If you're intending to keep operating that long, I would make sure all the CPE locations are registered too.
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 9:38 AM Chris Fabien <ch...@lakenetmi.com> wrote: > So sounds like consensus is we can continue to operate under the NN > license until 10/24/2022? > I do have these AP locations registered and will double check power is > within limits. > Thanks > Chris > > > On Wed, Feb 26, 2020, 10:32 AM Mark Radabaugh <m...@amplex.net> wrote: > >> I would very much second that statement - make sure you are following all >> the rules for 90z going forward. >> >> Mark >> >> On Feb 26, 2020, at 10:25 AM, Mathew Howard <mhoward...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Yeah, but tricky part is going to be stuff that's still operating legally >> under an unexpired license that the SAS can't manage. I think it would be >> wise to make sure everything is properly registered and you're not doing >> anything questionable if you plan to keep operating under the old rules >> much beyond April. >> >> On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 9:17 AM Steve Jones <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> 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 >>> >> -- >> 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 >
-- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
