From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Mon Dec 2 14:50:02 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id OAA04632 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 14:50:00 -0600 (CST) From: "Darryl Smith" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Forwarded from the NoCat Mailing List [NoCat] WIFi - Mckinsey report Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 07:47:45 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Scanner: exiscan *18IxUw-00074m-00*sseG1HCwPts* on Astaro Security Linux List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <002201c29a44$143c1250$4601a8c0@DELL8000> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk The following was on the NoCat mailing list and indicates the type of pressures on the 2.4 GHz band. I did learn a few things in this report - like the guy in florida who got 802.11 shout down in his apartment... Darryl --------- Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au I'd say this is "political heads up" time for those active in WI-FI network extension activities. Wi-FI goes to Washington http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/article_page.asp?ar=1236&L2=22&L3=78 Some excerpts: A new technology could not only restart economic growth but also help connect everyone, everywhere to the Internet-at low cost. Reed E. Hundt, Stagg Newman, and John E. Richards The McKinsey Quarterly, 2002 Number 4 Remember when technology-based start-ups were going to put established companies out of business? The surviving incumbents are now having a last laugh. But their schadenfreude may be short-lived in the telecommunications industry because a new technology called Wi-Fi (wireless fidelity) is threatening the business models of the mobile carriers, the phone gear makers, and the providers of high-speed DSL and cable modem services. Wi-Fi-known among techies as 802.11, a reference to its underlying technology standard-is an alternative means of Internet access. Simply hook up an inexpensive Wi-Fi base station (chip plus transceiver) to a high-speed Internet connection such as DSL, a cable modem, or a T1 line and place this base station within a couple of hundred feet of a house. All users in the vicinity who have a very inexpensive Wi-Fi device in their PCs or PDAs can then share low-cost, high-speed access to the Internet, without having to pay individually for more expensive dedicated DSL or cable modem service. Even better, with exciting new technologies such as mesh and ad hoc networks, improved Wi-Fi devices could create overlapping Wi-Fi networks in hotels, airports, office buildings, and malls. Strings of linked Wi-Fi networks can stretch through apartment buildings, campuses, and neighborhoods. Forget about digging up streets for fiber to every building or about erecting forests of towers; Wi-Fi can stretch the fabric of Internet connectivity, cheaply and painlessly, over any community to points where traffic is aggregated onto high-speed fiber backbone networks. Wi-Fi exploits the spectrum used by gadgets such as cordless telephones and microwave ovens-airwaves that haven't been auctioned or allocated to an exclusive user. This is the proverbial free lunch of spectrum. At last, Internet access can be easy, cheap, always on, everywhere. And Wi-Fi access is fast: indeed, with a fiber rather than a DSL or cable modem connection from the backbone network to the Wi-Fi base station, the transfer speed of Wi-Fi can be faster than the typical speeds of those technologies.1 A fiber connection of this sort would make it easy to download, stream, and swap movies-or vast volumes of corporate data-not only to computers but also to a new generation of flat screens equipped with Wi-Fi chips. Users will be able to make telephone calls by speaking into microphones in their lapels or on the edges of their computer screens. Guglielmo Marconi, the inventor of wireless communication, will have the last laugh on Alexander Graham Bell, the inventor of the telephone. What's the rub? Telephone companies could find that Wi-Fi will replace the additional, or "discretionary," phone lines that residential and business customers have had installed to supplement the traditional single "lifeline" connection. That change alone would probably make every telephone company in the United States unprofitable. Mobile carriers too could lose a substantial portion of their revenues (particularly future wireless data revenues) to Wi-Fi networks. For the mobile and wireline phone companies, the market-based reaction would be to embrace the new technology and extend its applications. But the likely alternative-though one that would poorly serve the economy and consumers-is for those companies to use the power of governments to slow or thwart Wi-Fi's advance. Already, in Taiwan only communications providers licensed by the government can operate commercial Wi-Fi networks. Some European countries appear to have similar, albeit ambiguous, regulations. Under such rules, Starbucks, which has put Wi-Fi connectivity into many of its shops, may not be able to charge an additional nickel a cup to patrons who want to have the Internet along with their coffee. Meanwhile, in the United Kingdom, regulators in effect prohibited service providers from offering commercial Wi-Fi services but recently took the wise course and reversed this rule, and BT has already indicated that it will offer them. Wi-Fi might also be squelched if governments decided to favor other industries that use the same radio frequencies. In Florida, one ham-radio operator has gone to court to shut down a Wi-Fi operator on the grounds that the apartment dwellers using this form of wireless Internet access were interfering with his radio. The electrical-lighting industry has petitioned the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to permit the use of the spectrum in a way that would create difficulties for Wi-Fi. And satellite operators have complained that Wi-Fi broadcasts will obstruct signals to and from satellites. Such spectrum battles are chronic at the FCC. Each of them will give the government a choice: to promote Wi-Fi or to restrain it. Even if the FCC sided with Wi-Fi on all issues of competing use, consumers would still have to reckon with the possibility that the government might protect existing communications services by forcing Wi-Fi to meet regulatory requirements for the security of signals and the quality of service. Actually, meeting these standards would be a laudable goal, but it should be achieved through competition and innovation, not government mandates. Imposing such requirements is a time-tested regulatory way of deterring competition and delaying change. Finally, the biggest risk is simply that the FCC might fail to allocate enough spectrum for free, unlicensed Wi-Fi and its many offshoots. If this new technology sweeps the country and the globe, as experts claim it can, spectrum auctions might become unnecessary to promote competition. Looking beyond auctions for revenues, the US Treasury Department might have to settle for reasonable taxation of a newly burgeoning information sector. But if governments become addicted to auction revenues, they may resist the allocation of free airwaves to Wi-Fiers. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------- Change is the elixir of growth in any economy, especially in the high-tech and innovation-driven economy of the United States. Now is the time for the US government to embrace Wi-Fi and, for that matter, many related new technologies. Let inventiveness again lead the country to new plateaus of high growth and to new solutions for the problem of bringing everyone into the Internet age. Notes: Reed Hundt, the chairman of the FCC from 1993 to 1997, is now a senior adviser to McKinsey; Stagg Newman, chief technologist of the FCC from 1998 to 1999, is a consultant in McKinsey's Washington, DC, office; John Richards is a consultant in the Silicon Valley office. 1This approach, however, wouldn't necessarily cut the DSL and cable providers out of the business, since these companies own most of the backbone networks and would therefore be the natural providers of fiber connections from them to Wi-Fi base stations. str8bizness wrote: Hill Heavyweights Preparing Their Own Spectrum Plan By Mark Rockwell November 22, 2002 news@2 direct WASHINGTON--Despite the FCC's attempt to provide a blueprint for future ways to harness spectrum, Congress apparently is preparing its own vision of how the resource should be used. There have been several indications in the last few weeks that Congress will take up allocation and other spectrum-related issues in its next session. Sen. John McCain, R.-Ariz., chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, has issued a brief statement listing spectrum next to the financial crisis in telecom, FCC re-authorization, broadband deployment and media consolidation as important issues the committee would address in the 108th Congress. McCain and spokespeople for the Commerce Committee didn't provide specifics about when or how those issues would be addressed by the committee, however. There also have been rumblings from Capitol Hill that Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont., another key telecom character on the Senate Commerce Committee, is keen on looking at 'major spectrum reform' legislation, say Capitol Hill sources. A draft bill could incorporate measures aimed at new methods of selling spectrum and how the revenue received from those sales is incorporated into the federal budget, said a Senate aide familiar with spectrum issues. Additionally, there also could be some effort to realign the spectrum relationship between the FCC and NTIA, the aide says. Hearings could begin soon after the beginning of the year. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Mon Dec 2 15:44:14 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id PAA08499 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:44:13 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 16:42:54 -0500 From: Jim Sanford X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Forwarded from the NoCat Mailing List [NoCat] WIFi - Mckinsey report References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3DEBD3DE.BE336F46@amsat.org> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk There's some real hype in here .. especially the bit about being FASTER than cable, dsl, fiber etc. (At least according to what I read in the trade press.) Also liked the bit about needing no more fiber in the ground, just let adjacent wi-fi networks propagate . . . shades of trying to netrom from DC to FL on vhf packet! 73, Jim wb4gcs@amsat.org Darryl Smith wrote: > > The following was on the NoCat mailing list and indicates the type of > pressures on the 2.4 GHz band. I did learn a few things in this report - > like the guy in florida who got 802.11 shout down in his apartment... > > Darryl > > --------- > Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia > Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] > Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au > > I'd say this is "political heads up" time for those active in WI-FI > network extension activities. > Wi-FI goes to Washington > > > http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/article_page.asp?ar=1236&L2=22&L3=78 > > Some excerpts: > > A new technology could not only restart economic growth but also > help connect everyone, everywhere to the > Internet-at low cost. > > Reed E. Hundt, Stagg Newman, and John E. Richards > The McKinsey Quarterly, 2002 Number 4 > > Remember when technology-based start-ups were going to put > established companies out of business? The surviving > incumbents are now having a last laugh. But their schadenfreude may > be short-lived in the telecommunications > industry because a new technology called Wi-Fi (wireless fidelity) > is threatening the business models of the mobile > carriers, the phone gear makers, and the providers of high-speed > DSL and cable modem services. > > Wi-Fi-known among techies as 802.11, a reference to its underlying > technology standard-is an alternative means > of Internet access. Simply hook up an inexpensive Wi-Fi base > station (chip plus transceiver) to a high-speed Internet > connection such as DSL, a cable modem, or a T1 line and place this > base station within a couple of hundred feet of a > house. All users in the vicinity who have a very inexpensive Wi-Fi > device in their PCs or PDAs can then share low-cost, > high-speed access to the Internet, without having to pay > individually for more expensive dedicated DSL or cable > modem service. > > Even better, with exciting new technologies such as mesh and ad hoc > networks, improved Wi-Fi devices could create > overlapping Wi-Fi networks in hotels, airports, office buildings, > and malls. Strings of linked Wi-Fi networks can stretch > through apartment buildings, campuses, and neighborhoods. Forget > about digging up streets for fiber to every building > or about erecting forests of towers; Wi-Fi can stretch the fabric > of Internet connectivity, cheaply and painlessly, over > any community to points where traffic is aggregated onto high-speed > fiber backbone networks. > > Wi-Fi exploits the spectrum used by gadgets such as cordless > telephones and microwave ovens-airwaves that > haven't been auctioned or allocated to an exclusive user. This is > the proverbial free lunch of spectrum. At last, > Internet access can be easy, cheap, always on, everywhere. And > Wi-Fi access is fast: indeed, with a fiber rather than > a DSL or cable modem connection from the backbone network to the > Wi-Fi base station, the transfer speed of Wi-Fi > can be faster than the typical speeds of those technologies.1 A > fiber connection of this sort would make it easy to > download, stream, and swap movies-or vast volumes of corporate > data-not only to computers but also to a new > generation of flat screens equipped with Wi-Fi chips. Users will be > able to make telephone calls by speaking into > microphones in their lapels or on the edges of their computer > screens. Guglielmo Marconi, the inventor of wireless > communication, will have the last laugh on Alexander Graham Bell, > the inventor of the telephone. > > What's the rub? Telephone companies could find that Wi-Fi will > replace the additional, or "discretionary," phone lines > that residential and business customers have had installed to > supplement the traditional single "lifeline" connection. > That change alone would probably make every telephone company in > the United States unprofitable. Mobile carriers > too could lose a substantial portion of their revenues > (particularly future wireless data revenues) to Wi-Fi networks. > > For the mobile and wireline phone companies, the market-based > reaction would be to embrace the new technology > and extend its applications. But the likely alternative-though one > that would poorly serve the economy and > consumers-is for those companies to use the power of governments to > slow or thwart Wi-Fi's advance. Already, in > Taiwan only communications providers licensed by the government can > operate commercial Wi-Fi networks. Some > European countries appear to have similar, albeit ambiguous, > regulations. Under such rules, Starbucks, which has put > Wi-Fi connectivity into many of its shops, may not be able to > charge an additional nickel a cup to patrons who want to > have the Internet along with their coffee. Meanwhile, in the United > Kingdom, regulators in effect prohibited service > providers from offering commercial Wi-Fi services but recently took > the wise course and reversed this rule, and BT > has already indicated that it will offer them. > > Wi-Fi might also be squelched if governments decided to favor other > industries that use the same radio frequencies. > In Florida, one ham-radio operator has gone to court to shut down a > Wi-Fi operator on the grounds that the > apartment dwellers using this form of wireless Internet access were > interfering with his radio. The electrical-lighting > industry has petitioned the US Federal Communications Commission > (FCC) to permit the use of the spectrum in a > way that would create difficulties for Wi-Fi. And satellite > operators have complained that Wi-Fi broadcasts will > obstruct signals to and from satellites. > > Such spectrum battles are chronic at the FCC. Each of them will > give the government a choice: to promote Wi-Fi or to > restrain it. Even if the FCC sided with Wi-Fi on all issues of > competing use, consumers would still have to reckon with > the possibility that the government might protect existing > communications services by forcing Wi-Fi to meet > regulatory requirements for the security of signals and the quality > of service. Actually, meeting these standards would > be a laudable goal, but it should be achieved through competition > and innovation, not government mandates. > Imposing such requirements is a time-tested regulatory way of > deterring competition and delaying change. > > Finally, the biggest risk is simply that the FCC might fail to > allocate enough spectrum for free, unlicensed Wi-Fi and its > many offshoots. If this new technology sweeps the country and the > globe, as experts claim it can, spectrum auctions > might become unnecessary to promote competition. Looking beyond > auctions for revenues, the US Treasury > Department might have to settle for reasonable taxation of a newly > burgeoning information sector. But if > governments become addicted to auction revenues, they may resist > the allocation of free airwaves to Wi-Fiers. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > -------- > > Change is the elixir of growth in any economy, especially in the > high-tech and innovation-driven economy of the > United States. Now is the time for the US government to embrace > Wi-Fi and, for that matter, many related new > technologies. Let inventiveness again lead the country to new > plateaus of high growth and to new solutions for the > problem of bringing everyone into the Internet age. > > Notes: > > Reed Hundt, the chairman of the FCC from 1993 to 1997, is now a > senior adviser to McKinsey; Stagg Newman, chief > technologist of the FCC from 1998 to 1999, is a consultant in > McKinsey's Washington, DC, office; John Richards is a > consultant in the Silicon Valley office. > > 1This approach, however, wouldn't necessarily cut the DSL and cable > providers out of the business, since these > companies own most of the backbone networks and would therefore be > the natural providers of fiber connections > from them to Wi-Fi base stations. > > > str8bizness wrote: > > > Hill Heavyweights Preparing Their Own Spectrum Plan > By Mark Rockwell > November 22, 2002 > news@2 direct > WASHINGTON--Despite the FCC's attempt to provide a blueprint for future > ways to harness spectrum, Congress apparently is preparing its own > vision of how the resource should be used. > There have been several indications in the last few weeks that Congress > will take up allocation and other spectrum-related issues in its next > session. Sen. John McCain, R.-Ariz., chairman of the Senate Commerce > Committee, has issued a brief statement listing spectrum next to the > financial crisis in telecom, FCC re-authorization, broadband deployment > and media consolidation as important issues the committee would address > in the 108th Congress. > > McCain and spokespeople for the Commerce Committee didn't provide > specifics about when or how those issues would be addressed by the > committee, however. > > There also have been rumblings from Capitol Hill that Sen. Conrad Burns, > R-Mont., another key telecom character on the Senate Commerce Committee, > is keen on looking at 'major spectrum reform' legislation, say Capitol > Hill sources. A draft bill could incorporate measures aimed at new > methods of selling spectrum and how the revenue received from those > sales is incorporated into the federal budget, said a Senate aide > familiar with spectrum issues. > > Additionally, there also could be some effort to realign the spectrum > relationship between the FCC and NTIA, the aide says. Hearings could > begin soon after the beginning of the year. > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: WB4GCS@AMSAT.ORG > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Mon Dec 2 19:23:13 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id TAA18270 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2002 19:23:10 -0600 (CST) Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 20:19:52 -0500 From: Robert McGwier Subject: [ss] Re: Forwarded from the NoCat Mailing List [NoCat] WIFi - Mckinsey report To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Importance: Normal X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-priority: Normal List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk 802.11a _IS_ faster than cable, dsl, etc. 802.11b in my house is faster than cable, dsl, etc. I immediately dump it into my cable modem through a router/firewall (linux based) and that gets limited to 3.5 Mbps/500kbps (measured) by Comcast Pro but the wireless backbone in my house is regularly measured 8 Mbps. For those who use 802.11 (a or b), I experimented with the channel until I found one that sustained the best rates for my house. I have not a single clue why this happens to be the case, probably materials in my house, but it is a repeatable experiment. My oldest son was having much poorer results on his laptop in his room until I changed channels in my wireless access point. Bob --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-message-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 3 01:23:23 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id BAA02206 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2002 01:23:23 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: X-Lyris-Type: unsub-conf-req From: Lyris Reply-To: Lyris To: lyris.ss@tapr.org Subject: Your confirmation is needed (ok 6751) Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 02:07:59 -0500 Your email address 'lyris.ss@tapr.org' has been submitted to be unsubscribed from the 'ss' mailing list. This unsubscribe command requires your confirmation that you want to be unsubscribed. To confirm that you do want to unsubscribe, reply to this message so that the words "ok 6751" appear somewhere on the subject line. Make sure that your reply message is addressed to unsubscribe-confirm@lists.tapr.org You will receive notification that your confirmation has been received, and that you have been unsubscribed. If you do not want to unsubscribe, do nothing. You will be kept on the mailing list. --- Return-Path: Received: from relay2.bt.net ([194.72.6.62]) by lists.tapr.org with SMTP (Lyris Server version 3.0); Tue, 03 Dec 2002 02:07:47 -0500 Received: from webstorm.megabyte.co.uk ([194.73.231.146] helo=filestorm.swanmore.megabyte.local) by relay2.bt.net with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #1) id 18J7OU-00007w-00; Tue, 03 Dec 2002 07:22:58 +0000 Received: from naseem.borsen.dk ([211.114.62.130] unverified) by filestorm.swanmore.megabyte.local with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.2966); Tue, 3 Dec 2002 07:16:39 +0000 Message-ID: <000008f15d84$00001d42$00003411@naseem.borsen.dk> To: ss-request From: "E-Merchant Solutions" Subject: Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 23:18:57 -2000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Dec 2002 07:16:42.0163 (UTC) FILETIME=[EDE54830:01C29A9B] # Mail sent to leave-ss-6751t was converted to these commands: unsubscribe ss lyris.ss@tapr.org confirm end # This is the text of the message that triggered the action: Return-Path: Received: from relay2.bt.net ([194.72.6.62]) by lists.tapr.org with SMTP (Lyris Server version 3.0); Tue, 03 Dec 2002 02:07:47 -0500 Received: from webstorm.megabyte.co.uk ([194.73.231.146] helo=filestorm.swanmore.megabyte.local) by relay2.bt.net with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #1) id 18J7OU-00007w-00; Tue, 03 Dec 2002 07:22:58 +0000 Received: from naseem.borsen.dk ([211.114.62.130] unverified) by filestorm.swanmore.megabyte.local with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.2966); Tue, 3 Dec 2002 07:16:39 +0000 Message-ID: <000008f15d84$00001d42$00003411@naseem.borsen.dk> To: From: "E-Merchant Solutions" Subject: Expand Your Business Now Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 23:18:57 -2000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Dec 2002 07:16:42.0163 (UTC) FILETIME=[EDE54830:01C29A9B] Increase Sales By Accepting Credit Cards Online
<= /TBODY>

Accepting Credit Cards Has
Never Been Easier!

Whether you= are starting your business from scratch, or already have an existing bus= iness, we make it simple to set up your merchant account.

No Se= t-up Fee
No Application Fee
Real-time, Online Payment Transactions
Ground Breaking 98% Approval
Fast 5-7 Day Set-up=
Same Day Approval

Make Money While You SleepQualified Busines= ses Get:

Free = Website Design
Free Web Hosting for 1 Year
Free Shopping Cart
Free = Web Promotion
Free Tech Support

Accepting Credit Cards Is A Must For Any Successful Business!

We make it easy, aff= ordable and secure for businesses to accept non-cash transactions and manage= their e-business on the Internet. "Accepting credit cards online can incre= ase sales by as much as 1500%", says the Wall Street Journal. Sta= rt excepting credit cards today to establish a professional web presenc= e and give your company a chance to compete in today=FFFFFF92s business market.

IMPROVE YOUR COMPETETIVE ADVANTAGE.

Fill out the no obligati= on form below
for more information.

Name *
State *
Day Phone *
Night Phone
Best time to contact
E-mail Address *
Years In Business
Questions/Comments



*Note: <= FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>If you are using a web based email system (= such as Yahoo!, Hotmail etc.) the form above will not work. Instead of using= the form, please click here.
You need to inclu= de your name, state, and phone number in the body of the message to receive = a response. Thank you.

To be removed, send an email to: remove@virtual-biz.net with the wo= rd "remove" in the subject line.

From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 4 00:09:09 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id AAA26533 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 00:09:06 -0600 (CST) From: "Darryl Smith" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Cc: "TAPR Board of Directors" , "TAPR APRS Special Interest Group" , "htaprs digest recipients" , "aprs sig \(aprs sig\)" , "'APRS Spec Discussion List'" , "'TAPR PIC Development Special Interest Group'" , "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" , "TAPR AO-16 APRS Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Authors Wanted for PSR and DCC... Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 17:05:40 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Scanner: exiscan *18JSfw-0000W5-00*FlZSUxm0Ikw* on Astaro Security Linux List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <008801c29b5b$2f294c00$4601a8c0@DELL8000> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk G'Day TAPR have decided to introduce some changes to support those members of TAPR who are putting time and energy into the various publications that TAPR puts out each year. Three Month Membership Extension for Packet Status Register (PSR) Articles ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -- >From the next issue of PSR, members who have articles published in the PSR magazine will have their membership of TAPR extended by three months. It is hoped that this will encourage members to write for the magazine. The deadline for articles for the next issue of PSR is mid-January. More information on submitting articles, and on obtaining copies of the magazine can be found on http://www.tapr.org/tapr/html/Fpsr.html Six Month Membership Extension for Digital Communications Conference (DCC) Articles ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----------- >From the 2003 DCC, planned for somewhere in the Eastern USA, TAPR will be offering Six Month membership extensions for all members who have papers published in the proceedings. Whilst we would dearly love all authors of papers to attend the conference, we recognize that there are reasons that members cannot attend the conference - so the requirement is only on having your paper published. This is of course in addition to the complimentary copy of the DCC proceedings that each author is entitled to. We are looking for papers on subject within the bounds of Digital Communications, as it applies to Ham Radio, on all levels. All you need is something to say. If you feel that you are unable to write a paper because you do not have the time, or writing a paper is outside your area of expertise, please contact me. I will attempt to find someone who will be able to help you with getting the paper written. More details on the conference itself will be made available early in 2003, along with a formal call for papers. Until then you can examine the DCC area of the TAPR www site for details on past conferences by looking at http://www.tapr.org/dcc/ Darryl VK2TDS TAPR Board Member --------- Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 4 17:31:18 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id RAA08399 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 17:31:16 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: X-Sender: wa5vms@204.17.217.20 Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 17:55:23 -0600 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Joe S. Borovetz" Subject: [ss] ISP Proposal and Illegal operation In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.2.20021204174715.029c82e8@204.17.217.20> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk I have just found out that a local ISP in Muskogee Oklahoma, they also have operations in Tulsa OK, company name of OnRamp, is trying to rent some tower space to install 802.11b wireless networking. They propose to do a 28 mile link and don't seem to mind that the 4 watt transmitter connected directly to a 30 dB gain dish mounted at the top of a tower, they don't seem to mind the fact that they are violating Part 15 rules. I have visited with one fellow, who happens to be a ham, and they plan to go ahead with these high power operations in spite of the rules. It is my understanding that they have equipment on the air in Tulsa OK and from the description, none of it meets Part 15 power limitations. Can someone on the list help me with who to contact since I plan to notify these folks that I will turn them in to the FCC the day they go on the air with such an operation. Joe --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 4 21:20:22 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id VAA16282 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2002 21:20:20 -0600 (CST) From: Jeff King To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 22:19:23 -0500 In-Reply-To: Subject: [ss] Re: ISP Proposal and Illegal operation Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Message-Id: Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id VAA16282 I would contact Ed Hare at the ARRL if they are interfering with legitimate amateur operations. Or if not, you could suggest they make a press release bragging about their link ;-) -- Jeff King, jeff@aerodata.net on 12/04/2002 On Wed, 04 Dec 2002 17:55:23 -0600, Joe S. Borovetz wrote: >I have just found out that a local ISP in Muskogee Oklahoma, they >also have >operations in Tulsa OK, company name of OnRamp, is trying to rent >some >tower space to install 802.11b wireless networking. > >They propose to do a 28 mile link and don't seem to mind that the 4 >watt >transmitter connected directly to a 30 dB gain dish mounted at the >top of a >tower, they don't seem to mind the fact that they are violating Part >15 rules. > >I have visited with one fellow, who happens to be a ham, and they >plan to >go ahead with these high power operations in spite of the rules. > >It is my understanding that they have equipment on the air in Tulsa >OK and >from the description, none of it meets Part 15 power limitations. > >Can someone on the list help me with who to contact since I plan to >notify >these folks that I will turn them in to the FCC the day they go on >the air >with such an operation. > >Joe > > >--- >You are currently subscribed to ss as: jeff@aerodata.net >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Dec 5 02:00:32 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id CAA27542 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 02:00:32 -0600 (CST) From: "Darryl Smith" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: ISP Proposal and Illegal operation Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 18:58:16 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Scanner: exiscan *18JqvG-0006Rn-00*bCTQfTTetKs* on Astaro Security Linux List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <011401c29c34$14a64a70$4601a8c0@DELL8000> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Yesterday the comment was made >They propose to do a 28 mile link and don't seem to mind that the 4 watt >transmitter connected directly to a 30 dB gain dish mounted at the top of a >tower, they don't seem to mind the fact that they are violating Part 15 rules. The value of 4W seems to be suspcious... I suspect that it is 4W eirp, with a 30db Gain antenna. 4W with a 30db gain antenna would mean a EIRP of 4000W, which is so far outside the realms of the legality that it is not funny. YDI is selling a 1 Watt amp, which they suggest can be used with a 24db antenna which they say can go 80 miles - which is only 200W EIRP. And this is the most powerful amp I could find there. Basically I doubt that the ISP is running that much power. If they do they can cook food... And I am sure that the FCC would have people calling up about a strange heating.... >I would contact Ed Hare at the ARRL if they are interfering with= legitimate >amateur operations. I would advise against getting the ARRL involved. Lets face it - the 2.4 GHz band is defacto secondary with the 802.11 commercial interests. If you fight that you will loose. Ham Radio will not win. There is a bigger national good at stake. Kicking commercial users out of the airspace is bad publicity for us. That is the worst thing we can do at the moment. If they are running too much power, contact the FCC, but don't mention you are a ham. Just a concerned citizen. Darryl --------- Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Dec 5 05:12:01 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id FAA02003 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 05:11:58 -0600 (CST) Subject: [ss] Re: ISP Proposal and Illegal operation To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 11:11:21 +0000 Message-ID: X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on mgeg01/S/EXT/MM1(Release 5.0.10 |March 22, 2002) at 12/05/2002 12:10:20 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Cook food??? An EIRP of 4000W means no such thing. You are still radiating a total of 4W. No more power magically comes from anywhere. If you put your christmas turkey in front of the dish, all 4W of it might go into the turkey, and, suprisingly enough, it might just about defrost, it would not cook. The XYL would not be impressed with dinner. So what's the difference compared to an omni dipole? It's just far more difficult to get all 4W into the turkey. Put it near the dipole and you might catch 0.4W. The rest goes off into space. To put this in context, the normal dissipation of a living human is around 300W, I'd guess a turkey when it's alive would be around 30W. Temperature at this dissipation is 37 deg. C, call that a rise of 20C above ambient. So 4W in a turkey might raise its temperature by 3 degrees maybe? Inmarsat-A ship-earth-station is 40W at 1.6GHz into 0.9m dish. No birds fell out of the sky. Although you wouldn't cook if you stood in front of 4000W EIRP, the field strength is not considered safe, so only use dead turkeys for this experiment... Ant M1FDE Ah, now if you put an 800W magnetron at the feed, that would be different. Now you're cooking with RF! What you need is one of these... http://www.nec-mwt.com/english/klyamp_tl/ld4416.html Uh, I just did a search and there's a small klystron on EBay! Type Varian VA-317A/445A. I wonder what frequency it is? :-))) --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Dec 5 09:24:37 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id JAA10712 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 09:24:36 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: dubose@texas.net Subject: [ss] Re: ISP Proposal and Illegal operation Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 09:23:43 US/Central X-User: dubose List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <200212051523.gB5FNhl11763@mail1.aus1.texas.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Good thoughts but they could be a bit misleading. You make a valid point about the rise in temperature...but what we should be concerned about is things such as raising the tempature of the viscus fluid in the eye from 98.6 deg F to say 105 deg. F or higher. This would probably cause great pain in the eye and probably damage the eye if exposed a long time to this temperature...altho I suspect that you would move away from the radiation before you damaged your eye. I reference eyes because W5DUU did research in that area. There may be, probably are other parts of you anatomy that are harmed by the rise in temperature; but, I don't know about them. In all honesty, I would start getting concerned if the EIRP is over 10 watts and you are about 1 ft away from the radiation source. To cook a turkey (a 10-18 poind bird), you need to raise the temperature from thawed temperature to 180 deg. F. That takes a lot of energy. To damage the eye (1 cubic cm of viscus fluid about the same density as salt water), you need to raise the temperature about 7 deg F. That doesn't take all that much energy. Walt/K5YFW > > Cook food??? > > An EIRP of 4000W means no such thing. > > You are still radiating a total of 4W. No more power > magically comes from anywhere. > > If you put your christmas turkey in front of the dish, > all 4W of it might go into the turkey, and, suprisingly > enough, it might just about defrost, it would not cook. > The XYL would not be impressed with dinner. > > So what's the difference compared to an omni dipole? > It's just far more difficult to get all 4W into the turkey. > Put it near the dipole and you might catch 0.4W. The > rest goes off into space. > > To put this in context, the normal dissipation of a > living human is around 300W, I'd guess a turkey > when it's alive would be around 30W. Temperature > at this dissipation is 37 deg. C, call that a rise of > 20C above ambient. So 4W in a turkey might > raise its temperature by 3 degrees maybe? > > Inmarsat-A ship-earth-station is 40W at 1.6GHz into > 0.9m dish. No birds fell out of the sky. > > Although you wouldn't cook if you stood in front of > 4000W EIRP, the field strength is not considered > safe, so only use dead turkeys for this experiment... > > Ant M1FDE > > Ah, now if you put an 800W magnetron at the feed, > that would be different. Now you're cooking with RF! > > What you need is one of these... > http://www.nec-mwt.com/english/klyamp_tl/ld4416.html > > Uh, I just did a search and there's a small klystron on > EBay! Type Varian VA-317A/445A. I wonder what > frequency it is? :-))) > > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: dubose@texas.net > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Dec 5 14:35:42 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id OAA23853 for ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 14:35:40 -0600 (CST) From: Jeff King To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 15:34:30 -0500 In-Reply-To: Subject: [ss] Re: ISP Proposal and Illegal operation Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Message-Id: Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id OAA23853 On Thu, 5 Dec 2002 18:58:16 +1100, Darryl Smith wrote: >Yesterday the comment was made Two different people you quoted. What I said was: >>I would contact Ed Hare at the ARRL if they are interfering with >>legitimate amateur operations. > >I would advise against getting the ARRL involved. And then you further stated: >If they are running too much power, contact the FCC, but don't >mention you are a ham. Just a concerned citizen. This is very poor advice. A "concerned citizen" has no grounds to complain with interference to their Part 15 device from another Part 15 user. Further, having 100's of ham's with 100 different opinions calling the FCC about a complaint is also ill-advised. Why not let the ARRL do the job we pay them money for? And that is to protect amateur interests. > Lets face it - the 2.4 >GHz band is defacto secondary with the 802.11 commercial interests. Not in the United States Darryl. Part 97 users do not have to accept interference from Part 15 users that stop communications. Here are the FCC rules: http://wireless.fcc.gov/rules.html Now, I am not in any way shape or form suggesting amateur's form death squads to hunt down errant baby monitors or put out a hit on the WLAN at the local Starbucks, but when a clear single source violation of Part 15 occurs AND it is interfering on a widespread basis with legitimate amateur communications, it is foolish not to do anything about it. >If >you fight that you will loose. Ham Radio will not win. There is a >bigger national good at stake. As the second TAPR board member to make such a similar statement, can you please clarify this. Are you aware of your board's position statement on spread spectrum? http://www.tapr.org/tapr/html/ss.position.html Is this statement still the position of the board, or am I to take you and another board members less the glowing support for amateur radio spread spectrum is the new norm? >Kicking commercial users out of the airspace >is bad publicity for us. Asking users that are subordinate to Part 97 to comply with the law is bad publicity?!? I think anything LESS then expecting people to obey the law and government to enforce that same law, is bad policy. It is also clear policy and something every citizen should expect. Now, if as some form of civil disobideince you are suggesting citizens violate Part 15 on a widespread basis, I'm most certainly liberal enough to be open to that as long as the reason is clear and the objective known. Is that what you are suggesting here? And in any case, "Part 15 users" by default are not commercial. They do not have licenses for the frequencies they use. The equipment is certified to the manufacturer, not the end users. The fact that some users are using the equipment for revenue producing means (such as WISP) is commendable, however on every part 15 device a "contract" is clearly spelled out. In that, a part 15 user may not cause interference to primary users and that a part 15 user must accept any and all interference. >That is the worst thing we can do at the moment. Please explain the above as I don't understand why rule compliance should be seasonal. And in closing, I hope you don't cut and run like the other board member did that made a similar statement. I have supported TAPR for 18 years and as member, I think I have a right to know what this organization, or its board members, actually support. I was a heavy contributor to the TAPR STA and had hoped more would come of it. -Jeff --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Dec 6 02:43:13 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id CAA22611 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 02:43:11 -0600 (CST) From: "Darryl Smith" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE: ss digest: December 05, 2002 Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 19:41:17 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Scanner: exiscan *18KE3Y-0006b8-00*YGHWFbGwhkI* on Astaro Security Linux List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <016f01c29d03$41836cb0$4601a8c0@DELL8000> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk G'Day All... Re: 4000w eirp... Well, in most cases the sun does not cause paper to burn. But with a magnifying glass it will. And antenna is just a lens for RF energy >>If they are running too much power, contact the FCC, but don't mention >>you are a ham. Just a concerned citizen. > >This is very poor advice. A "concerned citizen" has no grounds to= complain >with interference to their Part 15 device from another Part 15= user. Look on the back of a YDI amp... It says that it complies with PART 15, WHEN PART OF A CERTIFIED SYSTEM. When was the last time you saw a system run with an amp be a CERTIFIED SYSTEM? Add Amp - Not Certified Not Certified - Not part 15 Not part 15 - Operating illegally. I believe that ANYONE can complain about an unlicensed transmitter. Unless the antenna and amplifier are certified as a complete system as being part 15, then this transmitter is not part 15. >>Kicking commercial users out of the airspace >>is bad publicity for us. >policy and something every citizen should expect. Now, if as some= form of >civil disobideince you are suggesting citizens violate Part 15 on= a >widespread basis, I'm most certainly liberal enough to be open to= that as >long as the reason is clear and the objective known. Is that= what you are >suggesting here? How can I put this? I am suggesting that a PART 15 device that is operating legally should not be made to shut down by a PART 97 operator because he does not like the small increase in the noise floor on the local FM repeater. What can be worse for Ham Radio than an operator who goes to court to tell his neighbours they cannot use equipment that they legally purchased. That they cannot use their portable phones, VCR extenders, Bluetooth Devices, 802.11 cards. This is not good for the hobby... Lets think about it... A local ham tells the local water company to stop the operation of it's remote operated pumping station. How would you react if you saw a newspaper headline like "Sewer Overflows thanks to HAM" Local Ham WB1ABCD took the XYZ sewers to court in a bid to stop them using their new sewer pumping station and won. The court ordered that they immediately turn off the remotelty controlled pumping station as it was alleged that a transmitter at the site interfered with the Hams experiemental TV station. As a result of this, and the recent rain, the sewers have overflowed causing environmental damage.... THIS WILL HAPPEN. Everyone is starting to use 2.4 GHz. Part 15 is effectively joint secondary at the moment, and will get that official. In my view, part 15 and part 97 need to coexist. Part 97 and unlicenced (Illegal power amps etc) do not need to coexist. Realistically because of 802.11 in the USA, Ham Radio I personally believe that PRIMARY status of 2.4 GHz in the USA is in real danger. I believe that in the next 12-18 months the USA will have 2.4 GHz joint primary or joint secondary with 802.11 and other ISM users. By enforceing Part 97 to the detriment of part 15, I believe that there is a danger that this downgrading of the 2.4 GHz spectrum will actually loose 2.4 GHz. There are VERY BIG COMPANIES that believe that 802.11 is a way to go, and they spend a whole lot more on lobying in Washington DC than ARRL, TAPR or any other Ham Radio group. >>If you fight that you will loose. Ham Radio will not win. There is a >>bigger national good at stake. >As the second TAPR board member to make such a similar statement,= can you >please clarify this. Are you aware of your board's position= statement on >spread spectrum? > >http://www.tapr.org/tapr/html/ss.position.html I FULLY SUPPORT THE USE OF AMATEUR RADIO SPREAD SPECTRUM FROM DC TO DAYLIGHT. I SUPPORT IT ON LF, HF, VHF, MICROWAVE, INFRARED. As soon as morse gets abolished here in Oz, I plan to start playing spread spectrum on HF. I did my electrical engineering thesis on it. I LOVE SPREAD SPECTRUM. As far as I know that statement is still the position of the board. It was made before I was elected, but I fully support it. When that was written, the position of TAPR was that it supported spread spectrum on amateur frequencies. I have not seen anything showing me that the view of TAPR has changed. >>That is the worst thing we can do at the moment. >Please explain the above as I don't understand why rule= compliance should be >seasonal. Because the eyes of Washington are on us as hams... Whatever we do will make an impact. We do not have the lobying power of the wireless community groups.... Imagine the power of Microsoft, Cisco, Sprint, Verizon etc. Think the Little Leo and multiply things by 1000. >From memory I believe that there is a proposal in Washington for more spectrum arround 2.4 GHz. Whilst this is being done it would not take too much to change the 2.4 GHz amateur allocation. >And in any case, "Part 15 users" by default are not commercial.= They do not >have licenses for the frequencies they use. The equipment is= certified to the >manufacturer, not the end users. The fact that some users are= using the >equipment for revenue producing means (such as WISP) is= commendable, however >on every part 15 device a "contract" is clearly spelled out. In= that, a part >15 user may not cause interference to primary users and that a= part 15 user >must accept any and all interference. Fine, but if we are not careful we will not be primary for long. >And in closing, I hope you don't cut and run like the other board= member did >that made a similar statement. I have supported TAPR for 18 years= and as >member, I think I have a right to know what this organization, or= its board >members, actually support. I was a heavy contributor to the TAPR= STA and had >hoped more would come of it. I cannot speak for other members of the board, or for the board itself. I will tend not to run, except when I get into a flame war, and feel that it is time to stop that. I don't know if you or anyone else has noticed it, but I put my mobile phone number on the bottom of every email with my email address. I want to be accessable. Just remember the time difference... Darryl --------- Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Dec 6 12:31:28 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id MAA13411 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 12:31:23 -0600 (CST) To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE: ss digest: December 05, 2002 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 12:30:34 -0600 (CST) From: Jeff King References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.7 X-Originating-IP: 64.9.221.42 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <1039199434.3df0ecca0fa98@webmail.aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Darryl: It would really be nice if you would read my responses as well as the question that illicited this thread. But let me give you a thumbnail summary of who we got where we got. The complaintant was a licensed amateur radio operator, not a "concerned citizen". The violator was a WISP running in excess of Part 15 limits with non certified equipment. No where was it stated or implied that hams should chase after baby monitors, public utilties or portable phones. It also would be helpful for you to STOP rolling multiple people's qoutes, uncited, into your replies. At least qoute the sources if you must reply to multiple people's messages in a single one. Now, we do agree on one thing, abiet on opposite sides. It was stated regarding complaining to the FCC/ARRL about rule violations: > >>That is the worst thing we can do at the moment. > >Please explain the above as I don't understand why rule compliance > >should be seasonal. > Because the eyes of Washington are on us as hams... Whatever we do > will > make an impact. We do not have the lobying power of the wireless > community groups.... Imagine the power of Microsoft, Cisco, Sprint, > Verizon etc. Think the Little Leo and multiply things by 1000. Yes, we do agree the eyes of Washington are on hams. If we sit by, and let blatent rule violators take over our bands, in full view of the regulators, then this will become the norm. Part 97 are primary over part 15 and the rule of the land should mean something, even to the MicroSoft's that you seem to feel we should run scared from. Is rolling over and letting people walk all over you the impact you wish to make in life? And as I CLEARLY stated before, I am against hams forming death squads to track down baby monitors, portable phones and firebombing the local utilties. What I am saying is that it is foolish to standby while clear rule violations are taking place in part 15 AND those same rule violations are disrupting legitimate amateur communications. Part 15 users and hams CAN and SHOULD get along together. But this is a two way steet and the only time I am aware of that hams pushed back was when the Part 15 WISP was completely uncooprative (tried to claim he was running his ISP under Part 18). Most WISP's are more then willing to work with ham's to resolve problems. But you statement of contacting the FCC before the ARRL takes all chance of working things out without goverment involvement out of the picture. I think the FCC should only be involved as a last resort. How more clearly can I state this? -Jeff Quoting Darryl Smith : > G'Day All... > > Re: 4000w eirp... > > Well, in most cases the sun does not cause paper to burn. But with a > magnifying glass it will. And antenna is just a lens for RF energy > > > >>If they are running too much power, contact the FCC, but don't > mention > > >>you are a ham. Just a concerned citizen. > > > >This is very poor advice. A "concerned citizen" has no grounds to= > complain > >with interference to their Part 15 device from another Part 15= user. > > > Look on the back of a YDI amp... It says that it complies with PART > 15, > WHEN PART OF A CERTIFIED SYSTEM. When was the last time you saw a > system > run with an amp be a CERTIFIED SYSTEM? > > Add Amp - Not Certified > Not Certified - Not part 15 > Not part 15 - Operating illegally. > > I believe that ANYONE can complain about an unlicensed transmitter. > Unless the antenna and amplifier are certified as a complete system as > being part 15, then this transmitter is not part 15. > > >>Kicking commercial users out of the airspace > >>is bad publicity for us. > >policy and something every citizen should expect. Now, if as some= > form of > >civil disobideince you are suggesting citizens violate Part 15 on= a > > >widespread basis, I'm most certainly liberal enough to be open to= > that as > >long as the reason is clear and the objective known. Is that= what > you are > >suggesting here? > > How can I put this? I am suggesting that a PART 15 device that is > operating legally should not be made to shut down by a PART 97 > operator > because he does not like the small increase in the noise floor on the > local FM repeater. > > What can be worse for Ham Radio than an operator who goes to court to > tell his neighbours they cannot use equipment that they legally > purchased. That they cannot use their portable phones, VCR extenders, > Bluetooth Devices, 802.11 cards. This is not good for the hobby... > > Lets think about it... A local ham tells the local water company to > stop > the operation of it's remote operated pumping station. How would you > react if you saw a newspaper headline like > > "Sewer Overflows thanks to HAM" > > Local Ham WB1ABCD took the XYZ sewers > to court in a bid to stop them using > their new sewer pumping station and won. > The court ordered that they immediately > turn off the remotelty controlled pumping > station as it was alleged that a transmitter > at the site interfered with the Hams > experiemental TV station. > > As a result of this, and the recent rain, > the sewers have overflowed causing environmental > damage.... > > THIS WILL HAPPEN. Everyone is starting to use 2.4 GHz. Part 15 is > effectively joint secondary at the moment, and will get that official. > > > In my view, part 15 and part 97 need to coexist. Part 97 and > unlicenced > (Illegal power amps etc) do not need to coexist. Realistically because > of 802.11 in the USA, Ham Radio I personally believe that PRIMARY > status > of 2.4 GHz in the USA is in real danger. I believe that in the next > 12-18 months the USA will have 2.4 GHz joint primary or joint > secondary > with 802.11 and other ISM users. > > By enforceing Part 97 to the detriment of part 15, I believe that > there > is a danger that this downgrading of the 2.4 GHz spectrum will > actually > loose 2.4 GHz. There are VERY BIG COMPANIES that believe that 802.11 > is > a way to go, and they spend a whole lot more on lobying in Washington > DC > than ARRL, TAPR or any other Ham Radio group. > > >>If you fight that you will loose. Ham Radio will not win. There is a > >>bigger national good at stake. > >As the second TAPR board member to make such a similar statement,= > can > you > >please clarify this. Are you aware of your board's position= > statement > on > >spread spectrum? > > > >http://www.tapr.org/tapr/html/ss.position.html > > I FULLY SUPPORT THE USE OF AMATEUR RADIO SPREAD SPECTRUM FROM DC TO > DAYLIGHT. I SUPPORT IT ON LF, HF, VHF, MICROWAVE, INFRARED. As soon as > morse gets abolished here in Oz, I plan to start playing spread > spectrum > on HF. > > I did my electrical engineering thesis on it. I LOVE SPREAD SPECTRUM. > As > far as I know that statement is still the position of the board. It > was > made before I was elected, but I fully support it. When that was > written, the position of TAPR was that it supported spread spectrum on > amateur frequencies. I have not seen anything showing me that the view > of TAPR has changed. > > >>That is the worst thing we can do at the moment. > >Please explain the above as I don't understand why rule= compliance > should be > >seasonal. > > Because the eyes of Washington are on us as hams... Whatever we do > will > make an impact. We do not have the lobying power of the wireless > community groups.... Imagine the power of Microsoft, Cisco, Sprint, > Verizon etc. Think the Little Leo and multiply things by 1000. > > From memory I believe that there is a proposal in Washington for more > spectrum arround 2.4 GHz. Whilst this is being done it would not take > too much to change the 2.4 GHz amateur allocation. > > >And in any case, "Part 15 users" by default are not commercial.= > They > do not > >have licenses for the frequencies they use. The equipment is= > certified to the > >manufacturer, not the end users. The fact that some users are= using > the > >equipment for revenue producing means (such as WISP) is= > commendable, > however > >on every part 15 device a "contract" is clearly spelled out. In= > that, > a part > >15 user may not cause interference to primary users and that a= part > 15 user > >must accept any and all interference. > > Fine, but if we are not careful we will not be primary for long. > > >And in closing, I hope you don't cut and run like the other board= > member did > >that made a similar statement. I have supported TAPR for 18 years= > and > as > >member, I think I have a right to know what this organization, or= > its > board > >members, actually support. I was a heavy contributor to the TAPR= > STA > and had > >hoped more would come of it. > > I cannot speak for other members of the board, or for the board > itself. > I will tend not to run, except when I get into a flame war, and feel > that it is time to stop that. I don't know if you or anyone else has > noticed it, but I put my mobile phone number on the bottom of every > email with my email address. I want to be accessable. Just remember > the > time difference... > > Darryl > > --------- > Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia > Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] > Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: jeff@aerodata.net > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Dec 6 14:49:47 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id OAA18913 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 14:49:41 -0600 (CST) content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 Subject: [ss] Re: ISP Proposal and Illegal operation Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 15:48:49 -0500 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [ss] Re: ISP Proposal and Illegal operation Thread-Index: AcKcNFfcnU/HdMzlQyugb1WIOj22fAAxeGpg From: "Hare,Ed, W1RFI" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <721D3436A7C2B344A301FD4A413C71A9ADF32E@kosh.ARRLHQ.ORG> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id OAA18913 >> I would contact Ed Hare at the ARRL if they are interfering with >> legitimate amateur operations. > I would advise against getting the ARRL involved. >From what you say, it doesn't appear that you are specifically criticizing ARRL, but rather implying that filing complaints against Part 15 operation is not a good idea. I will address my comments in that direction. > Lets face it - the 2.4 GHz band is defacto secondary with the 802.11 commercial interests. Not by my read of Part 15, Darryl. There is a pretty clear "pecking order" on 2.4 GHz, with ISM on the top, Amateur in the middle and Part 15 on the bottom. Part 15 operates subject to two major requirements: The manufacturers of equipment need to meet the Certification requirements for their equipment and continue to manufacture it to those requirements and the users of that equipment must operate in a way that does not cause harmful interference to primary users. There is no defacto secondary anything about this. When these matters come up as rulemaking, ARRL, other groups and individuals often file comments with the FCC about the probabilty of harmful interference. The answer is often a variation of "the existing rules have a provision that says that if harmful interference occurs, the operator of the device must unconditionally correct the interference. How much more protection do you want than absolute." With reluctance, I can accept this, IF the FCC will enforce the rules as written. Your post implies that they will not, but I disagree at least in part, based on personal experience. For example, the FCC has been very active enforcing power-line interference cases. There are no specific limits for incidental emitters (power lines, motors, etc.), but only a requirement not to cause harmful interference. The Commission has been willing to address the issue on that basis, not caving in even when one of the utility companies had their lawyer draft an answer that said, "we are not allowed to interere with a radio service, but amateur radio doesn't sell any services, so we can interfere." (Honest! They really said that.) Darwin Networks' 2.4 GHz WISP operation was interfering with an amateur repeater in Texas; the FCC wrote a letter asking them how they intended to address the interference. ARRL has also helped expidite a few cases of interference to hams from various Part 15 equipment in neighbor's homes or businesses. > If you fight that you will loose. Ham Radio will not win. There is a bigger national > good at stake. Kicking commercial users out of the airspace is bad publicity for us. > That is the worst thing we can do at the moment. I can hardly imagine anything more irresponsible and defeatist to say. The national good of the Amateur Radio Service is a valid and valuable national resource. The Commission well understands the need for legitimate amateur interests and operation to be protected. The wireless industry has taken off in a way that I don't think anyone has envisioned and it may very well need its own spectrum, but the ISM bands are not the place for that spectrum, IHMO. No other operation in the ISM bands is offered any protection from the operation of an ISM device; that microwave oven in my neighbor's home can cause me all the RFI it wants. The potential for emissions from ISM devices within the ISM band is unlimited and one very high powered ISM device in a city could take out chunks of spectrum. This is NOT prime real estate and for the ISM band alone, 2.4-2.483.5 GHz is NOT the right place for any protected radio operation. (It is not the right place for ham radio, either, but I think it is the best we are gonna' get -- microwave ovens and all.) And in the meantime, as evidenced by facts, not conjecture, amateur radio can win. It needs to approach these things in a socially and legally responsible way, though. I can envision two valid reasons for seeking FCC intervention. The first should be obvious -- an operation that us using more power and/or antenna gain than what is permitted by Part 15 is a legitimate reason for complaint. The FCC will not back a Part 15 operator that is flouting FCC law. They may be reluctant to spend their staff time on a complaint that has no harmful interference, but if they investigate a complaint, they are not going to tell the miscreant that it is okay to break the rules. The Commission is well aware that the existing rules -- designed to minimize the likelihood of widespread harmful interference -- have a significant interfernce potential for nearby primary users. One watt and 6 dBi antenna gain is already high enough, thank you, and if someone is exceeding that, the interference potential is all the higher. This one is difficult to identify, though, because it is almost impossible for the other spectrum users (ie, us) to make field measurements that will identify rules violations. Even so, do I recommend running to the FCC with these complaints? No, I do not. I recommend that the operator of the system that may be operating outside Part 15 be contacted politely, a brief description of the rules be offered and give them every opportunity to correct the problem on their own. That is exactly what happened in a recent California case involving a 74-mile link, and once the operator realized what mistake had been made, they reduced the power to a legal level. In taking this first voluntary cooperation step, many of the cases will be corrected, amateur radio will develop better communication with local Part 15 operators and the reputation of amateur radio will be enhanced, not diminished. The same approach should be used wrt harmful interference. These cases should not go directly to the FCC. The Part 15 operator may not be aware that his operation is causing interference. At least some cases will resolve themselves that way and scarce FCC resources can be saved for those cases where only FCC intervention will work. This is the approach ARRL has used with power-line cases for a few years now -- first the ham tries to resolve it directly with the power company, then the ARRL will try to help by writing a letter to the CEO under our cooperative agreement with the FCC. If all that fails, the FCC is then willing to help, but behind each of those FCC letters is often tens of hours of the amateurs' and/or ARRL HQ staff time. In trying to resolve these problems directly first, with or without ARRL help, the amateurs strengthen their case to ask the FCC for help. It has been my experience so far that the FCC has helped, although this may well be due to Riley's dedication to his assigned duties to do enforcment involving the amateur radio service. These cases will involve people other than Riley and those waters haven't been fully tested. But tested they must be, because if the answer to amateur radio concerns is always going to be "they are not allowed to interfere," if that will not be backed up with FCC action, this must be determined. I have saved the subject of harmful interference for last. All of the above words are premised on the fact that harmful interference is occuring. Harmful interference has a specific regulatory definition. It is either any disruption of emergency communications or the repeated disruption of other communications. We cannot expect the FCC to act unless there is demonstrable harmful interference. What is is? It may be in the eye of the beholder, but like many things in life, it is possible to know it when you see it. The power line cases we have taken to the Commission have involved at least S6 level interference on entire ham bands. I think that a "strong" signal, to use the meaning of S6, is harmful interference. Would an SS Part signal that raised a noise floor by a dB or so be harmful interference? Probably not, and I wouldn't recommend taking that one to the FCC. Those cases for which any FCC action might be sought -- especially the first ones -- need to be clear-cut and clean, with reasonable conduct by the amateur as a major requirement. (The ham who has been arrested for trying to cut down the Part 15 tower need not apply!) What about hearing those Part 15 signals in our band? At CCSU, a local college, the level outside one of the buildings was S9. Is that harmful interference. Not at the time. I was listening for Part 15 signals, not engaged in a legitimate amateur operation. Merely hearing a Part 15 signal in our band is not harmful interference and we have no recourse -- or grievance. Amateur radio is secondary to commerical users on 30 meters and the military on 70 cm. How would we feel if they said "we can hear those hams in our bands, so they gotta' get out." We need to base our interference complaints to Part 15 operators on real harmful interference and be especially certain that we take only clear cases to the FCC. In general, ARRL wants hams to try to resolve these problems directly with the Part 15 operator first. From there, we will follow the recommendation of the involved hams on how to proceed. They are, after all, the ones most familar with the problem and the personalities and companies involved. If they feel a letter from ARRL to the company or individual will help, we are glad to do it. (And the letters are reasonable, respectful, helpful, but firm in our committment to ensuring that harmful interference doesn't occur). We can also expidite getting cases to the FCC, usually through the FCC national offices. In the cases that go to Riley, he relies heavily on our determination that harmful interference is occuring and there is enough indication that the responsible party has been correctly identified to warrant an FCC letter. I hate to see these things go to the field offices first, unless a ham has a good working relationship with that office. I have seen field office decisions all over the map and some have not been favorable to ham radio. Is ARRL batting 1000? Nope, but the successes have been well worth the doing. I do not approach this work with a defeatist attitude because there is a responsible -- and effective -- way to make realistic and reasonable requests of the Part 15 operators and the FCC. I hope my explanation is useful. 73, Ed Hare, W1RFI ARRL Lab 225 Main St Newington, CT 06111 Tel: 860-594-0318 Internet: w1rfi@arrl.org Web: http://www.arrl.org/tis > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Dec 6 14:52:34 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id OAA19172 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 14:52:33 -0600 (CST) content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 Subject: [ss] Cooking food with high EIRP? Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 15:51:42 -0500 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: Cooking food with high EIRP? Thread-Index: AcKdBB5w24+eLQikEdes5wAQS4iuIw== From: "Hare,Ed, W1RFI" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <721D3436A7C2B344A301FD4A413C71A9ADF32F@kosh.ARRLHQ.ORG> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id OAA19172 > YDI is selling a 1 Watt amp, which they suggest can be used > with a 24db antenna which they say can go 80 miles - which is > only 200W EIRP. And this is the most powerful amp I could find there. A 24 dB antenna would have to have no more than a 500 milliwatt transmitter. See below. > The value of 4W seems to be suspcious... I suspect that it is 4W eirp, > with a 30db Gain antenna. 4W with a 30db gain antenna would > mean a EIRP of 4000W, which is so far outside the realms of the legality > that it is not funny. Not necessarily in the US. Part 15 says that a 2.4 GHz SS transmitter can use 1 watt and a 6 dBi gain antenna. The power must be reduced by 1 dB for every 3 dB that the antenna gain exceeds 6 dBi. In theory, the EIRP could be unlimited, although before 4 kW EIRP was reached, the practical limit of antenna size would be reached. (On the 5 GHz band, no such requirement to reduce power for antenna gain exists, to EIRP's can easily be 4 kW or more). > Basically I doubt that the ISP is running that much power. If they do > they can cook food... And I am sure that the FCC would have people > calling up about a strange heating.... Not true. That EIRP is a far-field phenomenon. It simply will not be acheived in the near field of an antenna. I would have to run the math, but a good rule of thumb is that the power density in the aperture of a large dish cannot exceed 4 times the applied power divided by the area of the dish (if properly illuminated, that power is spread pretty uniformly across the aperture.) A 30 meter (3000 centimeter) dish has an aperture area of 28,260,000 square centimeters. If you apply 1000 watts (1000000 milliwatts) to that dish, the maximum field present right in the plane of the aperture will not exceed ~0.25 milliwatts/cm^2. This is well below the legal limit of exposure on 2.4 GHz, so you could stand in the plane of the aperture for all time! Gotta' be careful tossing around claims about RF safety, because a bit of careful analysis usually shows that RF safety is not an issue. It is almost impossible for a Part 15 device to exceed the FCC limits. It is nearly as hard for an amateur, even running 1000 watts to a 30-meter dish! :-) 73, Ed Hare, W1RFI ARRL Lab 225 Main St Newington, CT 06111 Tel: 860-594-0318 Internet: w1rfi@arrl.org Web: http://www.arrl.org/tis ARRL is the National Association for Amateur Radio. It is supported by membership dues, individual contributions and the sale of publications and advertising. For more information about ARRL, go to http://www.arrl.org/news/features/inside-your-league.html. For more information about membership, go to http://www.arrl.org/join.html. Your contribution can also help support ARRL's ongoing efforts to protect Amateur spectrum. Go to https://www.arrl.org/forms/development/donations/basic/ to learn more about the ways you can support the ARRL programs and activities of most importance to you. You can help ARRL protect Amateur Radio for you and future generations to enjoy. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Dec 6 17:52:01 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id RAA26930 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 17:52:00 -0600 (CST) From: "Darryl Smith" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Magazine Roundup - Circuit Cellar Inc - December 2002. Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 10:49:39 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Scanner: exiscan *18KSEC-0002Py-00*vQRBjSs9BRY* on Astaro Security Linux List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <01ac01c29d82$27bad460$4601a8c0@DELL8000> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Circuit Cellar Inc (December 2002) - www.circuitcellar.com - has done their latest issue on WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS Articles include Wireless Data Acquisition using Bluetooth Interfacing with Frequency Synthesizers Vector SoC - 1 GHz Vectorial Network Analyzer Wireless Temperature Sensors - based on the Microchip RFpic IC series. Smart RF Debugging - using SS modems in projects For those that are not aware of Circuit Cellar magazine you may be surprised to know that all the articles listed above include circuit diagrams and usually have links to code. From the information in the articles you can actually build the stuff. I would love to build the 1 GHz Vectorial Network Analyser - and then hack it to 2.5 GHz... Darryl --------- Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Dec 6 18:05:49 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id SAA27226 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 18:05:41 -0600 (CST) content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C29D84.420CED01" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 Subject: [ss] RE: Cooking food with high EIRP? Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 19:04:48 -0500 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: Cooking food with high EIRP? Thread-Index: AcKdBB5w24+eLQikEdes5wAQS4iuIwAfop3l From: "Hare,Ed, W1RFI" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <721D3436A7C2B344A301FD4A413C71A9ADF330@kosh.ARRLHQ.ORG> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C29D84.420CED01 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Pk5vdCB0cnVlLiAgVGhhdCBFSVJQIGlzIGEgZmFyLWZpZWxkIHBoZW5vbWVub24uICBJdCBzaW1w bHkgd2lsbCBub3QgYmUgYWNoZWl2ZWQgDQo+IGluIHRoZSBuZWFyIGZpZWxkIG9mIGFuIGFudGVu bmEuICBJIHdvdWxkIGhhdmUgdG8gcnVuIHRoZSBtYXRoLCBidXQgYSBnb29kIHJ1bGUgb2YgDQo+ IHRodW1iIGlzIHRoYXQgdGhlIHBvd2VyIGRlbnNpdHkgaW4gdGhlIGFwZXJ0dXJlIG9mIGEgbGFy Z2UgZGlzaCBjYW5ub3QgZXhjZWVkIDQgDQo+IHRpbWVzIHRoZSBhcHBsaWVkIHBvd2VyIGRpdmlk ZWQgYnkgdGhlIGFyZWEgb2YgdGhlIGRpc2ggKGlmIHByb3Blcmx5IGlsbHVtaW5hdGVkLCANCj4g dGhhdCBwb3dlciBpcyBzcHJlYWQgcHJldHR5IHVuaWZvcm1seSBhY3Jvc3MgdGhlIGFwZXJ0dXJl LikgIEEgMzAgbWV0ZXIgKDMwMDAgDQo+IGNlbnRpbWV0ZXIpIGRpc2ggaGFzIGFuIGFwZXJ0dXJl IGFyZWEgb2YgMjgsMjYwLDAwMCBzcXVhcmUgY2VudGltZXRlcnMuIElmIHlvdSANCj4gYXBwbHkg MTAwMCB3YXR0cyAoMTAwMDAwMCBtaWxsaXdhdHRzKSB0byB0aGF0IGRpc2gsIHRoZSBtYXhpbXVt IGZpZWxkIHByZXNlbnQgDQo+IHJpZ2h0IGluIHRoZSBwbGFuZSBvZiB0aGUgYXBlcnR1cmUgd2ls bCBub3QgZXhjZWVkIH4wLjI1IG1pbGxpd2F0dHMvY21eMi4gVGhpcyBpcyANCj4gd2VsbCBiZWxv dyB0aGUgbGVnYWwgbGltaXQgb2YgZXhwb3N1cmUgb24gMi40IEdIeiwgc28geW91IGNvdWxkIHN0 YW5kIGluIHRoZSANCj4gcGxhbmUgb2YgdGhlIGFwZXJ0dXJlIGZvciBhbGwgdGltZSEgDQoNCj4g R290dGEnIGJlIGNhcmVmdWwgdG9zc2luZyBhcm91bmQgY2xhaW1zIGFib3V0IFJGIHNhZmV0eSwg YmVjYXVzZSBhIGJpdCBvZiANCj4gY2FyZWZ1bCBhbmFseXNpcyB1c3VhbGx5IHNob3dzIHRoYXQg UkYgc2FmZXR5IGlzIG5vdCBhbiBpc3N1ZS4gSXQgaXMgYWxtb3N0IA0KPiBpbXBvc3NpYmxlIGZv ciBhIFBhcnQgMTUgZGV2aWNlIHRvIGV4Y2VlZCB0aGUgRkNDIGxpbWl0cy4gIEl0IGlzIG5lYXJs eSBhcyANCj4gaGFyZCBmb3IgYW4gYW1hdGV1ciwgZXZlbiBydW5uaW5nIDEwMDAgd2F0dHMgdG8g YSAzMC1tZXRlciBkaXNoISA6LSkNCiANCkdvdHRhJyBiZSBSRUFMIGNhcmVmdWwuIEkgYW0gc3Vy ZSBzb21lIGFzdHV0ZSBzb3VsIHdpbGwgcGljayB1cCB0aGUgZmFjdCB0aGF0IG15IGNhbGN1bGF0 aW9ucyB3ZXJlIGZvciBhIDMwLWZvb3QgcmFkaXVzIGRpc2gsIG5vdCB0aGUgaW1wbGllZCAzMC1m b290IGRpYW1ldGVyIGRpc2guIEkgYWxzbyBtYWRlIGFuIGVycm9yIGluIHRoZSBwb3dlciBkZW5z aXR5LiBJZiB0aGUgZGlzaCB3ZXJlIDYwIG1ldGVycyBhY3Jvc3MgKG9uZSBiaWcgZGlzaCwgZWgp LCB0aGUgcG93ZXIgZGVuc2l0eSB3b3VsZCBiZSBhYm91dCAwLjE0IG13L2NtXjIuIEZvciBhIDMw LWZvb3QgZGlzaCwgaXQgd291bGQgYmUgfjAuNTYgbXcvY21eMi4gU29ycnkgYWJvdXQgdGhlIGNv bmZ1c3Rpb24uIExldCdzIGNhbGwgaXQgYSBicmFpbiBzcGFzbS4gOi0pDQogDQpCdXQgbXkgZXJy b3IgZG9lcyBkZW1vbnN0cmF0ZSBhbiBpbnRlcmVzdGluZyBwb2ludC4gVGhlIHN0cmVuZ3RoIG9m IHRoZSBuZWFyIGZpZWxkIGlzIGdyZWF0ZXIgZm9yIHRoZSBzbWFsbGVyIGRpc2ghICBUaGlzIGFw cGxpZXMgb24gSEYsIHRvbyAtLSB2ZXJ5IG5lYXIgYSBzbWFsbCBsb29wLCB0aGUgZmllbGRzIHdp bGwgYmUgbXVjaCBoaWdoZXIgdGhhbiB2ZXJ5IG5lYXIgYSBoYWxmd2F2ZSBkaXBvbGUuICBWZXJ5 IG5lYXIgYSB2ZXJ5IGxhcmdlIGFudGVubmEsIHN1Y2ggYXMgYSByaG9tYmljLCB0aGUgZmllbGRz IGFyZSBzbWFsbGVyIHlldC4gIFRoZSByZWFzb24gaXMgZmFpcmx5IGludHVpdGl2ZSwgb2YgY291 cnNlLiBXaGVuIHlvdSBhcmUgbmVhciB0aGF0IHNtYWxsIGxvb3AsIHlvdSBhcmUgbmVhciBhbGwg b2YgdGhlIGFudGVubmEgYnV0IHdoZW4geW91IGFyZSBuZWFyIHRoZSByaG9tYmljLCBtb3N0IG9m IHRoZSBhbnRlbm5hIGlzIHZlcnkgZmFyIGF3YXksIHNvIHlvdXIgZXhwb3N1cmUgY29tZXMgZnJv bSBvbmx5IHBhcnQgb2YgdGhlIGVuZXJneSBhcHBsaWVkIHRvIHRoZSBhbnRlbm5hLiAgSW4gdGhl IGZhciBmaWVsZCwgYWxsIHBvaW50cyBvZiB0aGUgYW50ZW5uYSBjb250cmlidXRlIGVxdWFsbHks IHNvIHRoZXkgYWxsIGFkZCB1cC4gIEFuZCwgeWVzLCAgdGhlIGZpZWxkcyBjYW4gYmUgc3Ryb25n ZXIgZmFydGhlciBhd2F5IHRoYW4gdGhleSBhcmUgdXAgY2xvc2UhICBBaW4ndCBuZWFyIGZpZWxk cyB3b25kZXJmdWwuDQogDQpBdCBhbnkgcmF0ZSwgbm93IHRoYXQgSSBoYXZlIGNvcnJlY3RlZCBt eSBmYXV4IHBhcywgYW5kIG1hZGUgc29tZSBsZW1vbmFkZSB3aXRoIGl0LCBJIHRoaW5rIGl0IGJl c3Qgbm90IHRvIGRpc2N1c3MgdGhpcyBmYXJ0aGVyIGluIHRoZSBTUyByZWZsZWN0b3IsIHNvIHRo aXMgd2lsbCBiZSBteSBmaW5hbC4gSWYgYW55b25lIHdhbnRzIHRvIHN0ZWVyIGl0IGJhY2sgdG8g UkYgZXhwb3N1cmUgZnJvbSB0aGUgY3VycmVudCBzcGF0ZSBvZiBTUyBkZXZpY2VzLCBvciBldmVu IGEgMTAwLXdhdHQgdHJhbnNtaXR0ZXIgb24gYSBmcmVxdWVuY3kgd2hlcmUgU1MgaXMgbGVnYWws IHRoZW4gaXQgbWF5IGJlIGFwcHJvcHJpYXRlLCBidXQgSSB0aGluayB0aGF0IEkgaGF2ZSBnb3R0 ZW4gYSBiaXQgb2ZmIHRvcGljLCBzbyBJIHdpbGwgbm90IHB1cnN1ZSB0aGlzIG9uZSBoZXJlLg0K IA0KNzMsDQpFZCwgVzFSRkkNCi4NCiANCg== ------_=_NextPart_001_01C29D84.420CED01 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PE1FVEEgSFRUUC1FUVVJVj0iQ29udGVudC1UeXBlIiBDT05URU5UPSJ0ZXh0L2h0bWw7IGNoYXJz ZXQ9VVRGLTgiPgo8IURPQ1RZUEUgSFRNTCBQVUJMSUMgIi0vL1czQy8vRFREIEhUTUwgMy4yLy9F TiI+CjxIVE1MPgo8SEVBRD4KCjxNRVRBIE5BTUU9IkdlbmVyYXRvciIgQ09OVEVOVD0iTVMgRXhj aGFuZ2UgU2VydmVyIHZlcnNpb24gNi4wLjYyNDkuMSI+CjxUSVRMRT5bc3NdIENvb2tpbmcgZm9v ZCB3aXRoIGhpZ2ggRUlSUD88L1RJVExFPgo8L0hFQUQ+CjxCT0RZIGRpcj1sdHI+CjxESVY+PEZP TlQgc2l6ZT0yPiZndDtOb3QgdHJ1ZS4mbmJzcDsgVGhhdCBFSVJQIGlzIGEgZmFyLWZpZWxkIHBo ZW5vbWVub24uJm5ic3A7IApJdCBzaW1wbHkgd2lsbCBub3QgYmUgYWNoZWl2ZWQgPC9GT05UPjwv RElWPgo8RElWPjxGT05UIHNpemU9Mj4mZ3Q7IGluIHRoZSBuZWFyIGZpZWxkIG9mIGFuIGFudGVu bmEuJm5ic3A7IEkgd291bGQgaGF2ZSB0byAKcnVuIHRoZSBtYXRoLCBidXQgYSBnb29kIHJ1bGUg b2YgPC9GT05UPjwvRElWPgo8RElWPjxGT05UIHNpemU9Mj4mZ3Q7IHRodW1iIGlzIHRoYXQgdGhl IHBvd2VyIGRlbnNpdHkgaW4gdGhlIGFwZXJ0dXJlIG9mIGEgCmxhcmdlIGRpc2ggY2Fubm90IGV4 Y2VlZCA0IDwvRk9OVD48L0RJVj4KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBzaXplPTI+Jmd0OyB0aW1lcyB0aGUgYXBw bGllZCBwb3dlciBkaXZpZGVkIGJ5IHRoZSBhcmVhIG9mIHRoZSBkaXNoIAooaWYgcHJvcGVybHkg aWxsdW1pbmF0ZWQsIDwvRk9OVD48L0RJVj4KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBzaXplPTI+Jmd0OyB0aGF0IHBv d2VyIGlzIHNwcmVhZCBwcmV0dHkgdW5pZm9ybWx5IGFjcm9zcyB0aGUgCmFwZXJ0dXJlLikmbmJz cDsgQSAzMCBtZXRlciAoMzAwMCA8L0ZPTlQ+PC9ESVY+CjxESVY+PEZPTlQgc2l6ZT0yPiZndDsg Y2VudGltZXRlcikgZGlzaCBoYXMgYW4gYXBlcnR1cmUgYXJlYSBvZiAyOCwyNjAsMDAwIApzcXVh cmUgY2VudGltZXRlcnMuIElmIHlvdSA8L0ZPTlQ+PC9ESVY+CjxESVY+PEZPTlQgc2l6ZT0yPiZn dDsgYXBwbHkgMTAwMCB3YXR0cyAoMTAwMDAwMCBtaWxsaXdhdHRzKSB0byB0aGF0IGRpc2gsIHRo ZSAKbWF4aW11bSBmaWVsZCBwcmVzZW50IDwvRk9OVD48L0RJVj4KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBzaXplPTI+ Jmd0OyByaWdodCBpbiB0aGUgcGxhbmUgb2YgdGhlIGFwZXJ0dXJlIHdpbGwgbm90IGV4Y2VlZCB+ MC4yNSAKbWlsbGl3YXR0cy9jbV4yLiBUaGlzIGlzIDwvRk9OVD48L0RJVj4KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBz aXplPTI+Jmd0OyB3ZWxsIGJlbG93IHRoZSBsZWdhbCBsaW1pdCBvZiBleHBvc3VyZSBvbiAyLjQg R0h6LCBzbyB5b3UgCmNvdWxkIHN0YW5kIGluIHRoZSA8L0ZPTlQ+PC9ESVY+CjxESVY+PEZPTlQg c2l6ZT0yPiZndDsgcGxhbmUgb2YgdGhlIGFwZXJ0dXJlIGZvciBhbGwgdGltZSEmbmJzcDs8QlI+ PEJSPiZndDsgCkdvdHRhJyBiZSBjYXJlZnVsIHRvc3NpbmcgYXJvdW5kIGNsYWltcyBhYm91dCBS RiBzYWZldHksIGJlY2F1c2UgYSBiaXQgb2YgCjwvRk9OVD48L0RJVj4KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBzaXpl PTI+Jmd0OyBjYXJlZnVsIGFuYWx5c2lzIHVzdWFsbHkgc2hvd3MgdGhhdCBSRiBzYWZldHkgaXMg bm90IGFuIAppc3N1ZS4gSXQgaXMgYWxtb3N0IDwvRk9OVD48L0RJVj4KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBzaXpl PTI+Jmd0OyBpbXBvc3NpYmxlIGZvciBhIFBhcnQgMTUgZGV2aWNlIHRvIGV4Y2VlZCB0aGUgRkND IApsaW1pdHMuJm5ic3A7IEl0IGlzIG5lYXJseSBhcyA8L0ZPTlQ+PC9ESVY+CjxESVY+PEZPTlQg c2l6ZT0yPiZndDsgaGFyZCBmb3IgYW4gYW1hdGV1ciwgZXZlbiBydW5uaW5nIDEwMDAgd2F0dHMg dG8gYSAKMzAtbWV0ZXIgZGlzaCEgOi0pPC9GT05UPjwvRElWPgo8RElWPjxGT05UIHNpemU9Mj48 L0ZPTlQ+Jm5ic3A7PC9ESVY+CjxESVY+PEZPTlQgc2l6ZT0yPkdvdHRhJyBiZSBSRUFMIGNhcmVm dWwuIEkgYW0gc3VyZSBzb21lIGFzdHV0ZSBzb3VsIHdpbGwgcGljayAKdXAgdGhlIGZhY3QgdGhh dCBteSBjYWxjdWxhdGlvbnMgd2VyZSBmb3IgYSAzMC1mb290IHJhZGl1cyBkaXNoLCBub3QgdGhl IGltcGxpZWQgCjMwLWZvb3QgZGlhbWV0ZXIgZGlzaC4gSSBhbHNvIG1hZGUgYW4gZXJyb3IgaW4g dGhlIHBvd2VyJm5ic3A7ZGVuc2l0eS4gSWYgCnRoZSZuYnNwO2Rpc2ggd2VyZSA2MCBtZXRlcnMg YWNyb3NzJm5ic3A7KG9uZSBiaWcgZGlzaCwgZWgpLCB0aGUgcG93ZXIgZGVuc2l0eSAKd291bGQg YmUmbmJzcDthYm91dCAwLjE0IG13L2NtXjIuIEZvciBhIDMwLWZvb3QgZGlzaCwgaXQgd291bGQg YmUgfjAuNTYgbXcvY21eMi4gClNvcnJ5IGFib3V0IHRoZSBjb25mdXN0aW9uLiBMZXQncyBjYWxs IGl0IGEgYnJhaW4gc3Bhc20uIDotKTwvRk9OVD48L0RJVj4KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBzaXplPTI+PC9G T05UPiZuYnNwOzwvRElWPgo8RElWPjxGT05UIHNpemU9Mj5CdXQgbXkgZXJyb3IgZG9lcyBkZW1v bnN0cmF0ZSBhbiBpbnRlcmVzdGluZyBwb2ludC4gVGhlIApzdHJlbmd0aCBvZiB0aGUgbmVhciBm aWVsZCBpcyBncmVhdGVyIGZvciB0aGUgc21hbGxlciBkaXNoISZuYnNwOyBUaGlzIGFwcGxpZXMg Cm9uIEhGLCB0b28gLS0gdmVyeSBuZWFyIGEgc21hbGwgbG9vcCwgdGhlIGZpZWxkcyB3aWxsIGJl IG11Y2ggaGlnaGVyIHRoYW4gdmVyeSAKbmVhciBhIGhhbGZ3YXZlIGRpcG9sZS4mbmJzcDsgVmVy eSBuZWFyIGEgdmVyeSBsYXJnZSBhbnRlbm5hLCBzdWNoIGFzIGEgcmhvbWJpYywgCnRoZSBmaWVs ZHMgYXJlIHNtYWxsZXIgeWV0LiZuYnNwOyBUaGUgcmVhc29uIGlzIGZhaXJseSBpbnR1aXRpdmUs IG9mIGNvdXJzZS4gCldoZW4geW91IGFyZSBuZWFyIHRoYXQgc21hbGwgbG9vcCwgeW91IGFyZSBu ZWFyIGFsbCBvZiB0aGUgYW50ZW5uYSBidXQgd2hlbiB5b3UgCmFyZSBuZWFyIHRoZSByaG9tYmlj LCBtb3N0IG9mIHRoZSBhbnRlbm5hIGlzIHZlcnkgZmFyIGF3YXksIHNvIHlvdXIgZXhwb3N1cmUg CmNvbWVzIGZyb20gb25seSBwYXJ0IG9mIHRoZSBlbmVyZ3kgYXBwbGllZCB0byB0aGUgYW50ZW5u YS4mbmJzcDsgSW4gdGhlIGZhciAKZmllbGQsIGFsbCBwb2ludHMgb2YgdGhlIGFudGVubmEgY29u dHJpYnV0ZSBlcXVhbGx5LCBzbyB0aGV5IGFsbCBhZGQgdXAuJm5ic3A7IApBbmQsIHllcywmbmJz cDsgdGhlIGZpZWxkcyBjYW4gYmUgc3Ryb25nZXIgZmFydGhlciZuYnNwO2F3YXkgdGhhbiB0aGV5 IGFyZSB1cCAKY2xvc2UhJm5ic3A7IEFpbid0IG5lYXIgZmllbGRzIHdvbmRlcmZ1bC48L0ZPTlQ+ PC9ESVY+CjxESVY+PEZPTlQgc2l6ZT0yPjwvRk9OVD4mbmJzcDs8L0RJVj4KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBz aXplPTI+QXQgYW55IHJhdGUsIG5vdyB0aGF0IEkgaGF2ZSBjb3JyZWN0ZWQgbXkgZmF1eCBwYXMs IGFuZCBtYWRlIApzb21lIGxlbW9uYWRlIHdpdGggaXQsIEkgdGhpbmsgaXQgYmVzdCBub3QgdG8g ZGlzY3VzcyB0aGlzIGZhcnRoZXIgaW4gdGhlIFNTIApyZWZsZWN0b3IsIHNvIHRoaXMgd2lsbCBi ZSBteSBmaW5hbC4gSWYgYW55b25lIHdhbnRzIHRvIHN0ZWVyIGl0IGJhY2sgdG8gUkYgCmV4cG9z dXJlIGZyb20gdGhlIGN1cnJlbnQgc3BhdGUgb2YgU1MgZGV2aWNlcywgb3IgZXZlbiBhIDEwMC13 YXR0IHRyYW5zbWl0dGVyIG9uIAphIGZyZXF1ZW5jeSB3aGVyZSBTUyBpcyBsZWdhbCwgdGhlbiBp dCBtYXkgYmUgYXBwcm9wcmlhdGUsIGJ1dCBJIHRoaW5rIHRoYXQgSSAKaGF2ZSZuYnNwO2dvdHRl biBhIGJpdCBvZmYgdG9waWMsIHNvIEkgd2lsbCBub3QgcHVyc3VlIHRoaXMgb25lIApoZXJlLjwv Rk9OVD48L0RJVj4KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBzaXplPTI+PC9GT05UPiZuYnNwOzwvRElWPgo8RElWPjxG T05UIHNpemU9Mj43Myw8QlI+RWQsIFcxUkZJPC9GT05UPjwvRElWPgo8RElWPjxGT05UIHNpemU9 Mj4uPC9GT05UPjwvRElWPgo8RElWPjxGT05UIHNpemU9Mj48L0ZPTlQ+Jm5ic3A7PC9ESVY+Cgo8 L0JPRFk+CjwvSFRNTD4= ------_=_NextPart_001_01C29D84.420CED01-- --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Dec 6 20:48:45 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id UAA02426 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 20:48:45 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 20:47:47 -0600 From: Lawrence Stoskopf X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Cooking food with high EIRP? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3DF16153.BDDF53C8@tri.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk But I do remember about 1957 seeing at Kansas State's Engineering Open House someone cooking a hot dog over the end of an open waveguide right out of some sort of surplus RF generator. Wasn't sophisticated enough at the time to do anything but say, "WOW!" N0UU > Gotta' be careful tossing around claims about RF safety, because a bit of careful analysis usually shows that RF safety is not an issue. It is almost impossible for a Part 15 device to exceed the FCC limits. It is nearly as hard for an amateur, even running 1000 watts to a 30-meter dish! :-) --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Dec 6 23:19:00 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id XAA08308 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 23:18:50 -0600 (CST) From: "Steve Stroh" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: ISP Proposal and Illegal operation Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 21:14:19 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Ed: I'm speaking for myself - not TAPR. >From a purely pro-Amateur Radio point of view, your insights are entirely valid, and I think that they're probably shared by the majority of US Amateur Radio operators. I think that a "tippling point" has been reached sometime earlier this year, brought on by the million-plus Wi-Fi devices shipping per month (and that rate is accelerating)... almost ALL intended for 2.4 GHz. Even when 802.11a devices start to ship in quantity next year, the most popular Wi-Fi systems will be dual band / dual mode - 802.11b (2.4 GHz / DSSS), 802.11g (2.4 GHz / OFDM), and 802.11a (5.8 GHz / OFDM). It's unlikely that 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi devices will ever stop shipping. How much longer will Amateur Radio operations in 2.4 GHz such as ATV, high-power 802.11b, and Amateur Radio "cease and desist" requests / demands to Part 15 users be viewed as a public good rather than a public detriment? No less an authority than former FCC Chairman Reed Hundt has stated the latter in presentations this year (to audiences that include senior FCC officials)- that Amateur Radio operations should be banned from 2.4 GHz, or at a minimum, Amateur Radio complaints of interference from Part 15 operations be summarily dismissed. The reality is that the VAST popular (and industry) perception is that Wi-Fi operations are the highest and best use of 2.4 GHz band. Just TODAY there was an announcement of a consortium that intends to deploy a vast network of Wi-Fi HotSpots nationally. This level of investment gets serious attention when the wireline telecom industry is in such dire straits, and serves to highlight how important Wi-Fi has become to government, FCC, industry, and the public as a whole. I'm not arguing that 2.4 GHz is the optimum spectrum for such a popular service, or that Wi-Fi is the optimum technology. But such arguments are largely irrelevant. Wi-Fi on 2.4 GHz is "the hottest thing going" in the computer and telecommunications industry... and it's ill advised to try to stop or divert that trend. Amateur Radio is only one of many licensed services that will inevitably be crying "Not OUR spectrum!!!" as the FCC reorients the priorities of spectrum allocation to better reflect the use of advanced wireless technologies and much greater use of license-exempt systems. If Amateur Radio's leadership looks at the situation on 2.4 GHz the LEAST bit objectively, I would hope it would conclude that "go gracefully, on OUR terms" may well be a better course of action than the defiant stance of "We're PRIMARY! Hear that- WE'RE PRIMARY!" Embarking now on a "Go gracefully, on OUR terms" effort just may preserve Amateur Radio enough "bargaining power" to retain some 2.4 GHz privileges for space operations and other modes that don't materially impact Part 15 usage of 2.4 GHz. If not, I fully expect that Amateur Radio will lose all its unique privileges in the 2.4 GHz band; perhaps retaining defacto privileges whose technical parameters are the same as Part 15 users. Thanks, Steve N8GNJ -- Steve Stroh steve@strohpub.com 425-481-0600 > -----Original Message----- > From: bounce-ss-24593@lists.tapr.org > [mailto:bounce-ss-24593@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of Hare,Ed, W1RFI > Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 12:49 > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] Re: ISP Proposal and Illegal operation > > > >> I would contact Ed Hare at the ARRL if they are interfering with > >> legitimate amateur operations. > > > I would advise against getting the ARRL involved. > > From what you say, it doesn't appear that you are specifically > criticizing ARRL, but rather implying that filing complaints > against Part 15 operation is not a good idea. I will address my > comments in that direction. > > > Lets face it - the 2.4 GHz band is defacto secondary with the > 802.11 commercial interests. > > Not by my read of Part 15, Darryl. There is a pretty clear > "pecking order" on 2.4 GHz, with ISM on the top, Amateur in the > middle and Part 15 on the bottom. Part 15 operates subject to > two major requirements: The manufacturers of equipment need to > meet the Certification requirements for their equipment and > continue to manufacture it to those requirements and the users of > that equipment must operate in a way that does not cause harmful > interference to primary users. There is no defacto secondary > anything about this. > > When these matters come up as rulemaking, ARRL, other groups and > individuals often file comments with the FCC about the probabilty > of harmful interference. The answer is often a variation of "the > existing rules have a provision that says that if harmful > interference occurs, the operator of the device must > unconditionally correct the interference. How much more > protection do you want than absolute." With reluctance, I can > accept this, IF the FCC will enforce the rules as written. > > Your post implies that they will not, but I disagree at least in > part, based on personal experience. For example, the FCC has > been very active enforcing power-line interference cases. There > are no specific limits for incidental emitters (power lines, > motors, etc.), but only a requirement not to cause harmful > interference. The Commission has been willing to address the > issue on that basis, not caving in even when one of the utility > companies had their lawyer draft an answer that said, "we are not > allowed to interere with a radio service, but amateur radio > doesn't sell any services, so we can interfere." (Honest! They > really said that.) Darwin Networks' 2.4 GHz WISP operation was > interfering with an amateur repeater in Texas; the FCC wrote a > letter asking them how they intended to address the interference. > ARRL has also helped expidite a few cases of interference to > hams from various Part 15 equipment in neighbor's homes or businesses. > > > If you fight that you will loose. Ham Radio will not win. There > is a bigger national > > good at stake. Kicking commercial users out of the airspace is > bad publicity for us. > > That is the worst thing we can do at the moment. > > I can hardly imagine anything more irresponsible and defeatist to > say. The national good of the Amateur Radio Service is a valid > and valuable national resource. The Commission well understands > the need for legitimate amateur interests and operation to be > protected. The wireless industry has taken off in a way that I > don't think anyone has envisioned and it may very well need its > own spectrum, but the ISM bands are not the place for that > spectrum, IHMO. No other operation in the ISM bands is offered > any protection from the operation of an ISM device; that > microwave oven in my neighbor's home can cause me all the RFI it > wants. The potential for emissions from ISM devices within the > ISM band is unlimited and one very high powered ISM device in a > city could take out chunks of spectrum. This is NOT prime real > estate and for the ISM band alone, 2.4-2.483.5 GHz is NOT the > right place for any protected radio operation. (It is not the > right place for ham radio, either, but I think it is the best we > are gonna' get -- microwave ovens and all.) > > And in the meantime, as evidenced by facts, not conjecture, > amateur radio can win. It needs to approach these things in a > socially and legally responsible way, though. > > I can envision two valid reasons for seeking FCC intervention. > The first should be obvious -- an operation that us using more > power and/or antenna gain than what is permitted by Part 15 is a > legitimate reason for complaint. The FCC will not back a Part 15 > operator that is flouting FCC law. They may be reluctant to > spend their staff time on a complaint that has no harmful > interference, but if they investigate a complaint, they are not > going to tell the miscreant that it is okay to break the rules. > The Commission is well aware that the existing rules -- designed > to minimize the likelihood of widespread harmful interference -- > have a significant interfernce potential for nearby primary > users. One watt and 6 dBi antenna gain is already high enough, > thank you, and if someone is exceeding that, the interference > potential is all the higher. This one is difficult to identify, > though, because it is almost impossible for the other spectrum > users (ie, us) to make field measurements that will identify > rules violations. > > Even so, do I recommend running to the FCC with these complaints? > No, I do not. I recommend that the operator of the system that > may be operating outside Part 15 be contacted politely, a brief > description of the rules be offered and give them every > opportunity to correct the problem on their own. That is exactly > what happened in a recent California case involving a 74-mile > link, and once the operator realized what mistake had been made, > they reduced the power to a legal level. > > In taking this first voluntary cooperation step, many of the > cases will be corrected, amateur radio will develop better > communication with local Part 15 operators and the reputation of > amateur radio will be enhanced, not diminished. > > The same approach should be used wrt harmful interference. These > cases should not go directly to the FCC. The Part 15 operator may > not be aware that his operation is causing interference. At > least some cases will resolve themselves that way and scarce FCC > resources can be saved for those cases where only FCC > intervention will work. This is the approach ARRL has used with > power-line cases for a few years now -- first the ham tries to > resolve it directly with the power company, then the ARRL will > try to help by writing a letter to the CEO under our cooperative > agreement with the FCC. If all that fails, the FCC is then > willing to help, but behind each of those FCC letters is often > tens of hours of the amateurs' and/or ARRL HQ staff time. > > In trying to resolve these problems directly first, with or > without ARRL help, the amateurs strengthen their case to ask the > FCC for help. It has been my experience so far that the FCC has > helped, although this may well be due to Riley's dedication to > his assigned duties to do enforcment involving the amateur radio > service. These cases will involve people other than Riley and > those waters haven't been fully tested. But tested they must be, > because if the answer to amateur radio concerns is always going > to be "they are not allowed to interfere," if that will not be > backed up with FCC action, this must be determined. > > I have saved the subject of harmful interference for last. All of > the above words are premised on the fact that harmful > interference is occuring. Harmful interference has a specific > regulatory definition. It is either any disruption of emergency > communications or the repeated disruption of other > communications. We cannot expect the FCC to act unless there is > demonstrable harmful interference. What is is? It may be in the > eye of the beholder, but like many things in life, it is possible > to know it when you see it. The power line cases we have taken > to the Commission have involved at least S6 level interference on > entire ham bands. I think that a "strong" signal, to use the > meaning of S6, is harmful interference. Would an SS Part signal > that raised a noise floor by a dB or so be harmful interference? > Probably not, and I wouldn't recommend taking that one to the > FCC. Those cases for which any FCC action might be sought -- > especially the first ones -- need to be clear-cut and clean, with > reasonable conduct by the amateur as a major requirement. (The > ham who has been arrested for trying to cut down the Part 15 > tower need not apply!) > > What about hearing those Part 15 signals in our band? At CCSU, a > local college, the level outside one of the buildings was S9. Is > that harmful interference. Not at the time. I was listening for > Part 15 signals, not engaged in a legitimate amateur operation. > Merely hearing a Part 15 signal in our band is not harmful > interference and we have no recourse -- or grievance. Amateur > radio is secondary to commerical users on 30 meters and the > military on 70 cm. How would we feel if they said "we can hear > those hams in our bands, so they gotta' get out." We need to > base our interference complaints to Part 15 operators on real > harmful interference and be especially certain that we take only > clear cases to the FCC. > > In general, ARRL wants hams to try to resolve these problems > directly with the Part 15 operator first. From there, we will > follow the recommendation of the involved hams on how to proceed. > They are, after all, the ones most familar with the problem and > the personalities and companies involved. If they feel a letter > from ARRL to the company or individual will help, we are glad to > do it. (And the letters are reasonable, respectful, helpful, but > firm in our committment to ensuring that harmful interference > doesn't occur). We can also expidite getting cases to the FCC, > usually through the FCC national offices. In the cases that go to > Riley, he relies heavily on our determination that harmful > interference is occuring and there is enough indication that the > responsible party has been correctly identified to warrant an FCC > letter. I hate to see these things go to the field offices first, > unless a ham has a good working relationship with that office. I > have seen field office decisions all over the map and some have > not been favorable to ham radio. > > Is ARRL batting 1000? Nope, but the successes have been well > worth the doing. I do not approach this work with a defeatist > attitude because there is a responsible -- and effective -- way > to make realistic and reasonable requests of the Part 15 > operators and the FCC. > > I hope my explanation is useful. > > 73, > Ed Hare, W1RFI > ARRL Lab > 225 Main St > Newington, CT 06111 > Tel: 860-594-0318 > Internet: w1rfi@arrl.org > Web: http://www.arrl.org/tis --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Dec 6 23:42:18 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id XAA08738 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 23:42:11 -0600 (CST) From: "Darryl Smith" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: ISP Proposal and Illegal operation Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 16:40:52 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Scanner: exiscan *18KXiC-0001Sp-00*BJvBKoOZmSo* on Astaro Security Linux List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <01bd01c29db3$37ae1ea0$4601a8c0@DELL8000> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Jeff King wrote. >> Because the eyes of Washington are on us as hams... Whatever we do >> will make an impact. We do not have the lobying power of the wireless >> community groups.... Imagine the power of Microsoft, Cisco, Sprint, >> Verizon etc. Think the Little Leo and multiply things by 1000. > > >Yes, we do agree the eyes of Washington are on hams. If we sit by, and let >blatent rule violators take over our bands, in full view of the regulators, >then this will become the norm. Part 97 are primary over part 15 and the rule >of the land should mean something, even to the MicroSoft's that you seem to >feel we should run scared from. Is rolling over and letting people walk all >over you the impact you wish to make in life? I belive that the story of the Tar Baby is a USA fairy tale... About how more the brair fox from memory strugled, the more they got stuck. By enforcing part 97 TO THE LETTER OF THE LAW, I believe we run the risk of loosing primary >And as I CLEARLY stated before, I am against hams forming death squads to track >down baby monitors, portable phones and firebombing the local utilties. What I >am saying is that it is foolish to standby while clear rule violations are >taking place in part 15 AND those same rule violations are disrupting >legitimate amateur communications. But these users are not operating under part 15. They are unlicensed. Get unlicensed users shut down. Don't force licensed part 15 off the air. >Part 15 users and hams CAN and SHOULD get >along together. But this is a two way steet and the only time I am aware of >that hams pushed back was when the Part 15 WISP was completely uncooprative >(tried to claim he was running his ISP under Part 18). I am not arguing this... BTW, what is part 18? >Most WISP's are more >then willing to work with ham's to resolve problems. But you statement of >contacting the FCC before the ARRL takes all chance of working things out >without goverment involvement out of the picture. I think the FCC should only >be involved as a last resort. YES YES YES. But if that does not work, contact the FCC - at least if they are unlicensed because of illegal power or equipment. Darryl --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Dec 6 23:43:11 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id XAA08793 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 23:43:11 -0600 (CST) X-message-flag: Warning! Use of Microsoft Outlook renders your system susceptible to Internet worms. Message-Id: X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 22:41:26 -0700 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Brett Glass Subject: [ss] RE: ss digest: December 05, 2002 In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021206222257.027448f0@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk At 01:41 AM 12/6/2002, Darryl Smith wrote: >Look on the back of a YDI amp... It says that it complies with PART 15, >WHEN PART OF A CERTIFIED SYSTEM. When was the last time you saw a system >run with an amp be a CERTIFIED SYSTEM? Actually, YDI has amp/antenna systems which have been certified to meet Part 15 when used with Orinoco 802.11b cards. So does Hyperlink, which sells at least as many amplifiers. If you build the system from the components for which they've gotten certification, it's legal under Part 15. Also, many believe that the "professional installer" clause in Part 15 allows someone who knows what he's doing to do the math (antenna gain, amplifier gain, cable loss, etc.) and verify that a system will meet the emissions limits even if that particular combination of parts has not been certified. As far as I know, the FCC hasn't clarified whether it agrees with this reading of the regulations. But given that the logistics of installation involve so many variables (mast lengths, wall thicknesses, the need for handmade pigtails, etc.) that it's sometimes hard to do an install with only the prefab parts that come out of a box, it's reasonable. Finally, I personally believe that the Part 15 limits emissions for outdoor WLANs are too low by a factor of about 6 to 8 dB. If these LANs are to scale and be reliable, they really should have the power to reach a reasonable distance and to cut through the clutter on the band caused by kids' toys, baby monitors, etc. (which should be confined to the existing limits). It's absurd that it's possible for a wireless ISP's access point to be taken out by someone jabbering on a cordless phone nearby (Yes, I have actually seen this happen.) This being said, there are some flagrant violators -- just as there were in the 70's during the CB boom. To go over the EIRP limits by a fraction may be an honest mistake, but those grossly and wantonly exceeeding them by factors of 50-100 or more (as truckers did with linear amplifiers) should be caught and fined. --Brett Glass --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Dec 6 23:50:16 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id XAA08959 for ; Fri, 6 Dec 2002 23:50:14 -0600 (CST) From: "Darryl Smith" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE: ss digest: December 06, 2002 Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 16:48:52 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Scanner: exiscan *18KXpq-00023c-00*8/Elia90lkc* on Astaro Security Linux List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <01be01c29db4$554f9c30$4601a8c0@DELL8000> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Ed Hare commented >Gotta' be careful tossing around claims about RF safety, because a bit = >of careful analysis usually shows that RF safety is not an issue. It is = >almost impossible for a Part 15 device to exceed the FCC limits. It is = >nearly as hard for an amateur, even running 1000 watts to a 30-meter = >dish! :-) I totally Aggree with Ed Hare on the fact that a PARABOLIC DISH cannot create a high field per cm^2. It is not designed to. A Parabolic dish is designed to take emissions from a point source, and have them hit the dish and leave the dish in PARALELL. If you took a lens like this and tried to cook food using the sun it would be quite hard. We are talking about a lens that looks almost identical to a piece of glass here since the sun is so far away. Magnifying glasses are designed with point sources close to each end. You could design a semi-parabolic dish the same way, that would focus the field on a point at a distance - at least in theory. Darryl --------- Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 7 00:26:24 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id AAA11204 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 00:26:22 -0600 (CST) Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Message-ID: Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 00:26:02 -0600 From: Walt DuBose X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Use of 2.4 GHz Under Part 97 References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3DF1947A.1CEE684@texas.net> Precedence: bulk I have changed the subject but want to let you know my feelings about the subject. First, the ARRL received a rather large sum of money from the federal government's homeland security fund. Few non-aligned organizations have received money from this fund with few "strings" attached. This tells me that the administration acknowledges the value and worth of amateur radio operators and desires to see them improve the organization. Please note that no WiFi organization has received this kind of money. While is am a bit disappointed at how the League has decided to use this money, I believe that the mere fact that we received the money and especially the amount of money is a clear indication of our worth. Anything that we do to improve our communications capability will be noticed. Being able to use existing technology in an improved way will be most certainly be recognized. As hams certainly we know that the more reliable you can make a communications media, the better it is for the user. And when you design a system that can in an emergency be used to replace lost communications, you are going to be noticed. I see no such movement in the WiFi community. If we make a big splash and Washington knows about it, we have the advantage. In D.C. its not what you know or who you know, its do you have the advantage or what can you do for the administration that makes it look good and still benefits the nation. How the "Hill" is running today is very different than during the Clinton administration. Walt --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 7 00:32:31 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id AAA11608 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 00:32:29 -0600 (CST) Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Message-ID: Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 00:32:19 -0600 From: Walt DuBose X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE: ss digest: December 06, 2002 References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3DF195F3.79DF4B6@texas.net> Precedence: bulk Darryl Smith wrote: > > > If you took a lens like this and tried to cook food using the sun it > would be quite hard. We are talking about a lens that looks almost > identical to a piece of glass here since the sun is so far away. > Can you say solar oven and solar cooking. I've boiled soup and cooked beans on a solar cooker that has a shiny dish reflector and a hook in the center of focus of the dish to hang a pot on. I never looked at the physics of it, but the dang thing worked, except on cloudy days. But we have lots of sun up here in Texas. Walt --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 7 03:16:00 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id DAA15583 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 03:15:59 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 23:14:22 -1000 From: Ron Hashiro User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011128 Netscape6/6.2.1 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Cooking food with high EIRP? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH PLAIN at out001.verizon.net from [67.192.163.170] at Sat, 7 Dec 2002 03:14:21 -0600 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3DF1BBEE.8000602@verizon.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk I concur with Lawrence. If I recall correctly, the first demonstration of food cooking was at Raytheon, where someone popped popcorn kernals by hold it in the path of a 40 watt microwave amplifier output. A high powered residential microwave (such as the 1 KW Panasonic Microwaves) puts out 1000 Watts (look at the label) in the 2.4 GHz ISM band. 2.4 GHz is used because the components are cheaper than Ku Band or 65 GHz, where there are peaks in water absorption. So, if you get near 1 KW EIRP in the near field of a dish, you WILL cook food. Or you head. Don't be fooled. Ten watts, into 20 dB gain, is 1,000 watts. Be careful. Lawrence Stoskopf wrote: >But I do remember about 1957 seeing at Kansas State's Engineering Open >House someone cooking a hot dog over the end of an open waveguide right >out of some sort of surplus RF generator. Wasn't sophisticated enough >at the time to do anything but say, "WOW!" > >N0UU > >>Gotta' be careful tossing around claims about RF safety, because a bit of careful analysis usually shows that RF safety is not an issue. It is almost impossible for a Part 15 device to exceed the FCC limits. It is nearly as hard for an amateur, even running 1000 watts to a 30-meter dish! :-) >> --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 7 04:35:55 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id EAA16499 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 04:35:55 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: "Pinfold" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: Cooking food with high EIRP? Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 23:32:33 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <000601c29ddb$f4d51880$2901a8c0@co.nz> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Just to put my 2 cents worth in ... 10 watts ( calorific heating value ) into a 20 db dish still spits out 10 watts ( calorific heating value ) no more energy is obtained ! the max heating value is still only a possible maximum of 10 watts ! its power density that you have to watch! however please be carefull with your eyes ( they have neglible internal blood flow to carry heat away) and their insides can go like the white of an egg if heated up to much ! sort of limits the ability to read the colours on half watt resistors or 1 w or 10w ones as well ! so remember the inverse square law for saftey ! Mike ZL1BTB ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ron Hashiro" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2002 10:14 PM Subject: [ss] Re: Cooking food with high EIRP? > I concur with Lawrence. > > If I recall correctly, the first demonstration of food cooking was at > Raytheon, > where someone popped popcorn kernals by hold it in the path of a 40 watt > microwave > amplifier output. > > A high powered residential microwave (such as the 1 KW Panasonic Microwaves) > puts out 1000 Watts (look at the label) in the 2.4 GHz ISM band. 2.4 GHz is > used because the components are cheaper than Ku Band or 65 GHz, where there > are peaks in water absorption. > > So, if you get near 1 KW EIRP in the near field of a dish, you WILL cook > food. > Or you head. > > Don't be fooled. Ten watts, into 20 dB gain, is 1,000 watts. Be careful. > > Lawrence Stoskopf wrote: > > >But I do remember about 1957 seeing at Kansas State's Engineering Open > >House someone cooking a hot dog over the end of an open waveguide right > >out of some sort of surplus RF generator. Wasn't sophisticated enough > >at the time to do anything but say, "WOW!" > > > >N0UU > > > >>Gotta' be careful tossing around claims about RF safety, because a bit of careful analysis usually shows that RF safety is not an issue. It is almost impossible for a Part 15 device to exceed the FCC limits. It is nearly as hard for an amateur, even running 1000 watts to a 30-meter dish! :-) > >> > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: PINFOLD@XTRA.CO.NZ > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 7 06:25:05 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id GAA18927 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 06:25:04 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Geoff Edmonson" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: ISP Proposal and Illegal operation Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 06:24:45 -0600 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-RAVMilter-Version: 8.4.1(snapshot 20020919) (w5omr) List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: <001c01c29deb$a0e78cc0$0200a8c0@hamhome.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > But these users are not operating under part 15. They are unlicensed. > Get unlicensed users shut down. Don't force licensed part 15 off the > air. I believe we've finally hit the crux of the problem. As *I* understand it (here in the US) and I'm sure some others do, too... Part 15 users do NOT need to be licensed. For that matter, Part 95 users are no longer required to be licensed, either. Part 97, yes. Part 15 - Public. Part 95 - Citizens (as in Citizens Band) Part 97 - Amateur Radio Part 15 users licensed? Where? Regards, -Geoff --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 7 06:29:44 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id GAA18992 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 06:29:43 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Geoff Edmonson" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: Cooking food with high EIRP? Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 06:29:36 -0600 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-RAVMilter-Version: 8.4.1(snapshot 20020919) (w5omr) List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: <002c01c29dec$4e624160$0200a8c0@hamhome.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > Just to put my 2 cents worth in ... 10 watts ( calorific heating value ) > into a 20 db dish still spits out 10 watts ( calorific heating value ) no > more energy is obtained ! Tell that to the field strength meter. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 7 09:06:02 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id JAA23415 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 09:05:59 -0600 (CST) X-Originating-IP: [12.111.229.199] Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "John Champa" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] New Ham Recruits From Part 15 Users Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 10:04:58 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Dec 2002 15:04:59.0180 (UTC) FILETIME=[02ACD6C0:01C29E02] List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Greetings, The HSMM Working Group, by effectively adapting IEEE 803.11 technology to Part 97 use, is hoping to create a vast new pool of potential radio amateurs by welcoming Part 15 users and encouraging them to upgrade to a Ham ticket for greater and legal privileges on 2.4 GHz. BTW, it appears likely that we will be issuing a formal Call for Papers regarding the ARRL HSMM Protocol at the next Dayton Hamvention. Vy 73, John - K8OCL ARRL HSMM WG _________________________________________________________________ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 7 09:29:14 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id JAA24075 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 09:29:13 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: X-Sender: wa7nwp@pop.mail.yahoo.com Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 07:23:23 -0800 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Bill Vodall - WA7NWP Subject: [ss] Re: Use of 2.4 GHz Under Part 97 In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20021207070221.00a60100@pioneernet.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > >As hams certainly we know that the more reliable you can make a >communications media, the better it is for the user. And when >you design a system that can in an emergency be used to replace >lost communications, you are going to be noticed. > >I see no such movement in the WiFi community. The local WiFi organization here is contacting local emergency management organizations about providing services in times of need. Their network technology is based on dynamic, fairly modern, networking technology freely available in Unix systems. They have, in general, passed the 10+ year old Ampr.org network in technology. One of these days (and I mean days, not months) somebody on the community WiFi front will get the hot idea to VPN all the community networks together and when that happens, Ampr.org will be museum technology. They, the WiFi'ers, should be paying a bit more attention to the lessons we learned with legacy packet 15 years ago. Things like Hidden Transmitters and desense from near by radios are a real problem. It's fascinating to watch them "discover" these issues all over again. Now if we married the technologies we'd have something. 802.11* for the last 100 feet. Amateur links, using SS and other technologies on the other sparsely used ham bands, for the "10's of miles" connections from Internet gateways to 802.11 enabled servers. Tie it all together as a VPN under the Ampr.org umbrella. Wow! That would be impressive. 73, Bill - WA7NWP PS. Here's a thought. If a communications circuit can be established with Part 15 equipment, doing the same with "commonly configured" (a trick statement - troll bait) Part 97 equipment would technically put the Part 97 equipment in the realm of operating illegally. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 7 09:34:14 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id JAA24273 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 09:34:10 -0600 (CST) Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 9:33:18 Subject: [ss] FWIW: "Feds Label Wi-Fi a Terrorist Tool" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Clay Bartholow" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Message-Id: Precedence: bulk FWIW via ACM Tech News: "Feds Label Wi-Fi a Terrorist Tool" "Panelists at this week's 802.11 Planet conference warned that users and manufacturers of Wi-Fi technology will face federal regulation unless they can secure their systems." http://www.acm.org/technews/articles/2002-4/1206f.html#item1 http://www.wired.com/news/wireless/0,1382,56742,00.html Clay W0LED May the VSWR Be With You! --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 7 11:32:37 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id LAA28113 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 11:32:37 -0600 (CST) From: Jeff King To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 12:31:20 -0500 In-Reply-To: Subject: [ss] Re: ISP Proposal and Illegal operation Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Message-Id: Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id LAA28113 It is important to review how this thread got started. On Sat, 7 Dec 2002 16:40:52 +1100, Darryl Smith wrote: >I belive that the story of the Tar Baby is a USA fairy tale... About >how >more the brair fox from memory strugled, the more they got stuck. By >enforcing part 97 TO THE LETTER OF THE LAW, I believe we run the >risk of loosing primary The originator of this thread, a licensed amateur radio operator, was concerned about a WISP running uncertified gear well in excess of the Part 15 limits. I solely stated that if two conditions where meet, that is the WISP was in violation of part 15 (he is) AND that same operation repeatedly disrupted communications at his location, that he should contact the ARRL. How is this a TAR BABY fairy tale? BTW, primary on 2.4ghz is Part 18. I.E. your microwave ovens. > >>And as I CLEARLY stated before, I am against hams forming death >>squads >to track >>down baby monitors, portable phones and firebombing the local >>utilties. >What I >>am saying is that it is foolish to standby while clear rule >>violations >are >>taking place in part 15 AND those same rule violations are >>disrupting >>legitimate amateur communications. > >But these users are not operating under part 15. They are unlicensed. >Get unlicensed users shut down. Don't force licensed part 15 off the >air. Wrong and wrong. All the devices I mentioned are part 15 and I never suggested that they be shut down. As you are Australian, part of the original British empire, I didn't hesitate using sarcasm to make my point ("fire bombing and death squads"). Perhaps this was a mistake but you should understand now what I was saying. It is important to review how this thread got started. It had nothing to do with WLAN's or Baby monitors. > >>Part 15 users and hams CAN and SHOULD get >>along together. But this is a two way steet and the only time I am >aware of >>that hams pushed back was when the Part 15 WISP was completely >uncooprative >>(tried to claim he was running his ISP under Part 18). > >I am not arguing this... BTW, what is part 18? Microwave ovens and medical equipment. See: http://wireless.fcc.gov/rules.html >>Most WISP's are more >>then willing to work with ham's to resolve problems. But you >>statement >of >>contacting the FCC before the ARRL takes all chance of working >>things >out >>without goverment involvement out of the picture. I think the FCC >should only >>be involved as a last resort. > >YES YES YES. > >But if that does not work, contact the FCC - at least if they are >unlicensed because of illegal power or equipment. And this was all I was saying, and now we have come full circle with you now agreeing with me. But I am glad we got here. 73 Jeff --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 7 12:20:09 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id MAA29859 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 12:20:04 -0600 (CST) From: Jeff King To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 13:19:12 -0500 In-Reply-To: Subject: [ss] Re: ISP Proposal and Illegal operation Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Message-Id: Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id MAA29859 On Fri, 6 Dec 2002 21:14:19 -0800, Steve Stroh wrote: >I'm speaking for myself - not TAPR. Rubbish. While you may not be making an official statement for TAPR, you sit on the board of director's of TAPR and try to influence their position in votes and during meetings. And I wouldn't expect less from you. So while technically, without a board resolution, you can't speak for TAPR; if your going to use this excuse here in public, at least let the readers know you are a TAPR board member and your post reflects your position as such. This is only fair. You also should also disclose that you make part of your income from speaking and consulting for WISP's, some of who have been cited in this very thread as being in potential violation of Part 15. BTW, I'm glad for a change to see two TAPR board members that can speak their mind and are not afraid to interact with the membership... we need more of this. Open debate is the sign of any healthy organization. >I think that a "tippling point" has been reached sometime earlier >this year, >brought on by the million-plus Wi-Fi devices shipping per month Great. But not how the thread got started. It is important to look at this, to take things in context. In summary: The originator of this thread, a licensed amateur radio operator, was concerned about a WISP running uncertified gear well in excess of the Part 15 limits. I solely stated that if two conditions where meet, that is the WISP was in violation of part 15 (he is) AND that same operation repeatedly disrupted communications at his location, that he should contact the ARRL. I don't think it is fair of you to repeatedly try to make this thread something it is not. It is not ham radio vs. the attack of the baby monitors or Starbuck's hotspots. Read the original post, Steve. >I'm not arguing that 2.4 GHz is the optimum spectrum for such a >popular >service, or that Wi-Fi is the optimum technology. But such arguments >are >largely irrelevant. Wi-Fi on 2.4 GHz is "the hottest thing going" in >the >computer and telecommunications industry... and it's ill advised to >try to stop or divert that trend. I challenge you to point out one instance of this in any of the postings on this thread. You can't, because it never happened. Stop the hyperbole Steve. >If Amateur Radio's leadership looks at the situation on 2.4 GHz the >LEAST bit objectively, I look to the ARRL and TAPR as Amateur radio leadership. Maybe you two groups could get together and work things out. >If not, I fully expect that Amateur Radio will lose all its unique >privileges in the 2.4 GHz band; perhaps retaining defacto privileges >whose technical parameters are the same as Part 15 users. Part 18 (ISM) I believe is primary on the 2.4ghz band. Microwave ovens and the such. Ham's have no say over these devices, so what you suggest to a large degree is already the reality today. Lets take a look at one Amateur radio group, in a leadership role, spin on ham's and Part 15: http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/part15.html And while I can't find the specific citation here, I recall reading, and have been told by ARRL staffer's, that they only get involved in the most grievance cases. And frankly, I don't think most legitimate WISP's have a thing to worry about as amateur density in rural areas is very low, and any conflicts would be easily worked out. Steve, this is simply not a witch hunt nor should you try to make it into one. 73 Jeff >> --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 7 12:24:30 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id MAA00109 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 12:24:25 -0600 (CST) From: Jeff King To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 13:23:21 -0500 In-Reply-To: Subject: [ss] part 15 certification question Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Message-Id: Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id MAA00109 Hi Brett On Fri, 06 Dec 2002 22:41:26 -0700, Brett Glass wrote: >At 01:41 AM 12/6/2002, Darryl Smith wrote: > >>Look on the back of a YDI amp... It says that it complies with PART >>15, >>WHEN PART OF A CERTIFIED SYSTEM. When was the last time you saw a >>system >>run with an amp be a CERTIFIED SYSTEM? > >Actually, YDI has amp/antenna systems which have been certified to >meet >Part 15 when used with Orinoco 802.11b cards. So does Hyperlink, >which >sells at least as many amplifiers. If you build the system from the >components for which they've gotten certification, it's legal under >Part 15. The way I read that specific rule, it had to be a complete system, meaning YDI and Hyperlink had to sell them everything, including the 802.11b card and/or AP. Reason I ask is I have a design I did for a amp that I wanted to get certified (for the WAP11/WET11) but I DON'T want to have to sell the customer the AP... Any idea how YDI/Hyperlink got around this or am I reading it wrong? Regards, Jeff --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 7 12:32:10 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id MAA00348 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 12:32:09 -0600 (CST) From: Jeff King To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 13:31:06 -0500 In-Reply-To: Subject: [ss] Re: ISP Proposal and Illegal operation Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Message-Id: Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id MAA00348 Geoff: I believe what you are quoting is someone's misunderstanding of the Part 15 rules. Part 15 end users (as well as Part 95) are not required to be licensed. Part 15 equipment is certified by the manufacturer. If a part 15 user modifies the equipment as certified, then the equipment is not certified and cannot be used (except under part 97 if that person has an amateur license). Please see: http://wireless.fcc.gov/rules.html Regards, Jeff On Sat, 7 Dec 2002 06:24:45 -0600, Geoff Edmonson wrote: >>But these users are not operating under part 15. They are >>unlicensed. >>Get unlicensed users shut down. Don't force licensed part 15 off >>the >>air. > >I believe we've finally hit the crux of the problem. > >As *I* understand it (here in the US) and I'm sure some others do, >too... >Part 15 users do NOT need to be licensed. For that matter, Part 95 >users >are no longer required to be licensed, either. Part 97, yes. > >Part 15 - Public. >Part 95 - Citizens (as in Citizens Band) >Part 97 - Amateur Radio > >Part 15 users licensed? Where? > >Regards, >-Geoff > > > >--- >You are currently subscribed to ss as: jeff@aerodata.net >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 7 12:44:58 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id MAA00735 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 12:44:53 -0600 (CST) From: Jeff King To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 13:43:09 -0500 In-Reply-To: Subject: [ss] Re: ISP Proposal and Illegal operation Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Message-Id: Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id MAA00735 Oh, and I should mention their is an exemption under 15.23 for hobbyist's, but in the context of this thread, 15.23 would not apply (the end user was a commercial wisp modifying equipment AND operating in excess of ERP limits). -- Jeff King, jeff@aerodata.net on 12/7/2002 On Sat, 7 Dec 2002 13:31:06 -0500, Jeff King wrote: >Geoff: > >I believe what you are quoting is someone's misunderstanding of the >Part 15 >rules. > >Part 15 end users (as well as Part 95) are not required to be >licensed. Part >15 equipment is certified by the manufacturer. If a part 15 user >modifies the >equipment as certified, then the equipment is not certified and >cannot be >used (except under part 97 if that person has an amateur license). > >Please see: > >http://wireless.fcc.gov/rules.html > >Regards, > >Jeff > > > >On Sat, 7 Dec 2002 06:24:45 -0600, Geoff Edmonson wrote: >>>But these users are not operating under part 15. They are >>>unlicensed. >>>Get unlicensed users shut down. Don't force licensed part 15 off >>>the >>>air. >> >>I believe we've finally hit the crux of the problem. >> >>As *I* understand it (here in the US) and I'm sure some others do, >>too... >>Part 15 users do NOT need to be licensed. For that matter, Part 95 >>users >>are no longer required to be licensed, either. Part 97, yes. >> >>Part 15 - Public. >>Part 95 - Citizens (as in Citizens Band) >>Part 97 - Amateur Radio >> >>Part 15 users licensed? Where? >> >>Regards, >>-Geoff --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 7 14:48:47 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id OAA05115 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 14:48:44 -0600 (CST) From: "Steve Stroh" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Steve Stroh criticisms Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 12:46:32 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Jeff King has raised some points about me, my involvement with TAPR, and my involvement with the Wireless ISP industry. As I've previously stated on this list and elsewhere, from long experience I choose not to engage Jeff in a tit-for-tat, point-for-point debate. We've done so a number of times in the past, and such debates tend to alienate other list members, go on forever, and in the end they simply aren't that enlightening. Jeff raised some questions about me and my motivations, so I'll answer some of them here for the benefit of others who may, as a result of Jeff's innuendo, question my motivations for stating the opinions I've offered on this list over the past few weeks. As I stated, when I offer my opinions, I'm not speaking for TAPR... no more than I'm speaking for the ARRL as a member of same. I am a member of the TAPR Board of Directors. I am one of nine TAPR Directors and mine is but one voice. Yes, I am involved professionally with the WISP industry, as a glance at my web page - www.strohpub.com will quickly reveal. To be clear... I have a great and deep love for Amateur Radio. The experience I've gained as an Amateur Radio Operator is the foundation knowledge of my involvement with the Broadband Wireless Internet Access industry. I'm actively involved in Amateur Radio operations, and happily tinker when I get the chance with ongoing Amateur Radio digital communications projects. That said... I'm not blinded by my love of Amateur Radio so as not to see the many, MANY problems that Amateur Radio has. I'm being coldly realistic with the opinions that I have offered, and I expect them to be borne out substantially in the coming months and years, much as I have stated them. The only reason I offered these opinions was I felt that I had something to add to the discussions because of my background and the possibility that some who monitor this list who are in positions of influence within Amateur Radio might see the situation of Amateur Radio operations on 2.4 GHz from a different perspective. I will not benefit in any conceivable way from loss of Amateur Radio privileges on 2.4 GHz, should that come to pass as I have opined. I'll repeat this... I personally will not benefit in ANY CONCEIVABLE WAY from loss of Amateur Radio privileges on 2.4 GHz. I apologize for taking list bandwidth for this particular matter, but (also from long experience), if innuendo that's posted to a list isn't challenged, it festers and creates incorrect impressions. Thanks, Steve N8GNJ -- Steve Stroh steve@strohpub.com 425-481-0600 --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 7 15:07:32 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id PAA05921 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 15:07:31 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Geoff Edmonson" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: ISP Proposal and Illegal operation Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 15:07:02 -0600 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-RAVMilter-Version: 8.4.1(snapshot 20020919) (w5omr) List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: <003a01c29e34$9879c3c0$0200a8c0@hamhome.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > Geoff: > > I believe what you are quoting is someone's misunderstanding of the Part 15 > rules. > > Part 15 end users (as well as Part 95) are not required to be licensed. Part > 15 equipment is certified by the manufacturer. If a part 15 user modifies the > equipment as certified, then the equipment is not certified and cannot be > used (except under part 97 if that person has an amateur license). > > Please see: > > http://wireless.fcc.gov/rules.html Seems pretty plain to me. Why all the postulating here about it, then? A certified part 15 device, doesn't need a license to operate. The final (and, IMO, definitive) question is: "Are RF amplifiers certifiable under part 15?" If the answer is 'no', then any amplifier that increases the signal output to more than 1,000mW (1W) is illegal. Period. -- 73 = Best Regards, -=Geoff/W5OMR=- --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 7 15:45:10 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id PAA07549 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 15:45:08 -0600 (CST) From: Jeff King To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 16:43:49 -0500 In-Reply-To: Subject: [ss] Re: Steve Stroh criticisms Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Message-Id: Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id PAA07549 Steve: Once again, via your title, you chose to make this personal. It was not. I don't think it is too much to expect that a writer disclose their involvement's and any potential conflicts of interest. This is only in fairness to a reader, who may not know such things. Anything else you care to read into this is your own doing. It is really ashame that you cannot simply reply to messages in the context they were sent, and not continually cry foul or attempt to divert the conversation to something it is not. You might find I agree with you more often then you think. 73 Jeff P.S. I actually found a issue with your signature file which may have lead to your assumption everyone knew you where a paid WISP consultant. You might want to correct it. You stated: >Yes, I am involved professionally with the WISP industry, as a >glance at my web page - www.strohpub.com will quickly reveal. This is true, but looking at your signature file on the TAPR SS-SIG, we see no mention of this webpage or affiliation: TAPR SS-SIG>Steve Stroh steve@strohpub.com 425-481-0600 However, in a post you did today on the commercial WISP mailing list from the exact same address, strangely we see: ISP-WIRELESS>Steve Stroh steve@strohpub.com 425-481-0600 ISP-WIRELESS>Editor - Focus on Broadband Wireless Internet Access newsletter ISP-WIRELESS>http://www.strohpub.com/focus No sure why you would want to conceal this useful information from your SIGNATURE file here, but I just wanted to point out this discrepancy in case you overlooked it. I wouldn't naturally assume all the readers here are also on the ISP-WIRELESS mailing list and are aware you are a paid industry consultant, that is all. I was, and that is why I disclosed it since you had failed to. -- Jeff King, jeff@aerodata.net on 12/7/2002 On Sat, 7 Dec 2002 12:46:32 -0800, Steve Stroh wrote: > >Jeff King has raised some points about me, my involvement with TAPR, >and my >involvement with the Wireless ISP industry. As I've previously >stated on >this list and elsewhere, from long experience I choose not to engage >Jeff in >a tit-for-tat, point-for-point debate. We've done so a number of >times in >the past, and such debates tend to alienate other list members, go on >forever, and in the end they simply aren't that enlightening. > >Jeff raised some questions about me and my motivations, so I'll >answer some >of them here for the benefit of others who may, as a result of Jeff's >innuendo, question my motivations for stating the opinions I've >offered on >this list over the past few weeks. > >As I stated, when I offer my opinions, I'm not speaking for TAPR... >no more >than I'm speaking for the ARRL as a member of same. I am a member of >the >TAPR Board of Directors. I am one of nine TAPR Directors and mine is >but one >voice. > >Yes, I am involved professionally with the WISP industry, as a >glance at my >web page - www.strohpub.com will quickly reveal. > >To be clear... I have a great and deep love for Amateur Radio. The >experience I've gained as an Amateur Radio Operator is the foundation >knowledge of my involvement with the Broadband Wireless Internet >Access >industry. I'm actively involved in Amateur Radio operations, and >happily >tinker when I get the chance with ongoing Amateur Radio digital >communications projects. That said... I'm not blinded by my love of >Amateur >Radio so as not to see the many, MANY problems that Amateur Radio >has. I'm >being coldly realistic with the opinions that I have offered, and I >expect >them to be borne out substantially in the coming months and years, >much as I >have stated them. > >The only reason I offered these opinions was I felt that I had >something to >add to the discussions because of my background and the possibility >that >some who monitor this list who are in positions of influence within >Amateur >Radio might see the situation of Amateur Radio operations on 2.4 GHz >from a >different perspective. I will not benefit in any conceivable way >from loss >of Amateur Radio privileges on 2.4 GHz, should that come to pass as >I have >opined. > >I'll repeat this... I personally will not benefit in ANY CONCEIVABLE >WAY >from loss of Amateur Radio privileges on 2.4 GHz. > >I apologize for taking list bandwidth for this particular matter, >but (also >from long experience), if innuendo that's posted to a list isn't >challenged, >it festers and creates incorrect impressions. > > >Thanks, > >Steve N8GNJ > >-- >Steve Stroh steve@strohpub.com 425-481-0600 > > > >--- >You are currently subscribed to ss as: jeff@aerodata.net >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 7 16:09:41 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id QAA08356 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 16:09:39 -0600 (CST) From: Jeff King To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 17:08:22 -0500 In-Reply-To: Subject: [ss] Re: Steve Stroh criticisms Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Message-Id: Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id QAA08356 I missed a couple items. On Sat, 7 Dec 2002 12:46:32 -0800, Steve Stroh wrote: >I'll repeat this... I personally will not benefit in ANY CONCEIVABLE >WAY from loss of Amateur Radio privileges on 2.4 GHz. I believe you. However, within the context of "conflict of interest' another statement would also have to be true. It being: "I personally will not benefit in ANY CONCEIVABLE WAY from Part 15 WISP's being given more privileges on 2.4GHz to the determent of amateur radio." This is a statement you cannot make. Conflict of interest is always a statement of duality, not singularity as you are trying to make it. As you once told me, it is often the appearances that make the difference. >I apologize for taking list bandwidth for this particular matter, >but (also >from long experience), if innuendo that's posted to a list isn't >challenged, >it festers and creates incorrect impressions. As do I. And once again, I'll remind you Steve: -- The originator of this thread, a licensed amateur radio operator, was concerned about a WISP running uncertified gear well in excess of the Part 15 limits. I solely stated that if two conditions where meet, that is the WISP was in violation of part 15 (he is) AND that same operation repeatedly disrupted communications at his location, that he should contact the ARRL. I don't think it is fair of you to repeatedly try to make this thread something it is not. It is not ham radio vs. the attack of the baby monitors or Starbuck's hotspots. (Nor is it a "Steve vs. Jeff" issue as you have now tried to paint it) -- Thanks Jeff --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 7 16:12:03 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id QAA08429 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 16:12:00 -0600 (CST) From: Jeff King To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 17:10:53 -0500 In-Reply-To: Subject: [ss] Re: ISP Proposal and Illegal operation Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Message-Id: Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id QAA08429 On Sat, 7 Dec 2002 15:07:02 -0600, Geoff Edmonson wrote: >>Please see: >> >>http://wireless.fcc.gov/rules.html > >Seems pretty plain to me. Why all the postulating here about it, >then? You'll have to ask the other parties. The law is very clear to me. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 7 19:53:50 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id TAA14510 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 19:53:49 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: "Pinfold" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: Cooking food with high EIRP? Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 13:58:46 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <007401c29e5c$3cd3f9a0$2901a8c0@co.nz> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Hi Geoff, yes you are right the feild strength meter will read higher, no doubt about that ! and it will if the ant is doing a good job but if you think how an antenna gain array acheives an apparent increase in field strength in wanted directions by enhancing the field strength at the EXPENSE of field strength in other directions. thats the key !, instead of sharing its energy out in a spherical shape where field strength is identical at a fixed distance all around from the source. Look at it this way put a "huge rf catching cloth" completely encompassing the antenna, how much rf will we "catch" from that antenna if we feed it with 10 W ? at 100% catching efficiency 10 watts! doesnt matter how the 10 w of rf was radiated be it a 10db gain yagi 30 db dish or lowely dipole . BUT in front of a gain array , what you read on the feild strength meter is an EQUIVALENT power level. Increased by the concentration (gain) in one particular direction of that normally spherically radiated signal., it is purely a signal level equivalent of a spherically radiated signal generated by an antenna being fed by a power level multiplied by the gain ( concentration factor in a favoured direction.) that leads to a true increase in feild strength .. Cheers Mike ZL1BTB----- Original Message ----- From: "Geoff Edmonson" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 1:29 AM Subject: [ss] Re: Cooking food with high EIRP? > > > > Just to put my 2 cents worth in ... 10 watts ( calorific heating value ) > > into a 20 db dish still spits out 10 watts ( calorific heating value ) no > > more energy is obtained ! > > Tell that to the field strength meter. > > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: PINFOLD@XTRA.CO.NZ > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 7 21:30:56 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id VAA18212 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 21:30:51 -0600 (CST) X-message-flag: Warning! Use of Microsoft Outlook renders your system susceptible to Internet worms. Message-Id: X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 20:29:57 -0700 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Brett Glass Subject: [ss] Re: part 15 certification question In-Reply-To: <200212071823.LAA09796@lariat.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021207202439.03c33e20@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk At 11:23 AM 12/7/2002, Jeff King wrote: >The way I read that specific rule, it had to be a complete system, meaning >YDI and Hyperlink had to sell them everything, including the 802.11b card >and/or AP. Not so. What they care about is that the system be one whose components were certified as a complete system. Hyperlink, for example, sells kits that consist of an amplifier and antenna meant to work with a particular WLAN card or cards. You don't need to buy the card from them if you already have one -- just the amplifier and antenna kit. Which is reasonable. The FCC's charter isn't to regulate commerce or to dictate from whom you buy things. Why buy an extra unit when you already have one? Also, remember that Part 15 certification is "type" approval. Every system doesn't have to be tested individually; it's the design that has to be certified. --Brett Glass --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 7 23:59:00 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id XAA22709 for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 23:58:57 -0600 (CST) From: "Darryl Smith" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Some ideas for Articles and Papers... Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 16:59:29 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Scanner: exiscan *18KuRh-0001uI-00*lUhEvspTi1k* on Astaro Security Linux List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <01e301c29e7e$fb84af80$4601a8c0@DELL8000> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk G'Day All... Most of the people on this list know about all the work that TAPR does in the Ham Radio world, including the Digital Communications Conference next September, and the PSR magazine. Since we have some activity on the SS mailing list at the moment I thought it might be useful to suggest some topics for articles for PSR or for next years Digital Communications Conference. This list is not extensive, and I am sure that all the people reading this list could think of more ideas. So here is the challenge. Over christmas write a paper or an article on 802.11. Deadlines for PSR are mid-january - and articles may be posted to psr@tapr.org . Deadlines for the DCC will most likely be some time in july. Darryl VK2TDS Ideas for Papers and Articles a) Coexistance between Ham Radio and Community Wireless Groups a.1) Coexistance between Ham Radio and the commercial users of the spectrum. Including dispute resolution stratergies. b) Applications for 802.11 c) HIGHER LEVEL Protocols for 802.11, and applicability of higher level protocols to 802.11 mesh environments d) Antenna Designs for 802.11 e) Human Factors in 802.11 experimentation f) State of the 802.11 commercial environment g) Using Wireless Groups as the breeding grounds for new hams h) RF techniques for computer geeks i) Microwave for the HF Ham j) The new ATV - multicast MPEG on 802.11 k) Voice over 802.11 l) Equipment modifications for :- External antennas, changed frequencies etc m) 802.11 technology overview n) AX.25 and 802.11 - The similarities and the differences o) 802.11 - Why it is Amateur Radio - and why it is Packet Radio p) Builing a 2.4 GHz HT with 802.11 and a PDA --------- Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sun Dec 8 00:05:12 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id AAA24543 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 00:05:10 -0600 (CST) From: "Darryl Smith" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: ISP Proposal and Illegal operation Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 17:05:34 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Scanner: exiscan *18KuXb-0002Mq-00*Qr6yAbYZ9tM* on Astaro Security Linux List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <01e401c29e7f$d595e180$4601a8c0@DELL8000> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk "Geoff Edmonson" wrote >> But these users are not operating under part 15. They are unlicensed. >> Get unlicensed users shut down. Don't force licensed part 15 off the >> air. > >I believe we've finally hit the crux of the problem. > >As *I* understand it (here in the US) and I'm sure some others do, too... >Part 15 users do NOT need to be licensed. For that matter, Part 95 users >are no longer required to be licensed, either. Part 97, yes. > >Part 15 - Public. >Part 95 - Citizens (as in Citizens Band) >Part 97 - Amateur Radio > >Part 15 users licensed? Where? > >Regards, >-Geoff OK... The regulatory system in Oz is a bit different... Anyway I have just read up on some of Part 15, and I have come to the following conslusion Some Part 15 services are licensed and some are not. I would guess that part 15 devices only need to comply with the technical requirements of part 15. Here in oz howvere, CB equipment for instance are still licensed - under a class license. It is a very cheap license that is assigned to the equipment when it is imported into Oz. Modifications to that equipment would mean it loosing the license. Darryl --------- Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sun Dec 8 09:16:01 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id JAA09655 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 09:16:00 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Geoff Edmonson" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: Cooking food with high EIRP? Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 09:15:05 -0600 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-RAVMilter-Version: 8.4.1(snapshot 20020919) (w5omr) List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: <005301c29ecc$96e80420$0200a8c0@hamhome.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > Hi Geoff, yes you are right the feild strength meter will read higher, no > doubt about that ! and it will if the ant is doing a good job but I knew there was gonna be a "but"! ;-) Let's have some fun with this (grinnin') > if you > think how an antenna gain array acheives an apparent increase in field > strength in wanted directions by enhancing the field strength at the > EXPENSE of field strength in other directions. thats the key !, For a beam, yes. We're talking about a Dish, with some gain, and focusing all the energy that 'was' going in different directions, into one direction. >From what I read, it seems as if you're trying to say that "if you start with 10w, and you affix an antenna array, and measure the feild strength, then focus -all- the energy in one direction, then you are only going to see 10w" and I simply do -not- agree. > instead of sharing its energy out in a spherical shape where field strength is > identical at a fixed distance all around from the source. Are you saying that there are no vertical antennas (which radiate equally poor in -all- directions ;->) that have any gain? My 70cm mobile antenna has 6.3dbd (that's 6db of gain, over a referenced Dipole, which is 3db gain over an isotropic antenna). I can't buy into the idea that 10w of RF eneregy, at 2.4GHz, or higher is safe within 10' of the antenna. I think someone else here said it, and it's the way I believe, also - I think of a beam antenna as a magnifying glass for RF. a "focus", if you will, for the energy being generated. ERP means "Effective Radiated Power". Even vertical antennas can be configured to show 'gain' of up to 10db. Crunch that through the ERP formula (which slips my mind at this time - need more coffee ;->) and the Effective Radiated power will be more than the power generated by the transmitter. Roughly: 10W generated into a 9db gain antenna has an ERP of 80W. With 3db being the "twice power" point, 10W + 3db = 20W 20W + 3db = 40W 40W + 3db = 80W (this, assuming no losses per connector or transmission line) So, a "gain" vertical antenna vs. a vertical Dipole will increase the field strength by increasing the Effective Radiated Power, regardless of frequency. 73 = Best Regards, -=Geoff/W5OMR=- --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sun Dec 8 12:37:06 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id MAA18677 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 12:37:04 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: "Pinfold" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: Cooking food with high EIRP? Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 07:34:05 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <001601c29ee8$6408e120$2901a8c0@co.nz> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Hi Geoff The Key statement in the discussion in the ERP is that the gain array field strength, is now " EQUIVALANT TO " ie your 10w into the 9db gain antenna generates a field strength along the major lobe at distance x equivalent to a dipole radiating 80 watts. as you know there are directions around that gain array that show a much lower field strength the saftey on rf and at moderate power levels is a real hot potatoe all rf should be treated with respect! your vertical antenna that gives gain doesnt spray out its energy in a sphere but in a very flat doughnut shape there will be very little off the ends! a mind experiment to consider put 10w at 2.4 ghz into a 10 foot dia dish , point it down a 10 foot dia steel tube 100 foot long ,put another identicle 10 foot dia dish at the other end connect a bird wattmeter to the receiving dish feed point How many watts are you going to read in the Bird wattmeter assuming no propagation loss of RF ??????????10w ????? if its more than 10w tell me where the extra energy comes from ??? cheers Mike ----- Original Message ----- From: "Geoff Edmonson" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 4:15 AM Subject: [ss] Re: Cooking food with high EIRP? > > > > Hi Geoff, yes you are right the feild strength meter will read higher, no > > doubt about that ! and it will if the ant is doing a good job but > > I knew there was gonna be a "but"! ;-) > > Let's have some fun with this (grinnin') > > > if you > > think how an antenna gain array acheives an apparent increase in field > > strength in wanted directions by enhancing the field strength at the > > EXPENSE of field strength in other directions. thats the key !, > > For a beam, yes. We're talking about a Dish, with some gain, and focusing all > the energy that 'was' going in different directions, into one direction. > > From what I read, it seems as if you're trying to say that "if you start with > 10w, and you affix an antenna array, and measure the feild strength, then > focus -all- the energy in one direction, then you are only going to see 10w" and > I simply do -not- agree. > > > instead of sharing its energy out in a spherical shape where field strength is > > identical at a fixed distance all around from the source. > > Are you saying that there are no vertical antennas (which radiate equally poor > in -all- directions ;->) that have any gain? My 70cm mobile antenna has 6.3dbd > (that's 6db of gain, over a referenced Dipole, which is 3db gain over an > isotropic antenna). > > I can't buy into the idea that 10w of RF eneregy, at 2.4GHz, or higher is safe > within 10' of the antenna. > > I think someone else here said it, and it's the way I believe, also - I think of > a beam antenna as a magnifying glass for RF. a "focus", if you will, for the > energy being generated. > > ERP means "Effective Radiated Power". Even vertical antennas can be configured > to show 'gain' of up to 10db. Crunch that through the ERP formula (which slips > my mind at this time - need more coffee ;->) and the Effective Radiated power > will be more than the power generated by the transmitter. > > Roughly: 10W generated into a 9db gain antenna has an ERP of 80W. > With 3db being the "twice power" point, > 10W + 3db = 20W > 20W + 3db = 40W > 40W + 3db = 80W > (this, assuming no losses per connector or transmission line) > > So, a "gain" vertical antenna vs. a vertical Dipole will increase the field > strength by increasing the Effective Radiated Power, regardless of frequency. > > 73 = Best Regards, > -=Geoff/W5OMR=- > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: PINFOLD@XTRA.CO.NZ > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sun Dec 8 13:28:39 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id NAA20546 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 13:28:36 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 13:26:19 -0600 From: Gerry Creager User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020826 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Cooking food with high EIRP? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3DF39CDB.3080701@tamu.edu> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk I'd be real interested in measuring the standing wave set up in the steel tube... The combination of sidelobes, and reflective dispersion could be both interesting, and could easily lead to less than 10w at the receiving end... gerry Pinfold wrote: > Hi Geoff The Key statement in the discussion in the ERP is that the gain > array field strength, is now " EQUIVALANT TO " ie your 10w into the 9db gain > antenna generates a field strength along the major lobe at distance x > equivalent to a dipole radiating 80 watts. as you know there are directions > around that gain array that show a much lower field strength the saftey on > rf and at moderate power levels is a real hot potatoe all rf should be > treated with respect! your vertical antenna that gives gain doesnt spray > out its energy in a sphere but in a very flat doughnut shape there will be > very little off the ends! a mind experiment to consider put 10w at > 2.4 ghz into a 10 foot dia dish , point it down a 10 foot dia steel tube > 100 foot long ,put another identicle 10 foot dia dish at the other end > connect a bird wattmeter to the receiving dish feed point How many watts > are you going to read in the Bird wattmeter assuming no propagation loss of > RF ??????????10w ????? if its more than 10w tell me where the extra energy > comes from ??? cheers Mike > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Geoff Edmonson" > To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" > Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 4:15 AM > Subject: [ss] Re: Cooking food with high EIRP? > > > >> >>>Hi Geoff, yes you are right the feild strength meter will read higher, >> > no > >>>doubt about that ! and it will if the ant is doing a good job but >> >>I knew there was gonna be a "but"! ;-) >> >>Let's have some fun with this (grinnin') >> >> >>>if you >>>think how an antenna gain array acheives an apparent increase in field >>>strength in wanted directions by enhancing the field strength at the >>>EXPENSE of field strength in other directions. thats the key !, >> >>For a beam, yes. We're talking about a Dish, with some gain, and focusing > > all > >>the energy that 'was' going in different directions, into one direction. >> >>From what I read, it seems as if you're trying to say that "if you start > > with > >>10w, and you affix an antenna array, and measure the feild strength, then >>focus -all- the energy in one direction, then you are only going to see > > 10w" and > >>I simply do -not- agree. >> >> >>>instead of sharing its energy out in a spherical shape where field >> > strength is > >>>identical at a fixed distance all around from the source. >> >>Are you saying that there are no vertical antennas (which radiate equally > > poor > >>in -all- directions ;->) that have any gain? My 70cm mobile antenna has > > 6.3dbd > >>(that's 6db of gain, over a referenced Dipole, which is 3db gain over an >>isotropic antenna). >> >>I can't buy into the idea that 10w of RF eneregy, at 2.4GHz, or higher is > > safe > >>within 10' of the antenna. >> >>I think someone else here said it, and it's the way I believe, also - I > > think of > >>a beam antenna as a magnifying glass for RF. a "focus", if you will, for > > the > >>energy being generated. >> >>ERP means "Effective Radiated Power". Even vertical antennas can be > > configured > >>to show 'gain' of up to 10db. Crunch that through the ERP formula (which > > slips > >>my mind at this time - need more coffee ;->) and the Effective Radiated > > power > >>will be more than the power generated by the transmitter. >> >>Roughly: 10W generated into a 9db gain antenna has an ERP of 80W. >>With 3db being the "twice power" point, >>10W + 3db = 20W >>20W + 3db = 40W >>40W + 3db = 80W >>(this, assuming no losses per connector or transmission line) >> >>So, a "gain" vertical antenna vs. a vertical Dipole will increase the > > field > >>strength by increasing the Effective Radiated Power, regardless of > > frequency. > >>73 = Best Regards, >>-=Geoff/W5OMR=- >> >> >> >>--- >>You are currently subscribed to ss as: PINFOLD@XTRA.CO.NZ >>To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org >> > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: gerry.creager@tamu.edu > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org -- Gerry Creager -- gerry.creager@tamu.edu Network Engineering -- AATLT, Texas A&M University Office: 979.458.4020 FAX: 979.847.8578 Cell: 979.229.4301 Pager: 979.228.0173 --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sun Dec 8 16:32:26 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id QAA27451 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 16:32:24 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: Tony Langdon To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Use of 2.4 GHz Under Part 97 Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 09:31:41 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id QAA27451 > >I see no such movement in the WiFi community. > > The local WiFi organization here is contacting local > emergency management > organizations about providing services in times of need. > Their network technology > is based on dynamic, fairly modern, networking technology > freely available in > Unix systems. They have, in general, passed the 10+ year > old Ampr.org network > in technology. One of these days (and I mean days, not > months) somebody on the > community WiFi front will get the hot idea to VPN all the > community networks together > and when that happens, Ampr.org will be museum technology. You'll be surprised at the level of technology, particularly on the networking side. Emergency comms will come once the WiFi groups have workable networks. > They, the WiFi'ers, should be paying a bit more attention to > the lessons we learned > with legacy packet 15 years ago. Things like Hidden > Transmitters and desense from > near by radios are a real problem. It's fascinating to > watch them "discover" these issues > all over again. Indeed. And it's interesting to see how they play out in this new playing field as well. > Now if we married the technologies we'd have something. > 802.11* for the last 100 feet. > Amateur links, using SS and other technologies on the other > sparsely used ham bands, > for the "10's of miles" connections from Internet gateways to > 802.11 enabled servers. > Tie it all together as a VPN under the Ampr.org umbrella. > Wow! That would be impressive. Count me in! This is the sort of thing I'd want to get involved in. > PS. Here's a thought. If a communications circuit can be > established with Part 15 > equipment, doing the same with "commonly configured" (a > trick statement - troll bait) > Part 97 equipment would technically put the Part 97 equipment > in the realm of operating > illegally. Hmm, as a politician over used to say... "Please explain"... a little much doublespeak to be sure I know what you mean... --- Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.423 / Virus Database: 238 - Release Date: 25/11/2002 This correspondence is for the named person’s use only. It may contain confidential or legally privileged information or both. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of this correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sun Dec 8 16:55:04 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id QAA27955 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 16:55:03 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Geoff Edmonson" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: Cooking food with high EIRP? Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 16:54:51 -0600 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-RAVMilter-Version: 8.4.1(snapshot 20020919) (w5omr) List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: <002f01c29f0c$d11603a0$0200a8c0@hamhome.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > Hi Geoff The Key statement in the discussion in the ERP is that the gain > array field strength, is now " EQUIVALANT TO " ie your 10w into the 9db No no no. When you -START- with 10w, and you feed that into a 9db gain antenna, you will have the equivalent of 80w at the received end. 10W + 3db = 20W 20W + 3db = 40W 40W + 3db = 80W Effective Radiated Power out of a 9db gain antenna (ignoring losses in connectors/feedline) with 10W in, is 80W out. With 100W in, that's nearly a kiloWatt out! Now, run two antennas together, one with no gain, the other with 9db gain, set the meters up at the far end, and now tell me which one will show more on the meter at the far end? > a mind experiment to consider put 10w at > 2.4 ghz into a 10 foot dia dish , point it down a 10 foot dia steel tube > 100 foot long ,put another identicle 10 foot dia dish at the other end > connect a bird wattmeter to the receiving dish feed point How many watts > are you going to read in the Bird wattmeter assuming no propagation loss of > RF ??????????10w ????? if its more than 10w tell me where the extra energy > comes from ??? cheers Mike If there's no gain in the Effective Radiated Power, then why bother with a gain antenna? The extra energy comes from the 'focusing', if you will, of the energy all in ONE direction, instead of letting all the energy go everywhere. 73 = Best Regards, -=Geoff/W5OMR=- --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sun Dec 8 21:29:17 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id VAA07335 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 21:29:13 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 21:26:59 -0600 From: Lawrence Stoskopf X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Cooking food with high EIRP? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3DF40D83.595DA281@tri.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > Effective Radiated Power out of a 9db gain antenna (ignoring losses in > connectors/feedline) with 10W in, is 80W out. With 100W in, that's nearly a > kiloWatt out! to an omni antenna! Which will give the same power in the beamwidth of the 9 dB antenna as the 10 watts would have given. You just aren't wasting energy. N0UU --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sun Dec 8 23:43:24 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id XAA11682 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 23:43:24 -0600 (CST) From: "Darryl Smith" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] How can TAPR support SS development... Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 16:39:30 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Scanner: exiscan *18LGg2-0000X0-00*3kFF8Ui/MOU* on Astaro Security Linux List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <022d01c29f45$5b7a0b80$4601a8c0@DELL8000> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk People Lets attempt to get this all back on track... It seems to me that a) There are a lot of people out there experimenting with 802.11 inside and outside the ham world. b) A lot of these people have no idea about packet type networks (which is what 802.11 is) nor about microwave Given all this, and since this is a TAPR hosted list, I would like to solicit Some ideas from the members of this list... And given that not all the members Of TAPR have HAM licenses... What I want answered is WHAT SHOULD *TAPR* BE DOING TO SUPPORT THIS ACTIVITY Should we be looking at some microwave hardware projects? A spectrum analyser kit? Antennas? Then we have a related question... WHAT CAN YOU DO TO HELP *TAPR* ACHIEVE IT'S GOALS OF SUPPORTING SPREAD SPECTRUM? Feel free to email me privately.... --------- Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sun Dec 8 23:48:02 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id XAA12024 for ; Sun, 8 Dec 2002 23:47:59 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Geoff Edmonson" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: Cooking food with high EIRP? Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 23:47:38 -0600 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-RAVMilter-Version: 8.4.1(snapshot 20020919) (w5omr) List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: <001301c29f46$7b76b720$0200a8c0@hamhome.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Is it just me? > > Effective Radiated Power out of a 9db gain antenna (ignoring losses in > > connectors/feedline) with 10W in, is 80W out. With 100W in, that's nearly > > a kiloWatt out! > > to an omni antenna! Which will give the same power in the beamwidth of > the 9 dB antenna as the 10 watts would have given. > You just aren't wasting energy. Two complete and separate, yet identical transmitters, in two complete and separate, yet identical settings. Transmitter A is being fed into a 9dbi antenna. Transmitter B is being fed into an isotropic antenna Both transmitters are delivering the same amount of power to their respective loads (antennas) With complete and separate, yet identical receivers and receiving antennas, which transmitter will show more relative field strength at the receiver? Why? Geeze, I typed that, and it sounds exactly like the type of tests I HATE to take, but I guess at this point, I need someone to explain to me why 10W into a 9db gain antenna doesn't appear as 80W at the receiver. (example) Joe Ham is on 17m SSB. He thinks "Man, this is a GREAT band, the antenna is smaller than 20, there's no contest, there's no nets, and there's no 20m attitudes to deal with! I'll erect an Antenna for this band, and camp out here!" Suddenly, the dipole isn't cutting it anymore, and he wants -more-. So, he erects a 2-el quad (I picked that, because I've been working with a quad of late). Hmmm... 2 quad elements give ~7.3dbd gain. 3 elements is ~10.1dbd gain. 4 elements should be somewhere around (give or take) 12dbd gain. So, time goes by and Joe Ham has his 4 element quad in the air, with (let's just 'ass/u/me' it's 12dbd for arguments sake) 12dbd gain, and he puts his 100w out of his Icom 706 MKIIG (because they're so popular - wish I had one) and gets the equivalent of: 100W + 3db = 200W 200W + 3db = 400W 400W + 3db = 800W 800W + 3db = 1.6kW Joe now has the effective radiated power of 1.6kW out of his quad-beam antenna. In the meantime, Joe decides to leave his dipole up, for a reference. Switching between the two antennas, Joe sees a difference in the quad and the dipole. A MARKEDLY BIG difference! Why? Is it still the 100W coming out of the antenna? Why does the field strength show 10 to 15db of gain, over the dipole? they both have 100w out of 'me. Am I missing something here? -- 73 = Best Regards, -=Geoff/W5OMR=- --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Mon Dec 9 00:10:11 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id AAA14658 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 00:10:01 -0600 (CST) Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 00:08:29 -0600 From: Jeffrey Austen Subject: [ss] Re: Cooking food with high EIRP? In-reply-to: <"from w5omr"@w5omr.shacknet.nu> To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit Lines: 112 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <20021209000829.A16561@cerf.ece.tntech.edu> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Geoff: Try this experiment. Get a flashlight that comes apart so you can remove the reflector and have just a bare bulb. Go into a dark room, stand in the middle, and shine the flashlight at a wall. Observe how bright the wall is where the flashlight is shining and that any other place in the room is quite dark. Now remove the reflector so that you have a bare bulb and repeat the experiment. This time you will notice that the place where the bright spot was is now dimly illuminated, however all the other walls are also now dimly illuminated. Without the reflector the light went in all directions but with the reflector the light was all concentrated in one direction. This is exactly what happens with directional antennas. Jeff On 2002.12.08 23:47 Geoff Edmonson wrote: > Is it just me? > > > > > Effective Radiated Power out of a 9db gain antenna (ignoring > losses in > > > connectors/feedline) with 10W in, is 80W out. With 100W in, > that's nearly > > > a kiloWatt out! > > > > to an omni antenna! Which will give the same power in the beamwidth > of > > the 9 dB antenna as the 10 watts would have given. > > > You just aren't wasting energy. > > Two complete and separate, yet identical transmitters, in two complete > and > separate, yet identical settings. > > Transmitter A is being fed into a 9dbi antenna. > Transmitter B is being fed into an isotropic antenna > > Both transmitters are delivering the same amount of power to their > respective > loads (antennas) > > With complete and separate, yet identical receivers and receiving > antennas, > which transmitter will show more relative field strength at the > receiver? > > Why? > > Geeze, I typed that, and it sounds exactly like the type of tests I > HATE to > take, but I guess at this point, I need someone to explain to me why > 10W into a > 9db gain antenna doesn't appear as 80W at the receiver. > > (example) > Joe Ham is on 17m SSB. He thinks "Man, this is a GREAT band, the > antenna is > smaller than 20, there's no contest, there's no nets, and there's no > 20m > attitudes to deal with! I'll erect an Antenna for this band, and camp > out > here!" Suddenly, the dipole isn't cutting it anymore, and he wants > -more-. > > So, he erects a 2-el quad (I picked that, because I've been working > with a quad > of late). Hmmm... 2 quad elements give ~7.3dbd gain. 3 elements is > ~10.1dbd > gain. 4 elements should be somewhere around (give or take) 12dbd > gain. > > So, time goes by and Joe Ham has his 4 element quad in the air, with > (let's just > 'ass/u/me' it's 12dbd for arguments sake) 12dbd gain, and he puts his > 100w out > of his Icom 706 MKIIG (because they're so popular - wish I had one) > and gets the equivalent of: > > 100W + 3db = 200W > 200W + 3db = 400W > 400W + 3db = 800W > 800W + 3db = 1.6kW > > Joe now has the effective radiated power of 1.6kW out of his quad-beam > antenna. > In the meantime, Joe decides to leave his dipole up, for a reference. > Switching between the two antennas, Joe sees a difference in the quad > and the > dipole. A MARKEDLY BIG difference! Why? > > Is it still the 100W coming out of the antenna? > > Why does the field strength show 10 to 15db of gain, over the dipole? > they both > have 100w out of 'me. > > Am I missing something here? > > > -- > 73 = Best Regards, > -=Geoff/W5OMR=- > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: JAUSTEN@TNTECH.EDU > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Mon Dec 9 10:18:03 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id KAA07992 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 10:18:01 -0600 (CST) content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Subject: [ss] Re: ISP Proposal and Illegal operation X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 11:15:36 -0500 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [ss] Re: ISP Proposal and Illegal operation Thread-Index: AcKds088npAsmoRJQXmlpezAevXvugBhewMQ From: "Hare,Ed, W1RFI" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <721D3436A7C2B344A301FD4A413C71A96ECFED@kosh.ARRLHQ.ORG> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id KAA07992 > But these users are not operating under part 15. They are unlicensed. > Get unlicensed users shut down. Don't force licensed part 15 off the > air. There are no licensed Part 15 operations. The spread-spectrum operation operates under the same basic set of rules and assumptions as baby monitors. For information on Part 15 and amateur radio, see: http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/part15.html 73, Ed Hare, W1RFI ARRL Lab 225 Main St Newington, CT 06111 Tel: 860-594-0318 Internet: w1rfi@arrl.org Web: http://www.arrl.org/tis > -----Original Message----- > From: Darryl Smith [mailto:Darryl@radio-active.net.au] > Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2002 12:41 AM > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] Re: ISP Proposal and Illegal operation > > > Jeff King wrote. > > >> Because the eyes of Washington are on us as hams... Whatever we do > >> will make an impact. We do not have the lobying power of > the wireless > >> community groups.... Imagine the power of Microsoft, Cisco, Sprint, > >> Verizon etc. Think the Little Leo and multiply things by 1000. > > > > > >Yes, we do agree the eyes of Washington are on hams. If we > sit by, and > let > >blatent rule violators take over our bands, in full view of the > regulators, > >then this will become the norm. Part 97 are primary over part 15 and > the rule > >of the land should mean something, even to the MicroSoft's that you > seem to > >feel we should run scared from. Is rolling over and letting > people walk > all > >over you the impact you wish to make in life? > > I belive that the story of the Tar Baby is a USA fairy > tale... About how > more the brair fox from memory strugled, the more they got stuck. By > enforcing part 97 TO THE LETTER OF THE LAW, I believe we run > the risk of > loosing primary > > >And as I CLEARLY stated before, I am against hams forming > death squads > to track > >down baby monitors, portable phones and firebombing the > local utilties. > What I > >am saying is that it is foolish to standby while clear rule > violations > are > >taking place in part 15 AND those same rule violations are > disrupting > >legitimate amateur communications. > > But these users are not operating under part 15. They are unlicensed. > Get unlicensed users shut down. Don't force licensed part 15 off the > air. > > >Part 15 users and hams CAN and SHOULD get > >along together. But this is a two way steet and the only time I am > aware of > >that hams pushed back was when the Part 15 WISP was completely > uncooprative > >(tried to claim he was running his ISP under Part 18). > > I am not arguing this... BTW, what is part 18? > > >Most WISP's are more > >then willing to work with ham's to resolve problems. But you > statement > of > >contacting the FCC before the ARRL takes all chance of working things > out > >without goverment involvement out of the picture. I think the FCC > should only > >be involved as a last resort. > > YES YES YES. > > But if that does not work, contact the FCC - at least if they are > unlicensed because of illegal power or equipment. > > Darryl > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: W1RFI@ARRL.ORG > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Mon Dec 9 10:19:43 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id KAA08067 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 10:19:41 -0600 (CST) content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Subject: [ss] RE: ss digest: December 06, 2002 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 11:18:02 -0500 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [ss] RE: ss digest: December 06, 2002 Thread-Index: AcKdumALHwZzC9bqTQSU/9ICmEgfngBf2bhA From: "Hare,Ed, W1RFI" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <721D3436A7C2B344A301FD4A413C71A96ECFEE@kosh.ARRLHQ.ORG> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id KAA08067 A solar cooker is not a parabolic dish; it is a lens. It is not designed to focus energy in the far field, as is an antenna; it is designed to focus energy at a point that is clearly in the near field of the "antenna." 73, Ed Hare, W1RFI ARRL Lab 225 Main St Newington, CT 06111 Tel: 860-594-0318 Internet: w1rfi@arrl.org Web: http://www.arrl.org/tis > -----Original Message----- > From: Walt DuBose [mailto:dubose@texas.net] > Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2002 1:32 AM > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] RE: ss digest: December 06, 2002 > > > Darryl Smith wrote: > > > > > > If you took a lens like this and tried to cook food using the sun it > > would be quite hard. We are talking about a lens that looks almost > > identical to a piece of glass here since the sun is so far away. > > > > Can you say solar oven and solar cooking. I've boiled soup and > cooked > beans on a solar cooker that has a shiny dish reflector and a > hook in > the center of focus of the dish to hang a pot on. I never looked > at the > physics of it, but the dang thing worked, except on cloudy days. > But we > have lots of sun up here in Texas. > > Walt > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: W1RFI@ARRL.ORG > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Mon Dec 9 10:23:57 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id KAA08207 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 10:23:53 -0600 (CST) content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Subject: [ss] Re: Cooking food with high EIRP? X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 11:23:06 -0500 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [ss] Re: Cooking food with high EIRP? Thread-Index: AcKd7EaAdKZTfI+rQ6ujzdPpERFxaQBTeqOQ From: "Hare,Ed, W1RFI" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <721D3436A7C2B344A301FD4A413C71A96ECFEF@kosh.ARRLHQ.ORG> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id KAA08207 Correct; in the far field, the field strenght for a 1000 W EIRP signal will be 20 dB higher than a 10 W EIRP signal. However, at that point, it will not cook food. As you get closer and closer to the source, the near-field effects will be such at the "gain" of the antenna is reduced. Think of the lens and light -- it may focus energy at a point, but when you get close to the lens, the energy is still spread out. 73, Ed Hare, W1RFI ARRL Lab 225 Main St Newington, CT 06111 Tel: 860-594-0318 Internet: w1rfi@arrl.org Web: http://www.arrl.org/tis > -----Original Message----- > From: Geoff Edmonson [mailto:w5omr@w5omr.shacknet.nu] > Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2002 7:30 AM > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] Re: Cooking food with high EIRP? > > > > > > Just to put my 2 cents worth in ... 10 watts ( calorific > heating value ) > > into a 20 db dish still spits out 10 watts ( calorific > heating value ) no > > more energy is obtained ! > > Tell that to the field strength meter. > > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: W1RFI@ARRL.ORG > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Mon Dec 9 12:24:25 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id MAA14495 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 12:24:24 -0600 (CST) Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Message-ID: Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 12:24:32 -0600 From: Walt DuBose X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE: ss digest: December 06, 2002 References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3DF4DFE0.BC6DB88E@texas.net> Precedence: bulk Oops.your right...but is looks like a dish antenna? It pulls in the suns rays and focuses them in a specific spot and the spot gets hot. So don't put your head in the receiving spot of a receiving dish on 2.4 GHz, you might get bunred. -- Walt/K5YFW PS, Just pulling our leg Ed. Wanna hear my war story about what the radar trasnmitter on an F-106 can to to matches and flash bulbs at 30 ft? "Hare,Ed, W1RFI" wrote: > > A solar cooker is not a parabolic dish; it is a lens. It is not designed to focus energy in the far field, as is an antenna; it is designed to focus energy at a point that is clearly in the near field of the "antenna." > > 73, > Ed Hare, W1RFI > ARRL Lab > 225 Main St > Newington, CT 06111 > Tel: 860-594-0318 > Internet: w1rfi@arrl.org > Web: http://www.arrl.org/tis > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Walt DuBose [mailto:dubose@texas.net] > > Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2002 1:32 AM > > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > > Subject: [ss] RE: ss digest: December 06, 2002 > > > > > > Darryl Smith wrote: > > > > > > > > > If you took a lens like this and tried to cook food using the sun it > > > would be quite hard. We are talking about a lens that looks almost > > > identical to a piece of glass here since the sun is so far away. > > > > > > > Can you say solar oven and solar cooking. I've boiled soup and > > cooked > > beans on a solar cooker that has a shiny dish reflector and a > > hook in > > the center of focus of the dish to hang a pot on. I never looked > > at the > > physics of it, but the dang thing worked, except on cloudy days. > > But we > > have lots of sun up here in Texas. > > > > Walt > > > > --- > > You are currently subscribed to ss as: W1RFI@ARRL.ORG > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: dubose@texas.net > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Mon Dec 9 17:11:03 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id RAA28536 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 17:11:02 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: Tony Langdon To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS development... Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 10:10:18 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id RAA28536 > Lets attempt to get this all back on track... It seems to me that > > a) There are a lot of people out there experimenting > with 802.11 inside and outside the ham world. > b) A lot of these people have no idea about packet type networks > (which is what 802.11 is) nor about microwave I'd agree on both counts. And there's also... c) A significant fraction of these people are interested in learning more or experimenting with different aspects of the technology (antennas, access point configurations, routing, etc). > Given all this, and since this is a TAPR hosted list, I would like to > solicit > Some ideas from the members of this list... And given that not all the > members > Of TAPR have HAM licenses... What I want answered is > > WHAT SHOULD *TAPR* BE DOING TO SUPPORT THIS ACTIVITY > > Should we be looking at some microwave hardware projects? A spectrum > analyser kit? Antennas? I can see a need for low level, low budget hardware projects. Even things as simple as 2.4 GHz field strength meters will be useful (how many 802.11b experimenters have any idea of how their antenna is performing? - answer: almost none). At some stage, we will also need more "high end" projects for amateurs such as amplifiers, transverters and SS systems to go beyond what 802.11b offers. Perhaps TAPR can offer some form of online resource as well to serve both hams and non hams - fill the gap between the 802.11b info sites and the ham microwave/SS experimenters. Also, this list already acts as a meeting place for SS interested people. One problem I've noticed for hams on the higher bands is getting information and liaising with others who have similar interests. That's one area where both the Internet linking (IRLP, etc) and 802.11b camps have got it right. They know how to leverage the Internet for maximum benefit (in terms of behind the scenes support). > Then we have a related question... > > WHAT CAN YOU DO TO HELP *TAPR* ACHIEVE IT'S GOALS OF SUPPORTING > SPREAD SPECTRUM? Well, personally, I'm at the interface between the hams and the 802.11b experimenters, so I feel I can help in a number of ways, from recruiting new hams (who will have an interest in SS and high speed data) to putting them in touch with TAPR (especially if some of these low end projects take off - "Build the TAPR FS meter, it's what you need to tweak that antenna"). > > Feel free to email me privately.... No probs. At this stage, I'm happy to keep my discussion public. --- Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 This correspondence is for the named person’s use only. It may contain confidential or legally privileged information or both. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of this correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Mon Dec 9 18:55:50 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id SAA01857 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 18:55:50 -0600 (CST) content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Subject: [ss] Re: Cooking food with high EIRP? X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 19:55:03 -0500 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [ss] Re: Cooking food with high EIRP? Thread-Index: AcKfDMQ7kYOEjsFCTaqB3dyJHjS/gQAdOuLw From: "Hare,Ed, W1RFI" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <721D3436A7C2B344A301FD4A413C71A96ED008@kosh.ARRLHQ.ORG> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id SAA01857 > No no no. > > When you -START- with 10w, and you feed that into a 9db gain > antenna, you will > have the equivalent of 80w at the received end. Only if the antenna doing the radiating completely illuminates the capture area of the receive antenna. In the extreme near field of an antenna, the receive antenna is not fully illuminated by all of the transmit antenna, so the fields are less than would be indicated by the EIRP. And that 10 watts will never cook an entire hot dog, at any distance, any frequency or any antenna gain! 73, Ed Hare, W1RFI ARRL Lab 225 Main St Newington, CT 06111 Tel: 860-594-0318 Internet: w1rfi@arrl.org Web: http://www.arrl.org/tis ARRL is the National Association for Amateur Radio. It is supported by membership dues, individual contributions and the sale of publications and advertising. For more information about ARRL, go to http://www.arrl.org/news/features/inside-your-league.html. For more information about membership, go to http://www.arrl.org/join.html. Your contribution can also help support ARRL's ongoing efforts to protect Amateur spectrum. Go to https://www.arrl.org/forms/development/donations/basic/ to learn more about the ways you can support the ARRL programs and activities of most importance to you. You can help ARRL protect Amateur Radio for you and future generations to enjoy. > -----Original Message----- > From: Geoff Edmonson [mailto:w5omr@w5omr.shacknet.nu] > Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 5:55 PM > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] Re: Cooking food with high EIRP? > > > > > > Hi Geoff The Key statement in the discussion in the ERP is > that the gain > > array field strength, is now " EQUIVALANT TO " ie your 10w > into the 9db > > No no no. > > When you -START- with 10w, and you feed that into a 9db gain > antenna, you will > have the equivalent of 80w at the received end. > > 10W + 3db = 20W > 20W + 3db = 40W > 40W + 3db = 80W > > Effective Radiated Power out of a 9db gain antenna (ignoring losses in > connectors/feedline) with 10W in, is 80W out. With 100W in, > that's nearly a > kiloWatt out! > > Now, run two antennas together, one with no gain, the other > with 9db gain, set > the meters up at the far end, and now tell me which one will > show more on the > meter at the far end? > > > a mind experiment to consider put 10w at > > 2.4 ghz into a 10 foot dia dish , point it down a 10 foot > dia steel tube > > 100 foot long ,put another identicle 10 foot dia dish at > the other end > > connect a bird wattmeter to the receiving dish feed point > How many watts > > are you going to read in the Bird wattmeter assuming no > propagation loss of > > RF ??????????10w ????? if its more than 10w tell me where > the extra energy > > comes from ??? cheers Mike > > If there's no gain in the Effective Radiated Power, then why > bother with a gain > antenna? > > The extra energy comes from the 'focusing', if you will, of > the energy all in > ONE direction, instead of letting all the energy go everywhere. > > 73 = Best Regards, > -=Geoff/W5OMR=- > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: W1RFI@ARRL.ORG > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Mon Dec 9 19:13:14 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id TAA02515 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 19:13:09 -0600 (CST) content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Subject: [ss] Re: Cooking food with high EIRP? X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 20:12:23 -0500 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [ss] Re: Cooking food with high EIRP? Thread-Index: AcKezK/9q1NL6+u4T6iPxoiEWUsIjAAtizJw From: "Hare,Ed, W1RFI" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <721D3436A7C2B344A301FD4A413C71A9ADF33F@kosh.ARRLHQ.ORG> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id TAA02515 > I can't buy into the idea that 10w of RF eneregy, at 2.4GHz, > or higher is safe within 10' of the antenna. So, I ran EZNEC with a 2.4 GHz Yagi with 18 dBi of gain, in free space. I fed the antenna with 10 watts. I went 10 feet away with the near-field calculation. It showed that the field would be 45 volts/meter. The permitted exposure level is 61.4 volts/meter. The field does increase as one gets closer to the antenna. At about 7 feet, the limit is exceeded. If the power were 400 milliwatts, the Part 15 legal limit for an antenna of 18 dBi gain, the field would be 51.7 volts/meter 2 feet from the center of the antenna. 73, Ed Hare, W1RFI ARRL Lab 225 Main St Newington, CT 06111 Tel: 860-594-0318 Internet: w1rfi@arrl.org Web: http://www.arrl.org/tis ARRL is the National Association for Amateur Radio. It is supported by membership dues, individual contributions and the sale of publications and advertising. For more information about ARRL, go to http://www.arrl.org/news/features/inside-your-league.html. For more information about membership, go to http://www.arrl.org/join.html. Your contribution can also help support ARRL's ongoing efforts to protect Amateur spectrum. Go to https://www.arrl.org/forms/development/donations/basic/ to learn more about the ways you can support the ARRL programs and activities of most importance to you. You can help ARRL protect Amateur Radio for you and future generations to enjoy. > -----Original Message----- > From: Geoff Edmonson [mailto:w5omr@w5omr.shacknet.nu] > Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 10:15 AM > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] Re: Cooking food with high EIRP? > > > > > > Hi Geoff, yes you are right the feild strength meter will > read higher, no > > doubt about that ! and it will if the ant is doing a good job but > > I knew there was gonna be a "but"! ;-) > > Let's have some fun with this (grinnin') > > > if you > > think how an antenna gain array acheives an apparent > increase in field > > strength in wanted directions by enhancing the field > strength at the > > EXPENSE of field strength in other directions. thats the key !, > > For a beam, yes. We're talking about a Dish, with some gain, > and focusing all > the energy that 'was' going in different directions, into one > direction. > > From what I read, it seems as if you're trying to say that > "if you start with > 10w, and you affix an antenna array, and measure the feild > strength, then > focus -all- the energy in one direction, then you are only > going to see 10w" and > I simply do -not- agree. > > > instead of sharing its energy out in a spherical shape > where field strength is > > identical at a fixed distance all around from the source. > > Are you saying that there are no vertical antennas (which > radiate equally poor > in -all- directions ;->) that have any gain? My 70cm mobile > antenna has 6.3dbd > (that's 6db of gain, over a referenced Dipole, which is 3db > gain over an > isotropic antenna). > > I can't buy into the idea that 10w of RF eneregy, at 2.4GHz, > or higher is safe > within 10' of the antenna. > > I think someone else here said it, and it's the way I > believe, also - I think of > a beam antenna as a magnifying glass for RF. a "focus", if > you will, for the > energy being generated. > > ERP means "Effective Radiated Power". Even vertical antennas > can be configured > to show 'gain' of up to 10db. Crunch that through the ERP > formula (which slips > my mind at this time - need more coffee ;->) and the > Effective Radiated power > will be more than the power generated by the transmitter. > > Roughly: 10W generated into a 9db gain antenna has an ERP of 80W. > With 3db being the "twice power" point, > 10W + 3db = 20W > 20W + 3db = 40W > 40W + 3db = 80W > (this, assuming no losses per connector or transmission line) > > So, a "gain" vertical antenna vs. a vertical Dipole will > increase the field > strength by increasing the Effective Radiated Power, > regardless of frequency. > > 73 = Best Regards, > -=Geoff/W5OMR=- > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: W1RFI@ARRL.ORG > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Mon Dec 9 19:18:20 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id TAA02922 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 19:18:20 -0600 (CST) content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Subject: [ss] Re: ISP Proposal and Illegal operation X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 20:17:26 -0500 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [ss] Re: ISP Proposal and Illegal operation Thread-Index: AcKef6waFoR5Z2DeQiaLwMWYNCpqiABBOzSg From: "Hare,Ed, W1RFI" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <721D3436A7C2B344A301FD4A413C71A9ADF340@kosh.ARRLHQ.ORG> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id TAA02922 > OK... The regulatory system in Oz is a bit different... Anyway I have > just read up on some of Part 15, and I have come to the following > conslusion > Some Part 15 services are licensed and some are not. Actually, no. No Part 15 operating is licensed. Part 15 transmitters all must be Certificated, but that applies to the baby monitor and the SS device alike. Not all emitters have to be Certificated, though -- there is a whole range between incidental emitters, which have no specific requirements other than to use good engineering practice and to be operated in a way that doesn't cause harmful interference to intentional emitters which have to be Certificated. (Most Part 97 operation doesn't require Certification, with the exception of HF/6 M power amplifiers.) For info, see http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/part15.html. 73, Ed Hare, W1RFI ARRL Lab 225 Main St Newington, CT 06111 Tel: 860-594-0318 Internet: w1rfi@arrl.org Web: http://www.arrl.org/tis > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Mon Dec 9 19:30:04 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id TAA03483 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 19:30:04 -0600 (CST) content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Subject: [ss] Re: Cooking food with high EIRP? X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 20:29:05 -0500 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [ss] Re: Cooking food with high EIRP? Thread-Index: AcKd0ShggQlcKIh0Rz+j3SCU07gXBABtUhqA From: "Hare,Ed, W1RFI" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <721D3436A7C2B344A301FD4A413C71A96ED00B@kosh.ARRLHQ.ORG> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id TAA03483 > So, if you get near 1 KW EIRP in the near field of a dish, you WILL cook > food. Or you head. But you can't get 10 feet away from a 30-foot diameter dish. :-) If you are, most of the beamwidth of that antenna is NOT illuminating you. That is the whole premise about near-field radiation; you are never near all of a very large antenna. 73, Ed Hare, W1RFI ARRL Lab 225 Main St Newington, CT 06111 Tel: 860-594-0318 Internet: w1rfi@arrl.org Web: http://www.arrl.org/tis > -----Original Message----- > From: Ron Hashiro [mailto:rhashiro@verizon.net] > Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2002 4:14 AM > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] Re: Cooking food with high EIRP? > > > I concur with Lawrence. > > If I recall correctly, the first demonstration of food cooking was at > Raytheon, > where someone popped popcorn kernals by hold it in the path > of a 40 watt > microwave > amplifier output. > > A high powered residential microwave (such as the 1 KW > Panasonic Microwaves) > puts out 1000 Watts (look at the label) in the 2.4 GHz ISM > band. 2.4 GHz is > used because the components are cheaper than Ku Band or 65 > GHz, where there > are peaks in water absorption. > > So, if you get near 1 KW EIRP in the near field of a dish, > you WILL cook > food. > Or you head. > > Don't be fooled. Ten watts, into 20 dB gain, is 1,000 watts. > Be careful. > > Lawrence Stoskopf wrote: > > >But I do remember about 1957 seeing at Kansas State's > Engineering Open > >House someone cooking a hot dog over the end of an open > waveguide right > >out of some sort of surplus RF generator. Wasn't > sophisticated enough > >at the time to do anything but say, "WOW!" > > > >N0UU > > > >>Gotta' be careful tossing around claims about RF safety, > because a bit of careful analysis usually shows that RF > safety is not an issue. It is almost impossible for a Part 15 > device to exceed the FCC limits. It is nearly as hard for an > amateur, even running 1000 watts to a 30-meter dish! :-) > >> > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: W1RFI@ARRL.ORG > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Mon Dec 9 19:38:04 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id TAA03743 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 19:38:01 -0600 (CST) content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Subject: [ss] Re: Use of 2.4 GHz Under Part 97 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 20:36:58 -0500 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [ss] Re: Use of 2.4 GHz Under Part 97 Thread-Index: AcKduXp9yvMaN+8+TKa/sAabx/l45ABzV6Yg From: "Hare,Ed, W1RFI" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <721D3436A7C2B344A301FD4A413C71A9ADF341@kosh.ARRLHQ.ORG> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id TAA03743 > While is am a bit disappointed at how the League has decided to > use this money, I believe that the mere fact that we received the > money and especially the amount of money is a clear indication of > our worth. The money was not received with "few strings attached." ARRL applied for this grant for specific purposes, based in part on the pre-application discussions about the scope of the grant money and what types of things were apt to be funded. The League simply must use the money for exactly what it said it would do. I agree that the grant is a clear indication of the value of amateur radio to the nation. And in getting this "buy in" by the Feds, I believe that amateur radio's position is strengthened across the board. The funds are going to be used to train volunteers in emergency communications techniques. In what way do you feel the money could have been better spent towards homeland security? See: http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2002/07/18/102/ http://www.arrl.org/pio/press_releases/fed-grant.html Off topic, guys; I will let someone else have the last word, if they wish. 73, Ed Hare, W1RFI ARRL Lab 225 Main St Newington, CT 06111 Tel: 860-594-0318 Internet: w1rfi@arrl.org Web: http://www.arrl.org/tis > -----Original Message----- > From: Walt DuBose [mailto:dubose@texas.net] > Sent: Saturday, December 07, 2002 1:26 AM > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] Re: Use of 2.4 GHz Under Part 97 > > > I have changed the subject but want to let you know my feelings > about the subject. > > First, the ARRL received a rather large sum of money from the > federal government's homeland security fund. Few non-aligned > organizations have received money from this fund with few > "strings" attached. > This tells me that the administration acknowledges the value and > worth of amateur radio operators and desires to see them improve > the organization. Please note that no WiFi organization has > received this kind of money. > > While is am a bit disappointed at how the League has decided to > use this money, I believe that the mere fact that we received the > money and especially the amount of money is a clear indication of > our worth. > > Anything that we do to improve our communications capability will > be noticed. Being able to use existing technology in an improved > way will be most certainly be recognized. > > As hams certainly we know that the more reliable you can make a > communications media, the better it is for the user. And when > you design a system that can in an emergency be used to replace > lost communications, you are going to be noticed. > > I see no such movement in the WiFi community. > > If we make a big splash and Washington knows about it, we have > the advantage. > > In D.C. its not what you know or who you know, its do you have > the advantage > or what can you do for the administration that makes it look good > and still > benefits the nation. > > How the "Hill" is running today is very different than during the > Clinton > administration. > > Walt > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: W1RFI@ARRL.ORG > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Mon Dec 9 19:42:44 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id TAA03867 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 19:42:42 -0600 (CST) content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Subject: [ss] Re: ISP Proposal and Illegal operation X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 20:41:47 -0500 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [ss] Re: ISP Proposal and Illegal operation Thread-Index: AcKds088npAsmoRJQXmlpezAevXvugB1NbHQ From: "Hare,Ed, W1RFI" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <721D3436A7C2B344A301FD4A413C71A96ED00D@kosh.ARRLHQ.ORG> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id TAA03867 > I am not arguing this... BTW, what is part 18? Part 18 are the US rules for Industrial, Scientific and Medical equipment. 2.4 - 2.4835 GHz is ISM territory. ISM devices can radiate unlimited power in the ISM bands and no other user has any recourse for interference. ISM cannot be used to transmit information, but includes such devices as microwave ovens and heat sealers. 73, Ed Hare, W1RFI ARRL Lab 225 Main St Newington, CT 06111 Tel: 860-594-0318 Internet: w1rfi@arrl.org Web: http://www.arrl.org/tis > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 00:03:25 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id AAA15845 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 00:03:22 -0600 (CST) From: "Darryl Smith" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS development..."Build the TAPR FS meter" Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:58:40 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Scanner: exiscan *18LdTH-0002EP-00*hjDr9sNndSY* on Astaro Security Linux List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <026801c2a011$335aebc0$4601a8c0@DELL8000> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Tony Langdon noted >I can see a need for low level, low budget hardware projects. Even >things as simple as 2.4 GHz field strength meters will be useful >(how many = 802.11b experimenters have any idea of how their antenna >is performing? answer: almost none). OK. People. We have a challenge here... How do we go about actually getting a relative field strength meter designed for the 2.4 GHZ? I am sure someone on this list knows how to do the RF front end and get a voltage out. It cant be too hard. I can do some of the work once we have a sensor that works. Probably some GaAs diode would work. As for some ideas of what is out there I have included some links. BUT the reason for a project like this one is for the people working on it to actually discover that they like getting their hands dirty. When you build it yourself you usually understand more about it. So who is going to do the RF side? Darryl ------------------ http://www.northcountryradio.com/Kitpages/rffsm.htm http://www.safetyhero.com/mall/microproducts.asp http://www.comforthouse.com/comfort/micleakdetwi.html --------- Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 06:09:36 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id GAA25054 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 06:09:34 -0600 (CST) X-Originating-IP: [12.111.229.199] Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "John Champa" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] DCC Articles Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 07:08:47 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Dec 2002 12:08:47.0823 (UTC) FILETIME=[E4E505F0:01C2A044] List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Darryl, I have taken the liberty of posting your call for articles on the ARRL HSMM Reflector in the hope of encouraging the working group members to also contribute articles to the DCC. In fact Paul and I are already working on a second draft of an article we hope to submit. Another topic I would like to suggest is the use of ITU H.323 for ATV, voice QSOs, applications sharing, or remote control. This software is available as part of Windows (NetMeeting). It is frequently used to conduct videoconferences over IP networks using inexpensive webcams. Vy 73, John - K8OCL _________________________________________________________________ Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 06:25:40 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id GAA25600 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 06:25:36 -0600 (CST) X-Originating-IP: [12.111.229.199] Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "John Champa" Subject: [ss] Fwd: Register now: Intelligent Wireless LAN TechTalk Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 07:25:04 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Dec 2002 12:25:05.0218 (UTC) FILETIME=[2B77AA20:01C2A047] List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Possible interest... From: Cisco Systems Inc To: k8ocl@hotmail.com Subject: Register now: Intelligent Wireless LAN TechTalk Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 22:22:23 -0500 (EST) Dear John J Champa, Register now at http://www.cisco.com/go/semreg/soaptt/113706_27 to talk LIVE with Cisco wireless networking experts at the next Networking Professionals Online TechTalk, "Architecting the Intelligent Wireless LAN," on December 11, 2002, at 10:00 a.m. Pacific Time. Topics include: * Structured wireless LAN architecture * Security and QoS * Enterprise-class services * Wireless VLANs and Mobile IP * Cisco Aironet Access Points Don't miss this opportunity to engage with Cisco wireless networking experts and other networking professionals. You must be registered to attend, so visit http://www.cisco.com/go/semreg/soaptt/113706_27 today. If you have colleagues who are interested in wireless networking, please share this e-mail with them after you register. Sincerely, Cisco Systems, Inc. You have been sent this message because you have indicated that you wish to receive e-mail updates on Cisco products and special offerings. If you would prefer not to receive news about special promotions from Cisco in the future, please visit http://www.cisco.com/offer/unsubscribe . To receive future e-mail updates on Cisco products and special offerings, please visit http://www.cisco.com/offer/subscribe . Copyright (C) 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Catalyst, Cisco, Cisco Systems, Cisco IOS, and the Cisco Systems logo are registered trademarks or trademarks of Cisco Systems, Inc. and/or its affiliates in the U.S. and certain other countries. All other trademarks mentioned in this document or Web site are the property of their respective owners. The use of the word partner does not imply a partnership relationship between Cisco and any other company. (0207R) You are subscribed as k8ocl@hotmail.com _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 06:44:29 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id GAA26419 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 06:44:24 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Geoff Edmonson" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: DCC Articles Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 06:43:13 -0600 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-RAVMilter-Version: 8.4.1(snapshot 20020919) (w5omr) List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: <001901c2a049$b446f0c0$0200a8c0@hamhome.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > Another topic I would like to suggest is the use of ITU H.323 for ATV, voice > QSOs, applications sharing, or remote control. This software is available > as part of Windows (NetMeeting). It is frequently used to conduct > videoconferences over IP networks using inexpensive webcams. What's the Linux equivalent, John? -- 73 = Best Regards, -=Geoff/W5OMR=- --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 07:16:09 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id HAA27489 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 07:16:06 -0600 (CST) X-Authentication-Warning: watermelon.scs.ch: sailer set sender to sailer@scs.ch using -f Subject: [ss] Re: DCC Articles From: Thomas Sailer To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: 10 Dec 2002 14:15:25 +0100 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <1039526125.1679.117.camel@watermelon.scs.ch> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk On Tue, 2002-12-10 at 13:43, Geoff Edmonson wrote: > What's the Linux equivalent, John? GnomeMeeting? Although we use MPEG2/DVB for Digital Amateur TV. Tom --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 07:23:47 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id HAA27847 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 07:23:44 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Geoff Edmonson" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: DCC Articles Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 07:22:59 -0600 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-RAVMilter-Version: 8.4.1(snapshot 20020919) (w5omr) List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: <00b001c2a04f$42b7d680$0200a8c0@hamhome.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > On Tue, 2002-12-10 at 13:43, Geoff Edmonson wrote: > > > What's the Linux equivalent, John? > > GnomeMeeting? > > Although we use MPEG2/DVB for Digital Amateur TV. Is there anything that works from the command line, as I am -not- a fan of "gui's" 73 = Best Regards, -=Geoff/W5OMR=- --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 07:26:29 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id HAA27920 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 07:26:24 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Geoff Edmonson" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: DCC Articles Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 07:25:29 -0600 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-RAVMilter-Version: 8.4.1(snapshot 20020919) (w5omr) List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: <00be01c2a04f$9c292d40$0200a8c0@hamhome.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > On Tue, 2002-12-10 at 13:43, Geoff Edmonson wrote: > > > What's the Linux equivalent, John? > > GnomeMeeting? > > Although we use MPEG2/DVB for Digital Amateur TV. http://www.openh323.org/ --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 07:33:43 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id HAA28063 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 07:33:40 -0600 (CST) From: David Wilson Message-Id: Subject: [ss] Re: DCC Articles To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 07:31:19 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: from "Geoff Edmonson" at Dec 10, 2002 06:43:13 AM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <200212101331.HAA10004@wwns.wwns.com> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk IMHO Netmeeting is a good example of exceptionally poor design. Anyone that runs a firewall will probably cringe when you mention the requirements. As far as H.323 is concerned check out http://www.h323.org or http://www.openh323.org. Dave Geoff Edmonson wrote... > > > Another topic I would like to suggest is the use of ITU H.323 for ATV, voice > > QSOs, applications sharing, or remote control. This software is available > > as part of Windows (NetMeeting). It is frequently used to conduct > > videoconferences over IP networks using inexpensive webcams. > > > What's the Linux equivalent, John? > > > -- > 73 = Best Regards, > -=Geoff/W5OMR=- > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: david@wwns.com > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > -- David R. Wilson WB4LHO World Wide Network Services Nashville, Tennessee USA Need QSL cards? david@wwns.com http://store.wwns.com/lz1jz --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 07:37:00 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id HAA28137 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 07:36:48 -0600 (CST) content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C2A051.12118008" Subject: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS development..."Build the TAPR FS meter" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 08:35:57 -0500 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS development..."Build the TAPR FS meter" Thread-Index: AcKgEcihNj1OnltRRG2I+lr+YTPdCwAOTsCZ From: "Hare,Ed, W1RFI" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <721D3436A7C2B344A301FD4A413C71A9ADF346@kosh.ARRLHQ.ORG> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2A051.12118008 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 VGhlIHNpbXBsZXN0IHJlbGF0aXZlIGZpZWxkIHN0cmVuZ3RoIG1ldGVyIGlzIGEgcmVjZWl2ZXIg Y29ubmVjdGVkIHRvIGFuIGFudGVubmEgYW5kIHN3aXRjaGFibGUgdG8gYSBkdW1teSBsb2FkLiBJ ZiB5b3Uga25vdyB0aGUgcmVjZWl2ZXIncyBzZW5zaXRpdml0eSBhbmQgYW50ZW5uYSBnYWluIHlv dSBjYW4gbWVhc3VyZSB0aGUgaW5jcmVhc2UgaW4gcmVjZWl2ZXIgb3V0cHV0IHdpdGggYSB0cnVl LVJNUyB2b2x0bWV0ZXIsIGZpcnN0IHdpdGggbm8gc2lnbmFsIHByZXNlbnQsIHRoZW4gd2l0aCB0 aGUgcmVjZWl2ZXIgY29ubmVjdGVkIHRvIGFuIGFudGVubmEgYW5kIHRoZSBzaWduYWwgYmVpbmcg bWVhc3VyZWQgcHJlc2VudC4gIA0KIA0KQW4gIkFNL1NTQiIgbW9kZSByZWNlaXZlciBjYW4gYmUg dXNlZC4gVGhlIEFSUkwgTGFiIGhhcyBhbiBJY29tIFIzIHRoYXQgdHVuZXMgMi40IEdIeiBhbmQg aXMgcmVsYXRpdmVseSB1c2VmdWwuICBJdCBpcyBub3Qgd2VsbCBzaGllbGRlZCwgdGhvdWdoLCBh bmQgaXQgaGFzIGEgbG90IG9mIHNwdXJpb3VzIHJlc3BvbnNlcywgc28gaXQgdHJ1bHkgaXMganVz dCAicmVsYXRpdmVseSIgdXNlZnVsLiAgQSBzdGVwIGF0dGVudWF0b3IgaW4gZnJvbnQgb2YgdGhl IHJlY2VpdmVyIGNhbiBoZWxwIGtlZXAgdGhlIHNpZ25hbCBpbiB0aGUgbGluZWFyIHJhbmdlIG9m IHRoZSByZWNlaXZlciwgb3IgdGhlIFMgbWV0ZXIgY2FuIGJlIHByZS1jYWxpYnJhdGVkIGFnYWlu c3QgYSBnb29kIHNpZ25hbCBnZW5lcmF0b3IuIChUaGlzIGhhcyBpdHMgbGltaXRzLCBiZWNhdXNl IHRoZSBhY3VhbCBnYWluIG9mIHRoZSBJRiBzdHJpcCBjb3VsZCBjaGFuZ2UgYnkgc2V2ZXJhbCBk QiB3aXRoIHRpbWUgb3IgdGVtcGVyYXR1cmUsIGJ1dCBpdCBpcyBhIHJlYXNvbmFibGUgZ29vZCBh cHByb3hpbWF0aW9uLikNCiANCkZvciBtb3JlIGFjY3VyYXRlIG1lYXN1cmVtZW50cywgYSBiZXR0 ZXItc2hpZWxkZWQgcmVjZWl2ZXIgaXMgYSBtdXN0LiBUaGUgQVJSTCBMYWIgaXMganVzdCBwb2xp c2hpbmcgdXAgYSB0ZXN0IG1ldGhvZCB0byB1c2UgYW4gSWNvbSBQQ1ItMTAwMCBhbmQgYSBERU0g dHJhbnN2ZXJ0ZXIgdG8gZ2V0IHNvbWUgZ29vZCBtZWFzdXJlbWVudHMgb24gMi40IEdIei4gIFRo ZSByZWNlaXZlciBhbHNvIGhhcyBzcHVyaW91cyByZXNwb25zZXMsIGJ1dCB3ZSBmb3VuZCBhIGJh bmRwYXNzIGZpbHRlcnMgZm9yIDIuNCBHSHogdGhhdCByZWFsbHkgZG8gdGFtZSBpdCBkb3duLiAg DQogDQpJZiwgZm9yIGV4YW1wbGUsIHlvdSBrbm93IHRoYXQgeW91ciByZWNlaXZlIHN5c3RlbSBo YXMgYSBzZW5zaXRpdml0eSBvZiBtaW51czEzNSBkQm0gaW4gMzAwMCBIeiBiYW5kd2lkdGgsIGFu ZCB5b3UgbWVhc3VyZSBhbiBpbmNyZWFzZSBpbiByZWNlaXZlciBvdXRwdXQgb2YgMTUgZEIgd2hl biBhIHNpZ25hbCBpcyBwcmVzZW50LCB5b3Uga25vdyB0aGF0IHRoZSBzaWduYWwgaXMganVzdCBh Ym91dCBtaW51cyAxMjAgZEJtIGF2ZXJhZ2UgcG93ZXIgaW4gdGhhdCBiYW5kd2lkdGguIChJIHNh eSBqdXN0IGFib3V0IGJlY2F1c2UgaWYgeW91IGdldCBhIG1lYXN1cmVtZW50IG9mIHNpZ25hbCBh dCAtMTIwIGRCbSwgeW91IGhhdmUgdG8gc3VidHJhY3QgdGhlIC0xMzUgZEJtIHJlY2VpdmVyIG5v aXNlIGxldmVsIHRvIGdldCB0aGUgYWN0dWFsIHNpZ25hbCBsZXZlbC4gSWYgdGhlIG1lYXN1cmVk IGxldmVsIGlzID4xMCBkQiBoaWdoZXIgdGhhbiB0aGUgcmVjZWl2ZXIgb3V0cHV0IGxldmVsLCB0 aGUgZXJyb3IgYnkganVzdCBkb2luZyBhIHNpbXBsZSBkaWZmZXJlbmNlIGNhbGN1bGF0aW9uIGlz IGxlc3MgdGhhbiAwLjUgZEIuKQ0KIA0KRm9yIG5hcnJvd2JhbmQgc2lnbmFscyAoaWUgY2Fycmll cnMgb3IgYmlyZGllcyksIHRoaXMgaXMgYW4gZXhhY3QgbWVhc3VyZW1lbnQgb2YgdGhlIHNpZ25h bCBsZXZlbC4gVGhlIFJNUyB2b2x0YWdlIGNhbiBiZSB1c2VkIHRvIGNhbGN1bGF0ZSBhdmVyYWdl IHBvd2VyLCBhbmQgZm9yIGEgY2FycmllciwgYXZlcmFnZSBwb3dlciBhbmQgUEVQIGFyZSB0aGUg c2FtZS4gRm9yIGJyb2FkYmFuZCBzaWduYWxzLCB0aGUgcG93ZXIgeW91IG1lYXN1cmUgd2lsbCBi ZSBkZXBlbmRlbnQgb24gdGhlIGJhbmR3aWR0aC4gTW9zdCBicm9hZGJhbmQgc2lnbmFscyBhcmUg bm9pc2VsaWtlIGluIGEgbmFycm93IGJhbmR3aWR0aCwgdGhlIFBFUCBhbmQgYXZlcmFnZSBwb3dl ciBpcyBub3QgdGhlIHNhbWUuIEl0IGlzIG5vdCBwb3NzaWJsZSB0byBnZXQgYSBwcmVjaXNlIG1l YXN1cmVtZW50IG9mIHRoZSBwZWFrIHBvd2VyIGluIGEgbmFycm93IGJhbmR3aWR0aCB3aXRob3V0 IGVpdGhlciBrbm93aW5nIGEgbG90IGFib3V0IHRoZSBuYXR1cmUgb2YgdGhlIHNpZ25hbCBvciBi eSBtYWtpbmcgbG90cyBvZiBtZWFzdXJlbWVudHMgaW4gYXJiaXRyYXJ5IGNodW5rcyBvZiB0aGUg YmFuZHdpZHRoLCBydW5uaW5nIHRoZSByZXN1bHQgdGhyb3VnaCBhIHdob2xlIHNlcmllcyBvZiBG RlRzLCBwdXR0aW5nIHRoZW0gYWxsIGJhY2sgdG9nZXRoZXIgYW5kIHVzaW5nIERTUCB0byBjYWxj dWxhdGUgdGhlIG9yaWdpbmFsIHNpZ25hbC4NCiANClRoaXMgbWF5IG5vdCBiZSBuZWNlc3Nhcnks IHRob3VnaCwgaWYgeW91IGFyZSB3aWxsaW5nIHRvIGxpdmUgd2l0aCBzb21lIHNsb3AgaW4gdGhl IGVuZCByZXN1bHQuICBJZiB0aGUgc2lnbmFsIHdlcmUgYnJvYWRiYW5kIGdhdXNzaWFuIG5vaXNl LCBpZiBtZW1vcnkgc2VydmVzLCB0aGUgcGVhay10by1hdmVyYWdlIHJhdGlvIG9mIHRoYXQgc2ln bmFsIHdvdWxkIGJlIDkuNCBkQiAoYW55IG5vaXNlIGV4cGVydHMgaGVyZSwgcGxlYXNlIGNoaW1l IHJpZ2h0IGluISkgIElmIG9uZSB3ZXJlIGhlYXJpbmcgYSBub2lzZWxpa2Ugc2lnbmFsIGFuZCBw cmVzdW1lZCB0aGF0IHRoZSBwZWFrLXRvLWF2ZXJhZ2UgcmF0aW8gd2VyZSA5LjQgZEIsIG9uZSB3 b3VsZG4ndCBiZSBmYXIgb2ZmIGluIG1vc3QgY2FzZXMuICBBbmQsIGluIHRoZSBDNjMuNCBzdGFu ZGFyZCwgbWVhc3VyZW1lbnRzIG1hZGUgYWJvdmUgMSBHSHogYXJlIG1hZGUgdXNpbmcgYW4gYXZl cmFnZSBkZXRlY3Rvciwgc28gdGhlIGF2ZXJhZ2UgcG93ZXIgbWVhc3VyZW1lbnQgaXMgY29ycmVj dC4gIEZvciBsb3dlciBmcmVxdWVuY2llcywgd2hlcmUgdGhlIHBlYWsgc2lnbmFsIGlzIG1lYXN1 cmVkLCBhIHJlYXNvbmFibGUgYXBwcm94aW1hdGlvbiBmb3IgbW9zdCBub2lzZWxpa2Ugc2lnbmFs cyB3b3VsZCBiZSBvYnRhaW5lZCBieSBhc3N1bWluZyB0aGUgcGVhayB0byBiZSA5LjQgZEIgaGln aGVyIHRoYW4gdGhlIGF2ZXJhZ2UgaW4gcmVsYXRpdmVseSBuYXJyb3cgYmFuZHdpZHRoLg0KIA0K SXQgaXMgbm90IHBvc3NpYmxlIHRvIGdldCBhIHByZWNpc2UgY29ycmVsYXRpb24gYmV0d2VlbiB0 aGUgYXZlcmFnZSBwb3dlciBvZiBhIGNvbXBsZXggaW4gYSB3aWRlIGJhbmR3aWR0aCBieSBtYWtp bmcgYSBtZWF1cmVtZW50IGluIGEgbmFycm93IGJhbmR3aWR0aCB1bmxlc3Mgb25lIGtub3dzIGEg bG90IGFib3V0IHRoZSBzaWduYWwgYmVpbmcgbWVhc3VyZWQuICBDNjMuNCBzdGlwdWxhdGVzIGEg bWVhc3VyZW1lbnQgYmFuZHdpZHRoIG9mIDEgTUh6IGZvciBzaWduYWxzIGFib3ZlIDEgR0h6IChJ IGFtIHdvcmtpbmcgZnJvbSBtZW1vcnkgYXQgaG9tZSBoZXJlLCBzbyBjaGltZSBpbiBpZiBJIGFt IHJlbWVtYmVyaW5nIHdyb25nISkuICBUaGUgbWVhc3VyZW1lbnQgbWFkZSBpbiBhIDMga0h6IGJh bmR3aWR0aCB3aWxsIGJlIGFwcHJveGltYXRlbHkgMTBsb2coMTAwMDAwMC8zMDAwKSBsZXNzIHRo YW4gd2hhdCB3b3VsZCBiZSBvYnRhaW5lZCBieSB0aGUgc2FtZSBzaWduYWwgbWVhdXN1cmVkIGlu IGEgMSBNSHogYmFuZHdpZHRoLiAoVGhpcyBpcyBhcHByb3hpbWF0ZSBiZWNhdXNlIHRoZSBzaWdu YWwgbWF5IG5vdCBiZSBldmVubHkgc3ByZWFkIG91dCBpbiAzIGtIeiBzZWdtZW50cyBhY3Jvc3Mg dGhlIGVudGlyZSBiYW5kd2lkdGgpLg0KIA0KU28gaWYgeW91IGRldGVybWluZSBhbiBhY3V0YWwg c2lnbmFsIGxldmVsLCBlaXRoZXIgYXMgYXZlcmFnZSBwb3dlciBpbiBhIG5hcnJvdyBiYW5kd2lk dGgsIG9yIGV4dHJhcG9sYXRlZCB0byBhIHdpZGVyIGJhbmR3aWR0aCBhbmQvb3IgcGVhayBwb3dl ciwgdGhpcyBjYW4gdGhlbiBiZSByZWxhdGVkIHRvIHRoZSBhY3R1YWwgZmllbGQgc3RyZW5ndGgg YnkgYSBzaW1wbGUgY2FsY3VsYXRpb24NCiANCmRidXYvbSA9IDc3LjIgKyBzaWduYWxkQm0gLSBh bnRnYWluZEJpICsgbG9zc2RCICsgIDIwbG9nKEZNSHopIA0KIA0KQWx0aG91Z2ggdGhlcmUgYXJl IGEgZmV3IGFzc3VtcHRpb25zIG1hZGUgaW4gdGhpcyBtZXRob2QgdG8gb2J0YWluIHRoZSBSTVMg b3IgcGVhayB2YWx1ZSBvZiBhIGJyb2FkYmFuZCBtZWFzdXJlZCBmaWVsZCwgaXQgaXMgcHJvYmFi bHkgYXMgZ29vZCBhcyBvbmUgY2FuIGV4cGVjdCB1c2luZyBzaW1wbGUgZXF1aXBtZW50LiBBbmQs IGZvciB0aGUgbW9zdCBwYXJ0LCB0aGUgc2ltcGxlIGVxdWlwbWVudCBjYW4gYmUgdGhlIHN0YXRp b24gcmVjZWl2ZXIgYW5kIGFuIFJNUy1yZWFkaW5nIHZvbHRtZXRlciBhbmQgc291bmQgY2FyZC4g IFRoZXJlIGFyZSBhIGZldyBtb3JlIGNhdmVhdHMgLS0gdGhpcyBkb2Vzbid0IGFjY291bnQgZm9y IHBvbGFyaXphdGlvbiBtaXNtYXRjaCwgbmVhciBmaWVsZCBlZmZlY3RzIChvaCwgbm8gLS0gbm90 IFRIQVQgYWdhaW4pIG9yIHRoZSBmYWN0IHRoYXQgdGhlIG1lYXN1cmVtZW50IHBvaW50IG1heSBu b3QgYmUgaW4gdGhlIG1haW4gYmVhbSBvZiB0aGUgdHJhbnNtaXQgYW50ZW5uYS4gVGhpcyBtZWFu cyB5b3UgbWF5IG5vdCBiZSBtYWtpbmcgYSBtZWFzdXJlbWVudCBvZiB0aGUgbWF4aW11bSBmaWVs ZCByYWRpYXRlZCBieSB0aGF0IHN0YXRpb24sIGJ1dCB5b3UgYXJlIG1ha2luZyBhIHJlYXNvbmFi bGUgbWVhdXJlbWVudCBvZiB0aGUgZmllbGQgKmF0IHRoZSBtZWFzdXJlbWVudCBwb2ludCouDQog DQpEYXJ0cyB3ZWxjb21lOyBJIGFtIHBvc3RpbmcgZnJvbSBob21lIGFuZCBkb24ndCBoYXZlIGFj Y2VzcyB0byBhbGwgb2YgbXkgbm90ZXMgb24gdGhlIG1ldGhvZC4gVGhpcyBvbmUgaXMgbmVhcmx5 IHJlYWR5IGZvciBwcmltZSB0aW1lLiAgSSBoYXZlIGEgREVNIHRyYW5zdmVydGVyIGluIHRoZSB3 b3JrcyBhbmQgd2FudCB0byBkbyBzb21lIG1lYXN1cmVtZW50cyBvbiAyLjQgR0h6LiAgSSBoYXZl IGFsc28gZG9uZSBzb21lIHN1Y2Nlc3NmdWwgbWVhc3VyZW1lbnRzIG9mIHBvd2VyIGxpbmUgbm9p c2Ugb24gMy41IE1Iei4gIFRoZSBhcnRpY2xlIGlzIG5lYXJseSBkb25lIGFuZCB0aGUgc29mdHdh cmUgdG8gY29udHJvbCBhIFBDIGFuZCBzb3VuZCBjYXJkIGFuZCB0aGUgUENSLTEwMDAgaXMgaW4g cHJldHR5IGdvb2Qgc2hhcGUsIHRob3VnaCB0aGUgcHVyaXN0cyB3aWxsIGhhdGUgbWUgZm9yIGhh dmluZyB3cml0dGVuIGluIGluIFF1aWNrIEJhc2ljLiA6LSkNCiANCjczLA0KRWQgSGFyZSwgVzFS RkkNCiANCi0tLS0tT3JpZ2luYWwgTWVzc2FnZS0tLS0tIA0KRnJvbTogRGFycnlsIFNtaXRoIFtt YWlsdG86RGFycnlsQHJhZGlvLWFjdGl2ZS5uZXQuYXVdIA0KU2VudDogVHVlIDEyLzEwLzIwMDIg MTI6NTggQU0gDQpUbzogVEFQUiBTcHJlYWQgU3BlY3RydW0gU3BlY2lhbCBJbnRlcmVzdCBHcm91 cCANCkNjOiANClN1YmplY3Q6IFtzc10gUkU6IEhvdyBjYW4gVEFQUiBzdXBwb3J0IFNTIGRldmVs b3BtZW50Li4uIkJ1aWxkIHRoZSBUQVBSIEZTIG1ldGVyIg0KDQoNCg0KCVRvbnkgTGFuZ2RvbiA8 dGxhbmdkb25AYXRjdHJhaW5pbmcuY29tLmF1PiBub3RlZA0KCQ0KCT5JIGNhbiBzZWUgYSBuZWVk IGZvciBsb3cgbGV2ZWwsIGxvdyBidWRnZXQgaGFyZHdhcmUgcHJvamVjdHMuICBFdmVuDQoJPnRo aW5ncyBhcyBzaW1wbGUgYXMgMi40IEdIeiBmaWVsZCBzdHJlbmd0aCBtZXRlcnMgd2lsbCBiZSB1 c2VmdWwNCgk+KGhvdyBtYW55ID0gODAyLjExYiBleHBlcmltZW50ZXJzIGhhdmUgYW55IGlkZWEg b2YgaG93IHRoZWlyIGFudGVubmENCgk+aXMgcGVyZm9ybWluZz8gIGFuc3dlcjogYWxtb3N0IG5v bmUpLg0KCQ0KCU9LLiBQZW9wbGUuIFdlIGhhdmUgYSBjaGFsbGVuZ2UgaGVyZS4uLiBIb3cgZG8g d2UgZ28gYWJvdXQgYWN0dWFsbHkNCglnZXR0aW5nIGEgcmVsYXRpdmUgZmllbGQgc3RyZW5ndGgg bWV0ZXIgZGVzaWduZWQgZm9yIHRoZSAyLjQgR0haPyBJIGFtDQoJc3VyZSBzb21lb25lIG9uIHRo aXMgbGlzdCBrbm93cyBob3cgdG8gZG8gdGhlIFJGIGZyb250IGVuZCBhbmQgZ2V0IGENCgl2b2x0 YWdlIG91dC4gSXQgY2FudCBiZSB0b28gaGFyZC4gSSBjYW4gZG8gc29tZSBvZiB0aGUgd29yayBv bmNlIHdlIGhhdmUNCglhIHNlbnNvciB0aGF0IHdvcmtzLiBQcm9iYWJseSBzb21lIEdhQXMgZGlv ZGUgd291bGQgd29yay4NCgkNCglBcyBmb3Igc29tZSBpZGVhcyBvZiB3aGF0IGlzIG91dCB0aGVy ZSBJIGhhdmUgaW5jbHVkZWQgc29tZSBsaW5rcy4gQlVUDQoJdGhlIHJlYXNvbiBmb3IgYSBwcm9q ZWN0IGxpa2UgdGhpcyBvbmUgaXMgZm9yIHRoZSBwZW9wbGUgd29ya2luZyBvbiBpdA0KCXRvIGFj dHVhbGx5IGRpc2NvdmVyIHRoYXQgdGhleSBsaWtlIGdldHRpbmcgdGhlaXIgaGFuZHMgZGlydHku IFdoZW4geW91DQoJYnVpbGQgaXQgeW91cnNlbGYgeW91IHVzdWFsbHkgdW5kZXJzdGFuZCBtb3Jl IGFib3V0IGl0Lg0KCQ0KCVNvIHdobyBpcyBnb2luZyB0byBkbyB0aGUgUkYgc2lkZT8NCgkNCglE YXJyeWwNCgkNCgktLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0NCglodHRwOi8vd3d3Lm5vcnRoY291bnRyeXJh ZGlvLmNvbS9LaXRwYWdlcy9yZmZzbS5odG0NCglodHRwOi8vd3d3LnNhZmV0eWhlcm8uY29tL21h bGwvbWljcm9wcm9kdWN0cy5hc3ANCglodHRwOi8vd3d3LmNvbWZvcnRob3VzZS5jb20vY29tZm9y dC9taWNsZWFrZGV0d2kuaHRtbA0KCQ0KCS0tLS0tLS0tLQ0KCURhcnJ5bCBTbWl0aCwgVksyVERT ICAgUE9Cb3ggMTY5IEluZ2xlYnVybiBOU1cgMjU2NSBBdXN0cmFsaWENCglNb2JpbGUgTnVtYmVy IDA0MTIgOTI5IDYzNCBbKzYxIDQgMTIgOTI5IDYzNCBJbnRlcm5hdGlvbmFsXQ0KCURhcnJ5bEBy YWRpby1hY3RpdmUubmV0LmF1IHwgd3d3LnJhZGlvLWFjdGl2ZS5uZXQuYXUNCgkNCgkNCgkNCgkt LS0NCglZb3UgYXJlIGN1cnJlbnRseSBzdWJzY3JpYmVkIHRvIHNzIGFzOiBXMVJGSUBBUlJMLk9S Rw0KCVRvIHVuc3Vic2NyaWJlIHNlbmQgYSBibGFuayBlbWFpbCB0byBsZWF2ZS1zcy00NzQ1RkBs aXN0cy50YXByLm9yZw0KCQ0KCQ0KDQo= ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2A051.12118008 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PE1FVEEgSFRUUC1FUVVJVj0iQ29udGVudC1UeXBlIiBDT05URU5UPSJ0ZXh0L2h0bWw7IGNoYXJz ZXQ9dXRmLTgiPgo8IURPQ1RZUEUgSFRNTCBQVUJMSUMgIi0vL1czQy8vRFREIEhUTUwgMy4yLy9F TiI+CjxIVE1MPgo8SEVBRD4KCjxNRVRBIE5BTUU9IkdlbmVyYXRvciIgQ09OVEVOVD0iTVMgRXhj aGFuZ2UgU2VydmVyIHZlcnNpb24gNi4wLjYyNDkuMSI+CjxUSVRMRT5bc3NdIFJFOiBIb3cgY2Fu IFRBUFIgc3VwcG9ydCBTUyBkZXZlbG9wbWVudC4uLiZxdW90O0J1aWxkIHRoZSBUQVBSIEZTIG1l dGVyJnF1b3Q7PC9USVRMRT4KPC9IRUFEPgo8Qk9EWSBkaXI9bHRyPgo8RElWPlRoZSBzaW1wbGVz dCByZWxhdGl2ZSBmaWVsZCBzdHJlbmd0aCBtZXRlciBpcyBhIHJlY2VpdmVyIGNvbm5lY3RlZCB0 byBhbiAKYW50ZW5uYSBhbmQgc3dpdGNoYWJsZSB0byBhIGR1bW15IGxvYWQuIElmIHlvdSBrbm93 IHRoZSByZWNlaXZlcidzIHNlbnNpdGl2aXR5IAphbmQgYW50ZW5uYSBnYWluIHlvdSBjYW4gbWVh c3VyZSB0aGUgaW5jcmVhc2UgaW4gcmVjZWl2ZXIgb3V0cHV0IHdpdGggYSB0cnVlLVJNUyAKdm9s dG1ldGVyLCBmaXJzdCB3aXRoIG5vIHNpZ25hbCBwcmVzZW50LCB0aGVuIHdpdGggdGhlIHJlY2Vp dmVyIGNvbm5lY3RlZCB0byBhbiAKYW50ZW5uYSBhbmQgdGhlIHNpZ25hbCBiZWluZyBtZWFzdXJl ZCBwcmVzZW50LiZuYnNwOyA8L0RJVj4KPERJVj4mbmJzcDs8L0RJVj4KPERJVj5BbiAiQU0vU1NC IiBtb2RlIHJlY2VpdmVyIGNhbiBiZSB1c2VkLiBUaGUgQVJSTCBMYWIgaGFzIGFuIEljb20gUjMg dGhhdCAKdHVuZXMgMi40IEdIeiBhbmQgaXMgcmVsYXRpdmVseSB1c2VmdWwuJm5ic3A7IEl0IGlz IG5vdCB3ZWxsIHNoaWVsZGVkLCB0aG91Z2gsIAphbmQgaXQgaGFzIGEgbG90IG9mIHNwdXJpb3Vz IHJlc3BvbnNlcywgc28gaXQgdHJ1bHkgaXMganVzdCAicmVsYXRpdmVseSIgCnVzZWZ1bC4mbmJz cDsgQSBzdGVwIGF0dGVudWF0b3IgaW4gZnJvbnQgb2YgdGhlIHJlY2VpdmVyIGNhbiBoZWxwIGtl ZXAgdGhlIApzaWduYWwgaW4gdGhlIGxpbmVhciByYW5nZSBvZiB0aGUgcmVjZWl2ZXIsIG9yIHRo ZSBTIG1ldGVyIGNhbiBiZSBwcmUtY2FsaWJyYXRlZCAKYWdhaW5zdCBhIGdvb2Qgc2lnbmFsIGdl bmVyYXRvci4gKFRoaXMgaGFzIGl0cyBsaW1pdHMsIGJlY2F1c2UgdGhlIGFjdWFsIGdhaW4gb2Yg CnRoZSBJRiBzdHJpcCBjb3VsZCBjaGFuZ2UgYnkgc2V2ZXJhbCBkQiB3aXRoIHRpbWUgb3IgdGVt cGVyYXR1cmUsIGJ1dCBpdCBpcyBhIApyZWFzb25hYmxlIGdvb2QgYXBwcm94aW1hdGlvbi4pPC9E SVY+CjxESVY+Jm5ic3A7PC9ESVY+CjxESVY+Rm9yIG1vcmUgYWNjdXJhdGUgbWVhc3VyZW1lbnRz LCBhIGJldHRlci1zaGllbGRlZCByZWNlaXZlciBpcyBhIG11c3QuIFRoZSAKQVJSTCBMYWIgaXMg anVzdCBwb2xpc2hpbmcgdXAgYSB0ZXN0IG1ldGhvZCB0byB1c2UgYW4gSWNvbSBQQ1ItMTAwMCBh bmQgYSBERU0gCnRyYW5zdmVydGVyIHRvIGdldCBzb21lIGdvb2QgbWVhc3VyZW1lbnRzIG9uIDIu NCBHSHouJm5ic3A7IFRoZSByZWNlaXZlciBhbHNvIApoYXMgc3B1cmlvdXMgcmVzcG9uc2VzLCBi dXQgd2UgZm91bmQgYSZuYnNwO2JhbmRwYXNzIGZpbHRlcnMgZm9yIDIuNCBHSHogdGhhdCAKcmVh bGx5IGRvIHRhbWUgaXQgZG93bi4mbmJzcDsgPC9ESVY+CjxESVY+Jm5ic3A7PC9ESVY+CjxESVY+ SWYsIGZvciBleGFtcGxlLCB5b3Uga25vdyB0aGF0IHlvdXIgcmVjZWl2ZSBzeXN0ZW0gaGFzIGEg c2Vuc2l0aXZpdHkgb2YgCm1pbnVzMTM1IGRCbSBpbiAzMDAwIEh6IGJhbmR3aWR0aCwgYW5kIHlv dSBtZWFzdXJlIGFuIGluY3JlYXNlIGluIHJlY2VpdmVyIApvdXRwdXQgb2YgMTUgZEIgd2hlbiBh IHNpZ25hbCBpcyBwcmVzZW50LCB5b3Uga25vdyB0aGF0IHRoZSBzaWduYWwgaXMganVzdCBhYm91 dCAKbWludXMgMTIwIGRCbSBhdmVyYWdlIHBvd2VyIGluIHRoYXQgYmFuZHdpZHRoLiAoSSBzYXkg anVzdCBhYm91dCBiZWNhdXNlJm5ic3A7aWYgCnlvdSBnZXQgYSBtZWFzdXJlbWVudCBvZiBzaWdu YWwgYXQgLTEyMCBkQm0sJm5ic3A7eW91IGhhdmUgdG8gc3VidHJhY3QmbmJzcDt0aGUgCi0xMzUg ZEJtJm5ic3A7cmVjZWl2ZXIgbm9pc2UgbGV2ZWwgdG8gZ2V0Jm5ic3A7dGhlIGFjdHVhbCBzaWdu YWwgbGV2ZWwuIElmIHRoZSAKbWVhc3VyZWQgbGV2ZWwgaXMgJmd0OzEwIGRCIGhpZ2hlciB0aGFu IHRoZSByZWNlaXZlciBvdXRwdXQgbGV2ZWwsIHRoZSBlcnJvciBieSAKanVzdCBkb2luZyBhIHNp bXBsZSBkaWZmZXJlbmNlIGNhbGN1bGF0aW9uJm5ic3A7aXMgbGVzcyB0aGFuIDAuNSBkQi4pPC9E SVY+CjxESVY+Jm5ic3A7PC9ESVY+CjxESVY+Rm9yIG5hcnJvd2JhbmQgc2lnbmFscyAoaWUgY2Fy cmllcnMgb3IgYmlyZGllcyksIHRoaXMgaXMgYW4gZXhhY3QgCm1lYXN1cmVtZW50IG9mIHRoZSBz aWduYWwgbGV2ZWwuIFRoZSBSTVMgdm9sdGFnZSBjYW4gYmUgdXNlZCB0byBjYWxjdWxhdGUgCmF2 ZXJhZ2UgcG93ZXIsIGFuZCBmb3IgYSBjYXJyaWVyLCBhdmVyYWdlIHBvd2VyIGFuZCBQRVAgYXJl IHRoZSBzYW1lLiBGb3IgCmJyb2FkYmFuZCBzaWduYWxzLCB0aGUgcG93ZXIgeW91IG1lYXN1cmUg d2lsbCBiZSBkZXBlbmRlbnQgb24gdGhlIGJhbmR3aWR0aC4gCk1vc3QgYnJvYWRiYW5kIHNpZ25h bHMgYXJlIG5vaXNlbGlrZSBpbiBhIG5hcnJvdyBiYW5kd2lkdGgsIHRoZSBQRVAgYW5kIGF2ZXJh Z2UgCnBvd2VyIGlzIG5vdCB0aGUgc2FtZS4gSXQgaXMgbm90IHBvc3NpYmxlIHRvIGdldCBhIHBy ZWNpc2UgbWVhc3VyZW1lbnQgb2YgdGhlIApwZWFrIHBvd2VyIGluIGEgbmFycm93IGJhbmR3aWR0 aCB3aXRob3V0IGVpdGhlciBrbm93aW5nIGEgbG90IGFib3V0IHRoZSBuYXR1cmUgCm9mIHRoZSBz aWduYWwgb3IgYnkgbWFraW5nIGxvdHMgb2YgbWVhc3VyZW1lbnRzIGluIGFyYml0cmFyeSBjaHVu a3Mgb2YgdGhlIApiYW5kd2lkdGgsIHJ1bm5pbmcgdGhlIHJlc3VsdCB0aHJvdWdoIGEmbmJzcDt3 aG9sZSBzZXJpZXMgb2YgRkZUcywgcHV0dGluZyB0aGVtIAphbGwgYmFjayB0b2dldGhlciBhbmQg dXNpbmcgRFNQIHRvIGNhbGN1bGF0ZSB0aGUgb3JpZ2luYWwgc2lnbmFsLjwvRElWPgo8RElWPiZu YnNwOzwvRElWPgo8RElWPlRoaXMgbWF5IG5vdCBiZSBuZWNlc3NhcnksIHRob3VnaCwgaWYgeW91 IGFyZSB3aWxsaW5nIHRvIGxpdmUgd2l0aCBzb21lIApzbG9wIGluIHRoZSBlbmQgcmVzdWx0LiZu YnNwOyBJZiB0aGUgc2lnbmFsIHdlcmUgYnJvYWRiYW5kIGdhdXNzaWFuIG5vaXNlLCBpZiAKbWVt b3J5IHNlcnZlcywgdGhlIHBlYWstdG8tYXZlcmFnZSByYXRpbyBvZiB0aGF0IHNpZ25hbCB3b3Vs ZCBiZSA5LjQgZEIgKGFueSAKbm9pc2UgZXhwZXJ0cyBoZXJlLCBwbGVhc2UgY2hpbWUgcmlnaHQg aW4hKSZuYnNwOyBJZiBvbmUgd2VyZSBoZWFyaW5nIGEgCm5vaXNlbGlrZSBzaWduYWwgYW5kIHBy ZXN1bWVkIHRoYXQgdGhlIHBlYWstdG8tYXZlcmFnZSByYXRpbyB3ZXJlIDkuNCBkQiwgb25lIAp3 b3VsZG4ndCBiZSBmYXIgb2ZmIGluIG1vc3QgY2FzZXMuJm5ic3A7IEFuZCwgaW4gdGhlIEM2My40 IApzdGFuZGFyZCwmbmJzcDttZWFzdXJlbWVudHMgbWFkZSBhYm92ZSAxIEdIeiBhcmUgbWFkZSB1 c2luZyBhbiBhdmVyYWdlIGRldGVjdG9yLCAKc28gdGhlIGF2ZXJhZ2UgcG93ZXIgbWVhc3VyZW1l bnQgaXMgY29ycmVjdC4mbmJzcDsmbmJzcDtGb3IgbG93ZXIgZnJlcXVlbmNpZXMsIAp3aGVyZSB0 aGUgcGVhayBzaWduYWwgaXMgbWVhc3VyZWQsIGEgcmVhc29uYWJsZSBhcHByb3hpbWF0aW9uIGZv ciBtb3N0IG5vaXNlbGlrZSAKc2lnbmFscyB3b3VsZCBiZSBvYnRhaW5lZCBieSBhc3N1bWluZyB0 aGUgcGVhayB0byBiZSA5LjQgZEIgaGlnaGVyIHRoYW4gdGhlIAphdmVyYWdlIGluIHJlbGF0aXZl bHkgbmFycm93IGJhbmR3aWR0aC48L0RJVj4KPERJVj4mbmJzcDs8L0RJVj4KPERJVj5JdCBpcyBu b3QgcG9zc2libGUgdG8gZ2V0IGEgcHJlY2lzZSZuYnNwO2NvcnJlbGF0aW9uIGJldHdlZW4gdGhl IGF2ZXJhZ2UgCnBvd2VyIG9mIGEmbmJzcDtjb21wbGV4Jm5ic3A7aW4gYSB3aWRlIGJhbmR3aWR0 aCBieSBtYWtpbmcgYSBtZWF1cmVtZW50IGluIGEgCm5hcnJvdyBiYW5kd2lkdGggdW5sZXNzIG9u ZSBrbm93cyBhIGxvdCBhYm91dCB0aGUgc2lnbmFsIGJlaW5nIAptZWFzdXJlZC4mbmJzcDsmbmJz cDtDNjMuNCBzdGlwdWxhdGVzIGEgbWVhc3VyZW1lbnQgYmFuZHdpZHRoIG9mIDEgTUh6IGZvciAK c2lnbmFscyBhYm92ZSAxIEdIeiAoSSBhbSB3b3JraW5nIGZyb20gbWVtb3J5IGF0IGhvbWUgaGVy ZSwgc28gY2hpbWUgaW4gaWYgSSBhbSAKcmVtZW1iZXJpbmcgd3JvbmchKS4mbmJzcDsgVGhlIG1l YXN1cmVtZW50IG1hZGUgaW4gYSAzIGtIeiBiYW5kd2lkdGggd2lsbCBiZSAKYXBwcm94aW1hdGVs eSAxMGxvZygxMDAwMDAwLzMwMDApIGxlc3MgdGhhbiB3aGF0IHdvdWxkIGJlIG9idGFpbmVkIGJ5 IHRoZSBzYW1lIApzaWduYWwgbWVhdXN1cmVkIGluIGEgMSBNSHogYmFuZHdpZHRoLiAoVGhpcyBp cyBhcHByb3hpbWF0ZSBiZWNhdXNlIHRoZSBzaWduYWwgCm1heSBub3QgYmUgZXZlbmx5IHNwcmVh ZCBvdXQgaW4gMyBrSHogc2VnbWVudHMgYWNyb3NzIHRoZSBlbnRpcmUgCmJhbmR3aWR0aCkuPC9E SVY+CjxESVY+Jm5ic3A7PC9ESVY+CjxESVY+U28gaWYgeW91Jm5ic3A7ZGV0ZXJtaW5lIGFuIGFj dXRhbCBzaWduYWwgbGV2ZWwsIGVpdGhlciBhcyBhdmVyYWdlIHBvd2VyIGluIAphIG5hcnJvdyBi YW5kd2lkdGgsIG9yIGV4dHJhcG9sYXRlZCB0byBhIHdpZGVyIGJhbmR3aWR0aCBhbmQvb3IgcGVh ayBwb3dlciwgdGhpcyAKY2FuIHRoZW4gYmUgcmVsYXRlZCB0byB0aGUgYWN0dWFsIGZpZWxkIHN0 cmVuZ3RoIGJ5IGEgc2ltcGxlIGNhbGN1bGF0aW9uPC9ESVY+CjxESVY+PEZPTlQgc2l6ZT0yPjwv Rk9OVD4mbmJzcDs8L0RJVj4KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBzaXplPTI+ZGJ1di9tID0gNzcuMiArIHNpZ25h bGRCbSAtIGFudGdhaW5kQmkgKyBsb3NzZEIgKyZuYnNwOyAKMjBsb2coRk1IeikgPC9GT05UPjwv RElWPgo8RElWPjxGT05UIHNpemU9Mj48L0ZPTlQ+Jm5ic3A7PC9ESVY+CjxESVY+PEZPTlQgc2l6 ZT0yPkFsdGhvdWdoIHRoZXJlIGFyZSBhIGZldyBhc3N1bXB0aW9ucyBtYWRlIGluIHRoaXMgbWV0 aG9kIHRvIApvYnRhaW4gdGhlIFJNUyBvciBwZWFrIHZhbHVlIG9mIGEgYnJvYWRiYW5kIG1lYXN1 cmVkIGZpZWxkLCBpdCBpcyBwcm9iYWJseSBhcyAKZ29vZCBhcyBvbmUgY2FuIGV4cGVjdCB1c2lu ZyBzaW1wbGUgZXF1aXBtZW50LiBBbmQsIGZvciB0aGUgbW9zdCBwYXJ0LCB0aGUgCnNpbXBsZSBl cXVpcG1lbnQgY2FuIGJlIHRoZSBzdGF0aW9uIHJlY2VpdmVyIGFuZCBhbiBSTVMtcmVhZGluZyB2 b2x0bWV0ZXIgYW5kIApzb3VuZCBjYXJkLiZuYnNwOyBUaGVyZSBhcmUgYSBmZXcgbW9yZSBjYXZl YXRzIC0tIHRoaXMgZG9lc24ndCBhY2NvdW50IGZvciAKcG9sYXJpemF0aW9uIG1pc21hdGNoLCBu ZWFyIGZpZWxkIGVmZmVjdHMgKG9oLCBubyAtLSBub3QgVEhBVCBhZ2Fpbikgb3IgdGhlIGZhY3Qg CnRoYXQgdGhlIG1lYXN1cmVtZW50IHBvaW50IG1heSBub3QgYmUgaW4gdGhlIG1haW4gYmVhbSBv ZiB0aGUgdHJhbnNtaXQgYW50ZW5uYS4gClRoaXMgbWVhbnMgeW91IG1heSBub3QgYmUgbWFraW5n IGEgbWVhc3VyZW1lbnQgb2YgdGhlIG1heGltdW0gZmllbGQgcmFkaWF0ZWQgYnkgCnRoYXQgc3Rh dGlvbiwgYnV0IHlvdSBhcmUgbWFraW5nIGEgcmVhc29uYWJsZSBtZWF1cmVtZW50IG9mIHRoZSBm aWVsZCAqYXQgdGhlIAptZWFzdXJlbWVudCBwb2ludCouPC9GT05UPjwvRElWPgo8RElWPjxGT05U IHNpemU9Mj48L0ZPTlQ+Jm5ic3A7PC9ESVY+CjxESVY+PEZPTlQgc2l6ZT0yPkRhcnRzIHdlbGNv bWU7IEkgYW0gcG9zdGluZyBmcm9tIGhvbWUgYW5kIGRvbid0IGhhdmUgYWNjZXNzIHRvIAphbGwg b2YgbXkgbm90ZXMgb24gdGhlIG1ldGhvZC4gVGhpcyBvbmUgaXMgbmVhcmx5IHJlYWR5IGZvciBw cmltZSB0aW1lLiZuYnNwOyBJIApoYXZlIGEgREVNIHRyYW5zdmVydGVyIGluIHRoZSB3b3JrcyBh bmQgd2FudCB0byBkbyBzb21lIG1lYXN1cmVtZW50cyBvbiAyLjQgCkdIei4mbmJzcDsgSSBoYXZl IGFsc28gZG9uZSBzb21lIHN1Y2Nlc3NmdWwgbWVhc3VyZW1lbnRzIG9mIHBvd2VyIGxpbmUgbm9p c2Ugb24gCjMuNSBNSHouJm5ic3A7IFRoZSBhcnRpY2xlIGlzIG5lYXJseSBkb25lIGFuZCB0aGUg c29mdHdhcmUgdG8gY29udHJvbCBhIFBDIGFuZCAKc291bmQgY2FyZCBhbmQgdGhlIFBDUi0xMDAw IGlzIGluIHByZXR0eSBnb29kIHNoYXBlLCB0aG91Z2ggdGhlIHB1cmlzdHMgd2lsbCAKaGF0ZSBt ZSBmb3IgaGF2aW5nIHdyaXR0ZW4gaW4gaW4gUXVpY2sgQmFzaWMuIDotKTwvRk9OVD48L0RJVj4K PERJVj48Rk9OVCBzaXplPTI+PC9GT05UPiZuYnNwOzwvRElWPgo8RElWPjxGT05UIHNpemU9Mj43 Myw8L0ZPTlQ+PC9ESVY+CjxESVY+PEZPTlQgc2l6ZT0yPkVkIEhhcmUsIFcxUkZJPC9GT05UPjwv RElWPgo8RElWPjxGT05UIHNpemU9Mj48L0ZPTlQ+Jm5ic3A7PC9ESVY+CjxESVY+PEZPTlQgc2l6 ZT0yPi0tLS0tT3JpZ2luYWwgTWVzc2FnZS0tLS0tIDxCUj48Qj5Gcm9tOjwvQj4gRGFycnlsIFNt aXRoIApbbWFpbHRvOkRhcnJ5bEByYWRpby1hY3RpdmUubmV0LmF1XSA8QlI+PEI+U2VudDo8L0I+ IFR1ZSAxMi8xMC8yMDAyIDEyOjU4IEFNIAo8QlI+PEI+VG86PC9CPiBUQVBSIFNwcmVhZCBTcGVj dHJ1bSBTcGVjaWFsIEludGVyZXN0IEdyb3VwIDxCUj48Qj5DYzo8L0I+IAo8QlI+PEI+U3ViamVj dDo8L0I+IFtzc10gUkU6IEhvdyBjYW4gVEFQUiBzdXBwb3J0IFNTIGRldmVsb3BtZW50Li4uIkJ1 aWxkIHRoZSAKVEFQUiBGUyBtZXRlciI8QlI+PEJSPjwvRElWPjwvRk9OVD4KPEJMT0NLUVVPVEUg ZGlyPWx0ciBzdHlsZT0iTUFSR0lOLVJJR0hUOiAwcHgiPgogIDxQPjxGT05UIHNpemU9Mj5Ub255 IExhbmdkb24gJmx0O3RsYW5nZG9uQGF0Y3RyYWluaW5nLmNvbS5hdSZndDsgCiAgbm90ZWQ8QlI+ PEJSPiZndDtJIGNhbiBzZWUgYSBuZWVkIGZvciBsb3cgbGV2ZWwsIGxvdyBidWRnZXQgaGFyZHdh cmUgCiAgcHJvamVjdHMuJm5ic3A7IEV2ZW48QlI+Jmd0O3RoaW5ncyBhcyBzaW1wbGUgYXMgMi40 IEdIeiBmaWVsZCBzdHJlbmd0aCBtZXRlcnMgCiAgd2lsbCBiZSB1c2VmdWw8QlI+Jmd0Oyhob3cg bWFueSA9IDgwMi4xMWIgZXhwZXJpbWVudGVycyBoYXZlIGFueSBpZGVhIG9mIGhvdyAKICB0aGVp ciBhbnRlbm5hPEJSPiZndDtpcyBwZXJmb3JtaW5nPyZuYnNwOyBhbnN3ZXI6IGFsbW9zdCBub25l KS48QlI+PEJSPk9LLiAKICBQZW9wbGUuIFdlIGhhdmUgYSBjaGFsbGVuZ2UgaGVyZS4uLiBIb3cg ZG8gd2UgZ28gYWJvdXQgYWN0dWFsbHk8QlI+Z2V0dGluZyBhIAogIHJlbGF0aXZlIGZpZWxkIHN0 cmVuZ3RoIG1ldGVyIGRlc2lnbmVkIGZvciB0aGUgMi40IEdIWj8gSSBhbTxCUj5zdXJlIHNvbWVv bmUgCiAgb24gdGhpcyBsaXN0IGtub3dzIGhvdyB0byBkbyB0aGUgUkYgZnJvbnQgZW5kIGFuZCBn ZXQgYTxCUj52b2x0YWdlIG91dC4gSXQgCiAgY2FudCBiZSB0b28gaGFyZC4gSSBjYW4gZG8gc29t ZSBvZiB0aGUgd29yayBvbmNlIHdlIGhhdmU8QlI+YSBzZW5zb3IgdGhhdCAKICB3b3Jrcy4gUHJv YmFibHkgc29tZSBHYUFzIGRpb2RlIHdvdWxkIHdvcmsuPEJSPjxCUj5BcyBmb3Igc29tZSBpZGVh cyBvZiB3aGF0IAogIGlzIG91dCB0aGVyZSBJIGhhdmUgaW5jbHVkZWQgc29tZSBsaW5rcy4gQlVU PEJSPnRoZSByZWFzb24gZm9yIGEgcHJvamVjdCBsaWtlIAogIHRoaXMgb25lIGlzIGZvciB0aGUg cGVvcGxlIHdvcmtpbmcgb24gaXQ8QlI+dG8gYWN0dWFsbHkgZGlzY292ZXIgdGhhdCB0aGV5IAog IGxpa2UgZ2V0dGluZyB0aGVpciBoYW5kcyBkaXJ0eS4gV2hlbiB5b3U8QlI+YnVpbGQgaXQgeW91 cnNlbGYgeW91IHVzdWFsbHkgCiAgdW5kZXJzdGFuZCBtb3JlIGFib3V0IGl0LjxCUj48QlI+U28g d2hvIGlzIGdvaW5nIHRvIGRvIHRoZSBSRiAKICBzaWRlPzxCUj48QlI+RGFycnlsPEJSPjxCUj4t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS08QlI+PEEgCiAgaHJlZj0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy5ub3J0aGNvdW50cnly YWRpby5jb20vS2l0cGFnZXMvcmZmc20uaHRtIj5odHRwOi8vd3d3Lm5vcnRoY291bnRyeXJhZGlv LmNvbS9LaXRwYWdlcy9yZmZzbS5odG08L0E+PEJSPjxBIAogIGhyZWY9Imh0dHA6Ly93d3cuc2Fm ZXR5aGVyby5jb20vbWFsbC9taWNyb3Byb2R1Y3RzLmFzcCI+aHR0cDovL3d3dy5zYWZldHloZXJv LmNvbS9tYWxsL21pY3JvcHJvZHVjdHMuYXNwPC9BPjxCUj48QSAKICBocmVmPSJodHRwOi8vd3d3 LmNvbWZvcnRob3VzZS5jb20vY29tZm9ydC9taWNsZWFrZGV0d2kuaHRtbCI+aHR0cDovL3d3dy5j b21mb3J0aG91c2UuY29tL2NvbWZvcnQvbWljbGVha2RldHdpLmh0bWw8L0E+PEJSPjxCUj4tLS0t LS0tLS08QlI+RGFycnlsIAogIFNtaXRoLCBWSzJURFMmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsgUE9Cb3ggMTY5IElu Z2xlYnVybiBOU1cgMjU2NSBBdXN0cmFsaWE8QlI+TW9iaWxlIAogIE51bWJlciAwNDEyIDkyOSA2 MzQgWys2MSA0IDEyIDkyOSA2MzQgCiAgSW50ZXJuYXRpb25hbF08QlI+RGFycnlsQHJhZGlvLWFj dGl2ZS5uZXQuYXUgfCAKICB3d3cucmFkaW8tYWN0aXZlLm5ldC5hdTxCUj48QlI+PEJSPjxCUj4t LS08QlI+WW91IGFyZSBjdXJyZW50bHkgc3Vic2NyaWJlZCB0byAKICBzcyBhczogVzFSRklAQVJS TC5PUkc8QlI+VG8gdW5zdWJzY3JpYmUgc2VuZCBhIGJsYW5rIGVtYWlsIHRvIAogIGxlYXZlLXNz LTQ3NDVGQGxpc3RzLnRhcHIub3JnPEJSPjxCUj48L0ZPTlQ+PC9QPjwvQkxPQ0tRVU9URT4KCjwv Qk9EWT4KPC9IVE1MPg== ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2A051.12118008-- --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 08:15:59 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id IAA28986 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 08:15:57 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: dubose@texas.net Subject: [ss] Re: DCC Articles Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 08:15:26 US/Central X-User: dubose List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <200212101415.gBAEFQU05452@mail2.aus1.texas.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > Darryl, > > I have taken the liberty of posting your call for articles on the ARRL HSMM > Reflector in the hope of encouraging the working group members to also > contribute articles to the DCC. > > In fact Paul and I are already working on a second draft of an article we > hope to submit. > > Another topic I would like to suggest is the use of ITU H.323 for ATV, voice > QSOs, applications sharing, or remote control. This software is available > as part of Windows (NetMeeting). It is frequently used to conduct > videoconferences over IP networks using inexpensive webcams. > > Vy 73, > John - K8OCL > Also, H323 is available via OpenSource at http://www.openh323.org If you don't have NetMeeting, the site will have downloads for MS, Linux and Unix OSs. Joshua, KD5LSX, has am H323 Echo Server on-line. It will echo about 10 seconds of your audio back to you. Its really nice to check out your system. The H323 suite offers a server for multiple user connections as well as peer to peer connections. Audio and video work nicely. This looks like software written by a ham for hams; but, I'm sure that other folks can appreciate its functionalitity. Walt/K5YFW --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 08:19:56 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id IAA29114 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 08:19:52 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: dubose@texas.net Subject: [ss] Re: DCC Articles Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 08:19:22 US/Central X-User: dubose List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <200212101419.gBAEJMO05859@mail1.aus1.texas.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > > Another topic I would like to suggest is the use of ITU H.323 for ATV, voice > > QSOs, applications sharing, or remote control. This software is available > > as part of Windows (NetMeeting). It is frequently used to conduct > > videoconferences over IP networks using inexpensive webcams. > > > What's the Linux equivalent, John? > > The H323 standard is available OpenSource for MS, Linux and Unix at http://www.openh323.org Walt/K5YFW --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 10:49:44 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id KAA07033 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 10:49:42 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: X-Sender: wa7nwp@pop.mail.yahoo.com Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 08:48:02 -0800 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Bill Vodall - WA7NWP Subject: [ss] Re: DCC Articles In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20021210084410.0097bc60@pioneernet.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > > Another topic I would like to suggest is the use of ITU H.323 for ATV, voice > > QSOs, applications sharing, or remote control. This software is available > > as part of Windows (NetMeeting). It is frequently used to conduct > > videoconferences over IP networks using inexpensive webcams. > >What's the Linux equivalent, John? H323 is a beast.. Check out http://www.speakfreely.org A lightweight application that's open and works well through firewalls. This is, I believe, the basis of both IRLP and Echolink. The IM part of the solution is Jabber, http://www.jabber.org which is another open and rapidly evolving software solution. Bill, WA7NWP --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 11:56:37 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id LAA10348 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 11:56:34 -0600 (CST) Subject: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS development..."Build the TAPR FS meter" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:40:04 +0000 Message-ID: X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on mgeg01/S/EXT/MM1(Release 5.0.10 |March 22, 2002) at 12/10/2002 06:54:38 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk OK. People. We have a challenge here... How do we go about actually getting a relative field strength meter designed for the 2.4 GHZ? Great idea! A dipole, a schottky diode, and a meter should work fine. That's what the Kent ATV antenna expert recommends. You probably need sensitivity to detect 1mW to 100mW. You don't want it to be damaged if you hold it near a dipole with 10W up it. You could add a 2.4GHz amp chip to increase sensitivity; don't use an LNA as the damage levels are typically around 7dBm; use a PA-driver or other general purpose amp. I've got a couple of minicircuits MAV-11 MMICs but it's not a good choice; gain is dropping steeply at 2.5GHz and only 6.1 dB. If you wish to get accurate antenna gain measurements, put a quality attenuator in the Tx feeder, and adjust for identical field strength indications vs. a reference dipole. What are the devices used to check leakage of microwave ovens? The max. leakage permitted from ovens is 1mW; wouldn't they do the job? Now, how do you make an 802.11 WLAN device transmit as much as possible to give you field to measure? Possibly by some piece of software that makes it send a continuous stream of broadcast packets so you don't need any other WLANs nearby that may upset your readings. Can anyone sort this bit out? --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 12:22:18 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id MAA11936 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 12:22:12 -0600 (CST) Subject: [ss] Re: FWIW: "Feds Label Wi-Fi a Terrorist Tool" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 18:21:19 +0000 Message-ID: X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on mgeg01/S/EXT/MM1(Release 5.0.10 |March 22, 2002) at 12/10/2002 07:20:11 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > FWIW via ACM Tech News: > "Feds Label Wi-Fi a Terrorist Tool" The other side of the coin is that communications are also a tool for peacemaking. Is it not a goal of amateur radio to foster better international relations through communication? Spreading internet access through open wireless comms in poorer nations would be a great positive good that amateurs could do. Be highly resistant of any politics- of-the-day that restricts amateurs operating within their mandate. Remember that so-called "cyber-terrorism" is a myth. No such act has ever occurred, potential for death and destruction by computer is non-existant, and such methods have negligible value to a terrorist aresenal. I don't want to see partisan politics messing with the international nature of amateur radio. We already have adequate law in most nations that makes it illegal to assist in a crime, and that would include sending messages in support of a crime. In western culture we don't restrict people's freedoms to make sure thay can't commit crime. We use deterrents and convict them after they commit crime. Then we restrict their freedoms with a prison sentence. Security is frequently ineffective against terrorism. Could you recognise a terrorist if he requested access? They do not arrive in mini-subs and wetsuits and hook up to your WLAN with a military laptop... they are ordinary people; you cannot tell a terrorist from adam. To stop terrorists blowing up planes, you don't search for terrorists, you search for bombs. It would be valid to state that poor use of Wi-Fi could be a massive corporate liability. Availaibility of WLAN isn't guaranteed and users must be ready to accept interference (read the 1st page of the handbook). As it is not a protected business service, it would be irresponsible for business to stake trading and profit on WLAN. It is concerning that these things are being hawked as business-class network solutions. The concept of profit-making WLAN ISPs is very risky and should keep investors away. (In the UK we have slices of spectrum at 3.4GHz on offer for wireless ISPs but no takers.) Free WLAN in bus-stations, tube-trains, hotels & shopping malls as a customer incentive is a great idea though:-) Anyhow, I'm sure you americans can kick your own politicians' asses well enough; we have enough political asses to kick of our own over this side of the pond. Back to the hardware... M1FDE --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 12:37:00 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id MAA12230 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 12:36:51 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: "Pinfold" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: FWIW: "Feds Label Wi-Fi a Terrorist Tool" Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 07:33:18 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <002c01c2a07a$9c9bb6a0$2901a8c0@co.nz> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Some one is always trying to grandstand! anyway they can, if it maintains or helps their position in their job $$! eg "Feds Label grandmas bedsocks as a Terrorist Tool" "Federal Agenccies are extremely concerned that the bedsocks of grandmothers of dissidents can by used to make molatov cocktails.......... where does it end? HaHa Mike ZL1BTB ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 7:21 AM Subject: [ss] Re: FWIW: "Feds Label Wi-Fi a Terrorist Tool" > > > FWIW via ACM Tech News: > > > "Feds Label Wi-Fi a Terrorist Tool" > > The other side of the coin is that communications are > also a tool for peacemaking. > > Is it not a goal of amateur radio to foster better > international relations through communication? > > Spreading internet access through open wireless comms > in poorer nations would be a great positive good that > amateurs could do. Be highly resistant of any politics- > of-the-day that restricts amateurs operating within > their mandate. > > Remember that so-called "cyber-terrorism" is a myth. > No such act has ever occurred, potential for death and > destruction by computer is non-existant, and such methods > have negligible value to a terrorist aresenal. > > > I don't want to see partisan politics messing with the > international nature of amateur radio. > > We already have adequate law in most nations that makes > it illegal to assist in a crime, and that would include > sending messages in support of a crime. > > In western culture we don't restrict people's freedoms > to make sure thay can't commit crime. We use deterrents > and convict them after they commit crime. Then we restrict > their freedoms with a prison sentence. > > Security is frequently ineffective against terrorism. > Could you recognise a terrorist if he requested access? > They do not arrive in mini-subs and wetsuits and hook > up to your WLAN with a military laptop... they are ordinary > people; you cannot tell a terrorist from adam. To stop > terrorists blowing up planes, you don't search for > terrorists, you search for bombs. > > It would be valid to state that poor use of Wi-Fi could > be a massive corporate liability. Availaibility of WLAN > isn't guaranteed and users must be ready to accept > interference (read the 1st page of the handbook). As it > is not a protected business service, it would be > irresponsible for business to stake trading and profit > on WLAN. It is concerning that these things are being > hawked as business-class network solutions. The concept > of profit-making WLAN ISPs is very risky and should > keep investors away. (In the UK we have slices of > spectrum at 3.4GHz on offer for wireless ISPs but > no takers.) Free WLAN in bus-stations, tube-trains, > hotels & shopping malls as a customer incentive is a > great idea though:-) > > > Anyhow, I'm sure you americans can kick your own > politicians' asses well enough; we have enough political > asses to kick of our own over this side of the pond. > > Back to the hardware... M1FDE > > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: PINFOLD@XTRA.CO.NZ > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 12:44:49 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id MAA12440 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 12:44:48 -0600 (CST) From: Jeff King To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:43:29 -0500 In-Reply-To: Subject: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS development..."Build the TAPR FS meter" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Message-Id: Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id MAA12440 On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:40:04 +0000, Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com wrote: > >OK. People. We have a challenge here... How do we go about actually >getting a relative field strength meter designed for the 2.4 GHZ? > >Great idea! > >A dipole, a schottky diode, and a meter should work fine. I made something like this for 10ghz gunplexer's (10dBi horn) using a tiny dipole with a 1N23 in the middle. Could get indications up to about 10 feet away. So I think your idea here for 2.4ghz is a good one. >You could add a 2.4GHz amp chip to increase sensitivity; >don't use an LNA as the damage levels are typically >around 7dBm; use a PA-driver or other general purpose >amp. I've got a couple of minicircuits MAV-11 MMICs but >it's not a good choice; gain is dropping steeply at 2.5GHz >and only 6.1 dB. Good idea. >What are the devices used to check leakage of microwave >ovens? The max. leakage permitted from ovens is 1mW; >wouldn't they do the job? Would think so. Where can you buy one of these beastie's? I'll try and grab one if they are a commodity item available in the stores. >Now, how do you make an 802.11 WLAN device transmit as much >as possible to give you field to measure? Possibly by some piece >of software that makes it send a continuous stream of broadcast >packets so you don't need any other WLANs nearby that may upset >your readings. Set netstumbler on very fast polling? Still going to be short packets....I'd think you would need a peak reading meter or storage scope to get the actual level's. Lots of good ideas here in your message. Thanks! -Jeff --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 12:49:48 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id MAA12650 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 12:49:43 -0600 (CST) Subject: [ss] Re: How can TAPR support SS development... To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 18:48:52 +0000 Message-ID: X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on mgeg01/S/EXT/MM1(Release 5.0.10 |March 22, 2002) at 12/10/2002 07:47:45 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > WHAT SHOULD *TAPR* BE DOING TO SUPPORT THIS ACTIVITY I think there are 2 aspects to this... The whole point of being a group is to apply resources to problems that individuals don't have, or to use the combined voice to get action from other organisations. It should also have an organisational role for events & such. There is stuff that individuals can do themselves if motivated, so perhaps TAPR needen't be doing this, except to co-ordinate, share and reduce duplication. Some ideas... How about a WLAN unplugfest? particularly to test out features important to amateurs, like interoperability and compliance of 802.1D bridging... Do we need to comission drivers for some WLAN chipsets for Linux, or broker the release of technical data from suppliers that would allow them to be written? In some cases this is preventing some low-cost APs being used in networks. Linux support for USB WLAN devices is also missing. I'm told they're great dish feeds. Within the 802.x series there are checklists called the "PICS proforma" that manufacturers are required to complete to claim 802.x compliance. The purpose of these is said to enable users to determine the interoperability of products. Now I've never seen a completed PICS form for any WLAN product. Why? Can TAPR press for them to be released? How about an exchange for the borrowing of hardware for the purpose of demonstration, software testing, network testing etc? Do you think there should be a european TAPR equivalent, and would TAPR have a role in helping set one up? There are few europersons on SS-SIG; not thru lack of SS or WLAN in europe. Is TAPR not serving their needs well? Certainly conferences in the USA aren't very helpful. Should there be established spread-spectrum bands in the national band-plans, is this a job for TAPR? Some quick ideas to bounce around... Ant M1FDE --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 12:51:38 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id MAA12713 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 12:51:37 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 09:46:40 -0600 From: Gerry Creager User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020826 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: DCC Articles References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3DF60C60.5000605@tamu.edu> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk OpenH323.org, and their simple app, ohphone. Careful: Long compile times, but it works pretty well! Check out, also, gnomemeeting. gerry Geoff Edmonson wrote: >>Another topic I would like to suggest is the use of ITU H.323 for ATV, voice >>QSOs, applications sharing, or remote control. This software is available >>as part of Windows (NetMeeting). It is frequently used to conduct >>videoconferences over IP networks using inexpensive webcams. > > > > What's the Linux equivalent, John? > > > -- > 73 = Best Regards, > -=Geoff/W5OMR=- > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: gerry.creager@tamu.edu > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org -- Gerry Creager -- gerry.creager@tamu.edu Network Engineering -- AATLT, Texas A&M University Office: 979.458.4020 FAX: 979.847.8578 Cell: 979.229.5301 Pager: 979.228.0173 --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 13:11:47 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id NAA14046 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:11:36 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Geoff Edmonson" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: DCC Articles Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:10:48 -0600 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-RAVMilter-Version: 8.4.1(snapshot 20020919) (w5omr) List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: <003201c2a07f$d9f81480$0200a8c0@hamhome.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > OpenH323.org, and their simple app, ohphone. Careful: Long compile > times, but it works pretty well! Check out, also, gnomemeeting. Ohphone worked "out of the box" for me, this morning. I do mostly everything on a windows machine. The linux machine is my gateway/router/switch/ and web/mail/ssh/sftp server. Where I do anything on Linux, is at the command line. downloading and simply running Ohphone allowed the Windows program "Netmeeting" to work, and the two communicated quite nicely. Of course, I didn't try anything outside of the local network, but could detect minimal delay on the 100Mb/s Lan ;-) Looking more carefully at speakfree now, since that's also what the IRLP folk are using. Idealy, I'd like to run IRLP reflector software here on my linux machine and have remote systems be able to connect to the then 'local' reflector, with a UHF Linked-repeater system in the South Central Texas area and it's 9 'satelites', linked to the greater Metro Houston Linked Repeater system and around as many inputs. 2 connections, 18 repeaters, linking an area of South Texas from Pipe Creek to Beaumont, from Austin to Corpus and all points inbetween. Add 1 more connection to the Colorado reflector and a HUGE mass of land becomes available via IRLP. At least that's my plan. sorry for the rambling - I forget where I am, sometimes. IRLP don't have anything to do with Spread Spectrum, but running h.323 over 802.11b is exciting, also ;-) 73 = Best Regards, -=Geoff/W5OMR=- --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 13:23:35 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id NAA14966 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:23:34 -0600 (CST) From: Jeff King To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:21:19 -0500 In-Reply-To: Subject: [ss] Re: How can TAPR support SS development... Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Message-Id: Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id NAA14966 On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 18:48:52 +0000, Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com wrote: >Do you think there should be a european TAPR equivalent, Isn't that Nordlink? http://www.nordlink.org >Certainly conferences in the USA aren't very helpful. I'd be willing to attend a joint conference with them in Germany or some other cheap europe destination to fly to. In fact, I hope it happens as the last time the Germans attended in mass at the DCC, it was one of the better one's that I had gone to. -Jeff --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 14:18:53 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id OAA17812 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:18:48 -0600 (CST) From: "Joshua Davis, KD5LSX" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: DCC Articles Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:17:17 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Looking at this post, I think I'll jump out of "lurking mode" to let everybody who's interested in OpenH323 know that I've setup a conference (MCU) server at kd5lsx.no-ip.org:1720. If anybody wants to try speakfreely, I can turn on the server for that too. Feel free to use the OpenH323 server at any time. Besides, the only testing it's gotten is from me on my LAN. I could use feedback. :) 73, Joshua Davis, KD5LSX San Antonio, Texas, USA > -----Original Message----- > From: bounce-ss-31026@lists.tapr.org > [mailto:bounce-ss-31026@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of Geoff Edmonson > Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 1:11 PM > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] Re: DCC Articles > > > Ohphone worked "out of the box" for me, this morning. > > I do mostly everything on a windows machine. The linux machine is my > gateway/router/switch/ and web/mail/ssh/sftp server. > > Where I do anything on Linux, is at the command line. > > downloading and simply running Ohphone allowed the Windows > program "Netmeeting" > to work, and the two communicated quite nicely. > > Of course, I didn't try anything outside of the local network, > but could detect > minimal delay on the 100Mb/s Lan ;-) > > Looking more carefully at speakfree now, since that's also what > the IRLP folk > are using. > > Idealy, I'd like to run IRLP reflector software here on my linux > machine and > have remote systems be able to connect to the then 'local' > reflector, with a UHF > Linked-repeater system in the South Central Texas area and it's 9 > 'satelites', > linked to the greater Metro Houston Linked Repeater system and > around as many > inputs. > > 2 connections, 18 repeaters, linking an area of South Texas from > Pipe Creek to > Beaumont, from Austin to Corpus and all points inbetween. > > Add 1 more connection to the Colorado reflector and a HUGE mass > of land becomes > available via IRLP. > > At least that's my plan. > > sorry for the rambling - I forget where I am, sometimes. IRLP don't have > anything to do with Spread Spectrum, but running h.323 over > 802.11b is exciting, > also ;-) > > > 73 = Best Regards, > -=Geoff/W5OMR=- > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 15:18:46 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id PAA20391 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 15:18:42 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: Tony Langdon To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: DCC Articles Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:18:06 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > What's the Linux equivalent, John? GnomeMeeting is a NetMeeting lookalike. You've also got the OpenH323 app Ohphone, though that's more bare bones. --- Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 This correspondence is for the named person's use only. It may contain confidential or legally privileged information or both. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of this correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 15:34:53 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id PAA21482 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 15:34:50 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: =?UTF-8?B?VG9ueSBMYW5nZG9u?= To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] =?UTF-8?B?UkU6IFtzc10gUkU6IEhvdyBjYW4gVEFQUiBzdXBwb3J0IFNTIGRl?= =?UTF-8?B?dmVsb3BtZW50Li4uIkJ1aWxkIHRoZSBUQVBSIEZTIG1ldGVyIg==?= Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:33:37 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C2A093.CD17D5D0" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2A093.CD17D5D0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The simplest relative field strength meter is a receiver connected to = an antenna and switchable to a dummy load. If you know the receiver's sensitivity and antenna gain you can measure the increase in receiver = output with a true-RMS voltmeter, first with no signal present, then with the receiver connected to an antenna and the signal being measured present. = =20 =20 An "AM/SSB" mode receiver can be used. The ARRL Lab has an Icom R3 that tunes 2.4 GHz and is relatively useful. It is not well shielded, = though, and it has a lot of spurious responses, so it truly is just = "relatively" useful. A step attenuator in front of the receiver can help keep the = signal in the linear range of the receiver, or the S meter can be = pre-calibrated against a good signal generator. (This has its limits, because the = acual gain of the IF strip could change by several dB with time or = temperature, but it is a reasonable good approximation.)=20 We are after a FS meter which can be used with DSSS signals which are = 22 MHz wide. It is also intended to be useable by non hams who aren't likely = to have a suitable Rx in their possession.=20 =20 However, the biggest issue with your idea is the requirement for = ham/serious SWL type equipment, which we cannot assume is available. Certainly for those of us who do have the gear, it's a good idea. =20 My vision is for a simple relative field strength meter that can give a rough indication that antenna X is z dB higher gain than antenna Y when measured in the far field in a suitable environment (most likely an = open paddock for most people). --- Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 =20 This correspondence is for the named person=E2=80=99s use only. It may = contain confidential or legally privileged information or both. No = confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive = this correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system = and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of = this correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual = sender. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2A093.CD17D5D0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS development..."Build the TAPR = FS meter"
The simplest relative field strength meter is a receiver connected = to an=20 antenna and switchable to a dummy load. If you know the receiver's = sensitivity=20 and antenna gain you can measure the increase in receiver output with a = true-RMS=20 voltmeter, first with no signal present, then with the receiver = connected to an=20 antenna and the signal being measured present. 
 
An "AM/SSB" mode receiver can be used. The ARRL Lab has an Icom = R3 that=20 tunes 2.4 GHz and is relatively useful.  It is not well = shielded, though,=20 and it has a lot of spurious responses, so it truly is just = "relatively"=20 useful.  A step attenuator in front of the receiver can help = keep the=20 signal in the linear range of the receiver, or the S meter can be=20 pre-calibrated against a good signal generator. (This has its limits, = because=20 the acual gain of the IF strip could change by several dB with time = or=20 temperature, but it is a reasonable good approximation.) 
We are after a FS meter which can be used with DSSS = signals which=20 are 22 MHz wide.  It is also intended to be useable by non = hams who=20 aren't likely to have a suitable Rx in their=20 possession. 
 
However, the biggest issue with your idea is the requirement = for=20 ham/serious SWL type equipment, which we cannot assume is = available. =20 Certainly for those of us who do have the gear, it's a good=20 idea.
 
My vision is for a simple relative field strength meter that = can give a=20 rough indication that antenna X is z dB higher gain than antenna Y when = measured=20 in the far field in a suitable environment (most likely an open paddock = for most=20 people).

---
Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002


This correspondence is for the named = person=E2=80=99s use only. It may contain confidential or legally = privileged information or both. No confidentiality or privilege is = waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this = correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system = and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part = of this correspondence if you are not the intended = recipient.


Any opinions expressed in this message = are those of the individual sender.


------_=_NextPart_001_01C2A093.CD17D5D0-- --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 15:42:42 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id PAA21764 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 15:42:39 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: Tony Langdon To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: DCC Articles Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:41:19 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id PAA21764 > H323 is a beast.. Check out http://www.speakfreely.org A H323 is a pain when there's firewalls concerned, though on a completely connected network, it works fine. > lightweight application > that's open and works well through firewalls. This is, I > believe, the basis of both > IRLP and Echolink. The IM part of the solution is Jabber, You are correct in that assertion. IRLP uses Speak Freely pretty much directly (with some modifications). EchoLink is based on modified Speak Freely protocols. Only downside of Speak Freely in the suggested application is it doesn't support video. http://www.jabber.org which is another open and rapidly evolving software solution. Jabber works pretty well, I'm usually parked on a Jabber server when online. --- Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 This correspondence is for the named person’s use only. It may contain confidential or legally privileged information or both. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of this correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 15:46:15 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id PAA21933 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 15:46:13 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: Tony Langdon To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS development..."Build the TAP R FS meter" Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:43:55 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id PAA21933 > Now, how do you make an 802.11 WLAN device transmit as much > as possible to give you field to measure? Possibly by some piece > of software that makes it send a continuous stream of broadcast > packets so you don't need any other WLANs nearby that may upset > your readings. > > Can anyone sort this bit out? Hmm, a UDP flooding program perhaps? or even ping -f some.fake.ip.address? :-) --- Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 This correspondence is for the named person’s use only. It may contain confidential or legally privileged information or both. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of this correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 15:52:16 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id PAA22107 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 15:52:15 -0600 (CST) content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Subject: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS development..."Build the TAP R FS meter" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:51:30 -0500 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS development..."Build the TAP R FS meter" Thread-Index: AcKglXcM3lcBk3iAQ82aHxmGR/LT1QAZDWYg From: "Hare,Ed, W1RFI" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <721D3436A7C2B344A301FD4A413C71A96ED02D@kosh.ARRLHQ.ORG> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id PAA22107 The IEEE 802.11a and 802.11b cards we have set up in the ARRL Lab (with an SSID of W1RFI so as far as I was concerned, they were operated under Part 97) both sounded "bursty" when transmitting long files. There was no EMI or other interference from other WLAN devices, but the noise level would vary by several dB from time to time. I would be quite happy to measure the devices in situ, to whatever degree they varied. 73, Ed Hare, W1RFI ARRL Lab 225 Main St Newington, CT 06111 Tel: 860-594-0318 Internet: w1rfi@arrl.org Web: http://www.arrl.org/tis > -----Original Message----- > From: Tony Langdon [mailto:tlangdon@atctraining.com.au] > Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 4:44 PM > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS > development..."Build the TAP R > FS meter" > > > > Now, how do you make an 802.11 WLAN device transmit as much > > as possible to give you field to measure? Possibly by some piece > > of software that makes it send a continuous stream of broadcast > > packets so you don't need any other WLANs nearby that may upset > > your readings. > > > > Can anyone sort this bit out? > > Hmm, a UDP flooding program perhaps? or even ping -f > some.fake.ip.address? > > :-) > > --- > Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 > > > This correspondence is for the named person's use only. It may contain > confidential or legally privileged information or both. No > confidentiality > or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you > receive this > correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from > your system and > notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any > part of this > correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. > > Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the > individual sender. > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: W1RFI@ARRL.ORG > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 15:54:38 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id PAA22202 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 15:54:32 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: Tony Langdon To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: How can TAPR support SS development... Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:52:12 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id PAA22202 > How about a WLAN unplugfest? particularly to test out > features important to amateurs, like interoperability > and compliance of 802.1D bridging... Problem here is these events tend to be local in nature and we're trying to work at minimum on the USA scale, but more realistically, globally. However,TAPR could be a resource for groups planning such events (providing info, listing "official" events, etc)... And the actual running of those events could be managed at the local level. Another opportunity for radio clubs and WLAN groups to work side by side. > How about an exchange for the borrowing of hardware > for the purpose of demonstration, software testing, > network testing etc? Maybe, though the distance aspect becomes an issue again... > Do you think there should be a european TAPR > equivalent, and would TAPR have a role in helping > set one up? There are few europersons on SS-SIG; > not thru lack of SS or WLAN in europe. Is TAPR > not serving their needs well? Certainly conferences > in the USA aren't very helpful. Maybe TAPR needs affiliate organisations in each of the ITU regions? > Should there be established spread-spectrum bands > in the national band-plans, is this a job for TAPR? I see TAPR having an advisory role here, offering input to the national bodies that formulate the actual band plans. Afterall, TAPR is going to have the best understanding of current SS technology and its requirements. --- Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 This correspondence is for the named person’s use only. It may contain confidential or legally privileged information or both. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of this correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 15:56:19 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id PAA22535 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 15:56:18 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: dubose@texas.net Subject: [ss] Re: DCC Articles Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 15:53:47 US/Central X-User: dubose List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <200212102153.gBALrlU16668@mail2.aus1.texas.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk I know that H323 and Speak Freely support peer-to-peer conncetions. Does Jabber do this? I thought it was on a chat type applications. Walt/K5YFW > > > H323 is a beast.. Check out http://www.speakfreely.org A > > H323 is a pain when there's firewalls concerned, though on a completely > connected network, it works fine. > > > lightweight application > > that's open and works well through firewalls. This is, I > > believe, the basis of both > > IRLP and Echolink. The IM part of the solution is Jabber, > > You are correct in that assertion. IRLP uses Speak Freely pretty much > directly (with some modifications). EchoLink is based on modified Speak > Freely protocols. Only downside of Speak Freely in the suggested > application is it doesn't support video. > > http://www.jabber.org which > is another open and rapidly evolving software solution. > > Jabber works pretty well, I'm usually parked on a Jabber server when online. > > --- > Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 > > > This correspondence is for the named person’s use only. It may contain > confidential or legally privileged information or both. No confidentiality > or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this > correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system and > notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of this > correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. > > Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: dubose@texas.net > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 16:00:00 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id PAA22738 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 15:59:57 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: Tony Langdon To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: DCC Articles Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:58:04 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > > OpenH323.org, and their simple app, ohphone. Careful: Long compile > > times, but it works pretty well! Check out, also, gnomemeeting. > > Ohphone worked "out of the box" for me, this morning. > > I do mostly everything on a windows machine. The linux machine is my > gateway/router/switch/ and web/mail/ssh/sftp server. > > Where I do anything on Linux, is at the command line. Exactly the same as me, though add "IRLP node" to the list of my Linux box's functionality. :) > Looking more carefully at speakfree now, since that's also > what the IRLP folk > are using. > > Idealy, I'd like to run IRLP reflector software here on my > linux machine and > have remote systems be able to connect to the then 'local' > reflector, with a UHF > Linked-repeater system in the South Central Texas area and > it's 9 'satelites', > linked to the greater Metro Houston Linked Repeater system > and around as many > inputs. Well, combine that basic idea with SS links between repeaters (creeping back on topic LOL) - integrated voice and data. Could be an opportunity to experiment with QoS principles, giving the voice real time priority and data lower priority in times of congestion. > Add 1 more connection to the Colorado reflector and a HUGE > mass of land becomes > available via IRLP. > > At least that's my plan. I suspect some bits of this haven't yet been built.... but interesting. > sorry for the rambling - I forget where I am, sometimes. > IRLP don't have > anything to do with Spread Spectrum, but running h.323 over > 802.11b is exciting, > also ;-) Well, at Melbourne Wireless, we have had over a dozen people running Speak Freely on laptops. Everyone had an absolute ball, it was like the old CB days all over. One guy was even game enough to head down to the local pub and transmit live from there LOL. That night certainly stirred an interest in VoIP (especially when I later gave a few people demos of IRLP). --- Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 This correspondence is for the named person's use only. It may contain confidential or legally privileged information or both. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of this correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 16:02:18 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id QAA22865 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:02:15 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: Tony Langdon To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: DCC Articles Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:01:27 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > Looking at this post, I think I'll jump out of "lurking mode" to let > everybody who's interested in OpenH323 know that I've setup a > conference > (MCU) server at kd5lsx.no-ip.org:1720. If anybody wants to > try speakfreely, > I can turn on the server for that too. OK, cool. However, please don't run your Speak Freely on port 2074, as I won;t be able to easily test it (since that port is used by the IRLP box :) ). I normally reserve 2094 for the Windows PC (which I would be running SF from), or I could go for the "out of the box" reflector port of 4074. > > Feel free to use the OpenH323 server at any time. Besides, > the only testing > it's gotten is from me on my LAN. I could use feedback. :) Well, I can only try from home. Haven't got H323 support in the firewall here. Only H323 activity here is internal... --- Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 This correspondence is for the named person's use only. It may contain confidential or legally privileged information or both. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of this correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 16:03:33 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id QAA22959 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:03:32 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Geoff Edmonson" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: Possible SPAM (accuracy medium): Re: DCC Articles Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:03:28 -0600 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-RAVMilter-Version: 8.4.1(snapshot 20020919) (w5omr) List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: <008c01c2a097$f8a58c60$0200a8c0@hamhome.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > I know that H323 and Speak Freely support peer-to-peer conncetions. Does > Jabber do this? I thought it was on a chat type applications. >> The IM part of the solution is Jabber Walt - IM stands for "Instant Message". That is the "text-chat" type of application. 73 / Geoff --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 16:11:43 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id QAA23535 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:11:42 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Geoff Edmonson" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: Possible SPAM (accuracy low): Re: DCC Articles Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:11:36 -0600 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-RAVMilter-Version: 8.4.1(snapshot 20020919) (w5omr) List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: <009601c2a099$1b646540$0200a8c0@hamhome.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > > I do mostly everything on a windows machine. The linux machine is my > > gateway/router/switch/ and web/mail/ssh/sftp server. > > > > Where I do anything on Linux, is at the command line. > > Exactly the same as me, though add "IRLP node" to the list of my Linux box's > functionality. :) The hardware is installed. If I wanted to switch distro's to Redhat 6.2, I'd have the software installed, too ;-) > > Add 1 more connection to the Colorado reflector and a HUGE > > mass of land becomes available via IRLP. > > At least that's my plan. > I suspect some bits of this haven't yet been built.... but interesting. the only thing that hasn't been built yet, is 1 linux box connected to high-speed access in downtown San Antonio, and a radio hung on it, to talk to one of the link-repeaters. Everything else is there. When the San Antonio link system talks to the reflector at my place, and a box in the Houston area does the same, then those two linked repeater systems are then linked together. > > sorry for the rambling - I forget where I am, sometimes. > > IRLP don't have > > anything to do with Spread Spectrum, but running h.323 over > > 802.11b is exciting, also ;-) > > Well, at Melbourne Wireless, we have had over a dozen people running Speak > Freely on laptops. Everyone had an absolute ball, it was like the old CB > days all over. One guy was even game enough to head down to the local pub > and transmit live from there LOL. That night certainly stirred an interest > in VoIP (especially when I later gave a few people demos of IRLP). IRLP is 'the bomb', for V/UHF. for me, nothing will ever (again) replace HF for comms. 73 = Best Regards, -=Geoff/W5OMR=- --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 16:16:08 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id QAA23992 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:16:03 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: Tony Langdon To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS development..."Build the TAP R FS meter" Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:15:13 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > The IEEE 802.11a and 802.11b cards we have set up in the ARRL > Lab (with an SSID of W1RFI so as far as I was concerned, they > were operated under Part 97) both sounded "bursty" when > transmitting long files. There was no EMI or other > interference from other WLAN devices, but the noise level > would vary by several dB from time to time. > > I would be quite happy to measure the devices in situ, to > whatever degree they varied. OK, no probs. Actually, some time back, I had come up with an alternate strategy (another way for hams to help the non hams). I have a 2.4 GHz multiplier, which I configured to accept 1/2 watt on 400 ish MHz from the HT. The output is around 50 mW on 2.4 GHz. I was planning on using this as a signal source for future antenna testing. So use the 802.11b card if there's no hams around and if there is a ham, they could bring a 2.4 GHz signal source like mine. :) --- Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 This correspondence is for the named person's use only. It may contain confidential or legally privileged information or both. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of this correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 16:18:04 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id QAA24154 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:18:01 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: Tony Langdon To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: DCC Articles Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:17:03 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > I know that H323 and Speak Freely support peer-to-peer > conncetions. Does > Jabber do this? I thought it was on a chat type applications. Jabber is an open source replacement for ICQ like services and has server and client components. The difference is that it's open source and Jabber servers can be setup indepent of the main Jabber network on the Internet, so we could have a ham Jabber network that only exists on RF. :) --- Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 This correspondence is for the named person's use only. It may contain confidential or legally privileged information or both. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of this correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 16:22:18 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id QAA24276 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:22:00 -0600 (CST) content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C2A09A.6970F046" Subject: [ss] RE: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS development..."Build the TAPR FS meter" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:20:57 -0500 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [ss] RE: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS development..."Build the TAPR FS meter" Thread-Index: AcKgk+vBSXAdzyu7Q920qX4Ul8SoigAXwDaw From: "Hare,Ed, W1RFI" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Cc: "Lau, Zack, W1VT" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <721D3436A7C2B344A301FD4A413C71A9ADF34F@kosh.ARRLHQ.ORG> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2A09A.6970F046 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PiBNeSB2aXNpb24gaXMgZm9yIGEgc2ltcGxlIHJlbGF0aXZlIGZpZWxkIHN0cmVuZ3RoIG1ldGVy IHRoYXQgY2FuIGdpdmUgYSByb3VnaCBpbmRpY2F0aW9uIA0KPiB0aGF0IGFudGVubmEgWCBpcyB6 IGRCIGhpZ2hlciBnYWluIHRoYW4gYW50ZW5uYSBZIHdoZW4gbWVhc3VyZWQgaW4gdGhlIGZhciBm aWVsZCBpbiBhIA0KPiBzdWl0YWJsZSBlbnZpcm9ubWVudCAobW9zdCBsaWtlbHkgYW4gb3BlbiBw YWRkb2NrIGZvciBtb3N0IHBlb3BsZSkuDQogDQpUaGUgSWNvbSBSMyByZWNlaXZlciBtaWdodCBm aXQgdGhlIGJpbGwuIA0KIA0KaHR0cDovL3d3dy5sZW50aW5pY29tbS5jb20vc2hvcHBpbmcvcHJp Y2VsaXN0LmFzcD9wcmlkPTI1NjcNCiANCkl0IHN0cmVldCBwcmljZXMgZm9yIGFib3V0ICQzNDAg VVMsIHRob3VnaCwgcHJpY2V5IGZvciB3aGF0IHlvdSBoYXZlIGluIG1pbmQuICANCiANCkkgd2ls bCBzZWUgaWYgWmFjayBrbm93cyBvZiBhbnkgZmllbGQtc3RyZW5ndGggbWV0ZXIgY2lyY3VpdHMg dGhhdCB3aWxsIHdvcmsgaW4gMi40IEdIei4gSWYgdGhleSBhcmUgQVJSTCBwdWJzLCBJIHdpbGwg c2NhbiB0aGVtIGFuZCBhZGQgdGhlbSB0byBBUlJMJ3Mgd2ViIHBhZ2UgYW5kIGxldCB0aGlzIGdy b3VwIGtub3cgdGhlIFVSTC4gKEkgbG92ZSBiZWluZyB0aGUgQVJSTCBMYWIgRGFkOyBJIGNhbiBk byB0aGF0IHNvcnQgb2YgdGhpbmchISEpDQogDQo3MywNCkVkIEhhcmUsIFcxUkZJDQpBUlJMIExh Yg0KMjI1IE1haW4gU3QNCk5ld2luZ3RvbiwgQ1QgMDYxMTENClRlbDogODYwLTU5NC0wMzE4DQpJ bnRlcm5ldDogdzFyZmlAYXJybC5vcmcNCldlYjogaHR0cDovL3d3dy5hcnJsLm9yZy90aXMNCg0K DQotLS0tLU9yaWdpbmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0tLQ0KRnJvbTogVG9ueSBMYW5nZG9uIFttYWlsdG86 dGxhbmdkb25AYXRjdHJhaW5pbmcuY29tLmF1XQ0KU2VudDogVHVlc2RheSwgRGVjZW1iZXIgMTAs IDIwMDIgNDozNCBQTQ0KVG86IFRBUFIgU3ByZWFkIFNwZWN0cnVtIFNwZWNpYWwgSW50ZXJlc3Qg R3JvdXANClN1YmplY3Q6IFtzc10gUkU6IFtzc10gUkU6IEhvdyBjYW4gVEFQUiBzdXBwb3J0IFNT IGRldmVsb3BtZW50Li4uIkJ1aWxkIHRoZSBUQVBSIEZTIG1ldGVyIg0KDQoNClRoZSBzaW1wbGVz dCByZWxhdGl2ZSBmaWVsZCBzdHJlbmd0aCBtZXRlciBpcyBhIHJlY2VpdmVyIGNvbm5lY3RlZCB0 byBhbiBhbnRlbm5hIGFuZCBzd2l0Y2hhYmxlIHRvIGEgZHVtbXkgbG9hZC4gSWYgeW91IGtub3cg dGhlIHJlY2VpdmVyJ3Mgc2Vuc2l0aXZpdHkgYW5kIGFudGVubmEgZ2FpbiB5b3UgY2FuIG1lYXN1 cmUgdGhlIGluY3JlYXNlIGluIHJlY2VpdmVyIG91dHB1dCB3aXRoIGEgdHJ1ZS1STVMgdm9sdG1l dGVyLCBmaXJzdCB3aXRoIG5vIHNpZ25hbCBwcmVzZW50LCB0aGVuIHdpdGggdGhlIHJlY2VpdmVy IGNvbm5lY3RlZCB0byBhbiBhbnRlbm5hIGFuZCB0aGUgc2lnbmFsIGJlaW5nIG1lYXN1cmVkIHBy ZXNlbnQuICANCg0KIA0KQW4gIkFNL1NTQiIgbW9kZSByZWNlaXZlciBjYW4gYmUgdXNlZC4gVGhl IEFSUkwgTGFiIGhhcyBhbiBJY29tIFIzIHRoYXQgdHVuZXMgMi40IEdIeiBhbmQgaXMgcmVsYXRp dmVseSB1c2VmdWwuICBJdCBpcyBub3Qgd2VsbCBzaGllbGRlZCwgdGhvdWdoLCBhbmQgaXQgaGFz IGEgbG90IG9mIHNwdXJpb3VzIHJlc3BvbnNlcywgc28gaXQgdHJ1bHkgaXMganVzdCAicmVsYXRp dmVseSIgdXNlZnVsLiAgQSBzdGVwIGF0dGVudWF0b3IgaW4gZnJvbnQgb2YgdGhlIHJlY2VpdmVy IGNhbiBoZWxwIGtlZXAgdGhlIHNpZ25hbCBpbiB0aGUgbGluZWFyIHJhbmdlIG9mIHRoZSByZWNl aXZlciwgb3IgdGhlIFMgbWV0ZXIgY2FuIGJlIHByZS1jYWxpYnJhdGVkIGFnYWluc3QgYSBnb29k IHNpZ25hbCBnZW5lcmF0b3IuIChUaGlzIGhhcyBpdHMgbGltaXRzLCBiZWNhdXNlIHRoZSBhY3Vh bCBnYWluIG9mIHRoZSBJRiBzdHJpcCBjb3VsZCBjaGFuZ2UgYnkgc2V2ZXJhbCBkQiB3aXRoIHRp bWUgb3IgdGVtcGVyYXR1cmUsIGJ1dCBpdCBpcyBhIHJlYXNvbmFibGUgZ29vZCBhcHByb3hpbWF0 aW9uLikgDQoNCldlIGFyZSBhZnRlciBhIEZTIG1ldGVyIHdoaWNoIGNhbiBiZSB1c2VkIHdpdGgg RFNTUyBzaWduYWxzIHdoaWNoIGFyZSAyMiBNSHogd2lkZS4gIEl0IGlzIGFsc28gaW50ZW5kZWQg dG8gYmUgdXNlYWJsZSBieSBub24gaGFtcyB3aG8gYXJlbid0IGxpa2VseSB0byBoYXZlIGEgc3Vp dGFibGUgUnggaW4gdGhlaXIgcG9zc2Vzc2lvbi4gDQogDQpIb3dldmVyLCB0aGUgYmlnZ2VzdCBp c3N1ZSB3aXRoIHlvdXIgaWRlYSBpcyB0aGUgcmVxdWlyZW1lbnQgZm9yIGhhbS9zZXJpb3VzIFNX TCB0eXBlIGVxdWlwbWVudCwgd2hpY2ggd2UgY2Fubm90IGFzc3VtZSBpcyBhdmFpbGFibGUuICBD ZXJ0YWlubHkgZm9yIHRob3NlIG9mIHVzIHdobyBkbyBoYXZlIHRoZSBnZWFyLCBpdCdzIGEgZ29v ZCBpZGVhLg0KIA0KTXkgdmlzaW9uIGlzIGZvciBhIHNpbXBsZSByZWxhdGl2ZSBmaWVsZCBzdHJl bmd0aCBtZXRlciB0aGF0IGNhbiBnaXZlIGEgcm91Z2ggaW5kaWNhdGlvbiB0aGF0IGFudGVubmEg WCBpcyB6IGRCIGhpZ2hlciBnYWluIHRoYW4gYW50ZW5uYSBZIHdoZW4gbWVhc3VyZWQgaW4gdGhl IGZhciBmaWVsZCBpbiBhIHN1aXRhYmxlIGVudmlyb25tZW50IChtb3N0IGxpa2VseSBhbiBvcGVu IHBhZGRvY2sgZm9yIG1vc3QgcGVvcGxlKS4NCg0KDQotLS0NCk91dGdvaW5nIG1haWwgaGFzIGJl ZW4gc2Nhbm5lZCBmb3IgVmlydXNlcw0KQ2hlY2tlZCBieSBBVkcgYW50aS12aXJ1cyBzeXN0ZW0g KGh0dHA6Ly93d3cuZ3Jpc29mdC5jb20pLg0KVmVyc2lvbjogNi4wLjQyNyAvIFZpcnVzIERhdGFi YXNlOiAyNDAgLSBSZWxlYXNlIERhdGU6IDYvMTIvMjAwMg0KDQoNCg0KVGhpcyBjb3JyZXNwb25k ZW5jZSBpcyBmb3IgdGhlIG5hbWVkIHBlcnNvbuKAmXMgdXNlIG9ubHkuIEl0IG1heSBjb250YWlu IGNvbmZpZGVudGlhbCBvciBsZWdhbGx5IHByaXZpbGVnZWQgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gb3IgYm90aC4g Tm8gY29uZmlkZW50aWFsaXR5IG9yIHByaXZpbGVnZSBpcyB3YWl2ZWQgb3IgbG9zdCBieSBhbnkg bWlzdHJhbnNtaXNzaW9uLiBJZiB5b3UgcmVjZWl2ZSB0aGlzIGNvcnJlc3BvbmRlbmNlIGluIGVy cm9yLCBwbGVhc2UgaW1tZWRpYXRlbHkgZGVsZXRlIGl0IGZyb20geW91ciBzeXN0ZW0gYW5kIG5v dGlmeSB0aGUgc2VuZGVyLiBZb3UgbXVzdCBub3QgZGlzY2xvc2UsIGNvcHkgb3IgcmVseSBvbiBh bnkgcGFydCBvZiB0aGlzIGNvcnJlc3BvbmRlbmNlIGlmIHlvdSBhcmUgbm90IHRoZSBpbnRlbmRl ZCByZWNpcGllbnQuDQoNCg0KQW55IG9waW5pb25zIGV4cHJlc3NlZCBpbiB0aGlzIG1lc3NhZ2Ug YXJlIHRob3NlIG9mIHRoZSBpbmRpdmlkdWFsIHNlbmRlci4NCg0KDQo= ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2A09A.6970F046 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PCFET0NUWVBFIEhUTUwgUFVCTElDICItLy9XM0MvL0RURCBIVE1MIDQuMCBUcmFuc2l0aW9uYWwv L0VOIj4NCjxIVE1MPjxIRUFEPg0KPE1FVEEgSFRUUC1FUVVJVj0iQ29udGVudC1UeXBlIiBDT05U RU5UPSJ0ZXh0L2h0bWw7IGNoYXJzZXQ9dXRmLTgiPg0KPFRJVExFPltzc10gUkU6IEhvdyBjYW4g VEFQUiBzdXBwb3J0IFNTIGRldmVsb3BtZW50Li4uIkJ1aWxkIHRoZSBUQVBSIEZTIG1ldGVyIjwv VElUTEU+DQoNCjxNRVRBIGNvbnRlbnQ9Ik1TSFRNTCA2LjAwLjI4MDAuMTEwNiIgbmFtZT1HRU5F UkFUT1I+PC9IRUFEPg0KPEJPRFkgZGlyPWx0cj4NCjxESVY+PEZPTlQgc2l6ZT00Pg0KPERJViBk aXI9bHRyPjxTUEFOIGNsYXNzPTA5NzU3MjgyMS0xMDEyMjAwMj48Rk9OVCBmYWNlPUFyaWFsPjxG T05UIA0KY29sb3I9IzAwMDBmZj48Rk9OVCBzaXplPTI+PFNQQU4gY2xhc3M9OTcwMjUxNDEwLTEw MTIyMDAyPiZndDsgPC9TUEFOPk15IHZpc2lvbiANCmlzIGZvciBhIHNpbXBsZSByZWxhdGl2ZSBm aWVsZCBzdHJlbmd0aCBtZXRlciB0aGF0IGNhbiBnaXZlIGEgcm91Z2ggaW5kaWNhdGlvbiANCjwv Rk9OVD48L0ZPTlQ+PC9GT05UPjwvU1BBTj48L0RJVj4NCjxESVYgZGlyPWx0cj48U1BBTiBjbGFz cz0wOTc1NzI4MjEtMTAxMjIwMDI+PEZPTlQ+PEZPTlQ+PEZPTlQgZmFjZT1BcmlhbD48Rk9OVCAN CmNvbG9yPSMwMDAwZmY+PEZPTlQgc2l6ZT0yPjxTUEFOIGNsYXNzPTk3MDI1MTQxMC0xMDEyMjAw Mj4mZ3Q7IDwvU1BBTj50aGF0IA0KYW50ZW5uYSBYIGlzIHogZEIgaGlnaGVyIGdhaW4gdGhhbiBh bnRlbm5hIFkgd2hlbiBtZWFzdXJlZCBpbiB0aGUgZmFyIGZpZWxkIGluIGEgDQo8L0ZPTlQ+PC9G T05UPjwvRk9OVD48L0ZPTlQ+PC9GT05UPjwvU1BBTj48L0RJVj4NCjxESVYgZGlyPWx0cj48U1BB TiBjbGFzcz0wOTc1NzI4MjEtMTAxMjIwMDI+PEZPTlQ+PEZPTlQ+PEZPTlQ+PEZPTlQ+PEZPTlQg DQpmYWNlPUFyaWFsPjxGT05UIGNvbG9yPSMwMDAwZmY+PEZPTlQgc2l6ZT0yPjxTUEFOIGNsYXNz PTk3MDI1MTQxMC0xMDEyMjAwMj4mZ3Q7IA0KPC9TUEFOPnN1aXRhYmxlIGVudmlyb25tZW50ICht b3N0IGxpa2VseSBhbiBvcGVuIHBhZGRvY2sgZm9yIG1vc3QgDQpwZW9wbGUpLjwvRk9OVD48L0ZP TlQ+PC9GT05UPjwvRk9OVD48L0ZPTlQ+PC9GT05UPjwvRk9OVD48L1NQQU4+PC9ESVY+PC9GT05U PjwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBzaXplPTQ+PC9GT05UPiZuYnNwOzwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48U1BB TiBjbGFzcz05NzAyNTE0MTAtMTAxMjIwMDI+PEZPTlQgc2l6ZT00PlRoZSBJY29tIFIzIHJlY2Vp dmVyIG1pZ2h0IGZpdCANCnRoZSBiaWxsLiA8L0ZPTlQ+PC9TUEFOPjwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48U1BB TiBjbGFzcz05NzAyNTE0MTAtMTAxMjIwMDI+PEZPTlQgc2l6ZT00PjwvRk9OVD48L1NQQU4+Jm5i c3A7PC9ESVY+DQo8RElWPjxTUEFOIGNsYXNzPTk3MDI1MTQxMC0xMDEyMjAwMj48Rk9OVCBzaXpl PTQ+PEEgDQpocmVmPSJodHRwOi8vd3d3LmxlbnRpbmljb21tLmNvbS9zaG9wcGluZy9wcmljZWxp c3QuYXNwP3ByaWQ9MjU2NyI+aHR0cDovL3d3dy5sZW50aW5pY29tbS5jb20vc2hvcHBpbmcvcHJp Y2VsaXN0LmFzcD9wcmlkPTI1Njc8L0E+PC9GT05UPjwvU1BBTj48L0RJVj4NCjxESVY+PFNQQU4g Y2xhc3M9OTcwMjUxNDEwLTEwMTIyMDAyPjxGT05UIHNpemU9ND48L0ZPTlQ+PC9TUEFOPiZuYnNw OzwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48U1BBTiBjbGFzcz05NzAyNTE0MTAtMTAxMjIwMDI+PEZPTlQgc2l6ZT00 Pkl0IHN0cmVldCBwcmljZXMgZm9yIGFib3V0ICQzNDAgDQpVUywgdGhvdWdoLCBwcmljZXkgZm9y IHdoYXQgeW91IGhhdmUgaW4gbWluZC4mbmJzcDsgPC9GT05UPjwvU1BBTj48L0RJVj4NCjxESVY+ PFNQQU4gY2xhc3M9OTcwMjUxNDEwLTEwMTIyMDAyPjxGT05UIHNpemU9ND48L0ZPTlQ+PC9TUEFO PiZuYnNwOzwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48U1BBTiBjbGFzcz05NzAyNTE0MTAtMTAxMjIwMDI+PEZPTlQg c2l6ZT00Pkkgd2lsbCBzZWUgaWYgWmFjayBrbm93cyBvZiBhbnkgDQpmaWVsZC1zdHJlbmd0aCBt ZXRlciBjaXJjdWl0cyB0aGF0IHdpbGwgd29yayBpbiAyLjQgR0h6LiBJZiB0aGV5IGFyZSBBUlJM IHB1YnMsIA0KSSB3aWxsIHNjYW4gdGhlbSBhbmQgYWRkIHRoZW0gdG8gQVJSTCdzIHdlYiBwYWdl IGFuZCBsZXQgdGhpcyBncm91cCBrbm93IHRoZSANClVSTC4gKEkgbG92ZSBiZWluZyB0aGUgQVJS TCBMYWIgRGFkOyBJIGNhbiBkbyB0aGF0IHNvcnQgb2YgDQp0aGluZyEhISk8L0ZPTlQ+PC9TUEFO PjwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48Rk9OVCBzaXplPTI+PC9GT05UPiZuYnNwOzwvRElWPg0KPERJVj48Rk9O VCBzaXplPTI+NzMsPEJSPkVkIEhhcmUsIFcxUkZJPEJSPkFSUkwgTGFiPEJSPjIyNSBNYWluIFN0 PEJSPk5ld2luZ3RvbiwgDQpDVCAwNjExMTxCUj5UZWw6IDg2MC01OTQtMDMxODxCUj5JbnRlcm5l dDogdzFyZmlAYXJybC5vcmc8QlI+V2ViOiA8QSANCmhyZWY9Imh0dHA6Ly93d3cuYXJybC5vcmcv dGlzIiANCnRhcmdldD1fYmxhbms+aHR0cDovL3d3dy5hcnJsLm9yZy90aXM8L0E+PEJSPjwvRElW PjwvRk9OVD4NCjxCTE9DS1FVT1RFIA0Kc3R5bGU9IlBBRERJTkctTEVGVDogNXB4OyBNQVJHSU4t TEVGVDogNXB4OyBCT1JERVItTEVGVDogIzAwMDAwMCAycHggc29saWQiPg0KICA8RElWIGNsYXNz PU91dGxvb2tNZXNzYWdlSGVhZGVyIGRpcj1sdHIgYWxpZ249bGVmdD48Rk9OVCBmYWNlPVRhaG9t YSANCiAgc2l6ZT0yPi0tLS0tT3JpZ2luYWwgTWVzc2FnZS0tLS0tPEJSPjxCPkZyb206PC9CPiBU b255IExhbmdkb24gDQogIFttYWlsdG86dGxhbmdkb25AYXRjdHJhaW5pbmcuY29tLmF1XTxCUj48 Qj5TZW50OjwvQj4gVHVlc2RheSwgRGVjZW1iZXIgMTAsIA0KICAyMDAyIDQ6MzQgUE08QlI+PEI+ VG86PC9CPiBUQVBSIFNwcmVhZCBTcGVjdHJ1bSBTcGVjaWFsIEludGVyZXN0IA0KICBHcm91cDxC Uj48Qj5TdWJqZWN0OjwvQj4gW3NzXSBSRTogW3NzXSBSRTogSG93IGNhbiBUQVBSIHN1cHBvcnQg U1MgDQogIGRldmVsb3BtZW50Li4uIkJ1aWxkIHRoZSBUQVBSIEZTIG1ldGVyIjxCUj48QlI+PC9G T05UPjwvRElWPg0KICA8RElWPlRoZSBzaW1wbGVzdCByZWxhdGl2ZSBmaWVsZCBzdHJlbmd0aCBt ZXRlciBpcyBhIHJlY2VpdmVyIGNvbm5lY3RlZCB0byBhbiANCiAgYW50ZW5uYSBhbmQgc3dpdGNo YWJsZSB0byBhIGR1bW15IGxvYWQuIElmIHlvdSBrbm93IHRoZSByZWNlaXZlcidzIHNlbnNpdGl2 aXR5IA0KICBhbmQgYW50ZW5uYSBnYWluIHlvdSBjYW4gbWVhc3VyZSB0aGUgaW5jcmVhc2UgaW4g cmVjZWl2ZXIgb3V0cHV0IHdpdGggYSANCiAgdHJ1ZS1STVMgdm9sdG1ldGVyLCBmaXJzdCB3aXRo IG5vIHNpZ25hbCBwcmVzZW50LCB0aGVuIHdpdGggdGhlIHJlY2VpdmVyIA0KICBjb25uZWN0ZWQg dG8gYW4gYW50ZW5uYSBhbmQgdGhlIHNpZ25hbCBiZWluZyBtZWFzdXJlZCBwcmVzZW50LiZuYnNw OyA8L0RJVj4NCiAgPEJMT0NLUVVPVEUgZGlyPWx0ciANCiAgc3R5bGU9IlBBRERJTkctTEVGVDog NXB4OyBNQVJHSU4tTEVGVDogNXB4OyBCT1JERVItTEVGVDogIzAwMDBmZiAycHggc29saWQ7IE1B UkdJTi1SSUdIVDogMHB4Ij4NCiAgICA8RElWPiZuYnNwOzwvRElWPg0KICAgIDxESVY+QW4gIkFN L1NTQiIgbW9kZSByZWNlaXZlciBjYW4gYmUgdXNlZC4gVGhlIEFSUkwgTGFiIGhhcyBhbiBJY29t IFIzIHRoYXQgDQogICAgdHVuZXMgMi40IEdIeiBhbmQgaXMgcmVsYXRpdmVseSB1c2VmdWwuJm5i c3A7IEl0IGlzIG5vdCB3ZWxsIHNoaWVsZGVkLCANCiAgICB0aG91Z2gsIGFuZCBpdCBoYXMgYSBs b3Qgb2Ygc3B1cmlvdXMgcmVzcG9uc2VzLCBzbyBpdCB0cnVseSBpcyBqdXN0IA0KICAgICJyZWxh dGl2ZWx5IiB1c2VmdWwuJm5ic3A7IEEgc3RlcCBhdHRlbnVhdG9yIGluIGZyb250IG9mIHRoZSBy ZWNlaXZlciBjYW4gDQogICAgaGVscCBrZWVwIHRoZSBzaWduYWwgaW4gdGhlIGxpbmVhciByYW5n ZSBvZiB0aGUgcmVjZWl2ZXIsIG9yIHRoZSBTIG1ldGVyIGNhbiANCiAgICBiZSBwcmUtY2FsaWJy YXRlZCBhZ2FpbnN0IGEgZ29vZCBzaWduYWwgZ2VuZXJhdG9yLiAoVGhpcyBoYXMgaXRzIGxpbWl0 cywgDQogICAgYmVjYXVzZSB0aGUgYWN1YWwgZ2FpbiBvZiB0aGUgSUYgc3RyaXAgY291bGQgY2hh bmdlIGJ5IHNldmVyYWwgZEIgd2l0aCB0aW1lIA0KICAgIG9yIHRlbXBlcmF0dXJlLCBidXQgaXQg aXMgYSByZWFzb25hYmxlIGdvb2QgYXBwcm94aW1hdGlvbi4pPFNQQU4gDQogICAgY2xhc3M9MDk3 NTcyODIxLTEwMTIyMDAyPjxGT05UIGZhY2U9QXJpYWwgY29sb3I9IzAwMDBmZiANCiAgICBzaXpl PTI+Jm5ic3A7PC9GT05UPjwvU1BBTj48L0RJVj48L0JMT0NLUVVPVEU+DQogIDxESVYgZGlyPWx0 cj48U1BBTiBjbGFzcz0wOTc1NzI4MjEtMTAxMjIwMDI+PEZPTlQgZmFjZT1BcmlhbCBjb2xvcj0j MDAwMGZmIA0KICBzaXplPTI+V2UgYXJlJm5ic3A7YWZ0ZXIgYSBGUyBtZXRlciB3aGljaCBjYW4g YmUgdXNlZCB3aXRoIERTU1Mgc2lnbmFscyB3aGljaCANCiAgYXJlIDIyIE1IeiB3aWRlLiZuYnNw OyBJdCBpcyBhbHNvJm5ic3A7aW50ZW5kZWQgdG8gYmUgdXNlYWJsZSBieSBub24gaGFtcyB3aG8g DQogIGFyZW4ndCBsaWtlbHkgdG8gaGF2ZSBhIHN1aXRhYmxlIFJ4IGluIHRoZWlyIA0KICBwb3Nz ZXNzaW9uLjwvRk9OVD4mbmJzcDs8L1NQQU4+PC9ESVY+DQogIDxESVYgZGlyPWx0cj48U1BBTiBj bGFzcz0wOTc1NzI4MjEtMTAxMjIwMDI+PEZPTlQgZmFjZT1BcmlhbCBjb2xvcj0jMDAwMGZmIA0K ICBzaXplPTI+PC9GT05UPjwvU1BBTj4mbmJzcDs8L0RJVj4NCiAgPERJViBkaXI9bHRyPjxTUEFO IGNsYXNzPTA5NzU3MjgyMS0xMDEyMjAwMj48Rk9OVCBmYWNlPUFyaWFsIGNvbG9yPSMwMDAwZmYg DQogIHNpemU9Mj5Ib3dldmVyLCB0aGUgYmlnZ2VzdCBpc3N1ZSB3aXRoIHlvdXIgaWRlYSBpcyB0 aGUgcmVxdWlyZW1lbnQgZm9yIA0KICBoYW0vc2VyaW91cyBTV0wgdHlwZSBlcXVpcG1lbnQsIHdo aWNoIHdlIGNhbm5vdCBhc3N1bWUgaXMgYXZhaWxhYmxlLiZuYnNwOyANCiAgQ2VydGFpbmx5IGZv ciB0aG9zZSBvZiB1cyB3aG8gZG8gaGF2ZSB0aGUgZ2VhciwgaXQncyBhIGdvb2QgDQogIGlkZWEu PC9GT05UPjwvU1BBTj48L0RJVj4NCiAgPERJViBkaXI9bHRyPjxTUEFOIGNsYXNzPTA5NzU3Mjgy MS0xMDEyMjAwMj48Rk9OVCBmYWNlPUFyaWFsIGNvbG9yPSMwMDAwZmYgDQogIHNpemU9Mj48L0ZP TlQ+PC9TUEFOPiZuYnNwOzwvRElWPg0KICA8RElWIGRpcj1sdHI+PFNQQU4gY2xhc3M9MDk3NTcy ODIxLTEwMTIyMDAyPjxGT05UIGZhY2U9QXJpYWwgY29sb3I9IzAwMDBmZiANCiAgc2l6ZT0yPk15 IHZpc2lvbiBpcyBmb3IgYSBzaW1wbGUgcmVsYXRpdmUgZmllbGQgc3RyZW5ndGggbWV0ZXIgdGhh dCBjYW4gZ2l2ZSBhIA0KICByb3VnaCBpbmRpY2F0aW9uIHRoYXQgYW50ZW5uYSBYIGlzIHogZEIg aGlnaGVyIGdhaW4gdGhhbiBhbnRlbm5hIFkgd2hlbiANCiAgbWVhc3VyZWQgaW4gdGhlIGZhciBm aWVsZCBpbiBhIHN1aXRhYmxlIGVudmlyb25tZW50IChtb3N0IGxpa2VseSBhbiBvcGVuIA0KICBw YWRkb2NrIGZvciBtb3N0IHBlb3BsZSkuPC9GT05UPjwvU1BBTj48L0RJVj48QlI+DQogIDxQPjxG T05UIHNpemU9Mj4tLS08QlI+T3V0Z29pbmcgbWFpbCBoYXMgYmVlbiBzY2FubmVkIGZvciBWaXJ1 c2VzPEJSPkNoZWNrZWQgDQogIGJ5IEFWRyBhbnRpLXZpcnVzIHN5c3RlbSAoaHR0cDovL3d3dy5n cmlzb2Z0LmNvbSkuPEJSPlZlcnNpb246IDYuMC40MjcgLyBWaXJ1cyANCiAgRGF0YWJhc2U6IDI0 MCAtIFJlbGVhc2UgRGF0ZTogNi8xMi8yMDAyPEJSPjwvRk9OVD48L1A+PEJSPg0KICA8UD48Rk9O VCBmYWNlPUFyaWFsIHNpemU9Mj5UaGlzIGNvcnJlc3BvbmRlbmNlIGlzIGZvciB0aGUgbmFtZWQg cGVyc29u4oCZcyB1c2UgDQogIG9ubHkuIEl0IG1heSBjb250YWluIGNvbmZpZGVudGlhbCBvciBs ZWdhbGx5IHByaXZpbGVnZWQgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gb3IgYm90aC4gDQogIE5vIGNvbmZpZGVudGlh bGl0eSBvciBwcml2aWxlZ2UgaXMgd2FpdmVkIG9yIGxvc3QgYnkgYW55IG1pc3RyYW5zbWlzc2lv bi4gSWYgDQogIHlvdSByZWNlaXZlIHRoaXMgY29ycmVzcG9uZGVuY2UgaW4gZXJyb3IsIHBsZWFz ZSBpbW1lZGlhdGVseSBkZWxldGUgaXQgZnJvbSANCiAgeW91ciBzeXN0ZW0gYW5kIG5vdGlmeSB0 aGUgc2VuZGVyLiBZb3UgbXVzdCBub3QgZGlzY2xvc2UsIGNvcHkgb3IgcmVseSBvbiBhbnkgDQog IHBhcnQgb2YgdGhpcyBjb3JyZXNwb25kZW5jZSBpZiB5b3UgYXJlIG5vdCB0aGUgaW50ZW5kZWQg DQogIHJlY2lwaWVudC48L0ZPTlQ+PC9QPjxCUj4NCiAgPFA+PEZPTlQgZmFjZT1BcmlhbCBzaXpl PTI+QW55IG9waW5pb25zIGV4cHJlc3NlZCBpbiB0aGlzIG1lc3NhZ2UgYXJlIHRob3NlIG9mIA0K ICB0aGUgaW5kaXZpZHVhbCBzZW5kZXIuPC9GT05UPjwvUD48QlI+PC9CTE9DS1FVT1RFPjwvQk9E WT48L0hUTUw+DQo= ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2A09A.6970F046-- --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 16:24:17 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id QAA24422 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:24:13 -0600 (CST) content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Subject: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS development..."Build the TAP R FS meter" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:23:21 -0500 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS development..."Build the TAP R FS meter" Thread-Index: AcKgma6rvOk5aHiyQ6KoIaH8Qb8MEwAY/JeA From: "Hare,Ed, W1RFI" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <721D3436A7C2B344A301FD4A413C71A96ED032@kosh.ARRLHQ.ORG> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id QAA24422 And the Down East Microwave transverters are actually pretty affordable. Any 2-meter HT could serve as the signal source. http://downeastmicrowave.com/ 73, Ed Hare, W1RFI ARRL Lab 225 Main St Newington, CT 06111 Tel: 860-594-0318 Internet: w1rfi@arrl.org Web: http://www.arrl.org/tis > -----Original Message----- > From: Tony Langdon [mailto:tlangdon@atctraining.com.au] > Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 5:15 PM > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS > development..."Build the TAP R > FS meter" > > > > The IEEE 802.11a and 802.11b cards we have set up in the ARRL > > Lab (with an SSID of W1RFI so as far as I was concerned, they > > were operated under Part 97) both sounded "bursty" when > > transmitting long files. There was no EMI or other > > interference from other WLAN devices, but the noise level > > would vary by several dB from time to time. > > > > I would be quite happy to measure the devices in situ, to > > whatever degree they varied. > > OK, no probs. Actually, some time back, I had come up with > an alternate > strategy (another way for hams to help the non hams). I have > a 2.4 GHz > multiplier, which I configured to accept 1/2 watt on 400 ish > MHz from the > HT. The output is around 50 mW on 2.4 GHz. I was planning > on using this as > a signal source for future antenna testing. So use the > 802.11b card if > there's no hams around and if there is a ham, they could > bring a 2.4 GHz > signal source like mine. :) > > --- > Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 > > > This correspondence is for the named person's use only. It may contain > confidential or legally privileged information or both. No > confidentiality > or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you > receive this > correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from > your system and > notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any > part of this > correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. > > Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the > individual sender. > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: W1RFI@ARRL.ORG > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 16:26:14 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id QAA24532 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:26:12 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: Tony Langdon To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Possible SPAM (accuracy low): Re: DCC Articles Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:25:21 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > The hardware is installed. If I wanted to switch distro's to > Redhat 6.2, I'd > have the software installed, too ;-) Or Red Hat 7.3, which is the current flavour. :) > > > > > Add 1 more connection to the Colorado reflector and a HUGE > > > mass of land becomes available via IRLP. > > > > At least that's my plan. > > > I suspect some bits of this haven't yet been built.... but > interesting. > > the only thing that hasn't been built yet, is 1 linux box connected to > high-speed access in downtown San Antonio, and a radio hung > on it, to talk to > one of the link-repeaters. Everything else is there. When > the San Antonio link > system talks to the reflector at my place, and a box in the > Houston area does > the same, then those two linked repeater systems are then > linked together. OK, no probs. so there's a radio to link to the main IRLP network? I tend to look for as few conversions as possible, so I was thinking a reflector emulating a node, and the linking being purely digital... > > > > sorry for the rambling - I forget where I am, sometimes. > > > IRLP don't have > > > anything to do with Spread Spectrum, but running h.323 over > > > 802.11b is exciting, also ;-) > > > > Well, at Melbourne Wireless, we have had over a dozen > people running Speak > > Freely on laptops. Everyone had an absolute ball, it was > like the old CB > > days all over. One guy was even game enough to head down > to the local pub > > and transmit live from there LOL. That night certainly > stirred an interest > > in VoIP (especially when I later gave a few people demos of IRLP). > > IRLP is 'the bomb', for V/UHF. for me, nothing will ever > (again) replace HF for > comms. Depends what you want. HF at home is currently very limited. High noise levels and poor antenna positioning really kill it off. Can't even hear the "Californian Kilowatt" brigade on 14 MHz (even if they beam at me! :( ). In the mobile, it's a different story, now there's a place to operate HF - miles from anywhere, the cellphone hasn't offered a squeak for several hours (it just sits there looking stupid with "No network" on its LCD), only VHF activity is a few birdies from the car's electronics... and HF is in there, rock solid... :-) Yes, I do love HF when travelling! --- Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 This correspondence is for the named person's use only. It may contain confidential or legally privileged information or both. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of this correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 16:30:02 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id QAA24648 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:30:00 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: =?UTF-8?B?VG9ueSBMYW5nZG9u?= To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Cc: =?UTF-8?B?TGF1LCBaYWNrLCAgVzFWVA==?= Subject: [ss] =?UTF-8?B?UkU6IFtzc10gUkU6IFtzc10gUkU6IEhvdyBjYW4gVEFQUiBzdXBw?= =?UTF-8?B?b3J0IFNTIGRldmVsb3BtZW50Li4uIkJ1aWxkIHRoZSBUQVBSIEZTIG1ldGVy?= =?UTF-8?B?Ig==?= Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:28:40 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C2A09B.7DE27FD0" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2A09B.7DE27FD0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Remember, that's at least $650 over here, so it wouldn't be appropriate = (one can get 10 802.11b cards for that if you know the right sources). -----Original Message----- From: Hare,Ed, W1RFI [mailto:w1rfi@arrl.org] Sent: Wednesday, 11 December 2002 9:21 AM To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Cc: Lau, Zack, W1VT Subject: [ss] RE: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS development..."Build = the TAPR FS meter" > My vision is for a simple relative field strength meter that can give = a rough indication=20 > that antenna X is z dB higher gain than antenna Y when measured in = the far field in a=20 > suitable environment (most likely an open paddock for most people). =20 The Icom R3 receiver might fit the bill.=20 =20 HYPERLINK "http://www.lentinicomm.com/shopping/pricelist.asp?prid=3D2567"http://ww= w.lent inicomm.com/shopping/pricelist.asp?prid=3D2567 =20 It street prices for about $340 US, though, pricey for what you have in mind. =20 =20 I will see if Zack knows of any field-strength meter circuits that will = work in 2.4 GHz. If they are ARRL pubs, I will scan them and add them to = ARRL's web page and let this group know the URL. (I love being the ARRL Lab = Dad; I can do that sort of thing!!!) =20 73, Ed Hare, W1RFI ARRL Lab 225 Main St Newington, CT 06111 Tel: 860-594-0318 Internet: w1rfi@arrl.org Web: HYPERLINK "http://www.arrl.org/tis" \nhttp://www.arrl.org/tis -----Original Message----- From: Tony Langdon [mailto:tlangdon@atctraining.com.au] Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 4:34 PM To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Subject: [ss] RE: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS development..."Build = the TAPR FS meter" The simplest relative field strength meter is a receiver connected to = an antenna and switchable to a dummy load. If you know the receiver's sensitivity and antenna gain you can measure the increase in receiver = output with a true-RMS voltmeter, first with no signal present, then with the receiver connected to an antenna and the signal being measured present. = =20 =20 An "AM/SSB" mode receiver can be used. The ARRL Lab has an Icom R3 that tunes 2.4 GHz and is relatively useful. It is not well shielded, = though, and it has a lot of spurious responses, so it truly is just = "relatively" useful. A step attenuator in front of the receiver can help keep the = signal in the linear range of the receiver, or the S meter can be = pre-calibrated against a good signal generator. (This has its limits, because the = acual gain of the IF strip could change by several dB with time or = temperature, but it is a reasonable good approximation.)=20 We are after a FS meter which can be used with DSSS signals which are = 22 MHz wide. It is also intended to be useable by non hams who aren't likely = to have a suitable Rx in their possession.=20 =20 However, the biggest issue with your idea is the requirement for = ham/serious SWL type equipment, which we cannot assume is available. Certainly for those of us who do have the gear, it's a good idea. =20 My vision is for a simple relative field strength meter that can give a rough indication that antenna X is z dB higher gain than antenna Y when measured in the far field in a suitable environment (most likely an = open paddock for most people). --- Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 This correspondence is for the named person=E2=80=99s use only. It may = contain confidential or legally privileged information or both. No = confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive = this correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system = and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of = this correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual = sender. --- Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 =20 This correspondence is for the named person=E2=80=99s use only. It may = contain confidential or legally privileged information or both. No = confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive = this correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system = and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of = this correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual = sender. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2A09B.7DE27FD0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS development..."Build the TAPR = FS meter"
Remember, that's at least $650 over here, so it wouldn't be = appropriate=20 (one can get 10 802.11b cards for that if you know the right=20 sources).
-----Original Message-----
From: Hare,Ed, W1RFI=20 [mailto:w1rfi@arrl.org]
Sent: Wednesday, 11 December 2002 = 9:21=20 AM
To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest = Group
Cc:=20 Lau, Zack, W1VT
Subject: [ss] RE: [ss] RE: How can TAPR = support SS=20 development..."Build the TAPR FS meter"

> = My=20 vision is for a simple relative field strength meter that can give a = rough=20 indication
> that antenna X is z dB higher = gain than=20 antenna Y when measured in the far field in a=20
> suitable environment (most = likely an open=20 paddock for most=20 = people).
 
The Icom R3 = receiver might=20 fit the bill.
 
h= ttp://www.lentinicomm.com/shopping/pricelist.asp?prid=3D2567<= /SPAN>
 
It street prices = for about=20 $340 US, though, pricey for what you have in mind.  =
 
I will see if = Zack knows of=20 any field-strength meter circuits that will work in 2.4 GHz. If they = are ARRL=20 pubs, I will scan them and add them to ARRL's web page and let this = group know=20 the URL. (I love being the ARRL Lab Dad; I can do that sort of=20 thing!!!)
 
73,
Ed Hare, W1RFI
ARRL Lab
225 Main=20 St
Newington, CT 06111
Tel: 860-594-0318
Internet:=20 w1rfi@arrl.org
Web: http://www.arrl.org/tis
-----Original Message-----
From: Tony Langdon=20 [mailto:tlangdon@atctraining.com.au]
Sent: Tuesday, = December 10,=20 2002 4:34 PM
To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest=20 Group
Subject: [ss] RE: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS=20 development..."Build the TAPR FS meter"

The simplest relative field strength meter is a receiver = connected to=20 an antenna and switchable to a dummy load. If you know the = receiver's=20 sensitivity and antenna gain you can measure the increase in = receiver output=20 with a true-RMS voltmeter, first with no signal present, then with = the=20 receiver connected to an antenna and the signal being measured=20 present. 
 
An "AM/SSB" mode receiver can be used. The ARRL Lab has an = Icom R3=20 that tunes 2.4 GHz and is relatively useful.  It is not well = shielded, though, and it has a lot of spurious responses, so it = truly is=20 just "relatively" useful.  A step attenuator in front of the = receiver=20 can help keep the signal in the linear range of the receiver, or = the S=20 meter can be pre-calibrated against a good signal generator. = (This has its=20 limits, because the acual gain of the IF strip could change by = several dB=20 with time or temperature, but it is a reasonable good = approximation.) 
We are after a FS meter which can be used with DSSS = signals=20 which are 22 MHz wide.  It is also intended to be useable = by non=20 hams who aren't likely to have a suitable Rx in their=20 possession. 
 
However, the biggest issue with your idea is the = requirement for=20 ham/serious SWL type equipment, which we cannot assume is = available. =20 Certainly for those of us who do have the gear, it's a good=20 idea.
 
My vision is for a simple relative field strength meter = that can give=20 a rough indication that antenna X is z dB higher gain than antenna = Y when=20 measured in the far field in a suitable environment (most likely an = open=20 paddock for most people).

---
Outgoing mail has been scanned for = Viruses
Checked=20 by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: = 6.0.427 /=20 Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002


This correspondence is for the named = person=E2=80=99s use=20 only. It may contain confidential or legally privileged information = or both.=20 No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any = mistransmission. If=20 you receive this correspondence in error, please immediately delete = it from=20 your system and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or = rely on=20 any part of this correspondence if you are not the intended=20 recipient.


Any opinions expressed in this = message are those=20 of the individual = sender.



---
Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002


This correspondence is for the named = person=E2=80=99s use only. It may contain confidential or legally = privileged information or both. No confidentiality or privilege is = waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this = correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system = and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part = of this correspondence if you are not the intended = recipient.


Any opinions expressed in this message = are those of the individual sender.


------_=_NextPart_001_01C2A09B.7DE27FD0-- --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 16:32:15 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id QAA24753 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:32:13 -0600 (CST) content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Subject: [ss] Microwave oven detectors X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:29:42 -0500 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS development..."Build the TAP R FS meter" Thread-Index: AcKgma6rvOk5aHiyQ6KoIaH8Qb8MEwAY/JeAADG2M4A= From: "Hare,Ed, W1RFI" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <721D3436A7C2B344A301FD4A413C71A96ED034@kosh.ARRLHQ.ORG> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id QAA24753 http://www.lessemf.com/mw-oven.html The Less-EMF site is a lot of smoke and mirrors, but the price is right. :-) 73, Ed Hare, W1RFI ARRL Lab 225 Main St Newington, CT 06111 Tel: 860-594-0318 Internet: w1rfi@arrl.org Web: http://www.arrl.org/tis > -----Original Message----- > From: Hare,Ed, W1RFI > Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 5:23 PM > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS > development..."Build the TAP R > FS meter" > > > And the Down East Microwave transverters are actually pretty > affordable. Any 2-meter HT could serve as the signal source. > > http://downeastmicrowave.com/ > > > 73, > Ed Hare, W1RFI > ARRL Lab > 225 Main St > Newington, CT 06111 > Tel: 860-594-0318 > Internet: w1rfi@arrl.org > Web: http://www.arrl.org/tis > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Tony Langdon [mailto:tlangdon@atctraining.com.au] > > Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 5:15 PM > > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > > Subject: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS > > development..."Build the TAP R > > FS meter" > > > > > > > The IEEE 802.11a and 802.11b cards we have set up in the ARRL > > > Lab (with an SSID of W1RFI so as far as I was concerned, they > > > were operated under Part 97) both sounded "bursty" when > > > transmitting long files. There was no EMI or other > > > interference from other WLAN devices, but the noise level > > > would vary by several dB from time to time. > > > > > > I would be quite happy to measure the devices in situ, to > > > whatever degree they varied. > > > > OK, no probs. Actually, some time back, I had come up with > > an alternate > > strategy (another way for hams to help the non hams). I have > > a 2.4 GHz > > multiplier, which I configured to accept 1/2 watt on 400 ish > > MHz from the > > HT. The output is around 50 mW on 2.4 GHz. I was planning > > on using this as > > a signal source for future antenna testing. So use the > > 802.11b card if > > there's no hams around and if there is a ham, they could > > bring a 2.4 GHz > > signal source like mine. :) > > > > --- > > Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > > Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 > > > > > > This correspondence is for the named person's use only. It > may contain > > confidential or legally privileged information or both. No > > confidentiality > > or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you > > receive this > > correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from > > your system and > > notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any > > part of this > > correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. > > > > Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the > > individual sender. > > > > > > --- > > You are currently subscribed to ss as: W1RFI@ARRL.ORG > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: W1RFI@ARRL.ORG > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 16:34:13 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id QAA25076 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:34:13 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: Tony Langdon To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS development..."Build the TAP R FS meter" Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:31:11 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk In VK, the ATV multiplier modules are very cheap. Just need a modified HT to drive it (that's the combo I'm using). About $30 Aus for a dirt cheap signal source. Look up Mini Kits (www.minikits.com.au perhaps? Can't remember the URL off hand). If you don't want to use a HT, you could probably make a suitable oscillator on a sub multiple of the required frequency. > -----Original Message----- > From: Hare,Ed, W1RFI [mailto:w1rfi@arrl.org] > Sent: Wednesday, 11 December 2002 9:23 AM > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS > development..."Build the TAP R > FS meter" > > > And the Down East Microwave transverters are actually pretty > affordable. Any 2-meter HT could serve as the signal source. > > http://downeastmicrowave.com/ > > > 73, > Ed Hare, W1RFI > ARRL Lab > 225 Main St > Newington, CT 06111 > Tel: 860-594-0318 > Internet: w1rfi@arrl.org > Web: http://www.arrl.org/tis > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Tony Langdon [mailto:tlangdon@atctraining.com.au] > > Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 5:15 PM > > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > > Subject: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS > > development..."Build the TAP R > > FS meter" > > > > > > > The IEEE 802.11a and 802.11b cards we have set up in the ARRL > > > Lab (with an SSID of W1RFI so as far as I was concerned, they > > > were operated under Part 97) both sounded "bursty" when > > > transmitting long files. There was no EMI or other > > > interference from other WLAN devices, but the noise level > > > would vary by several dB from time to time. > > > > > > I would be quite happy to measure the devices in situ, to > > > whatever degree they varied. > > > > OK, no probs. Actually, some time back, I had come up with > > an alternate > > strategy (another way for hams to help the non hams). I have > > a 2.4 GHz > > multiplier, which I configured to accept 1/2 watt on 400 ish > > MHz from the > > HT. The output is around 50 mW on 2.4 GHz. I was planning > > on using this as > > a signal source for future antenna testing. So use the > > 802.11b card if > > there's no hams around and if there is a ham, they could > > bring a 2.4 GHz > > signal source like mine. :) > > > > --- > > Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > > Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 > > > > > > This correspondence is for the named person's use only. It > may contain > > confidential or legally privileged information or both. No > > confidentiality > > or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you > > receive this > > correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from > > your system and > > notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any > > part of this > > correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. > > > > Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the > > individual sender. > > > > > > --- > > You are currently subscribed to ss as: W1RFI@ARRL.ORG > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: tlangdon@atctraining.com.au > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > --- Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 This correspondence is for the named person's use only. It may contain confidential or legally privileged information or both. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of this correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 16:43:20 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id QAA25318 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:43:15 -0600 (CST) From: Jeff King To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:41:13 -0500 In-Reply-To: Subject: [ss] Re: Microwave oven detectors Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Message-Id: Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id QAA25318 I like the "microwave light" that lights up when you put it in the operating microwave oven. I've found that AOL CD's also "light up" when placed in a microwave oven ;-) Thanks for the link Ed! -- Jeff King, jeff@aerodata.net on 12/10/2002 On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:29:42 -0500, Hare,Ed, W1RFI wrote: >http://www.lessemf.com/mw-oven.html > >The Less-EMF site is a lot of smoke and mirrors, but the price is >right. :-) > >73, >Ed Hare, W1RFI >ARRL Lab >225 Main St >Newington, CT 06111 >Tel: 860-594-0318 >Internet: w1rfi@arrl.org >Web: http://www.arrl.org/tis > > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Hare,Ed, W1RFI >>Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 5:23 PM >>To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group >>Subject: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS >>development..."Build the TAP R >>FS meter" >> >> >>And the Down East Microwave transverters are actually pretty >>affordable. Any 2-meter HT could serve as the signal source. >> >>http://downeastmicrowave.com/ >> >> >>73, >>Ed Hare, W1RFI >>ARRL Lab >>225 Main St >>Newington, CT 06111 >>Tel: 860-594-0318 >>Internet: w1rfi@arrl.org >>Web: http://www.arrl.org/tis >> >> >> >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: Tony Langdon [mailto:tlangdon@atctraining.com.au] >>>Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 5:15 PM >>>To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group >>>Subject: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS >>>development..."Build the TAP R >>>FS meter" >>> >>> >>>>The IEEE 802.11a and 802.11b cards we have set up in the ARRL >>>>Lab (with an SSID of W1RFI so as far as I was concerned, they >>>>were operated under Part 97) both sounded "bursty" when >>>>transmitting long files. There was no EMI or other >>>>interference from other WLAN devices, but the noise level >>>>would vary by several dB from time to time. >>>> >>>>I would be quite happy to measure the devices in situ, to >>>>whatever degree they varied. >>> >>>OK, no probs. Actually, some time back, I had come up with >>>an alternate >>>strategy (another way for hams to help the non hams). I have >>>a 2.4 GHz >>>multiplier, which I configured to accept 1/2 watt on 400 ish >>>MHz from the >>>HT. The output is around 50 mW on 2.4 GHz. I was planning >>>on using this as >>>a signal source for future antenna testing. So use the >>>802.11b card if >>>there's no hams around and if there is a ham, they could >>>bring a 2.4 GHz >>>signal source like mine. :) >>> >>>--- >>>Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses >>>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). >>>Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 >>> >>> >>>This correspondence is for the named person's use only. It >>may contain >>>confidential or legally privileged information or both. No >>>confidentiality >>>or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you >>>receive this >>>correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from >>>your system and >>>notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any >>>part of this >>>correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. >>> >>>Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the >>>individual sender. >>> >>> >>>--- >>>You are currently subscribed to ss as: W1RFI@ARRL.ORG >>>To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss- >>>9838V@lists.tapr.org >>> >>> >> >>--- >>You are currently subscribed to ss as: W1RFI@ARRL.ORG >>To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org >> >> > >--- >You are currently subscribed to ss as: jeff@aerodata.net >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 16:52:07 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id QAA25981 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:52:06 -0600 (CST) From: "Lyle Johnson" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE:"Build the TAPR FS meter" Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:50:47 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk The Analog Devices AD8313 chip is a logarithmic amplifier from 100 MHz to 2.5 Ghz, costs only $12.25 in 100 qty, and an eval board already built is only $99 in unit qty. This would be easy to put on a PCB along with a dipole etched on the same PCB for 2.4 GHz and etc. Presto! a field strength meter with linear readout of dB and a 70 dB range. Add a battery and a meter (use your $10 DVM - I got one for $10 NZD, US $5 when I was in New Zealand last year so this is even cheap for our friends down under :-) At 2.4 GHz and for this purpsoe, FR-4 PCB material would be OK. Could probably model it and do the PCB artwork with Puff (used to be freeware, maybe still is). Ed, turn Zack loose on this project :-) 73, Lyle KK7P --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 16:55:11 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id QAA26056 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:55:10 -0600 (CST) From: "Lyle Johnson" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE:"Build the TAPR FS meter" Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:54:37 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk AMSAT-UK has links to a kit to build a 2.4 GHz signal source for not much money. http://www.g0mrf.freeserve.co.uk/source2.htm Why make it hard with HTs and transverters? "TAPR" could act as an agent for importing these kits to the US for the signal source, and make the FSM kit with the AD8313... 73, Lyle KK7P --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 16:57:28 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id QAA26189 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:57:24 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: Tony Langdon To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE:"Build the TAPR FS meter" Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:55:00 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > This would be easy to put on a PCB along with a dipole etched > on the same > PCB for 2.4 GHz and etc. Presto! a field strength meter with linear > readout of dB and a 70 dB range. Add a battery and a meter > (use your $10 > DVM - I got one for $10 NZD, US $5 when I was in New Zealand > last year so > this is even cheap for our friends down under :-) Sounds nice. And yes, DVMs are dirt cheap over here too. I can see a good possibility of a workable design here... --- Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 This correspondence is for the named person's use only. It may contain confidential or legally privileged information or both. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of this correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 17:24:11 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id RAA26857 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:24:07 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:22:13 -0600 From: Gerry Creager User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020826 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS development..."Build the TAP R FS meter" References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3DF67725.4080308@tamu.edu> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk If you were 'sending' a large file, it was stopping to look for ACK. It's half-duplex. It could have seen a bit of a delay, detectable by human ears, getting an ACK turned around. gerry Hare,Ed, W1RFI wrote: > The IEEE 802.11a and 802.11b cards we have set up in the ARRL Lab (with an SSID of W1RFI so as far as I was concerned, they were operated under Part 97) both sounded "bursty" when transmitting long files. There was no EMI or other interference from other WLAN devices, but the noise level would vary by several dB from time to time. > > I would be quite happy to measure the devices in situ, to whatever degree they varied. > > 73, > Ed Hare, W1RFI > ARRL Lab > 225 Main St > Newington, CT 06111 > Tel: 860-594-0318 > Internet: w1rfi@arrl.org > Web: http://www.arrl.org/tis > > > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Tony Langdon [mailto:tlangdon@atctraining.com.au] >>Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 4:44 PM >>To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group >>Subject: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS >>development..."Build the TAP R >>FS meter" >> >> >> >>>Now, how do you make an 802.11 WLAN device transmit as much >>>as possible to give you field to measure? Possibly by some piece >>>of software that makes it send a continuous stream of broadcast >>>packets so you don't need any other WLANs nearby that may upset >>>your readings. >>> >>>Can anyone sort this bit out? >> >>Hmm, a UDP flooding program perhaps? or even ping -f >>some.fake.ip.address? >> >>:-) >> >>--- >>Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses >>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). >>Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 >> >> >>This correspondence is for the named person's use only. It may contain >>confidential or legally privileged information or both. No >>confidentiality >>or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you >>receive this >>correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from >>your system and >>notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any >>part of this >>correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. >> >>Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the >>individual sender. >> >> >>--- >>You are currently subscribed to ss as: W1RFI@ARRL.ORG >>To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org >> >> > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: gerry.creager@tamu.edu > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org -- Gerry Creager -- gerry.creager@tamu.edu Network Engineering -- AATLT, Texas A&M University Office: 979.458.4020 FAX: 979.847.8578 Cell: 979.229.5301 Pager: 979.228.0173 --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 18:06:58 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id SAA29202 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 18:06:53 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Geoff Edmonson" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS development..."Build the TAP R FS meter" Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 18:07:00 -0600 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-RAVMilter-Version: 8.4.1(snapshot 20020919) (w5omr) List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: <001901c2a0a9$3a1a1420$0200a8c0@hamhome.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > If you were 'sending' a large file, it was stopping to look for ACK. > It's half-duplex. It could have seen a bit of a delay, detectable by > human ears, getting an ACK turned around. er? 802.11b Spread Spectrum Wireless Network connection is half-duplex? --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 18:44:47 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id SAA00570 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 18:44:44 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: "m.a.pinfold" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: Microwave oven detectors Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:47:27 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <000601c2a0ae$e168f160$1401a8c0@XTRA> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk CD's in the microwave go really cool ! just like 4th of July fireworks too! dont let your wife catch you though ( the kids think it's great) Mike ZL1BTB ----- Original Message ----- From: Jeff King To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 11:41 AM Subject: [ss] Re: Microwave oven detectors I like the "microwave light" that lights up when you put it in the operating microwave oven. I've found that AOL CD's also "light up" when placed in a microwave oven ;-) Thanks for the link Ed! -- Jeff King, jeff@aerodata.net on 12/10/2002 On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 17:29:42 -0500, Hare,Ed, W1RFI wrote: >http://www.lessemf.com/mw-oven.html > >The Less-EMF site is a lot of smoke and mirrors, but the price is >right. :-) > >73, >Ed Hare, W1RFI >ARRL Lab >225 Main St >Newington, CT 06111 >Tel: 860-594-0318 >Internet: w1rfi@arrl.org >Web: http://www.arrl.org/tis > > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Hare,Ed, W1RFI >>Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 5:23 PM >>To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group >>Subject: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS >>development..."Build the TAP R >>FS meter" >> >> >>And the Down East Microwave transverters are actually pretty >>affordable. Any 2-meter HT could serve as the signal source. >> >>http://downeastmicrowave.com/ >> >> >>73, >>Ed Hare, W1RFI >>ARRL Lab >>225 Main St >>Newington, CT 06111 >>Tel: 860-594-0318 >>Internet: w1rfi@arrl.org >>Web: http://www.arrl.org/tis >> >> >> >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: Tony Langdon [mailto:tlangdon@atctraining.com.au] >>>Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 5:15 PM >>>To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group >>>Subject: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS >>>development..."Build the TAP R >>>FS meter" >>> >>> >>>>The IEEE 802.11a and 802.11b cards we have set up in the ARRL >>>>Lab (with an SSID of W1RFI so as far as I was concerned, they >>>>were operated under Part 97) both sounded "bursty" when >>>>transmitting long files. There was no EMI or other >>>>interference from other WLAN devices, but the noise level >>>>would vary by several dB from time to time. >>>> >>>>I would be quite happy to measure the devices in situ, to >>>>whatever degree they varied. >>> >>>OK, no probs. Actually, some time back, I had come up with >>>an alternate >>>strategy (another way for hams to help the non hams). I have >>>a 2.4 GHz >>>multiplier, which I configured to accept 1/2 watt on 400 ish >>>MHz from the >>>HT. The output is around 50 mW on 2.4 GHz. I was planning >>>on using this as >>>a signal source for future antenna testing. So use the >>>802.11b card if >>>there's no hams around and if there is a ham, they could >>>bring a 2.4 GHz >>>signal source like mine. :) >>> >>>--- >>>Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses >>>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). >>>Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 >>> >>> >>>This correspondence is for the named person's use only. It >>may contain >>>confidential or legally privileged information or both. No >>>confidentiality >>>or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you >>>receive this >>>correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from >>>your system and >>>notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any >>>part of this >>>correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. >>> >>>Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the >>>individual sender. >>> >>> >>>--- >>>You are currently subscribed to ss as: W1RFI@ARRL.ORG >>>To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss- >>>9838V@lists.tapr.org >>> >>> >> >>--- >>You are currently subscribed to ss as: W1RFI@ARRL.ORG >>To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org >> >> > >--- >You are currently subscribed to ss as: jeff@aerodata.net >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: PINFOLD@XTRA.CO.NZ To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 10 23:51:35 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id XAA12907 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 23:51:29 -0600 (CST) From: "Darryl Smith" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE:"Build the TAPR FS meter" Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 16:45:50 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Scanner: exiscan *18LzlH-000205-00*sK1qVn7KWrM* on Astaro Security Linux List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <02b301c2a0d8$8fef7410$4601a8c0@DELL8000> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk People Funny that Lyle should suggest using the AD8313 to act as a field strength meter. I picked up a copy of Elektor Electronics magazine today, about the same time that Lyle posted his message. They had a project there for a 1 KHz to 1 GHz RF Wattmeter using the AD8307. It would not take too much work to move this onto the better AD8313 IC. This design is based on putting a postage stamp size PCB on the back of a BNC socket. With a small ammount of filtering on the output, the designer then fed the receive signal into a PIC16F876. For the PCB for the AD chip, I suspect that even normal PCB material will be OK if a small BNC whip is used instead of a dipole on the PCB. This would allow you to put it onto a receive dish for instace. And to get arround the problem of the signals going up and down, you have a reference antenna on one device, and the antenna under test on the other one. I suggest that people have a look at the design on http://www.webx.dk/oz2cpu/radios/miliwatt.htm Adding a CPU with display is very easy. I would find a better case (and I have some in mind). While we are at it we could also add a 2nd PCB - a Directional Coupler that could be used in association with the kit above. Minicircuits have a Directional Coupler from 1 -> 2.5 GHz for US$5.95 in small qantities - BDCA-10-25 Where to from here. Is there anyone that can do part of a project like this? Darryl >Subject: RE:"Build the TAPR FS meter" >From: "Lyle Johnson" >Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:50:47 -0800 >X-Message-Number: 42 > >The Analog Devices AD8313 chip is a logarithmic amplifier from 100 MHz to >2.5 Ghz, costs only $12.25 in 100 qty, and an eval board already built is >only $99 in unit qty. > >This would be easy to put on a PCB along with a dipole etched on the same >PCB for 2.4 GHz and etc. Presto! a field strength meter with linear >readout of dB and a 70 dB range. Add a battery and a meter (use your $10 >DVM - I got one for $10 NZD, US $5 when I was in New Zealand last year so >this is even cheap for our friends down under :-) > >At 2.4 GHz and for this purpsoe, FR-4 PCB material would be OK. > >Could probably model it and do the PCB artwork with Puff (used to be >freeware, maybe still is). > >Ed, turn Zack loose on this project :-) 73, Lyle KK7P --------- Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 11 00:52:11 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id AAA17428 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 00:52:10 -0600 (CST) From: "Darryl Smith" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS development..."Build the TAP R FS meter" Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 17:46:10 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Scanner: exiscan *18M0iC-0000gB-00*pn4gg6Nxn/s* on Astaro Security Linux List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <02b701c2a0e1$0043bc00$4601a8c0@DELL8000> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk From: "Geoff Edmonson" >er? > >802.11b Spread Spectrum Wireless Network connection is half-duplex? YES. 802.11b is 1200bps PACKET RADIO with faster modems and a bit of window dressing. Oh, and they have VERY fast TX/RX times. And very small TX Delays. Networks scale a bit better in ad-hoc half duplex. If you are wanting to learn more about 802.11 you might want to check out the O'Reilly book on the subject... http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0596001835/radioactivene-20 Darryl --------- Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 11 02:11:01 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id CAA19258 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 02:11:00 -0600 (CST) From: "Darryl Smith" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] TAPR in Europe. Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 19:03:40 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Scanner: exiscan *18M1vp-0000eu-00*rhpM5bvGZmQ* on Astaro Security Linux List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <02b801c2a0eb$d3f34750$4601a8c0@DELL8000> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk People... Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com asked "Do you think there should be a european TAPR equivalent" When I was asked to stand for the board, one of the reasons was to make TAPR 'More International'. I think that I am slowly succeeding. One of the first things I brought up at the TAPR Board was to get non-USA membership reduced to US$20/year. That means that you can join TAPR for the same price in Europe, the USA or in Asia. [If you are reading this from Europe, please email me. I would love to speak to you] I would love to have more europeans involved with TAPR, and for TAPR to be more involved in Europe. The question really is how. Conferences are a help, but realistically most people do not attend conferences - at least at the national level. Regional ones are another matter. Here in Australia there was a TECHNICAL SYMPOSIUM in our national capital for a Sunday a month back - The story will be in the next issue of PSR. The symposium could be best described as a mini-dcc. TAPR supported this symposium with some prizes for people who put in a lot of work either presenting or organising. But of the prizes we presented, none were really free. You see, we gave DCC proceedings to a couple of Hams who are actually doing real work in Ham Radio, and will probably write a paper for the conference next year. We gave a TAPR software CD to a ham who produces a CD of software and maps for the APRS community in the national capital. And we gave out about 20 application forms for TAPR for people who were interested. Will this pay off? Well, it will take a little while, but yes, it will. I was going to say that TAPR needs people in Europe to help us market an organisation that many of us love. But it needs more than that. It really needs people throught the world, including the USA, to help market the organisation. It is amazing what some simple marketing can do. Back in 1999, I went to the national conference of the NZART (ARRL for New Zealand) and spoke at their conference on APRS. I then spent the next couple of weeks doing another SEVEN talks on APRS arround the country. Go to new Zealand now, and you will find one of the most extensive national APRS networks in the world. People over there are now really into the mode. That is the power of marketing to ham radio [Off topic... I have started writing my paper for next years DCC... It will probably be more important than any paper I have ever written for Ham Radio... It will be on Marketing Ham Radio... ] What place do I see for TAPR? I see it as an organisation with the job of connecting people, and providing the resources for those people to do things. I can see TAPR doing a microwave field strength meter kit. I know that TAPR funds various projects to extend the state of the art. We hold the annual DCC. Whilst I am here, I would encourage any people reading this who are not members of TAPR to join so that TAPR has the critical mass in order to do things in the Ham Radio community. You can join by visiting www.tapr.org Darryl BTW, for those that have not heard, the ARRL is sponsoring three new annual Awards. ARRL TECHNICAL SERVICE AWARD ARRL TECHNICAL INNOVATION AWARD ARRL MICROWAVE DEVELOPMENT AWARD I am sure you can find more information about them on the ARRL web site. Darryl >Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com wrote: Do you think there should be a european TAPR equivalent, and would TAPR have a role in helping set one up? There are few europersons on SS-SIG; not thru lack of SS or WLAN in europe. Is TAPR not serving their needs well? Certainly conferences in the USA aren't very helpful. --------- Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 11 05:22:21 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id FAA24357 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 05:22:16 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 03:20:06 -0800 (PST) From: Jochen Feldhaar Subject: [ss] Re: TAPR in Europe. To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <20021211112006.74479.qmail@web13305.mail.yahoo.com> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Hello Darryl, I am in Germany - that makes me European, I think... I am subscribed now for more than half a year and nobody so much as deigned to acknowledge any post I made, while we get 5 posts on the same subject by the same sender in a row.... And I am not fond of guys who link our hobby to marketing, so "thanks but no thanks" Greets Jochen DH6FAZ --- Darryl Smith wrote: > People... > > Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com asked "Do you > think there should be a > european TAPR equivalent" > > When I was asked to stand for the board, one of the > reasons was to make > TAPR 'More International'. I think that I am slowly > succeeding. One of > the first things I brought up at the TAPR Board was > to get non-USA > membership reduced to US$20/year. That means that > you can join TAPR for > the same price in Europe, the USA or in Asia. [If > you are reading this > from Europe, please email me. I would love to speak > to you] > > I would love to have more europeans involved with > TAPR, and for TAPR to > be more involved in Europe. The question really is > how. Conferences are > a help, but realistically most people do not attend > conferences - at > least at the national level. Regional ones are > another matter. > > Here in Australia there was a TECHNICAL SYMPOSIUM in > our national > capital for a Sunday a month back - The story will > be in the next issue > of PSR. The symposium could be best described as a > mini-dcc. TAPR > supported this symposium with some prizes for people > who put in a lot of > work either presenting or organising. But of the > prizes we presented, > none were really free. > > You see, we gave DCC proceedings to a couple of Hams > who are actually > doing real work in Ham Radio, and will probably > write a paper for the > conference next year. We gave a TAPR software CD to > a ham who produces a > CD of software and maps for the APRS community in > the national capital. > And we gave out about 20 application forms for TAPR > for people who were > interested. Will this pay off? Well, it will take a > little while, but > yes, it will. > > I was going to say that TAPR needs people in Europe > to help us market an > organisation that many of us love. But it needs more > than that. It > really needs people throught the world, including > the USA, to help > market the organisation. It is amazing what some > simple marketing can > do. Back in 1999, I went to the national conference > of the NZART (ARRL > for New Zealand) and spoke at their conference on > APRS. I then spent the > next couple of weeks doing another SEVEN talks on > APRS arround the > country. Go to new Zealand now, and you will find > one of the most > extensive national APRS networks in the world. > People over there are now > really into the mode. That is the power of marketing > to ham radio > > [Off topic... I have started writing my paper for > next years DCC... It > will probably be more important than any paper I > have ever written for > Ham Radio... It will be on Marketing Ham Radio... ] > > What place do I see for TAPR? I see it as an > organisation with the job > of connecting people, and providing the resources > for those people to do > things. I can see TAPR doing a microwave field > strength meter kit. I > know that TAPR funds various projects to extend the > state of the art. We > hold the annual DCC. > > Whilst I am here, I would encourage any people > reading this who are not > members of TAPR to join so that TAPR has the > critical mass in order to > do things in the Ham Radio community. You can join > by visiting > www.tapr.org > > Darryl > > > BTW, for those that have not heard, the ARRL is > sponsoring three new > annual Awards. > ARRL TECHNICAL SERVICE AWARD > ARRL TECHNICAL INNOVATION AWARD > ARRL MICROWAVE DEVELOPMENT AWARD > > I am sure you can find more information about them > on the ARRL web site. > > Darryl > > > > > > >Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com wrote: > Do you think there should be a european TAPR > equivalent, and would TAPR have a role in helping > set one up? There are few europersons on SS-SIG; > not thru lack of SS or WLAN in europe. Is TAPR > not serving their needs well? Certainly conferences > in the USA aren't very helpful. > --------- > Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 > Australia > Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 > International] > Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au > > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: > feldhaar@yahoo.com > To unsubscribe send a blank email to > leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 11 05:48:51 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id FAA24828 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 05:48:50 -0600 (CST) Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:47:49 +0100 From: Marius Hauki Subject: [ss] Re: TAPR in Europe. To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Message-id: Organization: Data Respons MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en-us User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011128 Netscape6/6.2.1 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3DF725E5.1080007@datarespons.no> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk I think the post from Jochen does not represent the common view by most european radio amateurs if I inderstand it correctly. (Sorry if beeing off topic, but this is a TAPR list, right ?) Marketing our hobby across borders to recruit more people is very important in my view. This has nothing to do with poduct marketing. Personally I have learned most of the practical RF techniques and construction techniques that I use in my work from ham radio experience, hams that are willing to share their knowledge and technical hands on articles in ham magazines. I built the first TAPR TNC kit when I was around 15 years old. That started my career as a developer and introduced me to embedded microprosessor and analog development. I also have many important business relationships today that I were introduced to via ham radio. TAPR does a great job when offering kits at a low cost, publishing papers, working for standardisation, and giving technology introductions and presentations at DCC and other important meetings. Hams all over the world should definately cooperate to come up with new technology and new innovative ways of implementing designs. In almost every large corporations dealing with high tech electronic products, hams are positioned in key positions. The reason for this, I believe, is that hams are often dedicated, have genuine interest in their profession, are highly knowledgeable, have access to a good library of information, and have practical experience. I think that TAPR should keep on marketing your organisation and cooperate with european ham organisations. 73 de LA9EEA Marius Hauki Jochen Feldhaar wrote: > Hello Darryl, > > I am in Germany - that makes me European, I think... > > I am subscribed now for more than half a year and > nobody so much as deigned to acknowledge any post I > made, while we get 5 posts on the same subject by the > same sender in a row.... > > And I am not fond of guys who link our hobby to > marketing, so "thanks but no thanks" > > Greets > Jochen DH6FAZ > > ********************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the postmaster@datarespons.com . This email message has been virus checked by the virus programs used in Data Respons . ********************************************************************** --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 11 08:23:39 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id IAA28719 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:23:34 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: dubose@texas.net Subject: [ss] Re: DCC Articles Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:22:59 US/Central X-User: dubose List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <200212111422.gBBEMxO05601@mail1.aus1.texas.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > > I know that H323 and Speak Freely support peer-to-peer > > conncetions. Does > > Jabber do this? I thought it was on a chat type applications. > > Jabber is an open source replacement for ICQ like services and has server > and client components. The difference is that it's open source and Jabber > servers can be setup indepent of the main Jabber network on the Internet, so > we could have a ham Jabber network that only exists on RF. :) > I did some searching for myself and found that Bell South is in negotiation (perhaps was now) to make this their "chat" option. I personally think Jabber is preferred to IRC; but, am willing to accept any rebuttal. As far as H323 (OpenH323) goes, I like you or someone else said, SpeakFreely is probably a better VoIP choice than H323 a.k.a NetMeeting to MS folks. However, since NetMeeting is the "common" app. for H323 in the MS world, and so many appliance operators (SIC) are running MS, using H323 is a good choice. Plus it "does" video. My personal choice for apps. is the following: Chat - Jabber VoIP - SpeakFreely Teleconf - H323 (Netmeeting or OpenH323) Each of the above will run on MS and OpenSystems. Walt/K5YFW --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 11 09:32:46 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id JAA01224 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:32:46 -0600 (CST) Subject: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS development..."Build the TAP R FS meter" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 15:32:06 +0000 Message-ID: X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on mgeg01/S/EXT/MM1(Release 5.0.10 |March 22, 2002) at 12/11/2002 04:30:58 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > > Now, how do you make an 802.11 WLAN device transmit as much > > as possible to give you field to measure? Possibly by some piece > > of software that makes it send a continuous stream of broadcast > > packets so you don't need any other WLANs nearby that may upset > > your readings. > > > > Can anyone sort this bit out? > > Hmm, a UDP flooding program perhaps? or even ping -f > some.fake.ip.address? Of course! ping -f . Everyone's got ping. Should work with APs too. I assume you mean -f = flood (on linux?). Oops, ping -f doesn't flood on Windows-NT: << Usage: ping [-t] [-a] [-n count] [-l size] [-f] [-i TTL] [-v TOS] [-r count] [-s count] [[-j host-list] | [-k host-list]] [-w timeout] destination-list Options: -t Ping the specifed host until interrupted. -a Resolve addresses to hostnames. -n count Number of echo requests to send. -l size Send buffer size. -f Set Don't Fragment flag in packet. <-----<<< -i TTL Time To Live. -v TOS Type Of Service. -r count Record route for count hops. -s count Timestamp for count hops. -j host-list Loose source route along host-list. -k host-list Strict source route along host-list. -w timeout Timeout in milliseconds to wait for each reply. >> Have to check other MS platforms. Win95: less options, no -f at all. Pah! curses... I'm frantically looking for ping in cygwin and not finding. Anybody got GNU/Linux source for ping handy? Ping on SunOS and Solaris don't have -f. Solaris has -I (interval) but it won't go below 1 second. I'll check Linux & WinME when I get home. UDP packets don't have acknowledges at the IP level, but I think that any unicast packet gets acknowledges on the wireless link, including UDP. Not getting acks will generate plenty of retries; will that still allow saturation of the WLAN Tx? In fact, you won't see the UDP ping packets; what will happen first is an arp request from the IP stack to find the MAC address for the bogus IP address which will fail. The result could be cached and the flood might fail. If the IP address is not on the local subnet the IP stack may try to lookup a gateway instead, using arp, which fails... If "ping -f" doesn't have the desired effect we need a program that floods broadcasts via SOCK_RAW. I think I remember seeing some test programs that came with a LAN card that threw packets at a given MAC address. Only works with one type of card. I'll have a go at building a diode probe and see if it is sensitive enough. I can use a sig-gen first of all and then test it on a WLAN. Evening shedule full until next week... It's that festive season again. A field probe is pretty much a 1-man job. But we can use it to test "the process". I can do the design but we'll see if by the power of TAPR we can find people who will do the field trials, the PCB layout, the kit, the pre-built unit, the website, the handbook, distributors etc that are necessary to deliver a project. TAPR seem very keen so solve all our problems at the moment :^) It would be a mighty fine thing if we can make the project process "just work" as we can be confident in doing bigger things. I'm sure many great projects get stalled because of lack of some skill or resource or other that TAPR could help find. Ant --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 11 09:40:29 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id JAA01632 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:40:28 -0600 (CST) Subject: [ss] Re: How can TAPR support SS development... To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 15:40:13 +0000 Message-ID: X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on mgeg01/S/EXT/MM1(Release 5.0.10 |March 22, 2002) at 12/11/2002 04:39:03 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > >Do you think there should be a european TAPR equivalent, > Isn't that Nordlink? http://www.nordlink.org I'll havalook at that site. On the face of it, it seems to exist to front a piece of packet software called "TheNet". Nations in Europe all seem to have their own favourite packet node software :-) Some have formal organisation behind them, some don't. Here's Flexnet: http://www.afthd.tu-darmstadt.de/~flexnet/index.html There are also national and regional organisations that co-ordinate AX-25 packet networks, usually part of or associated with national ham-radio societies. The one I like best is the Slovenian one, with their 1Mb/s backbone: http://www.hamradio.si/packet.html There are also WLAN-specific groups, some with amateur involvement, eg. http://www.wlan.org.uk I suppose you're right EU groups "like TAPR" do exist. But not in the same form or on the same scale. There are too many "itty-bitty" groups to get stuff done. There are many disadvantages to the setup in the EU. Many groups are tightly allied to national radio societies... there needs to be places where amateurs who want to move beyond the status quo can associate and prepare the case for change. Many groups are fixated with AX-25 packet to the exclusion of other datacomms technologies, be it PSK31 or 802.11 or some new homebrew system. Groups are sub- 50 or 100 people and not large enough to have much clout with authorities & suppliers. If you're interested in high-rate datacomms you'd probably be the only one in the group. I attended the 1st UK datacomms day conference last year. It was considered successful; there were about 50 attending, nearly all AX-25 sysops. There are thought to be 9000 "active" amateurs in the UK, of which say 10% might be interested in packet, of which say 10% might be interested in construction, of which say 10% might be capable of new design, of which say 5% might be interested in any particular new project. As you can see, to get any motion on new developments requires harnessing people from across Europe. Or doing it alone. In fact there are quite a few heroic 1-person efforts, G8PZT's Xrouter software being one. http://www.g8pzt.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/software/software.htm Where there are universities or research labs you may find a few amateurs with similar skills and interests to get stuff done. Internationalisation of kits, built units & software and international distribution seems to be another problem no-one's tackling. Without doing it there isn't the volumes for making cheap PCBs or modules, or holding stock of components. With modern components, it isn't worth buying less than a reel of 5000. Ant --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 11 09:42:50 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id JAA01755 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:42:49 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "Geoff Edmonson" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: TAPR in Europe. Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:42:53 -0600 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-RAVMilter-Version: 8.4.1(snapshot 20020919) (w5omr) List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: <002701c2a12b$f8353f20$0200a8c0@hamhome.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > I am in Germany - that makes me European, I think... > > I am subscribed now for more than half a year and > nobody so much as deigned to acknowledge any post I > made, while we get 5 posts on the same subject by the > same sender in a row.... This is the first post I've -ever- seen by you, and I've been here for the last 6 months or so? > And I am not fond of guys who link our hobby to > marketing, so "thanks but no thanks" I believe that there are people here who are trying to keep the "Part 15 violators" in-check. I am in favor of that. 73 = Best Regards, -=Geoff/W5OMR=- --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 11 10:09:51 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id KAA02592 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:09:50 -0600 (CST) X-Authentication-Warning: kb9mwr.ampr.org: kb9mwr owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:11:42 -0600 (CST) From: Steve Lampereur X-Sender: kb9mwr@kb9mwr.ampr.org To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Part 97 <-> Part 15 at will? Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Assuming you do not exceed the Part 15 power limits and do not break the Part 15 certification, in theory one transmission could be Part 97 and the next Part 15. Much like when we take commerical mobile voice rigs and program some ham stuff and some commerical stuff. Its legal (assuming your authorized to transmit on the commerical channels) because the radio meets the certification requirements for both services. Why would you want this in this situation? Okay lets say you shoot a link to another ham some distance away. The link does not violate any of the Part 15 requirements, but you perfer to reclassify this as Part 97, maybe for the opperational protection. Now within your house you have a standard wireless network, Part 15 of course, same channel, talking to the same Access Point or NIC, that your ham friend does. This is an example of Part 97 and Part 15 at will. Any thoughts? My next thought is maybe we should try get the automatic power wording revised, instead or in addition to trying to get the limit upped before it has to be implemented. The current wording would be very difficult if not impossible to implement with existing off the shelf hardware. Maybe a simpler method, where the received energy adjusts the same systems transmitted energy. Something that dosen't require software hooks. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 11 10:22:30 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id KAA02987 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:22:29 -0600 (CST) Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:21:56 -0800 (PST) From: Bob Lorenzini To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS development..."Build the TAP R FS meter" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk On Wed, 11 Dec 2002 Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com wrote: > > Win95: less options, no -f at all. > > Pah! curses... IMHO this is a good thing. Bob - wd6dod --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 11 11:32:37 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id LAA06114 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:32:36 -0600 (CST) content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Subject: [ss] RE: Part 97 <-> Part 15 at will? X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:31:39 -0500 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [ss] Part 97 <-> Part 15 at will? Thread-Index: AcKhL67gMgjD2W7BR12vIWP7UYmJ+AAWiPOw From: "Hare,Ed, W1RFI" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <721D3436A7C2B344A301FD4A413C71A96ED059@kosh.ARRLHQ.ORG> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id LAA06114 > Now within your house you have a standard wireless network, Part 15 > of course, same channel, talking to the same Access Point or NIC, > that your ham friend does. This is an example of Part 97 and Part > 15 at will. Any thoughts? I agree that Part 15 equipment can be used unmodified under Part 97, then used under Part 15 at a later time. It is Certificated for Part 15 and if used under Part 97, requires no Certification. Bouncing back and forth is just fine as long as the equipment remains Certificated for Part 15 by virtue of not being modified. If a ham makes changes to equipment to operate in under Part 97, its Part 15 Certification is no longer valid. 73, Ed Hare, W1RFI ARRL Lab 225 Main St Newington, CT 06111 Tel: 860-594-0318 Internet: w1rfi@arrl.org Web: http://www.arrl.org/tis ARRL is the National Association for Amateur Radio. It is supported by membership dues, individual contributions and the sale of publications and advertising. For more information about ARRL, go to http://www.arrl.org/news/features/inside-your-league.html. For more information about membership, go to http://www.arrl.org/join.html. Your contribution can also help support ARRL's ongoing efforts to protect Amateur spectrum. Go to https://www.arrl.org/forms/development/donations/basic/ to learn more about the ways you can support the ARRL programs and activities of most importance to you. You can help ARRL protect Amateur Radio for you and future generations to enjoy. > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 11 11:59:00 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id LAA07011 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:58:59 -0600 (CST) Subject: [ss] Re: Microwave oven detectors To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 17:58:37 +0000 Message-ID: X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on mgeg01/S/EXT/MM1(Release 5.0.10 |March 22, 2002) at 12/11/2002 06:57:28 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > http://www.lessemf.com/mw-oven.html > The Less-EMF site is a lot of smoke and mirrors, but the price is right. :-) > 73, > Ed Hare, W1RFI Great surfing Ed! Neat little gadget. $30 for a 2.4GHz digital field strength meter. I want one for christmas... ... Shipping $22 for EMS or $42 for fedex outside US :-( Anybody know the OEM and model no. and I'll go surfing the local shops. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 11 12:00:26 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id MAA07094 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:00:23 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 22:24:39 -0600 From: Gerry Creager User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020826 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS development..."Build the TAP R FS meter" References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3DF6BE07.3010004@tamu.edu> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Simple answer: Yes. Longer answer: You're promised 11 Mb/s, you achieve 5.5 Mb/s each way. More marketing, less bandwidth. When you add that to channel sharing, collisions, etc. you can start really limiting bandwidth. 802.11a provides a lot more bandwidth, at the expense of more spectrum. Gerry Geoff Edmonson wrote: >>If you were 'sending' a large file, it was stopping to look for ACK. >>It's half-duplex. It could have seen a bit of a delay, detectable by >>human ears, getting an ACK turned around. > > > er? > > 802.11b Spread Spectrum Wireless Network connection is half-duplex? > > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: gerry.creager@tamu.edu > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org -- Gerry Creager -- gerry.creager@tamu.edu Network Engineering -- AATLT, Texas A&M University Office: 979.458.4020 FAX: 979.847.8578 Cell: 979.229.5301 Pager: 979.228.0173 --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 11 12:12:42 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id MAA07647 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:12:38 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: dubose@texas.net Subject: [ss] Re: Microwave oven detectors Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:11:54 US/Central X-User: dubose List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <200212111811.gBBIBsU14884@mail2.aus1.texas.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk I wanna a 2.4 GHz Power Meter or SWR bridge. -- k5yfw > > > http://www.lessemf.com/mw-oven.html > > > The Less-EMF site is a lot of smoke and mirrors, but the price is right. > :-) > > > 73, > > Ed Hare, W1RFI > > Great surfing Ed! > > Neat little gadget. $30 for a 2.4GHz digital field > strength meter. > > > I want one for christmas... > > > .... Shipping $22 for EMS or $42 for fedex outside US > > :-( > > Anybody know the OEM and model no. and I'll go surfing > the local shops. > > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: dubose@texas.net > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 11 12:15:07 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id MAA07779 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:15:02 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: dubose@texas.net Subject: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS development...Build the TAP R FS meter Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:12:48 US/Central X-User: dubose List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <200212111812.gBBICmU16552@mail2.aus1.texas.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Pray for 802.11g -- k5yfw > Simple answer: Yes. Longer answer: You're promised 11 Mb/s, you > achieve 5.5 Mb/s each way. More marketing, less bandwidth. When you > add that to channel sharing, collisions, etc. you can start really > limiting bandwidth. > > 802.11a provides a lot more bandwidth, at the expense of more spectrum. > > Gerry > > Geoff Edmonson wrote: > >>If you were 'sending' a large file, it was stopping to look for ACK. > >>It's half-duplex. It could have seen a bit of a delay, detectable by > >>human ears, getting an ACK turned around. > > > > > > er? > > > > 802.11b Spread Spectrum Wireless Network connection is half-duplex? > > > > > > > > > > --- > > You are currently subscribed to ss as: gerry.creager@tamu.edu > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > > -- > Gerry Creager -- gerry.creager@tamu.edu > Network Engineering -- AATLT, Texas A&M University > Office: 979.458.4020 FAX: 979.847.8578 > Cell: 979.229.5301 Pager: 979.228.0173 > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: dubose@texas.net > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 11 12:25:39 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id MAA08093 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:25:37 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:24:10 -0600 From: Gerry Creager User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020826 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS development...Build the TAP R FS meter References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3DF782CA.50102@tamu.edu> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk A bunch (not just 1 or 2) of the wireless vendors we're talking to say 11g is dead on arrival. Cisco is still making efforts that way, but doesn't really plan to deploy until they see a real market, meaning they'll have to build cards after the market develops, then claim to have created the need! gerry dubose@texas.net wrote: > Pray for 802.11g -- k5yfw > >>Simple answer: Yes. Longer answer: You're promised 11 Mb/s, you >>achieve 5.5 Mb/s each way. More marketing, less bandwidth. When you >>add that to channel sharing, collisions, etc. you can start really >>limiting bandwidth. >> >>802.11a provides a lot more bandwidth, at the expense of more spectrum. >> >>Gerry >> >>Geoff Edmonson wrote: >> >>>>If you were 'sending' a large file, it was stopping to look for ACK. >>>>It's half-duplex. It could have seen a bit of a delay, detectable by >>>>human ears, getting an ACK turned around. >>> >>> >>>er? >>> >>>802.11b Spread Spectrum Wireless Network connection is half-duplex? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>--- >>>You are currently subscribed to ss as: gerry.creager@tamu.edu >>>To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org >> >> >>-- >>Gerry Creager -- gerry.creager@tamu.edu >>Network Engineering -- AATLT, Texas A&M University >>Office: 979.458.4020 FAX: 979.847.8578 >>Cell: 979.229.5301 Pager: 979.228.0173 >> >> >> >>--- >>You are currently subscribed to ss as: dubose@texas.net >>To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org >> > > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: gerry.creager@tamu.edu > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org -- Gerry Creager -- gerry.creager@tamu.edu Network Engineering -- AATLT, Texas A&M University Office: 979.458.4020 FAX: 979.847.8578 Cell: 979.229.5301 Pager: 979.228.0173 --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 11 12:36:00 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id MAA08619 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:35:57 -0600 (CST) content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Subject: [ss] Re: Microwave oven detectors X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:34:48 -0500 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [ss] Re: Microwave oven detectors Thread-Index: AcKhPuvIs/h2MqPvSgqDUQlQhgxrRAAYM5wg From: "Hare,Ed, W1RFI" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <721D3436A7C2B344A301FD4A413C71A96ED05A@kosh.ARRLHQ.ORG> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id MAA08619 Maybe good surfing. The device will probably have a full-scale reading somewhere around 2 millwatts/cm^2. This would have to be very close to PC 802.11 devices to give a useful reading. For a high-gain antenna, one may have to be in the near-field region to get a useful deflection. Possibly could be amplified by an MMIC amplifier before the diode, though -- some of the Avantek or Mini Circuits devices do quite well on 2.4 GHz. Another technique may be a log amp on the diode output, to give a somewhat linear input-vs-output response. Seeing as the device has a reasonable 2.4 GHz antenna and detector, maybe the best article is how to modify it to be useful as a field-strength meter. :-) 73, Ed Hare, W1RFI ARRL Lab 225 Main St Newington, CT 06111 Tel: 860-594-0318 Internet: w1rfi@arrl.org Web: http://www.arrl.org/tis > -----Original Message----- > From: Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com > [mailto:Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com] > Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 12:59 PM > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] Re: Microwave oven detectors > > > > > http://www.lessemf.com/mw-oven.html > > > The Less-EMF site is a lot of smoke and mirrors, but the > price is right. > :-) > > > 73, > > Ed Hare, W1RFI > > Great surfing Ed! > > Neat little gadget. $30 for a 2.4GHz digital field > strength meter. > > > I want one for christmas... > > > ... Shipping $22 for EMS or $42 for fedex outside US > > :-( > > Anybody know the OEM and model no. and I'll go surfing > the local shops. > > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: W1RFI@ARRL.ORG > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 11 13:25:11 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id NAA10571 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:25:10 -0600 (CST) To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: TAPR in Europe. Message-ID: Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:24:08 -0600 (CST) From: Jeff King References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.7 X-Originating-IP: 64.9.221.42 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <1039634648.3df790d84181c@webmail.aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Darryl: Contact these folks: htt://www.nordlink.org If these folks are still actively involved in packet and it is a membership organization similar to TAPR, I think TAPR would be better served by generating a alliance with this Europeon group instead of reinventing the wheel. And there is precedence here in the sense of TAPR's relationship with PRUG (a Japanese packet radio group). Good luck -Jeff Quoting Darryl Smith : > People... > > Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com asked "Do you think there should be > a > european TAPR equivalent" > > When I was asked to stand for the board, one of the reasons was to > make > TAPR 'More International'. I think that I am slowly succeeding. One of > the first things I brought up at the TAPR Board was to get non-USA > membership reduced to US$20/year. That means that you can join TAPR > for > the same price in Europe, the USA or in Asia. [If you are reading this > from Europe, please email me. I would love to speak to you] > > I would love to have more europeans involved with TAPR, and for TAPR > to > be more involved in Europe. The question really is how. Conferences > are > a help, but realistically most people do not attend conferences - at > least at the national level. Regional ones are another matter. > > Here in Australia there was a TECHNICAL SYMPOSIUM in our national > capital for a Sunday a month back - The story will be in the next > issue > of PSR. The symposium could be best described as a mini-dcc. TAPR > supported this symposium with some prizes for people who put in a lot > of > work either presenting or organising. But of the prizes we presented, > none were really free. > > You see, we gave DCC proceedings to a couple of Hams who are actually > doing real work in Ham Radio, and will probably write a paper for the > conference next year. We gave a TAPR software CD to a ham who produces > a > CD of software and maps for the APRS community in the national > capital. > And we gave out about 20 application forms for TAPR for people who > were > interested. Will this pay off? Well, it will take a little while, but > yes, it will. > > I was going to say that TAPR needs people in Europe to help us market > an > organisation that many of us love. But it needs more than that. It > really needs people throught the world, including the USA, to help > market the organisation. It is amazing what some simple marketing can > do. Back in 1999, I went to the national conference of the NZART (ARRL > for New Zealand) and spoke at their conference on APRS. I then spent > the > next couple of weeks doing another SEVEN talks on APRS arround the > country. Go to new Zealand now, and you will find one of the most > extensive national APRS networks in the world. People over there are > now > really into the mode. That is the power of marketing to ham radio > > [Off topic... I have started writing my paper for next years DCC... It > will probably be more important than any paper I have ever written for > Ham Radio... It will be on Marketing Ham Radio... ] > > What place do I see for TAPR? I see it as an organisation with the job > of connecting people, and providing the resources for those people to > do > things. I can see TAPR doing a microwave field strength meter kit. I > know that TAPR funds various projects to extend the state of the art. > We > hold the annual DCC. > > Whilst I am here, I would encourage any people reading this who are > not > members of TAPR to join so that TAPR has the critical mass in order to > do things in the Ham Radio community. You can join by visiting > www.tapr.org > > Darryl > > > BTW, for those that have not heard, the ARRL is sponsoring three new > annual Awards. > ARRL TECHNICAL SERVICE AWARD > ARRL TECHNICAL INNOVATION AWARD > ARRL MICROWAVE DEVELOPMENT AWARD > > I am sure you can find more information about them on the ARRL web > site. > > Darryl > > > > > > >Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com wrote: > Do you think there should be a european TAPR > equivalent, and would TAPR have a role in helping > set one up? There are few europersons on SS-SIG; > not thru lack of SS or WLAN in europe. Is TAPR > not serving their needs well? Certainly conferences > in the USA aren't very helpful. > --------- > Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia > Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] > Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: jeff@aerodata.net > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 11 13:29:28 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id NAA10734 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:29:24 -0600 (CST) To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: TAPR in Europe. Message-ID: Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:28:35 -0600 (CST) From: Jeff King References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.7 X-Originating-IP: 64.9.221.42 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <1039634914.3df791e304789@webmail.aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Hello Jochen: Is Nordlink still active? I see there website has been recently updated so I assume so, but I cannot determine if they are a membership group or just a informal group of very talented people. Regards, Jeff Quoting Jochen Feldhaar : > Hello Darryl, > > I am in Germany - that makes me European, I think... > > I am subscribed now for more than half a year and > nobody so much as deigned to acknowledge any post I > made, while we get 5 posts on the same subject by the > same sender in a row.... > > And I am not fond of guys who link our hobby to > marketing, so "thanks but no thanks" > > Greets > Jochen DH6FAZ > > --- Darryl Smith wrote: > > People... > > > > Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com asked "Do you > > think there should be a > > european TAPR equivalent" > > > > When I was asked to stand for the board, one of the > > reasons was to make > > TAPR 'More International'. I think that I am slowly > > succeeding. One of > > the first things I brought up at the TAPR Board was > > to get non-USA > > membership reduced to US$20/year. That means that > > you can join TAPR for > > the same price in Europe, the USA or in Asia. [If > > you are reading this > > from Europe, please email me. I would love to speak > > to you] > > > > I would love to have more europeans involved with > > TAPR, and for TAPR to > > be more involved in Europe. The question really is > > how. Conferences are > > a help, but realistically most people do not attend > > conferences - at > > least at the national level. Regional ones are > > another matter. > > > > Here in Australia there was a TECHNICAL SYMPOSIUM in > > our national > > capital for a Sunday a month back - The story will > > be in the next issue > > of PSR. The symposium could be best described as a > > mini-dcc. TAPR > > supported this symposium with some prizes for people > > who put in a lot of > > work either presenting or organising. But of the > > prizes we presented, > > none were really free. > > > > You see, we gave DCC proceedings to a couple of Hams > > who are actually > > doing real work in Ham Radio, and will probably > > write a paper for the > > conference next year. We gave a TAPR software CD to > > a ham who produces a > > CD of software and maps for the APRS community in > > the national capital. > > And we gave out about 20 application forms for TAPR > > for people who were > > interested. Will this pay off? Well, it will take a > > little while, but > > yes, it will. > > > > I was going to say that TAPR needs people in Europe > > to help us market an > > organisation that many of us love. But it needs more > > than that. It > > really needs people throught the world, including > > the USA, to help > > market the organisation. It is amazing what some > > simple marketing can > > do. Back in 1999, I went to the national conference > > of the NZART (ARRL > > for New Zealand) and spoke at their conference on > > APRS. I then spent the > > next couple of weeks doing another SEVEN talks on > > APRS arround the > > country. Go to new Zealand now, and you will find > > one of the most > > extensive national APRS networks in the world. > > People over there are now > > really into the mode. That is the power of marketing > > to ham radio > > > > [Off topic... I have started writing my paper for > > next years DCC... It > > will probably be more important than any paper I > > have ever written for > > Ham Radio... It will be on Marketing Ham Radio... ] > > > > What place do I see for TAPR? I see it as an > > organisation with the job > > of connecting people, and providing the resources > > for those people to do > > things. I can see TAPR doing a microwave field > > strength meter kit. I > > know that TAPR funds various projects to extend the > > state of the art. We > > hold the annual DCC. > > > > Whilst I am here, I would encourage any people > > reading this who are not > > members of TAPR to join so that TAPR has the > > critical mass in order to > > do things in the Ham Radio community. You can join > > by visiting > > www.tapr.org > > > > Darryl > > > > > > BTW, for those that have not heard, the ARRL is > > sponsoring three new > > annual Awards. > > ARRL TECHNICAL SERVICE AWARD > > ARRL TECHNICAL INNOVATION AWARD > > ARRL MICROWAVE DEVELOPMENT AWARD > > > > I am sure you can find more information about them > > on the ARRL web site. > > > > Darryl > > > > > > > > > > > > >Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com wrote: > > Do you think there should be a european TAPR > > equivalent, and would TAPR have a role in helping > > set one up? There are few europersons on SS-SIG; > > not thru lack of SS or WLAN in europe. Is TAPR > > not serving their needs well? Certainly conferences > > in the USA aren't very helpful. > > --------- > > Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 > > Australia > > Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 > > International] > > Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au > > > > > > > > > > --- > > You are currently subscribed to ss as: > > feldhaar@yahoo.com > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to > > leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > > > > __________________________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. > http://mailplus.yahoo.com > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: jeff@aerodata.net > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 11 13:39:38 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id NAA11107 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:39:34 -0600 (CST) To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: How can TAPR support SS development... Message-ID: Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:38:38 -0600 (CST) From: Jeff King References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.7 X-Originating-IP: 64.9.221.42 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <1039635518.3df7943eca3a7@webmail.aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk So, what you saying is you don't know? Maybe some of our German readers can chime in. -Jeff Quoting Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com: > > > >Do you think there should be a european TAPR equivalent, > > > Isn't that Nordlink? http://www.nordlink.org > > I'll havalook at that site. On the face of it, it seems to exist to > front a > piece of packet software called "TheNet". Nations in Europe > all seem to have their own favourite packet node software :-) > Some have formal organisation behind them, some don't. > Here's Flexnet: > http://www.afthd.tu-darmstadt.de/~flexnet/index.html > > There are also national and regional organisations that > co-ordinate AX-25 packet networks, usually part of or > associated with national ham-radio societies. The one I > like best is the Slovenian one, with their 1Mb/s backbone: > http://www.hamradio.si/packet.html > > There are also WLAN-specific groups, some with amateur > involvement, eg. http://www.wlan.org.uk > > I suppose you're right EU groups "like TAPR" do exist. > But not in the same form or on the same scale. There are > too many "itty-bitty" groups to get stuff done. > > There are many disadvantages to the setup in the EU. > Many groups are tightly allied to national radio societies... > there needs to be places where amateurs who want to > move beyond the status quo can associate and prepare > the case for change. > > Many groups are fixated with AX-25 packet to the exclusion > of other datacomms technologies, be it PSK31 or 802.11 > or some new homebrew system. > > Groups are sub- 50 or 100 people and not large enough to > have much clout with authorities & suppliers. If you're > interested in high-rate datacomms you'd probably be > the only one in the group. I attended the 1st UK datacomms > day conference last year. It was considered successful; > there were about 50 attending, nearly all AX-25 sysops. > There are thought to be 9000 "active" amateurs in the UK, > of which say 10% might be interested in packet, of which > say 10% might be interested in construction, of which say > 10% might be capable of new design, of which say 5% > might be interested in any particular new project. As you > can see, to get any motion on new developments requires > harnessing people from across Europe. Or doing it alone. > > In fact there are quite a few heroic 1-person efforts, G8PZT's > Xrouter software being one. > http://www.g8pzt.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/software/software.htm > > Where there are universities or research labs you may find > a few amateurs with similar skills and interests to get stuff > done. > > Internationalisation of kits, built units & software and international > distribution seems to be another problem no-one's tackling. > Without doing it there isn't the volumes for making cheap PCBs > or modules, or holding stock of components. With modern > components, it isn't worth buying less than a reel of 5000. > > Ant > > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: jeff@aerodata.net > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 11 13:44:44 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id NAA11209 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:44:41 -0600 (CST) To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Part 97 <-> Part 15 at will? Message-ID: Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:43:53 -0600 (CST) From: Jeff King References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.7 X-Originating-IP: 64.9.221.42 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <1039635833.3df79579c830c@webmail.aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Yes, but this reminds me of the other day in my daughter's violin class when the children were asking why the "green room" was not painted green. A good question without a good answer. My take on it is if you have a good reason to run under part 15, I'd suggest it is not a good idea to go back and forth, even though in theory you could. -Jeff Quoting Steve Lampereur : > Assuming you do not exceed the Part 15 power limits and do not break > the > Part 15 certification, in theory one transmission could be Part 97 and > the next Part 15. Much like when we take commerical mobile voice rigs > and > program some ham stuff and some commerical stuff. Its legal (assuming > your authorized to transmit on the commerical channels) because the > radio > meets the certification requirements for both services. > > Why would you want this in this situation? Okay lets say you shoot a > link > to another ham some distance away. The link does not violate any of > the > Part 15 requirements, but you perfer to reclassify this as Part 97, > maybe > for the opperational protection. Now within your house you have a > standard wireless network, Part 15 of course, same channel, talking to > the > same Access Point or NIC, that your ham friend does. This is an > example > of Part 97 and Part 15 at will. Any thoughts? > > My next thought is maybe we should try get the automatic power wording > revised, instead or in addition to trying to get the limit upped before > it > has to be implemented. The current wording would be very difficult if > not > impossible to implement with existing off the shelf hardware. Maybe a > simpler method, where the received energy adjusts the same systems > transmitted energy. Something that dosen't require software hooks. > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: jeff@aerodata.net > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 11 14:03:07 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id OAA12091 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:03:06 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:02:47 -0800 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Thomas Allen Subject: [ss] Re: TAPR in Europe. Cc: w7yr@mindspring.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021211120149.03322a10@mail.dc3.adelphia.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Ah yes, NordLink, the infamous Amateur Radio group that stole Net/ROM and boldly denied their actions in public until TAPR pressed the issue. TAPR would be better served by NOT aligning with them. Tom, W7YR At 13.24 2002-12-11 -0600, you wrote: >Darryl: >Contact these folks: >htt://www.nordlink.org > >If these folks are still actively involved in packet and it is a membership >organization similar to TAPR, I think TAPR would be better served by >generating a alliance with this Europeon group instead of reinventing >the wheel. And there is precedence here in the sense of TAPR's relationship >with PRUG (a Japanese packet radio group). > >Good luck >-Jeff --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 11 15:18:21 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id PAA15522 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 15:18:20 -0600 (CST) To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: TAPR in Europe. Message-ID: Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 15:17:49 -0600 (CST) From: Jeff King References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.7 X-Originating-IP: 64.9.221.42 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <1039641469.3df7ab7d3bdc8@webmail.aerodata.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Actually, every group has their Skelton's in the closet, even TAPR. This is no different. When I posted this suggestion, I was afraid of attracting gossip mongers such as yourself, as even 10+ years later, with a whole different group of people, we still have hams that just can't grow up and get over allegations that where never proved and where strongly denied by NordLink. (and yes, I run my own small business and thoughly reviewed the NordLink case... the evidence, while compelling, never quite rang true to me.... I mean, it was clearly a legal issue between two business entities but why was it only addressed with mudslinging and never in a legal manner?? I tend to put my faith in the law and not the friend of the friend's opinion or a personal slander campaign which as demonstrated by you, to this day has not stopped.) But lets cut this off right away, OK? So, your suggesting, that TAPR not align it with a group, who it was alleged 10+ years ago, commited a wrong-doing? Fully realizing, without any investigation (which seems to be a trademark of your types) that you have no idea if the same people are even involved? (and the *allegations* never directly involved Nordlink per say, just one member of the group). Is it no doubt why TAPR is having a problem in Europe? GET OVER IT PEOPLE. -Jeff Quoting Thomas Allen : > Ah yes, NordLink, the infamous Amateur Radio group that stole Net/ROM > and > boldly denied their actions in public until TAPR pressed the issue. > > TAPR would be better served by NOT aligning with them. > > Tom, W7YR > > At 13.24 2002-12-11 -0600, you wrote: > >Darryl: > >Contact these folks: > >htt://www.nordlink.org > > > >If these folks are still actively involved in packet and it is a > membership > >organization similar to TAPR, I think TAPR would be better served by > >generating a alliance with this Europeon group instead of > reinventing > >the wheel. And there is precedence here in the sense of TAPR's > relationship > >with PRUG (a Japanese packet radio group). > > > >Good luck > >-Jeff > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: jeff@aerodata.net > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 11 15:37:26 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id PAA16083 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 15:37:24 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: Tony Langdon To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: TAPR in Europe. Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 08:36:30 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id PAA16083 > Marketing our hobby across borders to recruit more people is very > important in my view. This has nothing to do with poduct marketing. I agree 100%. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that a lot of our problems with an ageing ham population/lack of newcomers, declining on air activity and general lack of profile (ask the average person on the street - at least in Australia - what amateur radio is, and they won't have a clue) is because we don't market ourselves effectively to the general population. People bemoan the fact that the Internet and other activities are "taking" young people away from amateur radio, but don't do anything to raise our profile, or present our hobby as something that technically minded young people would want to get into (and if you present it right, they WILL come - I have seen that myself). 802.11b is one opportunity I'm investigating as a way to market ourselves to prospective new hams. > Personally I have learned most of the practical > RF techniques and construction techniques that I use in my > work from ham I've used ham radio in a number of ways at work, even though I don't work in the industry. However, at the enormous data rates of modern data comms, not to mention the increasing use of wireless devices, RF understanding becomes more important. Even mundane things like getting good reception for a "music on hold" radio or locating long forgotten cable runs (anyone for a foxhunt? :) ) can benefit from a bit of good old RF knowledge. > radio experience, hams that are willing to share their knowledge and > technical hands on articles in ham magazines. I built the > first TAPR TNC > kit when I was around 15 years old. That started my career as a I got heavily into packet radio in the early 1990's. At the time I was studying electronic engineering at uni - and data comms covered things such as HDLC and TCP/IP. Back then, I configured NOS and G8BPQ as a multi-protocol router (TCP/IP and NET/ROM) for part of the packet network here, and had the advantage of being able to watch TCP handshakes in real time(and slow enough to follow! :) ). For me, TCP/IP wasn't just something you read about at uni, it was real. Not surprisingly, I've never had problems understanding TCP/IP in the commercial environment (these days, it's bread and butter stuff). But my knowledge was built on that early packet radio foundation. > innovative ways of implementing designs. In almost every large > corporations dealing with high tech electronic products, hams are > positioned in key positions. The reason for this, I believe, is that > hams are often dedicated, have genuine interest in their > profession, are > highly knowledgeable, have access to a good library of > information, and > have practical experience. I think you have a point. What makes a good technical person is often what drives a ham to try new things, or improve the performance of their station. Not only a drive to improve their setup, but a desire to learn how things work and push the boundaries further. I'm the same. In more recent times, I've pulled apart the scripts on my IRLP box and have added a lot of extra functionality that's not available in the standard distribution. :-) Many people get into ham radio, because they enjoy learning. That's an excellent trait to have when working in the IT field, as the playing field is constantly changing. :) > > I think that TAPR should keep on marketing your organisation and > cooperate with european ham organisations. Agreed there (in the global sense). --- Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 This correspondence is for the named person’s use only. It may contain confidential or legally privileged information or both. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of this correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 11 16:11:36 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id QAA17841 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 16:11:35 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:09:08 -0800 (PST) From: Stewart Teaze Subject: [ss] Military application of 802.11b To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1835281988-1039644548=:94277" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <20021211220908.94462.qmail@web10906.mail.yahoo.com> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk --0-1835281988-1039644548=:94277 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii OK, imagine you have a military application for 802.11b, and you are not limited by Part 15 restrictions(application logistics will limit us to using a semi-remoted 3dBi gain omni at one site, but we can use a high-gain dish at the other site). Given that we want to keep the RF device costs below $2000 per site - what would you folks recommend for hardware manufacturers/models, as far as higher power output/high quality solutions (given that we want to operate at a minimum of 4Mbps, and obtain the maximum possible range)? We currently are using Breezecom equipment in another application here, but it has a limitation of 2Mbps top speed, which won't meet our minimum thruput requirements. - Stewart --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now --0-1835281988-1039644548=:94277 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

OK, imagine you have a military application for 802.11b, and you are not limited by Part 15 restrictions(application logistics will limit us to using a semi-remoted 3dBi gain omni at one site, but we can use a high-gain dish at the other site).  Given that we want to keep the RF device costs below $2000 per site - what would you folks recommend for hardware manufacturers/models, as far as higher power output/high quality solutions (given that we want to operate at a minimum of 4Mbps, and obtain the maximum possible range)?  We currently are using Breezecom equipment in another application here, but it has a limitation of 2Mbps top speed, which won't meet our minimum thruput requirements.

- Stewart


Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now --0-1835281988-1039644548=:94277-- --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 11 16:44:07 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id QAA19271 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 16:44:01 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: =?UTF-8?B?VG9ueSBMYW5nZG9u?= To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Cc: =?UTF-8?B?SGFyZSxFZCwgVzFSRkk=?= Subject: [ss] =?UTF-8?B?UkU6IFtzc10gUkU6IFtzc10gUkU6IEhvdyBjYW4gVEFQUiBzdXBw?= =?UTF-8?B?b3J0IFNTIGRldmVsb3BtZW50Li4uIkJ1aWxkIHRoZSBUQVBSIEZTIG1ldGVy?= =?UTF-8?B?Ig==?= Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 09:42:53 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C2A166.A8AC8090" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2A166.A8AC8090 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I think the idea of using a FS meter is flawed--how do you know = there=20 are no significant interference sources? The local VHF/microwave=20 =20 Take a baseline reading over a period of time. If the level of = interference is too high, you know the results will be flawed. So to me, the answer = is obvious, measure the environment. Now if there is significant = interference, there are two answers: Relocate the tests or use higher power and run = it as a ham test (taking care not to unduly interfere with anyone else). contest group gave up the idea of using signal sources and detectors to measure antennas years ago--we now wait for Joe Reisert to bring his HP network analyzer to the conference. Just imagine someone trying to measure antennas in San Diego, CA, thinking there wasn't a signal source out in the Pacific ocean,=20 before an illegal 2.4GHz wireless link was shut down (it was used by scientific researchers to get data from an island).=20 Now that the technology is widely available, it makes more sense to = set up communication links and measure the degradation in bit error rate.=20 There's a point, though we were specifically discussing measuring = antenna gain, not link performance. --- Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 =20 This correspondence is for the named person=E2=80=99s use only. It may = contain confidential or legally privileged information or both. No = confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive = this correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system = and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of = this correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual = sender. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2A166.A8AC8090 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS development..."Build the TAPR FS meter"
    I think the idea of using a FS meter is flawed--how do you know there
are no significant interference sources?  The local VHF/microwave 
 
Take a baseline reading over a period of time.  If the level of interference is too high, you know the results will be flawed.  So to me, the answer is obvious, measure the environment.  Now if there is significant interference, there are two answers:  Relocate the tests or use higher power and run it as a ham test (taking care not to unduly interfere with anyone else).
contest group gave up the idea of using signal sources and detectors
to measure antennas years ago--we now wait for Joe Reisert to bring
his HP network analyzer to the conference.
    Just imagine someone trying to measure antennas in San Diego, CA,
thinking there wasn't a signal source out in the Pacific ocean,
before an illegal 2.4GHz wireless link was shut down (it was used by
scientific researchers to get data from an island).
    Now that the technology is widely available, it makes more sense to set
up communication links and measure the degradation in bit error rate. 
 There's a point, though we were specifically discussing measuring antenna gain, not link performance.

---
Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002


This correspondence is for the named person’s use only. It may contain confidential or legally privileged information or both. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of this correspondence if you are not the intended recipient.


Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual sender.


------_=_NextPart_001_01C2A166.A8AC8090-- --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 11 16:49:09 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id QAA19520 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 16:49:07 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: Tony Langdon To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS development..."Build the TAP R FS meter" Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 09:47:59 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id QAA19520 > > Hmm, a UDP flooding program perhaps? or even ping -f > > some.fake.ip.address? > > Of course! ping -f . Everyone's got ping. > Should work with APs too. > > I assume you mean -f = flood (on linux?). Yes, -f is flood on Linux (and probably the *BSD OSs as well). > > Oops, ping -f doesn't flood on Windows-NT: > > << > Usage: ping [-t] [-a] [-n count] [-l size] [-f] [-i TTL] [-v TOS] > [-r count] [-s count] [[-j host-list] | [-k host-list]] > [-w timeout] destination-list Hmm, lame version of ping... :-( --- Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 This correspondence is for the named person’s use only. It may contain confidential or legally privileged information or both. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of this correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 11 16:56:57 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id QAA19690 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 16:56:55 -0600 (CST) From: "Steve Stroh" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE: Military application of 802.11b Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:54:54 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Suggest you post this to the isp-wireless mailing list - www.isp-wireless.com. You should get lots of offers to help. Thanks, Steve N8GNJ -- Steve Stroh steve@strohpub.com 425-481-0600 -----Original Message----- From: bounce-ss-24593@lists.tapr.org [mailto:bounce-ss-24593@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of Stewart Teaze Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 14:09 To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Subject: [ss] Military application of 802.11b OK, imagine you have a military application for 802.11b, and you are not limited by Part 15 restrictions(application logistics will limit us to using a semi-remoted 3dBi gain omni at one site, but we can use a high-gain dish at the other site). Given that we want to keep the RF device costs below $2000 per site - what would you folks recommend for hardware manufacturers/models, as far as higher power output/high quality solutions (given that we want to operate at a minimum of 4Mbps, and obtain the maximum possible range)? We currently are using Breezecom equipment in another application here, but it has a limitation of 2Mbps top speed, which won't meet our minimum thruput requirements. - Stewart --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 11 18:24:27 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id SAA24007 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 18:24:27 -0600 (CST) Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Message-ID: Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 18:24:11 -0600 From: Walt DuBose X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Military application of 802.11b References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3DF7D72B.404F3D12@texas.net> Precedence: bulk Stewart Teaze wrote: > > OK, imagine you have a military application for 802.11b, and you are not limited by Part 15 restrictions(application logistics will limit us to using a semi-remoted 3dBi gain omni at one site, but we can use a high-gain dish at the other site). Given that we want to keep the RF device costs below $2000 per site - what would you folks recommend for hardware manufacturers/models, as far as higher power output/high quality solutions (given that we want to operate at a minimum of 4Mbps, and obtain the maximum possible range)? We currently are using Breezecom equipment in another application here, but it has a limitation of 2Mbps top speed, which won't meet our minimum thruput requirements. > > - Stewart > Stewart, I have heard that the DoD is NOW allowing 802.11b on 5 GHz with additional encryption (3rd party encryption) above the 128 bit encryption for flight line use...i.e. where they have unclassified technical order information on PC. out to the aircraft and maintenance information to and from aircraft. Also, some "operation" is being allowed intra and inter building where wire or fiber is not practical. As far as tactical/operational use of 802.11b, I think the Army has tried it. The Navy is using it but I understand they are not using the normal 802.11b channels and are using 3rd party encryption. Currently the DoD has deployed ultra secure 10 Mbps or so high power point-to-point links which I am sure is proprietary stuff. As far as what our EOC group needs, we need at least 4 watt output into a 15 db antenna to make our links work. 5-6 watts would be better. Walt/K5YFW --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 11 21:39:08 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id VAA29175 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:39:08 -0600 (CST) From: Jeff King To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 22:38:11 -0500 In-Reply-To: Subject: [ss] Re: Military application of 802.11b Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Message-Id: Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id VAA29175 Hi Stewart: For these kinds of links, most folks are using the KarlNet software due to timing issues with these long links on 802.11b (including your good friends at UCSD ;-). He (Karlnet) has been in the spread spectrum scene since the early days, originally developed his software for Ohio State. See: http://www.karlnet.net/ They (Karlnet) modified the firmware on the Orinico cards to do a form of polling, seems to be one of the bigger hits among the WISP's. -Jeff -- Jeff King, jeff@aerodata.net on 12/11/2002 On Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:09:08 -0800 (PST), Stewart Teaze wrote: >OK, imagine you have a military application for 802.11b, and you are >not limited by Part 15 restrictions(application logistics will limit >us to using a semi-remoted 3dBi gain omni at one site, but we can >use a high-gain dish at the other site). Given that we want to keep >the RF device costs below $2000 per site - what would you folks >recommend for hardware manufacturers/models, as far as higher power >output/high quality solutions (given that we want to operate at a >minimum of 4Mbps, and obtain the maximum possible range)? We >currently are using Breezecom equipment in another application here, >but it has a limitation of 2Mbps top speed, which won't meet our >minimum thruput requirements. > >- Stewart > > >Do you Yahoo!? >Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Dec 12 00:45:20 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id AAA07053 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 00:45:10 -0600 (CST) From: "Darryl Smith" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE: Part 97 <-> Part 15 at will? Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 17:38:49 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Scanner: exiscan *18MN4c-0001DG-00*3rlyraOurGo* on Astaro Security Linux List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <02e701c2a1a9$2438c380$4601a8c0@DELL8000> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Steve Lampereur commented My next thought is maybe we should try get the automatic power wording revised, instead or in addition to trying to get the limit upped before it has to be implemented. Well, funny you should mention that. I had the oposite thought. Maybe the power control should be required for part 15. Realistically stations - particularly base stations could transmit beacons at full power for advertisments, but I think that most part 15 equipment should be required to run MINIMUM power.... And if that is already in the Part 15 requirements it should be enforced. I can see the 802.11b protocol extended with closed loop power control (Like the Qualcomm IS95 cellphone) where the power is kept within that required for communications. And I see that user terminals are what needs to be power limited, not necessarily access points. If the HSMM were to modify the protocol (and I don't think they should) this is where I can see things being done for the benefit of all. Darryl --------- Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Dec 12 00:51:08 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id AAA07164 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 00:51:04 -0600 (CST) From: "Darryl Smith" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] HTML Messages.... Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 17:44:49 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Scanner: exiscan *18MNAQ-0001fI-00*W.NyCx6ycbE* on Astaro Security Linux List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <02e801c2a1a9$fab50ef0$4601a8c0@DELL8000> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk PEOPLE, When you are sending to this SIG please DO NOT SEND IN HTML. Many people receive this and other SIG's via digest and cannot read HTML formatted EMAIL's very well. Thanks. Darryl VK2TDS --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Dec 12 03:34:39 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id DAA11691 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 03:34:38 -0600 (CST) Subject: [ss] RE: How can TAPR support SS development...Build the TAP R FS meter To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 09:33:29 +0000 Message-ID: X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on mgeg01/S/EXT/MM1(Release 5.0.10 |March 22, 2002) at 12/12/2002 10:32:19 AM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > A bunch (not just 1 or 2) of the wireless vendors we're talking to say > 11g is dead on arrival. Probably because it won't comply with ETS300-328 it's going nowhere in europe. The reason is the rather trivial "OFDM is not spread-spectrum". 11Mb/s 802.11 doesn't count as spread-spectrum in my book either. 802.11a at 5GHz has different requirements so it's a different matter. M1FDE --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Dec 12 05:52:30 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id FAA15708 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 05:52:30 -0600 (CST) Subject: [ss] Re: Military application of 802.11b To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:52:06 +0000 Message-ID: X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on mgeg01/S/EXT/MM1(Release 5.0.10 |March 22, 2002) at 12/12/2002 12:50:54 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk http://www.karlnet.net/ Thanks for that link. So they do the code for Lucent Orinocos... How come Karlnet can get all their AP code in a 256k flash when a linux-based AP just fits in a 1Mb flash? There's another software supplier (Global Sun Tech?) that does all the code for D-link, Linksys, & others. The APs are based on ThreadX RTOS on ARM7. If you think your WAP-11 or DWL-900 is secure, see this: http://www.securitytracker.com/alerts/2002/Nov/1005531.html (APs give out free WEP keys and admin password) Ant In't it amazing these days how few hardware companies do their own software? In fact, few hardware companies do their own hardware. People like Eumitcom & Broadcom do it. 802.11 Reference designs served on a platter. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Dec 12 06:07:04 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id GAA16268 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 06:07:02 -0600 (CST) From: "Darryl Smith" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Ham Radio marketing... Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 23:05:42 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Scanner: exiscan *18MS6i-0004Zm-00*XjlUQ2oaPKk* on Astaro Security Linux List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <02fb01c2a1d6$ce8b63b0$4601a8c0@DELL8000> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk There were a few comments on the SIG today about marketing and Ham Radio - and questions as to if Marketing has a place in Ham Radio. My view here is that it definitely does. As wireless becomes more of a Buzz Word, and 802.11 becomes more important, so does marketing. There are three groups of people we need to convince about anything in Ham Radio a) The general public b) Our family and friends c) Ourselves and other hams. Often the only contact will be to part of one of these categories - and this does not work. The TAPR sigs are a good example of marketing to ourselves and other hams - but we could be a lot better at even that. Anyway I have put a few of the ideas about marketing that I have into a single powerpoint presentation... Please bear in mind that I am not a marketer. I have a Electrical Engineering, and I am also a tradesman, having a certificate in Telecommunications Cabling. I am not in advertising.It is all of 68k long, and can be viewed at the moment on http://radio-active.net.au/web/ham/HamPublicity.ppt If people have comments on it can you email me direct. Darryl --------- Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Dec 12 06:30:44 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id GAA17039 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 06:30:43 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 04:29:33 -0800 (PST) From: Jochen Feldhaar Subject: [ss] Re: Ham Radio marketing... To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <20021212122933.10113.qmail@web13308.mail.yahoo.com> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Hello Darryl, now there, the native speakers should know even better than me.... Marketing is the active process of forming your market, and then to manage your way to success. I think you want to call it Public Relations, where the market is pre-existing and you just make yourself known by providing appropriate information.... 73 de Jochen Feldhaar DH6FAZ --- Darryl Smith wrote: > There were a few comments on the SIG today about > marketing and Ham Radio > - and questions as to if Marketing has a place in > Ham Radio. My view > here is that it definitely does. As wireless becomes > more of a Buzz > Word, and 802.11 becomes more important, so does > marketing. > > There are three groups of people we need to convince > about anything in > Ham Radio > a) The general public > b) Our family and friends > c) Ourselves and other hams. > > Often the only contact will be to part of one of > these categories - and > this does not work. The TAPR sigs are a good example > of marketing to > ourselves and other hams - but we could be a lot > better at even that. > > Anyway I have put a few of the ideas about marketing > that I have into a > single powerpoint presentation... Please bear in > mind that I am not a > marketer. I have a Electrical Engineering, and I am > also a tradesman, > having a certificate in Telecommunications Cabling. > I am not in > advertising.It is all of 68k long, and can be viewed > at the moment on > http://radio-active.net.au/web/ham/HamPublicity.ppt > > If people have comments on it can you email me > direct. > > Darryl > > > --------- > Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 > Australia > Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 > International] > Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au > > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: > feldhaar@yahoo.com > To unsubscribe send a blank email to > leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Dec 12 08:12:50 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id IAA22099 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 08:12:50 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: dubose@texas.net Subject: [ss] Re: Ham Radio marketing... Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 08:11:58 US/Central X-User: dubose List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <200212121411.gBCEBvB26568@mail2.aus1.texas.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk For those of us who do have MS, do you have this in another format? Walt/K5YFW > There were a few comments on the SIG today about marketing and Ham Radio > - and questions as to if Marketing has a place in Ham Radio. My view > here is that it definitely does. As wireless becomes more of a Buzz > Word, and 802.11 becomes more important, so does marketing. > > There are three groups of people we need to convince about anything in > Ham Radio > a) The general public > b) Our family and friends > c) Ourselves and other hams. > > Often the only contact will be to part of one of these categories - and > this does not work. The TAPR sigs are a good example of marketing to > ourselves and other hams - but we could be a lot better at even that. > > Anyway I have put a few of the ideas about marketing that I have into a > single powerpoint presentation... Please bear in mind that I am not a > marketer. I have a Electrical Engineering, and I am also a tradesman, > having a certificate in Telecommunications Cabling. I am not in > advertising.It is all of 68k long, and can be viewed at the moment on > http://radio-active.net.au/web/ham/HamPublicity.ppt > > If people have comments on it can you email me direct. > > Darryl > > > --------- > Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia > Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] > Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: dubose@texas.net > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Dec 12 09:17:34 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id JAA23817 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 09:17:30 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 05:16:44 -1000 From: Ron Hashiro User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011128 Netscape6/6.2.1 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Ham Radio marketing... References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH PLAIN at out001.verizon.net from [67.192.163.116] at Thu, 12 Dec 2002 09:16:45 -0600 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3DF8A85C.9070607@verizon.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk It's a start, but it begs certain questions. Some of the answers were alluded to in the presentation, but it's better if it's spelled out. 1) In order to market and PR, who is our target audience 2) What is the perception we want to influence? What do we want to change? 3) What is the audience's want(s) or need(s)? 4) What is our product or service to match that want or need? 5) What is our message (It's something you can say in 20 seconds to grab their attention, so they WANT to read or listen to more.) 6) THEN, how do we go about systematically setting out to give that message and measure the results. ------- Sorry for the long post, but you might find this interesting and synergistic. On that aspect, in Hawaii, Emergency Communications is the vehicle for spreading that message about amateur radio. Through systematic advances over 20 years, we have achieved the following results: a) Placed hams in the following key leadership in town. Communications officers at two Civil Defenses. Trained the entire operational staff at the local CD to be hams. Have four hams on board at the state CD level. Hams are at the CEO level in hospitals (two of them), one as an exec in another healthcare organization. The Police Comm Officer has regained his ham license, and the head of our Fire Department Hazardous Materials unit is a ham. The head of operations at Red Cross is a ham. This is only a sampling of the community leadership that the local amateur radio emergency comm unit has spread and planted in town -- through radio classes and by getting hams hired. I work personally with the head engineer of the police radio engineering, sharing thoughts and helping him solve problems. This also puts amateur radio in good standing. b) This has opened the door to packet radio applications. In fact, just prior to this e-mail, am furthering a proposal to advance packet radio in several institutions in town. c) The amateur radio teams in town have done a superb job advancing emergency comm in the last ten years. We have amateur radio stations and operators in most of the emergency management agencies. CD, Police, Fire, Hospitals, Telephone, Power, Sewer, Red Cross, just to name a few. Twenty Police personnel were trained in ham radio alone. We just graduated six fire personnel in amateur radio classes. The key attention grabber was the job done in Hurricane Iniki where amateur radio was the only link between Kauai and Oahu, and we were getting messages delivered faster over packet than on voice. http://home1.gte.net/rhashiro/am-radio/emcomm/iniki.htm Year 2000 blew open a number of doors wide open. http://home1.gte.net/rhashiro/am-radio/emcomm/fireworks-2000.htm d) There is the Amateur Radio Emegency Communications Course offered through ARRL. We have a number of people who've passed the various levels. So, Emergency Communications, and distributed wireless e-mail communications would be a logical foot in the door to leave a message message. http://home1.gte.net/rhashiro/am-radio/emcomm/ Ron Hashiro, AH6RH RACES, ARES, ARECC Honolulu, HI Jochen Feldhaar wrote: >Hello Darryl, > >now there, the native speakers should know even better >than me.... >Marketing is the active process of forming your >market, and then to manage your way to success. > >I think you want to call it Public Relations, where >the market is pre-existing and you just make yourself >known by providing appropriate information.... > >>There are three groups of people we need to convince >>about anything in >>Ham Radio >> a) The general public >> b) Our family and friends >> c) Ourselves and other hams. >> >>The TAPR sigs are a good example of marketing to >>ourselves and other hams - but we could be a lot >>better at even that. >> >>Anyway I have put a few of the ideas about marketing >>that I have into a single powerpoint presentation... >> >>It is all of 68k long, and can be viewed >>at the moment on >> http://radio-active.net.au/web/ham/HamPublicity.ppt >> >>If people have comments on it can you email me >>direct. >> >>Darryl >> --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Dec 12 09:33:43 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id JAA24478 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 09:33:36 -0600 (CST) Subject: [ss] RE: Part 97 <-> Part 15 at will? Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 10:33:03 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Message-ID: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 content-class: urn:content-classes:message Thread-Topic: [ss] RE: Part 97 <-> Part 15 at will? Thread-Index: AcKhqfXanblo84HdTA201C5SxlFSlwAf+OHA From: "Hare,Ed, W1RFI" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <721D3436A7C2B344A301FD4A413C71A96ED07B@kosh.ARRLHQ.ORG> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id JAA24478 > Well, funny you should mention that. I had the oposite thought. Maybe > the power control should be required for part 15. Realistically stations > - particularly base stations could transmit beacons at full power for > advertisments, but I think that most part 15 equipment should be > required to run MINIMUM power.... And if that is already in the Part 15 > requirements it should be enforced. This would, of course, solve part of our Part 97 problem, because that APC of Part 15 devices would still continue to function if they were amplified, so our Part 97 operation would then be controlled. However, keep in mind that our Part 97 power-control requirement applies only above 1 watt. All 802.11 Part 15 operation will be at power levels of 1 watt or less, so if amateur radio were to imply that APC is needed below 1 watt, we may well shoot ourselves in the foot. One has to be careful what one asks for... they might get it. :-) 73, Ed Hare, W1RFI > -----Original Message----- > From: Darryl Smith [mailto:Darryl@radio-active.net.au] > Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 1:39 AM > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] RE: Part 97 <-> Part 15 at will? > > > > Steve Lampereur commented > My next thought is maybe we should try get the automatic power > wording > revised, instead or in addition to trying to get the limit upped > before it > has to be implemented. > > Well, funny you should mention that. I had the oposite thought. Maybe > the power control should be required for part 15. > Realistically stations > - particularly base stations could transmit beacons at full power for > advertisments, but I think that most part 15 equipment should be > required to run MINIMUM power.... And if that is already in > the Part 15 > requirements it should be enforced. > > I can see the 802.11b protocol extended with closed loop power control > (Like the Qualcomm IS95 cellphone) where the power is kept within that > required for communications. And I see that user terminals are what > needs to be power limited, not necessarily access points. > > If the HSMM were to modify the protocol (and I don't think > they should) > this is where I can see things being done for the benefit of all. > > Darryl > > > > > > --------- > Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia > Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] > Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: W1RFI@ARRL.ORG > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Dec 12 09:56:51 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id JAA25432 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 09:56:49 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 10:55:49 -0500 From: "Eric S. Johansson" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Ham Radio marketing... References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3DF8B185.7050309@harvee.billerica.ma.us> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk dubose@texas.net wrote: > For those of us who do have MS, do you have this in another format? you can read it in open office without too much trouble. ---eric --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Dec 12 10:16:26 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id KAA25962 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 10:16:25 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: dubose@texas.net Subject: [ss] Re: Ham Radio marketing... Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 10:15:29 US/Central X-User: dubose List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <200212121615.gBCGFTh17152@mail1.aus1.texas.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > dubose@texas.net wrote: > > For those of us who do have MS, do you have this in another format? > > you can read it in open office without too much trouble. > > ---eric Eric, I don't have open office and I read my E-Mail using a web mail service so it only opens HTML. Walt --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Dec 12 10:18:19 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id KAA26086 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 10:18:18 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: "Hampton, Rickey L." To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE: Part 97 <-> Part 15 at will? Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:16:32 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <4CEA90C46E84D411B4F600805F9F0C81078F1B1A@phsexch15.mgh.harvard.edu> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Ed, Pardon me for playing the devil's advocate, but would this really be so bad? (The assumption is that APC would apply only to SS, not the other modes.) As someone faced with the pending installation of several campuses of Part 15 stuff, it would make my job SO much easier on several fronts, and not all of them are only for my good. First, APC would limit the range of our system to only that necessary and lower the chances we'll interfere with others, including Part 97. Second, it should lower the probability of intercept or intrusion into our network. If they can't find us, they can't break in. Third, if some non-radio type in an adjacent building decides they need "MORE POWER," the worse thing that happens is they spend their money and time to get what they already have, and they don't create a local area jammer. Couple APC with the active phased arrays now being advertised, and I don't need to worry about Hot Spot nearly as much, whether I'm dealing with Part 15 at work or Part 97 at home. The ONLY downside I see right now is the cost, but that would be spread across all the users. (I'm new to the list, but it seems "we" have been discussing taking Part 15 devices and adapting them to Part 97.) Even if someone has the skills and inclination to homebrew a system, they could probably get the chipsets at a reasonable cost and incorporate them. What have I overlooked? Rick Hampton, WD8KEL Wireless Communications Manager Partners HealthCare Systems One Constitution Center, 2nd Floor Charlestown, MA 02129 Phone: 617-726-6633 > -----Original Message----- > From: Hare,Ed, W1RFI [SMTP:w1rfi@arrl.org] > Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 10:33 AM > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] RE: Part 97 <-> Part 15 at will? > > > Well, funny you should mention that. I had the oposite thought. Maybe > > the power control should be required for part 15. Realistically stations > > - particularly base stations could transmit beacons at full power for > > advertisments, but I think that most part 15 equipment should be > > required to run MINIMUM power.... And if that is already in the Part 15 > > requirements it should be enforced. > > This would, of course, solve part of our Part 97 problem, because that APC > of Part 15 devices would still continue to function if they were > amplified, so our Part 97 operation would then be controlled. > > However, keep in mind that our Part 97 power-control requirement applies > only above 1 watt. All 802.11 Part 15 operation will be at power levels of > 1 watt or less, so if amateur radio were to imply that APC is needed below > 1 watt, we may well shoot ourselves in the foot. > > Ed Hare, W1RFI --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Dec 12 10:29:55 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id KAA26489 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 10:29:51 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 06:29:07 -1000 From: Ron Hashiro User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011128 Netscape6/6.2.1 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Powerpoint Viewer References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH PLAIN at out004.verizon.net from [67.192.163.116] at Thu, 12 Dec 2002 10:29:08 -0600 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3DF8B953.6080506@verizon.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Eric S. Johansson wrote: > dubose@texas.net wrote: > >> For those of us who do have MS, do you have this in another format? > > > you can read it in open office without too much trouble. > > ---eric Download the Powerpoint Viewer from Microsoft. http://office.microsoft.com/downloads/2000/Ppview97.aspx It works. And it's the right price. Free. Ron H --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Dec 12 10:33:17 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id KAA26646 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 10:33:16 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: dubose@texas.net Subject: [ss] Re: Powerpoint Viewer Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 10:32:38 US/Central X-User: dubose MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="--6dfb70ecda1342fe23b5b86f9fe48bef--" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <200212121632.gBCGWch14399@mail1.aus1.texas.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ----6dfb70ecda1342fe23b5b86f9fe48bef-- Content-Type: text/plain Will the PowerPoint viewer run on the Sun mainframe? Walt/K5YFW > Eric S. Johansson wrote: > > > dubose@texas.net wrote: > > > >> For those of us who do have MS, do you have this in another format? > > > > > > you can read it in open office without too much trouble. > > > > ---eric > > Download the Powerpoint Viewer from Microsoft. > > http://office.microsoft.com/downloads/2000/Ppview97.aspx > > It works. And it's the right price. Free. > > Ron H > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: dubose@texas.net > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > ----6dfb70ecda1342fe23b5b86f9fe48bef-- Content-Type: ; name="--\\" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="--\\" ----6dfb70ecda1342fe23b5b86f9fe48bef---- --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Dec 12 11:53:34 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id LAA00307 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:53:32 -0600 (CST) Subject: [ss] Re: TAPR in Europe. To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 17:52:52 +0000 Message-ID: X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on mgeg01/S/EXT/MM1(Release 5.0.10 |March 22, 2002) at 12/12/2002 06:51:41 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > Ah yes, NordLink, the infamous Amateur Radio group that stole Net/ROM and > boldly denied their actions in public until TAPR pressed the issue. > TAPR would be better served by NOT aligning with them. Whatever that was it was well before my time and I don't see the relevance of it. I do not think bearing grudges or shutting people out serves amateur radio's case very well at all. I can think of at least one case where a packet group and an amateur radio society aren't talking to each other and packet activity has suffered. I still don't know why. I shouldn't care why. Perhaps I should find out and try and do something about it. Making packet software and hardware designs readily available serves the goals of TAPR whoever's doing it... There are many new implementations of AX-25 from the ground up nowadays so what's the issue? If there's something annoying (if I understand the situation correctly) it's that a number of manufacturers of TNC-2 clones are largely using TAPR codebase and architecture and aren't required to release modifications back to the community. I'd like to see amateur radio IPR (hardware design, software...) shared with some kind of GPL copyleft to prevent these kinds of situation. In particular, witholding sourcecode or technical documentation prevents experimentation which is contrary to the goals of amateur radio. It may also prevent the free decoding of signals that others have encoded, unacceptable for several reasons. ANt --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Dec 12 15:07:24 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id PAA08634 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 15:07:24 -0600 (CST) Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 16:05:56 -0500 From: Robert McGwier Subject: [ss] Re: Powerpoint Viewer To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Importance: Normal X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-priority: Normal List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk No but Sun's StarOffice sure does. Bob -----Original Message----- From: bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org [mailto:bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of dubose@texas.net Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 5:33 AM To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Subject: [ss] Re: Powerpoint Viewer Will the PowerPoint viewer run on the Sun mainframe? Walt/K5YFW > Eric S. Johansson wrote: > > > dubose@texas.net wrote: > > > >> For those of us who do have MS, do you have this in another format? > > > > > > you can read it in open office without too much trouble. > > > > ---eric > > Download the Powerpoint Viewer from Microsoft. > > http://office.microsoft.com/downloads/2000/Ppview97.aspx > > It works. And it's the right price. Free. > > Ron H > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: dubose@texas.net > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Dec 12 15:31:41 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id PAA09358 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 15:31:39 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: Tony Langdon To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE: HTML Messages.... Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:30:53 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id PAA09358 > When you are sending to this SIG please DO NOT SEND IN HTML. > Many people > receive this and other SIG's via digest and cannot read HTML formatted > EMAIL's very well. Hmm, maybe this has a technical solution. TAPR runs the list server, doesn't it? I've been playing around with an email proxy called MessageWall. Among many other features, it has the ability to strip HTML from emails (or bounce them if there's no plain text in the message). Been running it before my own list server and it works a treat. :) Messagewall also has virus scanning capabilities built in. Oh, and it's GPL'd (meaning open source, freely distributable). Just a thought if there's any admin over there watching, or anyone who can pass this onto the admins. :) --- Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 This correspondence is for the named person’s use only. It may contain confidential or legally privileged information or both. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of this correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Dec 12 16:13:16 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id QAA11337 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 16:13:15 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: Tony Langdon To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Ham Radio marketing... Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:12:14 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > For those of us who do have MS, do you have this in another format? OpenOffice should be able to read it, and I'm also sure Microsoft have a free Powerpoint viewer, if you're running some form of Windows. --- Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 This correspondence is for the named person's use only. It may contain confidential or legally privileged information or both. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of this correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Dec 12 16:31:37 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id QAA12462 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 16:31:35 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: Tony Langdon To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Ham Radio marketing... Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:30:46 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id QAA12462 > 1) In order to market and PR, who is our target audience There are several target audiences: Other hams - make them aware of what we're doing and get their interest. Potential hams (who may not be aware we exist!) General public (for whom, what we can do for them is the most important thing) Governments (since they generally manage the spectrum) Industry (gotts get those fancy chips from somewhere!) > 2) What is the perception we want to influence? > What do we want to change? Depends on which category of person we are dealing with, but most of the non ham non industry groups seem to have this perception that ham radio is about older gentlemen sitting up all night with a Morse key and (valve, of course!) HF rig. I've surprised a LOT of people when telling them about ham satellites, APRS, VoIP (IRLP, Echolink and friends) and the digital voice experimentation that's going on in parts of the world. Considering that a lot of the people I associate with are young, with a strong interest in computers and networking, these areas are of a lot more interest than the "traditional" modes. Interestingly enough, the interest has gone full circle with some when I've fired up on HF during a band opening. That looks a bit like black magic to people who are so used to man made devices being used to get around the curve of the Earth. :) As for those not interested in getting a licence? Well, they still often get to see that it's not a "waste of time" and maybe a tip on improving their TV reception thrown in (some people actually have asked sensible questions about TVI and poor signal quality that they've experienced). :-) The 802.11b people now know the sort of people to turn to for answers on RF issues. > 3) What is the audience's want(s) or need(s)? > 4) What is our product or service to match that want or > need? > 5) What is our message (It's something you can say > in 20 seconds to grab their attention, so they WANT > to read or listen to more.) > 6) THEN, how do we go about systematically setting out > to give that message and measure the results. All good questions that we need to address. > > ------- > > Sorry for the long post, but you might find this interesting > and synergistic. > > On that aspect, in Hawaii, Emergency Communications is > the vehicle for spreading that message about amateur radio. > Through systematic advances over 20 years, we have achieved > the following results: Emergency communications is so low profile in VK (Darryl will probably agree) that you NEVER hear about it (at least in VK3), except for a small note in the ham news services that WICEN were active in this disaster. I feel this needs to be given more publicity. Similarly, WICEN itself doesn't have a real high profile in the ham community. I was a member at one stage (just lapsed through no other reason), but other than the occasional WICEN event mentioned in ham bulletins or the even rarer mention of a real activatation, you hear nothing. Anyway, my view is that promotion/marketing/PR is vital and it's an area I'm interested in supporting (even though my background has NOTHING to do with marketing). --- Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 This correspondence is for the named person’s use only. It may contain confidential or legally privileged information or both. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of this correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Dec 12 20:09:50 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id UAA22118 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2002 20:09:48 -0600 (CST) From: Jeff King To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 21:08:34 -0500 In-Reply-To: Subject: [ss] Re: Military application of 802.11b Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Message-Id: Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id UAA22118 Stewart: Saw the following on the BAWUG list. Interestingly enough, your using the same companies equipment as used here (Breezecom changed their name to Alvarion but I think they now do WiFI as well). -Jeff --- Wi-Fi Link Record Achieved In Sweden The state-owned Swedish Space Corporation (SSC) announced the establishment of a broadband wireless Wi-Fi link over a distance of 310 kilometers. The link was made between a stratospheric weather balloon and a base station on the ground in Esrange, Sweden using wireless equipment from Alvarion (www.alvarion.com). Weather information and video was transmitted over the link that used frequencies in the 2.4 GHz band in which SSC is allowed to higher power levels. It comprised the longest known Wi-Fi link ever established. An SSC spokesman declared it “an amazing technical achievement.” Regards Geoff -- On Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:09:08 -0800 (PST), Stewart Teaze wrote: >OK, imagine you have a military application for 802.11b, and you are >not limited by Part 15 restrictions(application logistics will limit >us to using a semi-remoted 3dBi gain omni at one site, but we can >use a high-gain dish at the other site). Given that we want to keep >the RF device costs below $2000 per site - what would you folks >recommend for hardware manufacturers/models, as far as higher power >output/high quality solutions (given that we want to operate at a >minimum of 4Mbps, and obtain the maximum possible range)? We >currently are using Breezecom equipment in another application here, >but it has a limitation of 2Mbps top speed, which won't meet our >minimum thruput requirements. > >- Stewart > > >Do you Yahoo!? >Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Dec 13 00:41:17 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id AAA02549 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 00:41:10 -0600 (CST) From: "Darryl Smith" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: TAPR in Europe. Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 17:34:58 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Scanner: exiscan *18MjUG-0002dB-00*wE8JD.HE9P6* on Astaro Security Linux List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <034301c2a271$c4f63870$4601a8c0@DELL8000> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk G'Day Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com commented If there's something annoying (if I understand the situation correctly) it's that a number of manufacturers of TNC-2 clones are largely using TAPR codebase and architecture and aren't required to release modifications back to the community. TAPR gets returns for the community in a number of ways. The way it works is to get a device out there, then get it commercialised, and move on. If you decide to buy a set of back issues of the PSR magazine you would find the story of the TNC's.. TAPR originally licensed the TNC-1 for $500 just to get it out there... That worked. Lots of the TNC-1 units were sold. The TNC2 was then designed and licensed for $5000 + $5/unit dropping to $3/unit and then to zero. This was later changed to $500 + $5/unit for five years. This has allowed TAPR to put money back into the ham community. I have no idea how much TAPR has given to AMSAT in total, but in the late 80's it had given over $20,000 to them. These companies are now competing for our $$$ and for the commercial dollar, and TAPR has moved on. The organisation has no need for selling TNC's any more since they are so available. The HAM community has got more back from the manufacturers than if we had forced them to release their mods back to the community. If all the manufacturers dropped out of the markert there might be a need, but that has not happened and it does not look likely. From memory the TNC-2 code was licensed from a programmer who wrote the code. I don't believe that TAPR has the right to distribute it - it is not ours to distribute. Where possible I support all the documentation for a TAPR being totally public - either at the time, or once TAPR stops producing whatever it it. Spread Spectrum is an area that all this is not possible at times thanks to export restrictions on spreading codes and the like. I hope this helps people to know where TAPR fits in... Darryl --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Dec 13 02:11:31 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id CAA05322 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 02:11:28 -0600 (CST) From: "Darryl Smith" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Military application of 802.11b - long links Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 19:04:32 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Scanner: exiscan *18Mktg-0003YV-00*2bfyDemgcyA* on Astaro Security Linux List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <034401c2a27e$47fb8480$4601a8c0@DELL8000> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk >The state-owned Swedish Space Corporation (SSC) announced the >establishment of a broadband wireless Wi-Fi link over a distance of 310 kilometers. This is VERY interesting, and I wonder how they did it. They are certainly bending the WiFi spec, if not breaking it. A while ago I documented some of the limitations on 802.11 on http://www.radio-active.net.au/web/80211/distance.html... Lets have a look at a 310 km wireless link. I believe that they are unable to get a throughput on this link more than about 5 mbit bits/sec without overhead. And that is assuming that data rate of the link is fast. Let me explain. 1. We are talking about a data link here where EVERY frame must be acknowledged before the next one is sent. Hams have worked out that this may not be the best idea in the world. Think AX.25 with out another packet being sent before the present one is ackedged. 2. The path... 310KM. Lets assume it really is 300KM. Makes the maths easier. 300 km = 1 mSec ONE WAY. Therefore a two way path delay is 2 mSec. 3. The maximum size of a packet is 2304 bytes (Oreilly 802.11 Wireless Networks Page 42 - http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0596001835/radioactivene-20) 4. The TX time assuming perfection is (2304 * 8/11000000) = 1.675 mSec. RX time will be the same 5. Assuming no retries, from the perspective of the Transmitter... It starts transmitting at T=0 and transmits for 1.675 mSec. 6. Thanks to the time delay (Damn Einstein) the packet starts to be received at T=1 mSec, and finishes receiving at T=2.675 7. The receiver sends back an OK, and it arrives back at T=3.675 mSec 8. This makes a maximum of 272 packets/second meaning 272 * 2304 * 8 = 5 mBit/sec Max throughput 9. But if we run TCP so that we are sure of getting the data off, that requires an ACK at IP level, with a lot of negotiation in order to change direction. I would guess that adding TCP ack would add a minimum 4-6 mSec, making the throughput much lower. 10. If it is 6 mSec, that would mean 9.675 mSec/packet or 103 packets/second or your 11 mBit link has just become a 2 mBit link. Point 9 is the interesting one... This link breaks all sorts of rules. The normal slottime is set at 20 uSec commonly, and the timer before sending a RETRY request is set at somewhere between 5 and 20 uSec as standard. For this link to work at maximum, the timers need to be hand configured. Conclusion. Are these guys completely nuts. There must be a better way to do this than a WIFI link. WiFi is not designed for this. You are looking at 10% useful bitrate used. Another Link Level protocol would work better. AX25 running with 2304 byte payloads and a 11 mbit/sec modem would work better... Darryl --------- Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Dec 13 06:26:30 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id GAA11908 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 06:26:27 -0600 (CST) X-Originating-IP: [12.111.229.199] Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "John Champa" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: ss digest: December 12, 2002 Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 07:22:45 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Dec 2002 12:22:46.0227 (UTC) FILETIME=[57DC9230:01C2A2A2] List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Forecast... When 802.11g products are released in 1Q03, the price for 802.11b equipment should fall very quickly (it's already fairly cheap) and create a windfall for Hams just getting into the HSMM mode. This is my guess, anyway (HI) Timing is important! Vy 73, John - K8OCL ARRL HSMM WG _________________________________________________________________ Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Dec 13 07:05:58 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id HAA12983 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 07:05:54 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 07:03:17 -0600 From: Gerry Creager User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020826 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Military application of 802.11b - long links References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3DF9DA95.6080901@tamu.edu> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk A nice analysis but you miss one point: 802.11b is adaptive. Thus it decreases throughput and increases window times with increased noise or diminished SNR. Or when told to. Thus, coming down to 2Mbps isn't breaking the spec at all. It may be a design feature. gerry Darryl Smith wrote: >>The state-owned Swedish Space Corporation (SSC) announced the >>establishment of a broadband wireless Wi-Fi link over a distance of 310 > > kilometers. > > This is VERY interesting, and I wonder how they did it. They are > certainly bending the WiFi spec, if not breaking it. > A while ago I documented some of the limitations on 802.11 on > http://www.radio-active.net.au/web/80211/distance.html... Lets have a > look at a 310 km wireless link. > > I believe that they are unable to get a throughput on this link more > than about 5 mbit bits/sec without overhead. And that is assuming that > data rate of the link is fast. Let me explain. > > 1. We are talking about a data link here where EVERY frame must be > acknowledged before the next one is sent. Hams have worked out that this > may not be the best idea in the world. Think AX.25 with out another > packet being sent before the present one is ackedged. > > 2. The path... 310KM. Lets assume it really is 300KM. Makes the maths > easier. 300 km = 1 mSec ONE WAY. Therefore a two way path delay is 2 > mSec. > > 3. The maximum size of a packet is 2304 bytes (Oreilly 802.11 Wireless > Networks Page 42 - > http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0596001835/radioactivene-20) > > 4. The TX time assuming perfection is (2304 * 8/11000000) = 1.675 mSec. > RX time will be the same > > 5. Assuming no retries, from the perspective of the Transmitter... It > starts transmitting at T=0 and transmits for 1.675 mSec. > > 6. Thanks to the time delay (Damn Einstein) the packet starts to be > received at T=1 mSec, and finishes receiving at T=2.675 > > 7. The receiver sends back an OK, and it arrives back at T=3.675 mSec > > 8. This makes a maximum of 272 packets/second meaning 272 * 2304 * 8 = 5 > mBit/sec Max throughput > > 9. But if we run TCP so that we are sure of getting the data off, that > requires an ACK at IP level, with a lot of negotiation in order to > change direction. I would guess that adding TCP ack would add a minimum > 4-6 mSec, making the throughput much lower. > > 10. If it is 6 mSec, that would mean 9.675 mSec/packet or 103 > packets/second or your 11 mBit link has just become a 2 mBit link. > > Point 9 is the interesting one... This link breaks all sorts of rules. > The normal slottime is set at 20 uSec commonly, and the timer before > sending a RETRY request is set at somewhere between 5 and 20 uSec as > standard. For this link to work at maximum, the timers need to be hand > configured. > > Conclusion. Are these guys completely nuts. There must be a better way > to do this than a WIFI link. WiFi is not designed for this. You are > looking at 10% useful bitrate used. Another Link Level protocol would > work better. AX25 running with 2304 byte payloads and a 11 mbit/sec > modem would work better... > > Darryl > > > > > > --------- > Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia > Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] > Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: gerry.creager@tamu.edu > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org -- Gerry Creager -- gerry.creager@tamu.edu Network Engineering -- AATLT, Texas A&M University Office: 979.458.4020 FAX: 979.847.8578 Cell: 979.229.5301 Pager: 979.228.0173 --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Dec 13 07:52:44 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id HAA15466 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 07:52:44 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: wchast@utilpart.com To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Military application of 802.11b - long links Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 08:50:19 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <0D7B0EF78F72D311B95F0008C7F3D0A001A0A9D5@dallas.utilpart.com> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk >AX25 running with 2304 byte payloads and a 11 mbit/sec > modem would work better... > A couple of LINUX boxes should let you test that theory out. Be nice to see what the numbers come up to? A delay line in between the two Wi-Fi points and you have your path. Be interesting to see the numbers ***************************************************************** This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy any hard copies you may have printed and remove all copies of the e-mail from your hard drive. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message that do not relate to the official business of Utility Partners, Inc shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it. Visit us on the web at http://www.utilpart.com ***************************************************************** --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Dec 13 23:46:44 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id XAA22025 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2002 23:46:43 -0600 (CST) From: "Darryl Smith" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Subject: Re: Military application of 802.11b - long links Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 16:39:15 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Scanner: exiscan *18N56r-0006SK-00*Z.Yth0Z/ye.* on Astaro Security Linux List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <037c01c2a333$270b3260$4601a8c0@DELL8000> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk G'Day... From: Gerry Creager >A nice analysis but you miss one point: 802.11b is adaptive. Thus it >decreases throughput and increases window times with increased noise or >diminished SNR. Or when told to. Thus, coming down to 2Mbps isn't >breaking the spec at all. It may be a design feature. I am still coming to terms with the internals. I did not realise that the performance of the link was that adaptive. The documentation I have been reading states that the 'contention window', which is I assume the period that a retry can can be trensmitted in, is reset on each successful packet getting through. So my reading of the protocol operation is Transmits the initial packet Waits for DIFS period - which from what I can gather is normally about 20 uSec waits for 0-31 slots and retransmits the packet [slots are 10 uSec]. The other station recieves the un-retransmitted packet, and sends an ack Waits for DIFS periods waits for 0-31 slots and retransmits the ack Which makes this worse than I thought. I would love to be proved wrong, but from my reading the protocol is adaptive, but assumes that stations are close in. It certainly does not attempt to work out the best way to get packets in by scheduling with some type of space/time algorithm. So if this is correct we are now down to worse than 1 mb/sec with an 11mbit/sec modulation. Which leads me to another conclusion... If we want to use this for long links we need to work out what variables to change for maximum throughput, and make them more dynamic. Darryl --------- Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 14 11:12:49 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id LAA12075 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 11:12:46 -0600 (CST) From: Jeff King To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 12:11:44 -0500 In-Reply-To: Subject: [ss] Re: Subject: Re: Military application of 802.11b - long links Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Message-Id: Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id LAA12075 In some of the long links in question, KarlNet firmware was used, which modified parameters or totally changed things. -- Jeff King, jeff@aerodata.net on 12/14/2002 On Sat, 14 Dec 2002 16:39:15 +1100, Darryl Smith wrote: >G'Day... > >From: Gerry Creager >>A nice analysis but you miss one point: 802.11b is adaptive. Thus >>it >>decreases throughput and increases window times with increased >>noise or > >>diminished SNR. Or when told to. Thus, coming down to 2Mbps isn't >>breaking the spec at all. It may be a design feature. > >I am still coming to terms with the internals. I did not realise that >the performance of the link was that adaptive. The documentation I >have >been reading states that the 'contention window', which is I assume >the >period that a retry can can be trensmitted in, is reset on each >successful packet getting through. So my reading of the protocol >operation is > > Transmits the initial packet > Waits for DIFS period - which from what I can gather is normally >about 20 uSec > waits for 0-31 slots and retransmits the packet [slots are 10 >uSec]. > The other station recieves the un-retransmitted packet, and >sends an ack > Waits for DIFS periods > waits for 0-31 slots and retransmits the ack > >Which makes this worse than I thought. I would love to be proved >wrong, >but from my reading the protocol is adaptive, but assumes that >stations >are close in. It certainly does not attempt to work out the best way >to >get packets in by scheduling with some type of space/time algorithm. > >So if this is correct we are now down to worse than 1 mb/sec with an >11mbit/sec modulation. > >Which leads me to another conclusion... If we want to use this for >long >links we need to work out what variables to change for maximum >throughput, and make them more dynamic. > >Darryl > > > >--------- >Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia >Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] >Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au > > > >--- >You are currently subscribed to ss as: jeff@aerodata.net >To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 14 14:25:59 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id OAA19128 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 14:25:56 -0600 (CST) From: Frosty6981@aol.com Message-ID: Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 15:25:09 EST Subject: [ss] Pansat To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_15f.188e3027.2b2ceda5_boundary" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <15f.188e3027.2b2ceda5@aol.com> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk --part1_15f.188e3027.2b2ceda5_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I have seen that Pansat (PO-34) is a spread spectrum sattlite. What do I=20 need to use it? Has anyone had any luck with it? 73, Reid KC=D8IDI --part1_15f.188e3027.2b2ceda5_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I have seen that Pansat (PO-34) is a spread spectrum s= attlite.  What do I need to use it?  Has anyone had any luck with=20= it?

73, Reid KC=D8IDI --part1_15f.188e3027.2b2ceda5_boundary-- --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 14 14:36:13 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id OAA19735 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 14:36:13 -0600 (CST) X-Internal-ID: 3DF73BCC00045019 From: "Marcelo Puhl" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 18:35:47 -0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [ss] California Amplifier Yagi? Reply-to: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Message-ID: Priority: normal In-reply-to: Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: <3DFB7A03.8610.2F2D1E@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Hi, I'm trying to use the California Amplifier MMDS Yagi antenna on 2.4 GHz but it is not working. Even on a 200m direct LOS link with low loss Heliax cable. The hardware is the good old Proxim Symphony cards and bridge, that runs fine at short distance with the original antennas. Is there any hint to make those MMDS Yagi antennas work on 2.4 GHz? Thanks. Marcelo - PY3SS --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 14 14:40:36 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id OAA20008 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 14:40:32 -0600 (CST) X-message-flag: Warning! Use of Microsoft Outlook renders your system susceptible to Internet worms. Message-Id: X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 13:39:47 -0700 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Brett Glass Subject: [ss] Re: California Amplifier Yagi? In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021214133924.03478c30@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk At 01:35 PM 12/14/2002, Marcelo Puhl wrote: >Hi, > >I'm trying to use the California Amplifier MMDS Yagi antenna on 2.4 GHz Why? MMDS isn't 2.4 GHz. --Brett --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 14 14:44:57 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id OAA20099 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 14:44:54 -0600 (CST) X-message-flag: Warning! Use of Microsoft Outlook renders your system susceptible to Internet worms. Message-Id: X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 13:43:54 -0700 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Brett Glass Subject: [ss] Re: Military application of 802.11b In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021214134157.0347e3f0@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk At 03:09 PM 12/11/2002, Stewart Teaze wrote: >OK, imagine you have a military application for 802.11b, and you are not limited by Part 15 restrictions Try HyperLink Technologies (hyperlinktech.com). They offer amplifiers which, they claim, can output high power for military/non-US applications. It'll be a custom job, though, so I don't know what they'll charge. --Brett Glass --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 14 14:48:44 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id OAA20187 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 14:48:41 -0600 (CST) X-Internal-ID: 3DF73BCC0004525E From: "Marcelo Puhl" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 18:48:13 -0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [ss] Re: California Amplifier Yagi? Reply-to: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Message-ID: Priority: normal In-reply-to: References: Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: <3DFB7CED.21795.3A8EC9@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk On 14 Dec 2002 at 13:39, Brett Glass wrote: > >I'm trying to use the California Amplifier MMDS Yagi antenna on 2.4 GHz > > Why? MMDS isn't 2.4 GHz. > > --Brett > I found them referenced on the page: http://www.qsl.net/n9zia/wireless/page04.html And we get those Yagis for free here... ;-) Marcelo - PY3SS --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 14 16:05:39 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id QAA22726 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 16:05:34 -0600 (CST) X-message-flag: Warning! Use of Microsoft Outlook renders your system susceptible to Internet worms. Message-Id: X-Sender: brett@localhost Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 15:04:52 -0700 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Brett Glass Subject: [ss] Re: California Amplifier Yagi? In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20021214150317.034d4ba0@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk At 01:48 PM 12/14/2002, Marcelo Puhl wrote: >I found them referenced on the page: > >http://www.qsl.net/n9zia/wireless/page04.html Reread that page carefully. It says that MMDS *dish* antennas are frequency-insensitive enough to work with 802.11b. Yagis are much more frequency-sensitive. >And we get those Yagis for free here... ;-) Alas, for your application it appears that you may be getting what you pay for. --Brett --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 14 18:24:41 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id SAA27155 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 18:24:40 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: wchast@utilpart.com To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: California Amplifier Yagi? Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 19:21:44 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <0D7B0EF78F72D311B95F0008C7F3D0A001A0A9DC@dallas.utilpart.com> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Maybe it is in his part of the world, look at his callsign. > -----Original Message----- > From: Brett Glass [mailto:brett@lariat.org] > Sent: Saturday, December 14, 2002 03:40 PM > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] Re: California Amplifier Yagi? > > > At 01:35 PM 12/14/2002, Marcelo Puhl wrote: > > >Hi, > > > >I'm trying to use the California Amplifier MMDS Yagi antenna > on 2.4 GHz > > Why? MMDS isn't 2.4 GHz. > > --Brett > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: wchast@utilpart.com > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > ***************************************************************** This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy any hard copies you may have printed and remove all copies of the e-mail from your hard drive. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message that do not relate to the official business of Utility Partners, Inc shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it. Visit us on the web at http://www.utilpart.com ***************************************************************** --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 14 18:46:39 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id SAA27981 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 18:46:38 -0600 (CST) Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 16:45:56 -0800 (PST) From: Bob Lorenzini To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: California Amplifier Yagi? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk On Sat, 14 Dec 2002, Brett Glass wrote: > At 01:48 PM 12/14/2002, Marcelo Puhl wrote: > > >I found them referenced on the page: > > > >http://www.qsl.net/n9zia/wireless/page04.html > > Reread that page carefully. It says that MMDS *dish* antennas are > frequency-insensitive enough to work with 802.11b. Yagis are > much more frequency-sensitive. > > >And we get those Yagis for free here... ;-) > > Alas, for your application it appears that you may be getting what > you pay for. You will be hard pressed to find a higher gain ant for 802.11 than the MMDS castoffs. If I remember correctly you need to change the feed and aiming is critical. When I get to the office I will try to find the link for modifying. Bob - wd6dod --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 14 23:06:06 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id XAA06044 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2002 23:06:05 -0600 (CST) From: "Darryl Smith" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Magazine Roundup - Elektor Electronics - October 2002 Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 15:57:13 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Scanner: exiscan *18NQuM-00030N-00*vO.QMrSWwuI* on Astaro Security Linux List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <038d01c2a3f6$71fd6770$4601a8c0@DELL8000> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Here in Oz October Elector has just hit the shelves. Articles and Kits include (www.elektor-electronics.co.uk) AT90S8535 Programmer Digital RF wattmeter based on a 16F876 (http://www.webx.dk/oz2cpu/radios/miliwatt.htm) 16F84 Motorcycle Theft Alarm Information on the OBD-2 Car network port Sound Pressure Level Meter Accoustic VoltMeter Electronic Fuse USB Driver Programming November Electronics World (formerly and Wireless world) WIDE Digital IO from the USB port TDA7000 Signal Strength Meter PIR Enhancement PIC in service programming RF Autotransformers line devices modelled in spice Capacitor Sound - Distortion added by capacitors in a circuit If people find this useful, let me know, and I will continue to publish this when I get the magazines Darryl --------- Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sun Dec 15 00:29:50 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id AAA10721 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 00:29:46 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: "Pinfold" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: Magazine Roundup - Elektor Electronics - October 2002 Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 19:26:48 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <514701c2a402$f2ee7980$2901a8c0@co.nz> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Hi Daryl glad to see some one else gets stuck into the good mags other than the usual boring one our friends up top may have trouble getting some of the european ones cheers Mike ZL1BTB ----- Original Message ----- From: Darryl Smith To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2002 5:57 PM Subject: [ss] Magazine Roundup - Elektor Electronics - October 2002 > Here in Oz October Elector has just hit the shelves. Articles and Kits > include (www.elektor-electronics.co.uk) > > AT90S8535 Programmer > Digital RF wattmeter based on a 16F876 > (http://www.webx.dk/oz2cpu/radios/miliwatt.htm) > 16F84 Motorcycle Theft Alarm > Information on the OBD-2 Car network port > Sound Pressure Level Meter > Accoustic VoltMeter > Electronic Fuse > USB Driver Programming > > November Electronics World (formerly and Wireless world) > > WIDE Digital IO from the USB port > TDA7000 Signal Strength Meter > PIR Enhancement > PIC in service programming > RF Autotransformers line devices modelled in spice > Capacitor Sound - Distortion added by capacitors in a circuit > > If people find this useful, let me know, and I will continue to publish > this when I get the magazines > > Darryl > > --------- > Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia > Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] > Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: PINFOLD@XTRA.CO.NZ > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sun Dec 15 13:26:09 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id NAA00624 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 13:26:06 -0600 (CST) X-Sender: kb9mwr@yahoo.com (Unverified) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Steve Lampereur Subject: [ss] Re: California Amplifier Yagi? Message-Id: Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 13:25:31 -0600 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk The Yagi's have a downconverter attached directly to them. So you need to solder a RF connector or your coax directly after removing the downconverter. The work okay afterwards. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sun Dec 15 13:52:32 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id NAA01465 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 13:52:25 -0600 (CST) X-Internal-ID: 3DF73BCC0004FDDA From: "Marcelo Puhl" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 17:51:07 -0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [ss] Re: California Amplifier Yagi? Reply-to: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Message-ID: Priority: normal In-reply-to: Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: <3DFCC10B.30788.DBCB77@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk On 15 Dec 2002 at 13:25, Steve Lampereur wrote: > The Yagi's have a downconverter attached directly to them. So you need to > solder a RF connector or your coax directly after removing the > downconverter. The work okay afterwards. > I did that. Removed the downconverter and the original short piece of cable. Installed a new one with a N-female on its end. No luck. The problem is I don't have any test equipment to evaluate the antenna. Just trying the link to see if it works :( Have you used this antenna? Thanks for the info. Mark - PY3SS --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sun Dec 15 15:33:16 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id PAA04663 for ; Sun, 15 Dec 2002 15:33:14 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: Tony Langdon To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: ss digest: December 12, 2002 Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 08:31:54 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id PAA04663 > When 802.11g products are released in 1Q03, the price for > 802.11b equipment > should fall very quickly (it's already fairly cheap) and > create a windfall > for Hams just getting into the HSMM mode. This is my guess, > anyway (HI) > Timing is important! 802.11b equipment is already quite cheap over here. You can buy PCMCIA cards for around A$100 retail and access points for under A$300. The wireless groups are good "spotters" for such retail bargains. In the US, I believe things are (at least in $ terms because of the exchange rate) much cheaper again. --- Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 This correspondence is for the named person’s use only. It may contain confidential or legally privileged information or both. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of this correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Mon Dec 16 13:41:13 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id NAA22303 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 13:41:13 -0600 (CST) X-Sender: kb9mwr@yahoo.com (Unverified) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Steve Lampereur Subject: [ss] Re: California Amplifier Yagi? Message-Id: Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 13:40:38 -0600 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Same problem here, no real way to test it. We stuck with the parabolic dishes, we unloaded a few of the Yagi's to someone else, I never really heard if they worked out. I know the Corner reflectors did & obviously the dishes. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Mon Dec 16 13:44:50 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id NAA22427 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 13:44:48 -0600 (CST) content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: [ss] Re: California Amplifier Yagi? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 13:49:00 -0600 Message-ID: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 Thread-Topic: [ss] Re: California Amplifier Yagi? Thread-Index: AcKlO8yjoiDumJeOQ0q+JEzNNuZWXwAADRwQ From: "Jason A. Beens" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3ED688DB5D46C04695CFB16A7CBA5F0C1138AD@office.sa-office.sensetechnologies.com> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id NAA22427 i have a VNA that will go to 3 GHz... i would be happy to make a measurement of S11 on the antenna port and publish it... can anyone spare an antenna? the VNA is in calibration right now, but it will be back before the end of hte year. Jason KB0CDN -----Original Message----- From: Steve Lampereur [mailto:kb9mwr@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 1:41 PM To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Subject: [ss] Re: California Amplifier Yagi? Same problem here, no real way to test it. We stuck with the parabolic dishes, we unloaded a few of the Yagi's to someone else, I never really heard if they worked out. I know the Corner reflectors did & obviously the dishes. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: jbeens@sensetechnologies.com To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.426 / Virus Database: 239 - Release Date: 12/2/2002 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.426 / Virus Database: 239 - Release Date: 12/2/2002 --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Mon Dec 16 18:40:11 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id SAA09063 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 18:40:09 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 19:39:33 -0500 From: "Eric S. Johansson" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] [Fwd: [nycwireless] Pebble Linux Distro release] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3DFE7245.4050105@harvee.billerica.ma.us> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk the part 15 world is moving ahead with hardware, software and network. --- eric -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [nycwireless] Pebble Linux Distro release Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 13:12:49 -0800 From: Todd Boyle To: dbs@philodox.com quoted from http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/2002q4/003938.html download/notes are at http://www.nycwireless.net/pebble/ [nycwireless] Pebble Linux Distro release Terry Schmidt terry at nycwireless.net Sun, 15 Dec 2002 11:01:43 -0500 I've made a smallish (~40mb) Linux distro with NoCat, DJBDNS, HostAP, Debian, and more. It works on the Soekris net4501, Soekris net4521, Stylistic 1000, and more. One of it's biggest benefit is that it is a read-only system, so you can unplug and reboot as much as you want without fearing data loss. Comments, bug reports, requests, etc, are welcome. --Terry --X1bOJ3K7DJ5YkBrT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="pebble.README.1" This is a somewhat minimal (more than 16 megs, less than 400 megs) Debian stripped distro aimed for use in wireless embeded devices. It's biggest advantage is that it mounts read-only. You don't have to worry as much about wearing down the compact flash, and you don't have to worry about doing proper shutdowns. Unplug and plug in as much as you want. What it has installed: Based on Debian GNU/Linux 3.0 (Woody) Linux Kernel 2.4.19 HostAP - Stable Version 10-12-02 - PCMCIA and PCI bridge-tools djbdns caching dns server elvis (tiny vi) gnupg iptables 1.2.6a lynx lilo NoCatAuth, running as non-root, post 0.81 nighthly ntpdate openSSH server 3.4p1 openSSL 0.9.6 patched pcmcia-cs (kernel module pcmcia) Perl 5.6.1 ppp pppoe rsync tcpdump udhcpc - tiny dhcp client udhcpd - tiny dhcp server zebra 0.92a-5 (BGP, OSPF Routing Daemon) What has it been tested to run on: Soekris Net 4501 (PCI version) Soekris Net 4521 (Dual PCMCIA Version) Stylistic 1000 PCMCIA Thinkpad T23 with mini-pci prism2 and Intel 10/100. [FAQ snipped] --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Mon Dec 16 19:48:16 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id TAA12856 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 19:48:07 -0600 (CST) From: "Steven Bible" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] San Diego wireless net installs 72-mile, 2.4-GHz link Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 18:47:02 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk These series of articles was posted to the AMSAT-BB list. I think you'll find these interesting from a number angles. One, ignorance of the FCC rules and regulations, and two, the extent of experimentation in IEEE 802.11b (can you say "reinventing the wheel?) that is being funded by the US Government (left hand this is right hand, over!). First read... http://www.computerworld.com/mobiletopics/mobile/story/0,10801,75830,00.html Then... http://www.computerworld.com/mobiletopics/mobile/story/0,10801,76118,00.html - Steve, N7HPR (n7hpr@tapr.org) --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Mon Dec 16 20:16:34 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id UAA14162 for ; Mon, 16 Dec 2002 20:16:30 -0600 (CST) From: "Stephen Nichols" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] more part 15 devices ? Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 19:16:04 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4920.2300 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Posted on the gnu-radio list today... >Excerpt from http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-229400A1.pdf >See also http://www.fcc.gov/oet for statements of commissioners. > > > > > FCC BEGINS INQUIRY REGARDING ADDITIONAL > SPECTRUM FOR UNLICENSED DEVICES > > > As part of the ongoing effort to promote efficient use of spectrum, > the FCC today asked for public comment on the possibility of > permitting unlicensed transmitters to operate in additional frequency > bands. Such changes could allow the development of new and innovative > types of unlicensed devices. This inquiry examines new and creative > ways to utilize the spectrum resource more efficiently by considering > new spectral frontiers for unlicensed use. > > In a Notice of Inquiry approved today, the Commission stated that the > current rules for unlicensed transmitters have been a tremendous > success. A wide variety of devices have been developed and introduced > under those rules for consumer and business use, including cordless > telephones, home security systems, electronic toys, anti-pilfering and > inventory control systems, and computer wireless local area > networks. The success of those rules shows that there could be > significant benefits to the economy, businesses and consumers in > making additional spectrum available for unlicensed > transmitters. Unlicensed transmitters may be operated under the > provisions of Part 15 of the Commission s Rules. Part 15 transmitters > generally operate on frequencies shared with authorized services at > relatively low power, levels and must operate on a non-interference > basis. > > The Notice seeks comments on whether unlicensed operations should be > permitted in additional frequency bands. Specifically, it seeks > comments on the feasibility of allowing unlicensed devices to operate > in the TV broadcast spectrum and locations and times when spectrum is > not being used. It also seeks comment on the feasibility of permitting > unlicensed devices to operate in other bands, such as the 3650-3700 > MHz band, at power levels higher than other unlicensed transmitters > with only the minimal technical requirements necessary to prevent > interference to licensed services. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 17 05:23:40 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id FAA29350 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 05:23:40 -0600 (CST) Subject: [ss] RE: HTML Messages.... To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:23:09 +0000 Message-ID: X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on mgeg01/S/EXT/MM1(Release 5.0.10 |March 22, 2002) at 12/17/2002 12:21:53 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > Hmm, maybe this has a technical solution. TAPR runs the list server, > doesn't it? I've been playing around with an email proxy called > MessageWall. Among many other features, it has the ability to strip HTML > from emails If you do this, make sure it correctly adjusts the headers to match. I've had problems with messages from listservs that strip HTML and yet leave "content-type" as multipart/mime etc. Lotus Notes vehemently objects to this error. Consequence you don't get to see the post. Ant --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 17 05:30:54 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id FAA29521 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 05:30:52 -0600 (CST) Subject: [ss] Re: Powerpoint Viewer To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:30:21 +0000 Message-ID: X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on mgeg01/S/EXT/MM1(Release 5.0.10 |March 22, 2002) at 12/17/2002 12:29:05 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Do you want me to convert the .ppt to a .pdf file - I did that for someone 2 days ago. The result was 50% smaller too. It's as simple as printing it (in powerpoint or powerpoint viewer or your fave Unix office package) to a PDF writer device. It has the convenient side-effect of stripping those silly animations. Ant --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 17 12:29:54 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id MAA14961 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 12:29:53 -0600 (CST) Subject: [ss] Re: Military application of 802.11b - long links To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 18:29:16 +0000 Message-ID: X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on mgeg01/S/EXT/MM1(Release 5.0.10 |March 22, 2002) at 12/17/2002 07:27:59 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > 9. But if we run TCP so that we are sure of getting the data off, that > requires an ACK at IP level, with a lot of negotiation in order to > change direction. I would guess that adding TCP ack would add a minimum > 4-6 mSec, making the throughput much lower. Multiple packets may be sent before acks are received in TCP. It doesn't wait for individual packets to be acked. Packets are acked by number and the quantity that can be "in transit" depends on the window size. TCP acks will consume some time on the link. They are short packets but framing overhead is high. It's a pity 802.11 can't send multiple short IP packets in one burst with one sync preamble and ack overhead. Another failing of 802.11 / AX.25 ... but 802.11 does provide some help. "negotiation" isn't required to change direction; Turnround time for an 802.11 ack is small; turnround time for TCP-ack will be slightly higher but not much. Lots of contention may be required! What will happen is that one end will be firing traffic packets while the other end is trying to get TCP-acks back, so both ends contend at each packet for the right to transmit. With long link delays, that contention phase will "fight" for a long time before it's resolved who won. If the stations opt to use the "ack+data" packet then the contention would be avoided, and turnrounds minimised. The TCP-ack sneaks in with the 802.11 ack, which is in in turn acked with the next traffic packet. CF-time is continually extended and no contention occurs. The 802.11 acks almost vanish from the link. (hey - AX.25 sux). Use of the full gamut of 802.11 packet types isn't compulsory; a working implementation can be built without. Performance would therefore be implementation-dependent. This is one reason I'd like people to post packet-sniffer dumps on the net (naming the firmware/software involved) so we can see which implementations are good and which aren't. Implementations that make maximum use of bandwidth-saving protocol elements being "good". Ant --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 17 13:02:05 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id NAA16369 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 13:02:03 -0600 (CST) Subject: [ss] Re: San Diego wireless net installs 72-mile, 2.4-GHz link To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:01:09 +0000 Message-ID: X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on mgeg01/S/EXT/MM1(Release 5.0.10 |March 22, 2002) at 12/17/2002 07:59:51 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk I can't believe the date on this post - server's not borken... Hey Mr. Steve Bible, we did that one to death weeks ago. Were you not awake... read the archives before posting. Let's not restart the FCC vs. Ham vs. licence-free war. We've poured many megabits over that fire already. It was reported the link has now been taken down. I'm quite conscious I'm flaming a TAPR director... You gotta love 'em, haven't you! Welcome Steve, I'm sure you're a nice chap. Nice to see Steve and Daryl involved in the lists. I commend Daryl for communicating effectively with members. And potential members. I will join, honest guv! Ant M1FDE > (left hand this is right hand, over!) . . . . --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 17 13:38:23 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id NAA18384 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 13:38:20 -0600 (CST) Subject: [ss] Re: TAPR in Europe. To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:38:10 +0000 Message-ID: X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on mgeg01/S/EXT/MM1(Release 5.0.10 |March 22, 2002) at 12/17/2002 08:36:51 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > I hope this helps people to know where TAPR fits in... Thanks Daryl. Pehaps I needed a history lesson. But I suppose each project is different. In future we should consider amateur's "right" or "duty" to experiment in the way we licence IPR or make use of other's IPR. The purpose of amateur radio is an important part of the licence - no less important than all those other rules and regs we must follow by law. Owners may be able to enhance the performance of their hardware or software if they have access to sourcecode. Without it the progress of improvement stops. This seems to be much in evidence on TNCs. It's important for training & education that hams have access to the codebase and development tools to build it. ie. learn by taking it apart and putting it back together again. Change something and see what happens. Making designs freely available to hams doesn't stop TAPR also making money from businesses who wish to manufacture kits or pre-built units. Is there a web-page of help on TAPR IPR? Don't like legalese but I've got a contract of employment to think about. I'm not allowed to do similar work for other companies, but I can't see why I can't do it for myself and give it away... Aside: It's just occurred to me that you could now build a tiny linux-based TNC with about 7 chips. Just looking at the Samsung processors... S3C4530A - ARM7, Ethernet, HDLC, UART, I2C (208QFP) S3C2500 - ditto + ARM9, USB, PCI/Cardbus (272PBGA) HDLC ctrlr is fully-featured with DPLL and DMA BSP (board support package) for uClinux. It seems synonymous with a platform for a Linux- based AP. Current Linux-AP platforms aren't capable of 54Mb/s; one based on S3C2500 would fix that - it has 133MHz CPU, cardbus and 100baseT. But I can't solder BGAs. If TAPR built them, how many do you think we could sell to WLAN-networkers the world over who adore Linux? LOADS. Would they join TAPR? YES. Using the evalboard circuit it's low risk design. We could expect help from people on the OpenAP-dev list to do the software; they are desperate for a platform like this. Ant M1FDE --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 17 14:19:19 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id OAA19621 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 14:19:15 -0600 (CST) From: "Lyle Johnson" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: TAPR in Europe. Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 12:18:21 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > Owners may be able to enhance the performance of > their hardware or software if they have access to > sourcecode. Without it the progress of improvement > stops. This seems to be much in evidence on TNCs. The source code to the TAPR TNC 1 was made available upon written request back in 1983. Nothing happened. Bob Richardson published source code for TNC's in his books "Packet Radio: The Software Approach" back in the early 1980s. Nothing happened. The TNC 2 source code was only made available to OEMs; it was not relased to the general Amateur population. It evolved into numerous verisons and variants. A lot happened. The source code to the TAPR Deviation Meter was openly published in the TAPR Software Library and later on the web. Nothing happened. Access to source code for embedded devices is a Good Thing, but it doesn't necessarily follow that improvements will come if the source is available, or that lack of it prevents innovation and improvement. Enjoy! Lyle KK7P (Note that I am a proponent of open source in so far as it is practical to make it open. But I am also a proponent of the right of the author to withold the source if he so chooses...) --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 17 15:30:21 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id PAA23781 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:30:16 -0600 (CST) From: Jeff King To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 16:29:13 -0500 In-Reply-To: Subject: [ss] Re: TAPR in Europe. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Message-Id: Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id PAA23781 On Tue, 17 Dec 2002 12:18:21 -0800, Lyle Johnson wrote: >>Owners may be able to enhance the performance of >>their hardware or software if they have access to >>sourcecode. Without it the progress of improvement >>stops. This seems to be much in evidence on TNCs. >The source code to the TAPR TNC 1 was made available upon written >request back in 1983. Nothing happened. Was this made public? About a year before my time, but first I heard of it. I do see the schematics on the TAPR web site, but no software. And open source doesn't require that the source be requested in writing with conditions. If there are conditions, it is not open source. And what about WA8DED host mode for the TNC1? How does this fit in with your statement of 'nothing happened'? This was the only thing keeping the TNC1 going for years after TAPR walked away from it (In fact, it was the only way to get AX.25 version 2.0 on the TNC1) >Bob Richardson published source code for TNC's in his books "Packet >Radio: >The Software Approach" back in the early 1980s. Nothing happened. This is not my memory at all. Many of the early commodore C-64 versions of bit banging TNC's cite this as a reference, as well as the later Baycom modems. Far from 'nothing happened', Bob's paper was the conception of almost every software TNC on the market. >The source code to the TAPR Deviation Meter was openly published in >the TAPR Software Library and later on the web. Nothing happened. Depends on your perspective. Have you heard of TheNET X1J? It incorporated some of your deviation meter ideas, but instead of a one on one device, it was a one on many device. The actual TNC itself read the deviation and could report it back to the station that was querying for deviation. Paccomm and MFJ were/are selling the A/D adapter boards. Sometimes open source is also known as open ideas/improvements, and in that regards, I would take your deviation meter as a rousing success. BTW, where on the web is the source? This was the first I heard that the source was available for it. But I'd be more interested in seeing the source/IP for the TAPR spread spectrum radio. Any clues on if and when that will ever be released as open source? I'm looking for some frequency hopping code to play with on a PIC. 73 Jeff --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 17 16:13:39 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id QAA25242 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 16:13:37 -0600 (CST) Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 17:11:34 -0500 From: Robert McGwier Subject: [ss] Re: TAPR in Europe. To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Importance: Normal X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-priority: Normal List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Lyle: I hear that memory is the second thing to go. Will Heather confirm this? WA8DED gave us AX25 v 2 for TNC-1 using the published code. But this is not really a fair list you have given us. When the TNC-2 was introduced and Howie limited distribution of the code, we were in the explosive growth period of packet radio, it was cheaper to manufacture the TNC-2, it drew less power, and on and on. The demand for the TNC-2 is what led to innovation on the part of the manufacturers. Frankly, I just can't see how there was ever going to be a great demand for the deviation meter. I never owned one. I just played with it until it sounded right on a receiver outside the near field ;-). I agree with your statement that embedded devices code do not seem to lead to a lot. I think this has more to do with return on investment after the original inner circle has milked it to death. Bob N4HY -----Original Message----- From: bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org [mailto:bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of Lyle Johnson Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 3:18 PM To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Subject: [ss] Re: TAPR in Europe. > Owners may be able to enhance the performance of > their hardware or software if they have access to > sourcecode. Without it the progress of improvement > stops. This seems to be much in evidence on TNCs. The source code to the TAPR TNC 1 was made available upon written request back in 1983. Nothing happened. Bob Richardson published source code for TNC's in his books "Packet Radio: The Software Approach" back in the early 1980s. Nothing happened. The TNC 2 source code was only made available to OEMs; it was not relased to the general Amateur population. It evolved into numerous verisons and variants. A lot happened. The source code to the TAPR Deviation Meter was openly published in the TAPR Software Library and later on the web. Nothing happened. Access to source code for embedded devices is a Good Thing, but it doesn't necessarily follow that improvements will come if the source is available, or that lack of it prevents innovation and improvement. Enjoy! Lyle KK7P (Note that I am a proponent of open source in so far as it is practical to make it open. But I am also a proponent of the right of the author to withold the source if he so chooses...) --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: rwmcgwier@comcast.net To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 17 17:09:54 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id RAA27334 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 17:09:51 -0600 (CST) From: "Lyle Johnson" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: TAPR in Europe. Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:08:32 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Hello Jeff! > >The source code to the TAPR TNC 1 was made available upon written > >request back in 1983. Nothing happened. > > Was this made public? It wasn't a secret, and I was taken to task about it in an Amateur publication in Australia in 1984, so I suspect it was pretty public :-) > I do see the schematics on the TAPR web site, but no software. And open > source doesn't require that the source be requested in writing with > conditions. If there are conditions, it is not open source. I wasn't refering to "Open Source Movememnt" but open in the sense of English, in that it wasn't closed and you could easily get it. For me, that is open. I don't know of any conditions on use the TNC 1 code. The authors just wanted to know who wanted it, not to prevent it from being used. > And what about WA8DED host mode for the TNC1? How does this fit > in with your > statement of 'nothing happened'? This was the only thing keeping the TNC1 > going for years after TAPR walked away from it. "TAPR" didn't walk away from it, but development by the original software team did stop due to unavailability of the development environment used to develop the original code. TAPR quite happily (and gratefully) distributed the WA8DED code for the TNC 1. I incorrectly said "nothing happened" but was thinking of AX.25 v2 with the TAPR user interface for the TNC 1. That never happened. > (In fact, it was the only way > to get AX.25 version 2.0 on the TNC1) Ron Raikes wrote a great set of code for the TNC-1. To my knowledge, it was an independent development and not based on the original TNC-1 source. But your point is taken, something did happen. > ...BTW, where on the web is the source [for the devmtr]? This was the > first I heard that the source was available for it. It is in the TAPR software library. (devmtr.sit) I don't know why it is compressed with Stuffit rather than ZIP... The QST article in Oct 1993 mentioned it was available, and I am sure (within the limits of my memory...) that it was mentioned in PSR. I don't have a copy of the kit manual any longer - it may have mentioned it as well. Regards, Lyle KK7P --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 17 17:24:20 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id RAA27856 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 17:24:16 -0600 (CST) From: "Lyle Johnson" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: TAPR in Europe. Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:23:20 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Hello Bob! > I hear that memory is the second thing to go. Will Heather > confirm this? Heather??? :-) > But this is not really a fair list you have given us. When the > TNC-2 was introduced and Howie limited distribution of the code... I was simply responding to the statement: "Owners may be able to enhance the performance of their hardware or software if they have access to sourcecode. Without it the progress of improvement stops. This seems to be much in evidence on TNCs." The implication is that TNCs not having open source limited improvements. My point was that the TNC-1 which had "open source" saw relatively little improvement. The WA8DED code was the big improvement, but I have no knowledge that Ron Raikes used the TNC-1 source code for that. In fact, he made a point of stating that the implementation was quite different, being based on 6809 assembly language and table lookup rather than Pascal and procedures. The fellow who did the KISS code didn't use the TNC-1 source either, as I recall from the comments in his source files. And that was a major software set used in numerous TNC-1s back in the heyday of KA9Q Net. The TNC-2, on the other hand, saw NETROM, TheNET, and other developments in the Amateur community, as well as all sorts of manufacturer's enhancements. And it was closed. As you say, Packet was in an explosive growth mode at the time. Not mentioned is that much of today's equipment is based on ASICs which we cannot buy, or FPGAs which also need to be "open" or the owner can't do much in the way of hardware improvements (well, modifications, they may not really be improvements). Maybe that is why I like my Elecraft K-2 so much (even if the PIC software is closed :-) Anyway, no biggie, just wanted to jump in and this comment seemed to be the invitation to do so :-) 73, Lyle KK7P --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 17 17:39:56 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id RAA28605 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 17:39:51 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: Tony Langdon To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE: TAPR in Europe. Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 10:39:06 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id RAA28605 > do. Back in 1999, I went to the national conference of the NZART (ARRL > for New Zealand) and spoke at their conference on APRS. I > then spent the > next couple of weeks doing another SEVEN talks on APRS arround the > country. Go to new Zealand now, and you will find one of the most > extensive national APRS networks in the world. People over > there are now > really into the mode. That is the power of marketing to ham radio That mirrors my IRLP experience. After setting up the first IRLP node in VK3, I have since done a total of 7 talks to radio clubs and 2 talks to computer groups. Of the ham clubs I've spoken to, more than half have their own system on the air, or are building/testing their system. Hams are as responsive to marketing as any segment of the population. As for APRS, I'm sold on that, just have to shoehorn it into an extremely "RF constrained" environment. Maybe I'll link to the packet network via 2.4 GHz SS :-) (actually, that idea's not as silly as it sounds, if I can get a ham mate up the road to run packet on VHF. :) ). --- Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 This correspondence is for the named person’s use only. It may contain confidential or legally privileged information or both. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of this correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 17 18:46:31 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id SAA01454 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 18:46:30 -0600 (CST) From: Jeff King To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:45:08 -0500 In-Reply-To: Subject: [ss] Re: TAPR in Europe. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Message-Id: Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id SAA01454 On Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:23:20 -0800, Lyle Johnson wrote: >The TNC-2, on the other hand, saw NETROM, TheNET, and other >developments in >the Amateur community, as well as all sorts of manufacturer's >enhancements. >And it was closed. Actually, this is not 100% correct. "TheNET" was a open source project. More importantly, and to Anthony's point, the only continued development we see in the TNC2 is in it's open source thread, that is, "TheNet", which spawned X1J, which spawned UiDigi, a APRS digi, whose development continues to this day. -Jeff --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 17 20:30:58 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id UAA05312 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:30:57 -0600 (CST) From: "Steven Bible" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: San Diego wireless net installs 72-mile, 2.4-GHz link Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:30:00 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Ouch! That really hurts! Guess I better withdraw to the other room and continue putting the DSP-10 kits together. Later everyone. - Steve N7HPR > -----Original Message----- > From: bounce-ss-5189@lists.tapr.org > [mailto:bounce-ss-5189@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of > Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com > Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 12:01 PM > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] Re: San Diego wireless net installs 72-mile, 2.4-GHz link > > > > > I can't believe the date on this post - server's not borken... > > Hey Mr. Steve Bible, we did that one to death weeks ago. > Were you not awake... read the archives before posting. > > Let's not restart the FCC vs. Ham vs. licence-free war. > We've poured many megabits over that fire already. > > It was reported the link has now been taken down. > > > I'm quite conscious I'm flaming a TAPR director... > You gotta love 'em, haven't you! > Welcome Steve, I'm sure you're a nice chap. Nice > to see Steve and Daryl involved in the lists. I commend > Daryl for communicating effectively with members. > And potential members. I will join, honest guv! > > Ant M1FDE > > > > (left hand this is right hand, over!) > > . . . . > > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: n7hpr@tapr.org > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 17 21:33:46 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id VAA07602 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 21:33:45 -0600 (CST) From: "Stephen Nichols" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] FCC allowing longer range ? Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:33:09 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4920.2300 Importance: Normal List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk http://www.commsdesign.com/news/OEG20021104S0025 http://www.businesswire.com/cgi-bin/f_headline.cgi?bw.121602/223500131 --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 17 22:33:33 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id WAA09978 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 22:33:33 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:43:13 -0800 From: Mark Bender X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: San Diego wireless net installs 72-mile, 2.4-GHz link References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3DFFFCE1.90859EB5@ix.netcom.com> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Steve, Are there more kits available, or are those kits already spoken for ? (Is this round 2?) Mark Steven Bible wrote: > Ouch! That really hurts! > > Guess I better withdraw to the other room and continue putting the DSP-10 > kits together. > > Later everyone. > > - Steve N7HPR > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: bounce-ss-5189@lists.tapr.org > > [mailto:bounce-ss-5189@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of > > Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com > > Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 12:01 PM > > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > > Subject: [ss] Re: San Diego wireless net installs 72-mile, 2.4-GHz link > > > > > > > > > > I can't believe the date on this post - server's not borken... > > > > Hey Mr. Steve Bible, we did that one to death weeks ago. > > Were you not awake... read the archives before posting. > > > > Let's not restart the FCC vs. Ham vs. licence-free war. > > We've poured many megabits over that fire already. > > > > It was reported the link has now been taken down. > > > > > > I'm quite conscious I'm flaming a TAPR director... > > You gotta love 'em, haven't you! > > Welcome Steve, I'm sure you're a nice chap. Nice > > to see Steve and Daryl involved in the lists. I commend > > Daryl for communicating effectively with members. > > And potential members. I will join, honest guv! > > > > Ant M1FDE > > > > > > > (left hand this is right hand, over!) > > > > . . . . > > > > > > > > > > --- > > You are currently subscribed to ss as: n7hpr@tapr.org > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: mbender@ix.netcom.com > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 17 22:48:07 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id WAA11018 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2002 22:48:05 -0600 (CST) Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 22:48:10 -0600 From: Steve Subject: [ss] DSP-10 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Importance: Normal X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-priority: Normal List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <001e01c2a650$aa82f9a0$6501a8c0@steve> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk It's hard to say as the website only says "Sold Out" and no other information has been posted including that they are doing a second run. I guess that it is an early XMAS present that they don't want to tell us about. 73, Steve KA5YFC > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Bender > > Steve, > > Are there more kits available, or are those kits already spoken for ? > (Is this round 2?) > > Mark > > Steven Bible wrote: > > > Guess I better withdraw to the other room and continue putting > the DSP-10 > > kits together. > > > > Later everyone. > > > > - Steve N7HPR --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 18 00:27:34 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id AAA14885 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 00:27:33 -0600 (CST) From: "Steven Bible" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE: DSP-10 (was: San Diego wireless...) Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 23:25:41 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Gee, it just never stops, does it. Yes, the announcement was made on the DSP-10 list. Yes, the TAPR web page says to email me if you are interested in a DSP-10 kit so that we could decide on doing a second kitting. Yes, the response was overwhelming, I have had over 200 requests and they still keep coming in. Yes, we started a second kitting based on the responses. Yes, we have been in the mist of a second kitting for several months now. What few kits are left will be sold first on a first come first serve basis. If you would like a kit, I suggest that you email me indicating your request. I'll put you in the queue. No, the web pages are not updated. And the reason is very simple, there is no time. The number of active volunteers has fallen to a handful. The amount of work that needs to be done has grown. What is needed is active volunteers to help with the multitude of administrative chores. And a little moral support wouldn't hurt either :-). - Steve N7HPR > -----Original Message----- > From: bounce-ss-5189@lists.tapr.org > [mailto:bounce-ss-5189@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of Steve > Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 9:48 PM > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] DSP-10 > > > > > It's hard to say as the website only says "Sold Out" and no other > information has been posted including that they are doing a second run. I > guess that it is an early XMAS present that they don't want to tell us > about. > > 73, > Steve > KA5YFC > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Mark Bender > > > > Steve, > > > > Are there more kits available, or are those kits already spoken for ? > > (Is this round 2?) > > > > Mark > > > > Steven Bible wrote: > > > > > Guess I better withdraw to the other room and continue putting > > the DSP-10 > > > kits together. > > > > > > Later everyone. > > > > > > - Steve N7HPR > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: n7hpr@tapr.org > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 18 01:39:41 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id BAA17360 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 01:39:02 -0600 (CST) X-Originating-IP: [12.111.229.199] Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "John Champa" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] New Webpage - SS on 2437 MHz Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 02:36:48 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Dec 2002 07:36:48.0792 (UTC) FILETIME=[394C8180:01C2A668] List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Gentlemen: Much worthwhile and enjoyable discussion here this time around! If you haven't check it out yet, please take a look at the new HSMM webpage: www.arrl.org/hsmm and let us know of any suggested improvements. All constructive comments are welcomed. Thanks, John - K8OCL From: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group digest" Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" To: "ss digest recipients" Subject: ss digest: December 17, 2002 Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 00:00:34 -0500 TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Digest for Tuesday, December 17, 2002. 1. RE: HTML Messages.... 2. Re: Powerpoint Viewer 3. Re: Military application of 802.11b - long links 4. Re: San Diego wireless net installs 72-mile, 2.4-GHz link 5. Re: TAPR in Europe. 6. Re: TAPR in Europe. 7. Re: TAPR in Europe. 8. Re: TAPR in Europe. 9. Re: TAPR in Europe. 10. Re: TAPR in Europe. 11. RE: TAPR in Europe. 12. Re: TAPR in Europe. 13. Re: San Diego wireless net installs 72-mile, 2.4-GHz link 14. FCC allowing longer range ? 15. Re: San Diego wireless net installs 72-mile, 2.4-GHz link 16. DSP-10 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: HTML Messages.... From: Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:23:09 +0000 X-Message-Number: 1 > Hmm, maybe this has a technical solution. TAPR runs the list server, > doesn't it? I've been playing around with an email proxy called > MessageWall. Among many other features, it has the ability to strip HTML > from emails If you do this, make sure it correctly adjusts the headers to match. I've had problems with messages from listservs that strip HTML and yet leave "content-type" as multipart/mime etc. Lotus Notes vehemently objects to this error. Consequence you don't get to see the post. Ant ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Powerpoint Viewer From: Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 11:30:21 +0000 X-Message-Number: 2 Do you want me to convert the .ppt to a .pdf file - I did that for someone 2 days ago. The result was 50% smaller too. It's as simple as printing it (in powerpoint or powerpoint viewer or your fave Unix office package) to a PDF writer device. It has the convenient side-effect of stripping those silly animations. Ant ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Military application of 802.11b - long links From: Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 18:29:16 +0000 X-Message-Number: 3 > 9. But if we run TCP so that we are sure of getting the data off, that > requires an ACK at IP level, with a lot of negotiation in order to > change direction. I would guess that adding TCP ack would add a minimum > 4-6 mSec, making the throughput much lower. Multiple packets may be sent before acks are received in TCP. It doesn't wait for individual packets to be acked. Packets are acked by number and the quantity that can be "in transit" depends on the window size. TCP acks will consume some time on the link. They are short packets but framing overhead is high. It's a pity 802.11 can't send multiple short IP packets in one burst with one sync preamble and ack overhead. Another failing of 802.11 / AX.25 ... but 802.11 does provide some help. "negotiation" isn't required to change direction; Turnround time for an 802.11 ack is small; turnround time for TCP-ack will be slightly higher but not much. Lots of contention may be required! What will happen is that one end will be firing traffic packets while the other end is trying to get TCP-acks back, so both ends contend at each packet for the right to transmit. With long link delays, that contention phase will "fight" for a long time before it's resolved who won. If the stations opt to use the "ack+data" packet then the contention would be avoided, and turnrounds minimised. The TCP-ack sneaks in with the 802.11 ack, which is in in turn acked with the next traffic packet. CF-time is continually extended and no contention occurs. The 802.11 acks almost vanish from the link. (hey - AX.25 sux). Use of the full gamut of 802.11 packet types isn't compulsory; a working implementation can be built without. Performance would therefore be implementation-dependent. This is one reason I'd like people to post packet-sniffer dumps on the net (naming the firmware/software involved) so we can see which implementations are good and which aren't. Implementations that make maximum use of bandwidth-saving protocol elements being "good". Ant ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: San Diego wireless net installs 72-mile, 2.4-GHz link From: Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:01:09 +0000 X-Message-Number: 4 I can't believe the date on this post - server's not borken... Hey Mr. Steve Bible, we did that one to death weeks ago. Were you not awake... read the archives before posting. Let's not restart the FCC vs. Ham vs. licence-free war. We've poured many megabits over that fire already. It was reported the link has now been taken down. I'm quite conscious I'm flaming a TAPR director... You gotta love 'em, haven't you! Welcome Steve, I'm sure you're a nice chap. Nice to see Steve and Daryl involved in the lists. I commend Daryl for communicating effectively with members. And potential members. I will join, honest guv! Ant M1FDE > (left hand this is right hand, over!) . . . . ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: TAPR in Europe. From: Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:38:10 +0000 X-Message-Number: 5 > I hope this helps people to know where TAPR fits in... Thanks Daryl. Pehaps I needed a history lesson. But I suppose each project is different. In future we should consider amateur's "right" or "duty" to experiment in the way we licence IPR or make use of other's IPR. The purpose of amateur radio is an important part of the licence - no less important than all those other rules and regs we must follow by law. Owners may be able to enhance the performance of their hardware or software if they have access to sourcecode. Without it the progress of improvement stops. This seems to be much in evidence on TNCs. It's important for training & education that hams have access to the codebase and development tools to build it. ie. learn by taking it apart and putting it back together again. Change something and see what happens. Making designs freely available to hams doesn't stop TAPR also making money from businesses who wish to manufacture kits or pre-built units. Is there a web-page of help on TAPR IPR? Don't like legalese but I've got a contract of employment to think about. I'm not allowed to do similar work for other companies, but I can't see why I can't do it for myself and give it away... Aside: It's just occurred to me that you could now build a tiny linux-based TNC with about 7 chips. Just looking at the Samsung processors... S3C4530A - ARM7, Ethernet, HDLC, UART, I2C (208QFP) S3C2500 - ditto + ARM9, USB, PCI/Cardbus (272PBGA) HDLC ctrlr is fully-featured with DPLL and DMA BSP (board support package) for uClinux. It seems synonymous with a platform for a Linux- based AP. Current Linux-AP platforms aren't capable of 54Mb/s; one based on S3C2500 would fix that - it has 133MHz CPU, cardbus and 100baseT. But I can't solder BGAs. If TAPR built them, how many do you think we could sell to WLAN-networkers the world over who adore Linux? LOADS. Would they join TAPR? YES. Using the evalboard circuit it's low risk design. We could expect help from people on the OpenAP-dev list to do the software; they are desperate for a platform like this. Ant M1FDE ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: TAPR in Europe. From: "Lyle Johnson" Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 12:18:21 -0800 X-Message-Number: 6 > Owners may be able to enhance the performance of > their hardware or software if they have access to > sourcecode. Without it the progress of improvement > stops. This seems to be much in evidence on TNCs. The source code to the TAPR TNC 1 was made available upon written request back in 1983. Nothing happened. Bob Richardson published source code for TNC's in his books "Packet Radio: The Software Approach" back in the early 1980s. Nothing happened. The TNC 2 source code was only made available to OEMs; it was not relased to the general Amateur population. It evolved into numerous verisons and variants. A lot happened. The source code to the TAPR Deviation Meter was openly published in the TAPR Software Library and later on the web. Nothing happened. Access to source code for embedded devices is a Good Thing, but it doesn't necessarily follow that improvements will come if the source is available, or that lack of it prevents innovation and improvement. Enjoy! Lyle KK7P (Note that I am a proponent of open source in so far as it is practical to make it open. But I am also a proponent of the right of the author to withold the source if he so chooses...) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: TAPR in Europe. From: Jeff King Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 16:29:13 -0500 X-Message-Number: 7 On Tue, 17 Dec 2002 12:18:21 -0800, Lyle Johnson wrote: >>Owners may be able to enhance the performance of >>their hardware or software if they have access to >>sourcecode. Without it the progress of improvement >>stops. This seems to be much in evidence on TNCs. >The source code to the TAPR TNC 1 was made available upon= written >request back in 1983. Nothing happened. Was this made public? About a year before my time, but first I= heard of it. I do see the schematics on the TAPR web site, but no software.= And open source doesn't require that the source be requested in writing= with conditions. If there are conditions, it is not open source. And what about WA8DED host mode for the TNC1? How does this fit= in with your statement of 'nothing happened'? This was the only thing keeping= the TNC1 going for years after TAPR walked away from it (In fact, it was= the only way to get AX.25 version 2.0 on the TNC1) >Bob Richardson published source code for TNC's in his books= "Packet >Radio: >The Software Approach" back in the early 1980s. Nothing= happened. This is not my memory at all. Many of the early commodore C-64= versions of bit banging TNC's cite this as a reference, as well as the later= Baycom modems. Far from 'nothing happened', Bob's paper was the= conception of almost every software TNC on the market. >The source code to the TAPR Deviation Meter was openly published= in >the TAPR Software Library and later on the web. Nothing= happened. Depends on your perspective. Have you heard of TheNET X1J? It= incorporated some of your deviation meter ideas, but instead of a one on one= device, it was a one on many device. The actual TNC itself read the= deviation and could report it back to the station that was querying for deviation.= Paccomm and MFJ were/are selling the A/D adapter boards. Sometimes open= source is also known as open ideas/improvements, and in that regards, I would= take your deviation meter as a rousing success. BTW, where on the web is the source? This was the first I heard= that the source was available for it. But I'd be more interested in seeing the source/IP for the TAPR= spread spectrum radio. Any clues on if and when that will ever be= released as open source? I'm looking for some frequency hopping code to play with= on a PIC. 73 Jeff ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: TAPR in Europe. From: Robert McGwier Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 17:11:34 -0500 X-Message-Number: 8 Lyle: I hear that memory is the second thing to go. Will Heather confirm this? WA8DED gave us AX25 v 2 for TNC-1 using the published code. But this is not really a fair list you have given us. When the TNC-2 was introduced and Howie limited distribution of the code, we were in the explosive growth period of packet radio, it was cheaper to manufacture the TNC-2, it drew less power, and on and on. The demand for the TNC-2 is what led to innovation on the part of the manufacturers. Frankly, I just can't see how there was ever going to be a great demand for the deviation meter. I never owned one. I just played with it until it sounded right on a receiver outside the near field ;-). I agree with your statement that embedded devices code do not seem to lead to a lot. I think this has more to do with return on investment after the original inner circle has milked it to death. Bob N4HY -----Original Message----- From: bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org [mailto:bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of Lyle Johnson Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 3:18 PM To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Subject: [ss] Re: TAPR in Europe. > Owners may be able to enhance the performance of > their hardware or software if they have access to > sourcecode. Without it the progress of improvement > stops. This seems to be much in evidence on TNCs. The source code to the TAPR TNC 1 was made available upon written request back in 1983. Nothing happened. Bob Richardson published source code for TNC's in his books "Packet Radio: The Software Approach" back in the early 1980s. Nothing happened. The TNC 2 source code was only made available to OEMs; it was not relased to the general Amateur population. It evolved into numerous verisons and variants. A lot happened. The source code to the TAPR Deviation Meter was openly published in the TAPR Software Library and later on the web. Nothing happened. Access to source code for embedded devices is a Good Thing, but it doesn't necessarily follow that improvements will come if the source is available, or that lack of it prevents innovation and improvement. Enjoy! Lyle KK7P (Note that I am a proponent of open source in so far as it is practical to make it open. But I am also a proponent of the right of the author to withold the source if he so chooses...) --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: rwmcgwier@comcast.net To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: TAPR in Europe. From: "Lyle Johnson" Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:08:32 -0800 X-Message-Number: 9 Hello Jeff! > >The source code to the TAPR TNC 1 was made available upon written > >request back in 1983. Nothing happened. > > Was this made public? It wasn't a secret, and I was taken to task about it in an Amateur publication in Australia in 1984, so I suspect it was pretty public :-) > I do see the schematics on the TAPR web site, but no software. And open > source doesn't require that the source be requested in writing with > conditions. If there are conditions, it is not open source. I wasn't refering to "Open Source Movememnt" but open in the sense of English, in that it wasn't closed and you could easily get it. For me, that is open. I don't know of any conditions on use the TNC 1 code. The authors just wanted to know who wanted it, not to prevent it from being used. > And what about WA8DED host mode for the TNC1? How does this fit > in with your > statement of 'nothing happened'? This was the only thing keeping the TNC1 > going for years after TAPR walked away from it. "TAPR" didn't walk away from it, but development by the original software team did stop due to unavailability of the development environment used to develop the original code. TAPR quite happily (and gratefully) distributed the WA8DED code for the TNC 1. I incorrectly said "nothing happened" but was thinking of AX.25 v2 with the TAPR user interface for the TNC 1. That never happened. > (In fact, it was the only way > to get AX.25 version 2.0 on the TNC1) Ron Raikes wrote a great set of code for the TNC-1. To my knowledge, it was an independent development and not based on the original TNC-1 source. But your point is taken, something did happen. > ...BTW, where on the web is the source [for the devmtr]? This was the > first I heard that the source was available for it. It is in the TAPR software library. (devmtr.sit) I don't know why it is compressed with Stuffit rather than ZIP... The QST article in Oct 1993 mentioned it was available, and I am sure (within the limits of my memory...) that it was mentioned in PSR. I don't have a copy of the kit manual any longer - it may have mentioned it as well. Regards, Lyle KK7P ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: TAPR in Europe. From: "Lyle Johnson" Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:23:20 -0800 X-Message-Number: 10 Hello Bob! > I hear that memory is the second thing to go. Will Heather > confirm this? Heather??? :-) > But this is not really a fair list you have given us. When the > TNC-2 was introduced and Howie limited distribution of the code... I was simply responding to the statement: "Owners may be able to enhance the performance of their hardware or software if they have access to sourcecode. Without it the progress of improvement stops. This seems to be much in evidence on TNCs." The implication is that TNCs not having open source limited improvements. My point was that the TNC-1 which had "open source" saw relatively little improvement. The WA8DED code was the big improvement, but I have no knowledge that Ron Raikes used the TNC-1 source code for that. In fact, he made a point of stating that the implementation was quite different, being based on 6809 assembly language and table lookup rather than Pascal and procedures. The fellow who did the KISS code didn't use the TNC-1 source either, as I recall from the comments in his source files. And that was a major software set used in numerous TNC-1s back in the heyday of KA9Q Net. The TNC-2, on the other hand, saw NETROM, TheNET, and other developments in the Amateur community, as well as all sorts of manufacturer's enhancements. And it was closed. As you say, Packet was in an explosive growth mode at the time. Not mentioned is that much of today's equipment is based on ASICs which we cannot buy, or FPGAs which also need to be "open" or the owner can't do much in the way of hardware improvements (well, modifications, they may not really be improvements). Maybe that is why I like my Elecraft K-2 so much (even if the PIC software is closed :-) Anyway, no biggie, just wanted to jump in and this comment seemed to be the invitation to do so :-) 73, Lyle KK7P ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: TAPR in Europe. From: Tony Langdon Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 10:39:06 +1100 X-Message-Number: 11 > do. Back in 1999, I went to the national conference of the NZART = (ARRL > for New Zealand) and spoke at their conference on APRS. I=20 > then spent the > next couple of weeks doing another SEVEN talks on APRS arround the > country. Go to new Zealand now, and you will find one of the most > extensive national APRS networks in the world. People over=20 > there are now > really into the mode. That is the power of marketing to ham radio That mirrors my IRLP experience. After setting up the first IRLP node = in VK3, I have since done a total of 7 talks to radio clubs and 2 talks to computer groups. Of the ham clubs I've spoken to, more than half have = their own system on the air, or are building/testing their system. Hams are = as responsive to marketing as any segment of the population. As for APRS, = I'm sold on that, just have to shoehorn it into an extremely "RF = constrained" environment. Maybe I'll link to the packet network via 2.4 GHz SS :-) (actually, that idea's not as silly as it sounds, if I can get a ham = mate up the road to run packet on VHF. :) ). --- Outgoing mail has been scanned for Viruses Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.427 / Virus Database: 240 - Release Date: 6/12/2002 =20 This correspondence is for the named person=92s use only. It may = contain confidential or legally privileged information or both. No = confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive = this correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system = and notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of = this correspondence if you are not the intended recipient. Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual = sender. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: TAPR in Europe. From: Jeff King Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:45:08 -0500 X-Message-Number: 12 On Tue, 17 Dec 2002 15:23:20 -0800, Lyle Johnson wrote: >The TNC-2, on the other hand, saw NETROM, TheNET, and other >developments in >the Amateur community, as well as all sorts of manufacturer's >enhancements. >And it was closed. Actually, this is not 100% correct. "TheNET" was a open source= project. More importantly, and to Anthony's point, the only continued= development we see in the TNC2 is in it's open source thread, that is, "TheNet", which= spawned X1J, which spawned UiDigi, a APRS digi, whose development continues to= this day. -Jeff ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: San Diego wireless net installs 72-mile, 2.4-GHz link From: "Steven Bible" Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:30:00 -0700 X-Message-Number: 13 Ouch! That really hurts! Guess I better withdraw to the other room and continue putting the DSP-10 kits together. Later everyone. - Steve N7HPR > -----Original Message----- > From: bounce-ss-5189@lists.tapr.org > [mailto:bounce-ss-5189@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of > Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com > Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 12:01 PM > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] Re: San Diego wireless net installs 72-mile, 2.4-GHz link > > > > > I can't believe the date on this post - server's not borken... > > Hey Mr. Steve Bible, we did that one to death weeks ago. > Were you not awake... read the archives before posting. > > Let's not restart the FCC vs. Ham vs. licence-free war. > We've poured many megabits over that fire already. > > It was reported the link has now been taken down. > > > I'm quite conscious I'm flaming a TAPR director... > You gotta love 'em, haven't you! > Welcome Steve, I'm sure you're a nice chap. Nice > to see Steve and Daryl involved in the lists. I commend > Daryl for communicating effectively with members. > And potential members. I will join, honest guv! > > Ant M1FDE > > > > (left hand this is right hand, over!) > > . . . . > > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: n7hpr@tapr.org > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: FCC allowing longer range ? From: "Stephen Nichols" Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:33:09 -0700 X-Message-Number: 14 http://www.commsdesign.com/news/OEG20021104S0025 http://www.businesswire.com/cgi-bin/f_headline.cgi?bw.121602/223500131 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: San Diego wireless net installs 72-mile, 2.4-GHz link From: Mark Bender Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:43:13 -0800 X-Message-Number: 15 Steve, Are there more kits available, or are those kits already spoken for ? (Is this round 2?) Mark Steven Bible wrote: > Ouch! That really hurts! > > Guess I better withdraw to the other room and continue putting the DSP-10 > kits together. > > Later everyone. > > - Steve N7HPR > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: bounce-ss-5189@lists.tapr.org > > [mailto:bounce-ss-5189@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of > > Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com > > Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 12:01 PM > > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > > Subject: [ss] Re: San Diego wireless net installs 72-mile, 2.4-GHz link > > > > > > > > > > I can't believe the date on this post - server's not borken... > > > > Hey Mr. Steve Bible, we did that one to death weeks ago. > > Were you not awake... read the archives before posting. > > > > Let's not restart the FCC vs. Ham vs. licence-free war. > > We've poured many megabits over that fire already. > > > > It was reported the link has now been taken down. > > > > > > I'm quite conscious I'm flaming a TAPR director... > > You gotta love 'em, haven't you! > > Welcome Steve, I'm sure you're a nice chap. Nice > > to see Steve and Daryl involved in the lists. I commend > > Daryl for communicating effectively with members. > > And potential members. I will join, honest guv! > > > > Ant M1FDE > > > > > > > (left hand this is right hand, over!) > > > > . . . . > > > > > > > > > > --- > > You are currently subscribed to ss as: n7hpr@tapr.org > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: mbender@ix.netcom.com > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: DSP-10 From: Steve Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 22:48:10 -0600 X-Message-Number: 16 It's hard to say as the website only says "Sold Out" and no other information has been posted including that they are doing a second run. I guess that it is an early XMAS present that they don't want to tell us about. 73, Steve KA5YFC > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Bender > > Steve, > > Are there more kits available, or are those kits already spoken for ? > (Is this round 2?) > > Mark > > Steven Bible wrote: > > > Guess I better withdraw to the other room and continue putting > the DSP-10 > > kits together. > > > > Later everyone. > > > > - Steve N7HPR --- END OF DIGEST --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: k8ocl@hotmail.com To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org _________________________________________________________________ Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 18 04:11:22 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id EAA22955 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 04:11:21 -0600 (CST) From: "Darryl Smith" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE: FCC allowing longer range ? Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 21:09:55 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Scanner: exiscan *18Ob9k-0007pu-00*h2QiMgFBWAU* on Astaro Security Linux List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <045b01c2a67d$9ff372d0$4601a8c0@DELL8000> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Well... The way I read the information on the Vivato stuff is that they have worked out how to have a antenna that they can direct into a tight beam electronically. Really it is not hard to get that sort of thing approved. I believe that the FCC have approved DISH antennas that get that sort of range (4 miles OUTDOORS, not 4 miles to INDOORS as mentioned on another mailing list). Think of this device as a DISH that is electrically steerable rather than mechanically steerable with a man and tilt controller. As for the electronics in this device, think of it as a KISS modem rather than a full TNC.... Darryl P.s. I hope they attempt to patent bits of it... It would be good for the DCC proceedings to be used for the source of another patent being cancelled :-) --------- Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 18 07:22:15 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id HAA27296 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 07:22:15 -0600 (CST) Subject: [ss] Diplexer filters for 2.4GHz To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:21:54 +0000 Message-ID: X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on mgeg01/S/EXT/MM1(Release 5.0.10 |March 22, 2002) at 12/18/2002 02:20:35 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Does anyone know of any off-the-shelf filters that split the 2.4-2.485GHz band in two? Any suppliers that could make them quickly? This is a commercial request. I know 5 metres of fresh air between the antennas would do fine, but in this application they must be on the same box. Ant M1FDE --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 18 07:37:41 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id HAA27841 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 07:37:40 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: "jeff millar" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: Diplexer filters for 2.4GHz Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 08:37:00 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <00bf01c2a69a$8b174e50$6a01a8c0@wa1hco> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Clearcom ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 8:21 AM Subject: [ss] Diplexer filters for 2.4GHz > Does anyone know of any off-the-shelf filters that split the > 2.4-2.485GHz band in two? Any suppliers that could make > them quickly? > > This is a commercial request. I know 5 metres of fresh air > between the antennas would do fine, but in this application > they must be on the same box. > > Ant M1FDE > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: JEFF@WA1HCO.MV.COM > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 18 10:17:54 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id KAA03525 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 10:17:53 -0600 (CST) Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Subject: [ss] RE: FCC allowing longer range ? X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 11:17:18 -0500 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [ss] RE: FCC allowing longer range ? Thread-Index: AcKmfchRl1TDROsiRVSWDE1+iNRz5gAlg/YQ From: "Hare,Ed, W1RFI" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <721D3436A7C2B344A301FD4A413C71A96ED14F@kosh.ARRLHQ.ORG> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id KAA03525 73, Ed Hare, W1RFI ARRL Lab 225 Main St Newington, CT 06111 Tel: 860-594-0318 Internet: w1rfi@arrl.org Web: http://www.arrl.org/tis ARRL is the National Association for Amateur Radio. It is supported by membership dues, individual contributions and the sale of publications and advertising. For more information about ARRL, go to http://www.arrl.org/news/features/inside-your-league.html. For more information about membership, go to http://www.arrl.org/join.html. Your contribution can also help support ARRL's ongoing efforts to protect Amateur spectrum. Go to https://www.arrl.org/forms/development/donations/basic/ to learn more about the ways you can support the ARRL programs and activities of most importance to you. You can help ARRL protect Amateur Radio for you and future generations to enjoy. > -----Original Message----- > From: Darryl Smith [mailto:Darryl@radio-active.net.au] > Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 5:10 AM > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] RE: FCC allowing longer range ? > > > Well... > > The way I read the information on the Vivato stuff is that they have > worked out how to have a antenna that they can direct into a > tight beam > electronically. Really it is not hard to get that sort of thing > approved. > > I believe that the FCC have approved DISH antennas that get > that sort of > range (4 miles OUTDOORS, not 4 miles to INDOORS as mentioned > on another > mailing list). Think of this device as a DISH that is electrically > steerable rather than mechanically steerable with a man and tilt > controller. > > As for the electronics in this device, think of it as a KISS modem > rather than a full TNC.... > > Darryl > > P.s. I hope they attempt to patent bits of it... It would be good for > the DCC proceedings to be used for the source of another patent being > cancelled :-) > > --------- > Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia > Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] > Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: W1RFI@ARRL.ORG > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 18 10:24:45 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id KAA03794 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 10:24:42 -0600 (CST) Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Subject: [ss] RE: FCC allowing longer range ? X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 11:23:42 -0500 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [ss] RE: FCC allowing longer range ? Thread-Index: AcKmfchRl1TDROsiRVSWDE1+iNRz5gAlg0ag From: "Hare,Ed, W1RFI" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <721D3436A7C2B344A301FD4A413C71A9ADF388@kosh.ARRLHQ.ORG> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id KAA03794 > The way I read the information on the Vivato stuff is that they have > worked out how to have a antenna that they can direct into a > tight beam electronically. Really it is not hard to get that sort of thing > approved. Sorry about the blank post -- and the commerical. One click too many and away it goes. :-) I usually remember to trim my sig for my posts to reflectors. The Part 15 rules permit a maximum of 1W for SS devices. On 2.4 GHz, the antenna gain can be up to 6 dBi with no power reduction. The power must be reduced by 1 dB for every 3 dB that the antenna gain exceeds 6 dBi. On the 5 GHz Part 15 bands, there is no requirement to reduce power for increased antenna gain. 73, Ed Hare, W1RFI ARRL Lab 225 Main St Newington, CT 06111 Tel: 860-594-0318 Internet: w1rfi@arrl.org Web: http://www.arrl.org/tis > -----Original Message----- > From: Darryl Smith [mailto:Darryl@radio-active.net.au] > Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 5:10 AM > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] RE: FCC allowing longer range ? > > > Well... > > The way I read the information on the Vivato stuff is that they have > worked out how to have a antenna that they can direct into a > tight beam > electronically. Really it is not hard to get that sort of thing > approved. > > I believe that the FCC have approved DISH antennas that get > that sort of > range (4 miles OUTDOORS, not 4 miles to INDOORS as mentioned > on another > mailing list). Think of this device as a DISH that is electrically > steerable rather than mechanically steerable with a man and tilt > controller. > > As for the electronics in this device, think of it as a KISS modem > rather than a full TNC.... > > Darryl > > P.s. I hope they attempt to patent bits of it... It would be good for > the DCC proceedings to be used for the source of another patent being > cancelled :-) > > --------- > Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia > Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] > Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: W1RFI@ARRL.ORG > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 18 11:22:59 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id LAA05908 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 11:22:57 -0600 (CST) From: "Steve Stroh" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE: FCC allowing longer range ? Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 09:20:44 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Darryl: What Vivato has developed is called a Phased Array Antenna, using Wi-Fi gear as the Customer Premise Equipment (CPE). We've had PAA technology for some time, but Vivato is the first to marry it to Wi-Fi devices. In essence, the Vivato system is a Wi-Fi Access Point... with MUCH greater range. There are NUMEROUS long-range antennas approved by the FCC for 2.4 GHz - panel, yagi, "slotted" dish (barbeque grill), circular polarization, that can extend the range of 2.4 GHz devices to 20 miles (and more) pretty easily (and yes, quite legally as long as a particular antenna is certified in a system with a particular radio and/or amplifier combination.) Thanks, Steve -- Steve Stroh steve@strohpub.com 425-481-0600 Editor - FOCUS on Broadband Wireless Internet Access newsletter http://www.strohpub.com/focus > -----Original Message----- > From: bounce-ss-24593@lists.tapr.org > [mailto:bounce-ss-24593@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of Darryl Smith > Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 02:10 > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] RE: FCC allowing longer range ? > > > Well... > > The way I read the information on the Vivato stuff is that they have > worked out how to have a antenna that they can direct into a tight beam > electronically. Really it is not hard to get that sort of thing > approved. > > I believe that the FCC have approved DISH antennas that get that sort of > range (4 miles OUTDOORS, not 4 miles to INDOORS as mentioned on another > mailing list). Think of this device as a DISH that is electrically > steerable rather than mechanically steerable with a man and tilt > controller. > > As for the electronics in this device, think of it as a KISS modem > rather than a full TNC.... > > Darryl > > P.s. I hope they attempt to patent bits of it... It would be good for > the DCC proceedings to be used for the source of another patent being > cancelled :-) > > --------- > Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia > Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] > Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: lists@strohpub.com > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 18 15:01:10 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id PAA14125 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 15:01:09 -0600 (CST) Subject: [ss] RE: FCC allowing longer range ? To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: Anthony.N.Martin@marconimobile.com Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 21:00:35 +0000 Message-ID: X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on mgeg01/S/EXT/MM1(Release 5.0.10 |March 22, 2002) at 12/18/2002 09:59:15 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Antenova antennas http://www.wordsun.com/photolibs/antenovaphotos.html Note the 5 sectored array for 5.8GHz WLAN. With 72 degree beamwidth horizontal and 20 degree in the vertical plane, you could compute the gain. My sperical geometry is a bit rusty but I make that 19.5dBi. Anyone like to check my maths? I don't think you need to invoke very complex RF assemblies like adaptive beamforming to get ranges like 4 miles outdoors from a well-placed access point; just sectorised panel antennas. Same as that used on every mobile phone base-station. No need for special Antenova dielectrics. Remember that important rule of advertising: "range" and "data rate" don't necessarily occur simultaneously! When we hear of phased arrays we immediately think of adaptive beamforming but a planar array of patch antennas is still a phased array when linked with fixed phasing lines to obtain a desired beam pattern. IMO that's all Vivato has. Flat panels were deployed by the now-defunct BSB satellite broadcaster in the UK over 10 years ago in the form of the "squarial". ie. they're competitive with dishes. They're a popular choice for WLL; I'm not sure what the merits are over yagis; just higher gain like dishes I suppose. You can hide a large electronics PCB on the back. Some pictures of the "squarial" and it's internal construction: http://www.whom.co.uk/grundig/bsb.htm The squarials were right-hand circular polarisation. The squarial seems to be making a UK resurgence in the form of 3.4GHz WISP "Squarial Wireless Broadband", and you can buy today's squarials for your DBS TV receiver. Ant --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From max9249@ampire.com.tw Wed Dec 18 15:23:39 2002 Received: from correoservidor.ugm.edu.mx (na-207-249-156-33.na.avantel.net.mx [207.249.156.33] (may be forged)) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with ESMTP id PAA15024; Wed, 18 Dec 2002 15:23:36 -0600 (CST) Received: from mail-fwd.hostcenter.com ([81.72.198.98]) by correoservidor.ugm.edu.mx with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:46:51 -0600 Message-ID: <000025840646$000010ae$0000558e@mail-relay.eunet.se> To: From: "Telcom center" Subject: Pay nothing for your conference calls! Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 11:48:58 -2000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Dec 2002 19:46:53.0687 (UTC) FILETIME=[370D0870:01C2A6CE]

Compare What Yo= u Pay For Conference Calls
We Only Charge <= u>15 Cents Per Minute!

(INCLUDES LONG DISTA= NCE)
  • No setup fees
  • No contracts or monthly fees
  • Call anytime, from anywhere, to anywhere
  • Connects up to 100 Participants
  • Simplicity in set up and administration
  • Operator Help available 24/7
  • Account Approval Required

    • Use Our Crystal Clear Conferencing Service
    to Manage Your Long Distan= ce Meetings.
    Fill out the form below and a representative
    will contact you with more information.

    Required Input Field*

    Name*
    Web Address
    Company Name
    State*
    Business Phone*
    Home Phone
    Email Address*
    Type of Business



    We are strongly against sending unsolicited emails to those who do not wish to receive our mailings. We have attained the servi= ces of an independent 3rd party to overlook list management and removal services. To be removed from our list, send an e-mail to remove@virtu= al-biz.net with the word "remove" in the subject line.
    From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Dec 20 05:14:23 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id FAA04186 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 05:14:20 -0600 (CST) From: "Darryl Smith" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Antennas in the real world. Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 22:13:05 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Scanner: exiscan *18PL5k-0000ae-00*yUSS/XESosU* on Astaro Security Linux List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <058501c2a818$c8320d00$4601a8c0@DELL8000> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk >From wireless@lists.samba.org Well, I ran around with two HUGE quad helicals experimenting with antenna performance. On paper, the 4x28 turn monster was ~27dBi and the 4x17 turn ~24dBi. Paper is an exceptionally good propagation medium - I recommend it wholeheartedly. Unfortunately my radio waves had to get through air, rather than paper. Real world gain on the helicals was nothing like the paper gain. The original gain formulas published for helicals were too optomistic, and more modern formulas discount the gain by about 5dB. Less another 3dB if working circular polarisation into linear polarisation. Implementaion losses probably crept in here too, but I did spend quite a bit of time trying to get the helicals right. Test paths from Gungahlin to Black Mt and Gungahlin to Mt Ainslie came up OK. I built a pair of 123x123mm biquads with 30mm skirts, as described at http://www.trevormarshall.com/biquad.htm . These perform very well, and given the ease of construction, seem like an excellent choice for starting out. The biquads worked over the paths mentioned above too. They also occupy about 1/250th the volume of the helical arrays. I am taken by the slotted waveguides described at http://www.trevormarshall.com/waveguides.htm . By flattening the radiation pattern to a narrow area close to the horizon, these antennas give reasonable gain over 180 or 360 degrees (depending upon the design) WA FreeNet seems to be getting excellent results (25km paths between omnis!) out of similar designs. This morning I picked up the parts to make four 16 slot (or 16+16 slot) waveguides. Damage was around $150. The major construction challenge seems to be cutting rectangular holes in the aluminium. Has anyone got any tips for doing this? Alternately, a waveguide design that allows for slots with curved ends would be nice (easier to cut with a router) All tips and pointers gladly accepted! Lyle Williams VK1XLW --------- Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 21 05:25:25 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id FAA22274 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 05:25:24 -0600 (CST) X-Internal-ID: 3DF73BCC000C7817 From: "Marcelo Puhl" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 09:24:27 -0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [ss] Proxim Symphony Gateway and external antenna? Reply-to: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Message-ID: Priority: normal In-reply-to: References: Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-description: Mail message body List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: <3E04334B.7711.415CDDA@localhost> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Hi, Is there any description on how to connect an external antenna to a Proxim Symphony Gateway model 4930? Thanks. Mark - PY3SS --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sat Dec 21 13:31:12 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id NAA05255 for ; Sat, 21 Dec 2002 13:31:09 -0600 (CST) X-Originating-IP: [12.111.229.199] Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "John Champa" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Cc: Darryl@radio-active.net.au, k8it@cac.net, microwaves@amrad.org, n7hpr@tapr.org, rwmcgwier@comcast.net Subject: [ss] Slot Antenna for 2437 MHz SS Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 14:30:03 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Dec 2002 19:30:04.0703 (UTC) FILETIME=[5CE38AF0:01C2A927] List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Lyle, Neil, K8IT, built one of the Trevor Marshall design slot antennas for the Livingston County HSMM Experimenters Team. It seems to work exceptionally well, too. However, it took two tries. The first had a few cutting errors, plus the wrong alloy for proper cutting. We may have, or soon will, be posting details on the HSMM Webpage (www.arrl.org/hsmm). They're getting 25 km...hmmm, very impressive! Thanks, and 73 for wonderful holiday season, John Champa - K8OCL ARRL Chairman HSMM Working Group k8ocl@arrl.net From: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group digest" Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" To: "ss digest recipients" Subject: ss digest: December 20, 2002 Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 00:01:08 -0500 TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Digest for Friday, December 20, 2002. 1. Antennas in the real world. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Antennas in the real world. From: "Darryl Smith" Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 22:13:05 +1100 X-Message-Number: 1 >From wireless@lists.samba.org Well, I ran around with two HUGE quad helicals experimenting with antenna performance. On paper, the 4x28 turn monster was ~27dBi and the 4x17 turn ~24dBi. Paper is an exceptionally good propagation medium - I recommend it wholeheartedly. Unfortunately my radio waves had to get through air, rather than paper. Real world gain on the helicals was nothing like the paper gain. The original gain formulas published for helicals were too optomistic, and more modern formulas discount the gain by about 5dB. Less another 3dB if working circular polarisation into linear polarisation. Implementaion losses probably crept in here too, but I did spend quite a bit of time trying to get the helicals right. Test paths from Gungahlin to Black Mt and Gungahlin to Mt Ainslie came up OK. I built a pair of 123x123mm biquads with 30mm skirts, as described at http://www.trevormarshall.com/biquad.htm . These perform very well, and given the ease of construction, seem like an excellent choice for starting out. The biquads worked over the paths mentioned above too. They also occupy about 1/250th the volume of the helical arrays. I am taken by the slotted waveguides described at http://www.trevormarshall.com/waveguides.htm . By flattening the radiation pattern to a narrow area close to the horizon, these antennas give reasonable gain over 180 or 360 degrees (depending upon the design) WA FreeNet seems to be getting excellent results (25km paths between omnis!) out of similar designs. This morning I picked up the parts to make four 16 slot (or 16+16 slot) waveguides. Damage was around $150. The major construction challenge seems to be cutting rectangular holes in the aluminium. Has anyone got any tips for doing this? Alternately, a waveguide design that allows for slots with curved ends would be nice (easier to cut with a router) All tips and pointers gladly accepted! Lyle Williams VK1XLW --------- Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au --- END OF DIGEST --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: k8ocl@hotmail.com To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 3 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail&xAPID=42&PS=47575&PI=7324&DI=7474&SU= http://www.hotmail.msn.com/cgi-bin/getmsg&HL=1216hotmailtaglines_smartspamprotection_3mf --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sun Dec 22 03:00:36 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id DAA07613 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 03:00:31 -0600 (CST) X-Originating-IP: [12.111.229.199] Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "John Champa" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Cc: ekarlk@yahoo.com, mwilliams@esperion.com Subject: [ss] RIC Mod For External Antenna Jack Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 03:59:06 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Dec 2002 08:59:07.0035 (UTC) FILETIME=[625F96B0:01C2A998] List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Mark, Ernst, K8EK, with the Livingston County HSMM Experimenters Team has successfully installed an external antenna jack on what we call a RIC (Radio Interface Cards), known commercially as PCMCIA Wireless LAN Adaptor Cards. The gateways with integrated antennas have the same chip set, so the process should be similar. He may be able to help you with this modification. Mark, AB8LN, also on the same team, has explored the inner workings of a RIC, and he may have some helpful tips, too. I have cc'd them both. At the last team meeting, photos of these RIC internal (integrated) antennas were taken, so it shouldn't be too long before details of such mods will be available on the HSMM webpage (www.arrl.org/hsmm). Vy 73, John - K8OCL From: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group digest" Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" To: "ss digest recipients" Subject: ss digest: December 21, 2002 Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 00:00:25 -0500 TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Digest for Saturday, December 21, 2002. 1. Proxim Symphony Gateway and external antenna? 2. Slot Antenna for 2437 MHz SS ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Proxim Symphony Gateway and external antenna? From: "Marcelo Puhl" Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 09:24:27 -0200 X-Message-Number: 1 Hi, Is there any description on how to connect an external antenna to a Proxim Symphony Gateway model 4930? Thanks. Mark - PY3SS ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Slot Antenna for 2437 MHz SS From: "John Champa" Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 14:30:03 -0500 X-Message-Number: 2 Lyle, Neil, K8IT, built one of the Trevor Marshall design slot antennas for the Livingston County HSMM Experimenters Team. It seems to work exceptionally well, too. However, it took two tries. The first had a few cutting errors, plus the wrong alloy for proper cutting. We may have, or soon will, be posting details on the HSMM Webpage (www.arrl.org/hsmm). They're getting 25 km...hmmm, very impressive! Thanks, and 73 for wonderful holiday season, John Champa - K8OCL ARRL Chairman HSMM Working Group k8ocl@arrl.net From: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group digest" Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" To: "ss digest recipients" Subject: ss digest: December 20, 2002 Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 00:01:08 -0500 TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Digest for Friday, December 20, 2002. 1. Antennas in the real world. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Antennas in the real world. From: "Darryl Smith" Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 22:13:05 +1100 X-Message-Number: 1 >From wireless@lists.samba.org Well, I ran around with two HUGE quad helicals experimenting with antenna performance. On paper, the 4x28 turn monster was ~27dBi and the 4x17 turn ~24dBi. Paper is an exceptionally good propagation medium - I recommend it wholeheartedly. Unfortunately my radio waves had to get through air, rather than paper. Real world gain on the helicals was nothing like the paper gain. The original gain formulas published for helicals were too optomistic, and more modern formulas discount the gain by about 5dB. Less another 3dB if working circular polarisation into linear polarisation. Implementaion losses probably crept in here too, but I did spend quite a bit of time trying to get the helicals right. Test paths from Gungahlin to Black Mt and Gungahlin to Mt Ainslie came up OK. I built a pair of 123x123mm biquads with 30mm skirts, as described at http://www.trevormarshall.com/biquad.htm . These perform very well, and given the ease of construction, seem like an excellent choice for starting out. The biquads worked over the paths mentioned above too. They also occupy about 1/250th the volume of the helical arrays. I am taken by the slotted waveguides described at http://www.trevormarshall.com/waveguides.htm . By flattening the radiation pattern to a narrow area close to the horizon, these antennas give reasonable gain over 180 or 360 degrees (depending upon the design) WA FreeNet seems to be getting excellent results (25km paths between omnis!) out of similar designs. This morning I picked up the parts to make four 16 slot (or 16+16 slot) waveguides. Damage was around $150. The major construction challenge seems to be cutting rectangular holes in the aluminium. Has anyone got any tips for doing this? Alternately, a waveguide design that allows for slots with curved ends would be nice (easier to cut with a router) All tips and pointers gladly accepted! Lyle Williams VK1XLW --------- Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au --- END OF DIGEST --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: k8ocl@hotmail.com To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 3 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail&xAPID=42&PS=47575&PI=7324&DI=7474&SU= http://www.hotmail.msn.com/cgi-bin/getmsg&HL=1216hotmailtaglines_smartspamprotection_3mf --- END OF DIGEST --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: k8ocl@hotmail.com To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 3 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail&xAPID=42&PS=47575&PI=7324&DI=7474&SU= http://www.hotmail.msn.com/cgi-bin/getmsg&HL=1216hotmailtaglines_advancedjmf_3mf --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Sun Dec 22 21:57:17 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id VAA15454 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 21:57:15 -0600 (CST) From: "Stephen Nichols" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Linksys 802.11b signal amp Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 20:56:20 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4920.2300 Importance: Normal List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk http://www.linksys.com/splash/wsb24_splash.asp --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Mon Dec 23 13:09:28 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id NAA13463 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 13:09:26 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: "Pinfold" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: ASIAN 802.11b Bidirectional signal amp Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 08:06:42 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <000901c2aab6$6e77a5e0$2901a8c0@co.nz> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Anybody intrested in these Bidirectional power amps .... I would only bring in the 1W (+30dBm) unit,??? price is US $350 each ...... power up coax , Cheers MIKE ZL1BTB Asian data supplied Frequency Range 2400 ~ 2500 MHz Bi-Directional Tx/ Rx Signal Mode DSSS Switching Time < 1 micro Sec. < 2 micro Sec. Tx Power ( dBm ) 500 mW / + 27 dBm or 1 W / + 30dBm Tx input Power ( dBm ) 0 dBm ( Min. ) to 20 dBm ( Max. ) Receiver Gain ( dB ) 20 dB typical Max. Rx Input Power 5 dBm ( 3 mW ) Gain Flatness +/- 1 dB ( Over operating range ) Connector N Type Female for both side ( SMA is also available ) Lightning? static Protected 1/4 wave-length stub Supply Voltage DC 9 V Power Consumption 700 mA @ DC 9V 850 mA @ DC 9V Operating -30 deg C to + 70 deg C Weight 357.5 g Available in SMA and top mounted receive connector ! ----- Original Message ----- From: Stephen Nichols To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Sent: Monday, December 23, 2002 4:56 PM Subject: [ss] Linksys 802.11b signal amp > http://www.linksys.com/splash/wsb24_splash.asp > > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: PINFOLD@XTRA.CO.NZ > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Mon Dec 23 14:48:37 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id OAA16537 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 14:48:36 -0600 (CST) From: "Steve Stroh" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] FW: [IP] The Pedal Powered Internet Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 12:45:13 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Importance: Normal List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk >From Dave Farber's Interesting People (IP) mailing list. Thanks, Steve N8GNJ -- Steve Stroh steve@strohpub.com 425-481-0600 -----Original Message----- From: owner-ip@v2.listbox.com [mailto:owner-ip@v2.listbox.com]On Behalf Of Dave Farber Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2002 12:17 To: ip Subject: [IP] The Pedal Powered Internet ------ Forwarded Message From: "Lena M. Diethelm" Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 12:07:39 -0800 To: dave@farber.net, lena@numbershuffler.com Cc: lee@nerditude.com Subject: for IP-The Pedal Powered Internet Dave, Lee Felsenstein, MC of the Homebrew Computer Club and designer of the SOL-20 and Osborne 1, (full disclosure: my SO), sits on the other side of a wall of bookcases which separates my tax practice from his engineering shop, where, in the past year, he invented, designed and continues to develop the "Jhai Computer" mentioned in the NY Times Magazine article as one of the Best Ideas of 2002. (See www.jhai.org ). The backstory to this is fascinating. Once more connecting technology and the Vietnam War, the two Lees, (Felsenstein & Lee Thorn, chair of the Jhai Foundation), reconnected at the 30th Reunion of Project One (Felsenstein, see Steven Levy's book, _Hackers_ re: Project One) http://www.stanford.edu/group/mmdd/SiliconValley/Levy/Hackers.1984.book/Chap ter8. html which was held concurrently with a reunion of Vietnam Vets Against the War (Thorn). Long fascinated with strengthening and rebuilding villages in industrial society, Felsenstein, was immediately interested in connecting these Laotian villages to the Internet. Forget going "off the grid", these villages have never even been on the grid. The system had to be low cost since the villages and Jhai foundation had little money, waterproof due to high humidity and Monsoon Season and low maintenance. Satellite connection was quickly ruled out as too expensive. To keep costs low, the software involved is all Open Source. Truly a global effort, the people, the parts and the small amount of funding so far come from all over the world. The pedal powered bicycles are manufactured in India. To date, professional expertise has come from the US, Germany, Australia, Laos and Sweden. More help and funding are needed. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/15/magazine/15PEDA. html With a level of ingenuity that would have impressed Robinson Crusoe, it turns out. Thorn's group is cobbling together five inexpensive computers with out-of-date microchips. To link these computers to the Internet, they're using cheap wireless broadcasting stations -- much like the ones that you can buy at Radio Shack for a few hundred dollars. A tower located in a Laotian city will tap into the Net and the local phone system, then blast the signal toward the villages nine miles away. A second tower will catch that signal and route it wirelessly to each village, like a hub with spokes. No expensive satellites or copper-wire phone lines needed. And as for electricity? That pedal-power technology is straight out of ''Gilligan's Island.'' ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Lena M. Diethelm, EA -The Numbershuffler-PO Box 60267-Palo Alto, CA 94306 vox: 650-322-8680 -fax: 650-322-2881- lena@numbershuffler.com --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 24 01:56:41 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id BAA11890 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 01:56:40 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 23:56:07 -0800 (PST) From: Stewart Teaze Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1491453603-1040716567=:51429" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <20021224075607.51514.qmail@web10904.mail.yahoo.com> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk --0-1491453603-1040716567=:51429 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii The obvious market for this product is to the general public, to "increase their hub's reach"... and for this application, this product is Snake Oil. To effectively increase communications range using increased transmitter power alone, you need to increase power on both sides of the link. The proper way to increase hub range is thru gain antennas. - Stewart ... and please, I understand that this product would help those installations using multiple hubs configured as repeaters(if all the devices included the power increase) - but this is NOT the obvious market that Linksys is shooting for. Stephen Nichols wrote:http://www.linksys.com/splash/wsb24_splash.asp --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: horseshoe7@yahoo.com To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now --0-1491453603-1040716567=:51429 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

    The obvious market for this product is to the general public, to "increase their hub's reach"... and for this application, this product is Snake Oil.  To effectively increase communications range using increased transmitter power alone, you need to increase power on both sides of the link.

    The proper way to increase hub range is thru gain antennas.

    - Stewart

    ... and please, I understand that this product would help those installations using multiple hubs configured as repeaters(if all the devices included the power increase) - but this is NOT the obvious market that Linksys is shooting for.

     Stephen Nichols <sgnichols@mindspring.com> wrote:

    http://www.linksys.com/splash/wsb24_splash.asp




    ---
    You are currently subscribed to ss as: horseshoe7@yahoo.com
    To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org


    Do you Yahoo!?
    Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now --0-1491453603-1040716567=:51429-- --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 24 08:15:09 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id IAA19614 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 08:15:07 -0600 (CST) Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Message-ID: Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 08:14:34 -0600 From: Walt DuBose X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3E086BCA.D2E2127E@texas.net> Precedence: bulk Stewart Teaze wrote: > > The obvious market for this product is to the general public, to "increase their hub's reach"... and > for this application, this product is Snake Oil. To effectively increase communications range using > increased transmitter power alone, you need to increase power on both sides of the link. > > The proper way to increase hub range is thru gain antennas. > >- Stewart > > >... and please, I understand that this product would help those installations using multiple hubs > configured as repeaters(if all the devices included the power increase) - but this is NOT the obvious > market that Linksys is shooting for. > > Stephen Nichols wrote: > > http://www.linksys.com/splash/wsb24_splash.asp > It is only 200 mw output, just 3 db gain. A 9 db antenna hung from the ceiling would do more. Walt/K5YFW --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 24 08:53:37 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id IAA20517 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 08:53:37 -0600 (CST) Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 09:51:58 -0500 From: Robert McGwier Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_H+3Yq6K84sqmCRdEXZvzXA)" Importance: Normal X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-priority: Normal List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --Boundary_(ID_H+3Yq6K84sqmCRdEXZvzXA) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Actually, this is almost true. I have two laptops operating in my house. The access point had no trouble hearing them to a nearly perfect level but the laptops, with their small poor antennas, had trouble in certain spots on my property. The amps 3 dB increase in omni-drectional power made quite the difference in link stability to these laptops, they now regularly maintain 11 mbps even out in my back yard. My statement about the laptops having trouble hearing, while my access point did not, are based on the access point statistics (packets, repeated packets, etc.) and on the signal quality meter available on the laptops. It definitely made a difference here. Bob N4HY -----Original Message----- From: bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org [mailto:bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of Stewart Teaze Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 2:56 AM To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp The obvious market for this product is to the general public, to "increase their hub's reach"... and for this application, this product is Snake Oil. To effectively increase communications range using increased transmitter power alone, you need to increase power on both sides of the link. The proper way to increase hub range is thru gain antennas. - Stewart ... and please, I understand that this product would help those installations using multiple hubs configured as repeaters(if all the devices included the power increase) - but this is NOT the obvious market that Linksys is shooting for. Stephen Nichols wrote: http://www.linksys.com/splash/wsb24_splash.asp --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: horseshoe7@yahoo.com To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now --Boundary_(ID_H+3Yq6K84sqmCRdEXZvzXA) Content-type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
    Actually,  this is almost true.   I have two laptops operating in my house.
    The access point had no  trouble hearing them to a nearly perfect level
    but the laptops, with their small poor antennas, had trouble in certain
    spots on my property.  The amps 3 dB increase in omni-drectional
    power made quite the difference in link stability to these laptops, they
    now regularly maintain 11 mbps even out in my back yard.
     
    My statement about the laptops having trouble hearing, while my
    access point did not,  are based on the access point statistics (packets,
    repeated packets, etc.) and on the signal quality meter available on
    the laptops.  It definitely made a difference here.
     
    Bob
    N4HY
     
    -----Original Message-----
    From: bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org [mailto:bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of Stewart Teaze
    Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 2:56 AM
    To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group
    Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp

    The obvious market for this product is to the general public, to "increase their hub's reach"... and for this application, this product is Snake Oil.  To effectively increase communications range using increased transmitter power alone, you need to increase power on both sides of the link.

    The proper way to increase hub range is thru gain antennas.

    - Stewart

    ... and please, I understand that this product would help those installations using multiple hubs configured as repeaters(if all the devices included the power increase) - but this is NOT the obvious market that Linksys is shooting for.

     Stephen Nichols <sgnichols@mindspring.com> wrote:

    http://www.linksys.com/splash/wsb24_splash.asp




    ---
    You are currently subscribed to ss as: horseshoe7@yahoo.com
    To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org


    Do you Yahoo!?
    Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
    --Boundary_(ID_H+3Yq6K84sqmCRdEXZvzXA)-- --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 24 11:02:12 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id LAA26120 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 11:02:11 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 09:01:00 -0800 (PST) From: Stewart Teaze Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1420118415-1040749260=:13342" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <20021224170100.13403.qmail@web10906.mail.yahoo.com> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk --0-1420118415-1040749260=:13342 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Dude, the "small poor antennas" on your laptops "work both ways" (it attenuates the signal at both ends)... if you got an increase in range by boosting the power on your Access Point, the only thing that proves is that the laptops were providing a significantly stronger signal than your access point! I suppose this is just another condemnation of the Linksys router... For the money you end up spending for the "Linksys combo" (AP and amp), you would be better off getting a higher quality access point from the get-go - or, better yet, go with a high-quality router AND high-gain antennas (high gain antennas, unlike amps, DO work both ways). ... and please, don't be fooled by manufacturers' advertised specs - they are all marketing lies anyway. Robert McGwier wrote:Actually, this is almost true. I have two laptops operating in my house.The access point had no trouble hearing them to a nearly perfect levelbut the laptops, with their small poor antennas, had trouble in certainspots on my property. The amps 3 dB increase in omni-drectionalpower made quite the difference in link stability to these laptops, theynow regularly maintain 11 mbps even out in my back yard. My statement about the laptops having trouble hearing, while myaccess point did not, are based on the access point statistics (packets,repeated packets, etc.) and on the signal quality meter available onthe laptops. It definitely made a difference here. BobN4HY -----Original Message----- From: bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org [mailto:bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of Stewart Teaze Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 2:56 AM To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp The obvious market for this product is to the general public, to "increase their hub's reach"... and for this application, this product is Snake Oil. To effectively increase communications range using increased transmitter power alone, you need to increase power on both sides of the link. The proper way to increase hub range is thru gain antennas. - Stewart ... and please, I understand that this product would help those installations using multiple hubs configured as repeaters(if all the devices included the power increase) - but this is NOT the obvious market that Linksys is shooting for. Stephen Nichols wrote: http://www.linksys.com/splash/wsb24_splash.asp --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: horseshoe7@yahoo.com To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now --0-1420118415-1040749260=:13342 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

    Dude, the "small poor antennas" on your laptops "work both ways" (it attenuates the signal at both ends)... if you got an increase in range by boosting the power on your Access Point, the only thing that proves is that the laptops were providing a significantly stronger signal than your access point!  I suppose this is just another condemnation of the Linksys router... For the money you end up spending for the "Linksys combo" (AP and amp), you would be better off getting a higher quality access point from the get-go - or, better yet, go with a high-quality router AND high-gain antennas (high gain antennas, unlike amps, DO work both ways).

    ... and please, don't be fooled by manufacturers' advertised specs - they are all marketing lies anyway.

     Robert McGwier <rwmcgwier@comcast.net> wrote:

    Actually,  this is almost true.   I have two laptops operating in my house.
    The access point had no  trouble hearing them to a nearly perfect level
    but the laptops, with their small poor antennas, had trouble in certain
    spots on my property.  The amps 3 dB increase in omni-drectional
    power made quite the difference in link stability to these laptops, they
    now regularly maintain 11 mbps even out in my back yard.
     
    My statement about the laptops having trouble hearing, while my
    access point did not,  are based on the access point statistics (packets,
    repeated packets, etc.) and on the signal quality meter available on
    the laptops.  It definitely made a difference here.
     
    Bob
    N4HY
     
    -----Original Message-----
    From: bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org [mailto:bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of Stewart Teaze
    Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 2:56 AM
    To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group
    Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp

    The obvious market for this product is to the general public, to "increase their hub's reach"... and for this application, this product is Snake Oil.  To effectively increase communications range using increased transmitter power alone, you need to increase power on both sides of the link.

    The proper way to increase hub range is thru gain antennas.

    - Stewart

    ... and please, I understand that this product would help those installations using multiple hubs configured as repeaters(if all the devices included the power increase) - but this is NOT the obvious market that Linksys is shooting for.

     Stephen Nichols <sgnichols@mindspring.com> wrote:

    http://www.linksys.com/splash/wsb24_splash.asp




    ---
    You are currently subscribed to ss as: horseshoe7@yahoo.com
    To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org


    Do you Yahoo!?
    Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now


    Do you Yahoo!?
    Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now --0-1420118415-1040749260=:13342-- --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 24 11:07:25 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id LAA26349 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 11:07:24 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 12:06:50 -0500 From: "Eric S. Johansson" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] [Fwd: Spectrum Wants to Be Free] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3E08942A.5060305@harvee.billerica.ma.us> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Status: RO From: "Duncan Goldie-Scot" To: "R. A. Hettinga" Subject: Spectrum Wants to Be Free Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 14:14:18 -0000 http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.01/view.html Issue 11.01 - January 2003 Spectrum Wants to Be Free Never pay for phone, cable, or net access again By Kevin Werbach A revolution is brewing in wireless. In an industry speech in October, FCC chair Michael Powell expressed support for a radical idea called open spectrum that could transform the communications landscape as profoundly as the Internet ever did. If it works, you'll never pay for telephone, cable, or Net access again. Open spectrum treats the airwaves as a commons, shared by all. It's the brainchild of engineers, activists, and scholars such as wireless gadfly Dewayne Hendricks, former Lotus chief scientist David Reed, and NYU law professor Yochai Benkler. The idea is that smart devices cooperating with one another function more effectively than huge proprietary communications networks. The commons can be created through distinct, unlicensed "parks" or through "underlay" technologies, such as ultrawideband, that are invisible to licensed users in the same band. In an open spectrum world, wireless transmitters would be as ubiquitous as microprocessors: in televisions, cars, public spaces, handheld devices, everywhere. They would tune themselves to free spectrum and self-assemble into networks. Anyone could become a radio broadcaster reaching millions. Phone calls would rarely need to pass through central networks; they would be handed off and relayed across devices, for free or nearly so. Businesses would track far-flung assets in real time via embedded sensors. Big TV networks and cable operators would lose their hammerlock control over media distribution. Entrepreneurs would develop as yet undreamed of applications that we can't live without. It happens any time open platforms emerge - think eBay and Amazon.com. The revolution has already started. Wi-Fi, a runaway success, uses a narrow slice of spectrum that is already "open." Wi-Fi is a shot across the bow, much the way the Arpanet served as a proving ground for the commercial Internet. As ever, Moore's law is on the side of the technology upstart. Radio waves resemble ripples on a pond rather than swimmers in a pool - they pass through one another. Distinguishing them can be difficult, but it's not beyond the talents of today's radio engineers. When spectrum licensing was established in the early 20th century, radios were primitive, as was the regulatory model used to govern them. To be heard, broadcasters needed an exclusive slice of spectrum. Today, however, digital technologies let many users occupy the same frequency at the same time. As the FCC's Powell points out, "Modern technology has fundamentally changed the nature and extent of spectrum use." Today's devices employ advanced digital signal processing and other techniques, and they're smart enough to coexist without interference. Wi-Fi's success is attracting capital and encouraging research into the open spectrum idea. Last year, over the bitter opposition of entrenched spectrum holders, the FCC granted limited approval for ultrawideband. Within the next year, half of all laptops used at work are expected to have wireless connections. And within four years, Intel hopes to incorporate transmitters into all of its processor chips. Standing in the way of open spectrum are incumbent licensees, government agencies nervous about interference, and economists entranced by the airwave auction market. Yet the spectrum auction markets are not free markets. Each buyer gains what is, in effect, a little monopoly - which, in the aggregate, stifles communications progress just as well as one big monopoly. Governments have long treated the airwaves like real estate to be handed out to favored operators or auctioned for huge sums. And like real estate, spectrum makes people do stupid things. The English auctions for third-generation mobile phone licenses in 2000 left the winners choked with debt. In the US, the battle over bankrupt NextWave's licenses and the hyped transition to digital TV are multibillion-dollar fiascoes. The problem here is not the market, but the outdated real-estate metaphor. Yet, if spectrum was seen as a commons that could be shared by all, then builders of wireless devices would rush to fill it, unleashing market forces to everyone's benefit. It's already happened with Wi-Fi: A billion-dollar industry emerged overnight with no protection against interference. And Wi-Fi is only the beginning. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Independent analyst Kevin Werbach (kevin@werbach.com) is the former FCC counsel for new technology policy. --- end forwarded text --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 24 11:38:39 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id LAA27068 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 11:38:36 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: wchast@utilpart.com To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] RE: [Fwd: Spectrum Wants to Be Free] Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 12:35:50 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <0D7B0EF78F72D311B95F0008C7F3D0A001A0AA1E@dallas.utilpart.com> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk > -----Original Message----- > From: Eric S. Johansson [mailto:esj@harvee.billerica.ma.us] > Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 12:07 PM > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] [Fwd: Spectrum Wants to Be Free] > > Open spectrum treats the airwaves as a commons, shared by > all. Do you think we could every get the repeater people to understand that one? Hey, TDMA would be a big step forward if the radio manufacturers would ever put it into our radios. The commericial side has it in all flavors from 2 channels to 8 (I think IDEN is now 8 channels in a 25Khz channel) ***************************************************************** This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy any hard copies you may have printed and remove all copies of the e-mail from your hard drive. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message that do not relate to the official business of Utility Partners, Inc shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it. Visit us on the web at http://www.utilpart.com ***************************************************************** --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 24 13:14:10 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id NAA00235 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 13:14:09 -0600 (CST) Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Message-ID: Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 13:13:22 -0600 From: Walt DuBose X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: [Fwd: Spectrum Wants to Be Free] References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3E08B1D2.7D3A4A62@texas.net> Precedence: bulk "Eric S. Johansson" wrote: > > Status: RO > From: "Duncan Goldie-Scot" > To: "R. A. Hettinga" > Subject: Spectrum Wants to Be Free > Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 14:14:18 -0000 > > http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.01/view.html > > Issue 11.01 - January 2003 > > Spectrum Wants to Be Free > > Never pay for phone, cable, or net access again > > By Kevin Werbach > IMHO, wireless will never replace copper/fiber to the home and office as the primary means of communications. In instances where wireless is used today, in time I believe it too will be replaced by fiber. Ultimately, wireless will be for mobile use only. I do see wireless moving to higher frequencies tho. This (fiber) is the true profit business model... not wireless. Walt/K5YFW --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 24 13:45:33 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id NAA01201 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 13:45:24 -0600 (CST) Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 14:44:32 -0500 From: Robert McGwier Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_j+lJvsc7+ImneBL7wIwAHg)" Importance: Normal X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-priority: Normal List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --Boundary_(ID_j+lJvsc7+ImneBL7wIwAHg) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Stewart: For whatever reason (I won't guess), the receiver and antenna situation in the access point is better able to handle the small signal out of the laptop, but the laptop receiver cannot do the reciprocal and the RESULTS say this is so. I can repeat these experiments perfectly and have done so repeatedly. In NJ, when you buy a thing like this amplifier, the consumer protection laws allow you to return "if it does not work in your application". I would have returned it had I not been able to repeat this experiment ad nauseum at every point on my property. Your suggestion for my application won't quite fit my needs. I am not interested in point to point communications, and I am not interested in putting up a larger, more efficient omni anywhere outside my office. I am interested in my son's laptop working wherever he is, and for mine to work wherever it is on my property (even if I am being a lazy bum surfing the web out back by the pool or on the back porch). For me, the increased pleasure of having this be reliable was worth the cost without having to run a single line of coax or figuring out how and where to mount the antenna. The amplifier solved my problem and I can prove it. Seasons Greetings to one and all, Bob McGwier N4HY --- --Original Message----- From: bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org [mailto:bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of Stewart Teaze Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 12:01 PM To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp Dude, the "small poor antennas" on your laptops "work both ways" (it attenuates the signal at both ends)... if you got an increase in range by boosting the power on your Access Point, the only thing that proves is that the laptops were providing a significantly stronger signal than your access point! I suppose this is just another condemnation of the Linksys router... For the money you end up spending for the "Linksys combo" (AP and amp), you would be better off getting a higher quality access point from the get-go - or, better yet, go with a high-quality router AND high-gain antennas (high gain antennas, unlike amps, DO work both ways). ... and please, don't be fooled by manufacturers' advertised specs - they are all marketing lies anyway. Robert McGwier wrote: Actually, this is almost true. I have two laptops operating in my house. The access point had no trouble hearing them to a nearly perfect level but the laptops, with their small poor antennas, had trouble in certain spots on my property. The amps 3 dB increase in omni-drectional power made quite the difference in link stability to these laptops, they now regularly maintain 11 mbps even out in my back yard. My statement about the laptops having trouble hearing, while my access point did not, are based on the access point statistics (packets, repeated packets, etc.) and on the signal quality meter available on the laptops. It definitely made a difference here. Bob N4HY -----Original Message----- From: bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org [mailto:bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of Stewart Teaze Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 2:56 AM To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp The obvious market for this product is to the general public, to "increase their hub's reach"... and for this application, this product is Snake Oil. To effectively increase communications range using increased transmitter power alone, you need to increase power on both sides of the link. The proper way to increase hub range is thru gain antennas. - Stewart ... and please, I understand that this product would help those installations using multiple hubs configured as repeaters(if all the devices included the power increase) - but this is NOT the obvious market that Linksys is shooting for. Stephen Nichols wrote: http://www.linksys.com/splash/wsb24_splash.asp --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: horseshoe7@yahoo.com To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now --Boundary_(ID_j+lJvsc7+ImneBL7wIwAHg) Content-type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
    Stewart:
     
    For whatever reason (I won't guess), the receiver and antenna situation in the access point is better able to
    handle the small signal out of the laptop, but the laptop receiver cannot do the reciprocal and the RESULTS say this
    is so.  I can repeat these experiments perfectly and have done so repeatedly.  In NJ, when you buy
    a thing like this amplifier, the consumer protection laws allow you to return "if it does not work in your
    application".  I would have returned it had I not been able to repeat this experiment ad nauseum at
    every point on my property.
     
    Your suggestion for my application won't quite fit my needs.  I am not interested in point to point communications,
    and I am not interested in putting up a larger, more efficient omni anywhere outside my office.  I am interested
    in my son's laptop working wherever he is, and for mine to work wherever it is on my property (even if I am being
    a lazy bum surfing the web out back by the pool or on the back porch).  For me, the increased pleasure of having
    this be reliable was worth the cost without having to run a single line of coax or figuring out how and where
    to mount the antenna.  The amplifier solved my problem and I can prove it.
     
    Seasons Greetings to one and all,
    Bob McGwier
    N4HY
     
    --- --Original Message-----
    From: bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org [mailto:bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of Stewart Teaze
    Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 12:01 PM
    To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group
    Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp <LYR27907-112255-2002.12.24-02.41.52--rwmcgwier#comcast.net@lists.tapr.org>

    Dude, the "small poor antennas" on your laptops "work both ways" (it attenuates the signal at both ends)... if you got an increase in range by boosting the power on your Access Point, the only thing that proves is that the laptops were providing a significantly stronger signal than your access point!  I suppose this is just another condemnation of the Linksys router... For the money you end up spending for the "Linksys combo" (AP and amp), you would be better off getting a higher quality access point from the get-go - or, better yet, go with a high-quality router AND high-gain antennas (high gain antennas, unlike amps, DO work both ways).

    ... and please, don't be fooled by manufacturers' advertised specs - they are all marketing lies anyway.

     Robert McGwier <rwmcgwier@comcast.net> wrote:

    Actually,  this is almost true.   I have two laptops operating in my house.
    The access point had no  trouble hearing them to a nearly perfect level
    but the laptops, with their small poor antennas, had trouble in certain
    spots on my property.  The amps 3 dB increase in omni-drectional
    power made quite the difference in link stability to these laptops, they
    now regularly maintain 11 mbps even out in my back yard.
     
    My statement about the laptops having trouble hearing, while my
    access point did not,  are based on the access point statistics (packets,
    repeated packets, etc.) and on the signal quality meter available on
    the laptops.  It definitely made a difference here.
     
    Bob
    N4HY
     
    -----Original Message-----
    From: bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org [mailto:bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of Stewart Teaze
    Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 2:56 AM
    To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group
    Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp

    The obvious market for this product is to the general public, to "increase their hub's reach"... and for this application, this product is Snake Oil.  To effectively increase communications range using increased transmitter power alone, you need to increase power on both sides of the link.

    The proper way to increase hub range is thru gain antennas.

    - Stewart

    ... and please, I understand that this product would help those installations using multiple hubs configured as repeaters(if all the devices included the power increase) - but this is NOT the obvious market that Linksys is shooting for.

     Stephen Nichols <sgnichols@mindspring.com> wrote:

    http://www.linksys.com/splash/wsb24_splash.asp




    ---
    You are currently subscribed to ss as: horseshoe7@yahoo.com
    To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org


    Do you Yahoo!?
    Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now


    Do you Yahoo!?
    Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
    --Boundary_(ID_j+lJvsc7+ImneBL7wIwAHg)-- --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 24 14:07:16 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id OAA02378 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 14:07:10 -0600 (CST) Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 15:06:21 -0500 From: Robert McGwier Subject: [ss] Re: [Fwd: Spectrum Wants to Be Free] To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Importance: Normal X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-priority: Normal List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Walt: I really disagree with this. I believe the smaller cost of infrastructure will cause wireless to spring to the fore bringing broadband access to the web and other services in small communities across America very quickly thanks to the vision of people like Hendricks and others. When the average Jane in a town of 3000 can have broadband access without a company having to lay a cable to her house, the picture becomes clearer I think. We need more small company entrepreneurs to spring up and decide to do this but it will happen. May I suggest a book that I am reviewing for QST (though they didn't ask me to do this one)? It is "Building Wireless Community Networks" by Rob Flickenger (O'Reilly). The Part 15 community, though driving me a bit crazy at times, has really become an exciting experimentation frontier and if we can just tame their vision to allow for the fact that others want the same spectrum, we can all benefit. Flickenger built just such a network in California. He has shared his experiences with us in this book and pointed out many other groups doing likewise. Wireless got trampled by the idiots laying tens of billions of dollars of dark fiber but I think it will lead us out of the tech doldrums in the next few years. I hope so, 'cause if not, I will be 70 years old before I can retire rather than the 62 I was planning on! Bob -----Original Message----- From: bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org [mailto:bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of Walt DuBose Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 2:13 PM To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Subject: [ss] Re: [Fwd: Spectrum Wants to Be Free] "Eric S. Johansson" wrote: > > Status: RO > From: "Duncan Goldie-Scot" > To: "R. A. Hettinga" > Subject: Spectrum Wants to Be Free > Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 14:14:18 -0000 > > http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.01/view.html > > Issue 11.01 - January 2003 > > Spectrum Wants to Be Free > > Never pay for phone, cable, or net access again > > By Kevin Werbach > IMHO, wireless will never replace copper/fiber to the home and office as the primary means of communications. In instances where wireless is used today, in time I believe it too will be replaced by fiber. Ultimately, wireless will be for mobile use only. I do see wireless moving to higher frequencies tho. This (fiber) is the true profit business model... not wireless. Walt/K5YFW --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: rwmcgwier@comcast.net To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 24 14:26:36 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id OAA02723 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 14:26:34 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: "jeff millar" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 15:25:51 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000D_01C2AB60.BE73B7A0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <001001c2ab8a$a7ca8860$6a01a8c0@wa1hco> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C2AB60.BE73B7A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The access point has diversity receive (note the two antennas) to = minimize the effects of multipath. That's not the same as pattern gain. = When one path is sitting in a deep fade, the other path is likely not = in a fade. Since fades are deep but very narrow, two antennas a few = wavelengths apart really help. Diversity probably improves receive at = the AP by 3-6 dB...allowing for more transmit power and still maintain a = balanced link. ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Robert McGwier=20 To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group=20 Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 2:44 PM Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp = = Stewart: For whatever reason (I won't guess), the receiver and antenna = situation in the access point is better able to handle the small signal out of the laptop, but the laptop receiver = cannot do the reciprocal and the RESULTS say this is so. I can repeat these experiments perfectly and have done so = repeatedly. In NJ, when you buy a thing like this amplifier, the consumer protection laws allow you to = return "if it does not work in your application". I would have returned it had I not been able to repeat = this experiment ad nauseum at every point on my property. ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C2AB60.BE73B7A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
    The access point has diversity receive = (note the=20 two antennas) to minimize the effects of = multipath.  That's=20 not the same as pattern gain.  When one path is = sitting in a deep=20 fade, the other path is likely not in a fade.  Since fades are = deep=20 but very narrow, two antennas a few wavelengths apart really=20 help.  Diversity probably improves receive at the AP by 3-6=20 dB...allowing for more transmit power and still maintain a balanced=20 link.
    ----- Original Message -----
    From:=20 Robert=20 McGwier
    Sent: Tuesday, December 24, = 2002 2:44=20 PM
    Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys = 802.11b signal=20 amp <LYR27907-112255-2002.12.24-02.41.52--rwmcgwier#comcast.n= et@lists.tapr.org>=20 <LYR27907-112298-2002.12.24-11.46.45--rwmcgwier#comcast.n= et@lists.tapr.org>

    Stewart:
     
    For whatever reason (I won't = guess), the=20 receiver and antenna situation in the access point is better able=20 to
    handle the small signal = out of the=20 laptop, but the laptop receiver cannot do the reciprocal and the = RESULTS say=20 this
    is=20 so.  I can repeat these experiments perfectly and have done so=20 repeatedly.  In NJ, when you buy
    a=20 thing like this amplifier, the consumer protection laws allow you to = return=20 "if it does not work in your
    application".  I would have returned = it had I=20 not been able to repeat this experiment ad nauseum = at
    every point on my=20 property.
    ------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C2AB60.BE73B7A0-- --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 24 14:38:43 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id OAA02891 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 14:38:38 -0600 (CST) Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Message-ID: Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 14:38:05 -0600 From: Walt DuBose X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: [Fwd: Spectrum Wants to Be Free] References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3E08C5AD.B1A9ED5A@texas.net> Precedence: bulk Bob, I am reading the O'Reilly now and use the on-line pages a lot. There are a lot of problems in some areas of the country, like West Texas. Lots of places there still don't have cellphone coverage and the closest cell is 10-20 miles away. We also have places within 20 miles of downtown San Antonio that still don't have electricity; however, a cable company is laying fiber. I look for multi-gigabit bandwidth to homes. The question is can wireless meet the need? I'm not talking about the next 5-10 years but out 10-25 years. This is not to say that technology can't support the small communities; but, I see even greater need for communications in the future...far beyond simple phone, TV, Internet...a whole new "data requirement". Walt Robert McGwier wrote: > > Walt: > > I really disagree with this. I believe the > smaller cost of infrastructure will cause > wireless to spring to the fore bringing > broadband access to the web and other services > in small communities across America very > quickly thanks to the vision of people > like Hendricks and others. When the average > Jane in a town of 3000 can have broadband > access without a company having to lay a > cable to her house, the picture becomes > clearer I think. We need more small company > entrepreneurs to spring up and decide to > do this but it will happen. > > May I suggest a book that I am reviewing for > QST (though they didn't ask me to do this one)? > It is "Building Wireless Community Networks" by Rob > Flickenger (O'Reilly). The Part 15 community, > though driving me a bit crazy at times, has > really become an exciting experimentation frontier > and if we can just tame their vision to allow > for the fact that others want the same spectrum, > we can all benefit. > > Flickenger built just such a network in California. > He has shared his experiences with us in this > book and pointed out many other groups doing > likewise. Wireless got trampled by the idiots > laying tens of billions of dollars of dark fiber > but I think it will lead us out of the tech > doldrums in the next few years. I hope so, 'cause if > not, I will be 70 years old before I can retire rather > than the 62 I was planning on! > > Bob > > -----Original Message----- > From: bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org > [mailto:bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of Walt DuBose > Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 2:13 PM > To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group > Subject: [ss] Re: [Fwd: Spectrum Wants to Be Free] > > "Eric S. Johansson" wrote: > > > > Status: RO > > From: "Duncan Goldie-Scot" > > To: "R. A. Hettinga" > > Subject: Spectrum Wants to Be Free > > Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 14:14:18 -0000 > > > > http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.01/view.html > > > > Issue 11.01 - January 2003 > > > > Spectrum Wants to Be Free > > > > Never pay for phone, cable, or net access again > > > > By Kevin Werbach > > > > > IMHO, wireless will never replace copper/fiber to the > home and office as the primary means of communications. > In instances where wireless is used today, in time I > believe it too will be replaced by fiber. > > Ultimately, wireless will be for mobile use only. > > I do see wireless moving to higher frequencies tho. > > This (fiber) is the true profit business model... > not wireless. > > Walt/K5YFW > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: rwmcgwier@comcast.net > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org > > --- > You are currently subscribed to ss as: dubose@texas.net > To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 24 14:46:37 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id OAA03031 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 14:46:26 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 12:45:28 -0800 (PST) From: Stewart Teaze Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-2080108897-1040762728=:28027" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <20021224204528.28068.qmail@web10907.mail.yahoo.com> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk --0-2080108897-1040762728=:28027 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Why would you run coax for any distance at all? That would be the worst thing you could do when adding antennas at these frequencies... keep the run length short, as transmission line loss at 2.4Ghz is significant. Anyway, the results you are seeing can be explained by 1 of 3 possibilites: 1) The signal generated by the original (unamplified) AP is of significantly lower quality than that of the laptops'. 2) The receivers in the laptops are of significantly lower quality than that in the AP. 3) A combination of 1) and 2) If it is case 1), then you probably would have been better off going with a higher-quality Access Point from the get-go (rather than a combo AP/Amp). If it is case 2), then the amplifier has utility for your particular application; although gain antennas would have worked just as well in your situation, and worked better in the future, if you acquire remote devices with better receiver quality. In any event, if you require an amplifier at your AP to increase your communications range, you definately have a quality problem (or problems) somewhere in your system. Improving communication range by increasing signal strength on only one side of a link does not usually make sense. I'm curious... what version of Linksys AP do you have? Earlier models were notorious for their poor quality transmissions. Rather than "patching up" a bad AP with an amplifier, you might have even been able to produce the same improved results by replacing the old AP with a new model AP by the same manufacturer. The reason I'm going into this, is because the amplifier "road" is typically a slippery slope - and it is best that the manufacturers NOT be rewarded for producing crap like this. They should be producing BALANCED quality devices (TPO, receiver quality, etc) all the way around, from the get-go. Robert McGwier wrote:Stewart: For whatever reason (I won't guess), the receiver and antenna situation in the access point is better able tohandle the small signal out of the laptop, but the laptop receiver cannot do the reciprocal and the RESULTS say thisis so. I can repeat these experiments perfectly and have done so repeatedly. In NJ, when you buya thing like this amplifier, the consumer protection laws allow you to return "if it does not work in yourapplication". I would have returned it had I not been able to repeat this experiment ad nauseum atevery point on my property. Your suggestion for my application won't quite fit my needs. I am not interested in point to point communications,and I am not interested in putting up a larger, more efficient omni anywhere outside my office. I am interestedin my son's laptop working wherever he is, and for mine to work wherever it is on my property (even if I am beinga lazy bum surfing the web out back by the pool or on the back porch). For me, the increased pleasure of havingthis be reliable was worth the cost without having to run a single line of coax or figuring out how and whereto mount the antenna. The amplifier solved my problem and I can prove it. Seasons Greetings to one and all,Bob McGwierN4HY --- --Original Message----- From: bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org [mailto:bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of Stewart Teaze Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 12:01 PM To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp Dude, the "small poor antennas" on your laptops "work both ways" (it attenuates the signal at both ends)... if you got an increase in range by boosting the power on your Access Point, the only thing that proves is that the laptops were providing a significantly stronger signal than your access point! I suppose this is just another condemnation of the Linksys router... For the money you end up spending for the "Linksys combo" (AP and amp), you would be better off getting a higher quality access point from the get-go - or, better yet, go with a high-quality router AND high-gain antennas (high gain antennas, unlike amps, DO work both ways). ... and please, don't be fooled by manufacturers' advertised specs - they are all marketing lies anyway. Robert McGwier wrote: Actually, this is almost true. I have two laptops operating in my house.The access point had no trouble hearing them to a nearly perfect levelbut the laptops, with their small poor antennas, had trouble in certainspots on my property. The amps 3 dB increase in omni-drectionalpower made quite the difference in link stability to these laptops, theynow regularly maintain 11 mbps even out in my back yard. My statement about the laptops having trouble hearing, while myaccess point did not, are based on the access point statistics (packets,repeated packets, etc.) and on the signal quality meter available onthe laptops. It definitely made a difference here. BobN4HY -----Original Message----- From: bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org [mailto:bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of Stewart Teaze Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 2:56 AM To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp The obvious market for this product is to the general public, to "increase their hub's reach"... and for this application, this product is Snake Oil. To effectively increase communications range using increased transmitter power alone, you need to increase power on both sides of the link. The proper way to increase hub range is thru gain antennas. - Stewart ... and please, I understand that this product would help those installations using multiple hubs configured as repeaters(if all the devices included the power increase) - but this is NOT the obvious market that Linksys is shooting for. Stephen Nichols wrote: http://www.linksys.com/splash/wsb24_splash.asp --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: horseshoe7@yahoo.com To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now --0-2080108897-1040762728=:28027 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

    Why would you run coax for any distance at all?  That would be the worst thing you could do when adding antennas at these frequencies... keep the run length short, as transmission line loss at 2.4Ghz is significant.

    Anyway, the results you are seeing can be explained by 1 of 3 possibilites:

    1) The signal generated by the original (unamplified) AP is of significantly lower quality than that of the laptops'.

    2) The receivers in the laptops are of significantly lower quality than that in the AP.

    3) A combination of 1) and 2)

    If it is case 1), then you probably would have been better off going with a higher-quality Access Point from the get-go (rather than a combo AP/Amp).  If it is case 2), then the amplifier has utility for your particular application; although gain antennas would have worked just as well in your situation, and worked better in the future, if you acquire remote devices with better receiver quality.

    In any event, if you require an amplifier at your AP to increase your communications range, you definately have a quality problem (or problems) somewhere in your system.

    Improving communication range by increasing signal strength on only one side of a link does not usually make sense.

    I'm curious... what version of Linksys AP do you have?  Earlier models were notorious for their poor quality transmissions.  Rather than "patching up" a bad AP with an amplifier, you might have even been able to produce the same improved results by replacing the old AP with a new model AP by the same manufacturer.

    The reason I'm going into this, is because the amplifier "road" is typically a slippery slope - and it is best that the manufacturers NOT be rewarded for producing crap like this.  They should be producing BALANCED quality devices (TPO, receiver quality, etc) all the way around, from the get-go.

     Robert McGwier <rwmcgwier@comcast.net> wrote:

    Stewart:
     
    For whatever reason (I won't guess), the receiver and antenna situation in the access point is better able to
    handle the small signal out of the laptop, but the laptop receiver cannot do the reciprocal and the RESULTS say this
    is so.  I can repeat these experiments perfectly and have done so repeatedly.  In NJ, when you buy
    a thing like this amplifier, the consumer protection laws allow you to return "if it does not work in your
    application".  I would have returned it had I not been able to repeat this experiment ad nauseum at
    every point on my property.
     
    Your suggestion for my application won't quite fit my needs.  I am not interested in point to point communications,
    and I am not interested in putting up a larger, more efficient omni anywhere outside my office.  I am interested
    in my son's laptop working wherever he is, and for mine to work wherever it is on my property (even if I am being
    a lazy bum surfing the web out back by the pool or on the back porch).  For me, the increased pleasure of having
    this be reliable was worth the cost without having to run a single line of coax or figuring out how and where
    to mount the antenna.  The amplifier solved my problem and I can prove it.
     
    Seasons Greetings to one and all,
    Bob McGwier
    N4HY
     
    --- --Original Message-----
    From: bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org [mailto:bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of Stewart Teaze
    Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 12:01 PM
    To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group
    Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp <LYR27907-112255-2002.12.24-02.41.52--rwmcgwier#comcast.net@lists.tapr.org>

    Dude, the "small poor antennas" on your laptops "work both ways" (it attenuates the signal at both ends)... if you got an increase in range by boosting the power on your Access Point, the only thing that proves is that the laptops were providing a significantly stronger signal than your access point!  I suppose this is just another condemnation of the Linksys router... For the money you end up spending for the "Linksys combo" (AP and amp), you would be better off getting a higher quality access point from the get-go - or, better yet, go with a high-quality router AND high-gain antennas (high gain antennas, unlike amps, DO work both ways).

    ... and please, don't be fooled by manufacturers' advertised specs - they are all marketing lies anyway.

     Robert McGwier <rwmcgwier@comcast.net> wrote:

    Actually,  this is almost true.   I have two laptops operating in my house.
    The access point had no  trouble hearing them to a nearly perfect level
    but the laptops, with their small poor antennas, had trouble in certain
    spots on my property.  The amps 3 dB increase in omni-drectional
    power made quite the difference in link stability to these laptops, they
    now regularly maintain 11 mbps even out in my back yard.
     
    My statement about the laptops having trouble hearing, while my
    access point did not,  are based on the access point statistics (packets,
    repeated packets, etc.) and on the signal quality meter available on
    the laptops.  It definitely made a difference here.
     
    Bob
    N4HY
     
    -----Original Message-----
    From: bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org [mailto:bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of Stewart Teaze
    Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 2:56 AM
    To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group
    Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp

    The obvious market for this product is to the general public, to "increase their hub's reach"... and for this application, this product is Snake Oil.  To effectively increase communications range using increased transmitter power alone, you need to increase power on both sides of the link.

    The proper way to increase hub range is thru gain antennas.

    - Stewart

    ... and please, I understand that this product would help those installations using multiple hubs configured as repeaters(if all the devices included the power increase) - but this is NOT the obvious market that Linksys is shooting for.

     Stephen Nichols <sgnichols@mindspring.com> wrote:

    http://www.linksys.com/splash/wsb24_splash.asp




    ---
    You are currently subscribed to ss as: horseshoe7@yahoo.com
    To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org


    Do you Yahoo!?
    Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now


    Do you Yahoo!?
    Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now


    Do you Yahoo!?
    Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now --0-2080108897-1040762728=:28027-- --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Tue Dec 24 15:13:10 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id PAA03623 for ; Tue, 24 Dec 2002 15:13:04 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 13:12:12 -0800 (PST) From: Stewart Teaze Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-1850433786-1040764332=:54394" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <20021224211212.55233.qmail@web10906.mail.yahoo.com> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk --0-1850433786-1040764332=:54394 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Thanks, that makes sense... Also, after I thought about this some more, it also makes sense for most Internet applications, due to the fact that most of the traffic comes from the Access Point - so it is more important that the AP end of the link transmit with more signal strength. Based on these two facts, I rescind my criticisms of the Linksys power amplifier. - Stewart jeff millar wrote:The access point has diversity receive (note the two antennas) to minimize the effects of multipath. That's not the same as pattern gain. When one path is sitting in a deep fade, the other path is likely not in a fade. Since fades are deep but very narrow, two antennas a few wavelengths apart really help. Diversity probably improves receive at the AP by 3-6 dB...allowing for more transmit power and still maintain a balanced link.----- Original Message ----- From: Robert McGwier To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 2:44 PMSubject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp Stewart: For whatever reason (I won't guess), the receiver and antenna situation in the access point is better able tohandle the small signal out of the laptop, but the laptop receiver cannot do the reciprocal and the RESULTS say thisis so. I can repeat these experiments perfectly and have done so repeatedly. In NJ, when you buya thing like this amplifier, the consumer protection laws allow you to return "if it does not work in yourapplication". I would have returned it had I not been able to repeat this experiment ad nauseum atevery point on my property. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now --0-1850433786-1040764332=:54394 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

    Thanks, that makes sense... Also, after I thought about this some more, it also makes sense for most Internet applications, due to the fact that most of the traffic comes from the Access Point - so it is more important that the AP end of the link transmit with more signal strength.

    Based on these two facts, I rescind my criticisms of the Linksys power amplifier.

    - Stewart

     jeff millar <jeff@wa1hco.mv.com> wrote:

    The access point has diversity receive (note the two antennas) to minimize the effects of multipath.  That's not the same as pattern gain.  When one path is sitting in a deep fade, the other path is likely not in a fade.  Since fades are deep but very narrow, two antennas a few wavelengths apart really help.  Diversity probably improves receive at the AP by 3-6 dB...allowing for more transmit power and still maintain a balanced link.
    ----- Original Message -----
    Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 2:44 PM

    Stewart:
     
    For whatever reason (I won't guess), the receiver and antenna situation in the access point is better able to
    handle the small signal out of the laptop, but the laptop receiver cannot do the reciprocal and the RESULTS say this
    is so.  I can repeat these experiments perfectly and have done so repeatedly.  In NJ, when you buy
    a thing like this amplifier, the consumer protection laws allow you to return "if it does not work in your
    application".  I would have returned it had I not been able to repeat this experiment ad nauseum at
    every point on my property.


    Do you Yahoo!?
    Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now --0-1850433786-1040764332=:54394-- --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 25 09:09:32 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id JAA29091 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 09:09:31 -0600 (CST) X-WebTV-Signature: 1 ETAtAhRaIkRzYVADUtef76IFNLixJXeTKAIVALeErzEhYSQZqZUJlki1qWU/zk0V From: k2pat@webtv.net (Pat Howard) Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 10:08:35 -0500 (EST) To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Mailbox Overflow Message-ID: In-Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group digest" 's message of Wed, 25 Dec 2002 00:00:22 -0500 Content-Disposition: Inline Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit MIME-Version: 1.0 (WebTV) List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <27597-3E09C9F3-7654@storefull-2114.public.lawson.webtv.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Someone is including HTML attachments instead of links in their replies. Please stop including redundant attachments in your replies. My mailbox overflows with multiple copies of the same needless attachments and I must delete the TAPR stuff just to have space for incoming mail. I thought the rules for posting here were meant to prevent this overflow. Pat --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 25 12:52:23 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id MAA05096 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 12:52:22 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: "Hampton, Rickey L." To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: [Fwd: Spectrum Wants to Be Free] Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 13:51:44 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <4CEA90C46E84D411B4F600805F9F0C81078F1B5E@phsexch15.mgh.harvard.edu> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Lots-O-Luck! I was told not long ago by a gent using COTS 802.11b stuff that his Part 15 equipment would not be shut down should it interfere with amateur operations. Why, you may wonder? Because, "The FCC isn't going to kill a billion dollar industry just for ham radio!" -----Original Message----- From: Robert McGwier [mailto:rwmcgwier@comcast.net] May I suggest a book that I am reviewing for QST (though they didn't ask me to do this one)? It is "Building Wireless Community Networks" by Rob Flickenger (O'Reilly). The Part 15 community, though driving me a bit crazy at times, has really become an exciting experimentation frontier and if we can just tame their vision to allow for the fact that others want the same spectrum, we can all benefit. --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Wed Dec 25 16:01:53 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id QAA09086 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2002 16:01:39 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: "Greg Ansley" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" References: Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal am.org> Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2002 17:00:13 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0044_01C2AC37.17A80020" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <004701c2ac61$00bfa500$db02020a@ansley.com> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0044_01C2AC37.17A80020 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The issue is not differential quality of transceivers on the link, it is = that the antenna on the laptop end is stuck in the RF noise of the = laptop. The amplifier is BALANCING the signal to noise ratio on the link by = overcoming the increased local noise at the laptop's receiver.=20 The access point typically has much better shielding at the frequency of = interest and has an antenna that is separated from the source of the = noise by several inches. Try using an external antenna on the laptop end of the link and move it = around the area of the laptop and you will see significant (as much as = 10db in some cases) changes in the laptop's receive S/N. Most of this = difference is a change in the noise level with a smaller contribution = attributable to higher receive signal strength in some positions. The = PCMIA slot is often a weak spot for RFI.=20 The amplifier is much more convenient than an external antenna on the = laptop! As far points 1 & 2 on every AP that I have examined (3 different = manufactures) the AP uses a stock PCMCIA 802.11b card with an external = antenna. Don't know what the Linksys is like internally, though. Greg Ansley KB4R ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Stewart Teaze=20 To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group=20 Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 3:45 PM Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp = = Why would you run coax for any distance at all? That would be the = worst thing you could do when adding antennas at these frequencies... = keep the run length short, as transmission line loss at 2.4Ghz is = significant.=20 Anyway, the results you are seeing can be explained by 1 of 3 = possibilites:=20 1) The signal generated by the original (unamplified) AP is of = significantly lower quality than that of the laptops'.=20 2) The receivers in the laptops are of significantly lower quality = than that in the AP.=20 3) A combination of 1) and 2)=20 If it is case 1), then you probably would have been better off going = with a higher-quality Access Point from the get-go (rather than a combo = AP/Amp). If it is case 2), then the amplifier has utility for your = particular application; although gain antennas would have worked just as = well in your situation, and worked better in the future, if you acquire = remote devices with better receiver quality.=20 In any event, if you require an amplifier at your AP to increase your = communications range, you definately have a quality problem (or = problems) somewhere in your system.=20 Improving communication range by increasing signal strength on only = one side of a link does not usually make sense.=20 I'm curious... what version of Linksys AP do you have? Earlier models = were notorious for their poor quality transmissions. Rather than = "patching up" a bad AP with an amplifier, you might have even been able = to produce the same improved results by replacing the old AP with a new = model AP by the same manufacturer.=20 The reason I'm going into this, is because the amplifier "road" is = typically a slippery slope - and it is best that the manufacturers NOT = be rewarded for producing crap like this. They should be producing = BALANCED quality devices (TPO, receiver quality, etc) all the way = around, from the get-go.=20 Robert McGwier wrote:=20 Stewart: For whatever reason (I won't guess), the receiver and antenna = situation in the access point is better able to handle the small signal out of the laptop, but the laptop receiver = cannot do the reciprocal and the RESULTS say this is so. I can repeat these experiments perfectly and have done so = repeatedly. In NJ, when you buy a thing like this amplifier, the consumer protection laws allow you = to return "if it does not work in your application". I would have returned it had I not been able to = repeat this experiment ad nauseum at every point on my property. Your suggestion for my application won't quite fit my needs. I am = not interested in point to point communications, and I am not interested in putting up a larger, more efficient omni = anywhere outside my office. I am interested in my son's laptop working wherever he is, and for mine to work = wherever it is on my property (even if I am being a lazy bum surfing the web out back by the pool or on the back = porch). For me, the increased pleasure of having this be reliable was worth the cost without having to run a single = line of coax or figuring out how and where to mount the antenna. The amplifier solved my problem and I can = prove it. Seasons Greetings to one and all, Bob McGwier N4HY --- --Original Message----- From: bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org = [mailto:bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of Stewart Teaze Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 12:01 PM To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp = Dude, the "small poor antennas" on your laptops "work both ways" = (it attenuates the signal at both ends)... if you got an increase in = range by boosting the power on your Access Point, the only thing that = proves is that the laptops were providing a significantly stronger = signal than your access point! I suppose this is just another = condemnation of the Linksys router... For the money you end up spending = for the "Linksys combo" (AP and amp), you would be better off getting a = higher quality access point from the get-go - or, better yet, go with a = high-quality router AND high-gain antennas (high gain antennas, unlike = amps, DO work both ways).=20 ... and please, don't be fooled by manufacturers' advertised specs = - they are all marketing lies anyway.=20 Robert McGwier wrote:=20 Actually, this is almost true. I have two laptops operating = in my house. The access point had no trouble hearing them to a nearly = perfect level but the laptops, with their small poor antennas, had trouble in = certain spots on my property. The amps 3 dB increase in omni-drectional power made quite the difference in link stability to these = laptops, they now regularly maintain 11 mbps even out in my back yard. My statement about the laptops having trouble hearing, while my access point did not, are based on the access point statistics = (packets, repeated packets, etc.) and on the signal quality meter = available on the laptops. It definitely made a difference here. Bob N4HY -----Original Message----- From: bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org = [mailto:bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of Stewart Teaze Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 2:56 AM To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp The obvious market for this product is to the general public, = to "increase their hub's reach"... and for this application, this = product is Snake Oil. To effectively increase communications range = using increased transmitter power alone, you need to increase power on = both sides of the link.=20 The proper way to increase hub range is thru gain antennas.=20 - Stewart=20 ... and please, I understand that this product would help = those installations using multiple hubs configured as repeaters(if all = the devices included the power increase) - but this is NOT the obvious = market that Linksys is shooting for.=20 Stephen Nichols wrote:=20 http://www.linksys.com/splash/wsb24_splash.asp --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: horseshoe7@yahoo.com To unsubscribe send a blank email to = leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now -------------------------------------------------------------------------= - Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now ------=_NextPart_000_0044_01C2AC37.17A80020 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
    The issue is not differential quality = of=20 transceivers on the link, it is that the antenna on the laptop end is = stuck in=20 the RF noise of the laptop.
     
    The amplifier = is BALANCING the signal to=20 noise ratio on the link by overcoming the increased local noise at the = laptop's=20 receiver.
     
    The access point typically has much = better=20 shielding at the frequency of interest and has an antenna that is = separated=20 from the source of the noise by several inches.
     
    Try using an external antenna on = the laptop=20 end of the link and move it around the area of the laptop and you will = see=20 significant (as much as 10db in some cases) changes in the laptop's = receive=20 S/N. Most of this difference is a change in the noise level with a = smaller=20 contribution attributable to higher receive signal strength in some=20 positions. The PCMIA slot is often a weak spot for RFI. =
     
    The amplifier is much more convenient = than an=20 external antenna on the laptop!
     
    As far points 1 & 2 on every AP = that I have=20 examined (3 different manufactures) the AP uses a stock PCMCIA 802.11b = card with=20 an external antenna. Don't know what the Linksys is like internally,=20 though.
     
    Greg Ansley
    KB4R
    ----- Original Message -----
    From:=20 Stewart=20 Teaze
    Sent: Tuesday, December 24, = 2002 3:45=20 PM
    Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys = 802.11b signal=20 amp <LYR27907-112255-2002.12.24-02.41.52--rwmcgwier#comcast.n= et@lists.tapr.org>=20 <LYR27907-112298-2002.12.24-11.46.45--rwmcgwier#comcast.n= et@lists.tapr.org>

    Why would you run coax for any distance at all?  That would be = the=20 worst thing you could do when adding antennas at these frequencies... = keep the=20 run length short, as transmission line loss at 2.4Ghz is significant.=20

    Anyway, the results you are seeing can be explained by 1 of 3 = possibilites:=20

    1) The signal generated by the original (unamplified) AP = is of=20 significantly lower quality than that of the laptops'.=20

    2) The receivers in the laptops are of significantly lower = quality=20 than that in the AP.=20

    3) A combination of 1) and 2)=20

    If it is case 1), then you probably would have been better off = going=20 with a higher-quality Access Point from the get-go (rather than a = combo=20 AP/Amp).  If it is case 2), then the amplifier has utility for = your=20 particular application; although gain antennas would have worked just = as well=20 in your situation, and worked better in the future, if you acquire = remote=20 devices with better receiver quality.=20

    In any event, if you require an amplifier at your AP to increase = your=20 communications range, you definately have a quality problem (or=20 problems) somewhere in your system.=20

    Improving communication range by increasing signal strength on only = one=20 side of a link does not usually make sense.=20

    I'm curious... what version of Linksys AP do you have?  = Earlier=20 models were notorious for their poor quality transmissions.  = Rather=20 than "patching up" a bad AP with an amplifier, you might have = even been=20 able to produce the same improved results by replacing the old AP with = a new=20 model AP by the same manufacturer.=20

    The reason I'm going into this, is because the amplifier "road" is=20 typically a slippery slope - and it is best that the manufacturers NOT = be=20 rewarded for producing crap like this.  They should be producing = BALANCED=20 quality devices (TPO, receiver quality, etc) all the way around, = from the=20 get-go.=20

     Robert McGwier <rwmcgwier@comcast.net> = wrote:=20

    Stewart:
     
    For whatever reason (I = won't guess),=20 the receiver and antenna situation in the access point is better = able=20 to
    handle the small = signal out of the=20 laptop, but the laptop receiver cannot do the reciprocal and the = RESULTS say=20 this
    is=20 so.  I can repeat these experiments perfectly and have done so=20 repeatedly.  In NJ, when you buy
    a=20 thing like this amplifier, the consumer protection laws allow you to = return=20 "if it does not work in your
    application".  I would have returned = it had I=20 not been able to repeat this experiment ad nauseum = at
    every point on my = property.
     
    Your suggestion for my application won't = quite fit=20 my needs.  I am not interested in point to point=20 communications,
    and I am not interested in putting up a = larger,=20 more efficient omni anywhere outside my office.  I am=20 interested
    in=20 my son's laptop working wherever he is, and for mine to work = wherever it is=20 on my property (even if I am being
    a=20 lazy bum surfing the web out back by the pool = or on the=20 back porch).  For me, the increased pleasure of=20 having
    this be reliable was worth the cost = without having=20 to run a single line of coax or figuring out how and=20 where
    to=20 mount the antenna.  The amplifier solved my problem and I can = prove=20 it.
     
    Seasons Greetings to one and=20 all,
    Bob McGwier
    N4HY
     
    --- --Original = Message-----
    From:=20 bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org=20 [mailto:bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of Stewart = Teaze
    Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 12:01 = PM
    To:=20 TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group
    Subject: = [ss] Re:=20 Linksys 802.11b signal amp=20 = <LYR27907-112255-2002.12.24-02.41.52--rwmcgwier#comcast.net@lists.tapr= .org>

    Dude, the "small poor antennas" on your laptops "work both = ways" (it=20 attenuates the signal at both ends)... if you got an increase in = range by=20 boosting the power on your Access Point, the only thing that = proves is=20 that the laptops were providing a significantly stronger signal = than your=20 access point!  I suppose this is just another condemnation of = the=20 Linksys router... For the money you end up spending for = the=20 "Linksys combo" (AP and amp), you would be better off getting a = higher=20 quality access point from the get-go - or, better yet, go with a=20 high-quality router AND high-gain antennas (high gain antennas, = unlike=20 amps, DO work both ways).=20

    ... and please, don't be fooled by manufacturers' advertised = specs -=20 they are all marketing lies anyway.=20

     Robert McGwier = <rwmcgwier@comcast.net> wrote:=20

    Actually,  this is almost=20 true.   I have two laptops operating in my=20 house.
    The access point had no  trouble = hearing=20 them to a nearly perfect level
    but the laptops, with their small = poor=20 antennas, had trouble in certain
    spots on my property.  The amps = 3 dB=20 increase in omni-drectional
    power made quite the difference in = link=20 stability to these laptops, they
    now regularly maintain 11 mbps even = out in my=20 back yard.
     
    My statement about the laptops having = trouble=20 hearing, while my
    access point did not,  are based = on the=20 access point statistics (packets,
    repeated packets, etc.) and on the = signal=20 quality meter available on
    the laptops.  It definitely made = a=20 difference here.
     
    Bob
    N4HY
     
    -----Original Message-----
    From:=20 bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org=20 [mailto:bounce-ss-27907@lists.tapr.org]On Behalf Of = Stewart=20 Teaze
    Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 2:56 = AM
    To:=20 TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group
    Subject: = [ss]=20 Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp

    The obvious market for this product is to the general = public, to=20 "increase their hub's reach"... and for this = application, this=20 product is Snake Oil.  To effectively increase=20 communications range using increased transmitter power = alone, you=20 need to increase power on both sides of the link.=20

    The proper way to increase hub range is thru gain antennas. =

    - Stewart=20

    ... and please, I understand that this product would help = those=20 installations using multiple hubs configured as repeaters(if = all the=20 devices included the power increase) - but this is NOT the = obvious=20 market that Linksys is shooting for.=20

     Stephen Nichols=20 <sgnichols@mindspring.com> wrote:=20 http://www.linksys.com/splash/wsb24_splash.asp




    = ---
    You=20 are currently subscribed to ss as: = horseshoe7@yahoo.com
    To=20 unsubscribe send a blank email to=20 leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org


    Do you Yahoo!?
    Yaho= o!=20 Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign= =20 up now


    Do you Yahoo!?
    Yaho= o!=20 Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign= up=20 now


    Do you Yahoo!?
    Yaho= o! Mail=20 Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign= up=20 now ------=_NextPart_000_0044_01C2AC37.17A80020-- --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Dec 26 22:25:37 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id WAA07170 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 22:25:37 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 20:24:49 -0800 From: Phil Karn User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3a) Gecko/20021212 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" CC: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3E0BD611.4030502@ka9q.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Robert McGwier wrote: > I am interested > in my son's laptop working wherever he is, and for mine to work wherever > it is on my property (even if I am being > a lazy bum surfing the web out back by the pool or on the back porch). Instead of adding an amplifier to a single base station, why not just put up a second access point to fill in the bad coverage spots of the first? Set them both to the same ESSID, and the handoffs should occur automatically. Put them on different RF channels (avoiding channel 1 to protect the satellite band, of course) and your overall network capacity will double when you and your son are using different base stations. Phil --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Thu Dec 26 23:32:06 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id XAA08818 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2002 23:32:03 -0600 (CST) From: "Darryl Smith" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 16:26:22 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 In-Reply-To: X-Scanner: exiscan *18Rn5c-0008BF-00*c552UG5DdpI* on Astaro Security Linux List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <00da01c2ad68$813d08a0$4601a8c0@DELL8000> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Phil KA9Q noted >Instead of adding an amplifier to a single base station, why not just >put up a second access point to fill in the bad coverage spots of the >first? Set them both to the same ESSID, and the handoffs should occur >automatically. Put them on different RF channels (avoiding channel 1 to >protect the satellite band, of course) and your overall network capacity >will double when you and your son are using different base stations. The only issue with this is that the RF Front Ends on the 802.11 equipment is quite wide. I suspect that there will be some adjacent channel interference meaning that the overall network capacity is not quite double. How much less is not certain. By protecting the satellite band on 'cenfer frequency #1' you are pushing the units closer together in frequency making it more likely that there will be destructive interference. This would also be the ideal scenario for automated power control in 802.11 equipment... If only part-15 had phil's rule on Eb/No for all power levels :-) Darryl --------- Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Dec 27 03:40:20 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id DAA16468 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 03:40:17 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 01:39:28 -0800 From: Phil Karn User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3a) Gecko/20021212 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" CC: Darryl@radio-active.net.au Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3E0C1FD0.1050902@ka9q.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Darryl Smith wrote: > The only issue with this is that the RF Front Ends on the 802.11 > equipment is quite wide. I suspect that there will be some adjacent > channel interference meaning that the overall network capacity is not > quite double. How much less is not certain. Do you have any numbers that could quantify this? I've long been interested in just how good (or bad) 802.11b RF front ends are, on both the TX and RX sides. What does the spectrum of a typical 802.11b card look like -- is there any filtering at all, or do you see a typical sin(x)/x spectrum? I can say that it's pretty common practice to deploy many base stations with common ESSIDs on a common LAN backbone to increase capacity and coverage throughout office buildings, hotels, etc. We do it at Qualcomm, and it seems to work well. IETF meetings typically use 40-50 base stations to cover a large hotel and convention center, and they do work quite well despite very heavy use. In any event, I don't see how you can do worse by adding extra base stations than by adding an amplifier to a single base station. And given how cheap base stations have become, I wouldn't be surprised if the extra base station is cheaper than the external RF power amplifier. Phil --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Dec 27 03:44:55 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id DAA16558 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 03:44:53 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 01:44:16 -0800 From: Phil Karn User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3a) Gecko/20021212 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Bogus Reply-To: headers References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3E0C20F0.4040302@ka9q.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Once again I see that the list processor for this group is misconfigured. It's adding a "Reply-To:" header that points to the list. This makes it tedious in most mailers to compose replies to the original sender of an article (with or without a copy to the list). Can somebody please fix this by removing this header? Thanks. Phil --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Dec 27 04:13:30 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id EAA17096 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 04:13:30 -0600 (CST) X-Originating-IP: [12.111.229.199] Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" From: "John Champa" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] The Channel Overlap Issue Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 05:12:24 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Dec 2002 10:12:24.0881 (UTC) FILETIME=[73C26210:01C2AD90] List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Bob, Phil has a good point. The problem is the part about avoiding Channel 1. That is an important consideration to avoid QRM to AO-40 downlinks, of course, so we should all stay off Channel 1 for certain. However, if you are operating under Part 97, Channel 6 (2437 MHz center frequency) is as high as you can go before you are out of the band, and you would have to go all the way down to Channel 1 to rid yourself of all channel overlap. What the local HSMM Experimenters Team is trying to establish is, it is sufficient in most instances to simply drop down 2 or 3 channels, e.g. to Channel 4 (2427 MHz) even or Channel 3 (2422 MHz) to accomplish most of the objective, i.e. is that sufficient reduction of the amount of channel overlap to avoid most of the destructive interference between channels when using two Access Points (AP) in close proximity to each other? We are conducting our first HSMM Experimenters Team Work Shop in Livingston County (Michigan) on January 4th and running what we hope will be our largest roundtable QSO to date (ad hoc mode), so we should have a few answers by then. You can check our webpage for our findings (www.arrl.org/hsmm). 73, John - K8OCL From: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group digest" Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" To: "ss digest recipients" Subject: ss digest: December 26, 2002 Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 00:00:28 -0500 TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Digest for Thursday, December 26, 2002. 1. Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp From: Phil Karn Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2002 20:24:49 -0800 X-Message-Number: 1 Robert McGwier wrote: > I am interested > in my son's laptop working wherever he is, and for mine to work wherever > it is on my property (even if I am being > a lazy bum surfing the web out back by the pool or on the back porch). Instead of adding an amplifier to a single base station, why not just put up a second access point to fill in the bad coverage spots of the first? Set them both to the same ESSID, and the handoffs should occur automatically. Put them on different RF channels (avoiding channel 1 to protect the satellite band, of course) and your overall network capacity will double when you and your son are using different base stations. Phil --- END OF DIGEST --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: k8ocl@hotmail.com To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 limited-time offer: Join now and get 3 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup&xAPID=42&PS=47575&PI=7324&DI=7474&SU= http://www.hotmail.msn.com/cgi-bin/getmsg&HL=1216hotmailtaglines_newmsn8ishere_3mf --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Dec 27 05:33:45 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id FAA17990 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 05:33:35 -0600 (CST) From: "Darryl Smith" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 22:32:31 +1100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 In-Reply-To: <3E0C1FD0.1050902@ka9q.net> X-Scanner: exiscan *18RsjO-0001tD-00*FYERFZmaUXI* on Astaro Security Linux List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <00ea01c2ad9b$a7908e40$4601a8c0@DELL8000> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Phil Wrote... >Do you have any numbers that could quantify this? I've long been >interested in just how good (or bad) 802.11b RF front ends are, on both >the TX and RX sides. What does the spectrum of a typical 802.11b card >look like -- is there any filtering at all, or do you see a typical >sin(x)/x spectrum? According to p180 of O'Reilly's 802.11 Wireless Networks the spectrum of a typical 802.11 signal looks to be sin(x)/x. It has nulls at 11 & 22 MHz, with the peaks of -30db and -50db at 33 MHz and 55 MHz offsets repectively. Notice that the nulls are offset by 11 MHz, and the frequency spacing (AKA Channel Spacing) is 5 MHz. That means that center frequencies will not line up with the nulls of the sin(x)/x. This overlap will cause some loss of throughput theoretically even if it only increases the noise. The question becomes how do systems with lots of base stations actually get the throughput... a) Near-Far problem, with the interfering base station being far. Therefore the near base station tends to get through the interference b) Inside - the worst possible RF environment. Things get absorbed by the walls. c) Good error handling d) Good protocols IMHO the most stupid thing the IEEE did with 802.11 was only have three frequencies. A fourth would have dramatically reduced the interference potential (look at a map - what is the minimum number of colours used?) I don't have actual numbers of for the receive or transmit front ends, but I seem to remember some work somewhere on this - I cant remember where. But if you think about it, there must be problems with co-channel interference darryl --------- Darryl Smith, VK2TDS POBox 169 Ingleburn NSW 2565 Australia Mobile Number 0412 929 634 [+61 4 12 929 634 International] Darryl@radio-active.net.au | www.radio-active.net.au -----Original Message----- From: Phil Karn [mailto:karn@ka9q.net] Sent: Friday, 27 December 2002 8:39 PM To: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Cc: Darryl@radio-active.net.au Subject: Re: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp Darryl Smith wrote: > The only issue with this is that the RF Front Ends on the 802.11 > equipment is quite wide. I suspect that there will be some adjacent > channel interference meaning that the overall network capacity is not > quite double. How much less is not certain. Do you have any numbers that could quantify this? I've long been interested in just how good (or bad) 802.11b RF front ends are, on both the TX and RX sides. What does the spectrum of a typical 802.11b card look like -- is there any filtering at all, or do you see a typical sin(x)/x spectrum? I can say that it's pretty common practice to deploy many base stations with common ESSIDs on a common LAN backbone to increase capacity and coverage throughout office buildings, hotels, etc. We do it at Qualcomm, and it seems to work well. IETF meetings typically use 40-50 base stations to cover a large hotel and convention center, and they do work quite well despite very heavy use. In any event, I don't see how you can do worse by adding extra base stations than by adding an amplifier to a single base station. And given how cheap base stations have become, I wouldn't be surprised if the extra base station is cheaper than the external RF power amplifier. Phil --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Dec 27 08:21:58 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id IAA21724 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 08:21:56 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: From: "Hampton, Rickey L." To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 09:20:57 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <4CEA90C46E84D411B4F600805F9F0C81078F1B63@phsexch15.mgh.harvard.edu> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by tapr.org id IAA21724 Guys, just a couple of questions... Phil Karn wrote: "What does the spectrum of a typical 802.11b card look like -- is there any filtering at all, or do you see a typical sin(x)/x spectrum?" I have a screen shot of two APs, one on channel 1, the other on channel 6, that I took with a loaner spectrum analyzer. (Mine is on order for a February delivery.) Is that what you are looking for? If so, let me know and I'll pass it along to everyone that's interested. (I don't know if the reflector will pass along attachments, but even if it does, I don't want to cause trouble for those who don't want the file.) Phil Karn also wrote: "...avoiding channel 1 to protect the satellite band, of course... My group is getting ready to deploy (whether I like it or not) a huge network in several of our hospitals. Most of it will be with 802.11b for data, but the rest will be 802.11FH for medical telemetry. As with other Part 15 users, much as I hate to say it, channel 1 figures in greatly for best usage of the spectrum for our purpose. So much for protecting the satellite band. Darryl Smith wrote: "Inside - the worst possible RF environment. Things get absorbed by the walls." Darryl, I'm not poking fun at you, but as for attenuation from walls, HA HA HA! You have GOT to be kidding! We have APs with which I can associate from distances you wouldn't believe using nothing but the patch antenna built into the Cisco card for my laptop and getting the full 11 Mbps. (That's also why we're running some pretty hefty encryption on top of the weak crap supplied as a part of 802.11b.) Once I get my spec analyzer, I want to go measure some signal strengths and knock the power down on some of these APs. Here is what NIST had to say about the range of these things in a recent paper on wireless security: "The reliable coverage range for 802.11 WLANs depends on several factors, including data rate required and capacity, sources of RF interference, physical area and characteristics, power, connectivity, and antenna usage. Theoretical ranges are from 29 meters (for 11 Mbps) in a closed office area to 485 meters (for 1 Mbps) in an open area. However, through empirical analysis, the typical range for connectivity of 802.11 equipment is approximately 50 meters (about 163 ft.) indoors. A range of 400 meters, nearly ¼ mile, makes WLAN the ideal technology for many campus applications. It is important to recognize that special high-gain antennas can increase the range to several miles." I was asked to do a site survey for one of our four story buildings. It's a rehab'ed warehouse with 5 meter ceilings and at least 50 meters long. Again, we were able to get the full 11 Mbps throughput anywhere in the building with only ONE access point located in the middle of the ground floor. It was using the stock whips and the laptop was using the patch antenna. So far, the only thing I've seen that's effective in attenuating or blocking these signals is aluminum siding and storm windows. So, the next question is, what kinds of tests would you like to see run? In about a month, I have to do some coexistence tests between the 802.11FH and .11b stuff. (The stuff is to be installed in the same physical areas, by the way.) I also want to do some tests to see what happens to the throughput when the APs aren't only on channels 1, 6, and 11. If you can come up with some meaningful tests, I'll do my best to run them in as controlled an environment as possible. I'm really hoping all this Part 15 ss stuff works as advertised when it comes to interference. It's not going to look good if hospitals and hams jam each other. Rick Hampton, WD8KEL Wireless Communications Manager Partners HealthCare Systems One Constitution Center, 2nd Floor Charlestown, MA 02129 Phone: 617-726-6633 --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Dec 27 12:49:05 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id MAA01577 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 12:49:03 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 10:48:22 -0800 From: Phil Karn User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3a) Gecko/20021212 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" CC: TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3E0CA076.1090502@ka9q.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Hampton, Rickey L. wrote: > I have a screen shot of two APs, one on channel 1, the other on channel 6, > that I took with a loaner spectrum analyzer. (Mine is on order for a > February delivery.) Is that what you are looking for? Yes. Did you take care to avoid the usual artifacts of taking the spectra of such short, low duty-cycle signals? You need to use a relatively wide resolution bandwidth and fast sweep, and integrate many packets over time. > My group is getting ready to deploy (whether I like it or not) a huge > network in several of our hospitals. Most of it will be with 802.11b for > data, but the rest will be 802.11FH for medical telemetry. Why not just use DS for everything? The channel contention algorithms work better when the co-channel base stations can hear and obey each others' hold-off packets. As with other > Part 15 users, much as I hate to say it, channel 1 figures in greatly for > best usage of the spectrum for our purpose. So much for protecting the > satellite band. Well, since the amateur satellite service is using 2400 MHz as a downlink right now, it's probably more important to avoid channel 1 in residential areas near ham operators than in large institutional settings away from residential areas. Phil --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Fri Dec 27 14:30:02 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id OAA06317 for ; Fri, 27 Dec 2002 14:30:01 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 12:29:15 -0800 From: Phil Karn User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3a) Gecko/20021212 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" CC: "'TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group'" Subject: [ss] Re: Linksys 802.11b signal amp References: <00ea01c2ad9b$a7908e40$4601a8c0@DELL8000> In-Reply-To: <00ea01c2ad9b$a7908e40$4601a8c0@DELL8000> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: <3E0CB81B.9010306@ka9q.net> Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk Darryl Smith wrote: > The question becomes how do systems with lots of base stations actually > get the throughput... > > a) Near-Far problem, with the interfering base station being > far. Therefore the near base station tends to get through the > interference Yes. If all the users are much closer to one base station than to the others, then everything works well. > b) Inside - the worst possible RF environment. Things get > absorbed by the walls. Actually, absorption is *good* in a frequency reuse environment like the one we're talking about here. The very last thing you want in a cellular network is inverse-square (free space) propagation. Are you familar with Olbers' Paradox in astronomy? It poses a seemingly simple question: why is the sky dark at night? If the universe is static, infinite and uniformly filled with an infinite number of stars, then in any direction you look you'd be looking at a star. The night sky should be uniformly bright, so bright that we'd immediately burn to a crisp. The resolution to the paradox lies in its erroneous assumptions. The universe is not infinite and static. It's expanding. You have red shifts that increase with distance, and this has the effect of increasing the "path loss" from a distant galaxy to more than simple inverse square. Similarly, an infinite cellular network cannot function unless the propagation losses are greater than inverse square. Otherwise, each base station would be lost in the din of countless remote base stations on the same frequency. So while you're cursing all those walls and obstacles as you set up your large institutional 802.11 network, keep in mind that these same obstacles allow you to build a network with much greater aggregate capacity than would otherwise be possible. And it further underscores the superiority of adding base stations to fill in coverage holes instead of increasing the power level of the existing base stations. Phil --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Mon Dec 30 14:18:01 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id OAA09799 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 14:17:59 -0600 (CST) From: "Stephen Nichols" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] DoD and 802.11a Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 14:17:21 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4920.2300 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/59/28639.html --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org From bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Mon Dec 30 14:21:33 2002 Received: from lists.tapr.org (lists.tapr.org [204.17.217.24]) by tapr.org (8.9.3/8.9.3/1.13) with SMTP id OAA10487 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 14:21:32 -0600 (CST) From: "Stephen Nichols" To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" Subject: [ss] another DoD and 802.11 Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 14:20:57 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4920.2300 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: List-Software: Lyris Server version 3.0 List-Subscribe: List-Owner: X-List-Host: Tucson Amateur Packet Radio Reply-To: "TAPR Spread Spectrum Special Interest Group" X-Message-Id: Sender: bounce-ss-6751@lists.tapr.org Precedence: bulk This requires a free NYT registration: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/17/technology/17WIRE.html --- You are currently subscribed to ss as: lyris.ss@tapr.org To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ss-6751T@lists.tapr.org