Slashdot Mirror


FCC Petitioned to Restrict 2.4GHz Band

Mean_Nishka writes: "Internet News is reporting that satellite radio provider Sirius is petitioning the FCC to regulate and hinder providers of 802.11b based networks. Sirius claims their radios operate at frequencies only 55mhz lower than wifi's range, and fear that Wifi users could interfere (especially mobile and internet service providers). This could effectively kill free networks nationwide..."

7 of 242 comments (clear)

  1. This never stopped FM by JoeShmoe · · Score: 4, Interesting

    And those frequencys are .2 MHz apart!

    Besides, I was under the (mistaken?) impression that one of the selling features of this satellite radio crap is that it is all digital.

    Thus said, could there ever be enough bleed through to completely wipe out their signal?

    OR is Sirius more afraid people will start driving around town listening to Shoutcasted streams on 802.11 networks? Oh yeah, gee, I wonder.

    - JoeShmoe

    .

    --
    -- I wonder which will go down in history as the bigger failure: the War on Drugs or the War on Filesharing
  2. Three Questions by Rayonic · · Score: 5, Interesting

    1) Which is more important, satillite radio or wireless internet access?

    2) Which is the FCC most likely to understand better?

    3) Which side has more money?

    I think it's obvious which side will win out (if there can be only one, that is).

    1. Re:Three Questions by namespan · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Which is the FCC most likely to understand better?

      This is what I don't understand. The FCC should (in theory, at least) have all the technical nuances of communication issues down, with a fair bit of serious in house expertise. If someone tries to deceive them, you'd think they'd know the difference.

      The FCC's stance on low power radio was at least more inspiring than congress's. The NAB propoganda was pointing to two stations in DC whose closer-than-third-adjacent-channel seperation caused interference. They neglected to report that these two stations were broadcasting at over 30 KW, and proposed power restrictions LPFM were 100 Watts. One of my senators (at least, the staff member I talked to) was fooled... the FCC didn't seem to be.

      --
      Libertarianism is rich wolves and poor sheep playing gambler's ruin for dinner.
  3. No Biggie... by EricKrout.com · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This isn't that big of a deal.

    "Besides being limited in size by FCC regulations, the 2.4-GHz band in which 802.11b products operate is becoming overcrowded. This is the same band that the long-awaited Bluetooth products, microwave ovens, some wireless speakers, and the latest wireless telephone handsets call home. Today's products already eke out all the performance they can within the band's regulatory structure, leaving very little bandwidth to accommodate next-generation needs such as video broadcasts and voice channels.

    The most likely place for wireless expansion is the 5-GHz band. Its comparatively wide- open space could provide increased speed and better control over the quality of transmissions. Plans are afoot on both sides of the Atlantic to devise a suitable protocol for the 5-GHz band. Not surprisingly, the U.S. and Europe are pursuing two different and non-interoperable 5-GHz protocols."

    Read the rest here.

    m o n o l i n u x :: The Critically Acclaimed New Linux Site. Ads Not Included.

  4. A few thoughts. by SagSaw · · Score: 5, Interesting

    1. I don't know the nature of either signal, but 55MHz is a decent amount of seperation. If there are pieces of 802.11 equipment which are really transmitting 55MHz too high, their manufactures deserve a bitchslapping from the FCC.

    2. If satelite radio receivers are having a hard time dealing with a signal 55MHz away, their manufactures need to send the design teams back to school.

    3. If someone is running 802.11 equipment at power levels which overwhelm nearby satelite receivers listening 55MHz away, they probably need to re-engineer their setup to use less power and/or use an antenna with a different pattern.

    4. If none of the above scenarios are true, this is probably Sirius looking for a little extra elbow room. If granted, their next move (a few years from now) will probably be to pettition the FCC for use of the now underutilized spectrum.

    Despite being a govenment agency, the FCC a knowledgeable technical staff to sort this kind of thing out. Occasionally the FCC even listens to them!

    --
    Come test your mettle in the world of Alter Aeon!
  5. F*ck 'em! Eat flaming death, satellite radio! by pedro · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This crap is gonna go down in flames even faster than Iridium did.
    Subscription, NON-LOCAL alleged radio, devoid of all of the values that make radio work in the first place? Bleahh!
    Ever turn on AM in the am (giggle) looking for something that's NOT ART BELL? Local color?

    That's what satradio is gonne be like in no time. Kiss of death. Nobody's gonna pay for the kind of homogenised drivel satradio will become within (mark my words) two years.

    Can't wait to see the pretty lights when they deorbit those puppies luminescently.

    THAT, I'd pay money for
    >8->

    --
    Brak: What's THAT?
    Thundercleese: A light switch.. of TOTAL DEVASTATION!
  6. One sinister possibility: by AndyChrist · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You've already spent significant amounts of money on WiFi. If your equipment gets outlawed (and that can actually be enforced), They (being whoever Sirius is acting on the behalf of in this lawsuit...either themselves or some big wireless networking company who might benefit) would have an easier time selling a competing standard, since the incumbent technology would be out, and the manufacturers of that equipment would not be ready with replacements.

    And Freemasons run the country.