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

[Kim Hawtin]

On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 06:42:48PM +1000, Barry Park wrote:
> Hey all,
> There's been a few more submissions added to the wireless broadband inquiry
> website (http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/cita/Wbt/subslist.htm).
> Sadly, it includes this dross from Integrity Data Systems. The bits leading
> with *** are my own comments. How can we correct this?
> - Barry

> "We recommend that steps be taken to protect the resource so it is available
> for use by everyone. Any vendors or importers selling the product in
> Australia should undertake an accreditation process, which involves
> educating their channel on the class license. All installed links should be
> registered with the ACA by the installer, end user or both and must supply,
> as a minimum, a link budget which clearly shows the product, RF cable, and
> antennas used, as well as the EIRP level for the link. The ACA could then
> issue a certificate of compliance. We also believe that retrospective steps
> be taken to clean up the band by ensuring current links comply with the
> class license conditions. After an amnesty or grace period, sites without a
> certificate of compliance could be fined. This should not only remove the
> “cowboy” element of some suppliers and resellers, but allow more second tier
> carriers to look at using the technology, which is still the most economical
> way to distribute Internet services.
> This would still allow the technology to be used for gaming purposes, but
> minimise the risk of interference with a second tier carrier who is
> deploying a suburb-wide wireless broadband service.
> Using the analogy of the spectrum resource as a river, there would be an
> uproar over the lax way we allow some to pollute it. We must protect it from
> the reckless or ignorant behaviour of a few so broadband is cost-effectively
> available for all.
> In regard to free community wireless networks, they again should not only
> register their links, but be excluded from using amplifiers. This should not
> be an issue, as community links ares typically point to point and cover
> short distances."
> 
> *** Again, This makes community wireless groups appear as a scapegoat, with
> IDS intersted only in protecting corporate interests over end-user
> interests. Legislation says 2.4GHz is open spectrum. They can pay for
> commercial spectrum. This is ill-informed conjecture.

this certainly seems to be the case.

is not the 2.4GHz spectrum open to the community in a way few other
bands are, *because* the other bands are reserved for *commercial*
(and other not-public) interests?

how can the commercial interests take away the public/community
areas of play? 

surely the commercial interests are charging a premium to their
customers for their "expertise" so they can use and pay for spectrum
that is "their own"!

i am not sure about at home, but here in the UK at least there is a band
for commercial ISP distribution, 3.5GHz and 10GHz ... why do they
*need* the 2.4GHz band *as well* ?

yours,

kim
~ thats a bit of a simplified view, but fair none the less
-- 
:Kim_Hawtin:--------------------------------------:-----------------:
| A.L. Digital Ltd.   Tel: +44 (20) 8742 0755     |  _  ASCII       |
| The Stores          Fax: +44 (20) 8742 5995     | ( ) ribbon      |
| 2 Bath Road         http://www.thebunker.net    |  X  campaign    | 
| London W4 1LT       http://www.aldigital.co.uk  | / \ against     |
| UNITED KINGDOM      mailto:kim at aldigital.co.uk  |     HTML e-mail |

  I want to hack myself and recompile with some better 
  default values. --  Bragi

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