Order Tray | Contact Us | Home | SIG Lists

[Ham-80211] APC

Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181 ooe at odessaoffice.com
Wed May 17 18:06:13 UTC 2006


Hiya,

That's about what I thought.

Let me ask you a question if I may.

You are in Odessa Wa. (population 1000) running your experiments.  And we 
quickly find out that your 100 watt always on transmitter completely shuts 
down my wifi broadband system and many of the portable phones and home wifi 
networks in the area.

What do we do then?

Marlon
(509) 982-2181                                   Equipment sales
(408) 907-6910 (Vonage)                    Consulting services
42846865 (icq)                                    And I run my own wisp!
64.146.146.12 (net meeting)
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam



----- Original Message ----- 
From: <hfeinstein at cox.net>
To: "ham-80211: lists.tapr.org" <ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 10:24 AM
Subject: [Ham-80211] APC


>I recall the original intent of the APC rule was to limit the RF
> spectral density from a large community
> of amateur spread spectrum users.  The channel models that
> people used back when the rules were amended to include APC were written 
> anticipated self-jamming and a high noise level from a
> large population of users.  Alas, no such large amateur community
> of spread spectrum users ever materialized but we were stuck with
> the APC clause anyway.  My support for removing APC is as an
> experimenter with continuing interest in amateur spread spectrum.
> The equipment I use for experimenting is either homebrew or
> locally modified commercial equipment.  Avoiding  complexity
> is something I really appreciate.  Second, as I mentioned above, the 
> original
> intent of APC solved a  problem that never appeared.
> In fact, the number of active amateur spread spectum experimenters
> could probably fill a small room with lots of seating left over.
> Amateur spread spectrum  is authorized on
> a variety of UHF and microwave amateur bands.  My experimental interests 
> are
> in these other frequency bands and not in the 2.4Ghz band.  So, I don't
> see any real conflict between current 802.11 users or operators  and 
> amateur spread spectrum experimenters ( the very few I know).
>
> _______________________________________________
> ham-80211 mailing list
> ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org
> https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ham-80211
> 





More information about the ham-80211 mailing list