Hello,
Am I right in thinking that a nanoBTS supports only one band and this cannot be changed, so a 165B version would be no use in Europe?
Regards,
Andrew
On 16-Jul-12 19:07, Andrew Back wrote:
Hello,
Hello Andrew,
Am I right in thinking that a nanoBTS supports only one band and this cannot be changed, so a 165B version would be no use in Europe?
I would say that any version is ok if you want to play and learn using it with OpenBSC software. Considering that all phones that were released in the last years are quad-band capable you will be fine.
Another thing is that if you use a nanoBTS on DCS1900 for example will be much better in Europe because you will not interfere with any operator. I am not sure if 850 and 1900 is even used in EU. Maybe somebody on the list can clarify this.
Regards,
Andrew
Regards, R.
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 11:24 AM, Labs rp.labs@gmx.ch wrote:
Another thing is that if you use a nanoBTS on DCS1900 for example will be much better in Europe because you will not interfere with any operator. I am not sure if 850 and 1900 is even used in EU. Maybe somebody on the list can clarify this.
Part of DCS1800 (downlink) and PCS1900 (uplink) do overlap.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GSM_frequency_bands
Thanks, Gus
On 7/16/12 8:48 PM, Gus Bourg wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 11:24 AM, Labs rp.labs@gmx.ch wrote:
Another thing is that if you use a nanoBTS on DCS1900 for example will be much better in Europe because you will not interfere with any operator. I am not sure if 850 and 1900 is even used in EU. Maybe somebody on the list can clarify this.
Part of DCS1800 (downlink) and PCS1900 (uplink) do overlap.
So, it would be possible to configure a nanoBTS for uses in Europe by only using certain ARFCN allocation, avoiding overlapping frequency with Telco's assigned frequency?
-naif
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Fabio Pietrosanti (naif) lists@infosecurity.ch wrote:
So, it would be possible to configure a nanoBTS for uses in Europe by only using certain ARFCN allocation, avoiding overlapping frequency with Telco's assigned frequency?
-naif
Looks possible, but take into account that PCS1900 (downlink) also overlaps with IMT2100 (uplink).
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UMTS_frequency_bands
Also, just because the band might not be used for GSM applications, doesn't mean it's not licensed for other use in your country. Certainly the best way to be sure that you're not interfering is to have a test license and/or run your gear in an appropriate cage.
On 16 July 2012 22:00, Gus Bourg gus@bourg.net wrote:
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Fabio Pietrosanti (naif) lists@infosecurity.ch wrote:
So, it would be possible to configure a nanoBTS for uses in Europe by only using certain ARFCN allocation, avoiding overlapping frequency with Telco's assigned frequency?
-naif
Looks possible, but take into account that PCS1900 (downlink) also overlaps with IMT2100 (uplink).
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UMTS_frequency_bands
Also, just because the band might not be used for GSM applications, doesn't mean it's not licensed for other use in your country. Certainly the best way to be sure that you're not interfering is to have a test license and/or run your gear in an appropriate cage.
Indeed, hence my question about whether they are permanently fixed to one band. I don't intend to radiate unless I'm licensed or the band/use is exempt.
Thank you all for the replies.
Regards,
Andrew
-
Andrew Back -
Fabio Pietrosanti (naif) -
Gus Bourg -
Labs