[CWN-Summit] Law change

[Joseph Bonicioli]

Hi Mitar,

Although myself I do not have a definitive answer or opinion whether power
limits should be raised, I have found out from experience that the limits
imposed are enough for most cases (at least speaking for Europe).
Good directional antennas, cabling and equipment are critical in squeezing
every last dB. We also train people here to keep way below limits. If you
don't really need all those dBs why use them? Also don't forget that an
antenna 
can receive as good as it transmits (which means lots of noise if the
environment is clattered with loud guys) plus the signal out of a
directional antenna does not stop on your opposite node while far away it
has widen enough to cover 2 city blocks.
Radio ECO thinking and training is much more important than raising a limit.
This will ensure that when that long link (and not only) is really needed
you will have the space to create it. 
Which brings us to the reason you might need some extra power. Long links so
far have not been targeted by our regulator, because we do everything by the
book (well not all since we surely increase power and 
dish sizes to do 50 and 70Km) when it comes to mountain installations, they
know the advantages outweigh the disadvantages when it comes to community
linking and lastly it is very difficult to extensively monitor those power
regulations with 
so many devices around that many times are out of the box over limits. 

Now I am not the super right person to talk about antenna theory, power
regulation etc. What I mean to say is that basic knowledge and eco training
of every member of or CWNs is much more useful and productive than creating
or amending a thousand
Regulations. It creates a good environment for our nets to grow smoothly.
Directional antennas should not only be recommended, but effectively
"imposed" as a rule when it comes to linking. It really makes sense.

On the other hand if someone comes with a concrete argument (maybe a study)
that those regulations need to be altered or enriched because the original
speculations where somehow strict or unfair for some cases, then yes by all
means we will be with him/her.
Raising limits and acquiring more spectrum because we are not trained
properly and we to not exercise eco or near eco Radio transmissions is not a
solution. 
More spectrum should be used mostly for the different properties of each
frequency and not necessarily for the extra space. Extra tx Power should be
used where it is really needed. I don't think that many would argue with
this.
Cognitive radio with algorithms that could adjust TX power accordingly or do
other nice tricks, surely can alter the picture and at that point
regulations could be obsolete in some cases, but until then I thing that we
ourselves are the solution.  Tx power regulations hopefully are there to
keep a balance until they are proven wrong.

It would be nice to hear some of your experiences on this. 

Regards
Joseph

-----Original Message-----
From: cwn-summit-bounces at lists.chambana.net
[mailto:cwn-summit-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Mitar
Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 4:24 PM
To: International Summit for Community Wireless Networks Participant E-mail
List
Subject: [CWN-Summit] Law change

Hi!

I would like to discuss an idea with you. I would like to see if I am
mistaken somewhere and if you agree that this would be better for everyone.

My idea is that we could try to change how power limits are measured.
Currently they are measured from the antenna and it is quite easy to go over
this limit with a directional antenna.

My idea is based on what I believe is the main purpose of power limits on
unlicensed spectrum and (only?) regulation of unlicensed spectrum I would
see as legitimate: to prevent to much interference between users.

And based on that there I believe there is no reason to limit power from
antenna but just power from transmitter (how much energy does the
transmitter put into the spectrum - this is how much it can interfere with
others). Because more directed antenna you have less you interfere with
others as less space you cover (and you are still putting the same amount of
energy).

As those power limits are regulated on country basis it would be possible to
locally lobby for a change.

Of course there are probably other lobbies behind which like limits as they
are because it limits long links, but at least public policy makers should
probably look only upon limiting interference, not that somebody should or
should not make long links just because they are long.

So my question is in fact just this: is my reasoning correct? I wouldn't
like to start lobbying and then they would show me that this would increase
interference and would make things worse for everybody. As my main argument
is exactly this: interference will not be increased but usefulness for
people will. So as they should make unlicensed spectrum as useful as
possible for people they should support it.


Mitar
_______________________________________________
CWN-Summit mailing list
CWN-Summit at lists.chambana.net
http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/cwn-summit