[MLB-WIRELESS] New submissions to the wireless broadband inqu iry

[Tony Langdon]

> Personally, I think the best way to tackle this is to proove 
> them wrong.
> 
> If we continue on the general path we're going, but ensure that we are
> openly seen to be making sure that we're aiming to stay 
> within the class
> licence, and within the current limitations of the Acts
> (Telecommunications, Radiocommunications, Broadcast, and any other
> revisions or laws), and are seen as self regulating, I think it would
> provide a good example of just how wrong they are.

I think we're on the right track.  Our website and general culture is one of
complying with relevant legislation, like the example EIRP calculations and
the like.

> By each of the groups working together to set pseudo standards and by
> showing that we can comply or integrate existing standards, it will
> benifit everyone.
Agreed.

> Things like certification or atleast registration of antenna 
> designs on
> each regions site, which has been tested in a propper testing facility
> to allow us to provide gain and propagation information. If someone
> wants to build their own, it should be checked .. the idea may be a
> little over the top, but we have to be seen to be pro-active in doing
> the right thing.

I have concerns about the practicalities of this, but I don't see any
problems in going with published antenna gain claims, and calculating EIRP
based on those.  Home brew antennas, in particular, are likely to have
somewhat lower gain than the theory suggests (usually due to manufacturing
imperfections).  There is many an amateur who has taken his "killer" antenna
down to a range in an antenna competition, only to find the gain was nothing
like he thought! :)

> If we are shown to do a bit of policing of the networks to 
> ensure people
> are within the law, it will show us in a good light.

I feel an education campaign (though many of us are already conversane with
the law), combined with social pressure and sanctions for recalcitrant
nodes.

> We don't have to argue with these sorts of people, we just have to
> proove them wrong.

One problem is they have $$$, but then again, they're trying to lay claim to
what is in essence a "spectral garbage dump" for "industrial RF waste". ;-)

> The more people that come into the industry, the lesser slice 
> of the pie
> they get.

True, and there's greener pastures out there for the commercials - it just
costs money, and they don't want to spend. :)

---
Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses. 
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.368 / Virus Database: 204 - Release Date: 29/05/2002
 

This correspondence is for the named person’s use only. It may contain
confidential or legally privileged information or both. No confidentiality
or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this
correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system and
notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of this
correspondence if you are not the intended recipient.

Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual sender.


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