --------- The Motley Fool Discussion Boards Subject: Re: auction results Date: 8/16/2001 5:35:43 PM Number: 11572 Author: ThornyStick URL: http://boards.fool.com/Message.asp?mid=15579028 I showed up at the Metricom offices shortly after 10 this morning and left at about noon (PST). They were not letting _anyone_ in other than registered bidders who had put up a security deposit. There weren't many other people outside, but a few of them were press(CNET, SF Chronicle, Business Week). Not even they were let in (even after offering to post the security). I didn't see everyone who went in, but reports from others there who saw everyone go in put the number of people upstairs at the auction at 25 or 30. I did speak briefly with a man who said he represented an investment group that was interested in a single GSA, but he left (and was back outside) before the auction even started. His feeling was that everything was too much of a cluster f* to be worth bidding on unless you were an insider. There was also a group in the lobby who represented the company who sold Metricom their furniture. They were also not allowed up to the auction. At about 11:15-30 caterers took lunch up to the auction. I'm not sure if the guy from CNET ever convinced the caterers to give him a lunch. I realize that none of this is really "news", but I figured I would post and at least let people know what little I saw. ------------ The Motley Fool Discussion Boards Subject: Re: auction results Date: 8/16/2001 5:49:31 PM Number: 11573 Author: blakdawg URL: http://boards.fool.com/Message.asp?mid=15579135 I live a few miles from where the auction was held at the new Ricochet headquarters near downtown San Jose - I went over there at 10:00 this morning, didn't think I'd be able to get in (the pre-auction material said it would be for "qualified bidders only", e.g., people who put down $50K in earnest money and otherwise appeared qualified to bid), and didn't get in. I hung around until about noon, when they brought in salads and sandwiches, looking like they were settling down for a long session. There were a number of other people interested in the proceedings who were excluded - several creditors, several reporters, some small investors, and some others like me who had some level of interest in bidding but were unable or unwilling to sign up in advance as bidders. We gossiped and kvetched about Ricochet's oddly loyal subscriber and investor base, and the failure of the management team to run the company decently, etc., but there really wasn't any information available to people not admitted as bidders. We did hear the liquidators say that they started the proceedings 1/2 hour late waiting for one participant, but it wasn't clear what his name was or who he represented. One of the questions in my head the last few weeks has been "what did they do with all of the money they burned through?" . . but as soon as I saw their new building, the answer was clear. They spent it on space (145,000 square feet of class A office space near downtown San Jose, probably leased near the height of the dot-com mania), with stylish, artistic furnishings, etc - maybe not all of it, but if the building reflects their approach to spending, I'm no longer surprised that they're out of money. ----- The Motley Fool Discussion Boards Subject: No Bid Accepted? Date: 8/17/2001 2:35:36 PM Number: 11583 Author: CliffordBuckner URL: http://boards.fool.com/Message.asp?mid=15584778 RUMOR: From a current employee to his realative to me (a few minute ago) ------- "none of the bids were accepted". If this is true they can now sell everything off piecemeal for very very little and/or competely destroy the company and technology. Maybe there will a new "Pheonix" wireless company in the near future. Cliff. _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp --- 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 Aug 20 07:28:26 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 HAA22340 for ; Mon, 20 Aug 2001 07:28:25 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: From: "Graeme Zimmer" 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 Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" 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 > Yet my 900 mhz hoppers still worked when the network was > up. My DSSS units, side by side with FH, where quite unreliable and unpredictable It was a couple of years ago, and my memory is getting hazy, but my experience was quite the reverse. We had been using early Lucent FH gear with fair success, but then changed to the more recent DSSS product and were absolutely amazed at the improved range and immunitity. With DSSS units we were able to achieve solid links over paths which were quite impossible with FHers. One comment I would make is that many of the competing DSSS products are pretty Micky-Mouse. With only a few bits A/D and short PN sequences it is no suprise that they have little processing gain and poor immunity. They have the simplest ASIC design possible and are designed for short range use only. A well engineered DSSS system should compete favorably with any FH system. Consider the astounding results achieved with modern GPS........ .......................... Zim ................... VK3GJZ --- 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 Tue Aug 21 17:18:44 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 RAA13300 for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2001 17:18:40 -0500 (CDT) Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 15:16:08 -0700 (PDT) From: Bob Lorenzini To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] 802.11 hacking now public 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 www.wired.com/news/wireless/0,1382,46187,00.html Bob - wd6dod --- 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 Aug 22 05:35:03 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 FAA26320 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 05:35:03 -0500 (CDT) Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 06:33:41 EDT From: KRD57@aol.com Subject: [ss] IP3 Standards To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: 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: <36.1a81cce5.28b4e486@aol.com> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Can anyone help me with the definition of the IP3 Standards. As I understand IP3, it is a measure of the 3rd order intercept point of a receiver. Selectivity is another way of looking at IP3. However, IP3 focusses on the rejection of unintended digital transmissions. Thanks --- 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 Aug 22 19:48:58 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 TAA01200 for ; Wed, 22 Aug 2001 19:48:57 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: From: "jeff millar" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: IP3 Standards Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 20:46:17 -0400 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 Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <000c01c12b6d$05d59e80$0201a8c0@home> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk An amplifier always has some nonlinearities that produce mixing and harmonics (intermodulation). To determine IP3 (intermodulation product, 3rd order), one plots the amplitude of the intended signal and the amplitude of the unintended mixing products on a graph as the input level is raised (input being two signals close to each other that generate intermodulation products). A basic principle nonlinearities holds that intermod products increase more rapidly with input level than intended output level. 3rd order products have a slope of three and 5th order products have a slope of 5, etc. while the intended output has a slope of 1. At low levels the input might be -50 dBm, the output -30 dBm (20 dB gain)and 3rd order products -90 dBm. Then increase the input 10 dB, output goes to -20, and mixing products go to -60 (slope of three). Plot this and you can predict where the two lines will cross (0 dBm). The output level at cross is the "output IP3" and input level is the input IP3. either may be specified on a component data sheet. Note that real parts can never get to these levels, the hit total power limits first. IP3 is just a convienent way to characterize signal handling capability of parts. Selectivity doesn't relate the IP3 except that if a filter removes a strong interferring signal, then it can't generate intermodulation products. These specifications generally get tested with pure carriers not wideband modulated signals. hope this helps.... jeff, wa1hco ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 6:33 AM Subject: [ss] IP3 Standards > Can anyone help me with the definition of the IP3 Standards. > > As I understand IP3, it is a measure of the 3rd order intercept point of a receiver. Selectivity is another way of looking at IP3. However, IP3 focusses on the rejection of unintended digital transmissions. > > > Thanks > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: JEFF@WA1HCO.MV.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 Aug 23 10:47:43 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 KAA22233 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 10:47:41 -0500 (CDT) From: s.monsey@att.net To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Interesting Gadget - D2D Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 15:45:54 +0000 Message-Id: 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: <20010823154554.UHGM26461.mtiwmhc26.worldnet.att.net@webmail.worldnet.att.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Check this thing out. The D2D device. http://www.d2d.com Steve - N0FPF --- 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 Aug 25 20:19:37 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 UAA22561 for ; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 20:19:34 -0500 (CDT) Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2001 01:14:19 UTC Message-Id: From: Glenn Wright To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] ve3jf 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: <13106@mail1.wb7spd.ampr.org> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Does anyone on the list have a current address for Barry VE3JF? Email to him at ve3jf@tapr.org and bm@hydra.carleton.ca are returned. -- 73, Glenn wb7spd@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 Sat Aug 25 20:32:01 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 UAA22938 for ; Sat, 25 Aug 2001 20:31:55 -0500 (CDT) From: David Wilson Message-Id: Subject: [ss] Re: ve3jf To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2001 20:35:42 -0500 (CDT) In-Reply-To: from "Glenn Wright" at Aug 26, 2001 01:14:19 AM MIME-Version: 1.0 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: <200108260135.UAA25590@wwns.wwns.com> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Hi, Have you tried bm@lynx.ve3jf.ampr.org ? Dave Glenn Wright wrote... > > Does anyone on the list have a current address for Barry VE3JF? > Email to him at ve3jf@tapr.org and bm@hydra.carleton.ca are > returned. > > -- > 73, > Glenn > wb7spd@arrl.net > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: david@wwns.com > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > -- David R. Wilson WB4LHO World Wide Network Services Nashville, Tennessee USA david@wwns.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 Mon Aug 27 17:47:12 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 RAA01152 for ; Mon, 27 Aug 2001 17:47:11 -0500 (CDT) Errors-To: Message-ID: Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 18:48:23 -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: ve3jf 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: <3B8ACE37.E864D0AA@aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk David Wilson wrote: > > Hi, > > Have you tried > bm@lynx.ve3jf.ampr.org ? Or barry.mclarnon@crc.ca --- 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 Aug 28 00:58:58 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 AAA11725 for ; Tue, 28 Aug 2001 00:58:58 -0500 (CDT) From: "Steven Bible" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] 2001 ARRL/TAPR DCC September 21-23, 2001 Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 23:00:45 -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 V5.50.4522.1200 Importance: Normal 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 2001 ARRL/TAPR Digital Communications Conference Cincinnati, Ohio September 21-23, 2001 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Hurry! Conference Room Rates end September 1st! - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - DCC Schedule Highlights: Friday All Day APRS Seminar Saturday Technical Papers and Introductory Sessions Banquet Speaker and Prize Drawing Sunday - 5 Hour Seminar: "Simulating Circuits and Systems with Serenade SV" by Dave Newkirk, W9VES - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - The 20th ARRL and TAPR Digital Communications Conference will be held September 21-23 in Cincinnati, Ohio. The annual gathering provides an international forum for radio amateurs involved in digital communication, networking, and related technologies to meet, publish their work, and present new ideas and techniques for discussion. The DCC is for technically oriented amateurs of all experience levels to exchange ideas and learn about recent hardware and software advances, theories, experimental results, and practical applications. Sessions at the beginner, intermediate, and advanced levels will be offered in selected areas of digital communication. Topics include APRS, satellite communication, TCP/IP, digital radio, spread spectrum and other introductory topics. Two symposia/seminars will be held which allow those with additional time and interest to make the most of the conference. For those who may have interest in just one symposium or seminar, registration for the conference is not required to attend these activities. The DCC banquet is Saturday night. A guest speaker will speak after the banquet and a prize drawing will top the evening. The Sunday morning seminar topic has not yet been announced. This year's fifth annual Automated Position Reporting System (APRS) National Symposium will be an all-day Friday event moderated by Steve Dimse, K4HG--the developer of javAPRS and www.findu.com. Possible attendees include APRS software authors such as Bob Bruninga, WB4APR--the father of APRS--Keith Sproul, WU2Z, and Mark Sproul, KB2ICI--the developers of MacAPRS and WinAPRS--Brent Hildebrand, KH2Z--the developer of APRSPLUS, Mike Musick, N0QBF--developer of PocketAPRS--and other nationally known APRS leaders. This session will include in-depth discussions and presentations on the status and future of APRS. It's a unique opportunity to gain insight into this fast-paced aspect of digital operation that combines computers, packet radio and GPS. Local co-hosts for the 2001 ARRL and TAPR DCC are Greater Cinti Amateur Radio Assn. http://w3.one.net/~rkuns/gcara.html DIAL Radio Club http://www.qsl.net/w8blv/Miami Valley FM Association http://www.mvfma.org/Southwest Ohio Digital Symposium http://w3.one.net/~rkuns/swohdigi.html Conference presentations, meetings, and seminars will be held at the Holiday Inn Cincinnati--Airport and Conference Center ; 859-371-2233. A special DCC room rate of $89/single and $89/double per night has been blocked for 50 rooms and is available until September 1. Once the 50 rooms have been reserved, room rates will increase. The hotel provides transportation to and from the Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport. Full information, a registration form, and hotel information also may be obtained by contacting Tucson Amateur Packet Radio, 972-671-TAPR (8277); fax 972-671-8716; e-mail: tapr@tapr.org. Conference registration includes the conference Proceedings, sessions, meetings, and lunch on Saturday. Registrations received before September 1 are $45. After September 1 or at the door, registration is $55. The banquet is $30. The APRS National Symposium on Friday is $25. The Sunday seminar is $20. --- 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 Aug 29 08:56:58 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 IAA00401 for ; Wed, 29 Aug 2001 08:56:58 -0500 (CDT) Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 09:58:09 -0400 (EDT) From: Jim Ussailis Subject: [ss] Re: ss digest: August 27, 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 Ideas... I finally got a 900 MHz DSSS system working, except for code lock-up. My system is inexpensive as it uses SAW local oscillators in the receiver & transmitter. No requirement for a microcontroller. I see a use for the circuit as a simple 900 MHz band HT, or packet board. Now the problem: I have been using a DDS board for the receiver code clock generator. With it I can change the clock speed ever so slightly until code lock occurs. Of course this condition only lasts for a short time, as the crystal in the DDS drifts a wee, causing the lock-up condition to fail. I could solve this problem with an oven controlled oscillator, but that would defete the purpose of a low cost, simple circuit. I plan to go the other way once the lock-up problem is solved... to a cheap code clock generater. Has anyone developed a simple circuit that will lock the code clock oscillator once code lock-up has been achieved? Jim, W1EQO --- 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 Aug 30 02:00:34 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 CAA02702 for ; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 02:00:20 -0500 (CDT) From: "Dennis Tolentino" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE: ss digest: August 29, 2001 Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 14:59:52 +0800 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 V5.50.4522.1200 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 suggestion: there's a lot of cheap PLL (phase-locked loop) IC's available 8) -----Original Message----- 8) From: bounce-ss-24671@lists.tapr.org 8) [mailto:bounce-ss-24671@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of TAPR Spread Spectrum 8) Special Interest Group digest 8) Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 1:01 PM 8) To: ss digest recipients 8) Subject: ss digest: August 29, 2001 8) 8) 8) TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Digest for 8) Wednesday, August 29, 2001. 8) 8) 1. Re: ss digest: August 27, 2001 8) 8) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) 8) Subject: Re: ss digest: August 27, 2001 8) From: Jim Ussailis 8) Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 09:58:09 -0400 (EDT) 8) X-Message-Number: 1 8) 8) Ideas... 8) 8) I finally got a 900 MHz DSSS system working, except for code lock-up. My 8) system is inexpensive as it uses SAW local oscillators in the receiver & 8) transmitter. No requirement for a microcontroller. 8) 8) I see a use for the circuit as a simple 900 MHz band HT, or packet board. 8) 8) Now the problem: 8) 8) I have been using a DDS board for the receiver code clock 8) generator. With 8) it I can change the clock speed ever so slightly until code lock occurs. 8) Of course this condition only lasts for a short time, as the crystal in 8) the DDS drifts a wee, causing the lock-up condition to fail. I could 8) solve this problem with an oven controlled oscillator, but that would 8) defete the purpose of a low cost, simple circuit. 8) 8) I plan to go the other way once the lock-up problem is solved... 8) to a cheap code clock generater. 8) 8) Has anyone developed a simple circuit that will lock the code 8) clock oscillator once code lock-up has been achieved? 8) 8) 8) Jim, W1EQO 8) 8) 8) 8) --- 8) 8) END OF DIGEST 8) 8) --- 8) You are currently subscribed to ss as: dentino@eee.upd.edu.ph 8) To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org 8) 8) 8) --- 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 Aug 30 02:31:20 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 CAA05272 for ; Thu, 30 Aug 2001 02:31:14 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 09:30:03 +0200 From: "Marius Hauki" Organization: Data Respons X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: ss digest: August 27, 2001 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: <3B8DEB7B.73F4762D@datarespons.no> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Jim, a circuit called a synchronous oscillator could pherhaps do something like you describe. I am not shure if you could use it with the DDS tough. It is described in the Spread Spectrum Experimenters Handbook from ARRL. 73 de LA9EEA Marius Jim Ussailis wrote: > > Ideas... > > I finally got a 900 MHz DSSS system working, except for code lock-up. My > system is inexpensive as it uses SAW local oscillators in the receiver & > transmitter. No requirement for a microcontroller. > > I see a use for the circuit as a simple 900 MHz band HT, or packet board. > > Now the problem: > > I have been using a DDS board for the receiver code clock generator. With > it I can change the clock speed ever so slightly until code lock occurs. > Of course this condition only lasts for a short time, as the crystal in > the DDS drifts a wee, causing the lock-up condition to fail. I could > solve this problem with an oven controlled oscillator, but that would > defete the purpose of a low cost, simple circuit. > > I plan to go the other way once the lock-up problem is solved... > to a cheap code clock generater. > > Has anyone developed a simple circuit that will lock the code > clock oscillator once code lock-up has been achieved? > > Jim, W1EQO > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: MARIUS@DATARESPONS.NO > 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