From RLANIER@mailb.harris.com Wed Oct 01 07:49:44 1997 Received: from suc1a.harris.com (suc1a.corp.harris.com [137.237.104.13]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id HAA03311 for ; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 07:49:39 -0500 (CDT) Received: from mailb.harris.com (eds-email-1.ess.harris.com [130.41.38.127]) by suc1a.harris.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id IAA11693 for ; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 08:49:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ccMail by mailb.harris.com (IMA Internet Exchange 1.04b) id 432463e0; Wed, 1 Oct 97 08:46:54 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 08:48:02 -0400 Message-ID: <432463e0@mailb.harris.com> Return-receipt-to: RLANIER@mailb.harris.com (RLANIER) From: RLANIER@mailb.harris.com (RLANIER) Subject: Re: [SS:1740] Re: 1997 ARRL and TAPR DCC Reminder To: ss@tapr.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: cc:Mail note part Cool Tony ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: [SS:1740] Re: 1997 ARRL and TAPR DCC Reminder Author: ss@tapr.org at smtp Date: 9/30/97 7:14 PM I am doing up a web page now covering the 900MHz FHSS radio that the paper and part of the Sunday seminar will produce. If we the audio record from the session is good that will be made available as well. I have all the audio from the Dayton presention, but the system I took messed up somehow and a lot of the audio doesn't sound very good when encoded. I have been working on that while I can...but hopefully the system will not have such problems at the DCC. Cheers - Greg > Since I can't make the conference, will this material be available? It > would be helpful if the the talks could be available in a audio format > as well, such as RealAudio. Or possibly notes. > > I would really like to here what they have to say. I can't break from > work right now - I have an ASIC due in December! > > Tony KE4ATO From wd5ivd@tapr.org Wed Oct 01 13:43:02 1997 Received: from [208.134.134.40] ([208.134.134.40]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id NAA06258 for ; Wed, 1 Oct 1997 13:42:49 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 1 Oct 1997 13:36:02 -0500 To: " Spread Spectrum " From: "Greg Jones, WD5IVD" Subject: ARRL and TAPR DCC If you can make the DCC this year, it should be an excellent time to meet and discuss potential and ongoing SS activities. Besides the indepth technical seminar on Sunday conducted by Dewayne Hendricks, Tom McDermott, and Phil Karn, there are will be several other SS papers and sessions happening. Hope to see everyone at this year's DCC in Baltimore. http://www.tapr.org/dcc Cheers - Greg, WD5IVD ----- Greg Jones, WD5IVD Austin, Texas wd5ivd@tapr.org http://www.tapr.org/~wd5ivd From critta66@shadow.net Thu Oct 02 20:37:21 1997 Received: from anshar.shadow.net (anshar.shadow.net [204.177.71.2]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id UAA01475 for ; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 20:37:20 -0500 (CDT) Received: from dazoo.shadow.net (ppp-12.shadow.net [209.4.38.32]) by anshar.shadow.net (8.8.7/8.7.3) with SMTP id VAA00272 for ; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 21:38:14 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <3.0.32.19971002213316.007d2790@shadow.net> X-Sender: critta66@shadow.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 21:33:27 -0400 To: ss@tapr.org From: Chris Subject: ethernet radio link implementation Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hello, Im looking for an easy way to set up a 2.3 ghz or 10 ghz high speed ethernet radio link. Ive seen the plans in the 1993 arrl book for the 10ghz link but i think it was a little too old. If anyone knows where i can find information on building such a link or know someone who has made something like this please reply.. thanks KF4MYN From lawrence@javanet.com Fri Oct 03 01:10:41 1997 Received: from pos-srv4100.javanet.com ([208.134.56.21]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id BAA00908 for ; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 01:10:40 -0500 (CDT) Received: from as4100a.javanet.com (as4100a.javanet.com [205.219.162.8]) by pos-srv4100.javanet.com (8.8.6/8.7) with ESMTP id CAA17127; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 02:06:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ljgruber (bos-us638.javanet.com [209.94.141.53]) by as4100a.javanet.com (8.8.6/8.7) with SMTP id CAA02915; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 02:06:51 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19971003020640.006b40fc@javanet.com> X-Sender: lawrence@javanet.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.3 (32) Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 02:06:40 -0400 To: ss@tapr.org From: Lawrence Gruber Subject: Re: [SS:1744] ethernet radio link implementation Cc: critta66@shadow.net In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19971002213316.007d2790@shadow.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Im looking for an easy way to set up a 2.3 ghz or 10 ghz high speed >ethernet radio link. Ive seen the plans in the 1993 arrl book for the >10ghz link but i think it was a little too old. If anyone knows where i >can find information on building such a link or know someone who has made >something like this please reply.. > >thanks >KF4MYN Check out Glenn Elmore's: W6GN's Higher Speed Packet Page at: http://www.tapr.org/~n6gn/ Also, The Slovenian Packet Radio Network Page at: http://lois.kud-fp.si/hamradio/packet.html Matjaz Vidmar's (S53MV) article's (23 & 12 cm./1.22 Mbps) was published in 15th ARRL & TAPR Digital Comm. Conference, 1966, and is available from TAPR. It also appeared in VHF Communications, No. 28 (& 29 for the 23 cm. article) 1966. Good Luck! Larry (Lawrence) Gruber Medford, Massachusetts USA lawrence@javanet.com From davek@komacke.com Fri Oct 03 13:27:37 1997 Received: from komacke.com (mg130-074.ricochet.net [204.179.130.74]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id NAA18267 for ; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 13:27:28 -0500 (CDT) Received: from musty.kobie.komacke.com (musty.kobie.komacke.com [192.168.1.2]) by komacke.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id LAA21873 for ; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 11:27:20 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19971002205201.006b9d50@mailhost> X-Header1: Finger for my PGP key X-Sender: davepost@mailhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32) Date: Thu, 02 Oct 1997 20:52:01 -0700 To: ss@tapr.org From: Dave Koberstein Subject: external switching for ISM SS products Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I recently read about a useful device for those employing OTS ISM SS products in the 2.4 GHz band. The M/A Com SW-356 SPDT switch takes a 5V-DC control signal on the RF feed line. One of these devices could be used as part of a circuit switching in/out a power amp and/or pre-amp. The switching latency is on the order of 20 ns, which should be fast enough for most radios out there. I would imagine an RF detector could be used to create the control signal. The power capacity is rated at 1W (1-dB compression) and isolation is around 15 dB. Insertion loss is about 1.2 dB. Don't know how much these things cost. Hope they aren't too expensive. I imagine they'll be useful for those that like the building-block approach to microwave. On another topic, if you are interested in using the Proxim RangeLAN2 under linux, check my web site for a driver: http://www.komacke.com. Also, Proxim can configure their cards to operate in the ham 2.4 band by special request. Send them a message via their web site. Davek ____________________________________________________________ Dave Koberstein keep in touch: davek@komacke.com / http://www.komacke.com work: davek@proxim.com / http://www.proxim.com ham internet: n9dk@n9dk.ampr.org [44.4.12.172] (ax.25/PBBS: n9dk@w6yx.#nocal.ca.usa.noam) From wd5ivd@tapr.org Tue Oct 07 10:10:33 1997 Received: from [208.134.134.40] ([208.134.134.40]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id KAA15421; Tue, 7 Oct 1997 10:10:20 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 09:59:17 -0500 To: "TAPR-BB list mailing", " tacgps ", " Spread Spectrum ", "NETSIG list mailing", "HF SIG list mailing" From: "Greg Jones, WD5IVD" Subject: AMRAD meeting Thur of DCC Participants in the 1997 Digital Communications Conference are invited to attend the regular monthly meeting of the Amateur Radio Research and Development club (AMRAD), Thursday evening at 7:30 PM in the lower meeting room of the Dolley Madison Branch Libary, McLean, Virginia. The library is located near the intersection of VA Rte 123 (Dolley Madison Blvd) and Old Dominion Drive. This month's meeting is devoted to the "dc" band of anywhere from 73 kHz to 190 kHz. ARRL has stated an amateur requirement for access to a low-frequency band and NTIA has accepted the justification. There are still many steps needed to acquire the band but interest is building among experimenters. American LF advocates are watching activities in Europe where CEPT is planning a "harmonised" band around 143 kHz. Bob Laney will be one of the (informal) speakers for this Thursdays meeting. He has a wonderful LF set-up and is even a fan of amateur seismology. He'll be bringing photos and share his experiences in the LF arena. From djk@tobit.co.uk Tue Oct 07 11:17:21 1997 Received: from tobit.co.uk (dirku.demon.co.uk [158.152.30.189]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with SMTP id LAA18170 for ; Tue, 7 Oct 1997 11:17:09 -0500 (CDT) Received: (qmail 1829 invoked by uid 500); 7 Oct 1997 16:16:58 -0000 Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 17:16:58 +0100 (BST) From: Dirk Koopman Reply-To: djk@tobit.co.uk To: ss@tapr.org Subject: Re: [SS:1747] AMRAD meeting Thur of DCC In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 7 Oct 1997, Greg Jones, WD5IVD wrote: > This month's meeting is devoted to the "dc" band of anywhere from 73 kHz to > 190 kHz. ARRL has stated an amateur requirement for access to a > low-frequency band and NTIA has accepted the justification. There are still > many steps needed to acquire the band but interest is building among > experimenters. American LF advocates are watching activities in Europe > where CEPT is planning a "harmonised" band around 143 kHz. > It has been announced as the "136Khz" band - width unknown as yet. -- Dirk-Jan Koopman Tel/Fax: +44 1362 696076 Mobile: +44 973 333806 Computer Consultant Email: djk@tobit.co.uk or G1TLH@GB7TLH.#35.GBR.EU "The typewriting machine, when played with expression, is no more annoying than the piano when played by a sister or near relation." --Oscar Wilde From greg@tu.koszalin.pl Sun Oct 12 07:57:25 1997 Received: from lew.tu.koszalin.pl (lew.tu.koszalin.pl [194.92.198.1]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id HAA12373 for ; Sun, 12 Oct 1997 07:57:17 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from greg@localhost) by lew.tu.koszalin.pl (8.8.4/8.8.4) id OAA11433; Sun, 12 Oct 1997 14:52:46 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 14:52:45 +0200 (MET DST) From: Grzegorz Siwicki To: ss@tapr.org Subject: Publication info, pse In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970923191133.0097bb70@uisx.skd.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Hello, Does anybody know the authors and the publishing house of "Digital Satellite Communications" ? Thank you for any information. 73 de Greg SP1RKV Koszalin, Poland greg@tu.koszalin.pl From rwhiting@winternet.com Sun Oct 12 14:14:23 1997 Received: from icicle.winternet.com (adm@icicle.winternet.com [198.174.169.13]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id OAA05579 for ; Sun, 12 Oct 1997 14:14:22 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from adm@localhost) by icicle.winternet.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id OAA15736 for ; Sun, 12 Oct 1997 14:14:19 -0500 (CDT) Received: from ppp-67-18.dialup.winternet.com(204.246.67.18) by icicle.winternet.com via smap (V2.0) id xma015715; Sun, 12 Oct 97 14:14:06 -0500 Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19971012141450.0069d5c8@mail.winternet.com> X-Sender: rwhiting@mail.winternet.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 14:14:50 -0500 To: ss@tapr.org From: The Whiting Household Subject: Re: Publication info, pse In-Reply-To: <199710121307.IAA12926@tapr.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Greg, I checked out Amazon Bookstore (URL www.amazon.com) and did a search on "Digital Satellite Communications." It returned a number of similar titles. One was Ha, Tri T. (1990), "Digital Satellite Communications," NY: McGraw-Hill. But, it was listed as out of print! I suggest you go to the URL and check out the titles and the descriptions of the books. Regards/ Rick At 08:07 10/12/97 -0500, you wrote: >Hello, > >Does anybody know the authors and the publishing house of "Digital Satellite >Communications" ? > >Thank you for any information. > >73 de Greg SP1RKV >Koszalin, Poland >greg@tu.koszalin.pl > ----------------------------------------------------------------- | Richard A. (Rick) Whiting Home Phone: +1 612 550-1213 | | RF Engineer, AirTouch Cellular Work Phone: +1 612 595-5065 | | 5780 Rosewood Ln. N. Fax: +1 612 595-5108 | | Plymouth, MN 55442-1411 E-Mail: rwhiting@winternet.com | ----------------------------------------------------------------- From vk2tds@ozemail.com.au Sun Oct 12 16:38:29 1997 Received: from oznet11.ozemail.com.au (oznet11.ozemail.com.au [203.2.192.118]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id QAA13785 for ; Sun, 12 Oct 1997 16:38:27 -0500 (CDT) Received: from ozemail.com.au (vna-va6-18.ix.netcom.com [207.223.176.210]) by oznet11.ozemail.com.au (8.8.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA11889 for ; Mon, 13 Oct 1997 07:38:18 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <34414260.A7B71941@ozemail.com.au> Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 17:34:24 -0400 From: Darryl Smith X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.02 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ss@tapr.org Subject: TAPR SS Alpha Boards References: <199710121307.IAA12926@tapr.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1; boundary="------------ms952F0DAEA7147FAE5ADC1E6A" This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format. --------------ms952F0DAEA7147FAE5ADC1E6A Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi There. I just had the opotunity to see the unpopulated prototype of the Spread Spectrum Transmitter TAPR is working on. I have the following comments. These comments are based partly on the paper I presented to the TNC. I love the Idea of the board. Basically though I think that the cost will be quite high for the whole board. So I have a method for reducing the total cost of the SS Transmitting System. Basically as the quantities go up, dollars go down. The modification I would like to see would be to have the following pins available on headers on the board. 3 SYNCH PORTS (All except Ethernet) [Including the ones connected to the viterbi encoder] 2 ASYNCH Ports 1 BDM port. This would cost about a fraction of a cent to add to the circuit board. Secondly, I would then like to see TAPR sell this board with memory, Ethernet, 68360 and headers; basically without the viterbi encoder, and without all the I&Q encoder and decoder stuff. This would give me a TNC that I could interface to at little cost and easally create the ultimate TNC, with 3 radio ports and 2 modem/serial ports; with ethernet ports. When I suggested this at the SS presentation at the DCC the comment was made that maybe I should design my own board. I can do that, but why should I? The board is 99% of what I want. TAPR have funded it. VERY FEW people I know would purchase a board like this, when at $349 I can purchase a similar system commercially. BUT with a partially populated board, for well under $200 I am sure that the 3+2 TNC with ethernet would be buildable. OK - Double the inventry for the partially populated board? They are actually going to sell more than the SS full model. Anyway, do not discard these ideas. I am a member. These ideas are also held by many other members. Darryl VK2TDS --------------ms952F0DAEA7147FAE5ADC1E6A Content-Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" Content-Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature MIIQngYJKoZIhvcNAQcCoIIQjzCCEIsCAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMAsGCSqGSIb3DQEHAaCC DwwwggpWMIIJv6ADAgECAhBNufKq2fQxOKEMhZogsXYtMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBAUAMGIxETAP BgNVBAcTCEludGVybmV0MRcwFQYDVQQKEw5WZXJpU2lnbiwgSW5jLjE0MDIGA1UECxMrVmVy aVNpZ24gQ2xhc3MgMSBDQSAtIEluZGl2aWR1YWwgU3Vic2NyaWJlcjAeFw05NzA4MDIwMDAw MDBaFw05ODA4MDIyMzU5NTlaMIIBHjERMA8GA1UEBxMISW50ZXJuZXQxFzAVBgNVBAoTDlZl cmlTaWduLCBJbmMuMTQwMgYDVQQLEytWZXJpU2lnbiBDbGFzcyAxIENBIC0gSW5kaXZpZHVh bCBTdWJzY3JpYmVyMUYwRAYDVQQLEz13d3cudmVyaXNpZ24uY29tL3JlcG9zaXRvcnkvQ1BT IEluY29ycC4gYnkgUmVmLixMSUFCLkxURChjKTk2MTMwMQYDVQQLEypEaWdpdGFsIElEIENs YXNzIDEgLSBOZXRzY2FwZSBGdWxsIFNlcnZpY2UxFzAVBgNVBAMTDkRhcnJ5bCBSIFNtaXRo MSQwIgYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFhV2azJ0ZHNAb3plbWFpbC5jb20uYXUwXDANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEF AANLADBIAkEA5epUXt4wi7NNoSMZh+g9NiY0qzeKimvVAaeVVzkYN6q0nx0NzRVJKaTQ8BQ1 vs7GUCteoAX9QBiDqH4FYDfVXQIDAQABo4IHkTCCB40wCQYDVR0TBAIwADCCAh8GA1UdAwSC AhYwggISMIICDjCCAgoGC2CGSAGG+EUBBwEBMIIB+RaCAadUaGlzIGNlcnRpZmljYXRlIGlu Y29ycG9yYXRlcyBieSByZWZlcmVuY2UsIGFuZCBpdHMgdXNlIGlzIHN0cmljdGx5IHN1Ympl Y3QgdG8sIHRoZSBWZXJpU2lnbiBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0aW9uIFByYWN0aWNlIFN0YXRlbWVudCAo Q1BTKSwgYXZhaWxhYmxlIGF0OiBodHRwczovL3d3dy52ZXJpc2lnbi5jb20vQ1BTOyBieSBF LW1haWwgYXQgQ1BTLXJlcXVlc3RzQHZlcmlzaWduLmNvbTsgb3IgYnkgbWFpbCBhdCBWZXJp U2lnbiwgSW5jLiwgMjU5MyBDb2FzdCBBdmUuLCBNb3VudGFpbiBWaWV3LCBDQSA5NDA0MyBV U0EgVGVsLiArMSAoNDE1KSA5NjEtODgzMCBDb3B5cmlnaHQgKGMpIDE5OTYgVmVyaVNpZ24s IEluYy4gIEFsbCBSaWdodHMgUmVzZXJ2ZWQuIENFUlRBSU4gV0FSUkFOVElFUyBESVNDTEFJ TUVEIGFuZCBMSUFCSUxJVFkgTElNSVRFRC6gDgYMYIZIAYb4RQEHAQEBoQ4GDGCGSAGG+EUB BwEBAjAsMCoWKGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LnZlcmlzaWduLmNvbS9yZXBvc2l0b3J5L0NQUyAwEQYJ YIZIAYb4QgEBBAQDAgeAMDYGCWCGSAGG+EIBCAQpFidodHRwczovL3d3dy52ZXJpc2lnbi5j b20vcmVwb3NpdG9yeS9DUFMwggSHBglghkgBhvhCAQ0EggR4FoIEdENBVVRJT046IFRoZSBD b21tb24gTmFtZSBpbiB0aGlzIENsYXNzIDEgRGlnaXRhbCAKSUQgaXMgbm90IGF1dGhlbnRp Y2F0ZWQgYnkgVmVyaVNpZ24uIEl0IG1heSBiZSB0aGUKaG9sZGVyJ3MgcmVhbCBuYW1lIG9y IGFuIGFsaWFzLiBWZXJpU2lnbiBkb2VzIGF1dGgtCmVudGljYXRlIHRoZSBlLW1haWwgYWRk cmVzcyBvZiB0aGUgaG9sZGVyLgoKVGhpcyBjZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZSBpbmNvcnBvcmF0ZXMgYnkg cmVmZXJlbmNlLCBhbmQgCml0cyB1c2UgaXMgc3RyaWN0bHkgc3ViamVjdCB0bywgdGhlIFZl cmlTaWduIApDZXJ0aWZpY2F0aW9uIFByYWN0aWNlIFN0YXRlbWVudCAoQ1BTKSwgYXZhaWxh YmxlCmluIHRoZSBWZXJpU2lnbiByZXBvc2l0b3J5IGF0OiAKaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cudmVyaXNp Z24uY29tOyBieSBFLW1haWwgYXQKQ1BTLXJlcXVlc3RzQHZlcmlzaWduLmNvbTsgb3IgYnkg bWFpbCBhdCBWZXJpU2lnbiwKSW5jLiwgMjU5MyBDb2FzdCBBdmUuLCBNb3VudGFpbiBWaWV3 LCBDQSA5NDA0MyBVU0EKCkNvcHlyaWdodCAoYykxOTk2IFZlcmlTaWduLCBJbmMuICBBbGwg UmlnaHRzIApSZXNlcnZlZC4gQ0VSVEFJTiBXQVJSQU5USUVTIERJU0NMQUlNRUQgQU5EIApM SUFCSUxJVFkgTElNSVRFRC4KCldBUk5JTkc6IFRIRSBVU0UgT0YgVEhJUyBDRVJUSUZJQ0FU RSBJUyBTVFJJQ1RMWQpTVUJKRUNUIFRPIFRIRSBWRVJJU0lHTiBDRVJUSUZJQ0FUSU9OIFBS QUNUSUNFClNUQVRFTUVOVC4gIFRIRSBJU1NVSU5HIEFVVEhPUklUWSBESVNDTEFJTVMgQ0VS VEFJTgpJTVBMSUVEIEFORCBFWFBSRVNTIFdBUlJBTlRJRVMsIElOQ0xVRElORyBXQVJSQU5U SUVTCk9GIE1FUkNIQU5UQUJJTElUWSBPUiBGSVRORVNTIEZPUiBBIFBBUlRJQ1VMQVIKUFVS UE9TRSwgQU5EIFdJTEwgTk9UIEJFIExJQUJMRSBGT1IgQ09OU0VRVUVOVElBTCwKUFVOSVRJ VkUsIEFORCBDRVJUQUlOIE9USEVSIERBTUFHRVMuIFNFRSBUSEUgQ1BTCkZPUiBERVRBSUxT LgoKQ29udGVudHMgb2YgdGhlIFZlcmlTaWduIHJlZ2lzdGVyZWQKbm9udmVyaWZpZWRTdWJq ZWN0QXR0cmlidXRlcyBleHRlbnNpb24gdmFsdWUgc2hhbGwgCm5vdCBiZSBjb25zaWRlcmVk IGFzIGFjY3VyYXRlIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIHZhbGlkYXRlZCAKYnkgdGhlIElBLjCBhgYKYIZI AYb4RQEGAwR4FnZkNDY1MmJkNjNmMjA0NzAyOTI5ODc2M2M5ZDJmMjc1MDY5YzczNTliZWQx YjA1OWRhNzViYzRiYzk3MDE3NDdkYTVjN2Y0MTQxYmVhZGIyYmQyZTg5MjA2YWY2ZWY3ZDIx MTQ5OWJhMmJkNDNmNGU0OTY2NTQxMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBAUAA4GBACaQJ/F/Ua1uvUoqnGNn +RETaY3OsPW/BYrVi/xwM5N95x1HwN/Vhmz5FsXMXuTHnL61RSoV6VlshTv7+Xkw+hyOC1ne fhbVJj1g93oRPJE2+iJpU6U5MFAB7lzH/fszM4ePZe3VnNl3N2xk0PfHBx76sX+kT32ttOtw om3XDLSBMIICeTCCAeKgAwIBAgIQUh81HfJwfgArvspZhwTVOTANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQIFADBf MQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzEXMBUGA1UEChMOVmVyaVNpZ24sIEluYy4xNzA1BgNVBAsTLkNsYXNz IDEgUHVibGljIFByaW1hcnkgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlvbiBBdXRob3JpdHkwHhcNOTYwNjI3MDAw MDAwWhcNOTkwNjI3MjM1OTU5WjBiMREwDwYDVQQHEwhJbnRlcm5ldDEXMBUGA1UEChMOVmVy aVNpZ24sIEluYy4xNDAyBgNVBAsTK1ZlcmlTaWduIENsYXNzIDEgQ0EgLSBJbmRpdmlkdWFs IFN1YnNjcmliZXIwgZ8wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADgY0AMIGJAoGBALYUps9N0AUN2Moj0G+q tCmSY44s+G+W1y6ddksRsTaNV8nD/RzGuv4eCLozypXqvuNbzQaot3kdRCrtc/KxUoNoEHBk kdc+a/n3XZ0UQ5tul0WYgUfRLcvdu3LXTD9xquJA8lQ5vBbuz3zsuts/bCqzFrGGEp2ukzTV uNXQ9z6pAgMBAAGjMzAxMA8GA1UdEwQIMAYBAf8CAQEwCwYDVR0PBAQDAgEGMBEGCWCGSAGG +EIBAQQEAwIBBjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQIFAAOBgQDB+vcC51fKEXXGnAz6K3dPh0UXO+PSwdoP WDmOrpWZA6GooTj+eZqTFwuXhjnHymg0ZrvHiEX2yAwF7r6XJe/g1G7kf512XM59uhSirguf +2dbSKVnJa8ZZIj2ctgpJ6o3EmqxKK8ngxhlbI3tQJ5NxHiohuzpLFC/pvkN27CmSjCCAjEw ggGaAgUCpAAAATANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQIFADBfMQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzEXMBUGA1UEChMOVmVy aVNpZ24sIEluYy4xNzA1BgNVBAsTLkNsYXNzIDEgUHVibGljIFByaW1hcnkgQ2VydGlmaWNh dGlvbiBBdXRob3JpdHkwHhcNOTYwMTI5MDAwMDAwWhcNOTkxMjMxMjM1OTU5WjBfMQswCQYD VQQGEwJVUzEXMBUGA1UEChMOVmVyaVNpZ24sIEluYy4xNzA1BgNVBAsTLkNsYXNzIDEgUHVi bGljIFByaW1hcnkgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlvbiBBdXRob3JpdHkwgZ8wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQAD gY0AMIGJAoGBAOUZv22jVmEtmUhx9mfeuY3rt56GgAqRDvo4Ja9GiILlc6igmyRdDR/MZW4M sNBWhBiHmgabEKFz37RYOWtuwfYV1aioP6oSBo0xrH+wNNePNGeICc0UEeJORVZpH3gCgNrc R5EpuzbJY1zF4Ncth3uhtzKwezC6Ki8xqu6jZ9rbAgMBAAEwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQECBQADgYEA UnO6mlXc3D+CfbCQmGIqgkx2AG4lPdXCCXBXAQwPdx8YofscYA6gdTtJIUH+p1wtTEJJ0/8o 2Izqnf7JB+J3glMj3lXzzkST+vpMvco281tmsp7I8gxeXtShtCEJM8o7WfySwjj8rdmWJOAt +qMp9TNoeE60vJ9pNeKomJRzO8QxggFaMIIBVgIBATB2MGIxETAPBgNVBAcTCEludGVybmV0 MRcwFQYDVQQKEw5WZXJpU2lnbiwgSW5jLjE0MDIGA1UECxMrVmVyaVNpZ24gQ2xhc3MgMSBD QSAtIEluZGl2aWR1YWwgU3Vic2NyaWJlcgIQTbnyqtn0MTihDIWaILF2LTAJBgUrDgMCGgUA oH0wGAYJKoZIhvcNAQkDMQsGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAcBgkqhkiG9w0BCQUxDxcNOTcxMDEyMjEz NDI1WjAeBgkqhkiG9w0BCQ8xETAPMA0GCCqGSIb3DQMCAgEoMCMGCSqGSIb3DQEJBDEWBBRN jC4dUL9U0MNKTRY13dZUsx6e8jANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAARA21I3w/DFy7gjFkNvgFS6Ro1J U6iZvPv1mq4f2DWC7siVqKd8u3TtBRl/nb2da6ZZthR3ZsSAfLcVL1YS8HB7dg== --------------ms952F0DAEA7147FAE5ADC1E6A-- From hwm@netcom.com Sun Oct 12 20:41:51 1997 Received: from mm.wd6dod.ampr.org (hwm@netcom20.netcom.com [192.100.81.133]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id UAA04510 for ; Sun, 12 Oct 1997 20:41:46 -0500 (CDT) Received: from localhost (by mm.wd6dod.ampr.org (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA00106 for ; Sun, 12 Oct 1997 18:42:20 -0700 Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 18:42:20 -0700 (PDT) From: Bob Lorenzini To: ss@tapr.org Subject: Re: [SS:1751] TAPR SS Alpha Boards In-Reply-To: <34414260.A7B71941@ozemail.com.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Where can the rest of us see the details on these boards or have I missed something. I'am begining to think that those of us on this list are the last to know about what is going on. Bob - wd6dod From k4hg@tapr.org Sun Oct 12 21:06:47 1997 Received: from [199.174.218.160] (hd38-160.hil.compuserve.com [199.174.218.160]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with SMTP id VAA06039 for ; Sun, 12 Oct 1997 21:06:43 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199710130206.VAA06039@tapr.org> Subject: Re: [SS:1752] Re: TAPR SS Alpha Boards Date: Sun, 12 Oct 97 22:07:14 -0400 x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0, March 15, 1997 From: Steve Dimse K4HG To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" On 10/12/97 9:43 PM Bob Lorenzini (hwm@netcom.com) wrote: > Where can the rest of us see the details on these boards or have I >missed something. I'am begining to think that those of us on this >list are the last to know about what is going on. > Should have been at DCC! In any case, release of this radio is a very long time away, upwards of a year. All that was shown at DCC was unpopulated first rev circuit boards. Lots of details about the radio was released, and it sounds very exciting, but we all will have to wait a while. Steve K4HG From wd5ivd@tapr.org Sun Oct 12 22:43:35 1997 Received: from [206.133.14.67] (sdn-ts-030mdrelRP16.dialsprint.net [206.133.14.67]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id WAA13599 for ; Sun, 12 Oct 1997 22:43:32 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <34414260.A7B71941@ozemail.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 12 Oct 1997 22:40:02 -0500 To: ss@tapr.org From: "Greg Jones, WD5IVD" Subject: Re: [SS:1752] Re: TAPR SS Alpha Boards Hi gang. As many of you might not know -- a good many of us have been attending the ARRL/TAPR 1997 DCC in Baltimore this weekend. It was great to get to visit with the folks on this list that got to attend. If you didn't make this one -- then be sure to make next year's conference (location will be worked on by the committee in the next several weeks). One of the high points of the conference was the banquet talk by the VP of the Japan PRUG (Packet Radio Users Group). They are doing some really exciting things and it was a great opportunity to listen, ask questions, and share information about their work. One of the papers presented was on the TAPR 900Mhz FHSS radio project which has been mentioned in the last 2 PSRs. (Bob -- do you get to read the PSR ?) The full paper will be printed in the next PSR or you can get it and all the other papers by getting the proceedings from TAPR or the ARRL. The conference was one of the best ever! We had over 150 people at the conference and lots of major stuff was accomplished and presented. The SS Design and Theory seminar on Sunday was hot stuff! Over 80 people attened and the APRS National Symposium on Friday had a very large turnout. If you have the chance, make plans to attend next years conference. One of the papers presented at conference was the TAPR 900Mhz FHSS radio project. I'll be creating a web page concerning the project now that we have some information to make available. The presentations and the realaudio segments on the site. A must note -- please do not e-mail the team. If you have questions, comments, or concerns, e-mail me. The team from the beginning has asked for a certain amount of quite and room in which to work. The TAPR BoD agreed with this request when we voted funding for the project at the Dayton Board meeting, which was reported in the PSR under the minutes of the meeting. Anyway, as it stands right now -- the boards that are mentioned are the __PROTOTYPE__ ver .00001 boards. These came from the board shop just this last wed and the team saw for the first time Friday after they got FedExed to the conference. There will be months of work getting the design further down the road and tested. Now -- as to Darryl's comments. To understand what Darryl is talking about you'll need to read both the papers -- what the 900Mhz radio team wrote and the one that Darryl submitted and presented on (that of next generation TNCs) -- this will explain what Darryl is looking for and why the interest. If Darryl wants to submit a proposal to TAPR concerning what he has in mind and what he wants to develop and if one of the board sets can be spared during the prototype phase of the project -- I am sure TAPR and the project team would consider his request. I am not sure why Darryl just didn't talk to me at the conference after the presentation and we could probably have worked something out then and there with most of the team around and available -- but that opportunity has been missed now. I look forward to getting a message from Darryl outling what support he might request for R&D as a member of TAPR so that if the project can't handle the request now, we could budget in one extra board set in a future development run and then see what he might be able to deliver from his end with respect to software that might create additional opportunities for TAPR with the project development money being spent. I am on the road until after the AMSAT conference and don't expect to start putting the various DCC web pages together until then. Cheers - Greg > Where can the rest of us see the details on these boards or have I >missed something. I'am begining to think that those of us on this >list are the last to know about what is going on. > >Bob - wd6dod ----- Greg Jones, WD5IVD Austin, Texas wd5ivd@tapr.org http://www.tapr.org/~wd5ivd From rbarron@pervasive-sw.com Mon Oct 13 07:26:15 1997 Received: from quiet.pervasive-sw.com (pervasive-sw.com [207.86.19.56]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with SMTP id HAA04446 for ; Mon, 13 Oct 1997 07:26:12 -0500 (CDT) Received: from mercury.pervasive-sw.com by quiet.pervasive-sw.com via smtpd (for tapr.org [204.17.217.20]) with SMTP; 13 Oct 1997 12:26:11 UT Received: by mercury.pervasive-sw.com with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) id <4X2KAFL1>; Mon, 13 Oct 1997 07:25:05 -0500 Message-ID: <21D35A9087ACD01186BB00805FFE4A837AC08C@mercury.pervasive-sw.com> From: Robert Barron To: "'ss@tapr.org'" Subject: WaveLAN specs Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 07:25:03 -0500 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Can someone point me in the direction of some more technical specifications for the WaveLAN cards? I'd like to know some things like real power output, antenna gain, exact frequency range, etc. Thanks! 73, ------------------------------------------------------------------------ --------------- Robert Barron, KA5WSS rbarron@pervasive.com Pervasive Software From jeff@mich.com Mon Oct 13 09:21:41 1997 Received: from home.nuge.com (home.nuge.com [152.160.156.254]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id JAA12746 for ; Mon, 13 Oct 1997 09:21:40 -0500 (CDT) Received: from alfalfa (alfalfa.mich.com [198.108.18.18]) by home.nuge.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA32051 for ; Mon, 13 Oct 1997 10:33:38 -0400 Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19971013101559.039d7100@mail.mich.com> X-Sender: jeff@mail.mich.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32) Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 10:15:59 -0400 To: ss@tapr.org From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [SS:1755] WaveLAN specs In-Reply-To: <21D35A9087ACD01186BB00805FFE4A837AC08C@mercury.pervasive-s w.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 07:32 AM 10/13/97 -0500, Robert Barron wrote: >Can someone point me in the direction of some more technical >specifications Have you looked at www.wavelan.com yet? >for the WaveLAN cards? I'd like to know some things like real power >output, antenna gain, exact frequency range, etc. On the 900mhz product, power output is about 26dbm, the antenna is a diversity patch antenna, not much gain and indoor only, so you'll likely want to use something else. Its a DSS unit, so I believe it covers the entire 902-928 band. Regards, ------------------------------------ | Jeff King Aero Data Systems | | jeff@mich.com P.O. Box 510895 | | (810)471-1787 Livonia, MI 48151 | |F(810)471-0279 United States | ------------------------------------ From hwm@netcom.com Mon Oct 13 09:28:24 1997 Received: from mm.wd6dod.ampr.org (hwm@netcom14.netcom.com [192.100.81.126]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id JAA13038 for ; Mon, 13 Oct 1997 09:28:15 -0500 (CDT) Received: from localhost (by mm.wd6dod.ampr.org (8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id HAA00207 for ; Mon, 13 Oct 1997 07:29:37 -0700 Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 07:29:37 -0700 (PDT) From: Bob Lorenzini To: ss@tapr.org Subject: Re: [SS:1754] Re: TAPR SS Alpha Boards In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Sun, 12 Oct 1997, Greg Jones, WD5IVD wrote: > One of the papers presented was on the TAPR 900Mhz FHSS radio project which > has been mentioned in the last 2 PSRs. (Bob -- do you get to read the PSR > ?) The full paper will be printed in the next PSR or you can get it and > all the other papers by getting the proceedings from TAPR or the ARRL. > realaudio segments on the site. A must note -- please do not e-mail the > team. If you have questions, comments, or concerns, e-mail me. The team > from the beginning has asked for a certain amount of quite and room in > which to work. The TAPR BoD agreed with this request when we voted funding > for the project at the Dayton Board meeting, which was reported in the PSR > under the minutes of the meeting. > > Cheers - Greg Yes Greg I do get the PSR, that is where I first heard about these ongoing SS projects that we don't hear about on this list. I thought this list was for the exchange of ideas and news about what is happening in SS. What makes me and judging from the private e-mail I have received others unhappy is to get this information second hand here. I know Greg that you have done what you can. I'am unhappy with the TAPR BOD for accepting the terms under which these projects are funded. We understand that there are developers who want to work without the bickering (such as mine) and requests for every feature known to man in their project, however this is our money they are spending and I think we have the right to know what projects are in active progress. I have no problem with an anonymous team working on a project but I do have a problem with secret projects. This is my last word on the subject, sorry for the dissention, back to SS. Bob - wd6dod From GStory@icomply.com Mon Oct 13 10:05:30 1997 Received: from lew_prods1.icomply.com (lew_prods1.icomply.com [38.223.45.65]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with SMTP id KAA15781 for ; Mon, 13 Oct 1997 10:05:28 -0500 (CDT) Received: by lew_prods1.icomply.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.995.52) id <01BCD7BF.6DBBA270@lew_prods1.icomply.com>; Mon, 13 Oct 1997 10:04:43 -0500 Message-ID: From: Guy Story To: "'ss@tapr.org'" Subject: RE: 1755] WaveLAN specs Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 10:04:42 -0500 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.995.52 Encoding: 24 TEXT www.lucent.com I forget the exact local but this will get you into the area. >---------- >From: Robert Barron[SMTP:rbarron@pervasive-sw.com] >Sent: Monday, October 13, 1997 7:32 AM >To: ss@tapr.org >Subject: [SS:1755] WaveLAN specs > >Can someone point me in the direction of some more technical >specifications >for the WaveLAN cards? I'd like to know some things like real power >output, antenna gain, exact frequency range, etc. > >Thanks! > >73, > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >--------------- >Robert Barron, KA5WSS rbarron@pervasive.com >Pervasive Software > > From bm@lynx.ve3jf.ampr.org Tue Oct 14 21:35:25 1997 Received: from lynx.ve3jf.ampr.org (bm@pc-18446.on.rogers.wave.ca [24.112.93.218]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id VAA15768 for ; Tue, 14 Oct 1997 21:35:23 -0500 (CDT) From: bm@lynx.ve3jf.ampr.org Received: (from bm@localhost) by lynx.ve3jf.ampr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id CAA04760 for ss@tapr.org; Wed, 15 Oct 1997 02:35:16 GMT Message-Id: <199710150235.CAA04760@lynx.ve3jf.ampr.org> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 02:35:15 +0000 (GMT) To: ss@tapr.org Subject: Re: [SS:1756] Re: WaveLAN specs In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.19971013101559.039d7100@mail.mich.com> X-Mailer: Ishmail 1.3.1-961106-linux MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Jeff King wrote: > At 07:32 AM 10/13/97 -0500, Robert Barron wrote: > >Can someone point me in the direction of some more technical > >specifications > > Have you looked at www.wavelan.com yet? > > >for the WaveLAN cards? I'd like to know some things like real power > >output, antenna gain, exact frequency range, etc. > > On the 900mhz product, power output is about 26dbm, the antenna is a > diversity patch antenna, not much gain and indoor only, so you'll > likely want to use something else. Its a DSS unit, so I believe it > covers the entire 902-928 band. Sigh... attendees of my DCC paper on propagation know that it's 24 dBm, not 26. :-) Actually, I just took a peek at the web site, and they say 23 dBm. The nominal bandwidth of WaveLAN is 11 MHz, centered at 915 MHz. The 2.4 GHz product has lower power output (15 dBm), and several choices of center frequency (up to 8, depending on version). The biggest problem with WaveLAN (and other similar products) is the relative deafness of the receiver, which seems to suffer from both poor noise figure and hefty modem implementation loss - it needs an SNR of around 35 dB to deliver a low BER. Barry > > > > Regards, > > ------------------------------------ > | Jeff King Aero Data Systems | > | jeff@mich.com P.O. Box 510895 | > | (810)471-1787 Livonia, MI 48151 | > |F(810)471-0279 United States | > ------------------------------------ > -- Barry McLarnon VE3JF/VA3TCP | Internet: bm@hydra.carleton.ca Ottawa Amateur Radio Club | AMPRnet: bm@lynx.ve3jf.ampr.org Packet Working Group | Web: http://hydra.carleton.ca From wd5ivd@tapr.org Tue Oct 14 21:59:28 1997 Received: from [206.133.7.92] (sdn-ts-050mdrelRP09.dialsprint.net [206.133.7.92]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id VAA17012 for ; Tue, 14 Oct 1997 21:59:21 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 21:51:27 -0500 To: ss@tapr.org From: "Greg Jones, WD5IVD" Subject: Re: [SS:1757] Re: TAPR SS Alpha Boards Hi Bob. > Yes Greg I do get the PSR, that is where I first heard about these >ongoing SS projects that we don't hear about on this list. I thought this >list was for the exchange of ideas and news about what is happening in SS. Glad to hear you read the PSR. We do have members that don't, so just wanted to make sure you knew we had put some things in the PSR...not a lot, but there was some information. I'll let Barry answer in full the purpose of the list, since he is the list chair. I'll put in my two cents a little later in this message. Also, thanks for taking the time to let me and others know how you feel about this issue. >What makes me and judging from the private e-mail I have received others >unhappy is to get this information second hand here. I know Greg that you >have done what you can. I'am unhappy with the TAPR BOD for accepting the >terms under which these projects are funded. We understand that there >are developers who want to work without the bickering (such as mine) and >requests for every feature known to man in their project, however this is >our money they are spending and I think we have the right to know what >projects are in active progress. I have no problem with an anonymous team >working on a project but I do have a problem with secret projects. This is >my last word on the subject, sorry for the dissention, back to SS. Let me take a minute to explain how project development works within TAPR for those who might not know or have never read before. There are two ways in which projects happen within TAPR. The organization thinks its has something that needs to be done or a group/individual(s) approaches TAPR with a concept. The success rate of projects brought to TAPR are very much higher then projects that we look for people to do that need to be done. The reason should be obvious, the very nature of volunteers. The Wireless Digital Book, TCP/IP book, GPS-20 power, Oncore Power, TAC-2/TOC, MIC-E, DAS (these just in the last two years) have all been brought to TAPR. Some of the ones that have been started by asking to have something done are the METCON-II, AN-93, updated 9600 baud modem, 9600 baud land mobile information, TNC-95, and a few others. These last ones are in various forms of completion or have been cancelled. Many project can be slowed, because of people issues -- things change and time commitment has to be changed. When you are dedicated (married) to a project that was brought to TAPR, then distractions are sometime not a problem -- distractions don't happen. I am sure if we could somehow pay people for their work -- thus breaking the volunteer process -- projects could be much more regularly thought up and executed. Long intense volunteer projects require a certain dedication to see final completion. Without this dedication, we wouldn't have many of the projects over the years in amateur radio, not just within TAPR. Look at APRS and other areas that a few people devote hours that could never be paid for. As to the issue of secret projects. I disagree completely, but then I was one of nine people who was responsible for what you see as a problem. This was no secret project. It was reported in the BoD meeting and in the PSR about the project was being funded. If the issue was that you couldn't read about it until now, then that is simple to answer. The issue is that we didn't have anything to publish until this next issue of the PSR, which is already published in the DCC proceedings. If you didn't make the DCC, then the PSR will be your first chance to read about the project. The Board approved money to move forward with the design based on a preliminary design proposal, but that was not of a quality we could publish. This design wasn't really finialized into what we have now until a few weeks ago and we put it into the DCC and now into the next PSR. No money was spent on the project until two design review meetings where held in August/Sept between members of the overview/project mgmt team and the design team. Since progress was very positive, no limitations on the project were imposed and the design continued forward. If the meetings had shown some problem or major issue, then some action would have been taken. While this is a very informal review process, it does yield the necessary results -- that of protecting the future investment by TAPR in a project. How can a project be secret if you knew about it -- I guess the issue is that you where not satisfied with the amount of information made available. I apologize, if this was the problem, but we didn't really have anything and the design team was not in a position to take time away from the design process to write articles during the period of the last 6 months. The DCC was a different issue, since the deadline was around the time of the reviews and the information could be complied and made available. You will be able to read all the project shortly when the article is in the PSR and up on the web page. I guess we could have made all this available a few weeks ago, but thinking back now I really wanted to announce all this at the ARRL and TAPR DCC/TAPR Annual Membership Meeting....a very traditional time to make this type of information available over the last ten years with major TAPR projects. Just in Baltimore instead of Tucson. I think I have already covered the reasons why the design group wants to be left to design and test until such time as we need to start bringing additional testers into the mix. When that time approaches we will take applications for testing -- although the first few people will have to have unique abilities, lots of time available, and good test equipment at home are available all the times. If you don't like the design approach, then TAPR is always open to others to approach us with something that we can ask questions about and see if we can help fund something. As an example, Randy Roberts made a proposal, but no one every followed up with a plan to do something with it. As to the decision of the Board. You vote for the board each year. If you voted for the current board then you have several options available. One, like what you did in your message....let us know that you are unhappy about what we did. We will be aware of this in the future. Two, vote for board members that support your position over the next few years. Three, run for the board to help change things from the inside and spend the countless hours that many of us do each month doing the day to day drudge that makes the organization live -- but doesn't give much time to code, build, test, and all the other things that many of us use to have time to do before joining the board. Four, leave TAPR. I would hope one of the first three options are the most appealing, but I look at the fact that we only have a 10% turnover currently in membership over the last 3 years, which is excellent for any group like TAPR. When membership drops rapidly that is the true indication that the organization has to rethink what it is about and does. People vote every day with their membership renewals and I look at those facts very seriously. If anyone on this group has something they feels needs to be said to me or the TAPR board, please feel free to drop me a message. These types of correspondence are shared with the board and all the rest of any replies. My e-mail box is open. Now -- the question becomes, how do we: 1. Educate more people about SS issues ? 2. find some OEM products that we can get without major strings to be made available to the membership while we work on our own development projects. 3. how to get people to be filing more info to the FCC on the subject so that we get rules that are conducive to what we are after. Anyway, we can all get back to the issues of SS and how we can move forward and get some other stuff on the air now. Cheers - Greg ----- Greg Jones, WD5IVD Austin, Texas wd5ivd@tapr.org http://www.tapr.org/~wd5ivd From bad@uhf.wireless.net Tue Oct 14 23:30:24 1997 Received: from eharden.com (eharden.com [207.193.60.129]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id XAA28423 for ; Tue, 14 Oct 1997 23:30:21 -0500 (CDT) Received: from uhf.wireless.net (pp8.eharden.com [207.193.60.154]) by eharden.com (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA16422 for ; Tue, 14 Oct 1997 23:34:39 -0500 (CDT) Received: from localhost (bad@localhost) by uhf.wireless.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id AAA06441 for ; Wed, 15 Oct 1997 00:32:29 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 00:32:28 -0400 (EDT) From: Bernie Doehner To: ss@tapr.org Subject: Re: [SS:1759] Re: WaveLAN specs In-Reply-To: <199710150235.CAA04760@lynx.ve3jf.ampr.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII > Sigh... attendees of my DCC paper on propagation know that it's 24 dBm, > not 26. :-) Actually, I just took a peek at the web site, and they say 23 dBm. > The nominal bandwidth of WaveLAN is 11 MHz, centered at 915 MHz. The 2.4 GHz > product has lower power output (15 dBm), and several choices of center > frequency (up to 8, depending on version). The biggest problem with WaveLAN > (and other similar products) is the relative deafness of the receiver, which > seems to suffer from both poor noise figure and hefty modem implementation > loss - it needs an SNR of around 35 dB to deliver a low BER. > > Barry Barry: Have you ever figured out a correspondence between signal level/noise/quality and REAL SNR? I tried, and found the variance between adjacent measurements to be too large to make any sense. Maybe I have to average over longer periods of time (I am working with the FreeBSD Wavelan driver, which includes a signal strength cache). 73 Bernie nu1s From vleveque@earthlink.net Tue Oct 14 23:57:48 1997 Received: from sweden.it.earthlink.net (sweden-c.it.earthlink.net [204.250.46.50]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id XAA02602 for ; Tue, 14 Oct 1997 23:57:21 -0500 (CDT) From: vleveque@earthlink.net Received: from [207.217.29.238] (pool038-max1isdn.la-ca-us.dialup.earthlink.net [207.217.29.238]) by sweden.it.earthlink.net (8.8.7/8.8.5) with SMTP id VAA29242 for ; Tue, 14 Oct 1997 21:57:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 21:57:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: ss@tapr.org Subject: Re: [SS:1749] Publication info, pse Bruce Elbert might be the authro, and the publishing house Artech >Hello, > >Does anybody know the authors and the publishing house of "Digital Satellite >Communications" ? > >Thank you for any information. > >73 de Greg SP1RKV >Koszalin, Poland >greg@tu.koszalin.pl From rbarron@pervasive-sw.com Thu Oct 16 09:10:51 1997 Received: from quiet.pervasive-sw.com (pervasive-sw.com [207.86.19.56]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with SMTP id JAA17325 for ; Thu, 16 Oct 1997 09:10:47 -0500 (CDT) Received: from mercury.pervasive-sw.com by quiet.pervasive-sw.com via smtpd (for tapr.org [204.17.217.20]) with SMTP; 16 Oct 1997 14:10:46 UT Received: by mercury.pervasive-sw.com with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) id <4X2KALT9>; Thu, 16 Oct 1997 09:09:41 -0500 Message-ID: <21D35A9087ACD01186BB00805FFE4A837AC0B1@mercury.pervasive-sw.com> From: Robert Barron To: "'ss@tapr.org'" Subject: Re: WaveLAN specs Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 09:09:40 -0500 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain Thanks to everyone who posted information about the WaveLAN specs. I'm supposed to speak a little about Spread Spectrum tonight at a club meeting and wanted some more detailed information. 73, ------------------------------------------------------------------------ --------------- Robert Barron, KA5WSS rbarron@pervasive.com Pervasive Software From jeff@mich.com Thu Oct 16 15:32:50 1997 Received: from home.nuge.com (home.nuge.com [152.160.156.254]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id PAA21187 for ; Thu, 16 Oct 1997 15:32:48 -0500 (CDT) Received: from alfalfa (alfalfa.mich.com [198.108.18.18]) by home.nuge.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA18656 for ; Thu, 16 Oct 1997 16:46:24 -0400 Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19971016162704.00842100@mail.mich.com> X-Sender: jeff@mail.mich.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32) Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 16:27:04 -0400 To: ss@tapr.org From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [SS:1761] Re: WaveLAN specs In-Reply-To: References: <199710150235.CAA04760@lynx.ve3jf.ampr.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Here is a archive of the wavelan mailing list if anyone is interested: http://www.cs.tamu.edu/people/mmehta/links/wavelan.txt Don't have the subscribe instructions handy, but should be able to dig it out from the archive. Regards, ------------------------------------ | Jeff King Aero Data Systems | | jeff@mich.com P.O. Box 510895 | | (810)471-1787 Livonia, MI 48151 | |F(810)471-0279 United States | ------------------------------------ From jeff@mich.com Thu Oct 16 15:53:05 1997 Received: from home.nuge.com (home.nuge.com [152.160.156.254]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id PAA22334 for ; Thu, 16 Oct 1997 15:53:03 -0500 (CDT) Received: from alfalfa (alfalfa.mich.com [198.108.18.18]) by home.nuge.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id RAA18746 for ; Thu, 16 Oct 1997 17:06:40 -0400 Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19971016164716.0083aa40@mail.mich.com> X-Sender: jeff@mail.mich.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32) Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 16:47:16 -0400 To: ss@tapr.org From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [SS:1760] Re: TAPR SS Alpha Boards In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 10:01 PM 10/14/97 -0500, Greg Jones, WD5IVD wrote: > > Hi Bob: < clip to chase> > I am sure if we could somehow pay people for their work -- thus >breaking the volunteer process -- projects could be much more regularly >thought up and executed. Greg, isn't TAPR being paid for the 2nd "NSF" project that you are doing with Pittsburg, Denton and I think Hawaii... the one to implement SS links for the school systems. I know TAPR is listed on the proposal but it wasn't clear to me that this was a TAPR project or just something on the side you Dewayne and Barry are doing. I do know nothing has been published or said about this in a public forum and only minimal information about the "1st" NSF proposal has ever been released. My point is exactly yours, more could be done with money. I've expressed interest to you in becoming involved with some of these NSF proposals that associated directly with TAPR, or at the very least have a "roadmap" laid out that would allow the membership to: 1. Know ahead of time about these projects. 2. How they could contribute and benefit from these projects. 3. How they can become involved in these projects. What do you think? Regards, ------------------------------------ | Jeff King Aero Data Systems | | jeff@mich.com P.O. Box 510895 | | (810)471-1787 Livonia, MI 48151 | |F(810)471-0279 United States | ------------------------------------ From vk2tds@ozemail.com.au Thu Oct 16 16:34:21 1997 Received: from server3.syd.mail.ozemail.net (server3.syd.mail.ozemail.net [203.108.7.41]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id QAA24715; Thu, 16 Oct 1997 16:34:17 -0500 (CDT) Received: from oznet07.ozemail.com.au (oznet07.ozemail.com.au [203.2.192.122]) by server3.syd.mail.ozemail.net (8.8.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA19355; Fri, 17 Oct 1997 07:34:14 +1000 (EST) Received: from ozemail.com.au (bst-ma21-53.ix.netcom.com [207.94.251.117]) by oznet07.ozemail.com.au (8.8.4/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA20895; Fri, 17 Oct 1997 07:34:08 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <34468746.3304874B@ozemail.com.au> Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 17:29:42 -0400 From: Darryl Smith X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.02 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Greg Jones, WD5IVD" CC: w9ddd@tapr.org, wd0etz@tapr.org, ss@tapr.org Subject: Re: SS Board. References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > If it is okay -- I would like to post this to the SS list, since we had > already started this thread on there. If we do this as private e-mail now, > the group that believes that the secret cabal is at work will feel left > further out of the loop. If you want, just redirect it back to the list. Done... > > >Basically the reason why I did not go to you directly was because I > >asked the question on Sunday during the presentation, and it was > >suggested that what I was suggesting would not be a good use of > >resourses. > > Well -- I don't think that is necessarily the case...but I do feel that Tom > was expressing his thoughts about what he feels the proper use of the > 900Mhz FHSS radio design is. I agree with it, but that doesn't mean that > we don't consider anything proposed no matter how fast the comment Tom made > during the presentation. Do remember that Tom was trying to fit into his > time period, so I believe that an unhurried Tom would have given you a > little more in depth response to your question and possibly would have been > able to take a little more discussion on the issue. As it was, he > responded quickly and a little short and kept going. This was my fault, > since I allowed the seminar to get a little behind schedule to begin with > -- but I felt that Phil needed the additional time to complete his section > of the seminar. > Sorry if I went a bit overboard. I was coming down with a visus at the time which was a bit of a pain. [and promptly spent about 2 days sick in bed when I was planning to see DC again] > The quest for the ultimate TNC is a questionable goal these days, don't you > think ? Probably not since I read your paper :-) -- at least one that is > designed specifically by amateurs. That was one of many reasons the TNC-95 > project was scrapped. When I was thinking about the TNC-95, four years > ago, I should have figured that and I had peopel tell me -- so I'll admit > it was a mistake, but you hopefully learn from them. The controller for > the radio is the case of a specific application requiring a fairly > integrated designed controller to make it all work together. A general > purpose processor -- which we found pretty much like what we have in the > design did not meet the necessary requirements for use without a lot of > work and cutting. People still need TNC's. They need them PNP too. > > > There are other controllers easily available like the board we have on this > unit...we purchased two development boards with the same basic functioning > on it for about $300 a board in single qty that has the same basic chips we > have on the TAPR board -- just that it would be a cluge (sp) to use it in > the final development. If you purchase enough of them, the price drops to > like $150. I didn't get a chance to mention this to you at the conference, > but I wanted to get the info from Bill Reed before I dropped you a note > about the source. > > I'll ask Bill Reed on his return and find out where he got those and pass > it along. > Great. The reason why I chose the Cirrus chip was the cost of the 360. But for $150 in qty it is cheap. Besides you can always add a cirrus.. > You can get these now without waiting for the team to debug the current > integrated design. > > John Koster and myself had already discussed what you asked, since we have > been thinking along the same lines about how to lower cost of the boards in > the long run with our production. It is to bad that John was unable to > attend the DCC this year, since he would have more time then myself to > follow up after the seminar. > > >All that would be required to the SS bourd would be a header for the > >SYNC and ASYNC ports allowing experimenters to access these pins. The > >only cost would be the extra holes. > > Yes. > > >OK - What I would like to suggest is a 3 port TNC based on the 68360 > >with an extra 2 async ports for modems, allowing GPS and modem to be > >plugged in. Ideally level converters are required, but they could be on > >a cheap single sided daugter board. > > That board already exists as I described above. I'll get you that info > when I get it. Also, PacComm has a design...not sure Gwyn ever made it > available, but Graclis ported their code over to the 68360 for the design. > That would be a great solution since it would have a really excellent > software package on it already. The software is also proprietry. I really want something I can program, and other hams can program. Personnally, I will probibaly never use this sort of TNC, but many of my friends would. I get most from the hobby from hacking. Others get the fun from using. > > > >Also the BDM should be connected allowing the FLASH RAM to be programmed > >through a serial port without loader software. > > We are using the BDM in the current radio design. I think Tom mentioned this. > > >I am not talking about putting full nos on the board at this stage, but > >something that will encapsulate AX25 frames in Ethernet frames for a NOS > >station.. > > Why not. There is plenty of room to put NOS on the thing. Nos adds complexity. Firstly do the simple things, and get them out, then add the harder things. > > > The real issue is not the controller in my thought -- but the radio. Like > the PRUG 768Kbps system. Did anyone notice that there was no picture of a > 1.2 G radio ? They don't have any RF yet for the modem you saw at the > banquet. So, without a radio (in our case a FHSS that sits on the > controller) a highspeed switch with a 68360 doesn't gain you much. Much > like the PacketTen as Barry pointed out to me Saturday night. In Australia our local radio BBS was with something like 5 or 6 radio ports. It was a huge problem to set it up. There is no problem having 1200 links up 24 hours a day. I know of people who have sent DOOM about sydney on the 1200 frequencies with 5 links. It took a while but worked.Basically the reason why I feel that TNC's are still needed is that the radios are not there yet!. And the radios will not get there without a cheap controller. Provided the DCC is close to an airport with free transfers... > Cheers -- Greg > > ----- > Greg Jones, WD5IVD > Austin, Texas > wd5ivd@tapr.org > http://www.tapr.org/~wd5ivd From akent@bga.com Thu Oct 16 17:50:14 1997 Received: from zoom.bga.com (root@zoom.realtime.net [205.238.128.40]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with SMTP id RAA29085 for ; Thu, 16 Oct 1997 17:50:13 -0500 (CDT) Received: from Kendra (max1-45.ip.realtime.net [205.238.168.45]) by zoom.bga.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA01599 for ; Thu, 16 Oct 1997 17:50:10 -0500 Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 17:50:10 -0500 Message-Id: <199710162250.RAA01599@zoom.bga.com> X-Sender: akent@bga.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.1.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: ss@tapr.org From: Kent Farnsworth Subject: Re: [SS:1765] Re: TAPR SS Alpha Boards Hello: I have been involved in commercial RF digital communications design for a while now on my own, and have a fairly complete RF laboratory. I wonder about the same things as Jeff. He has valid concerns. I am a TAPR member. I have never seen a 'request for participation'. All you would need to do is maybe ask for credentials, available time, along with the requirement of work. You might or might not offer to pay for anything, depending on the situation. Some of us have time for project participation! And TAPR, some of us have wonderful ideas that you should perhaps listen to. Not only are the rest of us interested, we would love a chance to be a part of the next generation of your products. I also wonder why some of the details and code (hardware and software) are not public domain for the previous projects that you now sell. Hummm?!?! Kent Farnsworth - KC5WPW >My point is exactly yours, more could be done with money. I've expressed >interest to you in becoming involved with some of these NSF proposals that >associated directly with TAPR, or at the very least have a "roadmap" laid >out that would allow the membership to: > >1. Know ahead of time about these projects. >2. How they could contribute and benefit from these projects. >3. How they can become involved in these projects. > >What do you think? > > >Regards, > >------------------------------------ >| Jeff King Aero Data Systems | >| jeff@mich.com P.O. Box 510895 | >| (810)471-1787 Livonia, MI 48151 | >|F(810)471-0279 United States | >------------------------------------ > > > --- Kent Farnsworth (akent@bga.com) From wd5ivd@tapr.org Thu Oct 16 21:30:54 1997 Received: from [206.133.11.141] (sdn-ts-051mdrelRP03.dialsprint.net [206.133.7.102]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id VAA23711 for ; Thu, 16 Oct 1997 21:30:51 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.19971016164716.0083aa40@mail.mich.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 20:06:43 -0500 To: ss@tapr.org From: "Greg Jones, WD5IVD" Subject: Re: [SS:1765] Re: TAPR SS Alpha Boards >At 10:01 PM 10/14/97 -0500, Greg Jones, WD5IVD wrote: >> >> Hi Bob: > >< clip to chase> > >> I am sure if we could somehow pay people for their work -- thus >>breaking the volunteer process -- projects could be much more regularly >>thought up and executed. > >Greg, isn't TAPR being paid for the 2nd "NSF" project that you are doing >with Pittsburg, Denton and I think Hawaii... the one to implement SS links >for the school systems. I know TAPR is listed on the proposal but it wasn't >clear to me that this was a TAPR project or just something on the side you >Dewayne and Barry are doing. I do know nothing has been published or said >about this in a public forum and only minimal information about the >"1st" NSF proposal has ever been released. That grant was not funded from what I heard from the writers. Anyway -- I was only in the proposal as a consultant and they listed my title as Pres of TAPR I guess to help the weight of the proposal. I maybe spent a few hours helping write one section of the grant. If it had been funded, I would have gotten about 5 hours of consultant time and TAPR would have gotten some good press for being involved. To date, none of our proposals have been funded. We only have one in the pipe which we will not know about for sometime and are thinking about writing another one. >My point is exactly yours, more could be done with money. I've expressed >interest to you in becoming involved with some of these NSF proposals that >associated directly with TAPR, or at the very least have a "roadmap" laid >out that would allow the membership to: > >1. Know ahead of time about these projects. >2. How they could contribute and benefit from these projects. >3. How they can become involved in these projects. The problem is that this stuff is very fluid. We (Dewayne and myself) map strategy on a month or even weekly basis. If I had written something for the next PSR that detailed what we thought would be happening when it went to print, it would have already been out dated with our meetings last week. Thus - it makes me and the organization look bad when we try to say what is happening, only to have to write that it was all wrong and here is the new slant and do that each quarter. Been there done that. Not a good thing to be doing. So -- you just have to trust we are working in the best interest of the organization and when people can get involved, we will make the announcement and offer positions of support. What you can be doing is coming up with things that we can try to go out and find money to do. Without projects to show developmetn for fudning, then we can't expect to find anything. We have to have things like the 900Mhz radio project and more like it to really get the well primed in order to track down those big grants that might eventually be able to get things designed and done for 219-220 and othere we would like to have things working. Bringing up 219-220. How about someone figure out how to do a DSS system on 219-220 that we can implement to allow folks to operate with the AMTS people. We really have to do something to show activity on that band -- or all that money that ARS spent to get it back will have been for not. Good news tonight. We have a led on WaveLan stuff and will be sniffing that down in the coming weeks. If we can work a deal, we might have something interesting to offer. If we do it -- sure going to need a lot of help putting a package of information together to go with it. Cheers - Greg ----- Greg Jones, WD5IVD Austin, Texas wd5ivd@tapr.org http://www.tapr.org/~wd5ivd From wd5ivd@tapr.org Thu Oct 16 21:31:03 1997 Received: from [206.133.11.141] (sdn-ts-051mdrelRP03.dialsprint.net [206.133.7.102]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id VAA23749 for ; Thu, 16 Oct 1997 21:30:59 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199710162250.RAA01599@zoom.bga.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 21:06:41 -0500 To: ss@tapr.org From: "Greg Jones, WD5IVD" Subject: Re: [SS:1767] Re: TAPR SS Alpha Boards >Hello: > >I have been involved in commercial RF digital communications design for a >while now on my own, and have a fairly complete RF laboratory. I wonder >about the same things as Jeff. He has valid concerns. > >I am a TAPR member. I have never seen a 'request for participation'. All you >would need to do is maybe ask for credentials, available time, along with >the requirement of work. You might or might not offer to pay for anything, >depending on the situation. Some of us have time for project participation! Well -- participation in what ? As stated in the first posting -- we really look for people to come to us with project concepts. When we have a project in beta we do ask for participants. Just read back in previous PSRs and in various SIG emails. The MIC-E, DSP-93, AN-93, TUC-52, have all had calls for people to participate in form or another. We asked for beta testers in the Freewave fiasco and got a number involved. There have been lots of calls over the last three years. You just have to read to see them. The 900Mhz radio isn't in a position to accept any help at this time. When additional testers beyond the design group are needed we will probably start to ask. I know that the first group of beta testers -- as I already outlined in an earlier message -- will have to have special equipment, time, and ability. After that, it opens up a little more as we get into field testing-- which will probably be done based on affiliated groups with TAPR. >And TAPR, some of us have wonderful ideas that you should perhaps listen to. >Not only are the rest of us interested, we would love a chance to be a part >of the next generation of your products. The issue becomes, what do you want to do ? Are you prepared to invest the personal time to make it happen as a TAPR project ? Is so -- let's get going ;-) There are plenty of projects I could list. We need a bilitarel amp for 900MHz and 2.4MHz that we can build instead of purchase for several hundred dollars each. We need RF to make the Japan 768Kbps modem work on 1.2G. We need something on 219-220 for a potential DSS system to be designed with and lots more. Someone could even follow up onthe Robert's proposal which no one did last fall, on his design. I think I posted at least twice asking if anyone was going to do anything with the message that was posted. No one ever did. >I also wonder why some of the details and code (hardware and software) are >not public domain for the previous projects that you now sell. Hummm?!?! Which ones ? The TNC-2 ? Just for the record -- we never owned the TNC-2 source code. That is owned by someone else -- Infomotion. All other projects have the code available, except the DSP-93 monitor which is about to become available. The reason for that was to maintain compatibility in all production units until the project/kit was completed -- which it is about to be, The PALS are available for the 9600baud modem and you can even get the source for the Devmeter if you want to us it. So, what project(s) are you referring to ? I am glad to see that we have RF folks on the list. What can you and TAPR do together Ken to help others ? Cheers - Greg ----- Greg Jones, WD5IVD Austin, Texas wd5ivd@tapr.org http://www.tapr.org/~wd5ivd From bm@lynx.ve3jf.ampr.org Thu Oct 16 21:32:04 1997 Received: from lynx.ve3jf.ampr.org (bm@pc-18446.on.rogers.wave.ca [24.112.93.218]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id VAA23868 for ; Thu, 16 Oct 1997 21:32:02 -0500 (CDT) From: bm@lynx.ve3jf.ampr.org Received: (from bm@localhost) by lynx.ve3jf.ampr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id CAA19711 for ss@tapr.org; Fri, 17 Oct 1997 02:31:59 GMT Message-Id: <199710170231.CAA19711@lynx.ve3jf.ampr.org> Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 02:31:58 +0000 (GMT) To: ss@tapr.org Subject: Re: [SS:1761] Re: WaveLAN specs In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Ishmail 1.3.1-961106-linux MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Bernie Doehner wrote: > > Sigh... attendees of my DCC paper on propagation know that it's 24 dBm, > > not 26. :-) Actually, I just took a peek at the web site, and they say 23 dBm. > > The nominal bandwidth of WaveLAN is 11 MHz, centered at 915 MHz. The 2.4 GHz > > product has lower power output (15 dBm), and several choices of center > > frequency (up to 8, depending on version). The biggest problem with WaveLAN > > (and other similar products) is the relative deafness of the receiver, which > > seems to suffer from both poor noise figure and hefty modem implementation > > loss - it needs an SNR of around 35 dB to deliver a low BER. > > > > Barry > > Barry: > > Have you ever figured out a correspondence between signal > level/noise/quality and REAL SNR? I tried, and found the variance between > adjacent measurements to be too large to make any sense. Maybe I have to > average over longer periods of time (I am working with the FreeBSD Wavelan > driver, which includes a signal strength cache). No - I've looked at it briefly, but didn't establish any correspondence. One of these days I want to take a close look at WaveLAN (and others) under lab conditions, where I can look at receiver sensitivity, effects of in-band and out-of-band interference, multipath immunity, etc. That would be a good chance to also try and calibrate the params that the cards provide. Barry -- Barry McLarnon VE3JF/VA3TCP | Internet: bm@hydra.carleton.ca Ottawa Amateur Radio Club | AMPRnet: bm@lynx.ve3jf.ampr.org Packet Working Group | Web: http://hydra.carleton.ca From fred@astro.wnmu.edu Fri Oct 17 00:37:09 1997 Received: from astro.wnmu.edu (root@ASTRO.WNMU.EDU [192.136.110.150]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with SMTP id AAA17951 for ; Fri, 17 Oct 1997 00:37:07 -0500 (CDT) Received: from astro.wnmu.edu (www.grmc.org [137.118.10.41]) by astro.wnmu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.9) with ESMTP id WAA15484 for ; Thu, 16 Oct 1997 22:37:11 -0700 Received: (from fred@localhost) by astro.wnmu.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) id PAA02348 for ss@tapr.org; Thu, 16 Oct 1997 15:48:22 -0600 From: Fred Treasure Message-Id: <199710162148.PAA02348@ astro.wnmu.edu> Subject: Re: [SS:1763] Re: WaveLAN specs To: ss@tapr.org Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 15:48:21 -0600 (MDT) In-Reply-To: <21D35A9087ACD01186BB00805FFE4A837AC0B1@mercury.pervasive-sw.com> from "Robert Barron" at Oct 16, 97 09:27:10 am Content-Type: text Hi Robert, One interesting feature (problem?) of the 900 MHz WaveLAN cards is that they all run on the same frequency and same coding sequence. The network identifier does not cause the card to change anything about the transmission characteristics, hence every WaveLAN card hears every other card within range. In the amateur radio context this can be a problem because there is nothing to separate the the various Novell LANs (which are quite "chatty" with SAP packets, etc.) from our TCP/IP LANs. In the network that I have running I relocated the antennas, and used more directional antennas to solve this problem but I can see that in a bigger town (Silver City, NM is just 10,000 folks) it might be a challenge to find a clear path. Hope that this bit of information that you can't get from the spec. sheets is useful... 73, Fred ke5ci fred@astro.wnmu.edu From n5jxs@tamu.edu Fri Oct 17 09:44:06 1997 Received: from mail.tamu.edu (mail.tamu.edu [128.194.103.38]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id JAA04507 for ; Fri, 17 Oct 1997 09:44:05 -0500 (CDT) Received: from study (pvme11.cs.tamu.edu [128.194.136.42]) by mail.tamu.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id JAA21414 for ; Fri, 17 Oct 1997 09:44:01 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <344779A0.5490@tamu.edu> Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 09:43:44 -0500 From: "Gerald J. Creager N5JXS" Reply-To: n5jxs@tamu.edu Organization: Da House X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ss@tapr.org Subject: Re: [SS:1768] Re: TAPR SS Alpha Boards References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Greg Jones, WD5IVD wrote: > ... > > What you can be doing is coming up with things that we can try to go out > and find money to do. Without projects to show developmetn for fudning, > then we can't expect to find anything. We have to have things like the > 900Mhz radio project and more like it to really get the well primed in > order to track down those big grants that might eventually be able to get > things designed and done for 219-220 and othere we would like to have > things working. > > Bringing up 219-220. How about someone figure out how to do a DSS system > on 219-220 that we can implement to allow folks to operate with the AMTS > people. We really have to do something to show activity on that band -- or > all that money that ARS spent to get it back will have been for not. I like this thought, Greg. Let me get past finals in Dec., and see what we can do. I can also see if I can lay hands on some SS decks Trimble Nav. has been using in the 900 MHz range where they CLAIM the RF is "straightforward and adaptable to other bands." They're phasing that line out from what I last heard... may be something there. > Good news tonight. We have a led on WaveLan stuff and will be sniffing > that down in the coming weeks. If we can work a deal, we might have > something interesting to offer. If we do it -- sure going to need a lot of > help putting a package of information together to go with it. I'll be following this with interest, too. My new workshop and RF lab should be built in about 2 months here at home. I hope to have more home time after Dec., plus or minus the newest family addition. 73, gerry From dzn1@juno.com Fri Oct 17 22:32:12 1997 Received: from m6.boston.juno.com (m6.boston.juno.com [205.231.101.197]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id WAA22285 for ; Fri, 17 Oct 1997 22:32:10 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from dzn1@juno.com) by m6.boston.juno.com (queuemail) id X]X07345; Fri, 17 Oct 1997 23:31:29 EDT To: ss@tapr.org Cc: ss@tapr.org Date: Fri, 17 Oct 1997 23:30:24 -0400 Subject: Re: TAPR SS Alpha Boards Message-ID: <19971017.233031.6598.0.dzn1@juno.com> References: <344779A0.5490@tamu.edu> X-Mailer: Juno 1.38 X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 5-7 From: dzn1@juno.com (Howard D Rubin) Regarding that RF lab at home, I wonder if you intend to populate it with professional equipment and surface mount assembly gear. Do you have a wish list of hardware? Maybe you could suggest a lab environment for other TAPR members to build over a period of time. Building a lab out of fleamarket equipment to do something useful in the 2.4 G band would be real fun. Regards, Howard Rubin, N3FEL From n5jxs@tamu.edu Sat Oct 18 09:12:21 1997 Received: from mail.tamu.edu (mail.tamu.edu [128.194.103.38]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id JAA20279 for ; Sat, 18 Oct 1997 09:12:20 -0500 (CDT) Received: from study (pvme11.cs.tamu.edu [128.194.136.42]) by mail.tamu.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id JAA17852 for ; Sat, 18 Oct 1997 09:12:18 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <3448C3B2.53A6@tamu.edu> Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 09:12:02 -0500 From: "Gerald J. Creager N5JXS" Reply-To: n5jxs@tamu.edu Organization: Da House X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ss@tapr.org Subject: Re: [SS:1773] Re: TAPR SS Alpha Boards References: <19971017.233031.6598.0.dzn1@juno.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit SMT assembly gear is not in the cards: I don't have a sufficient space to properly do the convection heating or wave soldering. As for SMT rework, I've got some thoughts and plan to be in that realm in a year or 2. For now I have access on a limited basis to a rework lab here at TAMU. As for the RF test gear, it's old but professional. From lylej@azstarnet.com Sat Oct 18 12:00:06 1997 Received: from mailhost.azstarnet.com (root@mailhost.azstarnet.com [169.197.1.8]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id MAA28916 for ; Sat, 18 Oct 1997 12:00:04 -0500 (CDT) Received: from ppp15.mmsi.com (dialup17ip21.tus.azstarnet.com [169.197.38.85]) by mailhost.azstarnet.com (8.8.5-nerd/8.8.5) with SMTP id KAA25891 for ; Sat, 18 Oct 1997 10:00:00 -0700 (MST) X-Sent-via: StarNet http://www.azstarnet.com/ Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19971018095855.00772420@pop.azstarnet.com> X-Sender: lylej@pop.azstarnet.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32) Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 09:58:55 -0700 To: ss@tapr.org From: Lyle Johnson Subject: Re: [SS:1774] Re: TAPR SS Alpha Boards In-Reply-To: <3448C3B2.53A6@tamu.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 09:18 AM 10/18/97 -0500, you wrote: >SMT assembly gear is not in the cards: I don't have a sufficient space >to properly do the convection heating or wave soldering. For building modules for P3D using extensive surface mount, we use: 1) temp conrolled soldering iron with fine tip. SOmetimes we use two simulataneously to melt the solder at both ends of a passive part. 2) flux. 3) microscope to inspect the work for flight, but usually a simple magnifying glass (or a near-sighted person without glasses) is more than adequate. 4) care. 5) practice. We can solder fine-pitch ICs with hundreds of leads. With a little practice, SMT hand-assembly is EASIER than through hole. Note that using these techniques some of our work has been inspected to ESA flight standards by ESA certified perosnnel with no problems. >As for SMT >rework, I've got some thoughts and plan to be in that realm in a year or >2. For now I have access on a limited basis to a rework lab here at >TAMU. Same equipment as above plus a GOOD heat gun with some shileds to keep the heat out of the wrong places. Usually you sacrifice the part you are removing. Bottom line: SMT is not hard, does not require extensive equipment. SMT is an ENABLING technology for experimentation... (And no I don't have a video on how to do it :-) 73, Lyle From bcarlson@cyberramp.net Sat Oct 18 19:49:52 1997 Received: from netcom16.netcom.com (hbaker@netcom16.netcom.com [192.100.81.129]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id TAA12758 for ; Sat, 18 Oct 1997 19:49:50 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from hbaker@localhost) by netcom16.netcom.com (8.8.5-r-beta/8.8.5/(NETCOM v1.01)) id RAA19280 for ss@tapr.org; Sat, 18 Oct 1997 17:49:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhost.cyberramp.net (mailhost.cyberramp.net [207.158.64.11]) by mail6.netcom.com (8.8.5-r-beta/8.8.5/(NETCOM v1.01)) with ESMTP id PAA26607 for ; Sat, 18 Oct 1997 15:50:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bcarlson.cyberramp.net (dal-tsa11-62.cyberramp.net [207.158.111.62]) by mailhost.cyberramp.net (8.8.7/8.8.7/jkd-1017-2318-NR) with SMTP id RAA27808 for ; Sat, 18 Oct 1997 17:50:05 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <34493D39.785D@cyberramp.net> Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 17:50:33 -0500 From: Brian Carlson Reply-To: bcarlson@cyberramp.net Organization: CyberRamp X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.dsp To: Henry Baker Subject: Re: Q: PCMCIA DSP's for SW development, etc. References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: hbaker@netcom.com Hello Henry, You can get a TI 'C32-based PCMCIA cards from CAC. The basic version is $895 and provides a stereo codec, 1MB SRAM and 512kB of Flash. You can get more memory including up to 4MB of DRAM also. A really nice board in a Type II or III slot. It comes with support software. You can also get real-time block diagram support from Hyperception that allows you to build applications for it quickly and even program the Flash memory directly from it. It can auto-boot from Flash, so you can save an application and have it always boot up at power-up. I took advantage of this by making a standalone box with a PCMCIA connector in it only providing power to the card. The serial port and audio interfaces were also accessible. This box became a nice programmable product that could be programmed using standard TI tools or automatically from with visual design with Hypersignal RIDE. Its also a nice way to provide a portable DSP platform using a standard notebook computer. Here is a web page for you that provides further details: http://www.cacdsp.com/products/bulletdsp.html Regards, Brian ---------------------------------------------------------------- Henry Baker wrote: > > On TI's (excellent!) web site, I read about a DSP chip with memory that > resided on a PCMCIA card that could be used as a co-processor for a laptop > to do compute-intensive operations as well as software development. > > Is this card for sale anywhere? Does it come with software? > > Are there any equivalent cards around -- i.e., programmable DSP's with > software that run on a variety of machines ?? > > I know that the AV Macs had some sort of Moto DSP, but I don't think they > made it particularly easy to do custom software on it. > > Do soundblaster's have a programmable DSP? > > I'm hoping for a card + development software (C, assembler, etc.) that > would be < $500. > > Thanks in advance. From bm@lynx.ve3jf.ampr.org Sun Oct 26 22:29:05 1997 Received: from lynx.ve3jf.ampr.org (bm@pc-18446.on.rogers.wave.ca [24.112.93.218]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id WAA25453 for ; Sun, 26 Oct 1997 22:29:03 -0600 (CST) From: bm@lynx.ve3jf.ampr.org Received: (from bm@localhost) by lynx.ve3jf.ampr.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id EAA00005 for ss@tapr.org; Mon, 27 Oct 1997 04:28:59 GMT Message-Id: <199710270428.EAA00005@lynx.ve3jf.ampr.org> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 04:28:58 +0000 (GMT) To: ss@tapr.org Subject: Propagation Article on the Net... X-Mailer: Ishmail 1.3.1-961106-linux MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Things have gone quiet on the ole SS list again... I did a tutorial piece on VHF to Microwave radio propagation for the ARRL/TAPR Digital Communications Conference that was held in Baltimore a few weeks back, and there is now a HTML'ized version at http://hydra.carleton.ca/articles/ve3jf-dcc97.html There have been a few minor revisions and additions since the version published in the DCC proceedings, and I hope to add some more material as time permits. I thought maybe it would fuel some discussion here, so have a look and tell me what you think... Barry -- Barry McLarnon VE3JF/VA3TCP | Internet: bm@hydra.carleton.ca Ottawa Amateur Radio Club | AMPRnet: bm@lynx.ve3jf.ampr.org Packet Working Group | Web: http://hydra.carleton.ca From nortel.postmaster@nortel.ca Mon Oct 27 07:54:29 1997 Received: from bcarsde4.localhost (mailgate.nortel.ca [192.58.194.74]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id HAA12068 for ; Mon, 27 Oct 1997 07:54:27 -0600 (CST) From: nortel.postmaster@nortel.ca Message-Id: <199710271354.HAA12068@tapr.org> Received: from bcarsca3.ca.nortel.com (actually 47.73.9.138) by bcarsde4.localhost; Mon, 27 Oct 1997 08:53:29 -0500 Received: from bnr.ca by bcarsca3.bnr.ca id <03572-0@bcarsca3.bnr.ca>; Mon, 27 Oct 1997 08:38:34 -0500 To: ss@tapr.org Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 08:38:10 -0500 Subject: WARNING: message delayed at "bnr.ca" **************************************************************** ** NORTEL E-Mail Gateway Warning Message ** **************************************************************** Delivery of your e-mail message to michael.gallen.2879930@bnr.ca has been delayed at a NORTEL E-Mail Gateway. If it is not delivered within 28 hour(s), a failed delivery report will be returned to you. From ge@hpsadr2.sr.hp.com Mon Oct 27 11:28:40 1997 Received: from palrel3.hp.com (palrel3.hp.com [156.153.255.219]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id LAA23964 for ; Mon, 27 Oct 1997 11:28:38 -0600 (CST) Received: from srmail.sr.hp.com (srmail.sr.hp.com [15.4.45.14]) by palrel3.hp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5tis) with ESMTP id JAA04359 for ; Mon, 27 Oct 1997 09:28:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from hpsadr2.sr.hp.com (n6gn.sr.hp.com) by srmail.sr.hp.com with ESMTP (1.37.109.16/15.5+ECS 3.3) id AA154133315; Mon, 27 Oct 1997 09:28:35 -0800 Received: by hpsadr2.sr.hp.com (1.37.109.16/15.5+ECS 3.3) id AA166723313; Mon, 27 Oct 1997 09:28:34 -0800 From: Glenn Elmore Message-Id: <199710271728.AA166723313@hpsadr2.sr.hp.com> Subject: Re: [SS:1777] SS digest 418 To: ss@tapr.org (ge) Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 09:28:33 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <199710270443.WAA26031@tapr.org> from "ge" at Oct 26, 97 10:43:09 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Barry writes: > Things have gone quiet on the ole SS list again... > > I did a tutorial piece on VHF to Microwave radio propagation for the ARRL/TAPR > Digital Communications Conference that was held in Baltimore a few weeks back, > and there is now a HTML'ized version at > > http://hydra.carleton.ca/articles/ve3jf-dcc97.html > Barry, Thanks for the work and for putting it up. It's a very helpful work and I intend to link to it from my pages. I think this is an excellent subject for this list and is at the core of the problem of AR networking and wide application of SS. My only fear is that the consequences of this theory will be glossed over or ignored by those who see it. Other than by building a 'library' of practical sites and paths (with pictures) and the associated path losses measured, I can't think how to bring this to an even more practical and user oriented level. I don't know if I can count the number of times hams have told me "my path is LOS" only to discover later that it really wasn't and that losses were 20-60 dB greater than they expected, generally making it unusable for their application(s). As much as those of us on this list might desire it, SS is no substitute for a quality site and path between ends of a link. Glenn Elmore n6gn amateur IP: glenn@SantaRosa.ampr.org Internet: ge@sr.hp.com n6gn@sonic.net |--------- N6GN's Higher Speed Packet WWW Page ---------| | | | http://www.tapr.org/~n6gn/index.html | | http://www.sonic.net/~n6gn | | | |-------------------------------------------------------| From bb@wv.com Mon Oct 27 11:55:31 1997 Received: from kansas.pn.com (kansas.pn.com [204.96.36.40]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id LAA25702 for ; Mon, 27 Oct 1997 11:55:30 -0600 (CST) Received: from battleship (godzilla-14.openface.ca [207.81.61.236]) by kansas.pn.com (8.8.6/8.8.0) with ESMTP id MAA18187; Mon, 27 Oct 1997 12:55:18 -0500 (EST) Received: (bb@localhost) by battleship (8.8.5/8.6.12) id MAA05316; Mon, 27 Oct 1997 12:54:39 -0500 Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 12:54:39 -0500 Message-Id: <199710271754.MAA05316@battleship> From: Brian Bartholomew To: ss@tapr.org Subject: Re: [SS:1777] Propagation Article on the Net... > One problem is that most of the people attracted to using digital > wireless techniques have little or no background in RF. Yes, exactly. I'm a Unix sysadmin/developer/electronics tech who would dearly love to be playing with 100 Mbit links on GHz carriers. Unfortunatly I can't find a radio person to partner with. > Example 1. Suppose you have a pair of 915 MHz WaveLAN cards, and > want to use them on a 10 km link on which you believe free space > path loss conditions will apply. Yes, exactly. Or a 100 Mbit full-duplex ethernet card feeding a transceiver of unspecified design. Is there anybody on this list who wants to trade computer networking expertise for high-frequency data radio expertise? Another member of the League for Programming Freedom (LPF) www.lpf.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Brian Bartholomew - bb@wv.com - www.wv.com - Working Version, Cambridge, MA From wb9mjn@wb9mjn.ampr.org Mon Oct 27 15:43:58 1997 Received: from wb9mjn.ampr.org (wb9mjn.ampr.org [44.72.98.19]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with SMTP id PAA19565; Mon, 27 Oct 1997 15:41:42 -0600 (CST) Received: from wb9mjn-1.ampr.org by wb9mjn.ampr.org (JNOS1.10i) with SMTP id AA15703 ; Mon, 27 Oct 97 14:43:44 UTC Message-ID: <34550A57.7719@wb9mjn.ampr.org> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 15:40:39 -0600 From: Don Lemke Reply-To: wb9mjn%wb9mjn.ampr.org@uugate.aim.utah.edu Organization: Ant-Panel Products X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ss@tapr.org CC: ve3jf@tapr.org Subject: Re:Propagation Article on the Net... Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Barry, Very Well Done! Your dcc-97 article web page is clear and straight forward. I noticed from it, that I have been unclear in the past with regards to Knife Edge/Flat Earth difraction. No wonder I was confusing. I did not see any conflicts with what I ve tried to say on the news group here, versus what ur article says. These things happen. Especially, when one learns something 10 years ago, and then try to relate it to people, today, hi. The reality of the Radio Enviorment is the true driving force behind what we can do next. Which is why I think we need access technigues that integrate antenna directivity into radio networking, in a dynamic fashion. -- 73, Don. AMPRNet : wb9mjn@wb9mjn.ampr.org[44.72.98.19] Internet: wb9mjn%wb9mjn.ampr.org@uugate.aim.utah.edu Website: http://www.qth.com/antpanel From stoskopf@tri.net Mon Oct 27 15:48:33 1997 Received: from styx.tri.net (root@styx.tri.net [205.153.244.6]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id PAA19944 for ; Mon, 27 Oct 1997 15:48:31 -0600 (CST) Received: from mine (g9.tri.net [205.153.244.142]) by styx.tri.net (8.8.3/8.8.3) with ESMTP id PAA09092 for ; Mon, 27 Oct 1997 15:48:18 -0600 Message-ID: <34550C29.418EF495@tri.net> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 15:48:25 -0600 From: Lawrence Stoskopf Reply-To: stoskopf@tri.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.01 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ss@tapr.org Subject: Re: [SS:1777] Propagation Article on the Net... X-Priority: 3 (Normal) References: <199710270428.EAA00005@lynx.ve3jf.ampr.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > > I did a tutorial piece on VHF to Microwave radio propagation for the > ARRL/TAPR > Digital Communications Conference that was held in Baltimore a few > weeks back, and > there is now a HTML'ized version at > > > I thought maybe it would fuel some discussion here, so have a look and > tell me > what you think... > > Nice article, especially as I am setting up a remote HF site at about 12 LOS and was wondering about design parameters. Thanks N0UU From mac@wireless.com Tue Oct 28 15:40:47 1997 Received: from ns1.culver.net (mac@ns1.culver.net [206.13.40.10]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with SMTP id PAA19565 for ; Tue, 28 Oct 1997 15:40:46 -0600 (CST) Received: (from mac@localhost) by ns1.culver.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) id NAA19730; Tue, 28 Oct 1997 13:55:36 -0800 Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 13:55:35 -0800 (PST) From: Mike Cheponis X-Sender: mac@ns1.culver.net To: ss@tapr.org Subject: IR-Laser Interface Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Although this is not strictly SS, perphaps some on this list can help these school folks? very best -Mike k3mc ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 08:54:57 +0100 From: Roel Verbroekken To: mail@wireless.com Subject: IR-Laser Interface Dear Sir. We need to build a Full-Duplex IR Stereo-Audio/Data wireless Communication system( not audio and data at the same time) ,distance about 50m,150FT and speed about 5Mbps for a school-project . To accomplish this we are planning to use the following method: We use an ADC to convert a stereo-Audio-signal to an 16-bit, digital signal which is then send by the same transmitter that we use for data transmission. On the receiving end we use an DAC to convert the digital data back to an audio-signal. We do it this way because we now can use the same components for sending audio and digital data. To allow two computers to communicate we use a multiplexer to convert the parallel-port data to an serial-signal which can be transmitted using the laser, on the receiving end we use a de-multiplexer to convert the data back. We need to send the Clock for synchronisation of the two Multiplexers and the decoders. We use an IC to code the Clock-pulse into the data by using the manchester or any other method. We then use an laser to send the combined signal to the receiver which decodes the signal and output's the clock and data signals. To accomplish the full-duplex connection we plan on using two of these systems in conjunction. The problem is we can't find an IC to use for coding and decoding using the manchester (or any other) method. We were hoping you could help us in selecting the right IC's and laserdiode's for this project. Thanx in advance Kai-Arne Reiter & Roel Verbroekken Gilde College Noord Limburg Kai-Arne Reiter Roel Verbroekken De Bisweide 32 Overambt 25 5971 AZ, Grubbenvorst 5821 CC, Vierlingsbeek The Netherlands The Netherlands Tel: +31 (0)77 3270035 Tel: +31 (0)478 631891 Fax: +31 (0)77 3662292 E-mail: mrspock@worldaccess.nl E-mail: r.verbroekken@wxs.nl Website: http://mirrorspock.mypage.org From tbarron@newlink.net Wed Oct 29 08:01:49 1997 Received: from gandalf.newlink.net (root@[206.135.106.12]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with SMTP id IAA11591 for ; Wed, 29 Oct 1997 08:01:46 -0600 (CST) Received: from Greg Williams ([206.135.132.3]) by gandalf.newlink.net (8.6.13/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA19828 for ; Wed, 29 Oct 1997 09:00:25 -0500 Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19971029090953.0069ad4c@newlink2000.com> X-Sender: tbarron@newlink2000.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32) Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 09:09:53 -0500 To: ss@tapr.org From: Trevor Barron Subject: Re: [SS:1783] IR-Laser Interface In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Don't overlook the fact that when sending the 16b digitized audio, you will need to obtain not only bit sysnc but word sync as well. The manchester encoding will help you with bit sync, but you need to send some framing data for word sync as well so you can grab the proper 16bits that make up your digitized music data word. You have the option of doing your encoding/decoding for both bit and word sync in either hardware or software. If you have a computer in your project already, and want to minimize external components, then I'd recommend the software approach. I'll dig into some previous projects and see what I come up with for hardware solutions. Regards, Trevor Barron KA1TW NEWLINK GLobal Engineering At 03:45 PM 10/28/97 -0600, you wrote: >Although this is not strictly SS, perphaps some on this list can help these >school folks? > >very best -Mike k3mc > > >---------- Forwarded message ---------- >Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 08:54:57 +0100 >From: Roel Verbroekken >To: mail@wireless.com >Subject: IR-Laser Interface > >Dear Sir. > > >We need to build a Full-Duplex IR Stereo-Audio/Data wireless >Communication system( not audio and data at the same time) ,distance >about 50m,150FT and speed about 5Mbps for a school-project . >To accomplish this we are planning to use the following method: > >We use an ADC to convert a stereo-Audio-signal to an 16-bit, digital >signal which is then send by the same transmitter that we use for data >transmission. >On the receiving end we use an DAC to convert the digital data back to >an audio-signal. >We do it this way because we now can use the same components for sending >audio and digital data. > >To allow two computers to communicate we use a multiplexer to convert >the parallel-port data to an serial-signal which can be transmitted >using the laser, on the receiving end we use a de-multiplexer to convert >the data back. >We need to send the Clock for synchronisation of the two Multiplexers >and the decoders. > >We use an IC to code the Clock-pulse into the data by using the >manchester or any other method. We then use an laser to send the >combined signal to the receiver which decodes the signal and output's >the clock and data signals. > >To accomplish the full-duplex connection we plan on using two of these >systems in conjunction. > > > >The problem is we can't find an IC to use for coding and decoding using >the manchester (or any other) method. > >We were hoping you could help us in selecting the right IC's and >laserdiode's for this project. > >Thanx in advance >Kai-Arne Reiter & Roel Verbroekken >Gilde College Noord Limburg > > >Kai-Arne Reiter Roel Verbroekken >De Bisweide 32 Overambt 25 >5971 AZ, Grubbenvorst 5821 CC, Vierlingsbeek >The Netherlands The Netherlands >Tel: +31 (0)77 3270035 Tel: +31 (0)478 631891 >Fax: +31 (0)77 3662292 >E-mail: mrspock@worldaccess.nl E-mail: r.verbroekken@wxs.nl >Website: http://mirrorspock.mypage.org > > From dewayne@warpspeed.com Wed Oct 29 13:40:55 1997 Received: from warpspeed.com (WA8DZP@odo.warpspeed.com [204.118.182.20]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id NAA12263; Wed, 29 Oct 1997 13:39:37 -0600 (CST) Received: from [192.160.122.32] (209.94.71.31) by warpspeed.com with ESMTP (Eudora Internet Mail Server 2.0b10); Wed, 29 Oct 1997 11:38:11 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 15:52:10 -0800 To: fccreg@tapr.org (TAPR FCC Regulatory List), ss@tapr.org From: Dewayne Hendricks Subject: Excerpts from FCC 97-305 I want to call everyone's attention to this MO&O that the FCC issued in September that adds restrictions on the use of Part 15 devices in the 902-928 MHz band. I have just included the relevant parts of the MO&O that pertain to Part 15 and amateur radio service (ARS) operations. Please take note that this change is the Part 90 and NOT Part 15 or 97!! As a result, it would be difficult for both Part 15 and 97 users to know that this all occured unless they have tracked this particular issue thru the rulemaking process at the Commission. One particular point of interest is that the Commission treated Part 15 and the ARS equally. This is rather interesting as one is a licensed service and the other is not. So new ground is being broken here. It is my understanding that the League will be taking further action on this matter by directing their General Counsel to file a petition to have the FCC issue a Declaratory Ruling that the burden of proof is on the AVM/LMS licensee to prove interference allegedly caused by ARS. I would interpret this to mean that the League will not accept the Part 15 "safe Harbor" provision in the R&O. It is unclear what the League will do if the FCC will not issue the Declaratory Ruling. -- Dewayne Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Amendment of Part 90 of the ) PR Docket No. 93-61 Commission's Rules to Adopt ) Regulations for Automatic Vehicle ) Monitoring Systems ) MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER AND FURTHER NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULE MAKING Adopted: August 28, 1997 Released: September 16, 1997 Comments Due: November 5, 1997 Reply Comments Due: November 20, 1997 By the Commission: TABLE OF CONTENTS Paragraph I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 II. ELIGIBILITY AND PERMISSIBLE USES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 III. OTHER ISSUES RAISED ON RECONSIDERATION A. Definition and Licensing of Non-Multilateration Systems 1. Antenna Heights and Power Limitations . . . . . . . . . . .18 2. Licensing Issues. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24 B. Accommodation of Secondary Users in the 902-928 MHz Band . . . . . . 28 1. Parameters of Safe Harbor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30 2. Safe Harbor and Non-Multilateration Systems . . . . . . . .39 3. Administrative Procedure Act. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .41 C. Spectrum Allocation Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43 D. Geographic Areas for Exclusive Licenses. . . . . . . . . . . . .51 E. Multilateration System Operations -- Wideband Forward Links. . . . . 56 F. Petitions for Reconsideration of Order on Reconsideration. . . . . . 65 IV. COMPETITIVE BIDDING FOR MULTILATERATION LMS LICENSEES. . . . . .72 V. CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .79 VI. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .80 VII. ORDERING CLAUSES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .83 Appendix A -- Pleadings Appendix B -- Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making) Appendix C -- Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (Report and Order) Appendix D -- Rule Changes ---------------------------------- 4. LMS operates in the 902-928 MHz frequency band. The band is allocated for primary use by Federal Government radiolocation systems. Next in order of priority are Industrial, Scientific and Medical (ISM) devices. Federal Government fixed and mobile and LMS systems are secondary to both of these uses. The remaining uses of the 902-928 MHz band include licensed amateur radio operations and unlicensed Part 15 equipment, both of which are secondary to all other uses of the band. Part 15 low power devices include, but are not limited to, those used for automatic meter reading, inventory control, package tracking and shipping control, alarm services, local area networks, internet access and cordless telephones. The amateur radio service is used by technically inclined private citizens to engage in self- training, information exchange and radio experimentation. In the LMS Report and Order, the Commission recognized the important contribution to the public provided by Part 15 technologies and amateur radio operators and sought to develop a band plan that would maximize the ability of these services to coexist with LMS systems. 5. The Commission adopted the LMS Report and Order with an eye toward minimizing potential interference within and among the various users of the 902-928 MHz band. The Commission's band plan accordingly permits secondary operations across the entire band by users of unlicensed Part 15 devices and amateur licensees. At the same time, the band plan separates non-multilateration from multilateration LMS systems in all but one subband so as to avert interference. The LMS Report and Order also established limitations on LMS systems' interconnection with the public switched network and set forth a number of technical requirements intended to ensure successful coexistence of all the services authorized to operate in the band. 6. This Memorandum Opinion and Order for the most part affirms decisions made by the Commission in the LMS Report and Order as an appropriate balancing of the interests of the different uses authorized in the band. Where appropriate, we clarify particular aspects of those decisions. First, we review petitioners' objections to our interconnection restrictions and clarify that the regulatory classification of LMS operators will be determined on a case-by-case basis. Next, we address petitioners' concerns regarding the definition and scope of the non-multilateration LMS service. We then discuss issues raised by petitioners regarding the "safe harbor" within which Part 15 devices and amateur operators will be deemed not to cause interference to multilateration LMS providers. We next address petitioners' suggested changes to the band plan adopted in the LMS Report and Order, as well as our decision to license multilateration LMS systems on a major trading area (MTA) basis. We further consider the propriety of allowing multilateration wideband forward links to operate in the 902-928 MHz band. Finally, in a Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making included as part of this item, we propose rules and procedures governing competitive bidding for multilateration LMS frequencies. --------------------------------- B. Accommodation of Secondary Users in the 902-928 MHz Band 28. Background. To accommodate the concerns of Part 15 interests regarding their secondary status vis-a-vis LMS, the LMS Report and Order adopted a "safe harbor" within which Part 15 devices may operate without fear of being deemed to cause interference to LMS operators. Specifically, a Part 15 device will, by definition, not be considered to be causing interference to a multilateration LMS system if it is otherwise operating in accordance with the provisions of Part 15 and meets at least one of the following conditions: (a) it is a Part 15 field disturbance sensor operating in compliance with Section 15.245 of the rules and it is not operating in the 904-909.750 or 919.750-928.000 MHz sub-bands; or (b) it does not employ an outdoor antenna; or, (c) if it does employ an outdoor antenna, then if (1) the directional gain of the antenna does not exceed 6 dBi, or if the directional gain of the antenna exceeds 6 dBi, it reduces its transmitter output power below 1 watt by the proportional amount that the directional gain of the antenna exceeds 6 dBi; and, (2) either (A) the antenna is 5 meters or less in height above ground; or, (B) the antenna is more than 5 meters in height above ground but less than or equal to 15 meters in height above ground and either: (i) adjusts its transmitter output power below 1 watt by 20 log (h/5) dB, where h is the height above ground of the antenna in meters; or, (ii) is providing the final link for communications of entities eligible under Subparts B or C of Part 90 of the rules. 29. In its Order on Reconsideration in this proceeding, the Commission denied requests by petitioners that the Part 15 safe harbor instead be treated as a rebuttable presumption, i.e., that LMS licensees be permitted to file complaints of interference regarding Part 15 devices operating within the safe harbor if the LMS licensees believe those Part 15 devices are causing harmful interference. The Commission concluded that the safe harbor approach represented an appropriate balancing of the interests of the various parties sharing the 902-928 MHz band. In this Memorandum Opinion and Order, we address petitioners' other contentions regarding the safe harbor. Specifically, petitioners also challenged the technical parameters of the safe harbor and argued that the Commission acted in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 551, et seq. In addition, some petitioners ask that the safe harbor apply to non-multilateration LMS operators as well as multilateration operators. 1. Parameters of Safe Harbor 30. Pleadings. A number of parties who support the concept of a safe harbor oppose the height and power restrictions adopted by the Commission. Some of them contend that the height limit should be eliminated, or at least raised to accommodate schools, libraries and other users that might locate their antennas on top of buildings or street light poles. If the Commission does not eliminate or relax the height/power requirements, some parties suggest that it add educational users to the exemption of Section 90.361(c)(2)(ii)(B), which now permits public safety and special emergency users to employ full power with antennas up to 15 meters. Similarly, UTC suggests revising the rule so that entities listed in Section 90.63 of the Commission's Rules (i.e., Power Radio Service entities such as utilities) will not be subject to the height/power restriction. Metricom submits that the safe harbor limits should not apply to mobile and portable Part 15 devices. It posits that a cordless phone being operated off a 50th floor balcony as part of a wireless network should not be subject to complaints of interference from LMS providers. In addition, some parties contend that the height and power restrictions are arbitrary in that they would not necessarily achieve their intended purpose of minimizing interference to LMS operators. For example, the Part 15 Coalition argues that an antenna operation five meters above ground on a mountaintop could cause more interference than an antenna 50 feet above ground located on average terrain. 31. Other parties, most of whom oppose the idea of a Part 15 safe harbor, urge the Commission not to relax the height and power restrictions. Indeed, some of these parties would tighten the parameters of the safe harbor. For example, Uniplex believes that the safe harbor should not include Part 15 devices that are within a given distance of LMS operations, and would apply that distance variable to indoor antennas. Pinpoint would limit the application of the safe harbor to Part 15 operations with antenna heights of five meters or less. Pinpoint contends that the height/power attenuation rule has the undesirable effect of allowing more powerful systems at 15 meters antenna height than at 5 meters to be insulated from interference complaints. Further, Pinpoint argues that any interference tolerance standard should be measured at the base station site (i.e., the receiver of interference) and not based on height and power of Part 15 devices. The American Radio Relay League contends that the safe harbor effectively places a power limit on amateur operators that does not exist in other bands and that the power limit is so severe that it precludes amateur operation in any segment of the 902-928 MHz band used for multilateration LMS. It further contends that the safe harbor was designed with Part 15 devices in mind rather than amateur radio operators. 32. Discussion. We believe that the safe harbor rule, which was adopted after careful study of the extensive record in this proceeding, appropriately balances the interests of the various parties operating in the 902-928 MHz band so as to limit the potential for harmful interference. In the LMS Report and Order, the Commission affirmed that unlicensed Part 15 devices in the band, as in any other band, may not cause harmful interference to and must accept interference from all other operations in the band. It also reiterated that unlicensed Part 15 operations have no vested or recognizable right to continued use of any given frequency. Nonetheless, the Commission recognized the concerns of Part 15 and amateur interests with respect to their secondary status. Accordingly, in order to alleviate such concerns and to provide all operators in the band with a greater degree of certainty in configuring their systems, thereby promoting competitive use of the band, the Commission adopted the safe harbor definition of non-interference. 33. The safe harbor rule is intended to identify Part 15 and amateur operations that will, in all cases, be deemed not to cause harmful interference to LMS operators. The Commission emphasized in the LMS Report and Order that Part 15 and amateur operations are not restricted from operating beyond the parameters of the safe harbor. Rather, the safe harbor specifications provide a threshold beyond which Part 15 and amateur operators will not be insulated from LMS operators' claims of harmful interference. We therefore do not believe it necessary to add exemptions to the safe harbor as urged by some petitioners. 34. Moreover, the technical specifications of the rule were clearly explained in the LMS Report and Order. In general, amateur operators or Part 15 devices using outdoor antennas that are between five and 15 meters above the ground must reduce their output power concomitant with the height of their antennas in order to fit within the safe harbor. The Commission observed that an antenna less than five meters in height driven by a transmitter with one watt or less of output power (the general power limitation for Part 15 devices) will only affect LMS operations that are geographically close. A higher antenna, however, has the potential to affect a larger number of LMS operations. The Commission concluded that the power adjustment assures that between 5 and 15 meters, an outdoor antenna has the equivalent effect on multilateration LMS operations of an antenna five meters high using no more than 1 watt transmitter output power. We continue to believe that these specifications appropriately balance the interests of all the parties in minimizing interference. 35. We do not believe, as Metricom suggests, that the term "final link" in Section 90.361(c)(2)(ii)(B) of the Commission's rules requires clarification. Metricom asserts that the meaning of "final link" is open to interpretation because the Commission does not define the term. Metricom proposes that it be read as encompassing the entire complement of Part 15 devices that carries, or is available to carry, communications ultimately intended for entities eligible under Subparts B or C of Part 90 of the Rules. However, what Metricom proposes would in fact expand the definition of "final link" beyond its intended scope. The term "final link" is that link in a communications system which terminates with the Part 15 device used by or within the control of the Subpart B or C eligible entity. The term does not apply to other links in the system used to support such communications, e.g., intermediate links or links used by non-Subpart B or C entities. Therefore, we decline to expand the list of operations included under "final link" as proposed by Metricom. 36. We are persuaded by petitioners, however, that we should expand Section 90.361(c)(2)(ii)(B) of the Commission's Rules to include schools, libraries and rural health care providers within the safe harbor, permitting them to employ full power with antennas up to 15 meters. It is apparent from the record that many such institutions, particularly schools, may wish to use Part 15 devices that operate in this band, as well as similar devices that operate in the 5 GHz National Information Infrastructure (NII) band, to connect to the Internet and other on-line resources. In addition to being invaluable research tools, such resources enhance the ability of students, teachers and parents to communicate with one another, as pointed out by the Connectivity for Higher Learning Coalition. We believe that inexpensive access to the national information infrastructure by our nation's educational institutions is of sufficiently significant benefit to the public to warrant special protection for this limited class of Part 15 devices. Further, the universal service provisions of Section 254 of the Communications Act, as amended by the Telecommunications Act of 1996, single out schools, libraries and public or nonprofit health care providers serving residents of rural areas as deserving of special attention so as to enable them to satisfy their communications needs. Accordingly, we will include within the safe harbor elementary and secondary schools, libraries and health care providers for rural areas as defined by Section 254. 37. Further, we recognize that unlike Part 15 devices, the vast majority of which could operate within the safe harbor, amateur radio operations typically would not fit within the safe harbor provisions. Nevertheless, to the extent that amateur operators wish to employ the 902-928 MHz band and to operate within the safe harbor provisions, they should have the same protection as Part 15 devices. Further, we reiterate that failure to fit within the safe harbor provisions does not prevent operations; such operations may continue exactly as before, but are not protected from LMS operators' claims of interference. 38. In addition, AirTouch/Teletrac asks that the Commission clarify whether video links are included in the category of "unprotected" Part 15 devices for purposes of determining eligibility for the safe harbor. They are not. The LMS Report and Order specifically provided that long-range video links will not be permitted to take advantage of the safe harbor. We stated that "because multilateration entities concur that most Part 15 interference to multilateration LMS systems is likely to be from field disturbance sensors and long range video links, we will not make any presumption of interference-free operations for these devices when they operate in the exclusive-use bands." -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dewayne Hendricks, WA8DZP ! Internet: dewayne@warpspeed.com Warp Speed Imagineering ! Packet Radio: WA8DZP @ K3MC.#NOCAL.CA.USA.NOAM 43730 Vista Del Mar ! WWW: Fremont, CA 94539-3204 ! Fax: (510) 770-9854 ! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From n3jly@erols.com Wed Oct 29 19:45:14 1997 Received: from smtp1.erols.com (smtp1.erols.com [205.252.116.101]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id TAA13139 for ; Wed, 29 Oct 1997 19:45:13 -0600 (CST) Received: from LOCALNAME (blb-as5s63.erols.com [207.172.207.63]) by smtp1.erols.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) with SMTP id UAA20460 for ; Wed, 29 Oct 1997 20:47:29 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 20:47:29 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199710300147.UAA20460@smtp1.erols.com> X-Sender: n3jly@pop.erols.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: ss@tapr.org From: Tony McConnell Subject: r&o from Dwayne's post of r&o or mo&o: However, what Metricom proposes would in fact expand the definition of "final link" beyond its intended scope. The term "final link" is that link in a communications system which terminates with the Part 15 device used by or within the control of the Subpart B or C eligible entity. The term does not apply to other links in the system used to support such communications, e.g., intermediate links or links used by non-Subpart B or C entities. Therefore, we decline to expand the list of operations included under "final link" as proposed by Metricom. when so much of what has gone on in this arena has been to the benefit of these 'carriers' this seems a serious bust in the chops to metricom. if they can't claim protection from interference to the 'infrastructure' links that use the same freqs as thier end links i think thier stock will plumit. 73 de n3jli From wpns@world.std.com Thu Oct 30 09:12:09 1997 Received: from europe.std.com (europe.std.com [199.172.62.20]) by tapr.org (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.9) with ESMTP id JAA15822 for ; Thu, 30 Oct 1997 09:12:07 -0600 (CST) Received: from world.std.com by europe.std.com (8.7.6/BZS-8-1.0) id KAA24880; Thu, 30 Oct 1997 10:12:02 -0500 (EST) Received: by world.std.com (5.65c/Spike-2.0) id AA21283; Thu, 30 Oct 1997 10:12:01 -0500 From: wpns@world.std.com (William Smith) Message-Id: <199710301512.AA21283@world.std.com> Subject: Re: [SS:1785] Excerpts from FCC 97-305 To: ss@tapr.org Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 10:12:01 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: from "Dewayne Hendricks" at Oct 29, 97 01:47:26 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dewayne sent us a fascinating MO&O about operation in the 915 MHz band, fo anyone who can parse it better than I, I've got a few questions: I've got a 915.00 MHz FM ATV transmitter running about 8 watts on a "robot" I built for investigation of Simulated Lunar Teleoperations. If I operate it indoors or outdoors with an antenna height of around 1 meter am I considered to be in the safe harbor, or do I need to reduce my transmitter power to 1 watt, or use a real commercial part15 device? Thanks! -- Willie Smith wpns@world.std.com N1JBJ@amsat.org #define NII Information SuperCollider