[aprssig] APRS legality
Robert Bruninga bruninga at usna.eduThu Jan 29 00:08:25 UTC 2009
- Previous message: [aprssig] APRS legality
- Next message: [aprssig] APRS legality
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Ben, Apparently we disagree. I contend that APRS is a network. The network is composed mostly of stations that are transmitting and receiving local data to each other. I just don't see any other way to see it. Similarly, transmissions from transmit only telemetry devices are one-way, and there too, I cannot see it any other way. Yet the difference between the first case (2-way with transceivers) and the latter case with transmitters only, is a really, really big difference to you , me and the FCC. I contend it is that distinction that the FCC was trying to define in their distinction of one-way transmissions. Bob > -----Original Message----- > From: Ben Jackson [mailto:bbj at innismir.net] > Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 6:35 PM > To: bruninga at usna.edu; TAPR APRS Mailing List > Subject: Re: [aprssig] APRS legality > > Robert Bruninga wrote: > > <all the continuing paragraphs and endless repetition snipped> > > > >> Bob,... I'd say over the last 12 years I've > >> transmitted somewhere over 100,000 packets > >> on HF and VHF APRS. Aside from a tiny handful > >> of messages (probably less than 0.001%), > >> none were directed at "one or more specific > >> stations". They were one-way transmission > >> to whoever happened to be listening, and for reception > >> into the APRS Internet System. > > > > Fine, that was your intent. > > > > Similarly, I have probably transmitted 100,000 or so packets too > > but the difference is that mine were all directed toward the > > local APRS network and the specific partitipating stations. > > None of mine (except the unattended remote telemetry station) > > were one-way transmissions. > > Bob: > > I think what Steve is trying to say that unless someone > replied to each > one of those 100000 or so packets, they are, be definition, one way. > > Your "drive time net" analogy does not work in your above > stated case as > in a roundtable-type net, each station knows who are they addressing. > They may or may not be addressing the entire roundtable, but > "go 'round" > each station addresses at least one other station, at very least when > they hand it off. Such a thing cannot be said for APRS. > > Is APRS legal? FCC seems to think so. Does it really matter > why at this > point? > > -- > Ben Jackson - N1WBV - New Bedford, MA > bbj <at> innismir.net - http://www.innismir.net/ >
- Previous message: [aprssig] APRS legality
- Next message: [aprssig] APRS legality
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the aprssig mailing list
