Background

A survey conducted by the ARRL Technology Task Force, of League members and other amateurs revealed that the number one interest in new technologies was in high-speed digital networks.

On January 2001, the ARRL Board of Directors voted unanimously that the ARRL should proceed with the development of High Speed Digital Networks for the Amateur Service. The ARRL President was to appoint a group of individuals knowledgeable in the field from the international Amateur community and industry. The group reports to the Technology Task Force.
The Group is officially called the High Speed Digital Networks and Multimedia Work Group. 

What is Happening to the HSMM Working Group?

By John Champa, K8OCL

At its January 2006 meeting, the ARRL BoD directed that the HSMM (High Speed Multi Media) Working Group summarize its accomplishments and submit its final recommendations by year’s end. With that directive in mind, and with dissatisfaction within the Working Group regarding how its recommendations concerning permitted radio network protection methods (e.g., encryption) for the Amateur Radio Service are being communicated by the League, most of the group members simply left.

The ARRL HSMM website (http://www.arrl.org/hsmm/), which has been in operation for the past five years, has been transferred to the Technical Information Services (TIS). However, the HSMM public discussion reflector (ARRL-80211B@listserv.tamu.edu) remains in full operation.

Some of the Working Group membership who left have since formed a new digital radio networks research organization, the Amateur Radio Broadband Alliance (ARBA) in association with Texas A&M University in College Station, TX. More on this new organization will be covered in this column in the next issue of CQ VHF. (From: http://www.cq-vhf.com/HSMMFall06.html)

There is a common misconception that HSMM was some sort of concentrated effort.  Really all it was is a loose set of guidelines to introduce the concept.  It really could evolve into something powerful, the "next generation of ham radio."  But. it needs a leading force for that.  The ARRL and TAPR both seem to have no interest.  The should both be working on the community/ public relations with companies like Ubiquiti, and developers like the DD-WRT guys.   Encouragement to work together and enabling hams would not only be beneficial for the hobby, but also the general populous.  The HSMM working group encouraged hams, but neither larger group did anything to enable further experimentation.

Misc Notes

The HSMM was chartered to find out what it would take to do high speed data and other modes on frequencies above HF.  The HSMM Working Group's Basic Charter was not openended...and in Jan. 2007 the board decided the WG had done its job and wanted to refine some specific works.  The working Group was always under the Technical Task Force.

Paul, W4RI as the Chief technical officer was the HSMM's reporting person.  It was also his recommendation to the Board that the HSMM Working Group be founded.  That's why he is referred to as the "Father of HSMM".  However, he did not come into the picture as the reporting person until 2006. A lot of frustration had built up by then.

It should be noted that The Technology Task Force still exists.  Some believe that in the future there will be more working groups to meet specific needs such as now exist with the DV group, SDR group and OFDM modem project.  (http://www2.arrl.org/announce/reports-2004/january/ttf.html) The HSMM WG did prove that COTS 802.11x hardware could be used under Part 97.

It still seems peculiar that the ARRL board of directors would close down a developing technology group as if it had done its job. A they have only begun with this technology. Instead you would have expected to see them request continued, if not even, expanded activity.

There are quite few rumors as the the why they were dissolved.  One rumor was the group was split on HSMM direction.   I'm sure it was probably due to friction between the ARRL board of directors and HSMM working group.  In general, just not seeing eye to eye.  Policy recommendations were part of the reason the ARRL disbanded the HSMM Working Group.

The board didn't like policy recommendations. They only wanted technical recommendations. But the WG got so frustrated with the Board's flip flops on the issue (sound familiar?), that they all just resigned... in TOTAL... after one conference call in November 2006.

I still submitted our WG year-end closing summary report to the Board for their January 2007 meeting, but by then I was about the only Ham left on the team.

The groups support for encryption, and objection to hard bandwidth regulations on HF, and possibly some other things I'll try to point out below.  Some of the working groups promoted ideas such as encryption the majority of hams would probably strongly oppose.  Basically these ideas are things the board and most hams don't like hearing.  Most Hams resist change.

There is an "emergency response" aspect of the HSMM, that I've noticed some have picked up on and commented on.  It's assumed that this is selling or justification point to the general audience, such as the ARRL board of directors, FCC when it comes to petitions, and so forth.  Actually a lot of hams have noticed a general trend that the ARRL is advocating more ties to emergency government.   This may be a suggestion to help secure FEMA grants to support the hobby.  It may also be to strengthen the justification of the amateur service.

While the ARRL was focusing on 2.4GHz 802.11, now some of the old working group members focusing on equipment for protected spectrum, as some R&D shifted to the 3.3 GHz band.  Developing equipment for protected spectrum seems to include; 6 Meter equipment 200kbs bandwidth + Testing under STA (now expired) with up to 200 kHz bandwidth, 440MHz equipment 2Mbs bandwidth, 10GHz specialized backbone link equipment.  Also see this report http://www2.arrl.org/announce/reports-0307/hsmm.html

Misc:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/  http://www.conmicro.cx/~jmaynard/arrlhsmm.pdf http://home.satx.rr.com/wdubose/hsmm/hsmm-webpage.html

The original HSMM web site was eliminated by direction from Joel Harrison, ARRL President.  You can see the old HSMM webpage by way of the internet archive.  http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.arrl.org/hsmm/

Prior HSMM purists ?

Encryption on ham radio

While IEEE 802.11b allows WEP, an encryption algorithm, Amateur Radio transmissions are characterized as being an open media. That is, amateur radio operators expect and assume that their transmissions are being listened to around the world with no presumption of privacy. And, the FCC even mandates that hams will not encode/encrypt to obscure meaning.

Encryption is a subject for debate but the League feels that encryption is ok as long as the purpose is NOT TO HIDE the message content is within Part 97.  Again, the encryption's purpose is not to "obscure" but to provide security and authentication.  To further this, an amendment made to Article 25.2A (1A) at the 2003 World radio Conference no longer specifically prohibits the use of encryption and other strong security measures on transmissions between Amateur Radio stations within the same jurisdiction. 

The FCC, under non-emergency situations does NOT want stations of one service routinely communicating with stations of another service  So many saw encryption as required to be used, and the ARRL attorney (Chris Imlay, W3KD) asked the FCC if that was acceptable and they said "yes". The FCC's reasoning was that it was NOT our INTENT (an important legal concept) to obscure the communications.

Some agree, some don't.  As far as I know the FCC is aware or should be as the HSMM and ARRL have made no secret that hams are using 802.11x with WEP for the  purpose of control of the access to Part 97 operations and thus far have not issued any citations.  It is my understanding that some hams have sent letters to the FCC telling them that they are running WEP and 802.11x on a certain 2.4 GHz frequency and at what location and times and the individual(s) have not received a citation. 

This probably isn't much of an issue for a private network, but I can see it being an issue when porting traffic over the internet. Keep in mind how the FCC rules are stated: "An amateur station shall not intentionally obscure the meaning ..." Encrypting just login & password strings doesn't obscure the meaning does it? Also using encryption can be classified as an "unspecified" digital code, which is permitted as long as you provide public documentation for it.   Which can be fulfilled much the way the ARRL HSMM created a standardized WEP key that they posted on their webpage.

(see: http://www.arrl.org/announce/reports-2004/july/HSMM.pdf)

From: http://web.archive.org/web/20041024032812/http://www2.arrl.org/hsmm/wep.html  (This WEP ham standard first appeared on the HSMM page Dec 2004.)

 

64 BIT

Mnemonic = HSMMPart97

Hexcode = 48 53 4D 4D 50 61 72 74 39 37

128 BIT

Mnemonic = Ham-Radio-HSMM-Part97-FCC

Hexcode = 48 61 6D 2D 52 61 64 69 6F 2D 2D 48 53 4D 4D 2D 50 61 72 74 39 37 2D 46 43 43

From: http://web.archive.org/web/20060106033255/www.arrl.org/hsmm/wep.html

 

64 BIT

Mnemonic = HSMM-

Hexcode = 48 53 4D 4D 2D

128 BIT

Mnemonic = HSMM-Part97-

Hexcode = 48 53 4D 4D 2D 50 61 72 74 39 37 2D

Quote:

Thus, the HSMM Working Group respectfully asks the ARRL Board of Directors for their support of this needed regulatory change and urges the Board to support the development and filing of a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) permitting the use of encryption and strong security protocols on domestic transmissions above 50 MHz.  (Source: http://www.arrl.org/hsmm/ofdm/WhitePaper7.pdf)
 

Request to drop Automatic Power Control (RM-11325)

In March 2006, the ARRL requested to drop the automatic power control requirement on amateur spread spectrum above 1 watt, as it impractical and deters experimentation.  Rumor is it was the actually  FCC who approached hams about dropping the APC requirement for spread spectrum.

League Requests Rule Change to Ease Spread Spectrum Operation

NEWINGTON, CT, March 20, 2006--The ARRL has asked the FCC to modify one of its rules governing spread spectrum (SS) operation on Amateur Radio frequencies. The League this month petitioned the Commission to drop all but the first sentence of §97.311(d), which now requires the use of automatic power control (APC) for SS stations running more than 1 W. The ARRL request would retain the 100 W overall power limitation for SS.

"The effect of the rule change would be to eliminate an automatic power control provision that has proven over time to be impractical" in terms of compliance, the League said in its Petition for Rule Making filed March 13. It also argued that the provision--one the League had proposed and supported more than 10 years ago--was unnecessary to protect the operations of other licensees and had "unfortunately served as an unintended but effective deterrent to spread spectrum experimentation" on ham radio.

Since the FCC first approved the use of spread spectrum techniques for Amateur Radio in 1985 on bands above 225 MHz and at power levels up to 100 W, there's been limited--but never widespread--experimental amateur operation. Over the years, the FCC also authorized Special Temporary Authority (STA) in some instances to allow broader SS experimentation. More recently, the FCC has made the SS rules less restrictive in response to League showings that the rules were hampering SS experimentation and that interference has not proven to be an issue.

The ARRL says it now agrees with those who opposed the automatic power control provision in WT Docket 97-12, which the Commission concluded in 1999. Those changes not only relaxed rules governing the use of spread spectrum techniques by radio amateurs but opened the door to the possibility of international spread spectrum communication.

"Now seven years later, it is apparent to ARRL that the rules requiring APC indeed have proven to be difficult to implement, unnecessary and something of a barrier to SS experimentation," the ARRL said in its latest rule making petition. "Section 97.311(d) can be greatly simplified without increasing the risk of intra-service or inter-service harmful interference."

The ARRL said it has no problem with the 100 W power limit because there's no evidence it "contributes to the current regulatory disincentive to experiment with SS." The 100 W power level also limits the power spectral density of an SS emission, contributing to compatibility between Amateur Radio SS and narrowband modes in the same allocations, the League said.

The rules already in place make spread spectrum "essentially secondary to any amateur narrowband emission modes," the League pointed out. "Given these existing rules, the APC requirement is not necessary to avoid interference to any other user of the same spectrum as the amateur SS emission."

In any event, the League concluded, radio amateurs employing SS modes would remain obliged to comply with the rule requiring use of "the minimum transmitter power necessary to carry out the desired communication." That was a primary reason the ARRL asked for the APC provision in the first place.

The FCC has not yet assigned a rule making (RM) petition number to the ARRL's petition nor invited comments.

In its Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) WT Docket 04-140, the FCC, in response to another ARRL petition, proposed extending the bands available for spread spectrum to include 222-225 MHz. On its own initiative, the Commission also recommended permitting SS operation on 6 and 2 meters, a move the ARRL opposed. In its comments, the League cited concerns about raising the noise floor on 6 meters and the fact that both bands already support substantial narrowband and weak-signal work, meaning "fewer opportunities for frequency reuse in those allocations."

The Commission is expected to conclude WT Docket 04-140 this year. The FCC suggested that restrictions on spread spectrum already in place should be sufficient to prevent any adverse impact of SS operation to other users of 6 and 2 meters.

The HSMM Working Group has recommended to the ARRL Board that a request for Spectial Temporary Authority (STA) be submitted to the FCC to allow all amateurs to operate up to 10 watts output with no automatic power control (APC) on spread spectrum modes.  (Quote: http://web.archive.org/web/20050416130935/http://www.arrl.org/hsmm/project.html)

The FCC contacted the HSMM WG to advise us that they now consider the 1W APC rule to be unfeasible using 802.11 modulation. The original reg was written on the basis that future Radio Amateur HSMM radio would be CDMA based,  not 802.11. With that development it is now considered null and void, both unworkable and unenforceable.

Lastly, it wasn't till recently that I noticed the ARRL board of directors seem to have caused the HSMM WG to disband.  I think what the HSMM attempted and promoted should be commended.  A part of ham radio is and should always should be about encouraging experimentation (Part 97 is actually the flexible service I can think of!).  Perhaps the board as well as other naysayers do not understand this.  To me, it all ties together. Hopefully the reason you entered this hobby was to learn, as that's what its all about. Big or small, software or hardware, concepts, or examples... you can make a contribution.