nanoBTS question

This is merely a historical archive of years 2008-2021, before the migration to mailman3.

A maintained and still updated list archive can be found at https://lists.osmocom.org/hyperkitty/list/OpenBSC@lists.osmocom.org/.

Albert Paijmans albert at vraagalex.nl
Tue Sep 21 11:19:20 UTC 2010


Thanks,

To be honest I thougt a single nanoBTS would be cheaper. Of course the
server and software (if you do not use OpenBSC) adds cost, officially you
need permission to use GSM frequencies and a license on that GSM channel you
want to use. And there are some patents.

How come that some manufacturers can sell a unit that cheap like AT&T does?

Albert

On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Sylvain Munaut <246tnt at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> > I have been looking around and I am wondering, when you are interested in
> a
> > consumer 3G / Femto or Pico cell it might be very cheap through AT&T at
> > around $150.
>
> > Might somebody be working rverse engineering on those cheaper
> > cells?
>
> Probably, but theses are 3G only, they won't work if your phone
> doesn't support 3G.
> The lack of good free ASN1 tool (for PER Unaligned and Aligned)
> doesn't help because 3G use those a lot.
>
> > The nanoBTS from ipaccess is costing euro 3450 Mind you this is without
> any
> > software or server, just a single nanoBTS unit.
>
> I thing several things contribute to the high price:
>
>  - That's part of ip.access revenue stream, they need to make money
>  - Quantity: There is probably much more femtocell made than nanoBTS
>  - GSM vs 3G. I think 3G was designed from the get go to support
> femtocell and so the RF interface has been designed to be doable with
> cheap components.
>
>
>    Sylvain
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osmocom.org/pipermail/openbsc/attachments/20100921/5367e3c0/attachment.htm>


More information about the OpenBSC mailing list