Order Tray | Contact Us | Home | SIG Lists

[Ham-80211] OT??? High power 2.4 GHz rules change

Carl R. Stevenson wk3c at wk3c.com
Mon May 22 14:47:22 UTC 2006


 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: jeff at aerodata.net [mailto:jeff at aerodata.net] 
> Sent: Sunday, May 21, 2006 2:25 PM
> To: wk3c at wk3c.com; TAPR Mailing List for Ham Radio Use of 802.11
> Subject: RE: [Ham-80211] OT??? High power 2.4 GHz rules change
> 
> 
> > I see the wide area (omni, point to multipoint) 802.11x use 
> that many 
> > hams tend to envision, based on the FM repeater paradigm, as being 
> > extremely inefficient and a misuse of a technology that was never 
> > intended to be used in that way.
> 
> And how is that different then the curent state of 90%+ of 
> the WISP industry, other then hams are "talking" about it, 
> and the WISP's have done it?
> 
> > Too
> > many hams pay NO attention to the "use the minimum power 
> necessary" rule.
> 
> Ok, so another law to fix the law everyone is ignoring? Makes sense.
> 
> 
> > Any evening, you can tune the HF bands and hear any number 
> of people 
> > running legal limit (or more) on 80m/40m/20m to talk to some guy 
> > across
> town ...
> 
> HF.. you mean SSB. You do realize that this APC request has 
> nothing at all to do with this, just as the WISP 
> misconception of 100watt ATV on 2.4ghz had nothing to do with 
> it? APC does not nor will it apply to what you speak of nor 
> what the WISP industry fears the most... solid on carriers 
> blanketing a wide area.
> 
> 
> BTW Carl, I think it is proper for you disclose your industry 
> connections here, if you still have any. Nothing wrong with 
> them, good perspective, but Marlon disclosed his.

Jeff,

I realize that the APC rule has nothing to do with modes other than SS ... I
simply stated the fact that the "use the minimum power necessary" rule is
widely ignored (and frequently causes interference that wouldn't exist if it
WAS observed).

As far as my "industry connections" go, it's widely known that I chair the
IEEE 802.22 WG ... Which has nothing to do with spectrum shared with hams.
And, in any event, my comments here are my personal views and I express them
in what I think is the best interests of the ham community "with my ham hat
on."  (As a consultant, I am VERY used to "wearing the right hat at the
right time" and avoiding any conflict of interest (in business between
clients, in this case between "industry connections" and my personal,
independent beliefs on what's in the best interest of the ham community.)

73,
Carl - wk3c







More information about the ham-80211 mailing list