Order Tray | Contact Us | Home | SIG Lists

[Ham-80211] Access control suggestions

dubose at texas.net dubose at texas.net
Thu Nov 4 19:17:24 UTC 2004


> Steven Phillips wrote:
> > I have decided to use this topic as a research project
> > for my sociology class.  Here's a question that I have
> > come up with.
> > 
> > In my opinion, one of the major uses of this type of
> > system would be for emergency use in disaster
> > situations.  With the exception of long range
> > communciation, is really necessary to use WiFi under
> > part 97?  What I"m getting at, is this.  In the event
> ....
> 
> I've often argued that the best interface for emergency communications 
> is a browser, and a standard e-mail client.  Which means amateur radio 
> becomes a pipe over which non ham originated messages pass.  Therefore, 
> we should concentrate on building tools that work with standard Internet 
> protocols on one side, transport messages across RF links, and then 
> interoperate with standard Internet protocols on the other side.  I've 
> often suggested that UUCP is a good conceptual model for this environment.
> 

Well I agree in part...what we have found is that voice, chat, web and finally
E-Mail (or a message format that looks like E-Mail) are the desired modes.

If you moved any 802 mode to RF in a form other than 802.11, then UUCP might be
the exact transport media we need...and I think should be looked at very hard.

> before you get your part 97 undies in a bunch, yes I know there are 
> content restrictions which I believe should be waived for the 
> circumstances.  One could argue for this on the grounds that we're not 
> providing general access, we're providing a publicly beneficial service 
> to the agencies servicing disasters zones.  One could use tiered 
> services to allow individuals to send "I'm alive and OK" messages 
> outside but not accept any traffic back except under very special 
> circumstances.  This traffic obviously would have to go through the part 
> 97 scrutiny process.

I'm alive and OK" messages  messages ARE Health and Welfare and as such fall
outside the ARES messaging system.  On the other hand, 200,000 individuals
wanting to tell relatives they are Ok becomes something other than Health and
Welfare.

What we must not do is allow Part 97 to hamper emergency communications;
however, you must build and daily test you system under Part 97.  If I can have
a room full of radio operators operating on 8 different ham band
frequencies/bands and I'm the only licensed amateru radio operator there, why
can't I have a dozen computer operators running on 802.11b under Part 97 and me
being the "control operator"?


> > 
> > Sheesh I'm long winded. 
> 

Not at all.

Walt/K5YFW

> comes with a territory.  I've had to go to water cooled finals I talk so 
> much.
> 
> ---eric
> 
> -- 
> George Bush makes me long for the honesty of Richard Nixon
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ham-80211 mailing list
> ham-80211 at lists.tapr.org
> https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ham-80211
> 






More information about the ham-80211 mailing list