From: <da...@ra...> - 2011-07-10 20:37:04
|
What you are doing is completely outside the spec. The response of a handset to this signal is not defined, but I have no explanation for why one beacon would be treated differently from the other. In the real world, if two operators run on the same ARFCN, there will be an overlap area where neither signal is usable due to radio interference. The solution is cross-border frequency coordination. There are also guidelines in the spec concerning NCC allocations in border areas. Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -----Original Message----- From: nghia phan <ngh...@gm...> Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2011 22:21:31 To: Openbts List<ope...@li...> Subject: [Openbts-discuss] A second beacon with combination V ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-c2 |