Correct. But that recommendation will take quite sometime to implement, if at all. First we have to convince our guys to move. That seed has already been planted, subsequent to the Board's adoption of the report in July, and the North Texas Microwave Society will be leading the effort. In fact, there will be a "trial balloon" of this idea floated around at the annual Microwave Update Conference Sept 26-28 in Seattle.
 
What response it will receive is not yet known, but having a well respected amateur microwave organization like NTMS to help us is a huge plus. The big question is going to be "If we go to the trouble of modifying our equipment to move, how can we be assured we won't encounter the same problems above 5.825 GHz?" A good question I cannot yet answer!
 
NTMS and the microwave group in the Chicago area are currently preparing engineering data on the interference U-NII operation is currently causing to amateur operations in those areas, and as soon as that is complete we want to send complaints to the FCC. FCC doesn't think there is any interference of this type because we've never submitted any real evidence before. That is about to change.
 
I would hate be somewhat friendly toward this NPRM prematurely.
 
73 Joel W5ZN
 
p.s. The NTMS data is being collected and prepared by degreed, professional RF engineers who are also radio amateurs.
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ [mailto:dsumner@arrl.org]
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 4:40 PM
To: arrl-odv
Subject: [ARRL-ODV:9441] Re: FCC NPRM on Part 15 wireless ISPs

Because outdoor U-NII operation is already permitted in the band 5725-5825 MHz, the Minute 56 report recommended investigating the relocation of amateur weak signal activity from 5760.0-5760.4 MHz to somewhere in the 5825-5830 MHz band.
 
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Harrison, Joel (1st Vice President)
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 5:31 PM
To: arrl-odv
Subject: [ARRL-ODV:9440] Re: FCC NPRM on Part 15 wireless ISPs

 
5.725-5.825 GHz wasn't the area in the 5 GHz band we wanted to be more "friendly" in, it was the lower segment. This segment is where current amateur activity is taking place.
 
Actually, 3.6 GHz would be excellent - no amateur activity there!!
 
73 Joel W5ZN
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ [mailto:dsumner@arrl.org]
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 3:34 PM
To: arrl-odv
Subject: [ARRL-ODV:9439] FCC NPRM on Part 15 wireless ISPs

The FCC has just released an NPRM (ET Docket No. 03-201) proposing some rules changes to make Parts 2 and 15 more friendly toward wireless ISPs. I have not studied the NPRM in detail. However, my initial reaction is that we may want to support at least some parts of the NPRM even though it would result in greater Part 15 use of the 2.4-2.45 and 5.725-5.825 GHz bands. This would be in keeping with the spirit of the "Minute 56" report to the July Board Meeting as well as offer support of a better alternative for "last mile" broadband delivery than BPL.

Personally, I think the 5 GHz band is a better place for it than 2.4 GHz (and maybe 3.6 GHz will be even better). But either one is better than BPL.

Dave K1ZZ

Here's the link:

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-223A1.pdf