I was told when I asked about examples being made that hopefully SAS will sort things out on its own. If it goes outside of SAS being able to manage an issue, such all illegal operators, particularly when more sensing capability comes into play with SAS 2.0, you do not want to be the guy who gets nailed. Apparently this iteration of the SAS modality is an entry run for a much larger spectrum management, as is the cowboy days are over moving forward
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 8:54 AM Mathew Howard <mhoward...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yeah, I agree, they probably will make an example out of a few operators. > But I don't see any reason why they'd bother with somebody who still has a > valid license. They'll probably go after some guys that are blatantly > running some old Ubiquiti or WiMax gear after their license expires. > > On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 6:56 AM Mark Radabaugh <m...@amplex.net> wrote: > >> >> > On Feb 25, 2020, at 5:20 PM, Mathew Howard <mhoward...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > >> > <cut> >> >> > I would assume that if a CBRS operator puts up gear that you're >> interfering with, it's going to be handled pretty much the same way it was >> under the old rules (in other words, work it out with eachother, or shut up >> and live with it)... there's a reason that they made 3650-3700 GAA only. >> > >> >> I would expect the FCC to make an example of a couple of operators who >> continue to operate 90z equipment illegally after the license expires. We >> all have too much to lose here if the operators are not running legally and >> the mobile industry starts another attempt to push everyone out that isn’t >> a mobile carrier. >> >> Mark >> >> >> -- >> AF mailing list >> AF@af.afmug.com >> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >> > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >
-- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
