|
OE7FTJ > WLAN 05.05.05 22:06l 44 Lines 1427 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 55FOE7XLR00C
Read: OE6DFD GUEST DG8DG DK5RAS OE7FTJ DO6NP OE8FKQ DD3IA
Subj: Re: RE packet vs WiFi
Path: DB0FHN<DB0MRW<DB0RGB<DB0AAB<DB0ZKA<DB0SIP<OE9XPI<OE7XLR
Sent: 050505/2055z @:OE7XLR.#OE7.AUT.EU [TCP/IP Node/BBS Innsbruck] obcm1.04
From: OE7FTJ @ OE7XLR.#OE7.AUT.EU (Wolf)
To: WLAN @ WW
X-Info: Received by SMTP-gateway
vk2zrg@vk2wi.#syd.nsw.aus.oc wrote:
> Wolf OE7FTJ wrote
>
>>But whats about the bandwidth? 20MHz as a ham application ...?
>>
>>de Wolf, oe7ftj
>>
> Hello Wolf and readers,
>
> What's the problem with 20 MHz bandwidth? The 13 cm band allocation in
> Australia is 50 MHz wide, (2400 to 2450) and I believe that it's similar
> in the USA. WI-FI is faily low power...around 50 or 100 milliwatts and
> also spread spectrum, as far as I know.
>
Hi Ralph et al!
BTW: OE is Austria - not USA!
The problem is the 20MHz bandwidth of _one_ channel!
We have a telecom regulation authority here in Austria! In most of the
european countries is only 1 MHz rf-bandwidth allowed in the 13cm band.
In the 6cm band it is 10 MHz!
> How much ham activity is there on 13 cm in your area Wolf? Ever heard
> of the saying use it or lose it?
>
Yes, I know this phrase ;-) We have a lot of packet links on 23 cm but
not on 13cm! In my area are two ATV links running in the 13cm band.
We intend to realize some links with AP's off the shelf. It is the
Linksys WRT54GS running under 'openWRT' with the packet node application
xnet. For further information have a look at:
http://db0fhn-i.ampr.org/wrt54gs
We would really like to setup links with wlan-devices, but we have to
match the etsi-wifi-conditions -> 100mW EIRP not 4W!
de Wolf, oe7ftj
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |